|
Post by Grand Lunar on Mar 1, 2010 11:21:34 GMT -4
YouTube user Nasafakedit (aka, HumanMonkeys) makes some of the lamest claims. And he doesn't even bother to back them up.
For instance, he repeats that the LM's computer was a "pocket calculator" with it's 4KB of RAM. Yet he refuses to bring up why this is insufficent. He also can't support his claim of the LM being a "toy spacecraft"; he simply refers to "20 layers of gold foil" amongst other things.
I'm beginning to think he's not interested in any sort of discussion, but rather throws out any claim he can come up with, even if they are claims that have been debunked time and again. In short, he's just a troll.
|
|
|
Post by Grand Lunar on Feb 25, 2010 16:26:43 GMT -4
In addition, they also ignore the time scales invovled. Hoaxers seem convinced that the issues with long term missions that will require better shielding mean that Apollo couldn't have made it to the moon. Somehow they also get the idea that en route to the moon, better radiation protection is needed, and believe that radiation is a show stopper in getting to the moon.
The more eccentric hoaxers feel that it's proof of a faked mission. Then again, they also think Jan Lundberg not only claims that you can't take good photos without a viewfinder, but also think Lundberg ridiculed the Apollo photos.
|
|
|
Post by Grand Lunar on Feb 25, 2010 16:10:50 GMT -4
This is probably the biggest irony, since the hoax believers accuse NASA of using Photoshop to alter LRO photos to put in the views of Apollo artifacts.
|
|
|
Post by Grand Lunar on Feb 25, 2010 16:05:41 GMT -4
That's my impression, especially after seeing Phil Karn's videos that discuss JarrahWhite's claims about the moon rocks.
|
|
|
Post by Grand Lunar on Feb 25, 2010 16:01:26 GMT -4
A factor that might help is whether or not the cabin of SpaceShipOne was lit or not. If it wasn't, or if there was very little light, then it's possible that Melvil could've seen stars easier than the Apollo astronauts could.
In any case, it is a ridiculous case the hoax believers bring up.
They probably would still claim it was a hoax even if the astronauts said they saw lots of stars. The facts don't matter to them. If they can make a claim and have people spread it around, they feel good about it.
|
|
|
Post by Grand Lunar on Feb 18, 2010 10:08:47 GMT -4
Makes sense, since the LM didn't have a heat shield, nor was it's propulsion system (except for the ascent stage) expected to be used again. Didn't the electronics provide heat?
|
|
|
Post by Grand Lunar on Feb 18, 2010 9:58:25 GMT -4
Not sure if this belongs here....
The subject of the LM sitting with one side in the sun and one side in darkness was brought up. I did mention the info from Clavius concerning this. Then I was asked "Why then did the CM (obviously referring to the CSM) need to perform the barbeque roll?"
I assumed this was because it didn't have he same thermal covering as the LM.
But I wish to be certain; what made the difference between the CSM to require a PTC roll where the LM didn't?
|
|
|
Post by Grand Lunar on Feb 18, 2010 9:54:27 GMT -4
If you can block all light sources from your eyes, including secondary light sources, you probably could see stars. The main snag here is that one of those light sources is the sky. I thought the person was referring to the lunar sky. Shame on me!
|
|
|
Post by Grand Lunar on Feb 18, 2010 9:50:28 GMT -4
In all the supposedly elaborate things done to create a hoax I would suggest that digging a crater under the LEM would have been one of the simpler things if they thought it was required. And if the set designer forgot to dig said crater the last thing you would do is draw attention to it. So why would Armstrong describe the blast crater (lack of) as virtually his first act after stepping onto the moon? www.youtube.com/watch?v=d73jCthcAok&feature=related(5.48 in) Even before you have to do a bit of technical research to discover the actual downforce, the hoax proposition is a non sequitur. P.s I have seen 3 Harriers take off (vertically) from a grass strip and they never left a crater. If the hoax proponents say there should be a crater I want to see their homework, just saying it should is not an argument. Excellent find with the video. Armstrong does mention rays ementating from the engine. Which is probably all one should expect. Well, any rational person anyway.
|
|
|
Post by Grand Lunar on Feb 18, 2010 9:18:07 GMT -4
Like several people here, I'm a space enthusiest. And I see Apollo as one of the top accomplishments in manned space flight.
I see the hoax believers as polluters of human culture. Note that I say human culture, not American. Apollo was an achievement that captured the imagination of the whole world. And hoax believers belittle it.
Hoax believers encourage ignorance and paranioa, whether they admit it or not. They do not encourage critical thinking, which is desperately needed in today's world.
Hoax believers simply want their claims to be accepted. They appearently throw their own sort of tantrums when people actually put their claims to the test (as evidenced by their reactions to the 'Mythbusters' special, as well as their attitude to Mr. Windley and Dr. Plait).
|
|
|
Post by Grand Lunar on Feb 11, 2010 16:26:48 GMT -4
If you can block all light sources from your eyes, including secondary light sources, you probably could see stars.
|
|
|
Post by Grand Lunar on Feb 11, 2010 16:12:46 GMT -4
Excellent find, Kiwi on that Nat Geo article.
Once again, another hoax believer claim gets trashed by simple research.
|
|
|
Post by Grand Lunar on Feb 1, 2010 12:01:18 GMT -4
Your old friend rocky/cosmored has decided to spread his wisdom far and wide. Now, I cannot read up on the good stuff about my beloved San Antonio Spurs without having to have "moon hoax" stupidity dumped on my head. www.spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=144487Not exactly sure what rift in the time space continuum led his fevered brain to pick a basketball forum to spam his, um, unique brand of thinking, but now we are cursed with having to put up with it. Sigh. That stinks. He continues to spread his stupidity on YouTube as well, under the name FatFreddy. Weird name. I now have the image of Rocky as being like Micheal Moore. Wonder what his excuse for LRO images is supposed to be?
|
|
|
Post by Grand Lunar on Feb 1, 2010 11:04:55 GMT -4
It's funny to see their devotion to White's analysis. Jack's claim show him to know next to nothing about the spacecraft and space science, let alone photo analysis. But of course, you see hoaxers (no names please!) that claim his analysis to be "top notch".
Right. On what sort of scale?
|
|
|
Post by Grand Lunar on Feb 1, 2010 10:56:43 GMT -4
The news lately seems to indicate that SpaceX will get people to the ISS and that the ISS will be extended.
Also, the idea points to a new heavy lift like the Jupiter rockets proposed by Direct to take the place of Ares.
It also seems the "Flexible Path" will take the the place of the lunar missions.
If true, then while we won't be making trips to Tycho, we at least can visit places never set foot upon before.
The ideas seem similar to Buzz Adrin's views for space exploration.
|
|