|
Post by abaddon on Jan 10, 2012 13:20:49 GMT -4
Ok, well done. I guess that explains your simulant thread. I think the HB crew will get you on two scores (or at least try). 1. It's a simulant and therefore not a valid test. 2. At the end of the video, the impressions left are not clearly that distinguishable, one to the other, at youtube resolutions. Now, to my eyes anyway, I can clearly see what you are showing. I bet it was almost a fingerprint in the simulant, but you better believe the HB crew will go that way. Perhaps, for that purpose, you might consider adding a "moon boot" simulant. Not literally an miniature moon boot, but any object which would leave a clearly identifiable pattern in the simulant, but not the sand. Just a thought. Like the phillwebb acolade at the end. ;D
|
|
|
Post by abaddon on Jan 9, 2012 11:33:47 GMT -4
It is interesting to note that the poster "dastardly" on BAUT forum now is using Fattydash/Patrick's arguments. Also: - claims to have won "sextant contests" as a youth (note that Bing does not return any hits for the phrase "sextant contest", so I suspect they are rarely held), just as fattydash and Patrick are self-proclaimed experts on every topic they discuss; - has been asked why he puts headings to his posts, even though they are not displayed on BAUT (although they are in Patrick's posts on JREF); and - claims he is supported in his proposals by his girlfriend and his sister, just as Patrick claims support from his wife and mother. So, I gather the parade of socks marches on. I noticed those similarities as well but at least Patrick can spell and punctuate. He only comes off as mildly retarded. Dastardly appears to have serious mental issues. Neither seem to be able to stick to a topic or answer directly questions. I sure that's a ploy. Patrick got suspended for a day at JREF, and immediately the dastardly account went active on BAUT after a month of nothing. Once the suspension expired, Patrick became active and dastardly vanished. Into the ether, no doubt. ;D Dastardly shares the same arguments, posts titles to his responses in exactly the same way as patrick, and declines to respond to questions. That's an MO.
|
|
|
Post by abaddon on Jan 4, 2012 4:38:34 GMT -4
To what end?
|
|
|
Post by abaddon on Dec 26, 2011 18:13:48 GMT -4
Thanks Santa for my saturn V rocket model ;D I got a 1 foot high lego storm trooper alarm clock. My youngest sister always does the oddest presents.
|
|
|
Post by abaddon on Dec 16, 2011 14:24:46 GMT -4
We are on a side track now in this thread from Pokrovsky and rocket technology, so I don't reply to those points above (I just wanted to introduce Popov's book where he and other Russian space scientists tell their views on Apollo - I have my own counter-arguments). I am also an engineer, and I concur with JayUtah, Bob.B and sts60. I think that we have in these pages a big team of NASA staff who are paid to: 1) collect information that the opponents have in order to counterattac; 2) provide lousy answers to any critical opinion presented in the discussion board. Got any evidence? I hope that anybody can really see, how nervous and desperate those Apollo defenders really are. Nope. Not at all nervous. It's amusing how often HB types make this allegation. It is to laugh. Somebody is e.g. saying that there is evidence that light reflectors were placed by human astronauts. What is that evidence? Fingerprints? Russians have put tens of those to Moon and several planets without a need to kiss them good-by by anybody at place. Bzzt! Wrong. Russia put two on the moon, and lost one. LRO found it. That is hardly "tens". And doubly wrong, none on other planets. And just exactly who is "somebody"? I happen to know something about the early rock samples of Apollo (unfortunately geologists have not had access to the later samples). Wrong. They are usually meteorites probably picked from Antarctica (contaminated with Earth materials as water with Earth's oxygen isotope contents), tectites (impactites from Earth), old lava stones with signals of Earth magnetic field, etc. Why 90% of the stones are secret and 500 samples have been lost? Wrong again. Apollo became a very expensive program for US taxpayers. Yup. It was expensive. Somebody said that Saturn V was abandoned because Shuttle was cheaper - no way. Shuttle was able to transport only 15 ton to LEO ... Saturn V ten times more 118 ton (which I don't believe a single second). Again with the infamous "somebody". Who exactly said this? Construction of space stations was the next step after Apollo and heavy rockets were definitely needed - but S-V and its F-1 were pieces of crap and therefore they were thrown to bin. Wernher von Braun was kicked out just before the Apollo-11 and so was the NASA director James Webb and many other leaders. FBI's statement was that v Braun was a "phony". In Russia, successful rocket designers are celebrated and end up to Kremlin wall. v33v.tripod.com/ww3.htmlWrong. Is there no limit to the amount of wrong you can put in a single post? I cannot present any "proof" on behalf of Soviet inteligence agency. So you have zero evidence. Colour me unsurprised. I am listening the others and publishing my own investigations (with relevant references included). So it would be better to discuss about substance issues ... not just to look for external support. Internet is not a reference anyway. Why do you use it as a reference then? An interesting question is why Soviet political leadership did not reveal the facts about US space program. Some people in Russia argue that there was a secret political deal which came up only later (like Gorbatshov's politics) - others say that USSR needed food and wheat because of catastrophic weather disasters and poor crop yields - again others say that USA bought the silence. Who knows.... And finish off with wild speculation. Where is the evidence for any of this?
|
|
|
Post by abaddon on Dec 3, 2011 17:03:08 GMT -4
Bottom line is the Mod's decision is the Mod's decision.
Bear in mind that the Mod sees a lot more data than you or I.
Been there and done that. You have no idea how far people will go until you actually see it.
|
|
|
Post by abaddon on Dec 2, 2011 21:40:01 GMT -4
I think he's going after the Guinness World Record for "Most Times Banned from a Website". Well, ya see, I had some spare time this evening, so I was doing the random surf thing. I was actually looking up some Apollo stuff on the porous plate sublimation dealy. I came across this dude, who believes it is all a hoax. All of it. No space travel at all, it's all hoaxed. And he oddly only posts to the comments sections of newspapers. And boy are those odd comments. Oh, and I should say, LOTS of newspapers, around the world. It was rather odd. If anyone wants the links, I can certainly shuck them up from my history.
|
|
|
Post by abaddon on Dec 2, 2011 19:58:02 GMT -4
twik i do not have an imagination capable of creating a scenario that would deposit dust just on the ground layer. To state that dust would not be accumulated on top of a rock there needs to be a mechanism that accounts for the material specifically being averted from the top surface of the rock. please also note the rock has very large unfilled cavities which would tend to trap particles. Rock is ejected by an impact. Rock lands on Moon surface. Ejecta moves out from rock. Well you wouldn't expect it to circulate back around and land where it was, would you. Time. The regolith has built up over geologic time, billions of years. Would you expect a contiguous dust layer? Simple enough?
|
|
|
Post by abaddon on Dec 2, 2011 6:33:45 GMT -4
newyorkmary has been banned (sock puppet of fattydash). You got to be kidding. What does he hope to achieve? Is he being spanked to much on JREF?
|
|
|
Post by abaddon on Dec 2, 2011 6:16:44 GMT -4
You state this: I have no idea what really happens on the moon Then you state this: any rock or meteorite on the moon will eventually be covered in this dust. If you have, as you state, no idea what really happens on the moon, then how are you so certain what happens on the moon?
|
|
|
Post by abaddon on Dec 1, 2011 19:30:33 GMT -4
bob b What about "when the conditions permit" did you not understand? there is no conditions in his statement like "when the conditions permit" Armstrong said stars can't be seen. as the commander he also has to be speaking for Aldrin and Collins, which means Aldrin could not see stars and Collins could not see stars. this is a clear statement What part of your chemistry qualification qualifies you in optics?
|
|
|
Post by abaddon on Dec 1, 2011 19:28:05 GMT -4
And this qualifies you in rocket science exactly how?
|
|
|
Post by abaddon on Dec 1, 2011 17:55:43 GMT -4
Are you? And more importantly, if so, are you a good one?
|
|
|
Post by abaddon on Dec 1, 2011 13:59:16 GMT -4
We Called It 'The Bug' www.airspacemag.com/space-exploration/the_bug.htmltalking about cernan "He was only 44 inches away from his crewmate but forced to speak to him through an intercom." was there that much noise in the lm when the descent engine was running? No there wasn't. You just left out the next sentence, which goes:
|
|
|
Post by abaddon on Nov 29, 2011 5:57:20 GMT -4
WHY don't i believe landing on the moon was possible Then you just don't understand radiation, do you? And why such exist? Why are there no craters under harrier jets? 3) no stars in cislunar space Go outside your home, stand under a street light, then tell me how many stars you see. 4) lm design was a disaster Which part or parts would not work and why. 5) didn't have necessary computing power for lm I write software for a living. I cut my student teeth on assembly language. (8086, 6800, and Z80 for those interested) I actually have the expertise to know for a fact that the machine could do it's job. Do you? 6) mylar / kapton film - no damage Um, that was thermal not mechanical. No. Just no. You are above every mechanical engineer on the planet? I think not. 8) America could not have a dead astronaut on the moon, but had to complete the goal And there are none such. 12 guys went, walked on the surface, and came home. NASA is a civilian organisation. Relevance? 11) footprints without inclusions... top ten was probably enough What is it you think they should include?
|
|