> In article > @u10g2000prn.googlegroups.com>, bradg...@gmail.com says...
>
>
>

>> On Feb 14, 3:12 am, Disneygeek hotmail.com> wrote:

>>> On Feb 13, 12:20 pm, BradGuth gmail.com> wrote:

>

>>>> On Feb 12, 11:19 am, Matt aol.com> wrote:

>

>>>>> The original post here is one of the more clever versions I've seen of
>>>>> burying a topic in gobbledygook that makes it look like the poster is
>>>>> objective. Congratulations on your hard work.

>

>>>>> There is, of course, no "controversy," only the laughable assertions
>>>>> that A) NASA could not solve well-known problems of trajectories,
>>>>> energy, radiation, etc. for a moom mission despite the Ranger probes
>>>>> and Surveyor soft-landers preparing the way, and B) The people who
>>>>> went to the moon, tracked the lunar spaceships, handled logistics, ...

> On Feb 14, 4:05 pm, BDK magicsteel.com> wrote:

>> In article >> @u10g2000prn.googlegroups.com>, bradg...@gmail.com says...
>>
>>
>>

>>> On Feb 14, 3:12 am, Disneygeek hotmail.com> wrote:

>>>> On Feb 13, 12:20 pm, BradGuth gmail.com> wrote:

>>

>>>>> On Feb 12, 11:19 am, Matt aol.com> wrote:

>>

>>>>>> The original post here is one of the more clever versions I've seen of
>>>>>> burying a topic in gobbledygook that makes it look like the poster is
>>>>>> objective. Congratulations on your hard work.

>>

>>>>>> There is, of course, no "controversy," only the laughable assertions
>>>>>> that A) NASA could not solve well-known problems of trajectories,
>>>>>> energy, radiation, etc. for a moom mission despite the Ranger probes ...

>Uh huh. Guthball, you're a trip, that's for sure.

> In article <86348882-eadb-4d04-8254-15c7c6fa6a96
> @e23g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, bradg...@gmail.com says...
>
>
>

>> On Feb 14, 4:05 pm, BDK magicsteel.com> wrote:

>>> In article >>> @u10g2000prn.googlegroups.com>, bradg...@gmail.com says...

>

>>>> On Feb 14, 3:12 am, Disneygeek hotmail.com> wrote:

>>>>> On Feb 13, 12:20 pm, BradGuth gmail.com> wrote:

>

>>>>>> On Feb 12, 11:19 am, Matt aol.com> wrote:

>

>>>>>>> The original post here is one of the more clever versions I've seen of
>>>>>>> burying a topic in gobbledygook that makes it look like the poster is
>>>>>>> objective. Congratulations on your hard work.

>

>>>>>>> There is, of course, no "controversy," only the laughable assertions ...

> On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 21:26:31 -0500, in a place far, far away, BDK
> magicsteel.com> made the phosphor on my monitor glow in such a
> way as to indicate that:
>

>>Uh huh. Guthball, you're a trip, that's for sure.

>
> He is insane. Stop feeding the troll, please.

> On Feb 14, 6:31 pm, simberg.interglo...@org.trash (Rand Simberg)
> wrote:

>> On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 21:26:31 -0500, in a place far, far away, BDK
>> magicsteel.com> made the phosphor on my monitor glow in such a
>> way as to indicate that:
>>

>>>Uh huh. Guthball, you're a trip, that's for sure.

>>
>> He is insane. Stop feeding the troll, please.

>
> But you and others of your brown-nosed kind keep returning to the
> fires of truth. Why is that?
> . - BG
>

> In sci.physics Pat Flannery daktel.com> wrote:
>

>> isw wrote:

>

>>> A friend and I watched, in real time, video transmitted directly from
>>> the antenna on the lunar rover during the Apollo 17 mission. My friend
>>> was a ham operator, and he had a 12-foot parabolic dish in his back
>>> yard; it was pointed directly at the moon. I contributed the video
>>> expertise necessary to demodulate the signal. The image was very noisy,
>>> but recognizable when we saw it some time later on a network broadcast.

>

>> That's a little fact that Moon hoax supporters will have trouble
>> with...why were the signals coming from the Moon?

>
> The usual wacko response it that there was a transponder just to fool
> the HAMs.
>
> --
> Jim Pennino ...

> On Feb 14, 11:55 am, j...@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:

>> In sci.physics Pat Flannery daktel.com> wrote:
>>

>>> isw wrote:

>>

>>>> A friend and I watched, in real time, video transmitted directly from
>>>> the antenna on the lunar rover during the Apollo 17 mission. My friend
>>>> was a ham operator, and he had a 12-foot parabolic dish in his back
>>>> yard; it was pointed directly at the moon. I contributed the video
>>>> expertise necessary to demodulate the signal. The image was very noisy,
>>>> but recognizable when we saw it some time later on a network broadcast.

>>

>>> That's a little fact that Moon hoax supporters will have trouble
>>> with...why were the signals coming from the Moon?

>>
>> The usual wacko response it that there was a transponder just to fool
>> the HAMs.
>>
>> -- ...

> In article <6bf696fa-6bc5-4d30-8fa8-
> 3431e5536...@i7g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, bradg...@gmail.com says...
>

>> On Feb 14, 6:31 pm, simberg.interglo...@org.trash (Rand Simberg)
>> wrote:

>>> On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 21:26:31 -0500, in a place far, far away, BDK
>>> magicsteel.com> made the phosphor on my monitor glow in such a
>>> way as to indicate that:

>

>>>>Uh huh. Guthball, you're a trip, that's for sure.

>

>>> He is insane. Stop feeding the troll, please.

>

>> But you and others of your brown-nosed kind keep returning to the
>> fires of truth. Why is that?
>> . - BG

>
> We like to play with the kooks. It's fun.
> ...

> On Feb 14, 11:55 am, j...@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>
>
>

>> In sci.physics Pat Flannery daktel.com> wrote:

>

>>> isw wrote:

>

>>>> A friend and I watched, in real time, video transmitted directly from
>>>> the antenna on the lunar rover during the Apollo 17 mission. My friend
>>>> was a ham operator, and he had a 12-foot parabolic dish in his back
>>>> yard; it was pointed directly at the moon. I contributed the video
>>>> expertise necessary to demodulate the signal. The image was very noisy,
>>>> but recognizable when we saw it some time later on a network broadcast.

>

>>> That's a little fact that Moon hoax supporters will have trouble
>>> with...why were the signals coming from the Moon?

>

>> The usual wacko response it that there was a transponder just to fool ...