|
Post by scooter on Jan 19, 2006 23:05:31 GMT -4
If this individual has a physics degree...I demand a like doctorate!! I briefly perused the "high schooler" site. Among the many oddities was the roasted astronauts inside the CM and the dry soil being unable to hold a footprint. Certainly this person with a physics degree (I did take a course or two in high school) would realize the value of the thin aluminized mylar coating covering the capsule in reflecting so much of the "heat rays" from the sun. Many seemingly flimsy materials are highly effective against the harsh space environment. The footprints...to heck with cement mix (tho I did use some for a lunar landing diorama in the 70s, worked great). How about flour? Haven't these kids ever been in the kitchen??? I mean, even Bisquik works...or pancake mix...all very cohesive stuff when bone dry. This person is a "believer", that is all. Not a thinking, reasoning, inquisitive being. Taking that website as a convincing authority for the "hoax" tells it all. Physics degree?? I don't think so...though if he has one, he certainly can tell us precisely how much fuel, given the engines' ISp ratings, it indeed would take to perform the LM's mission... Show us the science, friend, as you may detect, we've seen and crushed the rest. The math and science confirms the reality. BTW, what are your thoughts on the New Horizons mission? 41 minutes from a standing start to a path and velocity that will go by Pluto and out of the solar system...now THAT's cool! I may not understand all the math and engineering, but that doesn't make me so insecure that I refuse to believe it's reality.
Dave
|
|
|
Post by scooter on Jan 18, 2006 23:12:02 GMT -4
The astronauts used stars for navigation (attitude checks), Aldrin made some mention of his ability to make out stars when in the LM shadow. But cameras and eyeballs are different in their function. When on a brightly lit lunar surface, the astronaut has a choice...set the camera exposure (f-stop and exposure duration) for photographing stars, or set it for photographing the surface. They cannot have both. They chose the latter, as the surface was their reason for being there. Aside from the UV, the stars are the same as we see them from here (minus the "twinkle" as well). Had they set the camera with sensitivity to capture the stars, the bright landscape would have overpowered the film and rendered the photos useless. Call it "light pollution" if you will. Much as the neighbors porchlight ruins my ability to see many stars, the surface brightness made it difficult to visually see stars, and impossible to photograph when using exposure settings for the surface photography. It's quite simple. However, if it was faked, it was ALL faked. This said, you have labelled 100s of thousands of workers as duped fools, if not outright liars. Some folks take great exception to this. You certainly must have other evidence of this great fraud aside from your misunderstanding of photograhic exposure...?
Dave...school bus driver
|
|
|
Post by scooter on Jun 15, 2007 15:29:35 GMT -4
If our scientists can be bribed, then so can "theirs"... I say the HB "expert witnesses" are being paid to appear and say their silly stuff...and I honestly will bet I'm right!
|
|
|
Post by scooter on Apr 26, 2007 11:49:02 GMT -4
The astronauts are seen with their shaded visors up, bad idea with the blinding glare of the sun and the bright surface. but... We can see details in the shadowed area of the astronauts and LM, impossible without an artificial secondary light source...
The secondary light source IS the bright surface...
|
|
|
Post by scooter on Nov 21, 2006 21:54:11 GMT -4
Lets see... Over at the LC forum, we were going round and round with David C about the fall rate of the dust thrown up by the rover. He was doing calculations using the values of g on the Moon...
Others argue about the radiation of the particle events that eminate from the Sun that can indeed be lethal to astronauts.
Still more argue, albeit in a twisted fashion, about the +/- 250 degree temperatures on the Moon
They are getting this information and science from where? Mainstream science sources? Then how, at the flick of the wrist, can they just as quickly say that mainstream science lies and cannot be trusted...when it comes out supporting the reality of the Apollo flights?
This is interesting...
|
|
|
Post by scooter on Jan 26, 2006 21:00:03 GMT -4
Sorry, I am indeed speed typing. I will be back in a few days. I'd like to report a hit and run...or something...
|
|
|
Post by scooter on Dec 2, 2005 15:35:41 GMT -4
I think when the next one shows up with some baseless piece of "evidence", I will tend to get more into the tech discussions with those here as opposed to trying to make them realize that "2+2=4"... They're all the same, narrow thinking and ignorant. I do wish it was different. I am amazed that there are such folks existing, but again, all I have to do is watch TV to find out their mental picture of the world...warped and lemming-like...
Dave
|
|
|
Post by scooter on Nov 22, 2005 10:42:48 GMT -4
The hardware that was involved throughout the 60s, for all three programs, was built by private companies, from the hufe Rockwells and McDonnell Douglases down to the little supplier companies. Were they also involved in the hoax, in that their hardware wasn't up to the task? Why do you also distrust them? Honestly, your prsonal distrust doesn't amount to a hill of beans when placed next to the physical and scientific evidence. I'm still waiting for real evidence, have yet to see any. Mostly just uninformed claims from those who know little or nothing about the "business" (but no doubt enjoy the benefits of satellites that "cannot function" on a daily basis). Dave
|
|
|
Post by scooter on Mar 15, 2006 21:04:59 GMT -4
and you will both keep going in your own directions until acted upon by an outside force...very important concept in space travel...
|
|
|
Post by scooter on Apr 12, 2006 19:22:18 GMT -4
Last time I checked, it was Congress that made laws, and the Courts (district, Supreme) that determine their constitutionality, here in the US at least...The only "lawyers" that alter laws are Judges...you one of them? Your statements ring hollow...
|
|
|
Post by scooter on Apr 8, 2006 9:56:52 GMT -4
His favorite argument was "You haven't proven your point. I haven't had time to read your link but..."
He is a little boy, ignorant of science and physics. He appears here to get the attention of smart people, to get "credibility". He doesn't appear to have much attention at home, so he gets it here (better to be ridiculed than ignored). His blinding, willful ignorance is what gets me. I'll bet he still graduates with high grades from high school. (happens all the time here in the USA...) What worries me is that our society is "dumbing down" to accept and accomodate these types...lowest common denominators. Sorry for the outburst, just re-read the moonman thread...incredible. Dave
|
|
|
Post by scooter on Apr 8, 2006 6:51:41 GMT -4
Some of his statements were kind of "out there", much like the 10000lbs fuel burned almost instantaneously. I sure didn;t make the connection that he was thinking the fuel came from the descent stage! His lack of basic information on the hardware led him down some strange roads of logic... The whole +/-250 degrees on the Moon, decellerating from 24000mph to parachute speed in 400,000 feet (didn't take into account the thousands of miles of lateral travel through the atmosphere), the batteries, the shadows...his grasp and observational powers of the world around him seems limited. Unfortunately, it seems he's gone into "hit and run" mode.
|
|
|
Post by scooter on Apr 2, 2006 23:24:31 GMT -4
He's back, with a ...uh, not a vengance, just more ignorance
|
|
|
Post by scooter on Nov 20, 2005 0:43:31 GMT -4
I did use "my bad" recently, maybe a repercussion of my driving middle-schoolers like MM around for so long. Yep, he's just a kid...
Dave
|
|
|
Post by scooter on Nov 20, 2005 0:34:36 GMT -4
...and you, despite all your claimed life experience, are still ignorant. This is proven in this very thread, by your own hand. Dave
|
|