|
Post by chew on Dec 10, 2011 0:21:39 GMT -4
When viewing the 1122D video i poted my impression of it that the rendezvous and docking were too exacting to be realistic, Called it! What is so hard about understanding two objects that approach each other in a vacuum will not experience turbulence? It's not like a fighter jockeying into position behind a tanker.
|
|
|
Post by chew on Dec 9, 2011 14:45:07 GMT -4
I honestly do not see the relevance though. He's gonna replay his previous ignorance of Newton's Laws of Motion. He previously said the LM moved too smoothly when it approached the CSM for docking and he asked how the LM could possibly move to the side when it wasn't tiled to that side.
|
|
|
Post by chew on Dec 5, 2011 19:21:51 GMT -4
The CTs say Oswald was a lousy shot and couldn't have pulled off the feat he was credited with. Yet the conspirators used, by most looney accounts, 3 or 4 assassins, each of whom was a worse shot than Oswald. One assassin missed the car entirely, another missed JFK's head and hit him in the neck, another missed JFK entirely and hit Connally, until the GK assassin got lucky and hit JFK's head.
Who were these incompetent conspirators who hired these inept snipers and how did they manage to get selected for the job in the first place? Did they not like their job and were trying to get fired so they could collect unemployment?
|
|
|
Post by chew on Dec 5, 2011 18:19:10 GMT -4
As has been recently expressed elsewhere, the conspirators go to all the trouble of planting a patsy, framing him with buying the rifle that will be used for the assassination, plating that rifle in his work place, then you shoot JFK from an angle entirely different from your patsy???
|
|
|
Post by chew on Dec 5, 2011 17:47:38 GMT -4
You should include some screen caps of the Lunar Sample Return Lab files that show the names of the geologists who've studied the cors, rocks and regolith.
Don't forget the ridicule. Examples of the total ignorance of the HBs would go far to show the public what kind of people think Apollo was hoaxed. A lot of our signatures provide great examples. ApolloGnomon is still recovering from his time at the DIF but I'm sure he could provide more examples.
|
|
|
Post by chew on Dec 5, 2011 14:02:22 GMT -4
Over at the JREF he is saying the Doppler effect can be used to measure a spacecraft's total velocity, not just the radial velocity.
His newest hobbyhorse is Apollo was used to establish a Very Long Baseline Interferometer between the Moon, L-4 and L-5.
|
|
|
Post by chew on Dec 3, 2011 19:06:27 GMT -4
Yay!
Everydoby get ready for a group hug.
longfuzzy, if that is your real pseudonym, please understand we get a lot of Dunning-Kruger posterchildren here and faatydash's sockpuppets pop up on many forums. But mostly here.
|
|
|
Post by chew on Dec 3, 2011 1:07:07 GMT -4
It's still better than the Zambians.
|
|
|
Post by chew on Dec 1, 2011 22:44:46 GMT -4
again shuttle astronaut observed that as the shuttle rose the sky became black and stars were visible. playdor, which astronaut said this?
|
|
|
Post by chew on Dec 1, 2011 21:00:19 GMT -4
For some good lulz check out Rene's Wikipedia entry.
Pi is what???
|
|
|
Post by chew on Dec 1, 2011 12:00:21 GMT -4
this artist image may be a more accurate representation of what should have been visible in the actual video. So you'd take the word of an art major over the word of a science major?
|
|
|
Post by chew on Dec 1, 2011 1:35:50 GMT -4
why is there no dust on top of this rock? How do you expect dust to get on the rock? From the wind?
|
|
|
Post by chew on Nov 30, 2011 23:19:46 GMT -4
laurel until the moon landings the Russians were far ahead of the us in every category of space technology, referencing time in space and claimed achievements. playdor, do you ever bother to check these so-called facts you keep finding on hoax believer websites before presenting them on here? You find this idiotic stuff and just assume no one here has heard of it before and that it somehow proves Apollo was faked. How in God's name do you think the initial Russian lead in the space race proves Apollo was hoaxed? Do you ever question anything you believe? You have got to be the most gullible person who has ever lived.
|
|
|
Post by chew on Nov 29, 2011 21:51:42 GMT -4
chew "Science is not a democracy. " great line If you wish to worship at the alter of science go ahead, its your decision. Science can be (IS) influenced by money and politics, in short data and findings can be aligned with money and politics. You still haven't given me one example to support this claim. Let's narrow it down to the sciences applicable to the Apollo missions: Newton's 1st Law: The velocity of a body remains constant unless the body is acted upon by an external force. Which business or political entity has changed the findings of that law? Newton's 2nd Law: The acceleration of a body is parallel and directly proportional to the net force and inversely proportional to the mass. Which business or political entity has changed the findings of that law? Newton's 3rd law: The mutual forces of action and reaction between two bodies are equal, opposite and collinear. Which business or political entity has changed the findings of that law? Ideal Gas Law: The state of an amount of gas is determined by its pressure, volume, and temperature. Which business or political entity has changed the findings of that law? Stefan–Boltzmann's Law: The total energy radiated per unit surface area of a black body per unit time is directly proportional to the fourth power of the black body's thermodynamic temperature T. Which business or political entity has changed the findings of that law? When you break it down like this don't you think it's kinda stupid to have said what you said?
|
|
|
Post by chew on Nov 29, 2011 0:23:29 GMT -4
chew i have multiple degrees in science i know how it works Wow, you've jumped from complete ignorance to outright lying.
|
|