|
Post by tofu on Nov 20, 2005 13:46:46 GMT -4
So, an ABer says so without providing proof and a sheep like yourself claims it's a fact, eh... Go back to sheep. It's possible there's something wrong with me, because when I see this picture, I can't help but think the following: 1) my god, who painted their walls that awful color? 2) why are those drapes hung so low? 3) get that sheep off of the carpet before it makes a mess 4) nice TV, but why didn't they spring for a nice table instead of putting it on milk crates?
|
|
|
Post by neanderthal on Nov 20, 2005 17:50:45 GMT -4
And more willful ignorance from you. You were given an explanation for your made-up "problem" and you are unwilling to accept it... for what reason? An 8 pound canister ways only 1.3 pounds on the moon, and since it give the astronauts a safety margin it is worth the weight penalty. This is not a lame excuse, the safety of the astronauts was obviously important. The canisters were brought to the moon from earth. If there is 8 extra needless pounds on earth then there is 8 extra needless pounds. There is no need for a 5 or so hour safety margin when it will never be used or needed. Because a fact is proven that does work in the ABers favour the ABers say; so what, it's only 8 pounds. Argue first (in previous posts) that NASA did not provide enough of a safety margin for the astronauts as indicating a hoax, then argue that NASA providing a safety margin for the astronauts indicates a hoax. Your next argument, if I'm understanding correctly, will be that NASA provided exactly the right amount of safety margin for the astronauts and that indicates a hoax. You will follow with a question about how NASA could possibly have known just the right amount of safety margin to include, and follow with a scientific declaration of "It's just not believable." Am I close?
|
|
|
Post by neanderthal on Nov 20, 2005 17:54:45 GMT -4
So, an ABer says so without providing proof and a sheep like yourself claims it's a fact, eh... Go back to sheep. How does this apply to any of the arguments in the debate? In what way does this help to prove a point? You can try to counter that my post just above this does not try to prove a point, but that would indicate you did not get the point of it. The point is this: You cannot argue that there is too much A, therefore B, then turn around and argue that there is not enough A, therefore B. You need to clarify your position in your own mind and stop distracting yourself with random musings that contradict positions you've already stated.
|
|
|
Post by hplasm on Nov 20, 2005 20:03:37 GMT -4
So, an ABer says so without providing proof and a sheep like yourself claims it's a fact, eh... Go back to sheep. I take it, with this image, that MoonMan concedes the Spacesuit debate. And is now sulking. btw, nice to see you go your cut& paste working, MoonMan
|
|
|
Post by LunarOrbit on Nov 20, 2005 20:28:58 GMT -4
So, an ABer says so without providing proof and a sheep like yourself claims it's a fact, eh... Go back to sheep. I think that picture actually depicts a hoax believer because they're the only ones who believe anything FOX says.
|
|
|
Post by ottawan on Nov 20, 2005 21:05:38 GMT -4
Ya think any HB has ever heard of Harvey Kirck?
I mean here in the GWN.
|
|
|
Post by tofu on Nov 20, 2005 22:31:15 GMT -4
I think that picture actually depicts a hoax believer because they're the only ones who believe anything FOX says. I'll bet you a beer that MM is what we merkans would call a liberal.
|
|
|
Post by LunarOrbit on Nov 20, 2005 22:36:10 GMT -4
Well, my joke about FOX was only because they aired that stupid Moon hoax special... let's not bring political beliefs into this.
|
|
|
Post by ottawan on Nov 20, 2005 22:38:11 GMT -4
Well, you have to admit . . . . that last one was funny
|
|
|
Post by LunarOrbit on Nov 20, 2005 22:42:44 GMT -4
I consider myself a librel and I don't believe the moon landings were faked, so I don't see the connection.
|
|
|
Post by Van Rijn on Nov 20, 2005 23:08:31 GMT -4
I consider myself a librel and I don't believe the moon landings were faked, so I don't see the connection. In MM's case, he had a picture of Bush on Fox news (which some complain about because of perceived "conservative" bias, just as others complain about CNN for perceived "liberal" bias), and he has earlier made ... interesting ... comments about Nixon regarding the supposed moon hoax . Since he has great difficulty understanding the technical reasons for the statements around here, it is much easier for him to assume that it simply people going with "guberment lies." It is ironic for him that the Fox network happened to be the one that put on the silly Moon hoax show.
|
|
|
Post by tofu on Nov 20, 2005 23:39:34 GMT -4
huh? I didn't think we were getting political. I thought we were just having fun until the debate picked up again. Anyway, I gave MM a little keyboard and mouse and an autographed copy of Sibrel's book. Also, I helped him hang his law degree next to the model Saturn V that he built. The model rocket was mentioned over on BAUT in case anyone doesn't know what I'm talking about. He had some popups on his computer screen a minute ago, but I helped him run adaware. He's good to go now. Later on he and I are going to watch all 79 episodes of the original star trek and paint each others toenails.
|
|
|
Post by scooter on Nov 20, 2005 23:48:06 GMT -4
So, Moon Man, given the evidence, do the suits work, or not? If not, why not? I believe we have pretty well cleared up your misconceptions thus far. (aside from a general "disbelief", based on lack of understanding of how stuff works...) What's the next topic?
Dave
|
|
|
Post by PeterB on Nov 20, 2005 23:55:26 GMT -4
Would it perhaps be better to say that any question about the reality of the Apollo space suits also challenges the reality of other American spacewalks, such as on Gemini, Skylab and the Space Shuttle.
(In the same way, questioning the operation of explosive bolts questions every use of them in rockets over the last half century or so.)
(In the same way, questioning the operation of the Lunar Module Ascent Engine questions the operation of rocket engines over the last half century or so.)
|
|
|
Post by gwiz on Nov 21, 2005 5:24:25 GMT -4
Would it perhaps be better to say that any question about the reality of the Apollo space suits also challenges the reality of other American spacewalks, such as on Gemini, Skylab and the Space Shuttle. (In the same way, questioning the operation of explosive bolts questions every use of them in rockets over the last half century or so.) (In the same way, questioning the operation of the Lunar Module Ascent Engine questions the operation of rocket engines over the last half century or so.) Yeah, I raised that as reply #2 on this thread, and again in more detail as #95, but he completely ignored me on both occasions.
|
|