While in the Apollo capsule they had a space toilet that stored the waste in a container. While on the surface they went for a different strategy - they didn't poop. They were put on a special "low residue" diet that didn't produce much in they way of solid waste. If they really, really needed to go they did it in a plastic bag which they then discarded on the lunar surface the next time they opened the hatch.
Anonymous Coward User ID: 490596 8/28/2008 12:40 AM
Re: Myth Busters is doing a show on the Moon Landing.
While in the Apollo capsule they had a space toilet that stored the waste in a container. While on the surface they went for a different strategy - they didn't poop. They were put on a special "low residue" diet that didn't produce much in they way of solid waste. If they really, really needed to go they did it in a plastic bag which they then discarded on the lunar surface the next time they opened the hatch.
Quoting: Barls Knarkley 401789
Barls, your the biggest f'n idiot I've ever seen. My god, they ate their sh!t to conserve mass. That way it wouldn't take 4 times the rocket fuel to return home. At least get your facts about a hypothetical mission straight.
While in the Apollo capsule they had a space toilet that stored the waste in a container. While on the surface they went for a different strategy - they didn't poop. They were put on a special "low residue" diet that didn't produce much in they way of solid waste. If they really, really needed to go they did it in a plastic bag which they then discarded on the lunar surface the next time they opened the hatch.
Barls, your the biggest f'n idiot I've ever seen. My god, they ate their sh!t to conserve mass. That way it wouldn't take 4 times the rocket fuel to return home. At least get your facts about a hypothetical mission straight.
Quoting: Anonymous Coward 490596
mystified User ID: 492458 8/28/2008 3:05 AM
Re: Myth Busters is doing a show on the Moon Landing.
I have proof that Columbus never arrived in "America" and that no ship at that time could have ever reached "America". We were actually brought to "America" by reptilian ships and our history was rewriten to make it seem like people on silly wooden ships could actually cross such a vast huge amount of ocean without sophisticated computers. It is impossible to cross such a vast ocean with such primitive ships.
Willie Bobama User ID: 413049 8/28/2008 4:42 AM
Re: Myth Busters is doing a show on the Moon Landing.
is not logical to do something once and never again, once you do something successfully you instantly want to repeat the success.
Quoting: spock 484712
How does logic fit in with national budgets and the like? Do you think NASA has money growing in forests of trees? Lots of important things get cut all of the time for one reason or another. I sincerely hope whoever gets elected as the next president doesn't decide to cut the budget and missions of the proposed new moon landings by humans. But it's a dreaded possibility.
NASA and the astronauts thought they'd be tasked to return more than they did. A few of the astronauts have recently spoken out on the importance of manned missions to further explore the moon, and the grander goal of getting men to Mars. But who is listening now?
Most would agree that once we were going to the moon we shouldn't have stopped. They had all the infrastructure in place, the people with the learned expertise, and so on. But there are little things like national budgets and directives that get in the way. We beat the Soviets and national directives changed. The moon wasn't as big a priority nor had as big a budget to sustain future lunar manned missions. The public was tired of the moon landings because it had become almost routine. Hence, that also made funding disappear. It's incredibly dangerous to fly a space shuttle to Earth orbit and back, but do you think that makes any difference to the public?
At present, they are building smaller space probes than they have in the past, largely due to more budget cuts. The recent Phoenix lander used parts leftover from an earlier mission. They'd much rather redesign and improve where they could, but it wasn't possible with the funding they had. Logic doesn't necessarily apply when it comes down to money.
DrPostman Forum Moderator User ID: 51197 8/28/2008 5:04 AM
Re: Myth Busters is doing a show on the Moon Landing.
Not only that, columbus DID fall of the edge, only to fall endlesly and suddenly pup up near a nother island close to africa.
Quoting: Anonymous Coward 281126
Are you aware that Columbus was wrong in his claims about
the Earth? "It's kinda like creating a carpool lane on the internet, except instead of
high-occupancy vehicles, only rich assholes will be able to drive on it"
-- Jon Stewart on what the telecoms would prefer instead of Net Neutrality.
Can't PM? Feel free to email me at DrPostman(at)gmail.com
This show was absolutely terrible, they couldn't possibly be more biased. That and they only took shots at stuff they could easily disprove. That and they are good buddies with Nasa and even used their equipment for the tests do you honestly think they are very motivated to find results contrary to the government story?
Quoting: Anonymous Coward 471866
I don't think the Myth Busters are willing to disregard established facts and reality to prove a wishful hoax belief/myth. Most hoaxes, be they moon, 9/11, whatever, are based on small grains of truth mixed with large grains of falsities and misconceptions, even disinformation in some cases. The fact that these falsities are revealed and disproved time and time again, does little to stop them from being repeated over and over to support the hoax. Why should the Myth Busters risk their creditability and integrity to be guilty of doing that same thing? Exactly, they wouldn't and didn't. Good show, boys.
I've heard it said it would be easier to go fly men to the moon than create a hoax on the massive scale (people inside & outside NASA, space-based industries in R&D, other countries who monitored the space flights to the moon's surface, etc.) required to perpetrate what the moon hoax proponents tout. It's much easier to believe we sent men to the moon than to believe it's a hoax.
Anonymous Coward User ID: 464327 8/28/2008 5:16 AM
Re: Myth Busters is doing a show on the Moon Landing.
I think the reason most of the people that doubt the moon landing is because the government lies about so many other things nobody trust them anymore. Like the fact that it was a race against Russia instead of just trying to get to the moon.
Its kind of like the war in Iraq right now. Instead of just making strategic moves that are the best for Iraq and our soldiers, the Presidential election enters the decision making which is a total crock. "Yea, we really need to do that but we might loose some votes in Nov. because of it, so we better wait another year." "But sir, more people will die." Well, no matter, I gots to have dem votes or I will loose that campaign contribution.
With these type of characters running the show, why should we trust them? You can't blame the people that don't.
But with the moon rocks in hand, hard to doubt.
Anonymous Coward User ID: 483120 8/28/2008 5:34 AM
Re: Myth Busters is doing a show on the Moon Landing.
Face it people, you've been lied to and manipulated your entire life.
If you want to embrace it, then by all means, be my guest.
But for the few people that are actually _awake_, keep on pushing guys & gals, if we're lucky our race won't be as dumb as we believe it to be today.
Let's hope there's still a few brain cells left in the worlds aspartame infested minds that will fire off and maybe complete a full thought. A thought besides sex, sports, money, or whatever else this pathetic culture has implanted in your souls.
Anonymous Coward User ID: 380853 8/28/2008 5:40 AM
Re: Myth Busters is doing a show on the Moon Landing.
they should do a show on 9/11 to shut up the woo woo's already. But they wouldn't for the simple fact that the notion is absurd.
Quoting: Anonymous Coward 464327
Totally absurd. The government would never allow a false flag operation. Mmmmm..... like a "new Pearl Harbor." PNAC - now who were they? Totally absurd.
Anonymous Coward User ID: 483120 8/28/2008 5:42 AM
Re: Myth Busters is doing a show on the Moon Landing.
A lot of people get caught up in the van Allen belts and forget that in the background the solar wind is rushing through the solar system.
"The Van Allen belts are only part of the radiation environment. High-energy protons from cosmic rays make up part of the radiation in space. All of this radiation varies over both large and small distances and from minute to minute as well as from year to year. For example, during the years immediately after Solar maximum (defined traditionally as when the most dark spots are visible on the surface of the Sun), the Sun produces more large flares than at other times in its 11-year cycle. And these flares shoot large numbers of high-energy protons through the solar system. Currently, we are at Solar maximum, and radiation from the Sun will be at a peak in the next couple of years. Last year, for the first time ever, Concorde's radiation alarm sounded. The sensors had picked up high-energy protons, which had penetrated the Earth's magnetic field lines.
Solar wind sweeps charged particles from the Sun through the Solar System in streams travelling at between 400 and 800 kilometres per second. The particles interact with the magnetic field around the Earth, and in doing so they provide a constantly varying contribution to the radiation environment. We think that the radiation belts trap these charged particles from the solar wind. "
snip
" Unfortunately, engineers cannot check on the ground how well designed their spacecraft are to withstand radiation, because it is physically impossible to recreate the full radiation environment. The alternative is to simulate the radiation environment using computers. Coupling a computer simulation of the radiation environment with programs simulating the spacecraft's orbit, engineers can work out the radiation dose the satellite will receive over its lifetime. Satellite designers then select components that can withstand the estimated doses of radiation. As electronic components become smaller, and more and more of them are squashed into the same volume, this task becomes more critical, because one encounter with a charged particle can affect more components."
Source:
Surviving radiation in space: Radiation in space is a tricky and expensive problem for designers of satellites. This week, NASA and the Pentagon launched a satellite that will cut the cost
* 21 July 1990
* From New Scientist Print Edition.
* ANDREW COATES
They did not go to the moon in the apollo program.
Anonymous Coward User ID: 492498 8/28/2008 6:02 AM
Re: Myth Busters is doing a show on the Moon Landing.
do you really think you're making a valid point here, or are you just saying stuff to be contrary?
Quoting: Barls Knarkley 401789
Says the Nimrod, who earlier claimed that the Apollo astro's, would rather lift the front of the rovers to turn them, than using the steering, hence the photo of rover without any tire tracks around it. Or how about the claim that the moon is radioactive but with alpha particles, which are slow & heavy, and have a hard time penetrating a sheet of paper! Which is why they were not affected on the moon, but when I point out that the astro's were covered in this same radioactive dust, when they came back inside the LM from a mission & then must have breathed it in to their bodies!WHich would kill them pretty quickly. Knarles the fucking fraud Barkley ran for cover.
I have proof that Columbus never arrived in "America" and that no ship at that time could have ever reached "America". We were actually brought to "America" by reptilian ships and our history was rewriten to make it seem like people on silly wooden ships could actually cross such a vast huge amount of ocean without sophisticated computers. It is impossible to cross such a vast ocean with such primitive ships.
Quoting: Anonymous Coward 482065
Colon fue gallego. Si hubiese sido ingles ten por seguro aun estaría por descubrir America hoy. Pero fue gallego.
Tambien y eso casi nadie lo sabe tuvo voces interiores que le urgieron a hacer lo que hizo. Tuvo guia espiritual para hacer lo que vino a hacer.
Anonymous Coward User ID: 492498 8/28/2008 6:26 AM
Re: Myth Busters is doing a show on the Moon Landing.
Says the Nimrod, who earlier claimed that the Apollo astro's, would rather lift the front of the rovers to turn them, than using the steering, hence the photo of rover without any tire tracks around it.
Quoting: Anonymous Coward 492498
I did not. That's either a deliberate misrepresentation of what I said, or you weren't paying attention. I never said they would "rather" lift the rover, I said they could, it was light enough. I'm pretty sure they did it at least once during Apollo 16, but I haven't trawled through the entire mission transcript to find where it is mentioned. I think it was early, during the setup, but I can't recall off the top of my head.
You're also ignoring, probably wilfully, that that was only one of the reasons that were given for why prints might not be visible in some of the photos. But you're not going to mention that, are you?
Or how about the claim that the moon is radioactive but with alpha particles, which are slow & heavy, and have a hard time penetrating a sheet of paper!
Quoting: Anonymous Coward 492498
Again, that is not what I said. though it is true that alphas are very easily shielded against.
Which is why they were not affected on the moon, but when I point out that the astro's were covered in this same radioactive dust, when they came back inside the LM from a mission & then must have breathed it in to their bodies!WHich would kill them pretty quickly.
Quoting: Anonymous Coward 492498
And you are ignoring the detailed response I gave explaining why this is a fallacy - there is a world of difference between an object producing secondary radiation when struck by solar protons, and an object being radioactive, which means that it is composed of large, unstable nuclei like uranium which spontaneously emit radiation due to decay. The lunar dust is no more a spontaneous emitter of radiation than the dirt in your back yard. If I exposed your backyard soil to high energy protons, it would emit just as many alphas as lunar regolith. And it would stop just as quickly when it was shielded from those protons.
There, I've repeated myself. Maybe this time you'll acknowledge what I've written.
Hope springs eternal.
Knarles the fucking fraud Barkley ran for cover.
Quoting: Anonymous Coward 492498
Liar. I wrote just what I wrote above, and you chose not to respond. Your choice.
You are a wanker knarles.
Quoting: Anonymous Coward 492498
And the whole point of you posting seems to be the abuse rather than the quality of your argument. Go figure. Guess you're about fifteen and mad at your parents. Or at least I hope you are, that would make it something you might grow out of.
I have proof that Columbus never arrived in "America" and that no ship at that time could have ever reached "America". We were actually brought to "America" by reptilian ships and our history was rewriten to make it seem like people on silly wooden ships could actually cross such a vast huge amount of ocean without sophisticated computers. It is impossible to cross such a vast ocean with such primitive ships.
Colon fue gallego. Si hubiese sido ingles ten por seguro aun estaría por descubrir America hoy. Pero fue gallego.
Tambien y eso casi nadie lo sabe tuvo voces interiores que le urgieron a hacer lo que hizo. Tuvo guia espiritual para hacer lo que vino a hacer.
Quoting: Bao2
Colon era Portugues. Nasceu na aldeia de Cuba, em Alentejo. Gallego ... lol
Anonymous Coward User ID: 492482 8/28/2008 7:03 AM
Re: Myth Busters is doing a show on the Moon Landing.
"The claim that radiation exposure during the Apollo missions would have been fatal to the astronauts is only one example of such nonsense." -- Dr. James Van Allen
Quoting: Anonymous Coward 88145
Who cares what he allegedly said, it doesn't change the facts of the radiation 25,000 miles chick which nothing has ever passed and lived, not a dog, a monkey or a squirel. Then there's the stellar radiation on the other side of the protective belts which the astronauts allegedly tried to pass in a TIN CAN!
The temp on the moon!
-387 F to 253 F
or
-233 C to 123 C
Barls Knarkley User ID: 395921 8/28/2008 7:11 AM
Re: Myth Busters is doing a show on the Moon Landing.
Well, you for a start, I guess. Can't let the opinion of experts get in the way of your preconceived ideas, can we?
it doesn't change the facts of the radiation 25,000 miles chick which nothing has ever passed and lived, not a dog, a monkey or a squirel.
Quoting: Anonymous Coward 492482
Says who? The Soviets launched animals around the Moon in a Zond probe, they returned just fine.
Where do you get your data showing that the radiation belts are so strong? Are you just taking it on faith, or have you done any form of investigation into the international readings of the belts obtained over the last 50 years? Can you explain how various nations and even amateur groups like AMSAT are able to launch satellites into the belts with electronics shielding based on these figures and not have them fry because, according to you, the belts are far stronger than these readings would indicate?
Then there's the stellar radiation on the other side of the protective belts which the astronauts allegedly tried to pass in a TIN CAN!
Quoting: Anonymous Coward 492482
And how strong is that radiation? How do you know it would be lethal?
No, really. How do you know how strong the radiation environment is, or are you just assuming that any amount of radiation is automatically fatal?
The temp on the moon!
-387 F to 253 F
or
-233 C to 123 C
Quoting: Anonymous Coward 492482
The temperature on Earth: -89 C to 58 C. Oh dear, every single one of us is going to either freeze or die of heat stroke!
Or alternatively, taking the highest and lowest possible temperature that can be reached over the entire globe and any point of the day or year tells us absolutely nothing about the temperature conditions when people were actually there.
I think the reason most of the people that doubt the moon landing is because the government lies about so many other things nobody trust them anymore. Like the fact that it was a race against Russia instead of just trying to get to the moon.
Quoting: Anonymous Coward 380853
Why do you think this is a lie? Can you be specific?
Anonymous Coward User ID: 492527 8/28/2008 7:34 AM
Re: Myth Busters is doing a show on the Moon Landing.
I did not. That's either a deliberate misrepresentation of what I said, or you weren't paying attention. I never said they would "rather" lift the rover, I said they could, it was light enough. I'm pretty sure they did it at least once during Apollo 16, but I haven't trawled through the entire mission transcript to find where it is mentioned. I think it was early, during the setup, but I can't recall off the top of my head.
Quoting: Barls Knarkley 395921
I did not but I'm pretty sure they did it? They nearly lost their minds when a hammer snagged onto a fender & broke it off.but you tell me they lifted the front of the rover to turn, risking damaging the rover? To risk a mission failure? Being in those bulky suits & all? Which would probably never see them up in space again? Ok.
You're also ignoring, probably wilfully, that that was only one of the reasons that were given for why prints might not be visible in some of the photos. But you're not going to mention that, are you?
Quoting: Barls Knarkley 395921
In lunar gravity the rover is not especially heavy. An astronaut can lift one end of it with little difficulty. And since the rover's turn radius, like that of any four-wheeled vehicle, is limited, the astronauts sometimes found it easier to lift one end of the rover and turn it so it pointed in the direction they wanted to go, rather than maneuvering through a three-point turn. When this occurred, there would obviously be no track leading up to the wheels.
From Clavius, which you used.
And you are ignoring the detailed response I gave explaining why this is a fallacy - there is a world of difference between an object producing secondary radiation when struck by solar protons, and an object being radioactive, which means that it is composed of large, unstable nuclei like uranium which spontaneously emit radiation due to decay. The lunar dust is no more a spontaneous emitter of radiation than the dirt in your back yard. If I exposed your backyard soil to high energy protons, it would emit just as many alphas as lunar regolith. And it would stop just as quickly when it was shielded from those protons.
Quoting: Barls Knarkley 395921
What utter bollocks!
The surface of the Moon is baldly exposed to cosmic rays and solar flares, and some of that radiation is very hard to stop with shielding. Furthermore, when cosmic rays hit the ground, they produce a dangerous spray of secondary particles right at your feet. All this radiation penetrating human flesh can damage DNA, boosting the risk of cancer and other maladies.
When galactic cosmic rays collide with particles in the lunar surface, they trigger little nuclear reactions that release yet more radiation in the form of neutrons. The lunar surface itself is radioactive!
You breath this in & you die! Or did they leave their boots on the porch of lander before they re-entered the LM, after a mission?
Okay, so you're deliberately misquoting me. Very mature.
No, I did not say they would rather lift the rover than steer it, that's obviously false, and we both know it. Yes, I'm pretty sure that at one point when setting up they lifted it. "Rather" clearly implies a preference for doing it taht way, as opposed to it being something they might do if they felt it was easier in specific circumstances.
Troll.
They nearly lost their minds when a hammer snagged onto a fender & broke it off.but you tell me they lifted the front of the rover to turn, risking damaging the rover?
Quoting: Anonymous Coward 492528
Yes. But not by the fender, obviously. There are other places to grab hold.
To risk a mission failure? Being in those bulky suits & all? Which would probably never see them up in space again? Ok.
From Clavius, which you used.
Quoting: Anonymous Coward 492528
Yes. How does that refute the point about how it's not the only reason that footprints might become obscured?
Troll.
What utter bollocks!
The surface of the Moon is baldly exposed to cosmic rays and solar flares, and some of that radiation is very hard to stop with shielding. Furthermore, when cosmic rays hit the ground, they produce a dangerous spray of secondary particles right at your feet. All this radiation penetrating human flesh can damage DNA, boosting the risk of cancer and other maladies.
Quoting: Anonymous Coward 492528
Not in dispute.
When galactic cosmic rays collide with particles in the lunar surface, they trigger little nuclear reactions that release yet more radiation in the form of neutrons. The lunar surface itself is radioactive!
Quoting: Anonymous Coward 492528
No. That is wrong, as I've explained. There is a world of difference between something being radioactive, and emitting secondary radiation. They fact you are continuing to refuse to address this point (which I've made now three times, rather than 'run away', as you lied) is your problem.
the writer for that NASA peice was unforgivably sloppy when they wrote that, it simply isn't true. Whether you want to believe it or not (and you obviously won't because where would you get your trolling fun that way?), NASA is made up of individuals who are capable of making mistakes. the probably wrote that thinking that they were making it sound more interesting, but neglecting the fact that it was not accurate.
Tell you what - why don't you contact a physicist working at a university anywhere in the world. Anywhere. There are thousands of them. See what they say about this, ask if that is accurate or a misrepresentation. See what they have to say.
But again, where's the trolling fun in that?
You breath this in & you die!
Quoting: Anonymous Coward 492528
No. The regolith only emits the sprays of radiation while it is being bombarded by cosmic rays or solar protons. It's like the difference between fluorescence and phosphorescence - flurorescent materials only glow while they are being exposed to UV light, it stops glowing as soon as the light is turned off. Phosphorescent materials glow due to energy stored in the electron orbitals, and so will keep glowing even after the energy source is removed.
Why don't you try addressing what I wrote rather than acting like a scoffing troll?
You only repeated the crap you spouted last time, the only thing eternal is your mumbo jumbo son.
Quoting: Anonymous Coward 492528
Oho. "Mumbo jumbo". In other words, you claim that I am using big science-type words to conceal the truth. So falsify it. Email a scientist and post their response here saying I'm full of crap.
Because, let's face it, you are hardly going to actually address what I've written all by yourself, are you? That would just make blatantly obvious you don't know what you are talking about and are just interested in the abuse.
Troll.
More bollocks, i asked you for an explanation 3 or 4 times & im still waiting.
Quoting: Anonymous Coward 492528
Liar. I've explained it a number of times now and all you've said in response is "sh'yeah right shillboy, neener neener".
...wanker.
Quoting: Anonymous Coward 492528
Troll.
Anonymous Coward User ID: 492482 8/28/2008 7:57 AM
Re: Myth Busters is doing a show on the Moon Landing.
it doesn't change the facts of the radiation 25,000 miles chick which nothing has ever passed and lived, not a dog, a monkey or a squirel.
Says who? The Soviets launched animals around the Moon in a Zond probe, they returned just fine.
Quoting: Barls Knarkley 395921
The soviets have never been to the moon and were not the first in space as the have no ICBM/space capability, proven page 3 this thread #055.
[link to www.godlikeproductions.com]
"They would die on the way through the radiation belts if they were unshielded," says Anders Jorgensen, author of a new study on the subject and a technical staff member at Los Alamos National Laboratory, New Mexico, US.
[link to space.newscientist.com]
Disclaimer: This website exists for entertainment purposes only. The reader is responsible for discerning the validity, factuality
or implications of information posted here, be it fictional or based on real events. Moderators on this forum make every
effort to review the material posted on this site however, it is not realistically possible for our small staff to manually
review each and every one of the more than 10,000 posts GodlikeProductions gets on a daily basis.
The content of post
on this site, including but not limited to links to other web sites, are the expressed opinion of the original poster and are in
no way representative of or endorsed by the owners or administration of this website. The posts on this website are the opinion of
the specific author and are not statements of advice, opinion, or factual information on behalf of the owner or
administration of GodlikeProductions.
This site may contain adult content and if you feel you might be offended by such content, you should log off immediately.
Not all posts on this website are intended as truthful or factual assertion by their authors. Some users of this website are participating in internet role playing, with or without the use of an avatar. NO post on this website should be considered factual information on face value alone. Users are encouraged to USE DISCERNMENT and do their own follow up research while reading and posting on this website. Godlikeproductions.com reserves the right to make changes to, corrections and/or remove entirely at any time posts made on this website without notice. In addition, Godlikeproductions.com disclaims any and all liability for damages incurred directly or indirectly as a result of a post on this website.
This site is provided "as is" without warranty of any kind, either expressed or implied. You should not assume that this site is error-free or that it will be suitable for the particular purpose which you have in mind when using it. In no event shall Godlikeproductions.com be liable for any special, incidental, indirect or consequential damages of any kind, or any damages whatsoever, including, without limitation, those resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether or not advised of the possibility of damage, and on any theory of liability, arising out of or in connection with the use or performance of this site or other documents which are referenced by or linked to this site.
Some events depicted in certain posting and threads on this website may be fictitious and any similarity to any person living or dead is merely coincidental. Some other articles may be based on actual events but which in certain cases incidents, characters and timelines have been changed for dramatic purposes. Certain characters may be composites, or entirely fictitious.
We do not discriminate against the mentally ill!
Fair Use Notice: This site may contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Users may make such material available in an effort to advance awareness and understanding of issues relating to civil rights, economics, individual rights, international affairs, liberty, science & technology, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C.Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information please visit: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml
Please be aware any communications sent complaining about a post on this website may be posted publicly at the discretion of the administration.
This Disclaimer is subject to change at anytime.
Mail Webmaster with questions or comments about this site.
