|
Post by brotherofthemoon on Jul 17, 2009 17:12:21 GMT -4
From that site's comment section: Great stuff...now use the Hubble to take some pictures.Yeah, 1 meter/pixel isn't cutting it. Let's try again at 200 meters/pixel.
|
|
|
Post by brotherofthemoon on Jun 17, 2009 22:29:31 GMT -4
Allow me to propose a simple experiment for Mr. Jarrah:
1. Sit in front row of James Taylor concert. Record Db level. 2. Sit in front row of ManoWar concert. Record Db level. 3. Compare results.
|
|
|
Post by brotherofthemoon on Oct 26, 2008 8:16:00 GMT -4
I've often asked HBs who didactically state that the AGC was not up to the job of going to the moon the minimum system requirements in their doubtless expert opinions, and to show how the AGC does not meet these requirements. I have received an awful lot of words (or a lot of awful words) of bluster in reply, but not one of these experts has ever demonstrated the least understanding of the issue. You mean... you haven't had anyone tell you that the computer "didn't even have enough memory to hold the JPG file for the "Start" icon?" Seriously. I've heard that one. I guess the concept of a non-graphical user interface is above most folks.
|
|
|
Post by brotherofthemoon on Oct 24, 2008 9:50:08 GMT -4
Ha! Finally, an excuse for me to bring out my list of reasons why the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki were FAKE!
(Sarcasm Alert!)
1. The bombs yielded between 15 and 20 kilotons, but didn't leave a gigantic charred blast crater. 2. Supposedly, the bomb dropped on Hiroshima killed 70,000 people outright. Japan instituted a "Duck and Cover" plan in 1929, but for some reason didn't use it in Hiroshima. 3. It's impossible to pack 15,000 tons of explosives into a bomb ten feet long and three feet around. 4. A 500 pound bomb can destroy everything within 20 feet. Therefore, the Little Boy bomb should have flattened everything in a 114 mile radius. 5. The primary cause of death from a nuclear explosions are flashing skeletonizer rays that vaporize people instantly. This didn't happen in Hiroshima or Nagasaki. 6. Most of Hiroshima was flattened, but a building near the center of the explosion survived except for having all it's glass shattered. 7. The Russians built an atomic bomb in about the same amount as time as the Americans, which is completely ridiculous considering their vast technological superiority. 8. The burn shadows caused by the heat of the fireball are almost always non-parallel. 9. The intense heat of the explosion would have melted film for miles around, and yet people were taking photos of the destruction within hours. 10. The radiation caused by the bombs would have created a permanent radioactive bubble around Japan which no one could enter unless shielded by six feet of lead. 11. The bombs themselves were so unstable they would have flown back towards their B-29 and exploded. 12. One of the first Atomic Bomber Prototype Test Planes crashed during testing. The ABPTP was too dangerous too fly, and yet they built more than 4,000 production aircraft! 13. If atomic bombs could be dropped on cities 60 years ago, we would still be dropping them today. 14. Computing power was insufficient to guide the bombs to their targets. 15. In a 2003 Gallup poll, 98% of Americans doubted that nuclear weapons even existed. 16. The photos of the destruction are remarkably similar to the 1984 BBC television film Threads, and unsurprisingly, most of the photographs of the bombing's aftermath didn't start appearing until the mid 80s. 18. No one could see any stars in the sky the night after the bombing. 19. Some of the shadows created by the heat of the fireball aren't completely black. 20. The movement of crew members aboard the Atomic Bomb Dropping Plane would have changed it's center off gravity, knocking it off-balance. 21. Many survivors never heard the sound of the explosion, which is completely absurd. 22. If you speed the footage of the blast four times, it's obviously just a small bomb filmed in extreme close-up. 23. All of the photos taken after the bombing are perfectly framed and exposed. 24. If the bombings were real, Truman would have had General Eisenhower and Robert Oppenheimer killed in a fire for opposing them. 25. A feather dropped from a plane at 30,000 feet would take longer to hit the ground than an atomic bomb. 26. The ABDP had two bomb bays in the center of it's fuselage. There's no way the crew could have accessed the rear compartment with them in the way. 27. The state of technology was so bad in 1945 rifles still had bayonets on them. Are we supposed to believe they could make an atomic bomb?
|
|
|
Post by brotherofthemoon on Sept 3, 2008 7:40:00 GMT -4
Perhaps someone should tell Jon_Death that if the "Moon set" really was filled with helium, the dust would be billowing up behind the rover, instead of falling in parabolic arches. Not only does helium have anti-gravity powers, it can also simulate a vacuum.
|
|
|
Post by brotherofthemoon on Sept 1, 2008 18:53:16 GMT -4
OMG... now this guy is actually suggesting that, in order to fake the footage and to simulate 1/6 gravity, they filled a soundstage (uses the therm "environment") with helium... You know, so many old folks who shop where I work insist on having even the lightest groceries placed in paper and plastic bags, I've often wondered if the interaction between the two bags causes some kind of anti-gravity effect. So I then figured out, "Oh, that's how they faked the Moon landings! They wrapped the set in a giant plastic bag, and then put a paper bag over it! You PANs just got pwned! ;D
|
|
|
Post by brotherofthemoon on Aug 31, 2008 13:28:56 GMT -4
Did he check the ground clearance of a Formula 1 car? You'd be lucky to find anywhere on the moon where you could sit one on its wheels rather than its floor. The Moon must be perfectly flat - how else would you get those completely parallel shadows, otherwise?
|
|
|
Post by brotherofthemoon on Aug 29, 2008 18:37:13 GMT -4
"Gravitational Drag" Yes folks, apparently gravity has much the same effects as air resistance does. Don't believe me? There's someone on the IMDB board for Mythbusters who keeps insisting that the LRV should have been capable of speeds of up to 90 miles per hour because the lack of "gravitational drag" on the Moon. Basically, anything should be capable of traveling six times faster on the Moon because it has one-sixth the surface gravity of the Earth. The poster's name is "Jon_Death," and the board is here (you might have to register to read it, though): us.imdb.com/title/tt0383126/board/threads/
|
|
|
Post by brotherofthemoon on Jun 27, 2008 7:57:56 GMT -4
So, in summary:
Constructing an enormous cavern in the Earth's Outer Core, simulated to look like the Moon's surface, despite the fact that the outer core is composed of molten iron, and faking a Moon landing there, is somehow easier than just going to the Moon for real.
Right.
|
|
|
Post by brotherofthemoon on Jun 13, 2008 12:35:53 GMT -4
There are also hand-held Hasselblad photos of the moon's surface, of earthrise from the moon, of Tsiolkovsky on the back of the moon, and on page 624 a description of the spacecratft's re-entry on 27 December 1968 by Captain James Holliday, who, at re-entry time, was flying a Boeing 707, flight 812 and passengers, from Fiji to Honolulu. Well, it's pretty obvious that Captain Holliday witnessed the Command Module being dropped into the ocean from a C-130. A C-130 in lunar orbit, that is.
|
|
|
Post by brotherofthemoon on Mar 26, 2007 19:10:42 GMT -4
I'm about 3/4 of the way through Richard C. Cook's new book Challenger Revealed: An Insider's Account of How the Reagan Administration Caused the Greatest Tragedy of the Space Age[/u]. I have to say I'm extremely disappointed in this book and I'm glad I borrowed it from the library. It was mostly completed in 1991 but only released recently because Cook was afraid of being fired from his government job. It's extremely dry (the entire middle section consists of transcripts from the Rogers commission, interjected with the author's comments), poorly sourced (only 95 notes in the appendix!), partisan (randomly inserted Reagan-bashing), and mostly just self-serving. Cook even includes a letter sent to him calling him a guardian angel for leaking one of his memos to the New York Times! But what caught my eye was Cook's assertion that the Space Shuttles would be converted into orbital weapons platforms. He says the eventually they'd be armed with "city incinerating" lasers, command and control facilities, and equipment to guide nuclear weapons. Naturally, he doesn't give any references for this, so in the end it's just a minor footnote and in a remarkably uninvolving volume. I can't wait to read the last 100 pages and put this thing behind me!
|
|
|
Post by brotherofthemoon on Jan 1, 2007 5:37:34 GMT -4
At last, our long forum-wide nightmare is over.
|
|
|
Post by brotherofthemoon on May 24, 2006 19:22:42 GMT -4
Are you planning to acknowledge the previous rebuttal of your changes, or are you just going to ignore them? Well, I notice you all conveniently ignored the quote from pilot Russ Wittenburg about the maneuver being impossible for a 757. The maneuver (330 degree turn at 530 MPH, followed by a descent of 7000 feet in 2.5 minutes) is impossible in that type of plane, according to an experienced pilot. That's all the proof we need that the Pentagon wasn't hit by that plane. Exactly what it was hit with is still open for debate. Why didn't the government terrorists use a 757? Because it would have been a lot easier to use a stealthy military-based delivery system and then say it was a 757 to pin it on the alleged hijackers. Well, in that case, a gigantic aluminum Alien Space Bat crashed into the Pentagon.
|
|
|
Post by brotherofthemoon on Aug 25, 2006 23:07:28 GMT -4
I was digging through my old books when I stumbled across my copy of Scott Sullivan's Virtual LM. I hadn't looked at it in about a year, so I blew the dust off and dug in.
I have to say, even though it's not perfect, the amount of detail really blows me away. There's closeups of all the control panels, step-by-step illustrations of the LM construction, isometric cutaways of the ascent stage from 10 different angles, just to name a few. There's 15 pages devoted to the landing gear mechanisms, 14 pages devoted to the LRV deployment system, and all the illustrations show tiny details like piping and wiring, support beams and frames, valves, and electronics assemblies.
I think if Mr. Sullivan ever does a second edition of the book, he might want to annotate the illustrations a bit better, and refine some of the rougher 3D models. I heard a while back that he was working on a Virtual Saturn V. What became of that?
|
|
|
Post by brotherofthemoon on May 16, 2006 23:50:31 GMT -4
Does anyone have any thoughts on the article? Cheers Personally, I think Mark Wade should stick to providing us with reams of useful information, and knock it off with the cranky polemicism.
|
|