|
|
Post by margamatix on Sept 29, 2005 13:48:53 GMT -4
What I am interested in is his backing up his claim that the Apollo spacecraft were inadequate to the task, in terms of delta-V for any particular mission segment (or overall), radiation protection, or anything else. . The fact that it may or may not be theoretically possible to travel to the moon and back is neither here nor there. Moon footage was certainly faked- filmed on Earth, and showing actions which are completely incompatible with having been taken on the moon. Showing, for example astronauts moving in a way which would be totally incompatible with motion in one-sixth gravity. Moving exactly as they would on Earth, if you halved the speed of the film, in fact. So if we did go to the moon, why did we shoot the footage on Earth? |
|
|
|
Post by margamatix on Sept 29, 2005 13:34:58 GMT -4
|
|
|
|
Post by margamatix on Sept 29, 2005 12:43:59 GMT -4
. Are you suggesting (again) that a truck driver is more qualified to design equipment than rocket scientists? Is a truck driver more qualified than a Defence Secretary to have a correct view on whether Iraq had WMDs? Never be fooled by "mathemagics" rocketdad. |
|
|
|
Post by margamatix on Sept 29, 2005 12:40:51 GMT -4
[ Well apart from that fact it wasn't designed to return, and was only tested in earth orbit. Oh well, such minor differences that it hardly seems worth nitpicking!  |
|
|
|
Post by margamatix on Sept 29, 2005 12:38:58 GMT -4
Well this time you`ve got it plain WRONG...... This is obviously one of those things the Ruskies brew their tea in.....the samovar....  I think you might be on to something there............  |
|
|
|
Post by margamatix on Sept 29, 2005 12:28:22 GMT -4
Perhaps the nay-sayers can tell us all how THEY think the new missions should look. . . That's the thing, they don't seem to realise that they look similar because it's the best way to do it. Guess what the Russian LK (Lunar Lander) looked like.......  And how many people did this contraption bring back from the moon? |
|
|
|
Post by margamatix on Sept 29, 2005 5:21:21 GMT -4
sorry margamatix, you'll have to explain that to me No problem. NASA's next move will be to announce that the 2018 moon landings have been cancelled, and that there will be no further manned space missions for the forseeable future. |
|
|
|
Post by margamatix on Sept 29, 2005 3:53:04 GMT -4
I have highlighted the bit where the cat is let out of the bag.................
Unless the US wants to get out of the manned spaceflight business completely, this is the vehicle that we need to be building," Griffin said
|
|
|
|
Post by margamatix on Sept 29, 2005 18:06:07 GMT -4
I change my signature every week or so. That was one, ephemeral, signature.Does that you mean you no longer believe the claim you used in your signature? Or that you didn't agree with it in the first place? Or you did agree with it, but you don't think we should challenge it? No, it just means that I change my signature every week or so. |
|
|
|
Post by margamatix on Sept 29, 2005 17:58:26 GMT -4
That is not his claim. He said the Soviets had a 5-1 advantage in hours in space. Did he? Well then I'll have to stand corrected. Like I have said, about a dozen times now, I haven't read Bart Sibrel's claim and so am not qualified to comment on it. Hope this helps. |
|
|
|
Post by margamatix on Sept 29, 2005 16:35:12 GMT -4
Irrelevant. You're being asked instead about the supposed 5-1 superiority that has been thoroughly, conclusively debunked. Please answer that question. Once again, I didn't start that thread, I hadn't contributed to that thread, and at the time I was already under fire for commenting on too many aspects of the Apollo fakery at once. I declined to comment on the thread because of this, and had continued to do so. Although- unlike you- I do not base the success of my posts on my ability to cut n' paste the longest message possible, I will make an exception here, under extreme provocation..... "The Soviets had a five-to-one superiority to the U.S. in manned hours in space. They were first in achieving the following seven important milestones: • First manmade satellite in earth orbit… • First man in space… • First man to orbit the earth… • First woman in space… • The first crew of three astronauts onboard one spacecraft… • The first space walk… • The first of two orbiting space craft rendezvousing… " So of course, Bart Sibrel IS wrong. He should have said a 7-1 superiority. We didn't go there Jay. It was all faked in Nevada. Get over it. |
|
|
|
Post by margamatix on Sept 29, 2005 15:08:14 GMT -4
Uh, your signature used to be a direct, attributed quote from Bart Sibrel disputing the validity of the LM engineering. I change my signature every week or so. That was one, ephemeral, signature. Having said that, I completely agree with Sibrel on the ludicrous unsuitability of this craft to land on the moon and then take off again, let alone rise through 70-odd miles into moon orbit. Run it by me again. On descent, the LM cut out its engine six feet above the moon's surface. It weighed 11 tons So it fell to the moon's surface with the same force as an object weighing nearly two tons would do if it fell six feet onto the Earth's surface, without coming to any harm. I don't think so. |
|
|
|
Post by margamatix on Sept 29, 2005 12:34:54 GMT -4
You quote verbatim from his web site regarding other claims. I drew your attention to one short piece of footage taken fron his site which quoted Wernher von Braun. Where else do I quote from his website? Where does his website show Duke being snatched up on a wire? Where does his website draw attention that footage doubled in speed shows that the film was taken on Earth? If you repeat a lie often enough, some people might believe it. But not many. |
|
|
|
Post by margamatix on Sept 29, 2005 9:21:21 GMT -4
Margarmatix, here it is plain and simple: Do you think Bart Sibrel is trustworthy, honest, and competent? This question has nothing to do with Apollo, the moon, his 5-to-1 superiority claim, or any other claim. Simply, do you think he's trustworthy, honest, and competent? Well I've never met him, so how could I possibly say? I don't believe we went to the moon, but the fact that my views coincide with his on this ONE subject does not entitle me to an opinion about his personal trustworthiness. So I wouldn't care to venture an opinion. |
|
|
|
Post by margamatix on Sept 29, 2005 9:06:58 GMT -4
I will stipulate that you didn't bring that one forward; it was my mistake to say so. . Thank Gawd for that, I thought we were never going to get there. |
|
