Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > sci.physics > #612268 > unrolled thread

The Moon

Back to article view | Back to sci.physics

Contents

  The Moon The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2017-01-09 11:51 -0800
    Re: The Moon Yuri Kretin <invlaid@invalid.com> - 2017-01-09 14:25 -0600
      Re: The Moon Yuri Kretin <invlaid@invalid.com> - 2017-01-09 14:32 -0600
        Re: The Moon djheydt@kithrup.com (Dorothy J Heydt) - 2017-01-10 07:15 +0000
          Re: The Moon Yuri Kretin <invlaid@invalid.com> - 2017-01-10 09:34 -0600
            Re: The Moon The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2017-01-10 08:58 -0800
            Re: The Moon shima.tetsuo@dai.tokyo.teikoku (島鉄雄) - 2017-01-11 10:50 +0000
              Re: The Moon djheydt@kithrup.com (Dorothy J Heydt) - 2017-01-11 13:48 +0000
          Re: The Moon Kuri Yretin <invlaid@invalid.com> - 2017-01-10 15:12 -0600
            Re: The Moon moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-01-11 15:00 +0000
    Re: The Moon Nicholle Fiorillo <holhirlo@hololell.ho> - 2017-01-09 22:45 +0000
      Re: The Moon Jaqueline Yoho <eau@oeJqq.org> - 2017-01-10 22:08 +0000
      Re: The Moon "reber g=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> - 2017-01-12 15:01 -0800
        Re: The Moon "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2017-01-12 17:28 -0800
    Re: The Moon The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2017-01-09 21:28 -0800
    Re: The Moon The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2017-01-09 21:46 -0800
      Re: The Moon The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2017-01-09 21:49 -0800
        Re: The Moon The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2017-01-10 09:08 -0800
        Re: The Moon The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2017-01-10 23:05 -0800
          Re: The Moon The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2017-01-10 23:16 -0800
            Re: The Moon The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2017-01-11 14:21 -0800
              Re: The Moon Kuri Yretin <invlaid@invalid.com> - 2017-01-11 19:36 -0600
          Re: The Moon The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2017-01-12 22:36 -0800
            SwedenborG? thugstyle103@gmail.com - 2017-01-13 09:36 -0800
              there you go, swedenborgian noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2017-01-19 22:37 -0800
            Re: The Moon The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2017-01-13 11:01 -0800
              Re: The Moon The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2017-01-13 22:44 -0800
                Re: The Moon The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2017-01-16 10:12 -0800
    Re: The Moon "reber g=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> - 2017-01-12 15:59 -0800

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

#612268 — The Moon

https://www.google.com/#q=Researchers+Suggest+New+Theory+for+the+Moon%E2%80%99s+Origin
https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2017/01/moon-formation-theories/504449/
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/2017/01/09/moon-formed-merger-20-little-moonlets-new-theory-suggests/




It could only mean one thing....a trip to the moon.




to stop their ridiculous bickering and stupid theories.


they should be shot. caused they are stupid.






moon-formed-merger-20-little-moonlets-new-theory-suggests/




What does "new-theory" mean???? A new kook?


Yous people should not be allowed to come up with..."new-theory", cause they are gettin stupidier by the moment!

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#612271

On 1/9/2017 1:51 PM, The Starmaker wrote:
> https://www.google.com/#q=Researchers+Suggest+New+Theory+for+the+Moon%E2%80%99s+Origin
>
>
https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2017/01/moon-formation-theories/504449/
> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/2017/01/09/moon-formed-merger-20-little-moonlets-new-theory-suggests/

>
>  It could only mean one thing....a trip to the moon.

> to stop their ridiculous bickering and stupid theories.

> they should be shot. caused they are stupid.

> moon-formed-merger-20-little-moonlets-new-theory-suggests/

> What does "new-theory" mean???? A new kook?

> Yous people should not be allowed to come up with..."new-theory",
> cause they are gettin stupidier by the moment!
>

so, what were these "pre-moonies" called ?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#612272

On 1/9/2017 2:25 PM, Yuri Kretin wrote:
> On 1/9/2017 1:51 PM, The Starmaker wrote:
>> https://www.google.com/#q=Researchers+Suggest+New+Theory+for+the+Moon%E2%80%99s+Origin
>>
>>
>>
> https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2017/01/moon-formation-theories/504449/
>
>> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/2017/01/09/moon-formed-merger-20-little-moonlets-new-theory-suggests/
>>
>
>>
>>  It could only mean one thing....a trip to the moon.
>
>> to stop their ridiculous bickering and stupid theories.
>
>> they should be shot. caused they are stupid.
>
>> moon-formed-merger-20-little-moonlets-new-theory-suggests/
>
>> What does "new-theory" mean???? A new kook?
>
>> Yous people should not be allowed to come up with..."new-theory",
>> cause they are gettin stupidier by the moment!
>>
>
> so, what were these "pre-moonies" called ?

Moon is an English word

Luna is Latin

Levanah in Hebrew, or yareh-ah

Луна [луна́]    in russian

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#612340

In article <o50s1j$j4g$1@gioia.aioe.org>,
Yuri Kretin  <invlaid@invalid.com> wrote:
>On 1/9/2017 2:25 PM, Yuri Kretin wrote:
>> On 1/9/2017 1:51 PM, The Starmaker wrote:
>>>
>https://www.google.com/#q=Researchers+Suggest+New+Theory+for+the+Moon%E2%80%99s+Origin
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2017/01/moon-formation-theories/504449/
>>
>>>
>http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/2017/01/09/moon-formed-merger-20-little-moonlets-new-theory-suggests/
>>>
>>
>>>
>>>  It could only mean one thing....a trip to the moon.
>>
>>> to stop their ridiculous bickering and stupid theories.
>>
>>> they should be shot. caused they are stupid.
>>
>>> moon-formed-merger-20-little-moonlets-new-theory-suggests/
>>
>>> What does "new-theory" mean???? A new kook?
>>
>>> Yous people should not be allowed to come up with..."new-theory",
>>> cause they are gettin stupidier by the moment!
>>>
>>
>> so, what were these "pre-moonies" called ?
>
>Moon is an English word
>
>Luna is Latin
>
>Levanah in Hebrew, or yareh-ah
>
>Луна [луна́]    in russian

Could you transliterate that last, please?  I'm seeing a long
string of non-ASCII characters that don't look anything like
Cyrillic.

-- 
Dorothy J. Heydt
Vallejo, California
djheydt at gmail dot com

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#612362

On 1/10/2017 1:15 AM, Dorothy J Heydt wrote:
> In article <o50s1j$j4g$1@gioia.aioe.org>,
> Yuri Kretin  <invlaid@invalid.com> wrote:
>> On 1/9/2017 2:25 PM, Yuri Kretin wrote:
>>> On 1/9/2017 1:51 PM, The Starmaker wrote:
>>>>
>> https://www.google.com/#q=Researchers+Suggest+New+Theory+for+the+Moon%E2%80%99s+Origin
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>

>>>
>>> so, what were these "pre-moonies" called ?
>>
>> Moon is an English word
>>
>> Luna is Latin
>>
>> Levanah in Hebrew, or yareh-ah
>>
>> Луна [луна́]    in russian
>
> Could you transliterate that last, please?  I'm seeing a long
> string of non-ASCII characters that don't look anything like
> Cyrillic.
>

funny, when I read it from the server, the one I posted,  it is in 
cryillic, (using thunderbird reading from aioe)

but when I read yours it is messed up ascii...  are you reading from 
aioe or google groups? or ?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#612372

Yuri Kretin wrote:
> 
> On 1/10/2017 1:15 AM, Dorothy J Heydt wrote:
> > In article <o50s1j$j4g$1@gioia.aioe.org>,
> > Yuri Kretin  <invlaid@invalid.com> wrote:
> >> On 1/9/2017 2:25 PM, Yuri Kretin wrote:
> >>> On 1/9/2017 1:51 PM, The Starmaker wrote:
> >>>>
> >> https://www.google.com/#q=Researchers+Suggest+New+Theory+for+the+Moon%E2%80%99s+Origin
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> 
> >>>
> >>> so, what were these "pre-moonies" called ?
> >>
> >> Moon is an English word
> >>
> >> Luna is Latin
> >>
> >> Levanah in Hebrew, or yareh-ah
> >>
> >> Луна [луна́]    in russian
> >
> > Could you transliterate that last, please?  I'm seeing a long
> > string of non-ASCII characters that don't look anything like
> > Cyrillic.
> >
> 
> funny, when I read it from the server, the one I posted,  it is in
> cryillic, (using thunderbird reading from aioe)
> 
> but when I read yours it is messed up ascii...  are you reading from
> aioe or google groups? or ?


she's not reading it from Kansas anymore...

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#612484

島鉄雄です。
Yuri Kretin <invlaid@invalid.com> in <o52uu2$1nqf$1@gioia.aioe.org> writes:

> On 1/10/2017 1:15 AM, Dorothy J Heydt wrote:
>> In article <o50s1j$j4g$1@gioia.aioe.org>,
>> Yuri Kretin  <invlaid@invalid.com> wrote:
>>> On 1/9/2017 2:25 PM, Yuri Kretin wrote:
>>>> On 1/9/2017 1:51 PM, The Starmaker wrote:
>>>>>
>>> https://www.google.com/#q=Researchers+Suggest+New+Theory+for+the+Moon%E2%80%99s+Origin
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>
>>>>
>>>> so, what were these "pre-moonies" called ?
>>>
>>> Moon is an English word
>>>
>>> Luna is Latin
>>>
>>> Levanah in Hebrew, or yareh-ah
>>>
>>> Луна [луна́]    in russian
>>
>> Could you transliterate that last, please?  I'm seeing a long
>> string of non-ASCII characters that don't look anything like
>> Cyrillic.
>>
>
> funny, when I read it from the server, the one I posted,  it is in
> cryillic, (using thunderbird reading from aioe)
>
> but when I read yours it is messed up ascii...  are you reading from
> aioe or google groups? or ?

I think her newsreader don't support Unicode.

-- 
41号

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#612504

In article <m2ziix50qc.fsf@dai.tokyo.teikoku>,
å³¶é  é   <shima.tetsuo@dai.tokyo.teikoku> wrote:
>島鉄雄です。
>Yuri Kretin <invlaid@invalid.com> in <o52uu2$1nqf$1@gioia.aioe.org> writes:
>
>> On 1/10/2017 1:15 AM, Dorothy J Heydt wrote:
>>> In article <o50s1j$j4g$1@gioia.aioe.org>,
>>> Yuri Kretin  <invlaid@invalid.com> wrote:
>>>> On 1/9/2017 2:25 PM, Yuri Kretin wrote:
>>>>> On 1/9/2017 1:51 PM, The Starmaker wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>
>https://www.google.com/#q=Researchers+Suggest+New+Theory+for+the+Moon%E2%80%99s+Origin
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>
>>>>>
>>>>> so, what were these "pre-moonies" called ?
>>>>
>>>> Moon is an English word
>>>>
>>>> Luna is Latin
>>>>
>>>> Levanah in Hebrew, or yareh-ah
>>>>
>>>> Луна [луна́]    in russian
>>>
>>> Could you transliterate that last, please?  I'm seeing a long
>>> string of non-ASCII characters that don't look anything like
>>> Cyrillic.
>>>
>>
>> funny, when I read it from the server, the one I posted,  it is in
>> cryillic, (using thunderbird reading from aioe)
>>
>> but when I read yours it is messed up ascii...  are you reading from
>> aioe or google groups? or ?
>
>I think her newsreader don't support Unicode.

I think so too.  It's trn, running on BSD UNIX.

-- 
Dorothy J. Heydt
Vallejo, California
djheydt at gmail dot com

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#612396

On 1/10/2017 1:15 AM, Dorothy J Heydt wrote:
> In article <o50s1j$j4g$1@gioia.aioe.org>,
> Yuri Kretin  <invlaid@invalid.com> wrote:
>> On 1/9/2017 2:25 PM, Yuri Kretin wrote:
>>> On 1/9/2017 1:51 PM, The Starmaker wrote:
>>>>

>>>
>>>> Yous people should not be allowed to come up with..."new-theory",
>>>> cause they are gettin stupidier by the moment!
>>>>
>>>
>>> so, what were these "pre-moonies" called ?

>> Moon is an English word
>>
>> Luna is Latin
>>
>> Levanah in Hebrew, or yareh-ah
>>
>> Луна [луна́]    in russian
>
> Could you transliterate that last, please?  I'm seeing a long
> string of non-ASCII characters that don't look anything like
> Cyrillic.
>

using english letters
it was spelt with a    " capital pi y H a' "   in cyrillic letters

or  using letter names El U  En  A

  or by sound  l u n a

amazing!

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#612507

Kuri Yretin <invlaid@invalid.com> writes:

>> Could you transliterate that last, please?  I'm seeing a long
>> string of non-ASCII characters that don't look anything like
>> Cyrillic.

>using english letters
>it was spelt with a    " capital pi y H a' "   in cyrillic letters

>or  using letter names El U  En  A

>  or by sound  l u n a

>amazing!

Somewhat misleading as the Cyrillic letter that looks the most like a
capital pi has the 'P' sound.  The 'El' has a distinctive curved
left leg which you need to tell them apart. (It also looks like the
'D' except 'D' has the bottoms of the two legs joined)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#612287

pnalsing wrote:

>> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/2017/01/09/moon-formed-merger-20-
little-moonlets-new-theory-suggests/

I don't believe for a second in that moon landing. There are simply no 
proofs. Watching those pictures says exactly the opposite.

And I don't buy that argument saying that today is more expensive landing 
overthere. Can't possibly be. Much cheaper and affordable, YES, but more 
costly, absolutely NOT. So much for your moon landing.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#612401

pnalsing wrote:

>> NASA engineer admits they can't get past the Van Allen Belts
>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NlXG0REiVzE
> 
> Here, learn something...
> 
> http://www.popsci.com/blog-network/vintage-space/apollo-rocketed-through

Nonsense, probably you and your friends should read this detailed recent 
paper. I don't want to hear anything more about that moon landing.

NASA ADMITS: WE CAN'T LEAVE EARTH'S LOWER ORBIT
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nmEojSPDVG0

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#612805

On Monday, January 9, 2017 at 2:45:11 PM UTC-8, Nicholle Fiorillo wrote:
> pnalsing wrote:
> 
> >> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/2017/01/09/moon-formed-merger-20-
> little-moonlets-new-theory-suggests/
> 
> I don't believe for a second in that moon landing. There are simply no 
> proofs. Watching those pictures says exactly the opposite.
> 
> And I don't buy that argument saying that today is more expensive landing 
> overthere. Can't possibly be. Much cheaper and affordable, YES, but more 
> costly, absolutely NOT. So much for your moon landing.

When JFK was alive NASA had the right stuff GOPer Mafia could only take over USA if they killed him.Walter Annenberg gave the thumb's down.The rest is history.Those that say we never got men on the moon have to be GOPers.We now can't even get to the ISS and the reason is "GOPers stole 2 billion each year from NASA" 45 years WOW. Not to worry Trump promised us he would fix all of this once president.O ya You can trust a billionaire to keep his word and pay his taxes.He is our commander and chief,and pushing for bigger H-Bombs.I feel safer.don't you? When I go to Vagas its the Trump casino. He needs the $$$ to pay his taxes. 18 years  TreBrt

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#612839

"reber g=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> wrote:
I feel safer. When I go to Vagas, which I won't cuz
Michael does not want to see me, ... but I did call 
 the  Mental Health Hotline @ (800) 723-8641 again

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#612321

The Starmaker wrote:
> 
> https://www.google.com/#q=Researchers+Suggest+New+Theory+for+the+Moon%E2%80%99s+Origin
> https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2017/01/moon-formation-theories/504449/
> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/2017/01/09/moon-formed-merger-20-little-moonlets-new-theory-suggests/
> 
> It could only mean one thing....a trip to the moon.



What I meant by "It could only mean one thing....a trip to the
moon."....with Trump in, Mars is out!

That means 'they' will start talking Moon cause it's the only money they
are going to get is a ..ticket to the Moon.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#612325

The Starmaker wrote:
> 
> https://www.google.com/#q=Researchers+Suggest+New+Theory+for+the+Moon%E2%80%99s+Origin
> https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2017/01/moon-formation-theories/504449/
> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/2017/01/09/moon-formed-merger-20-little-moonlets-new-theory-suggests/
> 
> It could only mean one thing....a trip to the moon.
> 
> to stop their ridiculous bickering and stupid theories.
>


I don't know why yous even bother with these 'new theroies' about the moon, ...you're going to
throw them away anyway by next week.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#612326

The Starmaker wrote:
> 
> The Starmaker wrote:
> >
> > https://www.google.com/#q=Researchers+Suggest+New+Theory+for+the+Moon%E2%80%99s+Origin
> > https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2017/01/moon-formation-theories/504449/
> > http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/2017/01/09/moon-formed-merger-20-little-moonlets-new-theory-suggests/
> >
> > It could only mean one thing....a trip to the moon.
> >
> > to stop their ridiculous bickering and stupid theories.
> >
> 
> I don't know why yous even bother with these 'new theroies' about the moon, ...you're going to
> throw them away anyway by next week.


probably it's because no matter what theories yous come up with, there is always something ...missing.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#612374

The Starmaker wrote:
> 
> The Starmaker wrote:
> >
> > The Starmaker wrote:
> > >
> > > https://www.google.com/#q=Researchers+Suggest+New+Theory+for+the+Moon%E2%80%99s+Origin
> > > https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2017/01/moon-formation-theories/504449/
> > > http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/2017/01/09/moon-formed-merger-20-little-moonlets-new-theory-suggests/
> > >
> > > It could only mean one thing....a trip to the moon.
> > >
> > > to stop their ridiculous bickering and stupid theories.
> > >
> >
> > I don't know why yous even bother with these 'new theroies' about the moon, ...you're going to
> > throw them away anyway by next week.
> 
> probably it's because no matter what theories yous come up with, there is always something ...missing.


What's missing? Truth??

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#612467

The Starmaker wrote:
> 
> The Starmaker wrote:
> >
> > The Starmaker wrote:
> > >
> > > https://www.google.com/#q=Researchers+Suggest+New+Theory+for+the+Moon%E2%80%99s+Origin
> > > https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2017/01/moon-formation-theories/504449/
> > > http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/2017/01/09/moon-formed-merger-20-little-moonlets-new-theory-suggests/
> > >
> > > It could only mean one thing....a trip to the moon.
> > >
> > > to stop their ridiculous bickering and stupid theories.
> > >
> >
> > I don't know why yous even bother with these 'new theroies' about the moon, ...you're going to
> > throw them away anyway by next week.
> 
> probably it's because no matter what theories yous come up with, there is always something ...missing.


every single theory is missing 


something

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#612468

The Starmaker wrote:
> 
> The Starmaker wrote:
> >
> > The Starmaker wrote:
> > >
> > > The Starmaker wrote:
> > > >
> > > > https://www.google.com/#q=Researchers+Suggest+New+Theory+for+the+Moon%E2%80%99s+Origin
> > > > https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2017/01/moon-formation-theories/504449/
> > > > http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/2017/01/09/moon-formed-merger-20-little-moonlets-new-theory-suggests/
> > > >
> > > > It could only mean one thing....a trip to the moon.
> > > >
> > > > to stop their ridiculous bickering and stupid theories.
> > > >
> > >
> > > I don't know why yous even bother with these 'new theroies' about the moon, ...you're going to
> > > throw them away anyway by next week.
> >
> > probably it's because no matter what theories yous come up with, there is always something ...missing.
> 
> every single theory is missing
> 
> something


and a hundred years go by and
somebody comes along
and fixes the theory..

and something is still missing.


Einstein died trying to find
the theory of everything..

what he didn't realize was that

not that something was missing...but

that something 

will
always 
be
missing.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | sci.physics

csiph-web