| | | Page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80, 81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 90, 91, 92, 93, 94, 95, 96, 97, 98, 99, 100, 101, 102, 103, 104, 105, 106, 107, 108, 109, 110, 111, 112, 113, 114, 115, 116, 117, 118, 119, 120, 121, 122, 123, 124, 125, 126, 127, 128, 129, 130, 131, 132, 133, 134, 135, 136, 137, 138, 139, 140, 141, 142, 143, 144 | APOLLO MOON LANDINGS ------- FAKED OR REAL !!??
| nomuse (NLI)
User ID: 312236
10/14/2007 3:06 PM | | Re: APOLLO MOON LANDINGS ------- FAKED OR REAL !!?? | Quote |
Can anyone post of photo of them using lasers to "bounce" off of the moon "reflectors"?
Since this is the claim most used by believers, it should be easy to show a photo of them "firing the lasers" up to the moon. Quoting: Anonymous Coward 312115
What does a laser beam look like?
(Actually, though, I have seen a laser beam out in the real world. At the Greenwich Observatory they've gone and fired a couple of nice bright lasers up and down the meridian. You can see the light from a good mile away. With all that London-like fog and mist around Greenwich in November, I'd say I could see several hundred feet of red line at a time. Spooky, especially when you think about what it represents.)
I don't see a picture of a test right-off, but here's some pretty picture of the laser at Apache Point...
[link to physics.ucsd.edu] |
| Anonymous Coward
User ID: 312115
10/14/2007 3:07 PM | | Re: APOLLO MOON LANDINGS ------- FAKED OR REAL !!?? | Quote |
Never mind.
This is a photo of the alleged "laser reflectors" left on the moon.
It seems to be about the size of a CB radio.
Notice the foorprints near it for comparison of size.
(Best to not think of how footprints like this can be left in moon dust, in an atmosphere of zero humidity. Try making foot prints like this in sand or dust that has zero humidity. You cant. You can only do it in wet sand or soil. But then again, this is the moon, a magic place.) |
| Anonymous Coward
User ID: 312115
10/14/2007 3:08 PM | | nomuse (NLI)
User ID: 312236
10/14/2007 3:11 PM | | Re: APOLLO MOON LANDINGS ------- FAKED OR REAL !!?? | Quote |
Whoops. Here we go;
[link to physics.ucsd.edu]
By the by, there's three different kinds of reflectors up there. The Lunuokhod ones (one of which never deployed correctly, the other which is not that great), then two sizes deployed by Apollo missions. The revised model is bigger, and accepts a larger off-axis signal.
But haven't we been all through this before?
Interesting bit; the first EME -- done by ham radio enthusiasts -- was back before Apollo. These days you only get bragging rights if you can do a Moon Bounce on under 1 watt! |
| Anonymous Coward
User ID: 312115
10/14/2007 3:17 PM | | Re: APOLLO MOON LANDINGS ------- FAKED OR REAL !!?? | Quote |
"The reflectors are too small to be seen from Earth, so even when the beam is precisely aligned in the telescope, actually hitting a lunar retroreflector array is technically challenging. At the Moon's surface the beam is roughly four miles wide. Scientists liken the task of aiming the beam to using a rifle to hit a moving dime two miles away."
The reflectors are too small to be seen from earth, they say. So we just have to take their word for it.
Hitting these reflectors is like a rifle hitting a moving dime 2 miles away.
In other words, pretty impossible. |
| Anonymous Coward
User ID: 312115
10/14/2007 3:23 PM | | Re: APOLLO MOON LANDINGS ------- FAKED OR REAL !!?? | Quote |
Whoops. Here we go;
[ link to physics.ucsd.edu]
By the by, there's three different kinds of reflectors up there. The Lunuokhod ones (one of which never deployed correctly, the other which is not that great), then two sizes deployed by Apollo missions. The revised model is bigger, and accepts a larger off-axis signal.
But haven't we been all through this before?
Interesting bit; the first EME -- done by ham radio enthusiasts -- was back before Apollo. These days you only get bragging rights if you can do a Moon Bounce on under 1 watt!
Hmm.
And this is what, supposedly, they are firing the lasers at.
[link to images.search.yahoo.com] |
| Anonymous Coward
User ID: 289861
10/14/2007 3:31 PM | | Re: APOLLO MOON LANDINGS ------- FAKED OR REAL !!?? | Quote |
What is your point? Is your point that there is no laser reflector on the moon and the laser machine is faking? |
| Anonymous Coward
User ID: 312115
10/14/2007 3:36 PM | | Re: APOLLO MOON LANDINGS ------- FAKED OR REAL !!?? | Quote |
Lasers exist. That is a fact. That we can prove.
That picture of the "laser reflector", allegedly on the moon, thats a different story.
Its a picture of something. Where it is, cannot be confirmed.
And it is apparently, virtually useless. |
| Anonymous Coward
User ID: 297306
10/14/2007 3:38 PM | | Re: APOLLO MOON LANDINGS ------- FAKED OR REAL !!?? | Quote |
...didn't see any flame/exhaust from the ascent engine either, but it can be seen from the shuttle's thrusters (same fuel mix). Debunkers are side-stepping that question.
WHAT ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT!!
TRY READING A LITTLE BEFORE POSTING, UNLESS YOU ENJOY LOOKING LIKE A COMPLEATE IDIOT....
This is from one of hazzards posts...
--------------------------------------------------
We cannot see any flames from the lander takeoff from the moon because the lander rockets used a combination of hydrazine and dinitrogen tetroxide.
These substances burn with practically an invisible flame in a vacuum.
---------------------------------------------------
Get it!!?, the "evil nazi shill payed lying debunkers from hell" are not "side stepping" anything, it is you fine educated nice people that has a problem with reading and understanding. Quoting: Anonymous Coward 264194
At least I spell correctly before ranting off with CAPS LOCK on. (complete, not compleate).
And I meant the maneuvering thrusters on the shuttle. You can see exhaust from those. |
| Anonymous Coward
User ID: 289861
10/14/2007 3:39 PM | | Re: APOLLO MOON LANDINGS ------- FAKED OR REAL !!?? | Quote |
That doesn't answer my question, though. |
| Anonymous Coward
User ID: 312115
10/14/2007 3:42 PM | | Anonymous Coward
User ID: 289861
10/14/2007 3:43 PM | | Re: APOLLO MOON LANDINGS ------- FAKED OR REAL !!?? | Quote |
Let me phrase it differently, then.
Do you think there is no laser reflector on the moon and the laser machine is faking? |
| Anonymous Coward
User ID: 312115
10/14/2007 3:50 PM | | Re: APOLLO MOON LANDINGS ------- FAKED OR REAL !!?? | Quote |
I do not believe that is a photo of the moon.
Whether that is a "laser reflector" or not, I have no idea.
We can point lasers in any direction, moon or mars. |
| Anonymous Coward
User ID: 289861
10/14/2007 4:06 PM | | Re: APOLLO MOON LANDINGS ------- FAKED OR REAL !!?? | Quote |
Soo... the laser machine thingie and its people are not lying, but you're not sure whether the laser device is there? |
| Anonymous Coward
User ID: 312115
10/14/2007 4:10 PM | | Re: APOLLO MOON LANDINGS ------- FAKED OR REAL !!?? | Quote |
I will try and phrase it differently.
Lasers exist. They can be pointed in any direction.
I doubt that is a photo from the moon, as I do not believe Nasa got anywhere near the moon.
I do not know what the device is, without holding in my hands and looking at it. |
| Anonymous Coward
User ID: 289861
10/14/2007 4:42 PM | | Re: APOLLO MOON LANDINGS ------- FAKED OR REAL !!?? | Quote |
Alrighty, so you don't seem to think the laser device is actually on the moon. Now, are the laser machine thingie and its people lying? Saying "you can point a laser towards anything" does not answer that question. |
| HAZZARD
User ID: 308422
10/14/2007 4:42 PM | | Re: APOLLO MOON LANDINGS ------- FAKED OR REAL !!?? | Quote |
were is hazz and barls?
i have a REAL question about apollo....and not just the woo woo standard crap and shit throwing...
the way the astronaut "jumps up" from the lunar surface looks weird...i have never heard a good explanation for it...i know the gravity is only 1/6 of the earths and that the space suites are not like the average clothes, vaccum and all that..
but, is there any good explanation for this "weird" way to got back up on your feet..
hazz or barls only please....the rest of you seems a little...hmmmm....uneducated in this matter. Quoting: Anonymous Coward 264194
I dont know which specific clip youre referring to, but in general clips Ive seen that display similar properties are explained by 2 things.
The obvious one is the much reduced gravity, so it takes a much smaller force to lift oneself up.
The other is the design of the spacesuit, in particular the knee joints. The suits had a restrictive range of movements, but the design of the knee joints ( a bellows-like construction) meant that the more they were bent, the bigger the force tending to "spring" the joint back to its default position. It was also pressurized, of course.
Whether this applies in the clip youre talking about I dont know - but the reduced gravity certainly does!
It would take an increased amount of time to fall over in the 1/6th gravity - hence they had more time to react and try and regain their balance. |
| Anonymous Coward
User ID: 312115
10/14/2007 4:47 PM | | Re: APOLLO MOON LANDINGS ------- FAKED OR REAL !!?? | Quote |
Alrighty, so you don't seem to think the laser device is actually on the moon. Now, are the laser machine thingie and its people lying? Saying "you can point a laser towards anything" does not answer that question. Quoting: Anonymous Coward 289861
The device on the moon is not supposed to be a "laser". Just a reflector. Kind of small for a reflector, but I'm just a layman.
Whether people using a laser on earth are lying about their results is hard to say.
I cannot get inside their head. |
| Anonymous Coward
User ID: 289861
10/14/2007 4:52 PM | | Re: APOLLO MOON LANDINGS ------- FAKED OR REAL !!?? | Quote |
The device on the moon is not supposed to be a "laser". Just a reflector. Kind of small for a reflector, but I'm just a layman.
Whether people using a laser on earth are lying about their results is hard to say.
I cannot get inside their head. Quoting: Anonymous Coward 312115
Well, by "laser device" I meant the laser reflector. My terminology is not up to standards. I guess you just don't want to give your opinion on whether the laser machine thingie and its people are lying or not. |
| Anonymous Coward
User ID: 312115
10/14/2007 4:57 PM | | Re: APOLLO MOON LANDINGS ------- FAKED OR REAL !!?? | Quote |
The device on the moon is not supposed to be a "laser". Just a reflector. Kind of small for a reflector, but I'm just a layman.
Whether people using a laser on earth are lying about their results is hard to say.
I cannot get inside their head.
Well, by "laser device" I meant the laser reflector. My terminology is not up to standards. I guess you just don't want to give your opinion on whether the laser machine thingie and its people are lying or not. Quoting: Anonymous Coward 289861
My opinion is irrelevant. In fact, I have no opinion about them.
It sure looks like an expensive laser set up. I would love to have access to it and play with it.
I have never met them, do not know them, so I cannot judge them either way. |
| Anonymous Coward
User ID: 312115
10/14/2007 5:07 PM | | Re: APOLLO MOON LANDINGS ------- FAKED OR REAL !!?? | Quote |
"The other is the design of the spacesuit, in particular the knee joints. The suits had a restrictive range of movements, but the design of the knee joints ( a bellows-like construction) meant that the more they were bent, the bigger the force tending to "spring" the joint back to its default position. The other is the design of the spacesuit, in particular the knee joints. The suits had a restrictive range of movements, but the design of the knee joints ( a bellows-like construction) meant that the more they were bent, the bigger the force tending to "spring" the joint back to its default position. It was also pressurized, of course.
Baloney.
The "space suits" are obviously not pressurized.
If they were, the suits would look like the Michelin Man.
There is no pressurization in those suits. That is patently obvious.
Bending down would not cause them to "spring" back up.
This story gets more far reaching each time something is pointed out.
"It was also pressurized, of course." Of course. Of course. Maybe those magic air-conditioners on their backs were also pressurizing the suits?
Yet no outward air bulge can be seen on the suits.
And just how did those backpack air conditioners work?
The moon has no air, yet air conditioning works by intaking air, cooling it, and ejecting the heat/hot air.
Stand on the outside of an air conditioner, and feel the heat it throws off.
Just curious. |
| HAZZARD
User ID: 308422
10/14/2007 5:11 PM | | Re: APOLLO MOON LANDINGS ------- FAKED OR REAL !!?? | Quote |
It is much like a broken record.
More supposition without substantiation...
All that is actually present in the NASA information are scads of detailed scientific documentation of what happened, hundreds of pounds of lunar return, dozens of hours of film and video, thousands of photgraphs, and overwhelming verification of all of this by the world-wide scientific community.
One would be hard pressed, other than to engage in obvious supposition of course, to find any deception in this detailed record.
The actual point here, which goes completely ignored, is that we dont have to prove we did it.
The substantiation is beyond reproach. An old, tired request , which has yet to be fulfilled, is for you hoaxbelievers to provide proof that it was all a fake.
So far (and for far too long, I might add), that has not been done.
About the reflectors... Laser beams are routinely fired at these reflectors (about 270 times every year) through telescopes at McDonald Observatory in Texas and near Grasse in southern France.
I know theres nothing to convince a hard core HB, but here is a fun site for anyone else interested in the Apollo missions.
[link to www.boulder.swri.edu] |
| Anonymous Coward
User ID: 312115
10/14/2007 5:15 PM | | Re: APOLLO MOON LANDINGS ------- FAKED OR REAL !!?? | Quote |
"The actual point here, which goes completely ignored, is that we dont have to prove we did it."
"
But you do.
The burden of proof is on you, not the doubters. |
| Anonymous Coward
User ID: 312115
10/14/2007 5:17 PM | | Re: APOLLO MOON LANDINGS ------- FAKED OR REAL !!?? | Quote |
"The substantiation is beyond reproach."
Apparently not, as the past 18 pages shows, quite glaringly. |
| Anonymous Coward
User ID: 289861
10/14/2007 5:17 PM | | Re: APOLLO MOON LANDINGS ------- FAKED OR REAL !!?? | Quote |
Hehe.
[link to www.youtube.com]
They're in space, so their suits should be pressurized, but they don't look like Michelin man. Is it faked? |
| Anonymous Coward
User ID: 312115
10/14/2007 5:24 PM | | Re: APOLLO MOON LANDINGS ------- FAKED OR REAL !!?? | Quote |
They have a line attached to them, supposedly that is their source of O2.
Which brings up another question: What is the source of air for the Apollo guys?
They apparently have no air tank. |
| HAZZARD
User ID: 308422
10/14/2007 5:30 PM | | Re: APOLLO MOON LANDINGS ------- FAKED OR REAL !!?? | Quote |
Baloney.
The "space suits" are obviously not pressurized.
If they were, the suits would look like the Michelin Man.
There is no pressurization in those suits. That is patently obvious.
Yet no outward air bulge can be seen on the suits.
Just curious. Quoting: Anonymous Coward 312115
Of course it was pressurized.
The Apollo suit was actually a highly complex piece of gear, involving many layers of different material that was designed to sustain life (by allowing a pressurized atmosphere and providing for respiration and an adequate temperature environment).
To allow work, and to protect from micrometeoroid impact, solar radiation including heat, as well as protection from abraisions and cuts from various external sources that were present.
It also provided liquid and solid nourishment, and provided for the collection or elimination of bodily wastes.
In other words, it was a million dollar plus, custom made and meticulously manufactured spacecraft for one, which was continually improved upon during the program (as was the case with all aspects of the program).
Documentation concerning structure, testing, performance, operation of, and donning and doffing this complicated thing can be measured in many hundreds of pages.
Learning this stuff makes people go, "Whoa, youre kidding!"
When they realize I am not, they get that cool sensation that comes from learning something new for the first time. |
| HAZZARD
User ID: 308422
10/14/2007 5:35 PM | | Re: APOLLO MOON LANDINGS ------- FAKED OR REAL !!?? | Quote |
"Above Armstrong's Line (~63,000 ft/~19,000 m), pressurized suits are needed in the sparse atmosphere."
[link to en.wikipedia.org] |
| Anonymous Coward
User ID: 312115
10/14/2007 5:35 PM | | Re: APOLLO MOON LANDINGS ------- FAKED OR REAL !!?? | Quote |
"Whoa, youre kidding!"
Ok, then explain how this suit can: Produce air
Produce air conditioning in an airless environment.
Collect and expel or contain human waste.
Appear unpressurized, yet be pressurized.
And why would pressurization be needed?
Air is needed. Protection from heat and radiation would be needed.
And how could this suit do that? |
| Anonymous Coward
User ID: 312115
10/14/2007 5:37 PM | | Re: APOLLO MOON LANDINGS ------- FAKED OR REAL !!?? | Quote |
"The Apollo suit was actually a highly complex piece of gear"
Even magical, some might say. |
| | Page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80, 81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 90, 91, 92, 93, 94, 95, 96, 97, 98, 99, 100, 101, 102, 103, 104, 105, 106, 107, 108, 109, 110, 111, 112, 113, 114, 115, 116, 117, 118, 119, 120, 121, 122, 123, 124, 125, 126, 127, 128, 129, 130, 131, 132, 133, 134, 135, 136, 137, 138, 139, 140, 141, 142, 143, 144 | |
|
