|
|
Post by stargazer on Feb 5, 2006 14:05:57 GMT -4
So how far was Armstrong's thumb away form his eye? Holding your thumb close to the eye blocks out much more of the view than a full arms length. Have any data on this for your calculations? This stuff is only fishy if you want it to be. Ranb This again is exactly the response I expected. Of course, he put is thumb directly before his eye, as one always does in that situation. Keep dreaming... |
|
|
|
Post by stargazer on Feb 5, 2006 14:12:19 GMT -4
So how far was Armstrong's thumb away form his eye? Holding your thumb close to the eye blocks out much more of the view than a full arms length. Have any data on this for your calculations? This stuff is only fishy if you want it to be. Ranb This again is exactly the response I expected. Of course, he put is thumb directly before his eye, as one always does in that situation. Keep dreaming... What I predict next is that JayUtah, sts60 or another of the pros will come up with a calculation in which they will demonstrate that the "astronauts" helmet acted as a lense making everything smaller... but wait that would affect the appearance of the thumb also, well let's see, they certainly have something up their sleeves. |
|
|
|
Post by stargazer on Feb 5, 2006 14:37:54 GMT -4
But let's not be unjust to Armstrong. After all he wasn't such a full mouthed liar as some of the other "astronauts" rather he was the one who refused answering questions most of them all. Why? Because he is afraid. He knows that if he tries to come out they will kill him before his confession makes it on the airwaves. Sounds horrible, but I fear it's true.
|
|
|
|
Post by echnaton on Feb 5, 2006 14:45:05 GMT -4
What I predict next is that JayUtah, sts60 or another of the pros will come up with a calculation in which they will demonstrate that the "astronauts" helmet acted as a lense making everything smaller... If an astronaut is wearing helmet then he is wearing a pressure suit. The pressure suit includes a glove. If he is outside the LM looking at the earth, he is wearing a gauntlet over that glove making the apparent width of the thumb much larger than yours. How does this affect your calculation? |
|
|
|
Post by Retrograde on Feb 5, 2006 14:51:23 GMT -4
If an astronaut is wearing helmet then he is wearing a pressure suit. The pressure suit includes a glove. If he is outside the LM looking at the earth, he is wearing a gauntlet over that glove making the apparent width of the thumb much larger than yours. How does this affect your calculation? Depends on whether or not s/he squares the increase in the width of the thumb also. Wouldn't surprise me if that one didn't get squared... N |
|
|
|
Post by Retrograde on Feb 5, 2006 14:55:05 GMT -4
This again is exactly the response I expected. Of course, he put is thumb directly before his eye, as one always does in that situation. Keep dreaming... Well, ranb, s/he got you there, with the because-I-say-so method of proof. Can't argue with that... N |
|
|
|
Post by sts60 on Feb 5, 2006 15:00:16 GMT -4
What I predict next is that JayUtah, sts60 or another of the pros will come up with a calculation in which they will demonstrate that the "astronauts" helmet acted as a lense making everything smaller... but wait that would affect the appearance of the thumb also, well let's see, they certainly have something up their sleeves.
No calculation necessary, and just because I'm an engineer by profession (though not a P.E.) doesn't mean you need to be a "pro" to deal with this claim. Anyone can with a few moment's thought and easy experiment:
1. Your claim that your own thumb wouldn't cover up a full Moon is bogus unless you have some sort of digital deformity. 2 degrees is the common benchmark for one's thumb held at arm's length. The Moon subtends 1/2 degree as see from Earth, and the full Moon is more than covered up by any ordinary person's thumb held at arm's length.
1. The area of the Earth disc compared to the Moon disc is irrelevant. It's the diameter, which you had already looked up, that matters - 3.67 times that of the Moon. It's the shorter dimension (the width of your thumb) which must cover up the diameter. So the thumb must cover an area of 3.7 times 1/2 degree, or 1.9 degrees to be generous. Which is a little under the average angular width of an uncovered thumb at arm's length. Add a spacesuit glove and you make it even easier.
3. The Sun also subtends about 1/2 degree as seen from Earth, i.e., roughly the same as the full Moon - which is why we can have total and annular eclipses. I just went outside, and easily covered the Sun with my thumb - and I have long arms.
Why is it that conspiracy theorists seem so much less observant of the real world than the average person?
|
|
|
|
Post by sts60 on Feb 5, 2006 15:03:08 GMT -4
stargazer, do you withdraw your "Armstrong's thumb" claim, or not? If not, why not, exactly?
|
|
|
|
Post by Retrograde on Feb 5, 2006 15:04:09 GMT -4
Why is it that conspiracy theorists seem so much less observant of the real world than the average person? I think the causation goes the other way... N |
|
|
|
Post by sts60 on Feb 5, 2006 15:04:13 GMT -4
But let's not be unjust to Armstrong. After all he wasn't such a full mouthed liar as some of the other "astronauts" rather he was the one who refused answering questions most of them all. Why? Because he is afraid. He knows that if he tries to come out they will kill him before his confession makes it on the airwaves. Sounds horrible, but I fear it's true.
Yeah, sure. Just like they mercilessly and swiftly hunted down whistleblower Bill Kaysing. Well, they cleverly waited 40 years to make it look natural.
|
|
|
|
Post by JayUtah on Feb 5, 2006 15:07:35 GMT -4
I guess we can add trigonometry to the list of things Stargazer doesn't know anything about.
|
|
|
|
Post by sts60 on Feb 5, 2006 15:07:53 GMT -4
In my above post, I said that stargazer's claim that his thumb wouldn't cover up the full Moon was wrong. But he said he thought his thumb would "just about" cover the full Moon.
That's still wrong.
Again, unless he has some sort of deformed thumb, it will easily cover up the full Moon - by a factor of about four.
|
|
|
|
Post by sts60 on Feb 5, 2006 15:09:31 GMT -4
I guess we can add trigonometry to the list of things Stargazer doesn't know anything about. I wonder if he'll claim that NASA just made up the numbers for the average angular width of one's thumb at arm's distance. |
|
|
|
Post by JayUtah on Feb 5, 2006 15:09:36 GMT -4
Ah, but you neglected to consider that perhaps Stargazer's arm is very long -- say about ten feet.
|
|
|
|
Post by stargazer on Feb 5, 2006 15:11:51 GMT -4
stargazer, do you withdraw your "Armstrong's thumb" claim, or not? If not, why not, exactly? No, I don't withdraw it. As I said, I can also cover the moon with my thumb at full arm's length leaving very little space on both sides. I definitely cant cover 3,67 moons even if I wear two pairs of thick gloves one on the other. Armstrong freely made that up without thinking about it first. |
|
