Discussion in 'Coffee Shack (Daily News/Economy)' started by BarnacleBob, Jan 10, 2017.
Technically speaking, they are correct in that currently there exists no means to send people beyond low Earth orbit. That''s not the same as saying man has never went beyond LEO.
The seeing stars thing, it depends upon whether or not the observer is facing the Sun. The Sun is so bright it washes everything else out.
As for the Van Allen belts? It's all about duration of exposure....same as with any type of radiation.
LOL You're Joeking right?
Not at all, because the guy in the vid is absolutely correct. Moon landing was not faked and could not be faked. All the so-called proof that it was is easily debunked.
Haha. No actually it hasn't. The OP video alone shows that the NASA actors don't even have their story straight. Asking an astronaut if stars are visible and getting totally opposite answers and dumbfounded looks is a problem. Van Allen belts is a problem. The idea that 1960's technology made it to the moon and back 100% successfully and that none of the other super powers then or since have any desire to prove themselves (despite always wanting to in other areas - military might, economics, etc --but not technology and science?). If it was achieveable in the 60's it should be a cakewalk 50 years later. The idea that computers with the computing capabilities of a calculator were able to perfectly navigate, to do complex separation and landings (rover+ orbiter modules), complex take off orbit and re-uniting. The fact that most of the astronauts want to avoid talking about their "trip" such as Armstrong who rarely if ever wants to discuss it. This isn't to mention the massive problems with the photographs, lighting, shadows, equipment, fuel, letters on rock, gophers on Mars shots, fake space sets, green-screen backgrounds, bubbles coming from helmets in numerous videos, etc.
Sorry guy, if you believe this fairy tale, I imagine you believe everything the government has told you. If you've done any amount of research into this and still believe it, I seriously have to question your intellect.
Yes, actually it has been.
Because the answer is, it depends.
...on where the are on the ISS, which windows they are looking out of, and whether or not their eyes have had time to adjust to the lower light levels. The ISS orbits every 90 minutes and more than half of that time the Sun is visible. If it is in your field of view, you ain't seein' no stars. Also, most windows face the Earth and the ones facing "up" Ie: out to space are oftentimes covered in order to protect the windows from micrometeorite strikes.
Not to mention the fact that those on the ISS don't just sit there looking out the windows all day.
No, it's really not. Radiation is all about intensity and time of exposure. The Apollo missions did not travel through the middle of the radiation belts, but through the thinner edges. That was possible due to the fact that the Moons orbital plane is tilted relative to the Earths orbital plane. Near the Earths orbital plane the Van Allen Belts are at their most intense levels. The higher or lower you pass through them, the less exposure you would get.
Also, you wouldn't need heavy lead shielding either. As stated in the vid posted above, it's not x-rays that comprise the Van Allen Belts, but rather charged particles.
...but all the naysayers always equate it with things like x-rays and gamma rays.
Because there's really nothing there of value relative to cost of going there.
...but China is working on going. Don't they count?
It's because back then they were willing to take chances that most people today are not willing to take with other peoples lives.
Those are only "massive problems" if you don't really understand what you are seeing. Like the rock that supposedly has a letter "C" on it. Take a good look at that "C". When zoomed in on, it looks like some kind of small fiber or something that was introduced onto the film during developing. It certainly does not look anything like letter stamped into the supposedly fake rock.
....and if that's supposedly some type of catalog number for that particular rock, why would they only use a single letter designation? To recreate a Moon scape would require many many "fake" rocks, each presumably with their own "number". (Gotta keep that shit straight, right?)
Other stuff you mentioned is all debunked here. http://www.badastronomy.com/bad/tv/foxapollo.html
...and here. http://www.clavius.org/analyze.html
Among other places.
I'd say it's yours that need questioning, as you obviously suffer from confirmation bias. I've been on both sides of this issue. Have you? I'm also willing to go wherever the evidence points, not just to the things I already think are true like most of the hoax believers do.
One other thing. The Soviet Union tracked the Apollo missions all the way to the Moon. Why didn't they bust us out? I know, I know, they were in on it too, right? Along with all the amateur radio operators looking for their own verification of the mission. If Apollo spent the whole time in Earth orbit, the "secret" would have been blown wide open before the Astronauts had time to splash down.
There's too many people that would have had to been in on it, had it been faked. People in many different fields and in several different nations. To believe that all those people, including some of our sworn enemies, would all work together to keep a secret just to make the US gov look good, is beyond silly.
...but keep believing it. I got faith in ya!
Photo of stars as seen from on the ISS. Notice how over exposed the Earth is. You can't photograph a really bright thing next to a really dim thing and expect both to be seen equally well in the same photo. Anyone who thinks they should be able to and uses that as "proof" we didn't go to the Moon, obviously does not understand photography and/or is just trying to find reasons to confirm their pre-existing doubts. Ie: they suffer from a case of confirmation bias.
If you really want to prove or disprove something you are currently unsure of, it's critical to try to disprove your own views on the subject. Otherwise you'll just build a little fort around your beliefs and fight anything that might seem to prove those ideas wrong.
On a related note, the same effect is noticed when taking a pic of the city lights at night. If you want any stars to be visible, the city part will be over exposed.
Ie: stars are obviously visible from space. Anyone who thinks they wouldn't be, needs to fasten the straps a bit tighter on their thinking cap. lol
Too much effort to try to correct all of your failed arguments. I'll just leave you with this one picture:
Dude, it's just a picture of a rock. Possibly a few rocks.
...and of course you don't want to go through all the details of what I posted because too much of it disproves what you posted.
Meanwhile, you post a laundry list of stuff in post #7 that you expected me to address. lol
This explains the reason people think they see common things in pics of Mars.
Here's a hint. It's the same reason we sometimes think we see faces or other recognizable things in shadows and scenes here on Earth that upon closer inspection, are shown to not really be there. Ie: people are good at discerning recognizable patterns and assigning a defined object to those patterns.
That pic of a rock you posted is a 3 dimensional object viewed in only 2 dimensions. If you could rotate the scene and look at it from another angle, you'd quickly see that it's nothing more than a rock.
...but it confirms your pre-existing bias, so you cling tightly to the idea that it must be a rodent. Your brain won't let you see it any other way than as some type of rodent because that's what you want to see.
Another interesting fact about the Apollo missions is that knitting (the kind little old ladies do) is what actually got 'em there and back. If it were all fake, why would they go to such trouble to produce useless stuff meant to get them there, when they could do without and just lie about the navigation equipment?
...or were the little old ladies who knitted the core rope memory in on it too? They were old, so they would've died not too many years later, I suppose. lol
Here's another short vid that further explains the guidance system used by Apollo missions. Specifically, the optical alignment telescope. Without which, the mission would have been all but impossible.
...but if they were lying about it, why not just use the heavier motors, worm gears and rigid track used on traditional sextants? Why would it matter if it were all fake? Seems like a lotta trouble to spend so many resources solving problems that don't need to be solved. The reason they did, is because they had to due to weight restrictions.
LOL. What division of NASA do you work for?
Sorry, but the Museum was mistaken.
Also, that particular item was not given to Drees by Armstrong or Aldrin, but rather by an Ambassador who didn't know WTF he was talking about. Either that or Drees needed a hearing aid. Either way, NASA never gave away any lunar samples a mere 3 months after Apollo 11 returned.
NASA did give Moon rocks to certain other nations, but that wasn't until in the early '70's. Also, the actual Lunar rocks given to Holland are still accounted for and are not in question as to their authenticity. They have samples from Apollo 11 and 17 on display at the National Museum of the History of Science and Medicine in Leiden, Netherlands.
Try try again.
Edited to add: apparently the real Apollo 11 samples that were given as gifts were encased in Lucite and attached to a wooden plaque. Also, they weighed approx .05 grams. About the size of a grain of rice.
I was gonna let this thread die, but seeing that you're still interested, here's a vid explaining how the Apollo computer worked.
After watching that, I gotta ask the skeptics reading, if it was all fake, why go to all this trouble to create such complicated things? Just throw a sextant into the capsule and let 'em orbit the Earth a few hundred times. If it's all fake. If not, you need something like this in order to make sure it always works. Ie: fail safe.
Not to mention involving so many extra people for no good reason. The more people involved, the more likely you'll get found out.
A definitive history as to the origins of the Moon landing hoax, hoax.
Do you know where/how the hoax idea got started?
I would have to say you're the most gullible person I've ever encountered. Most mooners just haven't thought about this and researched it. You've actually looked into it and still buy the official narrative. It's quite amusing. Seriously, is there any official government narrative that you DON'T believe in?
Never fear "UnderDog" is here to set us straight! Now straighten up cause Joe says its so! /Sarc
Now you know the moon landings were reproduced in the desert & on film stages because authorities didnt want those pesky commies in Russia & China stealing our new technologies! /Sarc 2
At least I'm putting forth reasons for all the things you said prove they never happened. Reasons that are science based, mind you.
Is the Dutch rock thing the best you got? That's long been shown to not be as presented by the lunar hoaxers.
Edited to add:...and I have been on both sides of this issue. I've looked at the evidence given and at one time had my own doubts about it. However, once I dug deeper I realized that those putting forth this theory tend to have a poor understanding of the science around these things. It's akin to the chemtrail stuff and flatEarth stuff. It can all be attributed to a less than firm grasp on the science and physics involved.
It's not because "I say so", but rather because that's what the science says.
Take the Van Allen belts for example. Why is it so unreasonable to consider that the damaging radiation there works the same as other ionizing radiation you may be exposed to? It's all based upon ones duration of exposure. It's why the technician giving an xray is provided a lead shield, while the person getting it is not provided a lead shield. The patient only gets one every so often while the technician works near it everyday. Ie: their chance for harmful exposure is greater and is taken into consideration by providing them a lead shield.
Van Allen belts work the same way. As long as you go through the thinner parts at a fast enough rate, the duration of exposure is minimal. They've always maintained that they flew through the thinner portions of it. Why is that fact so difficult to understand?
You didn't answer my question:
Seriously, is there any official government narrative that you DON'T believe in?
If so, let's hear a couple examples.
How exactly does recognizing that the Apollo missions actually happened, equate to believing/disbelieving anything else?
What I believe/disbelieve has nothing to do with who the messenger is, but rather what the science and physics say on the matter. People of all sorts lie and/or are confused about some things. Including people with the gov.
In fact, if you would actually watch the vid I posted in post #3, the last two minutes address how things like the fake Moon hoax diverts peoples attention from the real stuff. Things like the NDAA, for example.
If as much effort was placed into exposing that, as is placed on trying to convince others to ignore/deny science and physics in order to accept we did not go to the Moon, we might not have the NDAA.
Things like this serve as nothing but a distraction and is meant to keep people like you barking up the wrong tree.
If you want to address other subjects and/or conspiracy theories, why don't you start a new thread about those things? This thread is about the Apollo Moon missions, but you can't seem to come up with anything plausible that would prove they did not happen, so you attempt to divert the conversation. Which is a typical response by those with no leg to stand on in the current discussion. As soon as one argument is destroyed, it is dropped and some other thing is immediately brought up.
Remember, to disprove a theory, all it takes is for one of it's so-called proofs to be dis-proven in order to destroy the theory. Everything you've thus far listed as proof of there being no manned Moon landing, has been utterly and completely dis-proven. Otherwise you'd be screaming it from the tree tops...but you aren't doing that. You just bounce from reason to reason in an attempt to justify that which you already want to believe. Then when you run out of reasons, you try to change the subject. lol
Now, how about you address the subject at hand? If you can.
Oh boy. Here we go again.............
*Hands Joe King a beer* You deserve it and I have a feeling you might need it after this discussion. :)
The thing that gets me about using the excuse of the Van Allen Belt radiation as a reason Apollo could not have gone to the Moon, is the fact that the only ones with any hard data about the radiation levels, is NASA and the space agencies of other nations. The ones using it as "proof" of the so-called hoax only know of its existence, but have no actual knowledge of it. They then extrapolate in their heads what they think they know about things like dental xrays and somehow come to the conclusion that without heavy lead shielding it has to be impossible to traverse the VARB's.
Ie: their "proof" in this case is 100% supposition based upon a limited understanding of the subject. That all radiation is the same and equally deadly at any level of exposure. The problem is, that is just not true.
What exactly am I looking at??? Why is this important to you?
It's really rather simple. I can see you're some ostrich with his head in the sand. The point wasn't to shif to a different topic. The point was to establish that you believe anything and everything the "authorities" tell you is true. I think your response makes that pretty clear. On the other hand, if you could actually admit that the US government does lie about a lot of important things and even list examples where you don't believe them, then I might actually believe you are a honest truth seeker with the ability to look at an issue from an honest open-minded perspective and an intellect that can sift through the tons of misinformation that we have spoon fed to us on a daily basis. Now I'm just pretty convinced that you're either a government shrill, a troll, or an ignoramus.
You're making my point for me that you suffer from confirmation bias.
Ie: it's obvious that you already believe something and are only searching for confirmation of it. In this case, you are jumping to a conclusion about me and my beliefs and/or lack thereof and are asking me to help confirm your conclusions. Sorry, but I don't play that game. As I said, if there are other topics you'd like to discuss, start a thread on them and we'll see what I post in 'em. This thread is about Apollo.
It seems that you are incapable of discussing the topic at hand and have no further "proof" that the Apollo missions were faked, specifically that the Van Allen Belts are completely impenetrable to humans,. If so, then you obviously do not have a leg to stand on. So far the best you've come up with is the Dutch rock thing.
...but at least you tried.
Now all you're doing is attempting to build a strawman in order to have something to attack.
I'm sorry to have to say this, but it is you who has the head buried in the sand, because to believe what you are saying requires one to ignore science and physics.
...and even the gov is subject to science and the laws of physics.
He can't tell what's in the pic. Otherwise he'd say what it's supposed to be. (here's a hint, it's a rock) lol
He just saw that someone who says Apollo missions were fake, thinks one of those rocks is alive. So obviously it must be. Ie: more proof of a confirmation bias at work. lol
Final post here. You've proven that you're just a government shill that believes every narrative .gov tells you. That was my point. If you could have stepped forward and said, yes there are some big lies coming from the government, then we could move forward. But there's no use in debating a government narrative with someone that believes .gov is his mommy and would never lie to him. This is your religion. I on the other hand am an honest skeptic. I started out in life being ignorant like you in the belief that .gov told the truth about everything. As I examined this and other issues it became clear that a good amount of the information we're spoon fed is lies and propaganda. You have a long ways to go in the fact that you have a fully formed adult mind and still believing the gov is your all-trustworthy momma. Good luck.
lol, I too have been accused of being a government shill many times. If we are shills then where is the payment we are supposed to get for participating in this supposed grand deception? It would be just as ignorant to believe everything the government says is a lie as it is to believe everything the government says is the truth.
Now you may wonder, why do I believe we went to the moon? There are a lot of reasons. I too, being the last person who will tell you to trust the government, looked in to the idea that it was a hoax with an open mind. I even continued to research after knowing there were horrendous flaws in a lot of the claims made by those trying to say it was a hoax. The fact is, there is a lot more evidence that we went to the moon than we did not. I have yet to see any credible evidence that we did not. Now if you want to blindly dismiss all the evidence that we went to the moon as lies and blindly accept all the claims that we did not go to the moon then that is up to you if you want to be that dishonest with yourself. I certainly did not come to my own conclusion so blindly.
Yea, but only because you are obviously unable to counter the science that proves the Apollo missions were real.
I haven't "proven" anything of the sort. It is you who are assigning a reason in order to protect your cherished delusions.
Edited to add:...and if you actually believed what you typed, you obviously haven't read any of my other posts on other subjects. lol
The only point I see you making is that you are incapabable of actually discussing the science of the Apollo missions.
See? All you are doing is attempting to confirm your preexisting bias by building a straw man.
No, you're just a skeptic.
The point is, the only "examining" you've done is that necessary to confirm your biases. You don't think Apollo missions went to the Moon, so you only look at the so-called evidence that supports your already existing position.
Let me guess, your "examining" consisted of watching the Fox show about this back in 2001, and you ate it up, hook line and sinker, right? lol
The people who resort to this kind of labeling and name calling only do so because apparently they are intellectually incapable of arguing the facts based on the science and physics of the issue.
Edited to add: because science and physics are also gov lies too. lol lol lol
Every time one of these threads comes up, the actual science is always ignored, as is any argument put forth that obviously discredits their position. Ie: that which can't be argued with won't be argued with.
lol, that's right. Once when I made the mistake of debating a flat-earther I explained how you can use simple geometry to show that the ISS really is near the height it is reported to be. Basically it turned out that the person believed that geometry itself is a lie. It was hard to know where to go from there. lol
It seems we will find out soon enough.
SpaceX to send two private citizens around the moon and back
SpaceX founder and chief executive Elon Musk announced Monday plans to send two paying “private individuals” on a week-long flight around the moon and back to Earth by the end of next year.
The two-person crew will be trained for emergencies, but the Dragon spaceship carrying them will fly on autopilot, loop around the far side of the moon on a “free-return” trajectory, then speed back to Earth. Musk said SpaceX aims to launch the circumlunar flight in the fourth quarter of 2018.
“This would do a long leap around the moon,” Musk said. “We’re working out the exact parameters, but this would be approximately a week-long mission, and it would skim the surface of the moon, go quite a bit farther out into deep space, and then loop back to Earth. I’m guessing probably distance-wise, maybe 300,000 or 400,000 miles.”
He acknowledged the trip will be risky.
End of next year, we should know for sure and then be able to put all these other theories to rest once and for all. Because if man can be sent to the Moon, landing on it isn't that much of a bigger step.
Don't waste your time with them Joe, they are just scientifically challenged Luddites leading us down in the next darkage. Look at all the great achievements the Romans made and then look at the lifestyles of the people who lived across Italy and Europe in the centuries that followed. When a civilization, like the united states of america begins to collapse, the inhabitants begin to deny their former achievements and bury any evidence of them. They deny their former glories and go back to a rudimentary lifestyle so that they can feel adequate and not the failures they are in reality. The flat earth theory flows on nicely from this one, when the satellites have fallen out of orbit in the decades ahead that will be the icing on the cake for them.
Separate names with a comma.