Bob B.
Bob the Excel Guru?
Posts: 3,072
|
Post by Bob B. on Apr 15, 2006 8:05:02 GMT -4
Either they are lunites or unmanned mission samples collected from the moon, or a combination of both. Imo, of course. I don't see how the samples could possibly be lunites for a couple reasons. First, there are distinguishing characteristics that separate lunites from lunar rocks collected in situ, which has already been explained. Second, the lunar samples aren't just rocks. Included are soil and core samples, which can't possibly be explained by the lunite hypothesis. The soil also matches the samples returned by the Soviet Luna probes. If the samples can't be explained by lunties then we are left with: (1) they were collected by Apollo astronauts, or (2) they were collected by robotic probes. In support of #1 we have surviving examples of the hardware used to collect the samples, we have extensive documentation explaining how it was done, we have photographs and film of the samples being collected, we have the testimony of thousands of people involved in the project, we have other corroborating eye-witness testimony, etc. In support of #2 we have zippo. Given the evidence, I'll go with #1. Turbonium, what reasons can you give us to prefer option #2 other than your fervent desire that is must somehow be true? You are simply working backward from the belief the landings were faked and supporting whatever absurd explanation is necessary to keep from altering that belief regardless of the evidence. Your argument, turbonium, boils down to this: “I can’t explain how it was done and I have no evidence to support it, but I know the landings were faked so they somehow figured out how to do it.”
|
|
|
Post by PhantomWolf on Apr 15, 2006 12:18:33 GMT -4
Either they are lunites or unmanned mission samples
Well part of the question was do you think that a Geologist could be fooled by the use of Lunaites, and why. Do you understand the differences between a pristine moon rock and a Lunaite? The other part of the question is do you think they would be fooled by the images that showed the rock in position. Do you understand why these images are important to a Geologist studying the rock and do you think they would be fooled when looking for specific things that should be in those images? Once you have dealt with that we can deal with the absurdity of your two proposed collection methods.
|
|
Bob B.
Bob the Excel Guru?
Posts: 3,072
|
Post by Bob B. on Apr 16, 2006 9:07:43 GMT -4
Either they are lunites or unmanned mission samples collected from the moon, or a combination of both. Imo, of course. Let me also point out, turbonium, that the unmanned probe explanation contradicts your claim that only a few people in the inner circle actually knew what was going on. Developing a lunar sample return probe capable of returning the samples known to exist would have been a huge project, probably exceeding any unmanned mission yet launched. The people designing, building, testing. launching, operating, and recovering these things would have to know what it was they were doing. Clearly you can see that literally thousands of people would have direct knowledge of the project and thousands more would have been witness to part of it. Yet there is not one single shred of evidence that even hints at the existence of such a project in nearly forty years.
|
|
MarkS
Earth
Why is it so?
Posts: 101
|
Post by MarkS on Apr 16, 2006 20:04:28 GMT -4
Greetings, Turbonium. You have an interesting conjecture that the lunar rock samples could have been obtained using unmanned probes. At this www.lpi.usra.edu/expmoon/Apollo11/A11_Samples_tools.html Universities Space Research Association Web site the various rock and soil gathering methods used (well, claimed to have been used) are outlined. Is it your claim, opinion, idea, inference or theory that these methods were accomplished robotically? Would you think instead a bulk, indiscriminate sample grab was made and returned, spread out on someone's garage floor and then a manual collection with the rakes and picks made? Here pages.cpsc.ucalgary.ca/~jaeger/visualMedia/robotHistory.html is a pictorial history of robotics including the Apollo period of 1969-1972. Do any of the robots of that time period look versatile enough to have accomplished the sample collections, including drilled cores? If not, could you hazard a sketch the sort of machine you think could get that done? Since we never actually see a face and eyes inside the helmet of the pressure suits, could those actually have been occupied by dexterous, tool-wielding robots? Would using astronauts maybe have been less expensive?
|
|
|
Post by PhantomWolf on Apr 16, 2006 22:26:29 GMT -4
Since we never actually see a face and eyes inside the helmet of the pressure suits, could those actually have been occupied by dexterous, tool-wielding robots?
Actually this isn't true, there are several times were the crew have their gold visors up and their faces are shown on the TV or 9mm footage.
|
|
|
Post by BertL on Apr 17, 2006 11:41:22 GMT -4
Also, if the stones have been collected after the film fakery, how come the stones are visible in images and on film?
|
|
|
Post by PeterB on Apr 17, 2006 23:54:14 GMT -4
Turbonium
If the Apollo rocks were collected by sample return missions, how do you explain photographs of actual Apollo rocks with astronauts? If they were photographed on a location here on Earth, how were the Apollo rocks not contaminated by the environment they were photographed in?
If the missions were faked, what was the source of the signal received at the Honeysuckle Creek tracking station which they only got when the dish was pointing at the Moon?
|
|
|
Post by sts60 on Apr 18, 2006 10:55:10 GMT -4
And what about all the other stations that received data from lunar orbit (unfakeable) and the lunar surface (unfakeable), including the hand-deployed ALSEP stations for years after Apollo 17?
|
|
MarkS
Earth
Why is it so?
Posts: 101
|
Post by MarkS on Apr 18, 2006 17:20:52 GMT -4
...there are several times were the crew have their gold visors up and their faces are shown on the TV or 9mm footage. Thank you for correcting that. I remember the gold-tinted visors but don't recall (and do not doubt) pictures of faces.
|
|
|
Post by dwight on Apr 19, 2006 2:45:17 GMT -4
The visor up is noticeable on:
A11: 16mm DAC as Armstrong decends the ladder on while he is on the surface. A15: As Jim Irwin descends the ladder A17: Jack Schmidt during a station stop doing some lunar prospecting (which is often used to demonstrate visor-up in LEVA). Also Gene Cernan at various times at the LRV where you can even see him talking.
Not Apollo, but on The Dream is Alive IMAX film, the astronauts come up to the window while doing an EVA, and you can clearly see their faces.
There are no doubt more instances, but I'm going from memory here.
cheers Dwight
|
|
|
Post by PeterB on Apr 19, 2006 20:28:16 GMT -4
Hello? Turbonium? Are you there?
*tap tap*
|
|
|
Post by gwiz on Apr 20, 2006 3:02:05 GMT -4
On previous form, maybe he's gone away again, only to return in a few weeks with everything back to square one.
|
|