|
Post by Mr Gorsky on Aug 3, 2005 8:29:18 GMT -4
As Margamatix has brought up the subject of this boards domain name at least twice in his various threads, I thought it would just be worth offering a note of clarification.
His point seems to be that we are all extremely pro-Apollo for a site called "Apollohoax".
The apollohoax.net website (yes, originally there was a website attached to this URL as well as the discussion board) was indeed originally set up by a believer in the Apollo moon landings having been hoaxed.
Over time, after much discussion along the lines going on at the moment, the site owner came to change his mind about the hoax and believe that they did happen exactly as advertised.
AFAIK (and there are many others with a longer history with the site than me), the site itself has gone through a couple of new owners since then, and is now a site dedicated to countering the many and various hoax arguments doing the rounds ... and the name has stuck with it through all of that.
Simple really.
;D
|
|
Bob B.
Bob the Excel Guru?
Posts: 3,072
|
Post by Bob B. on Aug 3, 2005 9:08:38 GMT -4
The purpose of the site is to discuss the alleged Apollo moon landing hoax, so Apollohoax seems like an appropriate enough name to me. Does it really matter whether most users are predominately pro-Apollo or not?
|
|
|
Post by margamatix on Aug 3, 2005 9:20:30 GMT -4
Doesn't matter to me.
|
|
|
Post by sts60 on Aug 3, 2005 10:47:04 GMT -4
Where is your current sig from, anyway - the one that replaced the Sibrel quote about the LM? It looks like a quote, or is that your own line?
|
|
|
Post by margamatix on Aug 3, 2005 10:50:07 GMT -4
I just made it up.
|
|
|
Post by JayUtah on Aug 3, 2005 11:16:30 GMT -4
Not to be overly contentious, but does that mean you no longer agree with Sibrel's lay asessment of the LM?
|
|
|
Post by margamatix on Aug 3, 2005 11:46:00 GMT -4
No- as engineers say, "If it looks wrong, it probably is wrong.
I just change my signature every week or so anyway, and signatures may be a quote from someone else, in which case I will attribute the quote, or some of my own home-spun trucker philosophy, in which case I won't.
|
|
|
Post by twinstead on Aug 3, 2005 11:48:18 GMT -4
No- as engineers say, "If it looks wrong, it probably is wrong. I just change my signature every week or so anyway, and signatures may be a quote from someone else, in which case I will attribute the quote, or some of my own home-spun trucker philosophy, in which case I won't. LOL you've just told engineers what engineers say. Good luck with that.
|
|
Bob B.
Bob the Excel Guru?
Posts: 3,072
|
Post by Bob B. on Aug 3, 2005 12:01:07 GMT -4
No- as engineers say, "If it looks wrong, it probably is wrong. Where did you come up with that one?
|
|
|
Post by sts60 on Aug 3, 2005 12:24:42 GMT -4
(has margamatix changed his mind regarding the sibrel lm quote-) No- as engineers say, "If it looks wrong, it probably is wrong.
Well, I haven't heard that particular expression. But I've only been an engineer about 14 years.
Really, though, there's some truth to that. An experienced engineer, one who actually knows about what he or she is considering, can often tell from something looking wrong.
This doesn't hold for laymen looking at something out of their experience. Orbital mechanics is an example. Why the heck would you slow down to catch up with something flying ahead of you? That "looks wrong!"
|
|
|
Post by skinbath on Aug 3, 2005 14:08:48 GMT -4
sts60 wrote earlier: This doesn't hold for laymen looking at something out of their experience. Orbital mechanics is an example. Why the heck would you slow down to catch up with something flying ahead of you? That "looks wrong!" [/quote] I`d appreciate you taking the time to explain this, Cheers. ( I`ll get the hang of this quote thing one day)
|
|
Bob B.
Bob the Excel Guru?
Posts: 3,072
|
Post by Bob B. on Aug 3, 2005 14:17:46 GMT -4
I`d appreciate you taking the time to explain this, Here's the quick answer: When an orbiting spacecraft slows down it begins to drop into a lower orbit. As it loses altitude the spacecraft begins to speed up. Thus slowing down actually has the effect of speeding you up, and vice versa.
|
|
|
Post by twinstead on Aug 3, 2005 14:30:45 GMT -4
I`d appreciate you taking the time to explain this, Here's the quick answer: When an orbiting spacecraft slows down it begins to drop into a lower orbit. As it loses altitude the spacecraft begins to speed up. Thus slowing down actually has the effect of speeding you up, and vice versa. Doh! I was thinking that if you are both in orbit at the same altitude, and one is in front, you could catch up to it by slowing down so the one in front would orbit faster and catch up to you from behind... I'm way off as usual
|
|
|
Post by skinbath on Aug 3, 2005 14:51:49 GMT -4
I`d appreciate you taking the time to explain this, Here's the quick answer: When an orbiting spacecraft slows down it begins to drop into a lower orbit. As it loses altitude the spacecraft begins to speed up. Thus slowing down actually has the effect of speeding you up, and vice versa. And this is due to the effects of gravity?
|
|
|
Post by ottawan on Aug 3, 2005 14:55:22 GMT -4
Actually it's due to orbital mechanics. In a lower orbit your speed increases, therefore you "catch up" to the object in a higher orbit, which is travelling slower.
|
|