Godlike Productions - Conspiracy Forum
Users Online Now: 1,132 (Who's On?)Visitors Today: 460,780
Pageviews Today: 617,205Threads Today: 117Posts Today: 2,848
06:43 AM


Rate this Thread

Absolute BS Crap Reasonable Nice Amazing
 

If the Moon landing was real: How the hell did they take off FROM the moon?

 
Halcyon Dayz, FCD
Contrarian's Contrarian

User ID: 31033756
Netherlands
01/28/2013 09:24 PM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: If the Moon landing was real: How the hell did they take off FROM the moon?
Center for an Informed America

Apollo 1 through 14. Yeah, it's long. But if you have the time to be entertained and informed its worth the read.

[link to www.davesweb.cnchost.com]
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 5455193

Entertained yes, informed not so much.
It's just a very long list of All The Things That Dave McGowan Is Misinformed About.
Dave has made a career out of being wrong with almost every single word he writes.
He has a standing invitation to defend his malarkey in public, but he's to cowardly to do anything other than hide in his little digital fortress and sling insults at people.

Any time, any place, Dave.

What do YOU think is his best evidence?
book
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.
Picture Pete
User ID: 21509763
United States
01/28/2013 10:05 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: If the Moon landing was real: How the hell did they take off FROM the moon?
Send me a picture of the rover on the moon from the GLP observatory and I will believe. I will believe.
Dr. Astro
Voice Chat Moderator

User ID: 31516487
United States
01/28/2013 10:17 PM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: If the Moon landing was real: How the hell did they take off FROM the moon?
Send me a picture of the rover on the moon from the GLP observatory and I will believe. I will believe.
 Quoting: Picture Pete 21509763


Dawes' limit. Look it up.
astrobanner2
Picture Pete
User ID: 21509763
United States
01/28/2013 10:33 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: If the Moon landing was real: How the hell did they take off FROM the moon?
Okay, Mutt-ster. I done looked it up:

English astronomer William R. Dawes (1799-1868, and known as the “eagle-eyed” for his acute vision) determined that the smallest separation between two stars which shows this 30% drop is equal to 4.56 arc seconds divided by the aperture of the telescope in inches. The larger the telescope aperture, the smaller the separation that can be resolved.

This “Dawes’ limit” (which he determined empirically simply by testing the resolving ability of many observers on white star pairs of equal magnitude 6 brightness) only applies to point sources of light (stars). Smaller separations can be resolved in extended objects, such as the planets. For example, Cassini’s Division in the rings of Saturn (0.5 arc seconds across), was discovered using a 2.5” telescope – which has a Dawes’ limit of 1.8 arc seconds!

The ability of a telescope to resolve to Dawes’ limit is usually much more affected by seeing conditions, by the difference in brightness between the binary star components, and by the observer’s visual acuity, than it is by the optical quality of the telescope.

-----
Now, what's the resolution of those scopes in the GLP lab?
Dr. Astro
Voice Chat Moderator

User ID: 31516487
United States
01/28/2013 10:55 PM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: If the Moon landing was real: How the hell did they take off FROM the moon?
Okay, Mutt-ster. I done looked it up:

English astronomer William R. Dawes (1799-1868, and known as the “eagle-eyed” for his acute vision) determined that the smallest separation between two stars which shows this 30% drop is equal to 4.56 arc seconds divided by the aperture of the telescope in inches. The larger the telescope aperture, the smaller the separation that can be resolved.

This “Dawes’ limit” (which he determined empirically simply by testing the resolving ability of many observers on white star pairs of equal magnitude 6 brightness) only applies to point sources of light (stars). Smaller separations can be resolved in extended objects, such as the planets. For example, Cassini’s Division in the rings of Saturn (0.5 arc seconds across), was discovered using a 2.5” telescope – which has a Dawes’ limit of 1.8 arc seconds!

The ability of a telescope to resolve to Dawes’ limit is usually much more affected by seeing conditions, by the difference in brightness between the binary star components, and by the observer’s visual acuity, than it is by the optical quality of the telescope.

-----
Now, what's the resolution of those scopes in the GLP lab?
 Quoting: Picture Pete 21509763


The largest scope is a half meter in diameter. I trust you can do the calculations. Then I would suggest you calculate the apparent angular size of the rover at the distance of the moon...
astrobanner2
Weasel_Turbine

User ID: 31859349
United States
01/28/2013 11:38 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: If the Moon landing was real: How the hell did they take off FROM the moon?
Center for an Informed America

Apollo 1 through 14. Yeah, it's long. But if you have the time to be entertained and informed its worth the read.

[link to www.davesweb.cnchost.com]
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 5455193


Entertained? Sure. Informed? Only of the fact that he knows nothing about space flight, astronomy, physics, etc. and love to argue from incredulity. Sorry, but reality is not determined by his lack of comprehension.
If you have to insist that you've won an Internet argument, you've probably lost badly. - Danth's Law
nomuse (not logged in)
User ID: 2380183
United States
01/28/2013 11:46 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: If the Moon landing was real: How the hell did they take off FROM the moon?
I don't even find him entertaining.

He attempts the style of a "Cracked" reviewer, but achieves only the disconnected, profanity-laced ramble of a drunken frat boy.

Even his ideas (with the rare exception) are not entertaining, because they are not original. They are cribbed from other hoax believers before him.

For the very best of the breed, a little knowledge is a dangerous thing. Dave doesn't have enough knowledge to achieve that. Instead of creatively strange thinking, he has only the tired incredulity of a failed stand-up on open mic night.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 12941282
United States
01/29/2013 12:03 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: If the Moon landing was real: How the hell did they take off FROM the moon?
pointless thread is pointless. remember guys, no gravity on the moon. all the needed was a little rocket propelled push on the lander and they would have lifted off. the only reason we need giant rockets to take off from earth is the amount of gravity on the planet and to get through the atmosphere. the moon has none of those,
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 8434843
United States
01/29/2013 12:12 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: If the Moon landing was real: How the hell did they take off FROM the moon?
Why no moon rovers?
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 8434843
United States
01/29/2013 12:14 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: If the Moon landing was real: How the hell did they take off FROM the moon?
The lander NEVER worked on earth. Not once. Halcyon and astronomer are pulling a lance armstrong and everyone can see it.
Picture Pete
User ID: 21509763
United States
01/29/2013 12:20 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: If the Moon landing was real: How the hell did they take off FROM the moon?
Okay, Mutt-ster. This is how I done figured it:

The angular radius of the Airy disk out to the first minima is represented as: A = 1.22 λ / D, where A in radians = 1.22 λ (Lambda) / D (Aperture). A is the angular radius of the Airy disk measured in radians. Lambda is the wavelength of light = 550 µm or 550 nanometers = 550 x 10^-9 meters.

Visible light is between 420 µm and 650 µm. We will use 550 µm, the wavelength of yellow light. D is the diameter of the aperture in meters. For a 500mm scope D = 0.50 meters.
Then A = 1.22 x 550 x 10^-9 meters / 0.50 meters = 1.35747831 x 10^-6 radians.

Converting radians to arcseconds, then 1.35747831 x 10^-6 radians x 360/2pi x 60 x 60 = 0.28 arcseconds. The angular radius of the Airy disk for a point source resolved with a 500mm telescope observing yellow light at a wavelength of 550um is 0.28 arc seconds.

The visible object must be no more than 50% of the diameter of the Airy disk. This would be true only for moderately faint stars. Bright stars put greater light into the visible disk and very faint stars obviously put less light into the visible disk. However, the size of the Airy disk remains constant for a given scope. (There would be considerable less light reflected off the moon's surface than if the telescope was directed at a star. Since the moon is closer than the stars and more light can be captured within the optical area, we will consider this equal...for now.)

We may consider the distance to the moon to be 356,334 kilometers at perigee (closest approach to Earth) and 405,503 kilometers at apogee (farthest point). Therefore, the average distance from the moon to the Earth is 384,392 kilometers. With the 500mm GLP scope and 0.28 arc seconds of observable yellow light, we can hope for a 420 meter resolution. Furthermore, considering an average male of approximately 35 years of age observing through the scope, with reasonable health and 20/20 ocular clarity, observing on a clear, cloudless night, devoid of obstructions, chemtrails, and excessive light pollution, we can modify the calculations and hope for a 440 meter observable resolution. Finally, considering the Lunar Rover to be 3.0 meters long we can make the following conclusions:

Conclusion #1: There is no way we can see the lunar rover using the GLP telescope. At best, we can achieve a 440 meter observable resolution from the 500mm telescope. This can no way see an object that is only 3 meters big. We could not even see the Titanic (268 meters long) if it was sitting on the moon's surface.

Conclusion #2: The moon landing was a hoax. Because we are not able to see the Lunar Rover with the GLP telescope, there was no moon landing. The whole thing is a scam.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 8434843
United States
01/29/2013 12:27 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: If the Moon landing was real: How the hell did they take off FROM the moon?
The scam is apperant in our lack of knowledge of the moon itself coupled by the lack of moon rovers and fifty other tell tale clues including admit ion from the astro nots themselves.
nomuse (not logged in)
User ID: 2380183
United States
01/29/2013 01:01 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: If the Moon landing was real: How the hell did they take off FROM the moon?
Astro emits ions?
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 33037330
United States
01/29/2013 05:34 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: If the Moon landing was real: How the hell did they take off FROM the moon?
Let me tell you why i am now convinced it was fake.

Dismissal and ridicule.

Same method they use for 911
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 6231580


But that is the tactic you are using. You offer no evidence to support your statement, only dismissal. And calling someone a good is ridicule. So stop using the tactics you blame others for using and try using some logic and real evidence.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 33037330
United States
01/29/2013 05:38 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: If the Moon landing was real: How the hell did they take off FROM the moon?
Just because you're not smart enough to wrap your tiny brain around it doesn't mean it couldn't be done.

No one said it was easy but it was quite doable, all the problems were solved, and we got it done.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 22631821


Yes, im no rocket scientist.

But it took hundreds of men with 1000's of lb's of fuel to get off the earth... and centuries of trial and error...

yet we send up 3 men with NO REAL firsthand knowledge of lunar aerodynamics? just theory? doesnt hold water.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 6231580


You're correct. Reality would dictate that they would explode and crash a few times before the technique had all the bugs worked out. Unless they faked it all, like beyonce lip syncing at the inauguration.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 2010868


Lookup Apollo 1
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 33037330
United States
01/29/2013 05:40 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: If the Moon landing was real: How the hell did they take off FROM the moon?
Time for somebody to send up a gigapixel camera instead of that Kodak Instamatic Japan sent up recently.

Which brings up, why didn't any film get ruined by radiation?
 Quoting: MHz


That's a good question. Another good question, a related one, is how did they build cameras and make film, in 1969, to withstand the average daily temperatures on the moon (225 degrees Fahrenheit in the sun and -243 degrees Fahrenheit without direct sunlight). Also, how did the astronauts aim the cameras (which were mounted on their chests, so they had no way to look through a viewfinder to frame their shots) with such amazing accuracy, and focus them so precisely, to give us the perfect pictures they "brought back from the moon"? Good questions, all.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 33173009


They did not land when the temperature was 225F or -243F. They landed with a Sun angle around 10 degrees which put the temperature around 80-90F. That is why the shadows are so long, the low Sun angle.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 33037330
United States
01/29/2013 06:15 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: If the Moon landing was real: How the hell did they take off FROM the moon?
Okay, Mutt-ster. This is how I done figured it:

The angular radius of the Airy disk out to the first minima is represented as: A = 1.22 λ / D, where A in radians = 1.22 λ (Lambda) / D (Aperture). A is the angular radius of the Airy disk measured in radians. Lambda is the wavelength of light = 550 µm or 550 nanometers = 550 x 10^-9 meters.

Visible light is between 420 µm and 650 µm. We will use 550 µm, the wavelength of yellow light. D is the diameter of the aperture in meters. For a 500mm scope D = 0.50 meters.
Then A = 1.22 x 550 x 10^-9 meters / 0.50 meters = 1.35747831 x 10^-6 radians.

Converting radians to arcseconds, then 1.35747831 x 10^-6 radians x 360/2pi x 60 x 60 = 0.28 arcseconds. The angular radius of the Airy disk for a point source resolved with a 500mm telescope observing yellow light at a wavelength of 550um is 0.28 arc seconds.

The visible object must be no more than 50% of the diameter of the Airy disk. This would be true only for moderately faint stars. Bright stars put greater light into the visible disk and very faint stars obviously put less light into the visible disk. However, the size of the Airy disk remains constant for a given scope. (There would be considerable less light reflected off the moon's surface than if the telescope was directed at a star. Since the moon is closer than the stars and more light can be captured within the optical area, we will consider this equal...for now.)

We may consider the distance to the moon to be 356,334 kilometers at perigee (closest approach to Earth) and 405,503 kilometers at apogee (farthest point). Therefore, the average distance from the moon to the Earth is 384,392 kilometers. With the 500mm GLP scope and 0.28 arc seconds of observable yellow light, we can hope for a 420 meter resolution. Furthermore, considering an average male of approximately 35 years of age observing through the scope, with reasonable health and 20/20 ocular clarity, observing on a clear, cloudless night, devoid of obstructions, chemtrails, and excessive light pollution, we can modify the calculations and hope for a 440 meter observable resolution. Finally, considering the Lunar Rover to be 3.0 meters long we can make the following conclusions:

Conclusion #1: There is no way we can see the lunar rover using the GLP telescope. At best, we can achieve a 440 meter observable resolution from the 500mm telescope. This can no way see an object that is only 3 meters big. We could not even see the Titanic (268 meters long) if it was sitting on the moon's surface.

Conclusion #2: The moon landing was a hoax. Because we are not able to see the Lunar Rover with the GLP telescope, there was no moon landing. The whole thing is a scam.
 Quoting: Picture Pete 21509763


While your first conclusion is correct, a 0.5m telescope is insufficient to see the lunar rover from Earth, the second conclusion is nonsense. It is equavalent to saying I have never been to Boise so it doesn't exist and all descriptions about it are a scam. #2 logically does not follow from the earlier statements.

Both Chandrayaan-1 and the Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter have taken images of the Apollo landing sites from Lunar orbit.
Halcyon Dayz, FCD
Contrarian's Contrarian

User ID: 31033756
Netherlands
01/29/2013 06:35 AM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: If the Moon landing was real: How the hell did they take off FROM the moon?
The lander NEVER worked on earth. Not once.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 8434843

Considering it was not designed to work in any gravity field stronger than 1/6th g why does that surprise you?
The LM was test flown on Apollo 5, 9, 10, and 11.
It performed satisfactory and was declared operational.

[link to www.youtube.com]

Halcyon and astronomer are pulling a lance armstrong and everyone can see it.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 8434843

Aaaaand another unevidenced claim.
Dance, boy. Entertain us.
book

Conclusion #1: There is no way we can see the lunar rover using the GLP telescope. At best, we can achieve a 440 meter observable resolution from the 500mm telescope. This can no way see an object that is only 3 meters big. We could not even see the Titanic (268 meters long) if it was sitting on the moon's surface.
 Quoting: Picture Pete 21509763

Indeed.
There isn't a telescope on the planet that could image the Apollo artefacts.

Conclusion #2: The moon landing was a hoax. Because we are not able to see the Lunar Rover with the GLP telescope, there was no moon landing. The whole thing is a scam.
 Quoting: Picture Pete 21509763

You need to explain the steps you took to get from 1 to 2.
Us rational people can't follow your "logic".

I put a €500,- note in a drawer.
There being no technology available to detect the note is evidence that the note isn't there?
Meanwhile I documented the process of putting the note in the drawer.
There are witnesses.
The drawer is locked and I have the key.
Where is the note?
Now aliens might have stolen the note through a trans-dimensional portal (no way of knowing) but the note was put in the drawer.

It is equivalent to saying I have never been to Boise so it doesn't exist and all descriptions about it are a scam.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 33037330

I have my suspicions about Bielefeld.
book

The scam is apperant in our lack of knowledge of the moon itself
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 8434843

We know a lot more about the Moon now than before Apollo.
It is you who doesn't know anything.

coupled by the lack of moon rovers
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 8434843

Wut.
Yeah sure, the only conceivable explanation for nobody yet spending half a billion dollars on trucking on the Moon is because every single space agency wants to cover up something the Yankees did.

and fifty other tell tale clues
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 8434843

You mean things you don't (want to) understand

including admit ion from the astro nots themselves.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 8434843

Stuff you confabulate isn't real.

This thread is full of promises of evidence that failed to materialise.
Boooring!
book
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.
Dr. Astro
Voice Chat Moderator

User ID: 31516487
United States
01/29/2013 12:23 PM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: If the Moon landing was real: How the hell did they take off FROM the moon?
Conclusion #1: There is no way we can see the lunar rover using the GLP telescope. At best, we can achieve a 440 meter observable resolution from the 500mm telescope. This can no way see an object that is only 3 meters big. We could not even see the Titanic (268 meters long) if it was sitting on the moon's surface.
 Quoting: Picture Pete 21509763


Well done. Correct.
astrobanner2
Weasel_Turbine

User ID: 31859349
United States
01/29/2013 08:22 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: If the Moon landing was real: How the hell did they take off FROM the moon?
The lander NEVER worked on earth. Not once. Halcyon and astronomer are pulling a lance armstrong and everyone can see it.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 8434843


The lander was not designed to work on Earth and could not have. It was designed to work in at most 1/6 gravity and a vacuum. That is why it was tested in space.

Perhaps you're thinking of the TRAINING vehicle that did work on Earth. Sure there was a crash with Armstrong (mechanical failure unrelated to whether it could have worked on the Moon or not) but there were hundreds of successful flights.
If you have to insist that you've won an Internet argument, you've probably lost badly. - Danth's Law
TheMessenger
User ID: 12100219
United States
02/04/2013 02:20 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: If the Moon landing was real: How the hell did they take off FROM the moon?
You are overlooking the actor that was used. Confirmation is easy, just look at his wife.

[link to www.wellaware1.com]
Kirk

User ID: 25384388
United States
02/04/2013 02:22 AM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: If the Moon landing was real: How the hell did they take off FROM the moon?
Not entirely sure, but I think most astronauts are rocket scientists.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 19725671


not really. More like glorified fighter jocks.
Worry is a misuse of the imagination.
anonymous astrophysicist
User ID: 1342645
United States
02/04/2013 02:37 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: If the Moon landing was real: How the hell did they take off FROM the moon?
It was only the 3 astronauts, right? No rocket scientists. No reconstructed apparatus. And what about the operations of firing a rocket WITH 3 MEN AND FUEL, CAMERA'S etc FROM THE MOON? How the hell could any scientist speculate that 3 astronauts would be able to take off by themseves? From point zero, the amount of fuel needed? What about the times; we needed to send disinfo to the Soviet Union... 1+1 = 2.

It was fake. Recondition your mind: Aint NO ONE been on the moon.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 6231580


Ummm...there were two men in the LEM when it lifted off from the moon, not three. The third was in the orbiting command module.

It did it with sixteen Reaction Control System (RCS) thrusters, 5.17 pounds (2.35 kg) each) mounted in four quads
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 22629621


ok.... 2 men.

not much difference though; what about the technology of the time? the fuel required would have been hundreds of lbs, no? to take off from point zero. And where is the rocketry apparatus? who built it?
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 6231580



"OK, 2 men". Hahahaha. And you expect anyone to take you seriously???

Anyway, and I know this will challenge your intellect:

The propellant mass for the ascent stage was 2,353 kg of Aerozine 50 fuel / nitrogen tetroxide oxidizer. Thrust generated was 16,000 N.

No I know you are nowhere near capable of doing the math, but if you do a calculation for the thrust and burn required for lunary escape velocity, that is more than enough to do the job.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 22629621


why is a naza propagandist posting through a Thai proxy from pine gap if he's telling the truth and has nothing to hide?

The moon landing is a fucking joke and an obvious lie, the only people who still believe it are morons and people who have never given it a moments thought
anonymous astrophysicist
User ID: 1342645
United States
02/04/2013 02:40 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: If the Moon landing was real: How the hell did they take off FROM the moon?
No scientific achievement is EVER considered a fact until duplicated and confirmed independently. This leaves apollo as simply a fairy tale
Halcyon Dayz, FCD
Contrarian's Contrarian

User ID: 31033756
Netherlands
02/04/2013 03:38 AM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: If the Moon landing was real: How the hell did they take off FROM the moon?
You are overlooking the actor that was used. Confirmation is easy, just look at his wife.

[link to www.wellaware1.com]
 Quoting: TheMessenger 12100219

You're either a poe, or blind as a bat.
book

Not entirely sure, but I think most astronauts are rocket scientists.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 19725671

not really. More like glorified fighter jocks.
 Quoting: Kirk

You haven't read the thread, have you?
Or the astronauts' bios.
book

why is a naza propagandist posting through a Thai proxy from pine gap if he's telling the truth and has nothing to hide?
 Quoting: IDW 1342645

Attempt at ad hominem.

The moon landing is a fucking joke and an obvious lie,
 Quoting: IDW 1342645

Bare assertion.

the only people who still believe it are morons and people who have never given it a moments thought
 Quoting: IDW 1342645

Appeal to (imaginary) bandwagon and yet another ad hom.

No scientific achievement is EVER considered a fact until duplicated and confirmed independently. This leaves apollo as simply a fairy tale
 Quoting: IDW 1342645

Red herring. r-herring
Going to the Moon is historical event and an engineering achievement, not a "scientific experiment".
We really don't need to shoot another president in Dealey Plaza to proof that JFK was murdered.
We do not need to invade France again to proof that Operation Overlord happened.
Etc.

This logic thing keeps evading you, doesn't it?
book
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.
nomuse (not logged in)
User ID: 2380183
United States
02/04/2013 03:50 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: If the Moon landing was real: How the hell did they take off FROM the moon?
Not entirely sure, but I think most astronauts are rocket scientists.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 19725671


not really. More like glorified fighter jocks.
 Quoting: Kirk


Both, actually. I believe every one had an advanced degree, most of them in things like aeronautic engineering (Harrison Schmidtt being the odd man out, as a Geologist).
Weasel_Turbine

User ID: 31859349
United States
02/04/2013 08:39 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: If the Moon landing was real: How the hell did they take off FROM the moon?
Not entirely sure, but I think most astronauts are rocket scientists.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 19725671


not really. More like glorified fighter jocks.
 Quoting: Kirk


Both, actually. I believe every one had an advanced degree, most of them in things like aeronautic engineering (Harrison Schmidtt being the odd man out, as a Geologist).
 Quoting: nomuse (not logged in) 2380183


IIRC Buzz Aldrin had a PHD in orbital mechanics.
If you have to insist that you've won an Internet argument, you've probably lost badly. - Danth's Law
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 8434843
United States
02/04/2013 08:54 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: If the Moon landing was real: How the hell did they take off FROM the moon?
Let me tell you why i am now convinced it was fake.

Dismissal and ridicule.

Same method they use for 911
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 6231580


But that is the tactic you are using. You offer no evidence to support your statement, only dismissal. And calling someone a good is ridicule. So stop using the tactics you blame others for using and try using some logic and real evidence.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 33037330


This guy nails it! Ask yourself how much we could learn with rovers ON the Moon!!!!

40 years of bullshit with the astronauts themselves trying to speak out.....in code.

Climate change is linked to space weather......to bad we have no equipment on the moon to help us study this......

Why?
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 8434843
United States
02/04/2013 09:12 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: If the Moon landing was real: How the hell did they take off FROM the moon?
Not entirely sure, but I think most astronauts are rocket scientists.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 19725671


not really. More like glorified fighter jocks.
 Quoting: Kirk


Both, actually. I believe every one had an advanced degree, most of them in things like aeronautic engineering (Harrison Schmidtt being the odd man out, as a Geologist).
 Quoting: nomuse (not logged in) 2380183


IIRC Buzz Aldrin had a PHD in orbital mechanics.
 Quoting: Weasel_Turbine


Before he agreed to lie.....

After he had a drinking problem.....go figure!

Why no real info on the moon?
Why no moon rover?

We just skip over the only place we "could" go???
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 8434843
United States
02/04/2013 09:16 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: If the Moon landing was real: How the hell did they take off FROM the moon?
Put it this way....

Real estate....it's valuable. We have only the earth. But wait.....
Where are our closest available non earth resources?

The Moon. And yet nothing. No useable pictures released. No rovers checking out the "environment" of our closest next supply?

Astro and halcyon ..... Your both full of poo!

News








Proud Member Of The Angry Mob