|
|
Post by tedward on Dec 16, 2011 16:22:11 GMT -4
It's From The Richard Nixon Library... [/color][/size] Uploaded by RichardNixonLibrary on 30 Mar 2011 On July 20, 1969, the Apollo 11 mission brought the first humans to the Moon. On that day President Nixon spoke with crewmembers Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin via telephone-radio transmission. Source: This edited presentation features film footage from the White House Staff Super 8 Film Collection and audio from the White House[/b] There Are Inconsistancies, In The Time Lapse... 2.02 - 2.09 7 seconds 2.35 - 2.37 2 seconds 2.41 - 2.46 5 seconds... Now I Understand That All Forms Of Electromagnetic Radiation Travels At The Speed Of Light, And The Distance From The Earth To The Moon Is Roughly About 245,000 miles Depending On Its Peregree... I Beleive That In July 1969 It Was At Its Closest... Using This Equation D=C x T (Distance=Constant X Time} We Get To About 1 And A Half Seconds For The Signal To Reach The Moon... And A Further 1 And A Half Seconds To Get Back... As You Can See The 2 Second Delay At 2.35 - 2.37 Is Impossible...!!! (***Oh Incase Anyone Picks Me Up On The Numbers,
They Are What I Consider To Be Accurate Estimates.)  [/quote] Sorry, dropped the colour and embedded vid, its not lost. Me old peepers are not what they used to be. Anyway. What have you done to ascertain what you have measured and the accuracy of the material. Also at what point are recordings made (in the system etc ,this also questions the material). Also which way were timings made and this is with respect the recorder. If that makes sense, that might answer the 2:35-2:37. Don't worry about where the moon is, or was, I know how to get that info and have figures to hand as I do the time to travel somewhere at a given speed. |
|
|
|
Post by jd on Dec 16, 2011 16:31:38 GMT -4
To be fair pointing out someone's spelling mistakes or sloggy grammar on an internet forum is thought of to be poor form. It depends on the forum. In certain fora--like this one--it is considered poor form not to use the best spelling and grammar you can. It is important to spell technical terms and people's names correctly, so they can be looked up by other people. Correcting the spelling of that for other readers is, frankly, just polite. In this case i dont think being polite came into it, belittleing a little yes but not polite. Not everyone is a smart interlectual, me less than most. However i feel that sometimes some people look down their noses at others and i dont think this is helpful in changing peoples minds. When and where i went to school some of the teachers acted in ways that were similar and i for one did not find that aided or helped my learning. Just my thoughts.  |
|
|
|
Post by nomuse on Dec 16, 2011 16:41:11 GMT -4
Right. Walk into a graphic arts forum and tell people "I don't know all the fancy terms you guys use but I'm going to tell you you're going about it all wrong anyhow."
Tough. If you can't handle the technical terminology, you don't have sufficient grasp of the subject yet.
|
|
|
|
Post by jd on Dec 16, 2011 16:52:23 GMT -4
Right. Walk into a forum and tell people "I don't know all the fancy terms you guys use but I'm going to tell you you're going about it all wrong anyhow." Tough. If you can't handle the technical terminology, you don't have sufficient grasp of the subject yet. If i was the graphic artist i would feel better about myself if i kept my cool and tried to educate the person in such a way as they didnt think i was looking down on them or taking the wee wee, no matter how they acted. |
|
|
|
Post by twik on Dec 16, 2011 16:56:19 GMT -4
It depends on the forum. In certain fora--like this one--it is considered poor form not to use the best spelling and grammar you can. It is important to spell technical terms and people's names correctly, so they can be looked up by other people. Correcting the spelling of that for other readers is, frankly, just polite. In this case i dont think being polite came into it, belittleing a little yes but not polite. Not everyone is a smart interlectual, me less than most. However i feel that sometimes some people look down their noses at others and i dont think this is helpful in changing peoples minds. When and where i went to school some of the teachers acted in ways that were similar and i for one did not find that aided or helped my learning. Just my thoughts. Well, if you claim that you can correct professionals about rocket science and astrophysics, you'd better be a smart intellectual. Just as if you want to tell the lead singer at La Scala she's off key, you'd better not be tone-deaf. Or if you want to tell your doctor he's a quack, you'd best be able to spell "aspirin". We're talking about topics that require very deep knowledge, and extreme precision here. Not being able to spell technical terms (as opposed to the occasional online typo) indicates that you haven't enough familiarity with such terms to be trusted to know what they mean. |
|
raven
Jupiter
That ain't Earth, kiddies.
Posts: 509
|
Post by raven on Dec 16, 2011 17:03:05 GMT -4
I would like to apologize to jd for accusing them of using overly enlarged text.
But next time, please be more careful with your formatting, your attempt at using the quote function failed.
The formatting here is a bit different than on some forums.
Also, even if it wasn't your words, but this cheeb person, you still could have shrunk them down to a more legible size as a courtesy.
But damnsod, wow, just wow. Turquoise on light grey? Do you want people to read your words or not? This obviously is an intentional choice, the default is black, so why do it?
It is quite hard to read, downright impossible in fact, without highlighting your text.
Is there a reason you are been so intentionally perverse?
|
|
|
|
Post by jd on Dec 16, 2011 17:05:01 GMT -4
In this case i dont think being polite came into it, belittleing a little yes but not polite. Not everyone is a smart interlectual, me less than most. However i feel that sometimes some people look down their noses at others and i dont think this is helpful in changing peoples minds. When and where i went to school some of the teachers acted in ways that were similar and i for one did not find that aided or helped my learning. Just my thoughts. Well, if you claim that you can correct professionals about rocket science and astrophysics, you'd better be a smart intellectual. Just as if you want to tell the lead singer at La Scala she's off key, you'd better not be tone-deaf. Or if you want to tell your doctor he's a quack, you'd best be able to spell "aspirin". We're talking about topics that require very deep knowledge, and extreme precision here. Not being able to spell technical terms (as opposed to the occasional online typo) indicates that you haven't enough familiarity with such terms to be trusted to know what they mean. Im not desputing that, its the attitude some members show that i dont like. Lets not forget im no HB and Cheeb and myself are far from seeing eye to eye but come on lagys and gentlemen not everyone is a brain box and some have been fooled into thinking they know it all and it must be a hoax. To be honest i dont think any of the points raised by cheeb most of what ive read from the HB's require a deep knowledge to put to bed. If someone wants to come here and mouth off that they know it all then rise above that and use your brains to show they are wrong. |
|
|
|
Post by twik on Dec 16, 2011 17:06:00 GMT -4
I for one will not read anything by damnsod until he uses a text colour that is more appropriate for adults than Crayola.
|
|
|
|
Post by jd on Dec 16, 2011 17:08:01 GMT -4
I would like to apologize to jd for accusing them of using overly enlarged text. But next time, please be more careful with your formatting, your attempt at using the quote function failed. The formatting here is a bit different than on some forums. Also, even if it wasn't your words, but this cheeb person, you still could have shrunk them down to a more legible size as a courtesy. But damnsod, wow, just wow. Turquoise on light grey? Do you want people to read your words or not? This obviously is an intentional choice, the default is black, so why do it? It is quite hard to read, downright impossible in fact, without highlighting your text. Is there a reason you are been so intentionally perverse? I tried my best to change the format of the first post i quoted as for the second i just didnt have time. I wonder why people are so snappy round here. Im mean come on its not the end of the world. Just to ask what do you mean by them? As in ' for accusing them of using overly enlarged text'. |
|
|
|
Post by twik on Dec 16, 2011 17:12:53 GMT -4
No, but you have come (at least as a proxy) to try to persuade people about a matter of great scientific and historical significance. That means you should present yourself as an intelligent adult. If you are not, you have no business trying to make a case that other adults have broken laws, or lied to the public. Those are pretty big charges, and if you don't look like you're making them seriously, don't expect other people to take you seriously.
|
|
|
|
Post by damnsod on Dec 16, 2011 17:18:56 GMT -4
245,000 miles Depending On Its Peregree... Is that kinda like pedigree? 
Does Not Compute...Should Not That Be Kind Of...!!!
It's Kind Of Funny To Have Americans Lecturing People On Spelling,
And Them Coming Out With Slang Terms That Teenage Girls Would Be Kinda Embarrassed To Use...
Perigee Is A Corruption Anyway...
It Should Be Perigaea If One Wishes To Be That Pedantic...!!!
If You Wish To Speak To An Englishperson,
Please Consult Samuel Johnson's Dictionary In Future...
Because The American Laziness In It's Usage Of The English Language Is Appalling...
I'm Assuming Your American, Based Solely On Your Lack Of Manners
And Your Usage Of Pre-Pubescent Girly Slang...!!! |
|
|
|
Post by jd on Dec 16, 2011 17:19:26 GMT -4
No, but you have come (at least as a proxy) to try to persuade people about a matter of great scientific and historical significance. That means you should present yourself as an intelligent adult. If you are not, you have no business trying to make a case that other adults have broken laws, or lied to the public. Those are pretty big charges, and if you don't look like you're making them seriously, don't expect other people to take you seriously. Rubbish. Im as far from a HB as you can get. The Admin has even vouched for me in this thread. You have been reading the thread havent you? I have not tried to change anyones mind on anything. I simply posted a couple of HB posts from another forum. I do expect an apology for what you have said about me which is totaly untrue. |
|
|
|
Post by nomuse on Dec 16, 2011 17:23:57 GMT -4
Let me count the ways:
1. "I'm just speaking for a friend." Sure, it seems to be true in this case. Other people have had no problem in the past simply going "Hey, there's a live one over at David Ickes today." It is pointless work; unless the person making the claims is actually watching the debate, they won't learn anything. The people the person has been making the claims TO won't learn anything in any case, because THEY aren't here. So who benefits? The sole benefit I can see is if the claim was so powerful it really needed to be heard; that it had the potential to overturn our current understanding. i certainly don't see that as the case here.
2. Bad formatting. Okay, again, not jd's fault. But since the original claimant is not here, and his work is being synopsized in any case, why not do a better job of it?
3. Bad timing. There's been a small run on really, really annoying Apollo Deniers recently. Oddly, however, they have mostly been somewhat educated, and willing and able to at least try to state their claims in detail. This "shy one" is a blast from the past -- bad arguments arising from poor understanding presented in annoying fashion. There is no meat there -- which Doctor Socks and other recent participants at least offer.
|
|
|
|
Post by nomuse on Dec 16, 2011 17:27:38 GMT -4
I didn't realize it was possible to be more annoying than ALL CAPS. |
|
raven
Jupiter
That ain't Earth, kiddies.
Posts: 509
|
Post by raven on Dec 16, 2011 17:29:20 GMT -4
I tried my best to change the format of the first post i quoted as for the second i just didnt have time. I wonder why people are so snappy round here. Im mean come on its not the end of the world. No, but imagine someone wanted to have a discussion with you, but decided to use a very load, grating tone voice, as analogous to large text, or intentionally mumbled, like using low contrast text colours. It would be annoying and rather rude, no? I do not know your chosen gender, and frankly do not care. English sadly does not have gender neutral singular pronouns, at least not ones that aren't also tied to a specific gender as well. I refer, of course, to 'he', 'him' and so forth. To make up for this lack, I personally use 'they', 'their', and, yes, 'them' as gender neutral singular pronouns. This is actually an archaic method that has since fallen to disuse, but in today's massive increase in anonymous communications, I feel it helps avoid confusion. But not always apparently. |
|
