Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Fred Mertz
I believe we've seen eveidence presented here in previous threads (which I KNOW you read, so don't plead ignorance) that stated the odds of being able to see damage with a ground-based telescope would require the damage to be extensive... if it was a few tiles, it would not have been easily seen...

bottom line: if the damage was extensive enough to be seen by ground-based telescopes, it was extensive enough that the crew would already have been aware of the damage...
144 posted on 02/05/2003 7:16:54 AM PST by Chad Fairbanks ('I WISH, at some point, that you would address those damned armadillos in your trousers." - JustShe)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 143 | View Replies ]


To: Chad Fairbanks
that stated the odds of being able to see damage with a ground-based telescope would require the damage to be extensive...

Don't put words in my mouth. I didn't use the term ground-based in my statement of query.

151 posted on 02/05/2003 9:43:22 AM PST by Fred Mertz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 144 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson