NASA Takes Aim at Moon with Double Sledgehammer

[da_monumental_1]

What scientific experiments were the slaves conducting in the cotton fields? How to survive a rape and bull whip in 100 degree weather?

Joe y'all really be throwin me how you jump on that e-soapbox and shout crazy things like this.

Prior to the invention of the cotton gin in 1793, cotton farming was small potatoes compared to other crops (Hemp was the money maker back then. It's what George Washington grew). With this invention, the US economy exploded. The cotton gin, a scientific invention, not only greased the US economic engine, it was the primary cause of chattel slavery's expansion in the United States.

Lewis Cecil Gray's History of Agriculture in the Southern United States to 1860, Volume 1

If you'd pick up this book, you'd find out that this period after the invention of the cotton gin is referred to as The Second Middle Passage. Vast amounts of slaves were moved from the coasts to places inland as far as Texas. They were importing so many slaves in this period, they had to create a law to stop importation. Illegal slave importation was called piracy, punishable by death. The black population at that time was never higher, as a percentage (1 in 5 persons in America were black), in the United States since.

Please tell me why the US slave population quadrupled, after the invention of the cotton gin, if scientific exploration, although morally reprehensible in its application here, has not been the primary driving force of the US economy.

Addendum: What we're not taught in school is that white folks even enslaved there own right up to the 1860's as well. I had an emancipated ancestor who owned both black and white slaves. And I'm not talking about indentured servitude.

 

[Les W]

Prior to the invention of the cotton gin in 1793, cotton farming was small potatoes compared to other crops (Hemp was the money maker back then. It's what George Washington grew). With this invention, the US economy exploded. The cotton gin, a scientific invention, not only greased the US economic engine, it was the primary cause of chattel slavery's expansion in the United States.

Lewis Cecil Gray's History of Agriculture in the Southern United States to 1860, Volume 1

If you'd actually pick up a book and read it, you'd find out that this period after the invention of the cotton gin is referred to as The Second Middle Passage. Vast amounts of slaves were moved from the coasts to places inland as far as Texas.

Please tell me why the US slave population quadrupled, after the invention of the cotton gin, if scientific exploration, although morally reprehensible in its application, has not been the primary driving force of the US economy.

Square peg, round hole

I think you should let this go

Miss me with that dime store rebuttal logic

 

[mk23666]

Less than 1% of all the water in the world is drinkable. What most folks don't realize, if WWIII ever happens, the commodity most likely that causes it won't be oil, it'll be drinkable water.

Scientific exploration IS AND ALWAYS HAS BEEN the engine that drives the US economy.

Umm, aint nobody going to the Moon to bring back drinking water.

 

[mk23666]

an why u got him in that clunker
thought all them ships kept the fuel rotatin in rings in the center or outer circumference




um yeah i'm gonna need some consultant work on a project i'm work in,

Heyyyyy now. I didn't sell it to him. We don't even use them old ships anymore. Don't get me wrong, they are still reliable and all ...

Yeah, the model he has uses the rotating canisters rig, we gave that design up for the donut rings in the hull configuration. (The ring in the center versions still takes up too much space, altho they do spool up faster IMHO)

 

[mk23666]

come on my people started them charts

does it have the debris feature to keep small space rocks and shit from hittin it?

that nigga wont tell me shit
odd thing is the spot where he was hidin looks like a gecko orgy at night when the moon is full.

1 You do know your people got them charts from folks like me?
2 The debris feature is a benefit of the drive system.
3 Not even gonna explain the gecko orgy thing cause it's just ...

 

[mk23666]

Both the FED and NASA are private. This is no longer fringe information please do research

Yeah, my point is that even tho they are "private" entities they are still a part of the big ol' Govt. machine. But you know this ...

 

[mike123]

Heyyyyy now. I didn't sell it to him. We don't even use them old ships anymore. Don't get me wrong, they are still reliable and all ...

Yeah, the model he has uses the rotating canisters rig, we gave that design up for the donut rings in the hull configuration. (The ring in the center versions still takes up too much space, altho they do spool up faster IMHO)

like a 95 accord huh lol

and i'm gonna need to borrow one of them black crystals.....
promise i wont touch nothing outside this solar system...
i just wanna look around alittle

 

[mk23666]

like a 95 accord huh lol

and i'm gonna need to borrow one of them black crystals.....
promise i wont touch nothing outside this solar system...
i just wanna look around alittle

They will revoke my abduction privileges If I gave you one of them black crystals! Might even strand me on this planet for that. (meet me out back and bring lots of jade)

 

[oolong tea]

Searching for water could be a cover up palatable for newspaper fodder. Wait til start digging and find some mummified niggas.

 

[mk23666]

Did God just pee on the Moon?

NASA's data about Moon rock composition over the last 40 years has
been very consistent. The non-polar regions of the Moon are dry,
desiccated, dead. Until yesterday. NASA announced that data from the
Indian Chandrayaan-1 lunar orbitor indicates that there is a relative
abundance of lunar water - even in areas exposed to the Sun's rays.
At 750 parts per million, a ton of lunar rock would yield about a
litre of water. Helpful for future missions.

But, how on earth did NASA get this so wrong for the last 40 years?
The Apollo astronauts brought back piles of Moon rocks, many of which
were analysed for water. Traces were found at the time, but NASA
claimed that "most of the boxes containing the lunar samples leaked
which led scientists to assume traces of water found came from Earth
air that had entered the containers". 750ppm is not a trace. And how
about the boxes which did not leak? What of the water composition in
them?

Then there are the NASA probes in the late 1990s,which deliberately
set out to discover water on the Moon. They found frozen water in
deep polar craters. But Clementine, and particularly Prospector, were
set up with spectrometers capable of detecting water across the
surface. How did they miss it? They certainly shouldn't have!
Here's the Mission guidelines for Prospector's spectrometers:

"Lunar Prospector (LP), which was launched on January 6, 1998, carries
an integrated suite of three spectrometers. A Gamma-Ray Spectrometer
(GRS) and a Neutron Spectrometer (NS) are providing global maps of the
major and trace elemental composition of the lunar surface, with
special emphasis on the search for polar water-ice deposits, implied
by the H abundance...Global mapping of elemental abundances by the LP
GRS and NS will impose major new constraints on the bulk composition
of the lunar crust, on compositional variations over the lunar
surface, and on the existence of lunar resources including polar water
ice" (2) [my emphasis]

The map opposite shows Prospector data from 1998 (3), which has still
not been properly peer-reviewed over ten years on, according to the
PDS website (4). The equatorial map indicates that a fairly detailed,
surface wide analysis was undertaken. So - it begs the question: Why
is the Indian data (and also Deep Impact data, we learn) so radically
different? How is it that 40 years of scientific opinion about Moon
soil and rock composition has been so fundamentally overturned? Did
God just pee on the Moon? Or is there something fundamentally wrong
with the data that NASA has been making public for the last 40 years?



Written by Andy Lloyd, 25/9/09, author of 'The Dark Star' and 'Ezekiel
One'

References:

1) Claire Bates "'Widespread water' found on the Moon, opening the
way for man to live there full-time" Daily Mail, 24/9/09

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencet...s-lunar-mission-detects-it.html#ixzz0S1TxnrKX

2) Lunar Prospector Data Maps http://lunar.arc.nasa.gov/dataviz/datamaps/index.html

3) The Los Alamos Built Spectrometers http://lunar.lanl.gov/pages/spectros.html

4) Lunar Prospector Reduced Spectrometer Data
http://pds-geosciences.wustl.edu/missions/lunarp/reduced.html

 

[BoyJupiter]

How American is that?

Smashing into a legacy stellar object for the sake of personal economic gain....wow.

Humans are truly dangerous.


One day we're going to smash into mars and prompt a fucking war with some shit that just didn't want to give us the privilege of meeting them, LOL.

 

[Negmarron]

Umm, aint nobody going to the Moon to bring back drinking water.

Because we can.
Helium-3 for fusion worth billions a ton.
Lowering cost for space travel to allow us to expand off of earth.
Water on the moon mean they can make rocket fuel on the Moon, which means they don't have to bring it from Earth at $10,000+ a pound.
Water on the moon means the ability to support mining operations that get titanium, aluminum, and iron from the Moon. Which leads to a bigger, better, more robust and ABLE TO PAY FOR ITSELF space program, so idiots that barely got through high school algebra can complain about the 1/4 of 1% of the federal budget that NASA gets.

 

[Negmarron]

Did God just pee on the Moon?

NASA's data about Moon rock composition over the last 40 years has
been very consistent. The non-polar regions of the Moon are dry,
desiccated, dead. Until yesterday. NASA announced that data from the
Indian Chandrayaan-1 lunar orbitor indicates that there is a relative
abundance of lunar water - even in areas exposed to the Sun's rays.
At 750 parts per million, a ton of lunar rock would yield about a
litre of water. Helpful for future missions.

But, how on earth did NASA get this so wrong for the last 40 years?
The Apollo astronauts brought back piles of Moon rocks, many of which
were analysed for water. Traces were found at the time, but NASA
claimed that "most of the boxes containing the lunar samples leaked
which led scientists to assume traces of water found came from Earth
air that had entered the containers". 750ppm is not a trace. And how
about the boxes which did not leak? What of the water composition in
them?

Then there are the NASA probes in the late 1990s,which deliberately
set out to discover water on the Moon. They found frozen water in
deep polar craters. But Clementine, and particularly Prospector, were
set up with spectrometers capable of detecting water across the
surface. How did they miss it? They certainly shouldn't have!
Here's the Mission guidelines for Prospector's spectrometers:

"Lunar Prospector (LP), which was launched on January 6, 1998, carries
an integrated suite of three spectrometers. A Gamma-Ray Spectrometer
(GRS) and a Neutron Spectrometer (NS) are providing global maps of the
major and trace elemental composition of the lunar surface, with
special emphasis on the search for polar water-ice deposits, implied
by the H abundance...Global mapping of elemental abundances by the LP
GRS and NS will impose major new constraints on the bulk composition
of the lunar crust, on compositional variations over the lunar
surface, and on the existence of lunar resources including polar water
ice" (2) [my emphasis]

The map opposite shows Prospector data from 1998 (3), which has still
not been properly peer-reviewed over ten years on, according to the
PDS website (4). The equatorial map indicates that a fairly detailed,
surface wide analysis was undertaken. So - it begs the question: Why
is the Indian data (and also Deep Impact data, we learn) so radically
different? How is it that 40 years of scientific opinion about Moon
soil and rock composition has been so fundamentally overturned? Did
God just pee on the Moon? Or is there something fundamentally wrong
with the data that NASA has been making public for the last 40 years?



Written by Andy Lloyd, 25/9/09, author of 'The Dark Star' and 'Ezekiel
One'

References:

1) Claire Bates "'Widespread water' found on the Moon, opening the
way for man to live there full-time" Daily Mail, 24/9/09

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencet...s-lunar-mission-detects-it.html#ixzz0S1TxnrKX

2) Lunar Prospector Data Maps http://lunar.arc.nasa.gov/dataviz/datamaps/index.html

3) The Los Alamos Built Spectrometers http://lunar.lanl.gov/pages/spectros.html

4) Lunar Prospector Reduced Spectrometer Data
http://pds-geosciences.wustl.edu/missions/lunarp/reduced.html

There you go.

 

[mk23666]

Because we can.
Helium-3 for fusion worth billions a ton.
Lowering cost for space travel to allow us to expand off of earth.
Water on the moon mean they can make rocket fuel on the Moon, which means they don't have to bring it from Earth at $10,000+ a pound.
Water on the moon means the ability to support mining operations that get titanium, aluminum, and iron from the Moon. Which leads to a bigger, better, more robust and ABLE TO PAY FOR ITSELF space program, so idiots that barely got through high school algebra can complain about the 1/4 of 1% of the federal budget that NASA gets.

Yeah ... I was talking about DRINKING water, as the poster I was replying to was alluding to.

There you go.

Again, I'm not following you here. you highlighted the part about the data not being peer reviewed in a decade or so.

What's your point?

 

[jblaque]

does it even rain on the Moon? i doubt it.

 

[Negmarron]

Yeah ... I was talking about DRINKING water, as the poster I was replying to was alluding to.



Again, I'm not following you here. you highlighted the part about the data not being peer reviewed in a decade or so.

What's your point?

I mean its not surprising that an analytical mistake from a a gov't agency stood for this long because the data was not peer reviewed.

 

[mk23666]

I mean its not surprising that an analytical mistake from a a gov't agency stood for this long because the data was not peer reviewed.

Govt. agency? Some here would have you believe that NASA is a private corp. that is somehow funded by the Govt.

 

[SamSneed]

1 You do know your people got them charts from folks like me?
2 The debris feature is a benefit of the drive system.
3 Not even gonna explain the gecko orgy thing cause it's just ...

i wont get tracked right?
i dont want these cac to know what i got,even if its old skool.
im guessin g-force will not affect me right.

 

[da_monumental_1]

Yeah ... I was talking about DRINKING water, as the poster I was replying to was alluding to.

Sorry, I should have gone into a little more detail.

Delta-V

"The lower the delta-V, the lower the energy needed." - Any AP/Honors high school Physics class.

In layman's terms, a lower escape velocity makes it easier to get off the ground and off into space.

It's far easier and cheaper to transport water for industrial use and consumption from a moon base to lower earth orbit (hell, the ground) than from from the ground on up. You've essentially cut your energy expenditure by almost half. No atmosphere equals no drag and the moon's gravity well is 1/6 of the Earth.

I'll concede that drinkable water is only a small part of the picture. The barriers that make electrolysis on earth so damned expensive would virtually be eliminated on the moon. Discovery of water on the moon would essentially guarantee a trip to Mars and the rest of the solar system in the future. The potential for large reserves of water on the moon is an untapped fuel source. You've got all the hydrogen and oxygen you'll ever need and you'll have water as a waste product.

 

[mk23666]

^ Ummm ... ok.
Still, they aint going to the Moon to bring back drinking water for Earthers.

 

[mk23666]

i wont get tracked right?
i dont want these cac to know what i got,even if its old skool.
im guessin g-force will not affect me right.

The older models can be tracked ... not easily, but still.
All of the downed UFOs of the past have been of the older models.
There are ways around it tho.

G-forces are cancelled by the effects of the propulsion system so no worries.

 

[Devilstrider]

LOL so nasa found out last week there is gallons of frozen water on the moon.. They found this out because of a satallite taking pictures..So now ur telling me a camera takes better pictures than bring back a sample's of drilled rock of the moon... and studying it here on earth..GTFOH nasa with this bullshit. & people wonder if we've ever been to the moon...lol wow..it must Rain in space..yeah thats it..

 

[Thedod]

We have already issued the earth one pass. DO NOT come back

 

[mk23666]

LOL so nasa found out last week there is gallons of frozen water on the moon.. They found this out because of a satallite taking pictures..So now ur telling me a camera takes better pictures than bring back a sample's of drilled rock of the moon... and studying it here on earth..GTFOH nasa with this bullshit. & people wonder if we've ever been to the moon...lol wow..it must Rain in space..yeah thats it..

Allegedly the reason for the +/-40 year mix up is that some of the canisters bringing back the Moon rocks lost their seal. So NASA assumed that they were contaminated with our atmosphere. (Notice they were talking about the samples in the broken seal containers and not the ones that weren't, They knew this for +/-40 years)

New report released states that NASA has discovered water ice on Mars in a crater closer to the equator than thought possible. The amount/volume of water ice is enormous! (think Greenland)

We have already issued the earth one pass. DO NOT come back

Easy my friend. They aint getting back up there no time soon. Our work here will be done before that happens.