Mythbusters caught in error re: lunar surface albedo

[Nostradamus]

The albedo is an average. The albedo is dependent on a number of factors including the texture of the surface. The albedo of a polished surface is clearly not the same as the albedo of a chipped surfaced, or the same as the material pulverized into dust.

From the wikipedia:

The overall albedo of the Moon is around 0.072, but it is strongly directional and non-Lambertian, displaying also a strong opposition effect.[15] While such reflectance properties are different from those of any terrestrial terrains, they are typical of the regolith surfaces of airless solar system bodies.

[Craig Browning]

Yes... what I propose doesn't entail a massive, very complicated cover-up and too, how I explain most of what I put forth stems from some very down to earth realities/facts that science itself is exploiting every day (with the exception of Edward... that's a different issue).

I believe I've also clarified some things about those people I consider probably for real vs. that other 95+% out there who function mainly off of ego and personal delusion... most of whom are "ladder climbers" following whatever new trend crops up in hopes of cashing in on that fad. Not so with the 6% (ish) mentioned... they are more reclusive, private and far more prone to do "the work" for free or barter than focusing on the cash or popularity game.

[ProfWag]

Yes... what I propose doesn't entail a massive, very complicated cover-up and too, how I explain most of what I put forth stems from some very down to earth realities/facts that science itself is exploiting every day (with the exception of Edward... that's a different issue).

I believe I've also clarified some things about those people I consider probably for real vs. that other 95+% out there who function mainly off of ego and personal delusion... most of whom are "ladder climbers" following whatever new trend crops up in hopes of cashing in on that fad. Not so with the 6% (ish) mentioned... they are more reclusive, private and far more prone to do "the work" for free or barter than focusing on the cash or popularity game.

Yes, you have clarified those things about the 6ish% of those you feel are probably for real. So to criticize those that believe there could be a government cover-up as you did is interesting to me in that you called the notiion "absurd," whereas most of us that are skeptical of all psychics and mediums also find those notions "absurd" as well. My point being that I find it interesting how people can find some things absurd but not other things that could also be considered absurd.
Several months ago, I posted an article about a mermaid in India (or somewhere like that.) The board administrator laughed off the matter as nonsense and the town was only after publicity, then turned around and posted a "breathtaking" testimony on how the WTCs were imploded. From a psychological, educational perspective, I find it interesting how people believe some things that are contnrovesial, but not other things. Not sayiing anyone is wrong, I just find it interesting.

[Craig Browning]

I understand what you're saying and agree, from a certain angle it sounds rather hypocritical But at the same time, a massive cover-up such as some have tabled... the logistics alone are mind-boggling. But hey, we live in an era in which folks claim the Holocaust didn't happen

[ciscop]

Sorry, but I simply can't comprehend how or why any human being with average intelligence let alone high intelligence, can fall into this ridiculous course of drama. For Christ's sake, engage your common sense man! Look at how absurd this kind of theory actually is and why.

I'm not saying that to be cruel of insulting, I'm honestly concerned about your mental & emotional well being given how vested you seem to be when it comes to this delusion.

And yet you say that as many as 6 out of 100 "psychics" could potentially be "real"c and that John Edward may actually be able to talk to the dead, but you don't see how there could be a government cover-up on 9/11? I actually agree with you on the conspiracy theory thoughts, but I find it a bit hypocritical to bash the CTers as bad as you do, yet have stated beliefs that to many people are also a bit "absurd."

for me that´s the reason i keep coming back here
is the beauty of
¨The moon landing hoax is dumb... but the Yeti is real¨..
is just funny..

[NinjaPuppy]

for me that´s the reason i keep coming back here
is the beauty of
¨The moon landing hoax is dumb... but the Yeti is real¨..
is just funny..

Who here ever said that the Yeti is real?

[Nostradamus]

Much of this moon hoax baloney can be traced back to 1964 when the Gemini program was running. The president had already started the race to the moon. One of the problems was that we did not have any idea what the surface of the moon was like other than what we could determine from earth. There was a question about the depth of the moon dust or regolith. Someone went to the top of a volcano and began to collect dust. The goal was to sort out the amount of incoming dust into 2 categories: extraterrestrial dust and terrestrial dust. If you knew how much dust was raining down and extrapolated you could get an idea of how much dust would be on the moon. The rate that was determined was multiplied by the estimated age of the solar system and a depth of something like 40 feet was computed.

This computation has been used by creationists to show that our solar system is not old. They point out that the trips to the moon show a certain depth. Divide this by the rate to obtain time and voila the time is small.

So the question is why is there so little dust on the moon?

[NinjaPuppy]

So the question is why is there so little dust on the moon?

Answer: Because it is all over my house?

[Nostradamus]

Great chuckle there. I hear that the dust in houses in Indonesia can be great at times due to the fact the the 13, 77 islands of the country are volcanic in origin. At any given time there are lots of eruptions and a great deal of dust in the air.

The simple answer to the dust on the moon is that the experiment done on the volcano did not separate out the terrestrial dust from the material descending from outer space very well. That had been suspected so a follow up experiment was done by measuring the dust in outer space. This was done by measuring the impacts on satellites. The volcano person assumed all of the nickel was extraterrestrial in origin. That turns out to be wrong.

Here are web sites that continue to use the wrong rate of deposition on the moon.
http://www.middletownbiblechurch.org/sciences/scienc6.htm
http://www.creationism.org/books/TaylorInMindsMen/TaylorIMMl12.htm

A good description of the science and the history are found here
http://www.kent-hovind.com/matson/1proofs.htm