|
Post by grashtel on Apr 21, 2006 8:23:08 GMT -4
Pity we cant get some pictures. Photographic film is too grainy. One day soon we will have multi gage pixel Cameras So we may be able to see a moon rover or two Is there any particular reason for having posted the exact same message on three different threads? (and BTW its gigapixel not gage pixel) Also what exactly are you trying to say? If you are referring to using a conventional digital camera to take pictures of the Apollo remnants on the moon then it doesn't matter how many pixels the CCD has, without a telescope considerably larger than any in existence today it wouldn't be possible to resolve objects that small and far away. There are fundamental limits on the maximum possible resolution of an optical device, and I am pretty sure that current telescopes use CCD arrays that have a resolution equaling or exceeding that which can be achieved by the telescope itself.
|
|
|
Post by grashtel on Mar 26, 2006 11:55:09 GMT -4
The moon landing is real! for you infomation! Have you actually bothered reading any of the threads in this section (well other than the one by GandpaSimpson which is quite obviously a joke) Most of the people here are not only convinced that the landing is real but are trying to convince the few that don't belive it was, and using arguments a hell of a lot better than just pronouncing that it was real.
|
|
|
Post by grashtel on Jul 2, 2006 21:09:37 GMT -4
The HB crowd rarely put their ideas into public discussion because they really don’t know what they are talking about and can’t defend their ideas. One old time HB, Jack White has tried to defend his belief that the Apollo photos were faked on the Education Forum. Some members here sliced is ideas to shreds. His primarily defense is to call his opponents names and dismiss them as belonging to a group of agents paid to oppose him. He is a classic HB. What about GodLikeProductions? I admit that I haven't actually read anyhting much there (my sanity and appreciation of humanity are both quite low enough without exposure to the kinds of goings on there) but they seem to have pretty much every conspiracy type thing imaginable (and some that aren't without lots of drugs) going on there.
|
|
|
Post by grashtel on Jun 26, 2006 9:40:32 GMT -4
There's a site out there that basically is the ApolloHoax of archeology sites; it exists to debunk the idea that primitive people couldn't possibly develop language, mathematics, writing, build monuments, etc., and had to have had the help of advanced aliens (or conveniently gone-missing ancient super-science). Wish I still had the link. I belive that you are refering to In The Hall of Ma'at
|
|
|
Post by grashtel on Feb 3, 2006 19:21:30 GMT -4
Also, if the earth really is spinning that fast how come people don't weight more at the poles where the centrifical force would be a lot less. In the center of either of the earths pole's the C force wouldn't even exist I would think, and the gravity would be vary strong there compared to the equator wouldn't it? If the moon is bigger than 1/6th that of the earth then that would explain it. But I would still wonder why we don't weigh more at the pole's if the earth really is spinning that fast. You're partly right, gravity at the Earth's poles is higher than at the equator, but only by 0.5% and a large portion of that isn't directly related to centrifugal force. The difference is mostly due to being closer to the center of the Earth as Earth isn't perfectly spherical, it bulges out at the equator due to centripetal force. Though even if the difference was entirely due to centripetal force the fact that it is so small on Earth means that the effect on the Moon would be non-existently small.
|
|
|
Post by grashtel on Feb 27, 2007 16:06:28 GMT -4
]I believe that figure represents unjustified transactions (internal transfers of all sorts as well as payments to outside contractors) ie. bad accounting practices, DoD wide, and IIRC may indeed represent one fiscal year (obviously the same money get misaccounted for several times). I must be off to work, but I'll try to remember tonight to find the documentation about this. Considering that the total budget of the US DoD for 2006 was just $419.3 Billion I think that is unlikely, if they have managed to loose track of every dollar an average of about five times bad accounting doesn't quite cover it.
|
|
|
Post by grashtel on Sept 10, 2006 21:24:27 GMT -4
Am I dense? I can't find the video Margamatix tried to link to. All I found was a link that said "replay intro" in which bart hassles an Apollo astronaut. The post is just over a year old, if you can't get at it its probably been taken down for some reason.
|
|
|
Post by grashtel on Feb 17, 2008 6:46:11 GMT -4
Going to the ultimate source of all knowledge about life the universe an everything (ie Wikipedia) finds this definition en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shill: A shill is an associate of a person selling goods or services or a political group, who pretends no association to the seller/group and assumes the air of an enthusiastic customer. The intention of the shill is, using crowd psychology, to encourage others unaware of the set-up to purchase said goods or services or support the political group's ideological claims. Shills are often employed by confidence artists. In the UK the term plant is used.
|
|
|
Post by grashtel on Oct 9, 2007 5:54:27 GMT -4
I am currently unable to access BAUTForum.com, BadAstronomy.com, or UniverseToday.com getting the message that the servers cannot be found, is anyone else having the same problems?
|
|
|
Post by grashtel on Aug 27, 2007 18:33:17 GMT -4
Oooh, shiney, I want one already (though the likely levels of DRM crap it is likely to be infested with may well change my opinion).
|
|
|
Post by grashtel on Aug 26, 2007 0:50:27 GMT -4
The natural reflectors worked fine, just as they do in ordinary photography everywhere in the universe. Can you point to the natural reflectors in that example. You mean like the ground which was being hit by sunlight at a low angle which nicely scatters light in all directions, particularly back in the direction of the sun (as is demonstrated by the Heiligenschein and Full Moon effects)?
|
|
|
Post by grashtel on May 5, 2007 12:23:40 GMT -4
Well whatever was going on seems to have resolved now. I just wonder what in the heck was going on (and more importantly if there is anything I can do to prevent it happening again)?
|
|
|
Post by grashtel on May 5, 2007 0:12:34 GMT -4
Right, thanks for the help, now I've just got the fun job of figuring out why I can access more or less the rest of the web but not BAUT {ponders upon the cost of a rather large hammer and obtaining a new machine}
|
|
|
Post by grashtel on May 4, 2007 21:41:51 GMT -4
Is anyone else not able to access the BAUT forums at the moment? I've not been able to get into them for several hours.
|
|
|
Post by grashtel on Apr 29, 2007 16:33:35 GMT -4
Foxes mostly live in the countryside where they are hunted, ostensibly as pests, but largely for entertainment. The law passed last year to ban this odd behaviour was somewhat less than watertight in its framing. Some foxes have taken to living in the urban environment, where they largely survive by scavenging from domestic refuse. It wouldn't surprise me at all that people feed them deliberately: leaving food out for birds and cute animals like hedgehogs is something of a tradition. Personally I don't: aside from on TV I've never actually seen or heard (which is apparently more likely) a fox. Urban foxes are supposed to actually have a higher population density than the ones out in the countryside. There are certainly quite a few living in the area around me, I regularly see them when I am out in the evening or night, and have one that tends to call on the street in front of my house.
|
|