Archive for August, 2006

>A recent comment left on my blog about this post:

Graham Hesketh & Fiona Mont said…
Why wont Nasa simply photograph the evidence? use the space telescope to photograph the lunar landing sites?

The only concivable reason why not would be because there is nothing there to photograph.

Are you serious? Or are you joking? I’m dying to know!

Well maybe the hoax promoters are right. In case anyone is interested, here are several websites with “evidence” that the lunar landing was a fake:

oh wait…those are the only sites I could find that actually claim hoax. Hmmm…

Well, here’s some good rebuttle info:

Ah…science. And this Kaysing guy is obviously a nut job. Check out this:
How sad and pathetic to defame the memory of a woman like Christa McAuliffe. I thought this was a funny thing until I started reading some of the bs this guy has said.

Oh, and also on that website is the answer to why the telescope can’t photo the landing site:
“7) Why doesn’t the Hubble Space Telescope provide proof?

This argument runs along the lines that as the HST can provide images of galaxies millions of light years away, why can’t it provide images of a lander on the Moon, which is on our door step?

Bit of a funny question really, anyone with normal eyesight can see the Andromeda Spiral Galaxy easily with the naked eye, and that’s over 2 million light years away, yet cannot see a lander on the Moon! As an amateur astronomer of some 40 years standing I have always understood why the HST could not provide images of the lunar landers on the surface of the Moon, but to get the correct figures I checked out the HST site at Hubble Space Telescope Its all down to the size of Hubble’s main mirror, which is 2.4 metres. One of the factors of the worth of a telescope is its resolution, the smallest amount of detail it can see, and this depends on the size and quality of the mirror. Hubble’s resolution is an amazing 0.048 arc seconds. This is how I calculate the minimum size object that HST can image on the Moon, in as simple a way as I could devise.

HST resolution = 0.048 arc seconds (formula for this is 116 divided by aperture in mm. = 116 divided by 2400)

Visual maximum diameter of full Moon = 31’40” = 1900 arc seconds (a fraction over 1/2 a degree)

Therefore HST can resolve an object on the Moon of (1900 divided by 0.048 ) = 1/39,583 of the Moon’s diameter

Actual diameter of Moon = 3476 km

Therefore resolvable object size = 3476 km divided by 39,583 = 87 metres

As the landers are only around 9 metres across it is not possible for the HST to resolve them, they just wouldn’t show up on any image of the area under examination. I emailed the HST site to make sure I had got my sums right, explaining why I needed it for this site, and their reply was as follows:

“You are correct. Hubble’s resolution is good and can resolve objects and areas as small as 280 feet, (86 metres) which rules out the Apollo debris on the moon. Hope this helps!”

Yes it does! Thanks to the HST Office of Public Outreach.

PS. The current largest ground based telescope is the 10 metre Keck, far bigger than the HST and therefore has a far better resolution of 0.012. But this is a theoretical limit that cannot be achieved through an atmosphere, so the HST, being in the vacuum of space, is still number one.”

Anyway, thanks for the comment and thanks for reading. Honestly, I had a lot of fun tonight going through websites to find this info. I had never given the subject much thought and now if ever at a cocktail party (’cause that’s somewhere I’m likely to be…not) I can carry on a very intelligent conversation on this topic.


Read Full Post »

>Even the Husband thought that this one was funny!

We are in the parking lot of Shop Rite and I see behind me there is a mother carefully putting one of those seat covers on the shopping cart. Obviously she cares that her precious child does not get sick from other people’s shopping cart germs. What a wonderful mother.


She’s SMOKING a big fat cigarette which she KEEPS DANGLING IN HER MOUTH while transferring her child from the car to the cart.

Shopping cart germs? Obviously Bad.
Secondhand smoke? Apparently, not a problem.

Now, I confess, I’m a former smoker and a Libertarian and I proudly defend the rights of smokers everywhere but COME ON!

Read Full Post »


>Woo-Hoo! I got a haircut. I went from long hair halfway down my back to a cute layered cut with the longest layer resting just above my shoulders. I feel so FREE!

I loved my long hair, but it was becoming a burden. Master J is obsessed with pulling, stroking, eating etc. my hair and honestly, it annoyed me so much that it was ruining our relationship. With the short cut he’s still all into my hair but because he can’t walk halfway across the room with it (okay, I’m exaggerating) I can tolerate it. Hurray!

Read Full Post »


>Sorry for the long silence. The Husband had to go away and with two littles who like constant attention and do not tolerate mama spending time on her own stuff, there was no blogging (or pretty much anything else!).

And then my computer chair broke. While I was sitting on it. The bottom caved in and then I was sitting INSIDE it. Legs up in the air, butt touching the floor, back against the back of the chair. Actually, if it hadn’t hurt it would have been really really funny.

Actually, even WITH the pain it was really really funny!

Anyway, blogging while sitting on the floor looking up at the computer…not gonna happen, folks. Sorry.

Read Full Post »

>Well Visit Woes

>Argh. I hate Well Baby Visits. Not only are there horrible shots to make my baby cry, but there are dumb-ass doctors who’s info is so mainstream and outdated it’s not even funny. Dr. “Mike” (because this office is so lame all the docs are called by their first names. blech) suggested I stop FEEDING Miss R during the night so she would SLEEP. She is TWO MONTHS OLD! Not only is she a great sleeper already (only up twice and briefly at that) but babies PHYSIOLOGICALLY NEED to eat during the night! She could develop Failure to Thrive if I refused to meet her nourishment needs. What an ass.

I hate this peds office. Although I also love it because there are over eight doctors. We can see a different one every time and no one ever catches on that (for example)the last doc prescribed vitamin d supplements and I never filled the scrip and am not giving them. They just assume everything is hunky-dory and that’s fine with me. I don’t get hassles for co-sleeping, breastfeeding, selective vax’s or whatever.

Read Full Post »

>Master J is…a handful. Seriously. He has boundless energy. He is intense and perceptive and persistent…especially persistent. He easily fits the categories of a Spirited Child (see Mary Sheedy Kurcinka’s Book) and a Highly Sensitive Child (see Elaine Aron’s Book). At least I think so. They have all sorts of quiz type things in the books where you rate characteristics on a scale of one to ten. But what if I’m wrong? What if I’m just a lousy parent who can’t handle a normal one and a half year old?

I wonder all the time what people must think when they see us out and about. For the most part, Master J is wonderful and well behaved. Please don’t get me wrong, I think he is an ice cream sundae with lots of whipped cream and two cherries on top fantastic! It’s just that he has so much ENERGY. Plus there are those times when he just digs in…stubborn to the core. I don’t have too many problems taking him out (mostly because his constant chatter is adorable and doesn’t bother me) except in places where calm and quiet are expected i.e. Church, the Library etc. I see other small children. They are not models of perfection, but they do sit for more than 2 seconds at a time. They whisper. They don’t think it is hysterically funny to race down an aisle flinging all the books off the shelves as they go. Or do they? Are other parents just more able to cope? Granted I’m generally wearing (yes wearing…in a sling or wrap) a two month old baby and am not quite as agile and quick as I could be, but do other children scream bloody murder when you gently try and redirect them?? Probably they do. Probably I just can’t cope.

Today I was really embarrassed. A very lovely well meaning woman took my son out of Church today because he was being…himself…and I was getting frustrated. (the Husband is a Sacristan and does not join us until right before Mass begins so I am alone with both children for about 20-30 minutes in the pews) She was SO nice about it, and it WAS helpful but…what does that say about me?? Why do women with five, six, ten etc. children seem to have it all under control? Does that mean I could never have a big family or did they struggle in the beginning as well?

Lots of questions today. Not a lot of answers. 😦 Some people just say, well, my kids know from the beginning that they sit in Church or get taken out for a spanking . I cannot believe that is the only way. We’re committed to gentle discipline and I do believe it works. Honestly, I don’t think Master J would change even if we (blech) decided to start hitting him. It’s not a punishment issue. It’s not a discipline issue. I truly don’t believe he CAN sit still. Am I so wrong??

Read Full Post »

>A New Blog

>I have a new blog here to detail my adventures in keeping my house/life clean and in order. This way I don’t have to bore ya’ll with details of kitchen scrubbing!!

Read Full Post »

Older Posts »