Godlike Productions - Conspiracy Forum
Users Online Now: 1,862 (Who's On?)Visitors Today: 901,627
Pageviews Today: 1,177,024Threads Today: 252Posts Today: 4,652
11:38 AM


Rate this Thread

Absolute BS Crap Reasonable Nice Amazing
 

Game Over for NASA Moon-Landing Hoax

 
Dr. AstroModerator
Forum Moderator

User ID: 4211721
United States
07/31/2013 11:36 AM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Game Over for NASA Moon-Landing Hoax
...

I doubt that very much.
...

I doubt that even more.
...

To who? You? You weren't even aware of Dawes' limit.
...

Rhea has a diameter of about 1,528 km. It's about 886 pixels across at the full resolution of that photo. That's a spatial resolution of 1.72 km per pixel. So what you're actually saying (without realizing it) is that you want to see a photo of the flag on the moon with a resolution of 1.72 km per pixel. Ok. Here you go:
[link to farm4.staticflickr.com]
In this image the moon is about 4270 pixels wide. The moon's diameter is about 3474 km so the image has a spatial resolution of about 0.814 km/pixel, twice as good as the Cassini photo of Rhea. Yeah, good luck seeing the flag...
 Quoting: Dr. Astro


Rhea crater? I don't know where you got that name..i mean the photo 2nd from the bottom on that link

The 13-mile (21-km) wide Giordano Bruno crater on the Moon’s far side was recently imaged by NASA’s Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter

[link to lightsinthedark.wordpress.com]
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 44175054


The Giordano Bruno crater image is from LRO, it's the same satellite that took the images of the Apollo sites! 21 km wide eh? It's about 880 pixels across in that image. That's about 23.8 meters per pixel. That's not even enough resolution to see the LM descent stage, let alone the flag. The images of the Apollo landing sites from LRO show that they're real, they agree perfectly with the images taken by the astronauts during the Apollo program.
[link to blogs.discovermagazine.com]
You are a troll, plain and simple.
 Quoting: Dr. Astro


nope your'e the troll, regurgitating the same crappy photos that show nothing besides the fact that you are delusional
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 44361468

Whine, whine, whine, but nothing to back up your whiney complaints with. You set the goalpost at "seeing" the flag on the moon. Well they've done that. That was the goalpost you set and it has been met.
a dot on a screen isn't evidence, wouldn't the colour at least stand out n so be a red pixel,
 Quoting: AC

A dot on a screen that is exactly where the flag should have been, next to another slightly fainter dot from the flag's shadow, is indeed evidence, particularly in context of all the other Apollo equipment surrounding it in the image. You set the goalpost (an unnecessary arbitrary one at that) at an image of the flag, that is what that is whether you want to deny it or not. It's a monochrome imager (as all the best astronomical CCDs in the world are), there is no color.
astrobanner2
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 44363604
Australia
07/31/2013 11:57 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Game Over for NASA Moon-Landing Hoax
...


Rhea crater? I don't know where you got that name..i mean the photo 2nd from the bottom on that link

The 13-mile (21-km) wide Giordano Bruno crater on the Moon’s far side was recently imaged by NASA’s Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter

[link to lightsinthedark.wordpress.com]
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 44175054


The Giordano Bruno crater image is from LRO, it's the same satellite that took the images of the Apollo sites! 21 km wide eh? It's about 880 pixels across in that image. That's about 23.8 meters per pixel. That's not even enough resolution to see the LM descent stage, let alone the flag. The images of the Apollo landing sites from LRO show that they're real, they agree perfectly with the images taken by the astronauts during the Apollo program.
[link to blogs.discovermagazine.com]
You are a troll, plain and simple.
 Quoting: Dr. Astro


nope your'e the troll, regurgitating the same crappy photos that show nothing besides the fact that you are delusional
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 44361468

Whine, whine, whine, but nothing to back up your whiney complaints with. You set the goalpost at "seeing" the flag on the moon. Well they've done that. That was the goalpost you set and it has been met.
a dot on a screen isn't evidence, wouldn't the colour at least stand out n so be a red pixel,
 Quoting: AC

A dot on a screen that is exactly where the flag should have been, next to another slightly fainter dot from the flag's shadow, is indeed evidence, particularly in context of all the other Apollo equipment surrounding it in the image. You set the goalpost (an unnecessary arbitrary one at that) at an image of the flag, that is what that is whether you want to deny it or not. It's a monochrome imager (as all the best astronomical CCDs in the world are), there is no color.
 Quoting: Dr. Astro


you say a lot but make no sense, argue with the video it smashes any idea that they walked on the moon..it was a hoax and you was fooled haha shattering 4u, or you're a paid troll defending the myth..it was pretty shonky work lookin back at it all, laughable

[link to www.youtube.com]
Dr. AstroModerator
Forum Moderator

User ID: 4211721
United States
08/01/2013 04:20 PM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Game Over for NASA Moon-Landing Hoax
...


The Giordano Bruno crater image is from LRO, it's the same satellite that took the images of the Apollo sites! 21 km wide eh? It's about 880 pixels across in that image. That's about 23.8 meters per pixel. That's not even enough resolution to see the LM descent stage, let alone the flag. The images of the Apollo landing sites from LRO show that they're real, they agree perfectly with the images taken by the astronauts during the Apollo program.
[link to blogs.discovermagazine.com]
You are a troll, plain and simple.
 Quoting: Dr. Astro


nope your'e the troll, regurgitating the same crappy photos that show nothing besides the fact that you are delusional
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 44361468

Whine, whine, whine, but nothing to back up your whiney complaints with. You set the goalpost at "seeing" the flag on the moon. Well they've done that. That was the goalpost you set and it has been met.
a dot on a screen isn't evidence, wouldn't the colour at least stand out n so be a red pixel,
 Quoting: AC

A dot on a screen that is exactly where the flag should have been, next to another slightly fainter dot from the flag's shadow, is indeed evidence, particularly in context of all the other Apollo equipment surrounding it in the image. You set the goalpost (an unnecessary arbitrary one at that) at an image of the flag, that is what that is whether you want to deny it or not. It's a monochrome imager (as all the best astronomical CCDs in the world are), there is no color.
 Quoting: Dr. Astro


you say a lot but make no sense, argue with the video it smashes any idea that they walked on the moon..it was a hoax and you was fooled haha shattering 4u, or you're a paid troll defending the myth..it was pretty shonky work lookin back at it all, laughable

[link to www.youtube.com]
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 44363604


That's not even a rebuttal. Thanks.
astrobanner2
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 44209750
United States
08/01/2013 04:32 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Game Over for NASA Moon-Landing Hoax
DIPSHIT THREAD FROM A DIPSHIT THAT DOESN'T KNOW HIS ASS FROM A HOLE IN THE GROUND. YOU DUMBASS'S WILL NEVER LEARN. SAME AS SYING THE EARTH IS FLAT. NOTHING BUT DIPSHIT DUMBASS LITTLE BOYS WHO SPEND THEIR TIME LISTENING TO B/S, AND SPREADING B/S.

EDGAR MITCHELL,(RELATIVE) I KNOW. THEY WENT TO THE MOON DIPSHITS
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 789570


oh, i'm sure ole Ed is always on the moon...

or half way there...

making sure no one else is...bsflag
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 44209750
United States
08/01/2013 04:37 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Game Over for NASA Moon-Landing Hoax
the question is what will the world think of the U.S. if it is a hoax..i would expect it to be a massive gamechanger, I kinda hope it isn't a hoax
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 44118449


half the world is already questioning... but people have retirements invested in this rickety corrupt perversity we call a system....

nothing will be done now that the entire economy is leveraged and can be bottomed out at will...
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 44209750
United States
08/01/2013 04:40 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Game Over for NASA Moon-Landing Hoax
seems to me they might have gone a different way... NASA is just a smokescreen for some deep occult shenanigans...

what does douglas dietrich say?

Ben Rich already said they can do anything you can imagine, at skunkworks...

what could be holding them back?
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 44427273
Italy
08/01/2013 09:04 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Game Over for NASA Moon-Landing Hoax
Shut the fuck up, douchebag.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 6693825


/\/\THIS/\/\
 Quoting: SnakeAirlines


When this is the only answer to the OP post, there must be some truth to the movie.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 404824


I was thinking the same lol
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 10919270


bump

same idiot shills I see...
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 44427273
Italy
08/01/2013 09:06 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Game Over for NASA Moon-Landing Hoax
...

I doubt that very much.
...

I doubt that even more.
...

To who? You? You weren't even aware of Dawes' limit.
...

Rhea has a diameter of about 1,528 km. It's about 886 pixels across at the full resolution of that photo. That's a spatial resolution of 1.72 km per pixel. So what you're actually saying (without realizing it) is that you want to see a photo of the flag on the moon with a resolution of 1.72 km per pixel. Ok. Here you go:
[link to farm4.staticflickr.com]
In this image the moon is about 4270 pixels wide. The moon's diameter is about 3474 km so the image has a spatial resolution of about 0.814 km/pixel, twice as good as the Cassini photo of Rhea. Yeah, good luck seeing the flag...
 Quoting: Dr. Astro


Rhea crater? I don't know where you got that name..i mean the photo 2nd from the bottom on that link

The 13-mile (21-km) wide Giordano Bruno crater on the Moon’s far side was recently imaged by NASA’s Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter

[link to lightsinthedark.wordpress.com]
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 44175054


The Giordano Bruno crater image is from LRO, it's the same satellite that took the images of the Apollo sites! 21 km wide eh? It's about 880 pixels across in that image. That's about 23.8 meters per pixel. That's not even enough resolution to see the LM descent stage, let alone the flag. The images of the Apollo landing sites from LRO show that they're real, they agree perfectly with the images taken by the astronauts during the Apollo program.
[link to blogs.discovermagazine.com]
You are a troll, plain and simple.
 Quoting: Dr. Astro


nope your'e the troll, regurgitating the same crappy photos that show nothing besides the fact that you are delusional

a dot on a screen isn't evidence, wouldn't the colour at least stand out n so be a red pixel, u have a photo of a rock or something..who knows
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 44361468


we well know that astro is a stupid liar bot...
74444

User ID: 74444
United States
08/01/2013 11:04 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Game Over for NASA Moon-Landing Hoax
...


Rhea crater? I don't know where you got that name..i mean the photo 2nd from the bottom on that link

The 13-mile (21-km) wide Giordano Bruno crater on the Moon’s far side was recently imaged by NASA’s Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter

[link to lightsinthedark.wordpress.com]
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 44175054


The Giordano Bruno crater image is from LRO, it's the same satellite that took the images of the Apollo sites! 21 km wide eh? It's about 880 pixels across in that image. That's about 23.8 meters per pixel. That's not even enough resolution to see the LM descent stage, let alone the flag. The images of the Apollo landing sites from LRO show that they're real, they agree perfectly with the images taken by the astronauts during the Apollo program.
[link to blogs.discovermagazine.com]
You are a troll, plain and simple.
 Quoting: Dr. Astro


nope your'e the troll, regurgitating the same crappy photos that show nothing besides the fact that you are delusional

a dot on a screen isn't evidence, wouldn't the colour at least stand out n so be a red pixel, u have a photo of a rock or something..who knows
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 44361468


we well know that astro is a stupid liar bot...
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 44427273


And I'll bet you just can't stand that *his* predictions and prognostications continue to accurately reflect reality... certainly much better than any hoax-believer's.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 33463156
United States
09/28/2013 01:28 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Game Over for NASA Moon-Landing Hoax
Three words. Again.

Van. Allen. Belt.

Man has never set foot on the moon.

Trust me.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 14435734


That's only two words

Van Allen is one name.

putin
John Farson
User ID: 44582992
United States
09/29/2013 08:59 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Game Over for NASA Moon-Landing Hoax
the tech at the time wasnt even close to advanced enough to land and then take off again with actual humans on board. ive talked to old timers who actually worked in the industry at the time and they told me the same thing. we never fuckin went!
Raphael

User ID: 46812713
Canada
09/29/2013 10:46 AM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Game Over for NASA Moon-Landing Hoax
Three words. Again.

Van. Allen. Belt.

Man has never set foot on the moon.

Trust me.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 14435734


That's only two words

Van Allen is one name.

putin
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 33463156


Nope we are back to three words N.C.C.

who or what is NCC?

star trekkies think they know?
star trekkies are space cadets

NCC was the fella who actually suggested the Van Allen Belts were out there .... and he had some interesting ideas about how to manipulate them.

NCC was the messianic genius who gave Van Allen the great idea to put a geiger counter on the satellite...

The rest is history and 'we the sheeple' reBLEAT idiot shit.

The same fella who suggested the belts were out there (not Van Allen) also invented the strong focusing principal being used at CERN.
[link to kachina2012.wordpress.com]

'we the sheeple' are lost in space.
The swastika is an inherent part of Intelligent Design.

[link to at37.wordpress.com]

“A theory is more impressive the greater is the simplicity of its premise, the more different are the kinds of things it relates and the more extended its range of applicability…”
-Einstein
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 14768050
United States
09/29/2013 11:22 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Game Over for NASA Moon-Landing Hoax
...


The Giordano Bruno crater image is from LRO, it's the same satellite that took the images of the Apollo sites! 21 km wide eh? It's about 880 pixels across in that image. That's about 23.8 meters per pixel. That's not even enough resolution to see the LM descent stage, let alone the flag. The images of the Apollo landing sites from LRO show that they're real, they agree perfectly with the images taken by the astronauts during the Apollo program.
[link to blogs.discovermagazine.com]
You are a troll, plain and simple.
 Quoting: Dr. Astro


nope your'e the troll, regurgitating the same crappy photos that show nothing besides the fact that you are delusional

a dot on a screen isn't evidence, wouldn't the colour at least stand out n so be a red pixel, u have a photo of a rock or something..who knows
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 44361468


we well know that astro is a stupid liar bot...
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 44427273


And I'll bet you just can't stand that *his* predictions and prognostications continue to accurately reflect reality... certainly much better than any hoax-believer's.
 Quoting: 74444


what predictions? It takes zero skill what so ever to say a comet isnt going to hurt anyone because by design a comet has a 99.999% chance of doing nothing, it simply flies by and its gone.

He points out the obvious and then we all get to share GLP with his ego and constant need to belittle everyone on here who doesnt praise his name or isnt there to help shill the masses. (like hydra who miraculously hasnt missed one of astro's posts, and always arrives to praise his 'successful' tired boom headshot posts or to join in on the mocking)

he spouts the typical dry nasa babble verbatim, he spends a disproportionate amount of time on GLP which means time not spent on a telescope.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 33463156
United States
09/29/2013 11:37 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Game Over for NASA Moon-Landing Hoax
Three words. Again.

Van. Allen. Belt.

Man has never set foot on the moon.

Trust me.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 14435734


That's only two words

Van Allen is one name.

putin
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 33463156


Nope we are back to three words N.C.C.

who or what is NCC?

star trekkies think they know?
star trekkies are space cadets

NCC was the fella who actually suggested the Van Allen Belts were out there .... and he had some interesting ideas about how to manipulate them.

NCC was the messianic genius who gave Van Allen the great idea to put a geiger counter on the satellite...

The rest is history and 'we the sheeple' reBLEAT idiot shit.

The same fella who suggested the belts were out there (not Van Allen) also invented the strong focusing principal being used at CERN.
[link to kachina2012.wordpress.com]

'we the sheeple' are lost in space.
 Quoting: Raphael


I will admit you and the rest of the woo do indeed appear lost in space.

I have no idea what you are talking about.
theNobodyfiles

User ID: 40568329
United States
09/29/2013 11:38 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Game Over for NASA Moon-Landing Hoax
the tech at the time wasnt even close to advanced enough to land and then take off again with actual humans on board. ive talked to old timers who actually worked in the industry at the time and they told me the same thing. we never fuckin went!
 Quoting: John Farson 44582992



Hi there.
Can you elaborate on this?
Did they work in the Aerospace industry or with Nasa?
Anyone claiming to be the nobody is guilty of impersonation.

I am the nobody, which is just code for "target" in gangstalking lingo.

The current information on gangstalking is another troll as well.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 33463156
United States
09/29/2013 11:42 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Game Over for NASA Moon-Landing Hoax
the tech at the time wasnt even close to advanced enough to land and then take off again with actual humans on board. ive talked to old timers who actually worked in the industry at the time and they told me the same thing. we never fuckin went!
 Quoting: John Farson 44582992



Hi there.
Can you elaborate on this?
Did they work in the Aerospace industry or with Nasa?
 Quoting: theNobodyfiles


They were friends of uncles of the food truck drivers....

chuckle
Raphael

User ID: 46812713
Canada
09/29/2013 12:02 PM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Game Over for NASA Moon-Landing Hoax
Three words. Again.

Van. Allen. Belt.

Man has never set foot on the moon.

Trust me.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 14435734


That's only two words

Van Allen is one name.

putin
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 33463156


Nope we are back to three words N.C.C.

who or what is NCC?

star trekkies think they know?
star trekkies are space cadets

NCC was the fella who actually suggested the Van Allen Belts were out there .... and he had some interesting ideas about how to manipulate them.

NCC was the messianic genius who gave Van Allen the great idea to put a geiger counter on the satellite...

The rest is history and 'we the sheeple' reBLEAT idiot shit.

The same fella who suggested the belts were out there (not Van Allen) also invented the strong focusing principal being used at CERN.
[link to kachina2012.wordpress.com]

'we the sheeple' are lost in space.
 Quoting: Raphael


I will admit you and the rest of the woo do indeed appear lost in space.

I have no idea what you are talking about.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 33463156


... and you are evidence of how stupid the average NASA NAZI is.

Who or what is NCC?
[link to puhep1.princeton.edu]
[link to en.wikipedia.org]

you are a typical patri-IDIOT dude who was fed caca the moment he was born free deadhorse

why is the average yank immune to the word propaganda?
iamwith

Last Edited by Raphael on 09/29/2013 12:07 PM
The swastika is an inherent part of Intelligent Design.

[link to at37.wordpress.com]

“A theory is more impressive the greater is the simplicity of its premise, the more different are the kinds of things it relates and the more extended its range of applicability…”
-Einstein
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 33463156
United States
09/29/2013 12:19 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Game Over for NASA Moon-Landing Hoax
...


That's only two words

Van Allen is one name.

putin
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 33463156


Nope we are back to three words N.C.C.

who or what is NCC?

star trekkies think they know?
star trekkies are space cadets

NCC was the fella who actually suggested the Van Allen Belts were out there .... and he had some interesting ideas about how to manipulate them.

NCC was the messianic genius who gave Van Allen the great idea to put a geiger counter on the satellite...

The rest is history and 'we the sheeple' reBLEAT idiot shit.

The same fella who suggested the belts were out there (not Van Allen) also invented the strong focusing principal being used at CERN.
[link to kachina2012.wordpress.com]

'we the sheeple' are lost in space.
 Quoting: Raphael


I will admit you and the rest of the woo do indeed appear lost in space.

I have no idea what you are talking about.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 33463156


... and you are evidence of how stupid the average NASA NAZI is.

Who or what is NCC?
[link to puhep1.princeton.edu]
[link to en.wikipedia.org]

you are a typical patri-IDIOT dude who was fed caca the moment he was born free deadhorse

why is the average yank immune to the word propaganda?
iamwith
 Quoting: Raphael


It was actually Birkeland but I don't see your point.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 33463156
United States
09/29/2013 12:38 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Game Over for NASA Moon-Landing Hoax
He knew nothing of the VA belts because no one did and the sats were equipped and found the VA belts because of project-A(r)gus which was undertaken to create a belt which it did.

It was VA that discovered that there were other belts that were completely separate from the project-A(r)gus detonations and that was why they were named after him.

I still don't see your point......do you have evidence that either person said that there was no way to safely penetrate the belts?

Guys the ban of that word is difficult because it was the name of a series of space nuclear detonations and not the news source......
74444

User ID: 74444
United States
09/29/2013 06:30 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Game Over for NASA Moon-Landing Hoax
...


That's only two words

Van Allen is one name.

putin
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 33463156


Nope we are back to three words N.C.C.

who or what is NCC?

star trekkies think they know?
star trekkies are space cadets

NCC was the fella who actually suggested the Van Allen Belts were out there .... and he had some interesting ideas about how to manipulate them.

NCC was the messianic genius who gave Van Allen the great idea to put a geiger counter on the satellite...

The rest is history and 'we the sheeple' reBLEAT idiot shit.

The same fella who suggested the belts were out there (not Van Allen) also invented the strong focusing principal being used at CERN.
[link to kachina2012.wordpress.com]

'we the sheeple' are lost in space.
 Quoting: Raphael


I will admit you and the rest of the woo do indeed appear lost in space.

I have no idea what you are talking about.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 33463156


... and you are evidence of how stupid the average NASA NAZI is.

Who or what is NCC?
[link to puhep1.princeton.edu]
[link to en.wikipedia.org]

you are a typical patri-IDIOT dude who was fed caca the moment he was born free deadhorse

why is the average yank immune to the word propaganda?
iamwith
 Quoting: Raphael


[link to star-trek.answers.wikia.com]
74444

User ID: 74444
United States
09/29/2013 06:34 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Game Over for NASA Moon-Landing Hoax
what predictions? It takes zero skill what so ever to say a comet isnt going to hurt anyone because by design a comet has a 99.999% chance of doing nothing, it simply flies by and its gone.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 14768050


Yet so many here predict just the opposite. Astro merely points out they are wrong, and gives facts to back it up.

He points out the obvious and then we all get to share GLP with his ego and constant need to belittle everyone on here who doesnt praise his name or isnt there to help shill the masses. (like hydra who miraculously hasnt missed one of astro's posts, and always arrives to praise his 'successful' tired boom headshot posts or to join in on the mocking)
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 14768050


So when you have nothing, use ad hominems and guilt by association, but continue to belittle the fact that Astro's predictions remain correct.

he spouts the typical dry nasa babble verbatim, he spends a disproportionate amount of time on GLP which means time not spent on a telescope.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 14768050


And. Remains. Correct.

Results and accuracy seem to mean little to you. Why is that?
Raphael

User ID: 46812713
Canada
09/30/2013 07:59 AM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Game Over for NASA Moon-Landing Hoax


It was actually Birkeland but I don't see your point.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 33463156


PhDUH
The swastika is an inherent part of Intelligent Design.

[link to at37.wordpress.com]

“A theory is more impressive the greater is the simplicity of its premise, the more different are the kinds of things it relates and the more extended its range of applicability…”
-Einstein
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 39792702
Canada
09/30/2013 08:07 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Game Over for NASA Moon-Landing Hoax


It was actually Birkeland but I don't see your point.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 33463156


PhDUH
 Quoting: Raphael



I still don't understand your point.

Is this to show that Apollo was or was not a hoax?

I guess you get all your science from science fiction TV?
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 47569105
Brazil
10/01/2013 02:25 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Game Over for NASA Moon-Landing Hoax
Has the government shutdown affected shill?

The Space Hoax is to convince us that we're the most advanced society the world has ever seen. That we can do so many things such as leave the planet whenever we want to when in reality Space is like the highest prison walls and we are much more trapped than if we were on an island in the sea.

All images and descriptions of rockets flying through space are farces and have no basis in actual science or physics.

People spent thousands of years believing in wizards, witches and dragons (some still do) so it should be no surprise that the space hoax is strong with many.
74444

User ID: 74444
United States
10/01/2013 07:37 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Game Over for NASA Moon-Landing Hoax
All images and descriptions of rockets flying through space are farces and have no basis in actual science or physics.


 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 47569105


Guess you never played with model rockets as a kid. Behold the brand new Estes Conspiracy.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 47569105
Brazil
10/01/2013 10:10 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Game Over for NASA Moon-Landing Hoax
All images and descriptions of rockets flying through space are farces and have no basis in actual science or physics.


 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 47569105


Guess you never played with model rockets as a kid. Behold the brand new Estes Conspiracy.
 Quoting: 74444



I'm guessing you never flew your model rockets in a vacuum.

Well neither has NASA. Their vacuum chambers aren't big enough to test rocket flight. Scientists will build a 17 mile long tunnel to smash atoms but only a 122 foot high vacuum chamber to test rockets.

Rockets work in the atmosphere but there is no proof they work in a vacuum except the NASA videos. It's a faith thing because they have no independent way to verify their claims.

Would you fly in a plane that was tested inside a 122 foot room and never actually flown in the open air? Well that's what NASA supposedly did to get to the moon. They had no way to verify how any of their designs would function between the earth and the moon yet somehow they all worked and nobody ever died up there. That's not how science and engineering work. People die trying new things. I'm not talking about being blown up on the launch pad I mean up there in deep space where we've never been. If we had really gone up there with untested and unverified equipment and designs something bad would have happened sooner or later.

Nothing works perfectly except in the movies.

If people don't ever die up in space, if it's so safe and easy we can do it with 1960's computers running on vacuum tubes and why don't we go back? Why aren't we living on the moon.
74444

User ID: 74444
United States
10/02/2013 12:43 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Game Over for NASA Moon-Landing Hoax
The amount of poor physics in your reply is astonishing.


All images and descriptions of rockets flying through space are farces and have no basis in actual science or physics.


 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 47569105


Guess you never played with model rockets as a kid. Behold the brand new Estes Conspiracy.
 Quoting: 74444



I'm guessing you never flew your model rockets in a vacuum.

Well neither has NASA. Their vacuum chambers aren't big enough to test rocket flight. Scientists will build a 17 mile long tunnel to smash atoms but only a 122 foot high vacuum chamber to test rockets.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 47569105


What else was necessary? Newton didn't need a vaccuum chamber to come up with his third law of motion, yet there it is. What has a vaccuum got to do with equal and opposite reactions?

Rockets work in the atmosphere but there is no proof they work in a vacuum except the NASA videos. It's a faith thing because they have no independent way to verify their claims.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 47569105


Well, except for private companies, the militaries of many different countries, different countries space programs, and every physics textbook on the planet. You can *see* satellites and the ISS in orbit.

Why would rockets fail in space? Why would Newtons Laws suddenly stop without atmosphere?

Your argument is beyond silly.

Would you fly in a plane that was tested inside a 122 foot room and never actually flown in the open air?
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 47569105


The Wright Brothers did.

Well that's what NASA supposedly did to get to the moon. They had no way to verify how any of their designs would function between the earth and the moon yet somehow they all worked and nobody ever died up there.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 47569105


If you knew anything about the various programs that led to Apollo 11, you'd see that each built upon the foundations laid before it. Physics and engineering were what was needed, and they delivered.

That's not how science and engineering work. People die trying new things.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 47569105


They did with Apollo, too.

I'm not talking about being blown up on the launch pad I mean up there in deep space where we've never been. If we had really gone up there with untested and unverified equipment and designs something bad would have happened sooner or later.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 47569105


Thankfully, they weren't untested or unverified. Each step was tested and verified, and a lot of times improved. Are you saying Mercury and Gemini taught us nothing for Apollo?

Nothing works perfectly except in the movies.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 47569105


And it didn't with Apollo, either. Every ride had its glitches. Would you believe Apollo was *more* likely if the crew of 13 had died in space?

If people don't ever die up in space, if it's so safe and easy we can do it with 1960's computers running on vacuum tubes and why don't we go back? Why aren't we living on the moon.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 47569105


It isn't safe (at least not like airline travel), it is *very* expensive, and no one has figured out a way to make the Moon so super-profitable as to invest the *billions* it would take. And we don't have a Cold War or Space Race to 'win' either. We insist on electing leaders who promise to lower our taxes, and then complain when we don't have enough resources to spend on manned space -- and many people think it is a waste when we do. So where is the impetus to go?

By your logic, the Hoover Dam and the Concorde were impossible, too.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 47569105
Brazil
10/02/2013 05:10 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Game Over for NASA Moon-Landing Hoax
Wow. You're not really a science guy are you? And you have the long, rambling and bizarre response pattern of a shill. Are some of you still working?


NASA never tested rocket powered flight in the vacuum of space yet succeeded in all missions. Impossible. How many planes crashed trying to get the first one to fly? Hundreds? Thousands?

NASA only tested rockets in the atmosphere. Never in the vacuum of space. They assumed, rightly, that if the public saw rockets fly through the air they would believe they could also fly through space. The atmosphere and the vacuum are completely different mediums. It's like saying that a car that drives on land should also work underwater. It's silly to think that way, isn't it?

The principle of "Free Expansion of Gas" as proven by Joule in the early 1900's is enough to invalidate rocket flight in space. Gas entering a vacuum does no work, releases no heat or energy and hence Newton's 3rd Law would not be applicable: if rocket gas produces no force then there is nothing "to be equal or opposite". Before gas can do any work, create any thrust in a vacuum, the vacuum must be filled with matter otherwise the gas simply disperses in all direction and fills the vacuum without ever releasing it's energy. This is a scientifically proven fact which needs to be addressed by space rocket designers before I believe they really work.

While NASA understands Free Expansion and admits it exists, it totally ignores it. Which I understand because, hey, it's a pain in the butt to find out that theoretically your rocket won't work when it gets out into true space.

See, like your model rockets, these things only work in the atmosphere. But they're fun to watch and they make for a good show and big dreams, Flash Gordon and all that. Reality, though, tells us otherwise.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 47755204
Australia
10/02/2013 07:06 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Game Over for NASA Moon-Landing Hoax
Wow. You're not really a science guy are you? And you have the long, rambling and bizarre response pattern of a shill. Are some of you still working?


NASA never tested rocket powered flight in the vacuum of space yet succeeded in all missions. Impossible. How many planes crashed trying to get the first one to fly? Hundreds? Thousands?

NASA only tested rockets in the atmosphere. Never in the vacuum of space. They assumed, rightly, that if the public saw rockets fly through the air they would believe they could also fly through space. The atmosphere and the vacuum are completely different mediums. It's like saying that a car that drives on land should also work underwater. It's silly to think that way, isn't it?

The principle of "Free Expansion of Gas" as proven by Joule in the early 1900's is enough to invalidate rocket flight in space. Gas entering a vacuum does no work, releases no heat or energy and hence Newton's 3rd Law would not be applicable: if rocket gas produces no force then there is nothing "to be equal or opposite". Before gas can do any work, create any thrust in a vacuum, the vacuum must be filled with matter otherwise the gas simply disperses in all direction and fills the vacuum without ever releasing it's energy. This is a scientifically proven fact which needs to be addressed by space rocket designers before I believe they really work.

While NASA understands Free Expansion and admits it exists, it totally ignores it. Which I understand because, hey, it's a pain in the butt to find out that theoretically your rocket won't work when it gets out into true space.

See, like your model rockets, these things only work in the atmosphere. But they're fun to watch and they make for a good show and big dreams, Flash Gordon and all that. Reality, though, tells us otherwise.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 47569105


So has anybody got an answer to this?
Halcyon Dayz, FCD
Contrarian's Contrarian

User ID: 37781229
Netherlands
10/02/2013 01:04 PM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Game Over for NASA Moon-Landing Hoax
Wow. You're not really a science guy are you? And you have the long, rambling and bizarre response pattern of a shill. Are some of you still working?
 Quoting: Brazillian Coward 47569105

Ad hominem attack.

NASA never tested rocket powered flight in the vacuum of space yet succeeded in all missions. Impossible.
 Quoting: Brazillian Coward 47569105

Unevidenced assertion.

How many planes crashed trying to get the first one to fly? Hundreds? Thousands?
 Quoting: Brazillian Coward 47569105

Since this is key to you statistical fallacy YOU need to tell us.

The atmosphere and the vacuum are completely different mediums. It's like saying that a car that drives on land should also work underwater. It's silly to think that way, isn't it?
 Quoting: Brazillian Coward 47569105

We know and understand the differences between the environments.
Why don't you?

As a matter of fact anyone who does also knows that rockets work BETTER in a vacuum.

The principle of "Free Expansion of Gas" as proven by Joule in the early 1900's is enough to invalidate rocket flight in space.
 Quoting: Brazillian Coward 47569105

Unevidenced assertion.

Gas entering a vacuum does no work, releases no heat or energy
 Quoting: Brazillian Coward 47569105

Unevidenced assertion.

the vacuum must be filled with matter otherwise the gas simply disperses in all direction and fills the vacuum without ever releasing it's energy. This is a scientifically proven fact
 Quoting: Brazillian Coward 47569105

Produce this alleged "proof". Please.

which needs to be addressed by space rocket designers before I believe they really work.
 Quoting: Brazillian Coward 47569105

What you believe is immaterial.

YOU assert that rockets cannot work in a vacuum contrary to ALL evidence.
YOU have the burden to PROVE YOUR ASSERTION.

they're fun to watch and they make for a good show and big dreams, Flash Gordon and all that. Reality, though, tells us otherwise.
 Quoting: Brazillian Coward 47569105

Reality tells us that rockets work in space.
We can SEE them work in space.
book

Darryl Cunningham Investigates The Moon Hoax [link to darryl-cunningham.blogspot.com]
Moon Base Clavius, for all your debunking needs [link to www.xmission.com]
_____________________________________________________________​____________________
I will give a hundred bucks (EUR100,-) to the first person who can prove a single relevant evidential fact ever claimed by any hoaxmonger.
The Halcyon Dayz EVIDENCE or STFU! Challenge.

Last Edited by Halcyon Dayz, FCD on 10/02/2013 02:03 PM
Hatred is a cancer upon the world.
It rots the mind and blackens the heart.


Hi! My name is Halcyon Dayz and I'm addicted to morans.

News