Post by sts60 on Aug 1, 2005 15:59:13 GMT -4
Here, "claim" is a summary of an HB position, "explanation" refers to the collective response by Jay, BobB, kiwi, etc., and "Followup" is of course the original poster's response. This is only a partial list. And yes, of course I'm paraphrasing.
Claim: Dust should be on the footpads.
Explanation: Dynamics of particles entrained in exhaust flow; trajectory in a vacuum; geometry of footpads.
Followup: "Dust is dust", suits were dirty. Dust should be on the footpads.
Explanation: Difference of suit material, walking through/falling in dust, picking up dusty objects; electrostatic charge.
Followup: None.
Claim: Apollo astronauts should swear on Bible.
Explanation: Swearing is not evidence of fact, only belief. New Testament admonishes against such swearing. Swearing was only a publicity stunt by serial stalker and proven liar.
Followup: None.
Claim: Astronaut clearly suspended by wire.
Explanation: No evidence of wire. Complete, high-quality motion imagery clearly shows astronaut leveraging himself off companion. Correlation with transcript. Behavior of motion compatible with such leveraging.
Followup: Astronaut clearly suspended by wire.
Explanation (peterb): Lunar samples. Unique qualities, quantity orders of magnitude greater than Soviet sample return; distinguishable from meteorites.
Claim: Geologists/chemists etc. incompetent to assess lunar samples. (Inferred from margamatix's statement that they "honestly believed" they were lunar samples.)
Explanation: Request explanation why international experts are incompetent. Request explanation for how samples could be faked.
Followup: None on this topic. New Claim: easier to pick up samples robotically.
Explanation: Not easy to pick up widely dispersed, selected, samples in quantity by robots. Absolutely no evidence for robotic program. Lunar sample collection exactly matches Apollo record. Entire point of Apollo was to go to the Moon, not pick up samples robotically anyway.
Followup: Apollo faked to distract public from Vietnam, etc., etc.
Claim: Moon distant/ Moon much further away than missions since.
Explanation: Distance to Moon part of Apollo mission design; orbital mechanics for lunar travel relatively simple; energy requirements small vs. reaching Earth orbit; mission simplified by short round-trip time. And, of course, no political will to go back to Moon since - public interest waned during Apollo.
Followup: Moon distant/ Moon much further away than missions since.
Claim: Moon environment hostile (vacuum, low gravity)
Explanation: Technology designed for vacuum, low-G environments. A number of design decisions simplified by vacuum and low gravity. Request for clarification on exactly what cannot be overcome, and why.
Followup: Moon environment hostile (vacuum, low gravity)
Claim: Moon environment hostile (high temperature/temperature extremes)
Explanation: Technology designed for temperature extremes. Lunar surface temperature is not "the" temperature. Well-known means for thermal management in space environment.
Followup: Moon environment hostile (high temperature/temperature extremes)
Claim: Lunar module design obviously incapable of task.
Explanation: Vehicle designed for low-gravity, vacuum applications. Brief discussion of materials used. Pointer to lengthy thread on this claim, with detailed discussion of LM design. Request for specific reasons vehicle inadequate. Request for experience or knowledge which would lend any weight to claim. Request to look at vehicle design documents (links provided).
Followup: Lunar module design obviously incapable of task.
Claim: Dust should be on the footpads.
Explanation: Dynamics of particles entrained in exhaust flow; trajectory in a vacuum; geometry of footpads.
Followup: "Dust is dust", suits were dirty. Dust should be on the footpads.
Explanation: Difference of suit material, walking through/falling in dust, picking up dusty objects; electrostatic charge.
Followup: None.
Claim: Apollo astronauts should swear on Bible.
Explanation: Swearing is not evidence of fact, only belief. New Testament admonishes against such swearing. Swearing was only a publicity stunt by serial stalker and proven liar.
Followup: None.
Claim: Astronaut clearly suspended by wire.
Explanation: No evidence of wire. Complete, high-quality motion imagery clearly shows astronaut leveraging himself off companion. Correlation with transcript. Behavior of motion compatible with such leveraging.
Followup: Astronaut clearly suspended by wire.
Explanation (peterb): Lunar samples. Unique qualities, quantity orders of magnitude greater than Soviet sample return; distinguishable from meteorites.
Claim: Geologists/chemists etc. incompetent to assess lunar samples. (Inferred from margamatix's statement that they "honestly believed" they were lunar samples.)
Explanation: Request explanation why international experts are incompetent. Request explanation for how samples could be faked.
Followup: None on this topic. New Claim: easier to pick up samples robotically.
Explanation: Not easy to pick up widely dispersed, selected, samples in quantity by robots. Absolutely no evidence for robotic program. Lunar sample collection exactly matches Apollo record. Entire point of Apollo was to go to the Moon, not pick up samples robotically anyway.
Followup: Apollo faked to distract public from Vietnam, etc., etc.
Claim: Moon distant/ Moon much further away than missions since.
Explanation: Distance to Moon part of Apollo mission design; orbital mechanics for lunar travel relatively simple; energy requirements small vs. reaching Earth orbit; mission simplified by short round-trip time. And, of course, no political will to go back to Moon since - public interest waned during Apollo.
Followup: Moon distant/ Moon much further away than missions since.
Claim: Moon environment hostile (vacuum, low gravity)
Explanation: Technology designed for vacuum, low-G environments. A number of design decisions simplified by vacuum and low gravity. Request for clarification on exactly what cannot be overcome, and why.
Followup: Moon environment hostile (vacuum, low gravity)
Claim: Moon environment hostile (high temperature/temperature extremes)
Explanation: Technology designed for temperature extremes. Lunar surface temperature is not "the" temperature. Well-known means for thermal management in space environment.
Followup: Moon environment hostile (high temperature/temperature extremes)
Claim: Lunar module design obviously incapable of task.
Explanation: Vehicle designed for low-gravity, vacuum applications. Brief discussion of materials used. Pointer to lengthy thread on this claim, with detailed discussion of LM design. Request for specific reasons vehicle inadequate. Request for experience or knowledge which would lend any weight to claim. Request to look at vehicle design documents (links provided).
Followup: Lunar module design obviously incapable of task.