|
Post by Kiwi on Aug 17, 2010 6:38:37 GMT -4
What about the Core Samples? Did they come from the Antarctic? I wonder if Rodin even knows what a core sample is, or has watched video of the astronauts drilling them on the moon, or knows anything about Dave Scott injuring his fingers while drilling, or that he and Jim Irwin had a really hard job pulling a core out of the lunar surface, or that it went down 8-1/2 feet and had 58 distinct layers.
|
|
|
Post by blackstar on Aug 17, 2010 8:04:51 GMT -4
Antarctica is where to look for Moon Rocks that have fallen to Earth as meteorites. Do you realise that only a small proportion of meteorites are from the moon? Do you realise that you need to do lab analysis to sort out which? Do you realise that the total mass of lunar meteorites gathered in the three decades since the first was recognised is an order of magnitude smaller than the Apollo collection? You are proposing that Von Braun was astonishingly successful is gathering these meteorites, to the extent that he emptied an entire continent of them in a couple of weeks. Which is a big problem with this idea. Even allowing that by some incredible insight NASA knew there were lunar meteorites it would have taken, at the very least, a small army crisscrossing Antarctica for months to come up with 400 pounds of rocks. And I think some of the other nations with territorial claims might just have noticed that and raised questions.
|
|
|
Post by ka9q on Aug 17, 2010 8:10:05 GMT -4
And I think some of the other nations with territorial claims might just have noticed that and raised questions. The Antarctica Treaty suspended all territorial claims on the continent. One of the reasons the US maintains a base right at the south pole is to stand on as many claims as they can, since most of them are wedges that come together at the pole.
|
|
|
Post by blackstar on Aug 17, 2010 8:35:09 GMT -4
And I think some of the other nations with territorial claims might just have noticed that and raised questions. The Antarctica Treaty suspended all territorial claims on the continent. One of the reasons the US maintains a base right at the south pole is to stand on as many claims as they can, since most of them are wedges that come together at the pole. Granted but even so I don't think the nations in question would have simply stayed silent while the USA engaged in what would have looked like a large scale geological survey of the continent for purposes unknown without making a fuss.
|
|
|
Post by PeterB on Aug 17, 2010 8:55:58 GMT -4
Well I have been baited into this thread. Excuse me, but you were the one throwing out bait with this statement several days ago: If you have the answers, I'm waiting to hear them, particularly your Moon rock answer; an answer which explains: - how lunar meteorites collected in Antarctica are covered with minuscule craters caused by the impact of dust particles at speeds of tens of kilometres per second; - how the surfaces of lunar meteorites collected in Antarctica show evidence of solar radiation which the Earth's Van Allen Belts block; - how lunar meteorites collected in Antarctica aren't contaminated from thousands of years of contact with water and the Earth's atmosphere; and - how lunar meteorites collected in Antarctica explain the Apollo rock evidence better than the explanation that they were collected on the Moon by people. You say you have answers, and you don't know what zap pits are. Why not educate yourself about Apollo first. Go immerse yourself in the Apollo Lunar Surface Journal for a couple of months and then come back with some questions.
|
|
|
Post by thetart on Aug 17, 2010 9:28:41 GMT -4
Why not educate yourself about Apollo first. Go immerse yourself in the Apollo Lunar Surface Journal for a couple of months and then come back with some questions. Seconded. Go and learn about Apollo then come back with questions. Sensible questions and challenges will be welcome. You may even enjoy it. And don't forget to explain the cores, once you find out what they are.
|
|
|
Post by Apollo Gnomon on Aug 17, 2010 10:52:55 GMT -4
Try to be polite to rodin. Unlike many hb's (especially at DIF) he's bothered to analyze the data and present products of his work.
He should be encouraged not bulllied. He's breaking out of the simplistic DIF "Apollo was a disney-zionist hoax" nonsense and should be commended for his hard work and willingness to engage with people here. You know AH has a reputation for chewing HB's up and spitting them out. Many have misinterpreted this to mean that AH bans anyone who actually "shows up with proof you can't dismiss." Seriously. Rocky/cosmored has spread it around, as have others.
I've disagreed with rodin on many subjects but I admire his willingness to "fill his boots" and do real work in pursuit of his theory. He's unusual at DIF in this regard.
I also have been glad to see that he can carry on his conversation here in a different mode than the DIF standard - over there the mods are very loose and there is no language censoring. It gets a bit rough-and-tumble, but rodin has been very serious and even-keel while he's been here.
AG out.
|
|
|
Post by thetart on Aug 17, 2010 11:04:11 GMT -4
Try to be polite to rodin. Unlike many hb's (especially at DIF) he's bothered to analyze the data and present products of his work. He should be encouraged not bulllied. He's breaking out of the simplistic DIF "Apollo was a disney-zionist hoax" nonsense and should be commended for his hard work and willingness to engage with people here. You know AH has a reputation for chewing HB's up and spitting them out. Many have misinterpreted this to mean that AH bans anyone who actually "shows up with proof you can't dismiss." Seriously. Rocky/cosmored has spread it around, as have others. I've disagreed with rodin on many subjects but I admire his willingness to "fill his boots" and do real work in pursuit of his theory. He's unusual at DIF in this regard. I also have been glad to see that he can carry on his conversation here in a different mode than the DIF standard - over there the mods are very loose and there is no language censoring. It gets a bit rough-and-tumble, but rodin has been very serious and even-keel while he's been here. AG out. Fair enough - the fact that he has come over here to debate is a good thing. I see his DIF thread has been taken over by the extreme fringe of the HB community! Anyway, I do maintain that rodin will be more effective in his challenges if he actually studies Apollo with an open mind for a few months, gets to know the issues and status of previously debunked claims, then he can post with a bit more authority. However - he claimed on DIF that the LRO photos were taken by Stanley Kubrick which exposes a certain lack of basic research which does expose him to a bit of ridicule.
|
|
|
Post by gillianren on Aug 17, 2010 12:25:16 GMT -4
Try to be polite to rodin. Unlike many hb's (especially at DIF) he's bothered to analyze the data and present products of his work. And then completely and utterly reject 90% of the explanations of how oversimplified and wrong it is. The remaining 10%, he incorporates into his sliding goal posts without comment as to its origins. Rocky/cosmored has other issues which I won't comment upon here, ones which ought to be obvious to anyone watching him for any length of time. You can't stop people's misinterpreting things; if you could, there wouldn't be HBs in the first place. And, no, I don't have to commend him for his hard work. It is bluntly obvious that he hasn't actually done that much of it. He's conducted a small amount of flawed analysis on a few seconds of the record. He's heard the story about the telemetry tapes but couldn't explain it on a bet. He's heard the story about von Braun's trip to Antarctica, but he hasn't done enough work to understand why it's nowhere near a plausible explanation for the Apollo mineral record. "Zap pats"? Ye Gods. I wish he'd show evidence of it here. Compared to the others, yes.
|
|
|
Post by Count Zero on Aug 17, 2010 12:32:24 GMT -4
Try to be polite to rodin. Unlike many hb's (especially at DIF) he's bothered to analyze the data and present products of his work. He should be encouraged not bulllied. He's breaking out of the simplistic DIF "Apollo was a disney-zionist hoax" nonsense and should be commended for his hard work and willingness to engage with people here. Seconded. He shows some willingness to learn, and I've enjoyed watching him wake-up to the technical aspects of which he was totally unaware. As usual, I am learning from the exchange also. By all means, correct, clarify and teach; but don't be condescending, dismissive or discouraging.
|
|
|
Post by rodin on Aug 18, 2010 7:43:02 GMT -4
Why send the high profile Von Braun in particular to Antarctica? Right now I don't know. I thought the secret NAZI base was up the other end of the Earth.... But to Antarctica he went. For that matter why send him to study conditions there? He was a rocket scientist not a survival expert Let's say they were looking for something that could pass as Moon rocks. Point has been made that not so many have been found since, yet 800 lbs were gathered there according to Hoax Believers (BTW I am a Hoax proponent - there is a difference). Is that a dealbreaker? Well no. What if - the team collected a bunch of meteorites using some kind of radar* finding system so as to be able to be very efficient in collection. Then they return to base and analyse all of them. A certain % are of the same family. These are designated 'Lunar' - type. No matter their true origin. These are manipulated into rocks and cores etc, bombarded with whatever isotopes of elements that will be used to date them, and given a sheen by irradiation @ Lawrence Livermore or similar. Later Antarctic explorers would find similar rocks, compare them with 'Moon' rocks and designate them 'Lunar'. Of perhaps technology exists to fabricate 'Moon rocks' just as artificial diamonds are now admitted (though curiously the price has not yet collapsed) Or perhaps there is nothing like 800 pounds of the stuff. How much material has been independently studied? Meanwhile it is over 3 decades I think since ANYTHING soft landed on the Moon. Far less took off again. (We have 'managed' to crash into it though - that's progress 4 ya : edit *sonar, microwave, satellite based, GPS whatever
|
|
|
Post by rodin on Aug 18, 2010 7:49:11 GMT -4
What about the Core Samples? Did they come from the Antarctic? I wonder if Rodin even knows what a core sample is FTR I have followed junior miner exploratory results from drilling. Got by analysing cores.
|
|
|
Post by rodin on Aug 18, 2010 7:59:40 GMT -4
Well now - how do we know that some meteorites in Antarctica come from the Moon. Is it because they match the Moon Rocks? Without the Moon Rocks as comparison could we tell if these meteorites were indeed Lunar? Are you suggesting that the Soviets faked their unmanned sample returns as well? Yes. Nothing at all has soft landed on the Moon (note this is a theory I am proposing not a belief) Cold War was a hoax (this I know) therefore so must have been the Space Race (logical deduction) Are you aware that Eisenhower sanctioned shipments of materials to build the atom bomb to Stalin during the Second World War? Personages also worth investigating on this matter are Harry Dexter White, Alger Hiss (who was instrumental in setting up the UN) Bernard Baruch etc
|
|
|
Post by tedward on Aug 18, 2010 8:01:16 GMT -4
Of perhaps technology exists to fabricate 'Moon rocks' just as artificial diamonds are now admitted (though curiously the price has not yet collapsed) Snip Oh dear. OK, there is one glaringly obvious in front of your face so obvious bit you are missing. It is with us from birth to death. It was here before us and will be here for many many years after us. It is the atmosphere. It does things to us and does things to the planet and has been for a millennia or several. The planet also does things, it is geologically active. So, rocks that have never seen an atmosphere? These rocks have never had the protection of an atmosphere, never had the tender administrations of fluids, and can be shown as such. See where this is going?
|
|
|
Post by tedward on Aug 18, 2010 8:04:56 GMT -4
Cold War was a hoax (this I know) therefore so must have been the Space Race (logical deduction) How so? In your estimation? So far the lack of any real research or evidence as demonstrated by the jump has convinced me to think that history as I know it is wrong.
|
|