|
Post by Ginnie on Apr 29, 2011 19:58:39 GMT -4
I found this video series on YouTube. I'm English, and as is the case with Percy, Allen makes me ashamed to be English. I cringe when ever I hear this sort of pseudo-intellectual waffle. It''s the usual rubbish if anyone want to sit through 2 hours of it. However, in Part 9, Allen is nicely challenged, and gives the usual 'radiation in space will fry everything' response. I actually found Allen quite defensive when he asked his challenger if he 'was sure?' I don't know if I want to watch any more - only three minutes in he says the December 1969 cover of National Geographic was from 1968... also at 7:00 min of part 2 he says " no independent verifications have ever taken place of anything that has occurred after liftoff and before splashdown"
|
|
|
Post by Ginnie on Apr 10, 2011 0:33:21 GMT -4
Except you are. The evidence is that scientists around the world have examined the rock and soil samples brought back from the Apollo missions and found that they originated on the Moon. The evidence is that the technology was insufficient to bring back that kind of sample with that kind of documentation using anything but humans. You are explicitly denying this. You are explicitly denying that the photographs showing various of the samples being collected are evidence that the samples were collected that way, even though the photographs are often used in conjunction with the samples by geologists. Because you know? Based on what evidence can you claim that? LOL I am assuming that it's possible, how isn't that possible, did you refute it? I am saying that it is possible men landed on the moon, but it's also possible that they could have brought samples with robots. I take it for granted that something is possible unless you refute it. Refute it then. Huh? There's tons of evidence that man landed on the moon. There's no evidence that the soil samples were brought back , in your words "with robots". You're basically saying that anything is possible on one hand, and on the other, nothing can be guaranteed to be possible. What is the point?
|
|
|
Post by Ginnie on Apr 5, 2011 20:54:23 GMT -4
|
|
|
Post by Ginnie on Mar 25, 2011 13:45:27 GMT -4
Okay, this is preliminary work - comparing a Clementine photo with Lunar Orbiter 5 medium resolution photo. I can't find a high res LO5 photo of the exact landing site. and the two photos separately: (I can't believe how much work is involved in getting them sized and rotated accurately!) I'll try to do the same with a LRO photo. "A" is supposed to be disturbed soil caused by the Falcon's engine blast. "B" and "C" are other anomalies related to small fresh craters. The Clementine image is a UV image so the disturbances would not be visible under normal light. Also... this explains the Clementine image in more detail:
|
|
|
Post by Ginnie on Mar 24, 2011 21:15:08 GMT -4
As I understand, most of Apollo's landing sites were chosen based on images of the area made by other missions orbiting the Moon. Has anyone ever tried comparing the LRO pictures of the landing sites to these photographs of the (undisturbed) landing sites to see what the difference would be? Why don't you give it a go BertL? I thought Apollo 15 would be a good mission to map out because Hadley Rille is so distinctive. Co-ordinates are 26 07'55.99 N ---3 038'1.90 E I was looking over these pics from LO 5 : 106HR50 and 107HR50 or pic 5106? some sites: ser.sese.asu.edu/LO/index.htmlwww.lpi.usra.edu/resources/lunarorbiter/frame/?5106Closeup LRO pic of the landing site: www.nasa.gov/images/content/369442main_lroc_apollo15_lrg.jpgGo to it Bert!
|
|
|
Post by Ginnie on Mar 24, 2011 20:38:15 GMT -4
The trouble with online research is that they can always explain something they don't agree with as "they" are spreading misinformation. "They" say there are geosynchronous satellites? Well, "they" are "known to be liars", so they don't need to be believed. It's harder to argue with looking at the sky, and seeing something with their own eyes. Is there a picture of "they"? Does it look like any of us?
|
|
|
Post by Ginnie on Mar 23, 2011 22:10:51 GMT -4
As I understand, most of Apollo's landing sites were chosen based on images of the area made by other missions orbiting the Moon. Has anyone ever tried comparing the LRO pictures of the landing sites to these photographs of the (undisturbed) landing sites to see what the difference would be? I've tried this before using the Lunar Orbiter's (1-5) photographs. But I don't know the landscape of the moon well enough to find the landing sites. Lunar Orbiter 5 had hi-res photographs that could detail to 2 metres. The photos are here: www.lpi.usra.edu/resources/lunarorbiter/mission/?5
|
|
|
Post by Ginnie on Mar 19, 2011 21:53:06 GMT -4
... and from the other side: If you get a big enough telescope, you can see the remains of the lander on the moon.
|
|
|
Post by Ginnie on Mar 3, 2011 21:19:56 GMT -4
I especially love when they claim to have found "post processing" in a scan of a print found in a book. Have you actually seen this somewhere? It would be in interesting to find that in a thread! But, it points out something important about HBs. Generally, they are ignorant of the history, technology and capabilities of the Space Program. In the same way, someone who lets say would "enhance" a printed photograph in a book to make a point would be ignorant of the process of how something gets printed in the first place, especially the dot pattern involved, the angles of the colours, usage of screens etc.
|
|
|
Post by Ginnie on Feb 12, 2011 19:36:13 GMT -4
He's not an athlete but...
Bill O'Reilly: "Okay, how did the Moon get there? How'd the Moon get there? Look, you pinheads who attacked me for this, you guys are just desperate. How'd the Moon get there? How'd the Sun get there? How'd it get there? Can you explain that to me? How come we have that and Mars doesn't have it? Venus doesn't have it. How come? Why not? How'd it get here?"
|
|
|
Post by Ginnie on Jan 15, 2011 20:32:41 GMT -4
Nice work, Bob. I like how clean your layout is, and good illustrations.
|
|
|
Post by Ginnie on Jan 15, 2011 20:27:29 GMT -4
trouble is, those folk dont care about actually learning anything. They are so emotionally committed to the cause, that they will let nothing stand in their way - like facts. I have a question: I have a radio interview regarding "Live tv" in 2 weeks. Should I mention the HB mentality at all? The few encounters I have had since the book came out are disturbing to say the least. Exposing these folk seems to be the only way I can let the fence sitters know what type of people they are. I'd completely ignore HB. Exposing them only gives them more exposure. (huh? something like that!)
|
|
|
Post by Ginnie on Jan 10, 2011 19:44:28 GMT -4
Perhaps a better comparison is to look at the violent death rates, not just the gun deaths: International Violent Death RatesI would rather us look into relaxing drug laws rather than making government even more intrusive. We had a similar problem during the Prohibition era when liquor was outlawed. I was surprised to see that 29% of Canadian households have guns! I know a couple of people who hunt, but that's about it. On the other hands a lot of farmers have a rifle to shoot varmints with.
|
|
|
Post by Ginnie on Jan 10, 2011 19:30:18 GMT -4
The Sikes-Picot agreement was flawed in many ways - it represented French and British interests, not that of the people who inhabited the Middle East. Maybe this split is long overdue - although I'll admit I know little about Sudanese history. Where the Sudanese gets their weapons from is less important than the fact that they wanted them and used them. Seems like the people who live in Sudan should take most of the responsibility of what goes on in their country, although a corrupt authority is hard to deal with.
|
|
|
Post by Ginnie on Jan 2, 2011 17:34:45 GMT -4
If it is only some pages, could you point to a specific page that displays the problem? Umm, they're all over the place... the BACK button too suffers from the same problem sometimes. Seems the problem in a lot of the links is instead of /space/race/ link.htm it is coded as /space/race/..\ link.htmHere's one page where the HOME button is mis-linked: www.braeunig.us/space/race/slide004.htmHere the BACK button is mis-linked: www.braeunig.us/space/race/slide001.htm
|
|