Why do so many doubt the moon landing? | |
Alan SheepHerder User ID: 1145689 United States 11/02/2010 01:37 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
Gene Sirhan Sirhan Cernan User ID: 1145689 United States 11/02/2010 01:40 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 969583 United States 11/02/2010 01:59 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
Pete Pecker Conrad User ID: 1145689 United States 11/02/2010 01:59 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | Regarding Neil Armstrong's speech where he says: "There are great ideas undiscovered, breakthroughs available to those who can remove one of truth's protective layers. There are places to go beyond belief..." What is truth's protective layer? A LIE. There is no other answer. Neil Armstrong, while remaining loyal to his oath and to his fellow Apollo astronauts, tells us it was a lie. By the way, Neil got very emotional at the end of the speech, getting choked up and tearing up. Follow the breadcrumbs. |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 969583 United States 11/02/2010 02:00 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 969583 United States 11/02/2010 02:06 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | Regarding Neil Armstrong's speech where he says: "There are great ideas undiscovered, breakthroughs available to those who can remove one of truth's protective layers. There are places to go beyond belief..." Quoting: Pete Pecker Conrad 1145689What is truth's protective layer? A LIE. There is no other answer. Neil Armstrong, while remaining loyal to his oath and to his fellow Apollo astronauts, tells us it was a lie. By the way, Neil got very emotional at the end of the speech, getting choked up and tearing up. Follow the breadcrumbs. That's right. Neil Armstrong was revealing secrets through cryptic language that only the alumni of the University of Youtube are smart enough to decipher. |
Roger Chaffing Skin User ID: 1145689 United States 11/02/2010 02:20 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | Regarding Neil Armstrong's speech where he says: "There are great ideas undiscovered, breakthroughs available to those who can remove one of truth's protective layers. There are places to go beyond belief..." Quoting: Anonymous Coward 969583What is truth's protective layer? A LIE. There is no other answer. Neil Armstrong, while remaining loyal to his oath and to his fellow Apollo astronauts, tells us it was a lie. By the way, Neil got very emotional at the end of the speech, getting choked up and tearing up. Follow the breadcrumbs. That's right. Neil Armstrong was revealing secrets through cryptic language that only the alumni of the University of Youtube are smart enough to decipher. We have yet to hear your interpretation. (This'll be good. Let me go get some popcorn and soda). Okay, all set. |
Commutator
User ID: 904552 United States 11/02/2010 04:04 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | CunnyTraitor can't answer the Armstrong quote or why we stopped going. I guess the only thing it lists for a response in the official NASA debunking booklet is: "budget constraints". Then, below that, it says: When your opponent blasts that defense out of the water, resort to personal attacks; early and often. Quoting: Buzz Doldrum 1145689You're and idiot and insane. Get help. No fairer destiny could be allotted to any physical theory, than that it should of itself point out the way to the introduction of a more comprehensive theory, in which it lives on as a limiting case. - Albert Einstein |
Commutator
User ID: 904552 United States 11/02/2010 04:06 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | <------AssholeKnot and CunnyTraitor on the ropes Quoting: Gene Sirhan Sirhan Cernan 1145689Is that all you can do. Stupid pictures and corrupting names. What are you a three year old? Your mommy is calling time for bedtime. And don't play with her computer again, you drooled all over it. Idiot No fairer destiny could be allotted to any physical theory, than that it should of itself point out the way to the introduction of a more comprehensive theory, in which it lives on as a limiting case. - Albert Einstein |
Commutator
User ID: 904552 United States 11/02/2010 04:16 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | My 'question' was pertaining to saying it was 20 lbs after picking it up. Moon weight was less than 5lbs why say it was 20 lbs. I find it to be an 'curious', are you saying he wouldn't have been able to pick up a 26 lb rock using the very same moves? It is far from being the most compelling items. Quoting: MHzHe actually says it was 20 pounds before he picked it up. I never said anything about the ability to pick up the rock at all. He struggled with the rock because of the constraints of the suit. Even though he was in one sixth gravity the center of gravity of the system, astronaut plus rock plus spacesuit plus backpack does not change. The suit plus backpack weighed around 200 pounds. Bending over normally to pick something up would have caused him to fall. That is why he used his other hand to prop himself up on the scoop. No fairer destiny could be allotted to any physical theory, than that it should of itself point out the way to the introduction of a more comprehensive theory, in which it lives on as a limiting case. - Albert Einstein |
Michael Chris Collinswoth User ID: 1145689 United States 11/02/2010 04:17 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
Commutator
User ID: 904552 United States 11/02/2010 04:19 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | Your own "evidence" clearly shows this is not a movie set. Quoting: Anonymous Coward 1110690[link to apolloanomalies.com] While trying to make one claim, you debunk another. Here's the movie set. You'll notice an uncanny lack of similarity in the terrain, all other differences aside. BTW: Looks like most of the moon here is a matte painting. [link to mimg.ugo.com] Since I'm here now and haven't followed this thread a lot, I will inform you as to why stars are not visible in the Apollo pics. 1. Brightness of the sun precludes human perception of objects that are vastly more dim. But I digress. 2. Film latitude (light to dark ratio) is way too narrow to encompass the wide range needed to record a bright sunlit moonscape and include any stars whatsoever. It's simply impossible. Color print film of the 60s had a latitude of about 5 f stops. At a film speed (sensitivity) of 100 ASA (now ISO) a sunlit scene coud be captured at f8 or f11(aperture) /250th of sec shutter speed. To capture any stars at all you need to shoot f2 (4 x wider than 8) at a shutter speed of about 2 minutes. That's roughly a 15 stop difference. Each stop reduction cuts the amount of light by half. So you can see the difference is vast. Color slide film had even less latitude so I doubt that it was used for the missions. I'm guessing Kodacolor c-24 color negative film was used because it has that signature look to the pics. Different films have different looks. While I know the government has lied and hoaxed the masses over and over again. This is simply not one of them. The mindset of the cold war precluded such a hoax as there was simply to much pride to lose by getting caught in fakery. We were once a nation that was proud of who we were as a people, as a nation, and of our achievements, and our abundance, and to be able to share those achievments with the world, and thus raise the bar for the standard of living. And not just for ourselves. That is gone. America is a different place than it was back then. We have become self doubting and cynical. There's a boogie man behind every rock and we are way too sensitive for our own good. I can see that growing up in modern times one can be swayed that we didn't do what we did. But we did. It was a massive national effort and we were an inspired people in those days. This was a space race and it was for real, for ourselves and the Russians. Remember, we spent the 40's and especially the 50's fantasizing about going into space. We made it to the moon. We quit going because of lost interest and there was apparently nothing there that warranted the expense of our return. It really was kind of a social orgasm after which we went partially back to sleep. I can say that nothing in my lifetime has roused the natonal spirit as did the space race. You really would do your self good to find another conspiracy to hang your hat on. At least one that has some more plausable leads to it. Good day. Everything you say is true and has been said before. The hoax believers don't want to hear any of it though. You will soon be labeled a shill like anyone else who speaks the truth. No fairer destiny could be allotted to any physical theory, than that it should of itself point out the way to the introduction of a more comprehensive theory, in which it lives on as a limiting case. - Albert Einstein |
Commutator
User ID: 904552 United States 11/02/2010 04:22 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | Back from the glory hole so soon, CunnyTraitor? So you're saying a 3 year old can interpret what a NASA shill can't? Apparently. Still waiting for your interpretation of Armstrong's "removing truth's protective layers" speech. Hurry up. Your mom's calling me to bed. HER bed. (squirt! squirt!) Quoting: Michael Chris Collinswoth 1145689Ever post proves more and nore that you are incapble of being rational. You seriously need medical help. You're not worth responding to anymore. No fairer destiny could be allotted to any physical theory, than that it should of itself point out the way to the introduction of a more comprehensive theory, in which it lives on as a limiting case. - Albert Einstein |
Sean O'Queef User ID: 1145689 United States 11/02/2010 05:01 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | CunnyTraitor can't say, because there's only one interpretation of Armstrong's statement. Engineers aren't real good at reading between the lines, are they CuntTickler? But then again, Neil made it pretty obvious; even for the likes of you. Still waiting for your interpretation. Ohhh CunnyTraitor, where ARRRE youuuuuu???? |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 1149058 Canada 11/02/2010 05:47 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | Back from the glory hole so soon, CunnyTraitor? So you're saying a 3 year old can interpret what a NASA shill can't? Apparently. Still waiting for your interpretation of Armstrong's "removing truth's protective layers" speech. Hurry up. Your mom's calling me to bed. HER bed. (squirt! squirt!) Quoting: CommutatorEver post proves more and nore that you are incapble of being rational. You seriously need medical help. You're not worth responding to anymore. |
Rey Rogers
User ID: 1147258 Spain 11/02/2010 06:07 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | So this is how you will prove it is fake? The only way to do that is to work out the scenario point by point. And then you will find that Apollo could not have been faked and thus they went. You can use the S-word all you want, but getting to the truth is easy and you can do that all by your very self. Anomalies in footage and imagery does not equal they didn´t go at all. Time field researcher Dr David Anderson and his websites are missing. Why? Please discuss. Thread: Spacetime manipulation and the Dr David Anderson Enigma: Opening the road to time travel and limitless energy |
Astronut
Senior Forum Moderator User ID: 922113 United States 11/02/2010 07:14 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | For those who choose to go beyond TRUTHS protective layer. Hmmmm what did he mean? Quoting: Anonymous Coward 1145689He ment we never went to the moon. You guys are transperant. I concur. I've yet to hear a shill give a reasonable explanation of this Armstrong comment. Neil played his hand VERY well in choosing these words for his speech. Clearly you've never read the whole speech or you're just so fucking biased you don't see how he was actually talking about the process of scientific discovery in general and that many discoveries are still left to be made by those with insight. That rules out hoax believing idiots like you. You're right. I haven't read the whole speech. I WATCHED him give it on video. He said TRUTH's protective layer; not science's" protective layer. Neil doesn't speak publicly often, but when he does, he chooses his words carefully and makes them count. See the part about being "fucking biased." Science peels back truth's protective layers, science does not have protective layers. Your biased and twisted interpretation ignorant of the context does not prove a hoax. You're grasping at straws. |
Rey Rogers
User ID: 1147258 Spain 11/02/2010 01:33 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | See the part about being "fucking biased." Science peels back truth's protective layers, science does not have protective layers. Your biased and twisted interpretation ignorant of the context does not prove a hoax. You're grasping at straws. Quoting: AstronutI say the quote in full context refers to NASA censorship of the fact that there is evidence someone was on the Moon before (structures etc.) and of the evidence overall we are not alone. At least I like to think so. Time field researcher Dr David Anderson and his websites are missing. Why? Please discuss. Thread: Spacetime manipulation and the Dr David Anderson Enigma: Opening the road to time travel and limitless energy |
MHz
User ID: 988049 Canada 11/02/2010 03:22 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 1149058 Canada 11/02/2010 03:52 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | Just a few more words on the rock that was picked up. If you were on the moon, would you roll anything up your leg that has the potential to puncture you suit? Quoting: MHzMaybe they knew more about the durability of their space suits than you. Just a thought. |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 969583 United States 11/02/2010 03:58 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | Just a few more words on the rock that was picked up. If you were on the moon, would you roll anything up your leg that has the potential to puncture you suit? Quoting: Anonymous Coward 1149058Maybe they knew more about the durability of their space suits than you. Just a thought. Iz theer an youbtube vid? Its not tru wifout a youtube vid. |
Gazmik
User ID: 487277 United States 11/02/2010 04:45 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | Just a few more words on the rock that was picked up. If you were on the moon, would you roll anything up your leg that has the potential to puncture you suit? Quoting: MHzExactly how fragile do you believe that the suits were? They were designed to keep micrometeoroids from puncturing them. "The extravehicular mobility unit was one of the outstanding engineering successes of the Apollo Space program. While there were some minor problems experienced with the suit, for example, the lunar visor tended to scratch easily and finger dexterity was not optimum, never was a major or even minor failure experienced with the suit or backpack system. "Rigorous preflight testing was accomplished during suit development, and each individual flight suit was tested prior to every mission. The Apollo suits were impact tested against various objects, including extremely sharp devices, for resistance to penetration and rips. Quality control was meticulous. Pins used in the manufacture of the garment were accounted for and each suit was X-rayed to preclude the possibility of an oversight. Training suits were used in most preflight tests rather than flight suits to ensure there would be no compromise of the integrity of the flight suit. However, each flight suit was tested in a limited number of altitude chamber tests, after which the suits were thoroughly inspected for any possible damage. "The helmet used during EVA had an extremely high resistance to impact. The helmet material, Lexan, will not break even upon impact with a hammer. Lexan was substituted for the Project Gemini visor material. The latter lacked the impact resistance necessary for lunar operations. During one Gemini reentry, the visor cracked when the astronaut lurched forward, hitting the instrument panel." [link to lsda.jsc.nasa.gov] |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 1149058 Canada 11/02/2010 04:46 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | Just a few more words on the rock that was picked up. If you were on the moon, would you roll anything up your leg that has the potential to puncture you suit? Quoting: GazmikExactly how fragile do you believe that the suits were? They were designed to keep micrometeoroids from puncturing them. "The extravehicular mobility unit was one of the outstanding engineering successes of the Apollo Space program. While there were some minor problems experienced with the suit, for example, the lunar visor tended to scratch easily and finger dexterity was not optimum, never was a major or even minor failure experienced with the suit or backpack system. "Rigorous preflight testing was accomplished during suit development, and each individual flight suit was tested prior to every mission. The Apollo suits were impact tested against various objects, including extremely sharp devices, for resistance to penetration and rips. Quality control was meticulous. Pins used in the manufacture of the garment were accounted for and each suit was X-rayed to preclude the possibility of an oversight. Training suits were used in most preflight tests rather than flight suits to ensure there would be no compromise of the integrity of the flight suit. However, each flight suit was tested in a limited number of altitude chamber tests, after which the suits were thoroughly inspected for any possible damage. "The helmet used during EVA had an extremely high resistance to impact. The helmet material, Lexan, will not break even upon impact with a hammer. Lexan was substituted for the Project Gemini visor material. The latter lacked the impact resistance necessary for lunar operations. During one Gemini reentry, the visor cracked when the astronaut lurched forward, hitting the instrument panel." [link to lsda.jsc.nasa.gov] Just another example of how uniformed the hoax believers are. |
Commutator
User ID: 904552 United States 11/02/2010 06:06 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | Just a few more words on the rock that was picked up. If you were on the moon, would you roll anything up your leg that has the potential to puncture you suit? Quoting: MHzThe suits aren't made of thin plastic. They had multiple layers and were puncture resistant. Also, it was a technique used on a previous Apollo flight. [link to en.wikipedia.org] No fairer destiny could be allotted to any physical theory, than that it should of itself point out the way to the introduction of a more comprehensive theory, in which it lives on as a limiting case. - Albert Einstein |
MHz
User ID: 988049 Canada 11/02/2010 07:10 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | Just a few more words on the rock that was picked up. If you were on the moon, would you roll anything up your leg that has the potential to puncture you suit? Quoting: Anonymous Coward 1149058Maybe they knew more about the durability of their space suits than you. Just a thought. NP, I was pointing out that I would be somewhat nervous about letting anything sharp come in contact with the only thing between me an death. I can also pick up a 25 lb rock wearing a hockey glove and the motions are very similar, with a 5 lb one who knows as I have yet to find one that has the volume and the lesser weight. I appreciate the posts that gave the durability specs. I was in grade 6 when the event was broadcast live and the question about the flag waving didn't go over all that well in class the next day. BTW I highly doubt it would stop a bb traveling several thousand MPH Last Edited by MHz on 11/02/2010 07:12 PM |
Commutator
User ID: 904552 United States 11/03/2010 08:38 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | NP, I was pointing out that I would be somewhat nervous about letting anything sharp come in contact with the only thing between me an death. I can also pick up a 25 lb rock wearing a hockey glove and the motions are very similar, with a 5 lb one who knows as I have yet to find one that has the volume and the lesser weight. Quoting: MHzI appreciate the posts that gave the durability specs. I was in grade 6 when the event was broadcast live and the question about the flag waving didn't go over all that well in class the next day. BTW I highly doubt it would stop a bb traveling several thousand MPH They did train with the suits and learned their limitations, something you have not done. The rock picking technique had been used by previous astronauts with no problems. Most of the Apollo astronauts where test pilots of some sort and used to danger in a way you or I could never experience. Most meteoroids aren't BB sized; they are closer to the size of a grain of dust. For at least five years before Apollo they sent up satellites to study the danger. But then again, the shuttle, Mir, skylab and the ISS have been up for extended stays and suffer no ill effects even though they have been struck. A little bit of trivia. If it is orbiting the Sun the term is meteoroid. If it is moving through the Earth's atmosphere it is a meteor. If you find it on the ground it is a meteorite. Last Edited by Commutator on 11/03/2010 08:39 AM No fairer destiny could be allotted to any physical theory, than that it should of itself point out the way to the introduction of a more comprehensive theory, in which it lives on as a limiting case. - Albert Einstein |
Darth Shadow User ID: 1146059 United States 11/03/2010 08:51 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | wake up sheeple! it was done in a studio! you can see a reflection in the astronauts visor of the cameraman eating a ham and cheese sandwich! Quoting: CaptainZeroLink Please... Because I think you are full of shit, but I'll retract my feelings toward what you said here if you an prove it to me. Balls in YOUR COURT now bubba! |
Gazmik
User ID: 487277 United States 11/03/2010 09:19 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | Most meteoroids aren't BB sized; they are closer to the size of a grain of dust. For at least five years before Apollo they sent up satellites to study the danger. But then again, the shuttle, Mir, skylab and the ISS have been up for extended stays and suffer no ill effects even though they have been struck. Quoting: CommutatorOn the Apollo 12 mission, they inspected the Surveyor 3 site. They found imprints made by the Surveyor landing pads intact after being there for over two years. If the imprints were intact after that long, it would be a good indication of how low the astronauts' odds were of being hit by a micrometeoroid. |
Sir Phydeau
User ID: 960398 United States 11/04/2010 07:24 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | commenting to return to active threads "When the facts change, I change my mind. What do you do, sir?" — John M. Keynes "The way to see by [blind] faith is to shut the eye of reason." - Benjamin Franklin Real men keep Torah. Knighted into the Army of Yahuwah on 10-9-10. Dear disaffected Democrats: Welcome to the Libertarian Party, we think you will find our social tolerance delightful. However in exchange for this, you're going to have to find a way to be ok with people keeping their guns and more of their money. Dear disaffected Republicans: Welcome to the Libertarian Party, we think you will find our small government economic policies to your liking. However in exchange you will have to find a way to be ok with "the gays" getting married. Snacks are on the table, help yourself. Please introduce yourself to someone on "the other side", you might be astonished just how much you actually have in common. |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 1152180 Canada 11/04/2010 10:46 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |