Earthshine

Posted on by
Reply

This video takes us around the Moon and shows how it is illuminated not only by the brilliant light of the Sun but also by light reflected from the Earth. The trip starts on the side facing away from Earth where part of the surface is brightly illuminated by the Sun but the rest is totally dark. Moving around the Moon, the Earth rises, and its reflected bluish light illuminates the Moon’s surface. This dull glow is the earthshine. (You can clearly see it from Earth when the Moon appears as a crescent in the evening or morning sky.) When the Sun emerges from behind the Moon, the brilliant crescent is seen, but the earthshine is still faintly visible.

Video Credit: ESO

Team Kimberlin Post of the Day

Posted on by
1

The Dread Deadbeat Pro-Se Kimberlin claimed in his LOLsuits that he was the victim of false narratives spun to defame him. However, it turns out that the lies being told in the various court papers and testimony were all coming from him. The TKPOTD from five years ago today deals with one rather stupid falsehood Brett Kimberlin included in a court filing.

* * * * *

The Dread Pro-Se Kimberlin makes mind-bogglingly false assertions in his various court filings. Consider this from his opposition to my motion to dismiss his first amended complaint in his Kimberlin v. The Universe, et al. RICO Madness.ECF 29-2The Smith case he mentions is a case from the U. S. District Court for the District of Maryland which interprets the Maryland one year statute of limitations on defamation as also applying to false light invasion of privacy. It’s the controlling legal authority in the court handling the RICO Madness. TDPK states that Maryland’s highest court, that would be the Court of Appeals, has ruled otherwise. If that were the case, that would settle the law because defamation is a matter of state rather than federal law.

However, …

The Allen v. Bethlehem Steele case TDPK cites never went to the Court of Appeals. It is a Court of Special Appeals case, and that court is an intermediate appeals court. It’s decisions on matters of law are not binding on any federal court. The Court of Appeals has never ruled on the statute of limitations for false light, so the federal court’s precedent controls. Furthermore, there is no such case citation as 314 Md. 458 (1988). The proper citation for Allen is 76 Md. App. 642 (1988).

Oops.

popcorn4bkThere has been a certain sense of TDPK sorta/kinda making it up as he goes along. It will be interesting to see what kind of bizarre legal theories he will put in his omnibus opposition to the motions to dismiss his second amended complaint.

Stay tuned.

* * * * *

Lying liars gotta lie.