From Daniel Ross's book UFOs and the Complete Evidence from Space:
"Astronomers have always that the question of lunar atmosphere can
be answered by the way in which stars are " occulted " by the moon.
since stars passing behind the rim of the moon appear to snap out
instantaneously, astronomers readily conclude that there must not be
an atmosphere there. If there were a gaseous layer, they say the
effect should be as obvious as the case of a star occultation of
Venus, where the extensive atmosphere makes the star appear to
flicker and fade briefly before disappearingbehind the rim of the
planet. ButVenus' atmosphere is much denser, and the planet's size
too massive, to compare effects.
William Brian, a recent moon researcher, suggests that al unar
atmosphere would be very clean due to the lack of high winds and
other weather conditions. Since the Lunar atmosphere would not
generally be carrying dust and water vapor by surface winds, he
points out that light diffusion and scattering effects would be
minimal. Therefore, the occultation of stars would not be as
pronounced, even if The Moon possessed a dense atmosphere."
End of quote-
People-
Daniel Ross presents some very good logic, his book is full of such
logic. A lot of evidence prior to the space program is presented,
such as the findings of the lunar observers who employed huge
telescopes. And it is easy to read.
I suggest that you all to go to his site and pick up the book. It isn't
expensive, and it is good to know these things, to learn the
arguments against orthodoxy.
Dean