|
Post by Obviousman on Jul 2, 2011 20:05:07 GMT -4
|
|
|
Post by Obviousman on Jul 2, 2011 19:44:37 GMT -4
|
|
|
Post by Obviousman on Jul 2, 2011 19:43:39 GMT -4
|
|
|
Post by Obviousman on Jul 2, 2011 19:39:27 GMT -4
|
|
|
Post by Obviousman on Jul 2, 2011 6:56:10 GMT -4
Oh, is it worth wasting bandwidth on?
|
|
|
Post by Obviousman on Jul 1, 2011 3:12:57 GMT -4
Thank you Bob! Comprehensive and detailed, as always.
|
|
|
Post by Obviousman on Jun 4, 2011 22:05:17 GMT -4
|
|
|
Post by Obviousman on Jun 4, 2011 18:48:00 GMT -4
It didn't. The internet came out of development by the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) into redundant messaging systems. The launching of satellites enhanced it to a degree, it could be argued. See here: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Internet
|
|
|
Post by Obviousman on Jun 4, 2011 18:38:47 GMT -4
It's all in the section here: apollohoax.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=theoriesAlso, information that disproves hoax theories are located all over the internet, all available with a little research. Some of them are accessible by clicking on the bottom of the home page where it says " Recommend Websites".
|
|
|
Post by Obviousman on Jun 3, 2011 0:06:47 GMT -4
Pedant! How many fighter pilots does it take to change a light bulb? One - he just holds the bulb and the world revolves around him. Rotates. If the world revolved around him, it would be orbiting him, and that action isn't very useful for manipulating threaded fasteners.
|
|
|
Post by Obviousman on May 26, 2011 11:07:39 GMT -4
Not a popular opinion, but I think he is a little full of himself. Then again, so is Chuck Yeager and I consider both to be American heroes.
IMO, just because a guy has a big ego does not mean he doesn't do things to warrant that ego. Let's face it, successful fighter pilots for the most part have egos that wouldn't fit in a pickup truck.
How do you know when a fighter pilot is in the room? He'll tell you.
How many fighter pilots does it take to change a light bulb? One - he just holds the bulb and the world revolves around him.
A woman runs into a police station, saying she was raped by a man. The police ask if she can give a description of the assailant. She says she can't describe him because it was too dark, but she knew he was a fighter pilot. They ask how she could know such a thing when she couldn't identify him? Well, she says, he had a big watch and a little dick, and he told me how good he was.
|
|
|
Post by Obviousman on Apr 25, 2011 18:46:21 GMT -4
I diagree vehemently with your opinion. If he showed any intellectual honesty, he would correct / withdraw much of what he claims. Instead, he is aware of the inaccuracies of what he says but continues to sprout them. He has displayed intellectual cowardice in the same way; he has been given the opportunity to debate - in person - his theories with experts in mechanical physics, biomedical effects of ionizing radiation, etc, but refused to do so. This is because he knows he is wrong but refuses to admit it. He can make little snippets of video; so what? There are a multitude of people out there who do a far better job than him. He is nothing special in this regard. He uses music that you like; I actually dislike the music. That is not taste; you simply like the same music he does. I could easily use an old joke in this regard: " I display good taste; YOU have an opinion". He has been woeful in his dealings with Jay; I suggest you read this exchange: www.imdb.com/title/tt0446557/board/flat/133905495?p=1Jay tries to demonstrate that Jarrah does not really understand what he is quoting and misinterpreting what it says, but Jarrah refuses to learn (an indication he is NOT 'smart') and instead resorts to personal abuse on many occasions (the deleted posts). If, after spending hours and hours trying to educate this idiot, Jay gets a little terse from all the dodging / weaving / personal abuse then I think that is only understandable. Jarrah now tries to make himself the centre of attention by adopting a 'Bart Sibrel' style. No, Jarrah deserves not our praise but our scorn. To call him pond scum is offensive to algae.
|
|
|
Post by Obviousman on Apr 24, 2011 15:17:24 GMT -4
IIRC the qualification was for jet hours and to be a TP, which meant that only military (or ex-military) would be eligible. There was a requirement for security clearance, which might be used to bar or delay a civilian candidate. In any case, the initial offers to apply as a candidate were chosen from a list of military people. I am unsure if any were not active military.
|
|
|
Post by Obviousman on Apr 24, 2011 7:37:03 GMT -4
I agree the title was a misnomer, and the concept for the LMP's duties was that of systems monitoring, but I think it is unfair to downgrade the responsibility of the position.
Firstly, they were all pilots - even Jack Schmitt.
Secondly, it is unlikely the CDR could have landed the LM without the assistance of the LMP. They gave LPDs, altitude, h-dot, v-dot, etc. Even if the CDR decide to go with P65 (full autoland) I think they would have had too much on their hands.
Lastly, as I said before, all the LMPs were trained to fly the LM.
|
|
|
Post by Obviousman on Apr 23, 2011 19:13:26 GMT -4
It was up for a while but appears to have gone down again.
|
|