The pro-Apollo people said that the fact that there was no dust cloud showed the footage was taken on the moon.
The hoax believer said it was possible to make sand dust-free by sifting it and washing it. Jay Windley and the other regular posters here insisted that just transporting and placing dust-free sand would cause enough erosion to create enough dust to create a dust cloud when the sand is driven over.
Here are some of the posts in which this was discussed.
http://apollohoax.proboards21.com/index.....ge=1#1179656014 Rocky, what dust does in an atmosphere that it doesn't do in a vacuum is billow about in the vehicle wake and generally hang in the air. The Apollo videos, on the other hand, show dust that falls back to the ground as rapidly as it is thrown up. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://apollohoax.proboards21.com/index.....ge=2#1179769377 However, since dust aerosolizes profusely in atmosphere, the visible lack of aerosolization can be taken as evidence of a lack of atmosphere. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://apollohoax.proboards21.com/index.....ge=7#1180463695 If I wanted to keep dust from billowing up for a fake moon shot, I'd get some sand and sift it and wash it so there wouldn't be any particles small enough to float in the air. A few dozen truckloads of that would do it. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
And then all of those billions of grains of sand rub and grind and wear against each other in the act of sifting and filling and dumping creating...
guess what...
Dust.
The same way that dust is created in the first place. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://apollohoax.proboards21.com/index.....ge=7#1180472159 And about washing the sand until no dust remains, what about the dust that's created once they actually lay the washed sand down on the sets? The very process of laying the sand down and walking on it would create more dust from the particles rubbing together. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://apollohoax.proboards21.com/index.....ge=8#1180473413 If I wanted to keep dust from billowing up for a fake moon shot, I'd get some sand and sift it and wash it so there wouldn't be any particles small enough to float in the air. A few dozen truckloads of that would do it.
You've obviously never tried to sift and wash particulates. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
And said dust is promptly generated as the sand is handled, transported, distributed, and driven across. I can accept that HBs are ignorant of the science and technology involved, but what really strikes me is how unobservant they are of the way things work in the real world, even as they are appealing to "common sense". ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://apollohoax.proboards21.com/index.....ge=9#1180548427 It's funny that a non-scientist like myself can even understand that the very act of laying down and walking on washed sand would create more dust but rocky can't. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
So are you saying it's impossible to make dustless sand and place it along a route so that no dust is kicked up when it's driven on?
Yes. And I'm further agreeing that the material in the Grand Prix video clearly cannot be sand, for it is visibly impressible. And since you are the one proposing that a dustless impressible particulate was created and used for this purpose, it is your burden of proof to show that it can be done and that it was in fact done.
You need to get a serious grip. You're not proposing anything remotely rational. You're simply supposing that some previously unknown material exists that somehow magically has all the properties you need in order for your alternative theory to be true. You can't salvage an absurd theory simply by listing all the improbable things that would have to change in order for it no longer to be absurd, and then on that basis simply say that list must have happened.
You're clearly ideologically entrenched on this issue and now simply grasping at straws. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sand that has been sifted and washed to the point of removing all dust is magical. Such sand that remains dustless forever, even when driven over by a vehicle, is magical. Such a material does not exist. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://apollohoax.proboards21.com/index.....e=13#1181070209 in rocky's fantasy world, we might as well assume that NASA engineered a special container that fully seperated every grain of sand into it's own little container so that none of the particles rubbed together. Then they sprayed all the particles with Pam to reduce friction so they wouldn't create dust.
But wait, if we are in fantasy land, why don't we just say that NASA engineered a new kind of sand that doesn't create dust at all! NASA can do anything so long as it doesn't involve technology that could actually take them to the moon.
It's really great that people can think the way you do rocky. It makes perfect sense in that weird little brain of yours that NASA could literally fake anything they wanted but at the same time couldn't use those talents towards actually going to the moon. I'm just glad that people like you aren't wasting your talents trying to make the world a better place or anything. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://apollohoax.proboards21.com/index.....e=13#1181076725 But don't you think Rocky would be great if he got into the sand washing business? He could help NASA fake the next moon landing too with his extensive knowledge of sand washing techniques. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://apollohoax.proboards21.com/index.....e=15#1181478556 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- And again, so Rocky can ignore it one more time, particles encountering an atmosphere would form a cloud and be suspended in the air taking even longer to fall than on the moon.
I'm not ignoring it. I think the soil could have been sifted and washed to remove all the dust. I don't buy your explanation that the wheel kicking up dirt would cause enough erosion to create enough new dust to form a visible cloud. ---------------- Particles in an atmosphere aerosolize. These do not. You got around that only by proposing a sort of magical sand that washes perfectly clean and stays washed no matter what you do to it, and was laid down only exactly where the rover wheels would hit, so that such an unimpressible particulate wouldn't give away the other illusions -- a material no one (including you) has ever seen.
There's nothing magical about sifting and washing a few dozen truckloads of sand to remove the dust. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
You're ignoring what I said about sifting and washing sand to make it dust-free. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Asked and answered. ---------------------- I don't buy your explanation that the wheel kicking up dirt would cause enough erosion to create enough new dust to form a visible cloud.
I have practical experience with this. You do not, and admit that you cannot because you "live in an apartment." Sheer denial. ---------------- There's nothing magical about sifting and washing a few dozen truckloads of sand to remove the dust.
Asked and answered. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://apollohoax.proboards21.com/index.....e=18#1181559735 I would suggest watching a Dune buggy/Dirt Bike at speed and watching the Roostertails, noting Vortices and Aerosolisation, and Turbulence wakes they are suprisingly visible, you might also like to watch the Irregular spray pattern from the back of a speed boat.
Only dust-sized particles would form Vortices and Aerosolisation, and Turbulence wakes. If the sand was sifted and washed there wouldn't be any dust-sized particles.
There is dust billowing in the pictures you posted because the dirt hasn't been sifted and washed. You totally ignored the idea that the sand might have been treated in your post. It would have been very easy to sift and wash a few dozen truckloads of sand and place it in the area where the rover was going to drive at high speed. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Then do it. Make some of this magical dust-free sand and show us footage of a vehicle driving on it in Earth's atmosphere without leaving a cloud of dust. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Just common sense. If sand is sifted, only the larger grains remain. Then, the sand can be washed and scrubbed for as long as possible until there aren't any dust-sized particles left. It would take years of erosion to produce enough dust-sized particles to form a cloud as big as the ones in these pictures when driven over.
Then do it. Make some of this magical dust-free sand and show us footage of a vehicle driving on it in Earth's atmosphere without leaving a cloud of dust. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Then it's very simple. You don't know whether you can perfectly wash sand and have it stay perfectly washed as you claim. Therefore it remains Magic Sand.
Some of the rest of us have practical experience with sifting and sizing particulates and we really do know what we're talking about. As I said before, engineers use sized particulates all the time. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No. You keep ignoring all the practical problems with this. You ignore that no one in the history of the universe has yet been able to do what you say was done: wash and sift sand so completely as to remove all aerosolizable particles, then handle it in any way without creating more of those particles. You just "guess" that it could be done!
And you won't test that theory. You won't show an example of when others allegedly have done it. You won't conduct any sifting/washing experiment of any kind whatsoever to confirm that what you say must have happened is, in fact, actually possible.
Not only are you ignorant of the facts relating to your claim, you prefer to remain ignorant. Why do you think anyone cares what you believe under those circumstances? ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
How long would that take? I want an actual number and a description of the method you used to determine the number. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://apollohoax.proboards21.com/index.....e=19#1181593432 As I said before--sand can be made dust-free by sifting and then washing for as long as necessary. You attempts to say it's impossible to make sand dust-free were pretty lame. Also, the erosion caused by the wheels kicking up dust-free sand would not break up enough sand into dust-sized particles to form a visible cloud. That was another lame attempt to discredit the theory that they could have sifted and washed some sand to make it dust-free.
Total BS and you know it. It is not just the spinning of the wheels that would break up the sand and cause more dust but also the act of sifting it and of moving it. In both situations the sand will grind together and create more dust. That is why it is impossible to have completely dust free sand on such a large scale. This was already explained to you once before but of course you ignored it just like you do with everything inconvenient to your paranoid preset world view. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://apollohoax.proboards21.com/index.....e=19#1181596038 Just the pressure of tons of sand being dumped out of a dump truck will be enough to grind it together and create dust. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://apollohoax.proboards21.com/index.....e=22#1181838149 Q. if It runs into atmosphere which removes the Horizontal component of motion causing it to fall straight down, Why are no other signatures of atmosphere? espescially when you consider that this dust must have reached its Terminal Velocity and is now fauling through at atmosphere at the mercy of every turbulent wake it cares to strike
I still think they could have removed any dust by sifting and washing sand. You're explanations of not being able to do that and that just moving the sand and driving on it would cause enough erosion to form enough dust to form clouds were laughable.
I guess I should just post stuff for the viewers to see and forget about you people. I know you're going to deny everything hell-or-high-water. I never hoped to make you admit anything. All I ever hoped to do was find an anomaly that was so clear that when you tried to explain it away, you'd look silly--this rover footage is it. You all look very silly trying to explain this away. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
But you offer only vague, handwaving theories for how to accomplish this, and you refuse to test any of those theories yourself before requiring others to believe them. Those who have actually done what you refuse to do disagree with you that your "I think they could have" constitutes a valid depiction of reality. -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
...when you said that it was impossible to make sand dust-free by sifting and washing it.
We know why the dust forms. You just say it somehow didn't happen again during handling after washing and sifting. And those of us who have handled such treated particules know what we're talking about. You, who refuse to acquire any practical understanding of the process, do not.
There's nothing impossible about sifting some sand and washing and scrubbing it until it's dust free and then placing it where the rover is going to drive.
It has been clearly explained to you many times why it's impossible to handle particulates without generating dust. You simply say that it somehow didn't happen in this case, but do not say why.
Spinning wheels over dust-free sand would not cause enough sand to erode into dust to make a cloud.
The majority of the dust is created as it is removed from the washing apparatus, conveyed to the photography site, and laid down -- not right as the rover wheels pass over it. The rover wheels would aerosolize the dust that was created in those prior steps.
This whole idea of not being able to make sand dust-free is totally silly.
Not to the people who have actually tried to do it. And that would not be you.
And the whole idea that dust-free sand would exhibit the properties you say you see in the videos is also totally silly. Even if you could make it and get enough of it under the wheels without creating more dust, it still wouldn't be ejected from the wheels in air in the "obviously non-parabolic" way you say.
Not only is your sand made magical by the impossible process you say created it, but also by its uncanny ability to selectively defy the laws of aerodynamics -- laws you admit you don't understand.
You can pretend all you want but you destroyed your credibility when you said this.
Not according to any who have rendered an opinion. If you can refer to anyone who agrees with you at all, anywhere, now would be the time to identify him.
If a theory that's being put forth is just inherently silly, it doesn't matter how many people there are with scornful patronizing attitudes that agree with it...
Ah, so anyone who agrees with us simply has a "scornful patronizing attitude," and their opinion does not factor into your assessment of your own argument's strength. That would be very helpful to maintaining the illusion that there's a silent army of very knowledgeable lurkers supporting you. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Anybody who is wondering whether just transporting and placing dust-free sand would cause enough erosion to create enough dust to form a dust cloud when driven over should to to a university and ask a geology professor. He or she will say that just transporting and placing dust free sand will not cause enough erosion to create enough dust to cause a dust cloud when the sand is driven over. These people have been caught in a big lie. Evidently they were so accustomed to lying about science that they got careless and lied about something very basic. Their credibiIity is shot and I would say that the credibility of this whole site is shot.
Re: The Dust-Free Sand Issue « Reply #1 on Nov 3, 2007, 12:56pm »
Why did you simply summarize another whole thread?
Rocky had his chance to explain the particulate behavior in a way that made scientific sense, and he either couldn't or wouldn't. Are you taking up his cause?
As for consulting geology professors; their expertise doesn't generally include hauling sifted particulates in trucks. Engineers do that. Rocky has a whole cast of imaginary, anonymous "experts" who somehow manage to say (through Rocky, of course) exactly what Rocky needs in order to maintain his beliefs, but then fade away when we want to know who they are.
So cosmored, are you actually trying to make a point here?
Joined: Nov 2005 Gender: Male Posts: 1,260 Location: the Netherlands
Re: The Dust-Free Sand Issue « Reply #2 on Nov 3, 2007, 12:57pm »
Quote:
Anybody who is wondering whether just transporting and placing dust-free sand would cause enough erosion to create enough dust to form a dust cloud when driven over should to to a university and ask a geology professor. He or she will say that just transporting and placing dust free sand will not cause enough erosion to create enough dust to cause a dust cloud when the sand is driven over. These people have been caught in a big lie. Evidently they were so accustomed to lying about science that they got careless and lied about something very basic. Their credibiIity is shot and I would say that the credibility of this whole site is shot.
Saying it doesn't make it true, and is not proof. Prove it. You've made a pretty bald accusation there, you might as well want to back it up.
Re: The Dust-Free Sand Issue « Reply #4 on Nov 3, 2007, 2:04pm »
...should to to a university and ask a geology professor. He or she will say that just transporting and placing dust free sand will not cause enough erosion...
Have you actually done this? If so, name the university and professor. If not, what qualifies you to say what someone else would or would not say, who is expected to be taken as an expert? Isn't the whole point of consulting an expert to obtain information that you don't have?
Evidently they were so accustomed to lying about science that they got careless and lied about something very basic.
Converting the conditional. What you imagine a professor of geology would say about hauling sand in trucks, without actually having asked him, does not qualify as having established a "very basic" scientific principle. People contradicting your unsupported supposition does not constitute having told a "big lie."
A very substantial case was made against Rocky's "sifted and washed sand" hypothesis. Rocky didn't have any answer for it, except to suppose that something could be invented that magically solved his problem and exhibited contradictory physical properties. The subsequent imagination that armies of experts would rise to his defense has failed to be realized.
Rocky never got the picture. He didn't realize that he was talking to people who actually are qualified in these fields and actually know what they're talking about. Faced with his inability to bluff his way through the science, having taken no training and having performed no experiments, he resorted to trying to dismiss everyone as the antagonists in his paranoid fantasy on no stronger grounds than their disagreement with his beliefs.
Joined: Feb 2006 Gender: Male Posts: 790 Location: Minneapolis MN / Houston TX
Re: The Dust-Free Sand Issue « Reply #8 on Nov 3, 2007, 7:47pm »
*sniff sniff* hmm, smells like dirty old socks in here.
I used to help my dad haul rocks of all sizes when he was rebuilding our yard. We hauled everything from bags of small pebbles to large rocks that we just threw in the back of his truck. Every single time we hauled the rocks, it generated lots of dust. At the bottom of every bag of small pebbles was a big pile of dust and every time we emptied the truck of the big rocks there was dust all over the bed. When it came to the big rocks, we would pick them out ourselves and they didn't have dust on them when we picked them out.
Handling particulates of any size for any amount of time generates dust. We could have sifted and washed those bags of pebbles and large rocks all day, but as soon as we packed them up again there would have been dust.
Who is this mysterious geologist that you attribute to this bold claim? If you want to make any kind of dent in the apollo record for your claims then you had better start providing names and sources. Vague claims make no impact on the Apollo record at all.
Joined: May 2005 Gender: Male Posts: 537 Location: Robins AFB, GA
Re: The Dust-Free Sand Issue « Reply #9 on Nov 3, 2007, 8:04pm »
If we've lost all our credibility, and believe me I'm really broken up that you think so, honestly there could be tears, then why do you feel the need to hide your identity and come back to talk with us? Did you seriously think we wouldn't notice that you used the exact same wording that you did on the Loose Change forum?
Joined: Jul 2006 Gender: Male Posts: 478 Location: Atlanta, GA
Re: The Dust-Free Sand Issue « Reply #10 on Nov 3, 2007, 8:07pm »
Hey, cosmored, don't forget this one:
The hardness thing is a red herring, anyway. It is a well known fact that a material can only be scratched by something of equal or greater hardness.
Suppose I had thirty tons of diamonds in a truck. Suppose I dumped out those diamonds onto the ground. What do you think would be the result of the rubbing and scraping of thirty tons of diamonds against each other?
You would get a cloud of diamond dust, that's what.
I'm pretty proud of that one, and I wouldn't want to see it left out of your list of quotes.
![[Home]](http://s1.images.proboards.com/menu/home.gif)
![[Help]](http://s1.images.proboards.com/menu/help.gif)
![[Search]](http://s1.images.proboards.com/menu/search.gif)
![[Login]](http://s1.images.proboards.com/menu/login.gif)
![[Register]](http://s1.images.proboards.com/menu/register.gif)
![[Search This Thread]](http://s1.images.proboards.com/search2.gif)
![[Send Topic To Friend]](http://s1.images.proboards.com/buttons/sendtopic.gif)
![[Print]](http://s1.images.proboards.com/buttons/print.gif)
Author
Logged
![[avatar]](http://www.majhost.com/gallery/BertL/Stuff/aniava.gif)
![[homepage]](http://s1.images.proboards.com/buttons/www_sm.gif)
![[avatar]](http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v388/plan2scrap/avatar3.jpg){kind=avatar}
![[avatar]](http://www.bautforum.com/signaturepics/sigpic31082_1.gif)
![[avatar]](http://www.braeunig.us/pics/gemini.jpg)
![[avatar]](http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v176/ReynoldBot/Art/Gallery/Bomb-Study-3.gif)
![[aim]](http://s1.images.proboards.com/aim.gif)
![[avatar]](http://i120.photobucket.com/albums/o162/lunarorbit/manonmoon.jpg)
