|
Post by BertL on Oct 20, 2007 17:29:02 GMT -4
Why bad to be a member of powerful and influential organization as CIA and NASA? It would not per se be a bad thing to be a member of the CIA. However, in this discussion related to fake moon landings, you accuse me of being a paid government agent which I am absolutely not. You are spreading lies about who I am. So, please refrain from getting personal on me. Nice way of twisting my words. I never said I agree with you. I'm not surprised by the 2.4 meter height of the astronaut, not at all. I expected such strange figures to come out of such incorrect techniques for measuring heights. I don't think the astronaut is 2 meter 40, I don't think the technique used for measuring that height is correct. You see, the astronauts were not allowed to be taller than 1 meter 80 (6 feet), for various reasons. So, an astronaut suit wouldn't be higher than an estimated 190cm maximum (depending on how much room the astronaut would get in the suit). The measurement that the astronaut is 240cm tall is wrong, because the maximum height of the astronaut suit wouldn't have been more than two meters. As such, your technique of measurement (the one used to measure the height of the astronaut) is wrong. It's as simple as that. Your technique gives a 240 cm tall astronaut, which is wrong. Now, as for the question (again, but rephrased): Do you agree that your technique of measurement is wrong, or do you think the astronaut is really 240cm high? And, for another question: Are you going to use NASA's high quality video provided by dwight (and me) to retry your calculations?
|
|
MarkS
Earth
Why is it so?
Posts: 101
|
Post by MarkS on Oct 20, 2007 19:59:35 GMT -4
BerrLsy, baby...[h]ow many your IQ? Having read BertLs's posts for some time, I'm betting in the low 140's or better. I really wouldn't go there if I were you, conspiromaniac.
|
|
|
Post by Grand Lunar on Oct 20, 2007 22:20:46 GMT -4
So, let's tally up, shall we?
Ad homs, check. Ignoring calculations, check. Claims based on poor quality video, check. Focusing too much on politics, check. Little discussion on actual science, check.
Is there anything else I've missed? So far, our "friend" is scoring well with the usual techniques of what I can only call "hoax beliver-ism". Or better put, near insanity.
"Stop the near insanity!" - Micheal J Nelson
|
|
|
Post by Grand Lunar on Oct 20, 2007 22:23:38 GMT -4
no comments on the giant astronaut? That's because everybody knows Buzz Aldrin is ten feet tall... I sometimes make Dr. Aldrin out to be larger than life, but never something like this! *Gasp!* Maybe this is a new strategy of the HB crowd! To make out astronauts to be larger than life, thus covering up their true intentions! Oh the fun.
|
|
|
Post by tofu on Oct 20, 2007 22:37:20 GMT -4
I sometimes make Dr. Aldrin out to be larger than life, but never something like this! yeah, it was a quote from braveheart.
|
|
|
Post by Grand Lunar on Oct 20, 2007 22:41:27 GMT -4
I sometimes make Dr. Aldrin out to be larger than life, but never something like this! yeah, it was a quote from braveheart. I knew that. I mean, who wouldn't, nowadays?
|
|
|
Post by conspiromaniac on Oct 21, 2007 1:58:39 GMT -4
Try again. I work with video of NASA! Do you understand me? Let me elaborate on why this particular argument is flawed Just because the source of the video is a NASA source doesn't make the video itself good enough to perform accurate measurements on. If we we tell you "Your measurements are not accurate, and they can't be because of 1) low resolution, 2) low framerate, 3) bad compression", responding to that with "But it's from NASA!" doesn't make the measurements any inch more accurate. They're just as inaccurate as before. Just because you work "with video of NASA!" doesn't mean your measurements (and conclusions) are accurate, and it also does not mean that you don't need to use a better quality version to make the measurements (and conclusions) more accurate. See here one history which happened to me in Russian forum. I looked the film ?For all mankind? and began to critic NASA for this film. NASA?s bodyguards answer for me that I not right, because this film not from NASA. I have not found objection on this. Does NASA take responsibility on itself for this video ?a16tc.mpg??
|
|
|
Post by dwight on Oct 21, 2007 4:42:29 GMT -4
A little background information on the a16tc.mpg clip I posted. The Apollo 16 mission video I used was newly converted from the raw sequential tapes. That means the black and white footage with the varying colour wheel filter information encoded into it was re-converted to the standard NTSC colour tv signal. When comparing the tape side by side with Mark Gray's DVDs you notice a 10-15% quality improvement. However, the conversion, which was essentially done as a test to see the results of converting the material anew, had one flaw: the colour sequence was made as Red - Green - Blue instead of the correct Red - Blue - Green. The end result has hue errors which look like the tint control is out of whack. The a16tc.mpg is a clip I made using a dvd of the above tv footage. The time code is somthing I added which simply reads the current field of video and adds a corresponding marker code to indetify the frame. This allows field accurate pinpointing and timing, and is something used on _ALL_ broadcast transmissions, and a visit to wikipedia will help clarify any lingering thoughts. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TimecodeIt is simply a counter. I doubt NASA will claim any responsibility for the clip I made, because essentially I created it, but they certainly _dont_ deny it is from their original material from which I extrapolated a timecode display. In short: * The source of the clip is direct from the NASA archives. Newly colour converted original source tape. * I added the time code display which was extracted from the frame information of the video itself. In this case a standard NTSC 29.97 frames per second provided the NTSC timecode.
|
|
|
Post by conspiromaniac on Oct 21, 2007 4:48:23 GMT -4
Mission of Apollo was political action on 90%. This all known long ago.Hogwash. It was a period of unprecedented peacetime innovation and effort, the effects of which can still be felt today. I was trained in my profession by Apollo engineers, who I can say today from my own experience were the best I know who ever practiced the trade. I, Sts60, and several others here have the technical expertise to evaluate the credibility of Apollo without the need for anyone else's opinion. You are uneducated person. You not know history of ?Apollo? program! ?Protector NASA troops are formed from such ignoramuses!? © conspiromaniac. Oh, my god! He is an engineer! Hey, engineer, you will show its professional knowledge! If draw a conclusion from your messages that you such engineer as I Japanese emperor! Give me reference to this sheet of document. My shelf, although I believe a scan may be available at Karl Doddenkoff's web site -- I used my hard copy. What is the source for your claim that the PLSS excluding the OPS is 0.8 meter high? You have provided no reference; just a number, which has turned out to be wrong -- and you had the means to test your measurement, but did not. You reject as "empty words" the work of those who did your check for you. This signifies you not have a proof. I no distrusted in it. You are liar!
|
|
|
Post by conspiromaniac on Oct 21, 2007 4:55:52 GMT -4
Calculate of the speedup of the free fall, please.Non sequitur. That activity does not need to be accomplished in order to point out your egregious errors. You are not teacher for me, and I am not pupil for you. Do not point to my mistakes, prove that I mistaken.
|
|
|
Post by conspiromaniac on Oct 21, 2007 5:42:17 GMT -4
Blood of NASA and bodyguards NASA will flow as river! Maniac gives a guarantee! The Empty bottles, banks and the lacerated "corpses" of bodyguards of NASA wallow under legs
I not advise for small babes and bodyguards of NASA to drink
I ignore empty chatter. I answer the arguments it proved calculation.
Mission of Apollo was political action on 90%. This all known long a
BerrLsy, baby, do you think you measured growing? How many your IQ?
Conspiromaniac, it is because on inane statements like this that led me to doubt as to whether you were really who you say you are. Somehow, I thought that in Russia,you would have been well educated. I guess I was stereotyping, this does not seem to be the case and I apologize for that.. You have shown to have the character of a typical Hoax Believer - incapable of reason, denying evidence, unable to do good research and easily prone to insulting people who bent over backwards to provide you with evidence that you were looking for. Freethinkers are those who are willing to use their minds without prejudice and without fearing to understand things that clash with their own customs, privileges, or beliefs. This state of mind is not common, but it is essential for right thinking;? Leo Nikolaevich Tolstoy To change the sense said twitching line from context it is a cheat. I actually agree with conspiramac that the motivation behind the Apollo program was primarily political. That doesn't mean anything about whether it really happened or not, however, and doesn't detract from the achievement in any way. Hey, ?ginnie?, your opinion quickly changed when American complied with me. I was posting a little too quick in response to his post. Yeah, it was political in nature to a large extent. Being in the Cold War Era, the Americans wanted to best the Russians on all fronts, be it on Earth or in Space. Luckily for NASA, the Russians didn't have anything equivalent to the Saturn V or things might have turned out differently. I'm hoping that with the international co-operation today creative space projects can be implemented. It seems though, that the private sector will be relied upon more and more. They don't have as deep a pocket as the government. You are miserable Canadian ?tail? which twirls American ?dog?. The Canadian of the charge money, Russian long ago carry the tourist in cosmos.
|
|
|
Post by Czero 101 on Oct 21, 2007 6:18:20 GMT -4
First you disrespect Jay who is a noted and respected expert in the field, then you disrespect Canadians...?
hmmm... I really don' t think that is going to help you in your Quixotic quest to prove your misbegotten assumptions.
I hope you enjoy the rest of your short stay here...
Cz
|
|
|
Post by BertL on Oct 21, 2007 6:43:38 GMT -4
Wow, conspiromaniac. Your latest stream of posts have been nothing but insults and personal attacks. I guess you ran out of arguments.
|
|
|
Post by Ginnie on Oct 21, 2007 8:17:48 GMT -4
To change the sense said twitching line from context it is a cheat. Hey, ?ginnie?, your opinion quickly changed when American complied with me. You are miserable Canadian ?tail? which twirls American ?dog?. The Canadian of the charge money, Russian long ago carry the tourist in cosmos. Well conspiromaniac, at least I will do some research now as to how much of the Apollo effort was political, unlike you who will reject any information that conflicts with your made up mind. I'll come back with my findings in this matter later...I'm hardly an expert in this area. The difference in you and me is that I like to learn, my opinion is not set in stone and I welcome input from other people. Do you really think I agree with Jason most of the time? Check out other threads where we've posted together! What's really tiring from you are the constant cliche expressions and simplistic rebuttals to our members posts. You've become something of a fictional character rather than a logical, thinking and reasonable human being. Conspiro the Maniac. From the steppes of Russia comes the one man who can right history! Ignored in his homeland, he surfs the internet, fighting to destroy the evil NASA regime. Able to work with the flimsiest of evidence, able to hurl multiple insults, he fights a never ending battle against American lies, Canadian complicity and International deception! You know, Conspiro, why don't we all start over - start a new thread, leave out the wild gesturing and personal insults. Maybe go on to another aspect of Apollo that you think is faked. I mean if the Apollo Missions weren't real surely there must be an easier part of it to pick apart than the video on this thread.
|
|
Bob B.
Bob the Excel Guru?
Posts: 3,072
|
Post by Bob B. on Oct 21, 2007 9:46:05 GMT -4
Well conspiromaniac, at least I will do some research now as to how much of the Apollo effort was political I think it depends on your perspective. To the politicians who gave their support to Apollo and approved its funding, it was almost certainly political. To the engineers, etc. who worked on Apollo, it was almost certainly not political -- to them it was an engineering and science endeavor. I don't think one can look at the vast amount technology and knowledge gained from Apollo and simply call it a political stunt, though without political motivation Apollo would have likely not received the funding needed to succeed.
|
|