Godlike Productions - Discussion Forum
Users Online Now: 1,737 (Who's On?)Visitors Today: 150,767
Pageviews Today: 255,078Threads Today: 83Posts Today: 1,547
03:20 AM


Rate this Thread

Absolute BS Crap Reasonable Nice Amazing
 

Another Question Not Yet Asked By The Whiny Moon Landing Conspiracists.

 
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 81828905
United States
01/11/2022 09:12 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Another Question Not Yet Asked By The Whiny Moon Landing Conspiracists.
I just cannot believe this. None of them have thought to ask:

"Why Did None of the Thousands of Professional Astronomers, or Any of the Amateur People, Down Here on Earth Use Their Telescopes to See the Lunar Lander and Astronauts Moving Around Up There On the Moon, and Snap a Photo or Take a Video?"

"Why Was NASA Not Interested in That Sort of Data? Did They Forget It Was Possible To Do That?"

This would be another killer question. Lol.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 81847434
United States
01/13/2022 08:43 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Another Question Not Yet Asked By The Whiny Moon Landing Conspiracists.
I just cannot believe this. None of them have thought to ask:

"Why Did None of the Thousands of Professional Astronomers, or Any of the Amateur People, Down Here on Earth Use Their Telescopes to See the Lunar Lander and Astronauts Moving Around Up There On the Moon, and Snap a Photo or Take a Video?"

"Why Was NASA Not Interested in That Sort of Data? Did They Forget It Was Possible To Do That?"

This would be another killer question. Lol.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 81828905


Guess they cannot say much. Lol.
LasVegasBrad

User ID: 79661142
United States
01/14/2022 07:33 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Another Question Not Yet Asked By The Whiny Moon Landing Conspiracists.
You ask that stupid question? and think somehow that "proves" any idiot has ever set foot on the Moon?

We hear that the ex-Hubble telescope was not able to resolve anything that small. The new Webb telescope is conveniently 1 million miles away. So forget any good Moon pics ever.

So many things do not add up. It only takes one impossible thing, and it all goes away. My 2 favorite things: impossible space suit, impossible retro rocket. Not even counting the impossible radiation shielding. Or impossible navigation necessary for the moon take-off and perfect orbit matching to the command module. With a calculator.

But you guys are just shills anyway.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 37355702
United States
01/14/2022 07:36 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Another Question Not Yet Asked By The Whiny Moon Landing Conspiracists.
using an amateur telescope to see the lunar lander lol
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 46210440
United States
01/14/2022 07:40 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Another Question Not Yet Asked By The Whiny Moon Landing Conspiracists.
I ask that question all the time. No one can tell me. you cant even find a picture on google.
LasVegasBrad

User ID: 79661142
United States
01/14/2022 09:12 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Another Question Not Yet Asked By The Whiny Moon Landing Conspiracists.
I am an actual engineer. I have truly designed Power converting circuits for space. I have been in Nasa buildings, knew some of their engineers. I have been at the Ft Collins test facility. I have consulted with Hughes Space on satellite microwave transmitters.

I utterly believe the entire Moon thing is fake.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 25209280
United States
01/14/2022 09:14 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Another Question Not Yet Asked By The Whiny Moon Landing Conspiracists.
I just cannot believe this. None of them have thought to ask:

"Why Did None of the Thousands of Professional Astronomers, or Any of the Amateur People, Down Here on Earth Use Their Telescopes to See the Lunar Lander and Astronauts Moving Around Up There On the Moon, and Snap a Photo or Take a Video?"

"Why Was NASA Not Interested in That Sort of Data? Did They Forget It Was Possible To Do That?"

This would be another killer question. Lol.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 81828905


because the telescopes can't zoom into the actual surface of the moon and take photos of human sized people on the moon surface

that's why no one asked that question

cause its a dumb dumb question
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 76559242
Germany
01/14/2022 09:19 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Another Question Not Yet Asked By The Whiny Moon Landing Conspiracists.
I am an actual engineer. I have truly designed Power converting circuits for space. I have been in Nasa buildings, knew some of their engineers. I have been at the Ft Collins test facility. I have consulted with Hughes Space on satellite microwave transmitters.

I utterly believe the entire Moon thing is fake.
 Quoting: LasVegasBrad


good dude!

it was filmed at a doe site in tonopah in the amerikan state of nevada
LasVegasBrad

User ID: 79661142
United States
01/15/2022 10:01 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Another Question Not Yet Asked By The Whiny Moon Landing Conspiracists.
I dont know where it was "filmed". But look at this 13 year old headline. Talk about fake news.

NASA lost moon footage, but Hollywood restores it

www.ctvnews.ca/nasa-lost-moon-footage-but-hollywood-restores-​it-1.417599

How very convenient.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 79009989
United States
01/15/2022 10:26 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Another Question Not Yet Asked By The Whiny Moon Landing Conspiracists.
using an amateur telescope to see the lunar lander lol
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 37355702


Using an amateur telescope to see the lunar lander leaving the moon, or to see the orbital stage leaving moon orbit and coming back to earth. LOL

<math xmlns=" [link to www.w3.org]
<mi>arctan</mi>
<mo>&#x2061;<!-- &#8289; --></mo>
<mrow class="MJX-TeXAtom-ORD">
<mfrac>
<mrow>
<mn>10</mn>
<mi>m</mi>
</mrow>
<mrow>
<mn>380000</mn>
<mi>k</mi>
<mi>m</mi>
</mrow>
</mfrac>
</mrow>
<mo>&#x2248;<!-- &#8776; --></mo>
<msup>
<mn>10</mn>
<mrow class="MJX-TeXAtom-ORD">
<mo>&#x2212;<!-- &#8722; --></mo>
<mn>6</mn>
</mrow>
</msup>
<mi>deg</mi>
</math>



So scientific. So compelling.

One simple problem............................................

Apparently NASA forgot that these space propulsion systems have bright flames pointing out of them when maneuvering.

Search up Saturn V flame magnitude.

Internet no like such information, appears scrubbed.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 81756785
United States
01/15/2022 10:32 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Another Question Not Yet Asked By The Whiny Moon Landing Conspiracists.
quite simple, not one apollo mission left earth's orbit.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 79009989
United States
01/15/2022 01:03 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Another Question Not Yet Asked By The Whiny Moon Landing Conspiracists.
If my maff is correct, an object with an absolute magnitude of about 66 would be visible on the unlit moon at night.


Now a forum genius will calculate the luminosity of the orbiter, lander and return vehicle.

Apparently these statistics are not liked by the nets.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 79009989
United States
01/15/2022 01:05 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Another Question Not Yet Asked By The Whiny Moon Landing Conspiracists.
If my maff is correct, an object with an absolute magnitude of about 66 would be visible on the unlit moon at night.


Now a forum genius will calculate the luminosity of the orbiter, lander and return vehicle.

Apparently these statistics are not liked by the nets.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 79009989


OOps, inB4 a genius tells me theres no real luminosity from those object.


Allow me clafiry.

The flames coming from the nozzles of the rockets on those space vehicles.

Wow you had me there for a millisecond.
StopsniffinmeBrandon

User ID: 80068884
United States
01/15/2022 01:42 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Another Question Not Yet Asked By The Whiny Moon Landing Conspiracists.
If my maff is correct, an object with an absolute magnitude of about 66 would be visible on the unlit moon at night.


Now a forum genius will calculate the luminosity of the orbiter, lander and return vehicle.

Apparently these statistics are not liked by the nets.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 79009989


OOps, inB4 a genius tells me theres no real luminosity from those object.


Allow me clafiry.

The flames coming from the nozzles of the rockets on those space vehicles.

Wow you had me there for a millisecond.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 79009989


As a Whiny Moon Landing Conspiracist, my evidence comes from the photos the astronauts allegedly took on the Moon.

1) A hazy sunset photo - With no atmosphere, the Sun would always look like a spotlight, with sharp defined edges.

2) Perfect detail visible in the shadows- The Kodak color transparency film used in the Hasselblad cameras, did not have the dynamic range to be able to capture detail from the brightest whites, to the deepest shadows. Again, with no atmosphere, there is no light diffusion, and all images would have extreme contrast. But you can see the fine detail on the astronauts backpack as the astronaut climbs down the lunar lander in the shade, which should be pitch black.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 79009989
United States
01/15/2022 01:47 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Another Question Not Yet Asked By The Whiny Moon Landing Conspiracists.
If my maff is correct, an object with an absolute magnitude of about 66 would be visible on the unlit moon at night.


Now a forum genius will calculate the luminosity of the orbiter, lander and return vehicle.

Apparently these statistics are not liked by the nets.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 79009989


OOps, inB4 a genius tells me theres no real luminosity from those object.


Allow me clafiry.

The flames coming from the nozzles of the rockets on those space vehicles.

Wow you had me there for a millisecond.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 79009989


As a Whiny Moon Landing Conspiracist, my evidence comes from the photos the astronauts allegedly took on the Moon.

1) A hazy sunset photo - With no atmosphere, the Sun would always look like a spotlight, with sharp defined edges.

2) Perfect detail visible in the shadows- The Kodak color transparency film used in the Hasselblad cameras, did not have the dynamic range to be able to capture detail from the brightest whites, to the deepest shadows. Again, with no atmosphere, there is no light diffusion, and all images would have extreme contrast. But you can see the fine detail on the astronauts backpack as the astronaut climbs down the lunar lander in the shade, which should be pitch black.
 Quoting: StopsniffinmeBrandon


Good points, but I think OP is considering going to the moon the "conspiracy theory".
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 47055399
United States
01/15/2022 01:50 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Another Question Not Yet Asked By The Whiny Moon Landing Conspiracists.
Faking the moon landing is how we convinced ourselves we are better than Russia.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 79009989
United States
01/16/2022 11:41 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Another Question Not Yet Asked By The Whiny Moon Landing Conspiracists.
Hmmmm.


Absolute or apparent magnitude of a Saturn V.


You surprise me GLP.
Thought that would be cake.
Morrissons are cunts

User ID: 46133311
United Kingdom
01/16/2022 12:22 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Another Question Not Yet Asked By The Whiny Moon Landing Conspiracists.
Does anyone really think a handful of parachutes could slow the descent of a six ton space capsule travelling into our atmosphere at 25 thousand miles per hour?

No wonder there is ZERO footage of those moments. To believe that is possible is monumental absurdity.
Morrissons are cunts
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 79009989
United States
01/17/2022 08:29 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Another Question Not Yet Asked By The Whiny Moon Landing Conspiracists.
Hmmmm.


Absolute or apparent magnitude of a Saturn V.


You surprise me GLP.
Thought that would be cake.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 79009989


I am absolutely certain that there is at least one individual here who
can provide this information.

But will he?
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 81886705
Australia
01/17/2022 08:31 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Another Question Not Yet Asked By The Whiny Moon Landing Conspiracists.
I just cannot believe this. None of them have thought to ask:

"Why Did None of the Thousands of Professional Astronomers, or Any of the Amateur People, Down Here on Earth Use Their Telescopes to See the Lunar Lander and Astronauts Moving Around Up There On the Moon, and Snap a Photo or Take a Video?"

"Why Was NASA Not Interested in That Sort of Data? Did They Forget It Was Possible To Do That?"

This would be another killer question. Lol.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 81828905


cattheend
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 81886705
Australia
01/17/2022 08:32 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Another Question Not Yet Asked By The Whiny Moon Landing Conspiracists.
Does anyone really think a handful of parachutes could slow the descent of a six ton space capsule travelling into our atmosphere at 25 thousand miles per hour?

No wonder there is ZERO footage of those moments. To believe that is possible is monumental absurdity.
 Quoting: Morrissons are cunts


hf
JustmeTX

User ID: 80193276
United States
01/17/2022 08:34 AM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Another Question Not Yet Asked By The Whiny Moon Landing Conspiracists.
I just cannot believe this. None of them have thought to ask:

"Why Did None of the Thousands of Professional Astronomers, or Any of the Amateur People, Down Here on Earth Use Their Telescopes to See the Lunar Lander and Astronauts Moving Around Up There On the Moon, and Snap a Photo or Take a Video?"

"Why Was NASA Not Interested in That Sort of Data? Did They Forget It Was Possible To Do That?"

This would be another killer question. Lol.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 81828905


There is a basic law of physics that relates telescope lens diameter to possible object resolution at a defined distance.

There are no telescopes with the diameter needed to resolve man sized objects on the Moon viewed from Earth. Not to mention atmospheric distortion.

"Limits of Resolution: The Rayleigh Criterion"
[link to courses.lumenlearning.com (secure)]

Theta = 1.22 (Lamda/D)

[link to pressbooks.bccampus.ca (secure)]



Last Edited by JustmeTX on 01/17/2022 08:39 AM
Justme
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 79009989
United States
01/17/2022 09:00 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Another Question Not Yet Asked By The Whiny Moon Landing Conspiracists.
I just cannot believe this. None of them have thought to ask:

"Why Did None of the Thousands of Professional Astronomers, or Any of the Amateur People, Down Here on Earth Use Their Telescopes to See the Lunar Lander and Astronauts Moving Around Up There On the Moon, and Snap a Photo or Take a Video?"

"Why Was NASA Not Interested in That Sort of Data? Did They Forget It Was Possible To Do That?"

This would be another killer question. Lol.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 81828905


There is a basic law of physics that relates telescope lens diameter to possible object resolution at a defined distance.

There are no telescopes with the diameter needed to resolve man sized objects on the Moon viewed from Earth. Not to mention atmospheric distortion.

"Limits of Resolution: The Rayleigh Criterion"
[link to courses.lumenlearning.com (secure)]

Theta = 1.22 (Lamda/D)

[link to pressbooks.bccampus.ca (secure)]


 Quoting: JustmeTX


So how do telescopes see stars that are trillions of miles away, with a relatively small diameter?

LUMINOSITY

Since you are so smart, how about you answer the question about Saturn V LUMINOSITY?

Were you aware the Apollo rockets had flames shooting out of them?
JustmeTX

User ID: 80193276
United States
01/17/2022 10:34 AM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Another Question Not Yet Asked By The Whiny Moon Landing Conspiracists.
I just cannot believe this. None of them have thought to ask:

"Why Did None of the Thousands of Professional Astronomers, or Any of the Amateur People, Down Here on Earth Use Their Telescopes to See the Lunar Lander and Astronauts Moving Around Up There On the Moon, and Snap a Photo or Take a Video?"

"Why Was NASA Not Interested in That Sort of Data? Did They Forget It Was Possible To Do That?"

This would be another killer question. Lol.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 81828905


There is a basic law of physics that relates telescope lens diameter to possible object resolution at a defined distance.

There are no telescopes with the diameter needed to resolve man sized objects on the Moon viewed from Earth. Not to mention atmospheric distortion.

"Limits of Resolution: The Rayleigh Criterion"
[link to courses.lumenlearning.com (secure)]

Theta = 1.22 (Lamda/D)

[link to pressbooks.bccampus.ca (secure)]


 Quoting: JustmeTX


So how do telescopes see stars that are trillions of miles away, with a relatively small diameter?

LUMINOSITY

Since you are so smart, how about you answer the question about Saturn V LUMINOSITY?

Were you aware the Apollo rockets had flames shooting out of them?
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 79009989


I just showed you a law of physics that you seemed unaware of. If you don't like it go complain to the creator of the universe.

Bringing up other points is irrelevant.
You can believe whatever you want. I was just answering your first question. I typically get paid to provide lessons in engineering and physics. How much are you offering? :)

Last Edited by JustmeTX on 01/17/2022 10:34 AM
Justme
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 81621734
United States
01/17/2022 10:41 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Another Question Not Yet Asked By The Whiny Moon Landing Conspiracists.
Poon landing
LHP598

User ID: 80141479
United States
01/17/2022 01:12 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Another Question Not Yet Asked By The Whiny Moon Landing Conspiracists.
Does anyone really think a handful of parachutes could slow the descent of a six ton space capsule travelling into our atmosphere at 25 thousand miles per hour?

No wonder there is ZERO footage of those moments. To believe that is possible is monumental absurdity.
 Quoting: Morrissons are cunts


No, It was air friction that slowed the spacecraft to terminal velocity then the parachutes were deployed. Only those that feel the need to prove they don't have a clue what they are talking about think only the parachutes slowed it from 25 thousand miles per hour.
If you have to insist that you've won an Internet argument, you've probably lost badly. - Danth's Law
LHP598

User ID: 80141479
United States
01/17/2022 01:20 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Another Question Not Yet Asked By The Whiny Moon Landing Conspiracists.
As for seeing the rocket flames from Earth. The Saturn V first and second stage was used up and discarded getting to orbit. The SIV-B third stage was used for the Translunar injection burn and I've heard that WAS viewed by many on Earth. They were pushed back by the rocket on the service module and that would likely have been hard to see as the burn would have started around the back side of the moon and continued as it was traveling towards the Earth with the rocket pointed the other direction.
If you have to insist that you've won an Internet argument, you've probably lost badly. - Danth's Law
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 81859464
United States
01/17/2022 01:22 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Another Question Not Yet Asked By The Whiny Moon Landing Conspiracists.
I am an actual engineer. I have truly designed Power converting circuits for space. I have been in Nasa buildings, knew some of their engineers. I have been at the Ft Collins test facility. I have consulted with Hughes Space on satellite microwave transmitters.

I utterly believe the entire Moon thing is fake.
 Quoting: LasVegasBrad


good dude!

it was filmed at a doe site in tonopah in the amerikan state of nevada
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 76559242

Yes they filmed the tests and trial runs in Nevada, get over it.
That does not change the fact, that they actually went to the moon.





GLP