Zorgon, oh dear...

My job is not to 'police' a thread. I actually enjoy seeing things go off topic...I'm kinda new here, so when I post something that seems to be awry, I get nervous, waiting for the big slap o' the wrist, so I try to qualify my comments so as not to incur the wrath...

Sorry you took my cowering in fear in the wrong way...oh, please don't stab me again!!

See? I can try to lighten the mood too!!

Cheers

Stan Meyer died of a brain aneurism and Gene Mallove died, tragically, in a robbery.

I remember when people (whose judgement I usually seek out) thought that, if you played on Saturday Night Live, you died.

John Belushi, Gilda Radner.

Then, er... Denitra Vance...!

Then... wait for it... Chris Farley!

Yeah, that's right. All those comedians worked at SNLNASA and then died.

Strange but true.

Originally posted by tep200377

Just to give you a brief overview of our solarsystems moons:

earth 1
mars 2
jupiter 64
saturn 33
uranus 27
neptun 13
pluto 1

A grand total of 141 planetlike moons here in our solarsystem.
All are round and planetlike, except for one walnut shaped

bigfatfurrytexan

That is not correct.

Iapetus has its equitorial ridge (and a slightly hexagonal shape to its' silhouette). Phobos and Deimos look like potatos. Hyperion looks like a yam.

Enceladus is nothing like any other "planetary body". it has been witnessed to have a cometary tail (making it a comet that is currently inactive...even though it isn't a dirty snowball. More on that in another thread).

My post is all correct except for Phobos and Deimos, wich are not seen as moons. They are asteroids caught in mars orbit.

So I'll correct my statement to 139 planetary moons.

Enceladus has a regular round shape as all the other moons and do not have a cometary tail. It has a water-rich plume venting from the moon's south polar region. This is in no means a tail ...

Iapetus was reffered to as a walnut. If you didn't understand that, then im out of arguments for you my friend.

The only thing that the system moons have in common is that they have nothing in common. The shapes are only occasionally similar.

c'mon guys, do you even read my post, or even the post i commented on?
Apparently not ...

The reason for my post :

Originally posted by housegroove23
After awaking to the truth that there really is an atmosphere on the moon, Naza's lies are blatantly obvious when I walk outside and look at the moon, and the moon looks planet like. If we were to believe the lies and the image of boring lifeless black & gray moon that Naza portrays in their photos then the moon would look more like your standard asteroid when you look up in the night sky instead of planet like, the way it looks now.

And there you have it ..
There are 2 asteroid like moons, and 139 planetary like.

Where did I go "very incorrect" here?

If you get down to some of the lesser known moons in the Jovian system (Amalthea, Thebe, Metis) you see moons that are very similar in shape to the Martian potato-twins.

Ps: who cares about the jovian system?

I talked about our solarsystem, you didn't
My post is all correct except for Phobos and Deimos, wich are not seen as moons. They are asteroids caught in mars orbit.

Look it up ..

Do some checking...you are very incorrect.

Yes pleas, do some cheking...

Originally posted by zorgon
Yup Protector of Sanity is absolutely correct They all look the same Although I have no idea why he brought it up or what it has to do with Hoagland's press release?

Sorry about this... but he tasks me... I tried to resist... but they are all so pretty

If you read the post I am answering to, you might get a revelation of why i postet it ( I cant promise you will understand the complexity of theses posts, but itst worth a try ). Then again, you post images of planetary moons ( I have already commented on phobos and deimos ), but for the rest, they are "planetary like".. I other words, no less planetary like than our moon..

So you are in fact supporting my claims.

Well...after all this, I intend to keep my tongue firmly in cheek from now on...even as I continue to type with all ten fingers. (Gosh, ain't I clever?)

Oh, dear...was that a one line post?!? Boy, am I in trouble........

Originally posted by tep200377
Where did I go "very incorrect" here?

By misunderstanding housegroove23 post

"If we were to believe the lies and the image of boring lifeless black & gray moon that Naza portrays in their photos then the moon would look more like your standard asteroid when you look up in the night sky instead of planet like, the way it looks now."

It was a reference to COLOR not shape

Ps: who cares about the jovian system?
I talked about our solarsystem, you didn't

Yes pleas, do some cheking...

last time I did some checking... the Jovian system IS in our solar system

If you read the post I am answering to, you might get a revelation of why i postet it ( I cant promise you will understand the complexity of theses posts, but itst worth a try ).

Wasn't very complex to me... the comment was about the color of the moon and I responded with Color pictures of the moon... that seems to have "bothered: a few people so I removed them...

But before you go in a rant and insult people, you might want to double check what your responding to

Just a thought

So you are in fact supporting my claims.

So much for "Deny ignorance"

Originally posted by tep200377
Just out of curiosity regarding the OP, when will we have this promised Disclosure? Will there be any evidence or proof?

Doesn't look to good right now on that score, at least not from Ken Johnston et all

Oh wait I see an update from JimO

Well here is the first piece of evidence that actually looks like it supports some of Ken's claims... perhaps they have been 'holding out' while this 'soap opera' plays out


This one looks ligit... and has name on it... and looks like many other NASA letters I have seen...




[edit on 13-12-2007 by zorgon]

Zorgon: "Well here is the first piece of evidence that actually looks like it supports some of Ken's claims... perhaps they have been 'holding out' while this 'soap opera' plays out "

Nope, they posted this on Bara's site a month ago. It proves nothing of interest.

Johnston was at the lunar lab, serving as a a shipping clerk for lunar samples and associated photodocumentation.

Dark_Mission claims he was in charge of all Apollo photo archives and was ordered to destroy ALL original images as part of a coverup.

He was 27 at the time, with at best a BS in engineering. Sure, NASA has hundreds of lunar scientists on the project, and they chose this kid to be their boss. Right.

What actually seems to have happened was he worked in a lab that was sent a few sets of images, from the actual office that was in charge of them, and at the end of the lunar sample collection period, he was told to clean out the bookshelves by getting rid of no longer needed (for his task) reference albums.

The originals were, and always remained, in another building, under another group's control. And always fully available for scientific and media access.

The DM version is a crock.

I knew Jeff Warner (mentioned in the latter), and recently exchanged emails with him about this.

Mike joking? Not likely -- he seems to sincerely believe he is the victuim of an evil gummint plot.... and he even challenged me to admit which coverup official had ordered me to 'get' Johnston.

Originally posted by JimO...I'll happily go away and leave him...

Maybe, but I am getting kind of fond of you coming by here. Perchance you'll stay a while longer if that is in your plans when the KJ fiasco blows over?

Talk about what a terraformed Moon may look like?

Or that "scar" where a moon fell, the Vallis Marinaras?

And the oceans of Ceres?

The ice fields of Mercury?

Surely we could do something with those iceballs in the Krupier Belt?

There is no end to what we could know, but what we do know is finite.

“Mr. Oberg did NOT have permission from NBC to send that as their representative.”

Bob has a hard time with English comprehension. He made up the claim that I posed as an “NBC science reporter”. A ‘consultant’ to an organization is not a ‘representative’ of that organization, and in this case, I was checking out the credentials of Johnston on behalf of a request from an NBC client in the features department. Bob has exchanged emails with the MSNBC website, and since they are not interested in a story, he has concluded – and is reporting as a fact – that NOBODY at NBC was ever interested in this subject. But even the Enterprise mission home page reported that NBC was interested in an interview with Hoagland, back at the time of the book’s release date. This has badly confused him and he seems lonely, hoping to get company in his confusion.

Hoagland and others have described that email to JPL as demanding Johnston be terminated from his volunteer position. That also suggests difficulty with English comprehension.

Most to the point, the two issues I originally raised – the ‘jet jock’ credentials (as in Dark_Mission) and the claim of his being in charge of the original Apollo photographs – turn out to be absolutely valid. Despite weeks of shrieking and whining, Johnston’s defenders have been unable to show any evidence he ever was IN military flight school, much less graduated and served as a pilot. To the contrary, the certificates they have posted show that between his graduation from PRE-flight school and his reporting to work at Grumman as a Lunar Module ‘switch monkey’ (NOT a ‘test pilot), there was less than 18 months of time to complete the waiting period pre-school, the 13 month school, and the 6-year duty commitment for flight school graduates. No explanation has ever been offered as to how Johnston is supposed to have accomplished this. And per my request to a friend, a retired Marine BG formerly in charge of pilot training, his request to the USMC personnel office at the Pentagon came up with a definitive ‘NO’ – there never was any ‘pilot officer’ named ‘Ralph K. Johnston’ (or variations on that name) in the Marines in the 1960s.

And associates of Johnston’s at the moon lab confirm – they never were in charge of any photographs except the sets they were sent from the real photo lab, where all images were always preserved and available for study. Johnston was apparently ordered to clear out HIS office’ local filing cabinets at the end of the Apollo program, but this had nothing to do with any cover-ups of the original images, as Dark_Mission claims.

And this doesn’t even touch on perhaps the most sensitive item on Johnston’s self-written biography on the NASA program’s website, his claimed ‘PhD in Meta Physics’ (his spelling). Big organizations are particularly sensitive to employee use of questionable education documentation, and this ‘certificate’ (labeled a ‘deploma’ on Bara’s blog) is NOT a “PhD” (Doctor of Philosophy in some field), but a “Doctor of Metaphysics” from a non-accredited, no longer existing corporation in Colorado calling itself a "church seminary" and thus being exempt from state standards (there are national standards for “PhD equivalent” degrees in the academic world – “Doctor of Metaphysics” is not on any of those lists). There is no evidence it ever had a campus, a library, even a faculty – only a printing press. “Dr.” Johnston might well have been nervous about NASA asking him for support documentation on this claim that he had had them post on their website.

Because Johnston’s claims are so central to the theme of Dark_Mission, it’s not surprising that they have chosen to fight it out on this line and portray any validation efforts on Johnston’s claims as “attacks” on him. This portrayal, it is worth noting, comes from the same people who gleefully attack the integrity of real lunar scientists such as Mike Duke and Thornton Page and many many others as liars, forgers, betrayers, and crypto-Nazis. It’s a technique worth drawing attention to.