Green is Urth Redux

DAVID STOCKHOFF · 12 Jan 2011, 17:25 · from 2011-January.txt.gz

This is the message as the crawl holds it, before anything here touched it. What the conversation shows has been through ingest: transfer encodings decoded, attachments dropped, quote markers repaired, and the archiver’s ? resolved into quotation marks and dashes. Those repairs are judgements and some of them are wrong, which is what this page is for. Email addresses are obscured here as they are everywhere else on the site, so it is before our repairs rather than byte for byte.

From: dstockhoff at verizon.net (DAVID STOCKHOFF)
Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2011 09:25:22 -0800 (PST)
Subject: (urth) Green is Urth Redux
In-Reply-To: <4D2DDD04.2090600 at io.com>
Message-ID: <79388.64238.qm at web84102.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

I'm not sure I follow that, but what I mean is that there is no reason to think that only the near side is green.

--- On Wed, 1/12/11, Jeff Wilson <jwilson at io.com> wrote:

> From: Jeff Wilson <jwilson at io.com>
> Subject: Re: (urth) Green is Urth Redux
> To: "The Urth Mailing List" <urth at lists.urth.net>
> Date: Wednesday, January 12, 2011, 11:55 AM
> On 1/12/2011 10:30 AM, DAVID
> STOCKHOFF wrote:
> > As I thought. Therefore, the entire Lune is probably
> 70% green. No point, just saying.
> 
> You still can't see the *far* side from the earth, due to
> tide locking.? Geometrically, this means you can get
> 70% visible area greenness with as little as 60% coverage of
> the near side's surface area, or 30% of the total surface
> area.
>

An unofficial mirror of a public mailing list · about & removal requests · download the archive · before the list · original archive at urth.net