|
Post by Count Zero on Feb 6, 2012 23:25:14 GMT -4
That they acted on an abuse claim without any investigation or even checking with the accused party is simply outrageous. You pay money to these people?
|
|
|
Post by Count Zero on Jan 31, 2012 1:37:44 GMT -4
Vincent - Here is the Earth orbital parameters for all of the Apollo missions. It comes from a wonderful resource called Apollo by NumbersEnjoy! P.S. What's the game?
|
|
|
Post by Count Zero on Jan 29, 2012 21:33:00 GMT -4
Oh Jay, you know they'll go for the rover tracks. They always go for the rover tracks.
|
|
|
Post by Count Zero on Jan 25, 2012 3:19:05 GMT -4
That was pathetic even by conspiretard standards.
|
|
|
Post by Count Zero on Jan 9, 2012 0:31:51 GMT -4
This was EXCELLENT WORK Count Zero. In fact, during my conversation with Bart Sibrel, I brought up weather patterns. He was quick to assert that that is all easily faked. I don't suppose he stated how exactly? That reminds me of a thread over in ATS where I pointed-out that not even modern special effects could replicate the behavior of kicked dust in the Apollo video. The HB answer? "Video trickery!" Remember folks, in HB world anything is possible except flying to the Moon. If reading Silver Age comic books has taught me anything, radiation can do anything. Hmmm... I wonder if we can argue that secret NASA technology (developed by R. Richards et al) harness radiation to fly us to the Moon. Make that easily harness - HBs seem to like that word...
|
|
|
Post by Count Zero on Dec 31, 2011 21:33:48 GMT -4
I've recently heard a new one among the places claimed as the film site, Lanzarote Island. Hmmm... Circular depression, raised rim, exposed rocks, low sun-angle... It looks just like the Moon!!!1! Link
|
|
|
Post by Count Zero on Dec 12, 2011 4:11:24 GMT -4
The Gemini films would not provide a valid comparison with 1122D because the Gemini capsules were the actively-maneuvering vehicles during their rendezvous, whereas the Apollo footage was taken from the CSM, which was the passive target of the maneuvering LM.
|
|
|
Post by Count Zero on Nov 20, 2011 0:53:14 GMT -4
ok fair answer on the size of the sun how about this photo is this the correct size of the sun? How big is the streetlight in the center-right of this picture?
|
|
|
Post by Count Zero on Nov 19, 2011 23:11:55 GMT -4
Arrrgh! They have the LM mirror-imaged on the mission patch. Considering how well they did the LK, I'm surprised they got that detail wrong.
|
|
|
Post by Count Zero on Nov 14, 2011 21:52:43 GMT -4
The check's in the mail.
|
|
|
Post by Count Zero on Nov 13, 2011 21:53:16 GMT -4
Welcome, gtvc! I love the astronautix website. there's more information there than I could read in a lifetime.
PW: There's your site! I'd recently noticed that the link to your BS-debunk didn't work anymore and wondered where it went. What's the new link to that page? I couldn't find the right section on my first pass.
ETA: Never mind, I found it.
|
|
|
Post by Count Zero on Nov 6, 2011 21:50:44 GMT -4
The RP1/LOX plume is incandescent in the atmosphere, but is not in near vacuum. Watch this video of the Apollo launch. Shortly after launch the plume is long, thin and bright. By T+1:45 (altitude ~20km) the plume has spread-out considerably due to the lower pressure, but is still glowing. By T+2:20 (altitude 46km), the plume is very wide and the particles (basically soot) are no longer incandescent.
|
|
|
Post by Count Zero on Oct 22, 2011 20:54:32 GMT -4
My first thought when looking at it was that it might be a prototype/model for a computer backplane. Raise the specified pins, make connections, lower them, raise the next set... Wild guess on my part, but that was my impression.
|
|
|
Post by Count Zero on Oct 11, 2011 22:23:45 GMT -4
Is the mission called "secret" because it's existence was not publically known (which, for reasons already mentioned, is silly) or because it's an alternate history where the mission was known but the details had not previously been released? I have no problem with the alternate-history conceit. Take "Cloverfield": Obviously the events depicted in that "found footage" did not actually occur. If they had, the news would have been 911 times a thousand (yes, 911,000!). The story of the characters caught-up in these events makes a [potentially] interesting story. Really, all fiction is alternate-history. The "found footage" format is a tool for emotionally engaging the audience. It's in the same tradition as Orson Welles' "War of the Worlds" broadcast, David L. Wolper's faux-footage documentaries (which featured grainy, hand-held black-and-white film of Robert E. Lee at his field headquarters), and the documentary/interview episodes of "M*A*S*H", "Babylon 5" and others. So, having not seen the movie yet, I can pretend that there was an Apollo mission that did not return, but the details of what happened have been supressed and/or not known until this footage turned-up. Whatever...
|
|
|
Post by Count Zero on Sept 12, 2011 21:39:10 GMT -4
I've noticed that some of the conspiretards on other sites who argue that it was impossible to go to the Moon are also arguing that it was possible to launch a secret Apollo mission as shown in the movie.
|
|