|
| Page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13 |
Myth Busters is doing a show on the Moon Landing.
|
Barls Knarkley
User ID: 395921
8/28/2008 10:00 AM | | Re: Myth Busters is doing a show on the Moon Landing. | Quote |
Sigh. One last one before lights out.
Astro's steering the rover by lifting the front, instead of the multi million dollar four wheel (no less) steering, because it was easier? Quoting: Anonymous Coward 492590
How often did they do the lifting thing? Once? Twice? I'm not sure, but it would only have been a handful of times during the entire program. Like I said, the only time I'm pretty sure about is when the rover was being set up during Apollo 16, they lifted it into the initial heading when neither of them was sitting in it. you're trying to make it sound like they would drive ina straight line, get out and lift it onto a new heading, get in and drive until they needed to turn again, and so on. Puh-leeze.
Nasa wrong about lunar radioactivity to such an embarrassing degree Quoting: Anonymous Coward 492590
Really? Where are they 'wrong'? How does obtaining new, long-term data never collected before in short-term missions, using new instruments that didn't exist 40 years ago, count as either wrong or embarrassing?
that they are wasting billions of tax payers $ on a mission to find out Quoting: Anonymous Coward 492590
Billions, huh? LRO is going to cost billions of dollars, is it? Or perhaps you are just demonstrating that you are ignorant of the facts and saying whatever damn fool thing comes into your head that sounds good, as the real mission cost is an order of magnitude smaller than that.
Billions. Heh. |
|
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 492585
8/28/2008 10:01 AM | | Re: Myth Busters is doing a show on the Moon Landing. | Quote |
Always a pleasure to read your input Barls. Excellent.
Thanks. It's the rare expressions of appreciation like yours that make doing this sort of thing worthwhile and humouring the adolescent trolls easier.
Bedtime for Barls, though. More tomorrow. Quoting: Barls Knarkley 395921
DO NOT EVER leave glp. Your input is greatly appreciated. Would like to see your views and opinions with more science related threads in the future. |
|
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 492590
8/28/2008 10:04 AM | | Re: Myth Busters is doing a show on the Moon Landing. | Quote |
Otherwise there's nothing here.
Astro's steering the rover by lifting the front, instead of the multi million dollar four wheel (no less) steering, because it was easier?
Nasa wrong about lunar radioactivity to such an embarrassing degree that they are wasting billions of tax payers $ on a mission to find out hun all because you say so! & whateverscience.com printing the story verbatim, because ITS SEXY!
Your right, there's fuck all there, all right.
Barls has whipped you, with facts, but do carry on. For sheer amusement value at least. Quoting: Anonymous Coward 492585
Barls whipped me how?
Is that Nasa story incorrect & if it is & Nasa are wrong about such a fundamental fact like the radioactivity of the moon ( that they allegedly visited multiple times decades ago) here in 2008, then what makes them the bastion of honesty concerning Apollo in the 1st place, that we have to just take their word for it?
"with facts" my ass. he ran away the last moon thread too, saying something about being tired. |
|
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 492585
8/28/2008 10:06 AM | | Re: Myth Busters is doing a show on the Moon Landing. | Quote |
Anonymous Coward 492590. To make a point on radioactivity and the moon. Keep this in mind.
You are aware that the worlds oceans contain vast amounts of uranium?
---------Did you glow on after your last swim at the beach?-----
The oceans have about 0.00015 grams of uranium per metric ton (tonne, occupying one cubic meter) of water, or about 150 kilograms per cubic kilometer.
The energy from uranium fission (if breeders are used) in about 6 to 7 cubic kilometers of sea water would be enough to run a one-billion watt (electric) power plant for a year.
The continental shelf off the east coast of the United States is roughly 1500 miles (2400 km) north-to-south, and extends roughly 200 miles (320 km) out, making an area of roughly 750,000 square kilometers. The uranium in the top 1/100 of a millimeter, therefore, could keep one large nuclear reactor running for one year.
oceanic data from: The Handbook of Chemistry & Physics
[link to www.energyadvocate.com] |
|
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 88145
8/28/2008 10:06 AM | | Re: Myth Busters is doing a show on the Moon Landing. | Quote |
Maybe if they never went outside & got all the dust on their suits which they had to have brought back inside the LM & then breathed into their lungs.Or are you saying that ingesting radioactive particals is the same as an x-ray?
Exposing ignorance & thinking?
Considering that the moon is probably much older than the earth itself & doesn't have the earth's defences against radiation, they it must be very radioactive, enough that an ingested partical would kill in just a few days. Butthats just me... & Nasa too apparently who are sending a probe no less to see for themsleves ... again. Quoting: Anonymous Coward 492528
You have a very flawed understanding of the difference between something being radioactive and something emitting secondary radiation when exposed to radiation. The dust was NOT radioactive. Please look it up and stop wasting our time trying to explain it to you. |
|
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 492585
8/28/2008 10:09 AM | | Re: Myth Busters is doing a show on the Moon Landing. | Quote |
Otherwise there's nothing here.
Astro's steering the rover by lifting the front, instead of the multi million dollar four wheel (no less) steering, because it was easier?
Nasa wrong about lunar radioactivity to such an embarrassing degree that they are wasting billions of tax payers $ on a mission to find out hun all because you say so! & whateverscience.com printing the story verbatim, because ITS SEXY!
Your right, there's fuck all there, all right.
Barls has whipped you, with facts, but do carry on. For sheer amusement value at least.
Barls whipped me how?
Is that Nasa story incorrect & if it is & Nasa are wrong about such a fundamental fact like the radioactivity of the moon ( that they allegedly visited multiple times decades ago) here in 2008, then what makes them the bastion of honesty concerning Apollo in the 1st place, that we have to just take their word for it?
"with facts" my ass. he ran away the last moon thread too, saying something about being tired. Quoting: Anonymous Coward 492590
Yeah yeah yeah, the thing is, i have been following all the 'moon hoax' threads from years ago, and i can state without mallice, YOU have been whipped by Barls.
Give it up, but carry on if you must. |
|
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 88145
8/28/2008 10:12 AM | | Re: Myth Busters is doing a show on the Moon Landing. | Quote |
Once again...this thread is a perfect demonstration of my statement that those who deny Apollo are preceisely those who know the absolute least about it. |
|
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 492590
8/28/2008 10:17 AM | | Re: Myth Busters is doing a show on the Moon Landing. | Quote |
Sigh. One last one before lights out.
Astro's steering the rover by lifting the front, instead of the multi million dollar four wheel (no less) steering, because it was easier?
How often did they do the lifting thing? Once? Twice? I'm not sure, but it would only have been a handful of times during the entire program. Like I said, the only time I'm pretty sure about is when the rover was being set up during Apollo 16, they lifted it into the initial heading when neither of them was sitting in it. you're trying to make it sound like they would drive ina straight line, get out and lift it onto a new heading, get in and drive until they needed to turn again, and so on. Puh-leeze. Quoting: Barls Knarkley 395921
I've seen at least three different pictures with no tracks under the rover, one was the broken fender another with just on ASStro in it & another after it was abandoned just before a departure. All have no tracks where there should be, your explanation was they lifted it by hand.
Nasa wrong about lunar radioactivity to such an embarrassing degree
Really? Where are they 'wrong'? How does obtaining new, long-term data never collected before in short-term missions, using new instruments that didn't exist 40 years ago, count as either wrong or embarrassing? Quoting: Barls Knarkley 395921
You said they were wrong, They said the "The Lunar surface IS radioactive" & you said they were wrong & it was shoddy writing on behalf of Nasa & incorrect.
that they are wasting billions of tax payers $ on a mission to find out
Billions, huh? LRO is going to cost billions of dollars, is it? Or perhaps you are just demonstrating that you are ignorant of the facts and saying whatever damn fool thing comes into your head that sounds good, as the real mission cost is an order of magnitude smaller than that.
Billions. Heh. Quoting: Barls Knarkley 395921
I was talking about Ugandan Dollars.
$10.000 us for a Navy Toilet seat & Nasa is going to spend less than a billion on a Moon probe? Why go to bed? Your living in a dream world already. |
|
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 492590
8/28/2008 10:28 AM | | Re: Myth Busters is doing a show on the Moon Landing. | Quote |
Yeah yeah yeah, the thing is, i have been following all the 'moon hoax' threads from years ago, and i can state without mallice, YOU have been whipped by Barls.
Give it up, but carry on if you must. Quoting: Anonymous Coward 492585
& that makes you an expert somehow?
Having your nose deeply inserted into his ass doesn't make you right now does it? He said he was going to bed, shouldn't you go tuck him in? |
|
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 492590
8/28/2008 10:32 AM | | Re: Myth Busters is doing a show on the Moon Landing. | Quote |
Maybe if they never went outside & got all the dust on their suits which they had to have brought back inside the LM & then breathed into their lungs.Or are you saying that ingesting radioactive particals is the same as an x-ray?
Exposing ignorance & thinking?
Considering that the moon is probably much older than the earth itself & doesn't have the earth's defences against radiation, they it must be very radioactive, enough that an ingested partical would kill in just a few days. Butthats just me... & Nasa too apparently who are sending a probe no less to see for themsleves ... again.
You have a very flawed understanding of the difference between something being radioactive and something emitting secondary radiation when exposed to radiation. The dust was NOT radioactive. Please look it up and stop wasting our time trying to explain it to you. Quoting: Anonymous Coward 88145
THE LUNAR SURFACE IS RADIOACTIVE. from Nasa. |
|
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 492590
8/28/2008 10:41 AM | | Re: Myth Busters is doing a show on the Moon Landing. | Quote |
Currently mid-way through their NASA-funded study, the researchers are working to determine whether a set of electrically charged shield spheres atop 40-meter masts could deflect radiation from a populated moonbase.
If it proves possible, such a radiation-proof screen - called an electrostatic shield - could protect astronauts from the long-lasting, and possibly fatal, radiation hazards of spaceflight beyond the Earth's magnetic field.
[link to www.space.com]
Why dont they just use the shield they had on Apollo? |
|
Duncan Kunz 
The Debunker King
User ID: 97965
8/28/2008 10:42 AM
 | | Re: Myth Busters is doing a show on the Moon Landing. | Quote |
Sigh. One last one before lights out. Quoting: Anonymous Coward 492590
I believe you've been pwned by Brother Barls.
All you can do now is make the rest of us laugh.
Those western imperialist warmongers beat us to the Moon. Damn! |
|
G. House
User ID: 492619
8/28/2008 10:45 AM
 | | Re: Myth Busters is doing a show on the Moon Landing. | Quote |
Alpha particles, once their energy is spent are not radioactive.
You certainly don't have a clue about nuclear physics do you?
That makes 2 of us.
all three kinds of radiations produce the same effects on the body. If the dose from ingested material is sufficiently large, indeed very large, observable effects such as reduced blood counts, diarrhea, various cytogenetic effects (for example, chromosome breaks), or interference with function may occur. [In fact, extremely large doses of radiation are medically used to treat a number of diseases including malignancies and certain forms of thyroid disease to destroy or ablate malfunctioning tissue.]
[ link to www.hps.org]
No they don't.
Plutonium for example emits alpha particles and you can hold it in your hand with no ill effect.
And again, once an alpha particles energy is SPENT, that's it, not radioactive.
Apparently you don't get it.
Apparently you are thinking about ingesting materials that are still emitting alpha particle which is another matter entirely.
Another thing.
You keep going on and on and on about how radioactive the moon is.
Well, exactly how radioactive is it?
How many rads were they supposedly exposed to?
For instance what was it times normal background on earth?
Ten times, one hundred times?
Even at one hundred times they were not at terrible risk considering their short stay.
You also mention a nuber of elements present, not the isotopes. What isotopes were present in what quantities?
You really need to bring this forward instead of making blanket statements. |
|
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 492590
8/28/2008 10:46 AM | | Re: Myth Busters is doing a show on the Moon Landing. | Quote |
Once again...this thread is a perfect demonstration of my statement that those who deny Apollo are preceisely those who know the absolute least about it. Quoting: Anonymous Coward 88145
This post is the perfect demonstration of the statement that most Americans cant think for themselves.
The Gulf of Tonkin incident was real once, too. |
|
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 492590
8/28/2008 10:49 AM | | Re: Myth Busters is doing a show on the Moon Landing. | Quote |
Quoting: Anonymous Coward 492585
is that like the Nasa handbook for space then? Because as Barles so elegantly put it, they make mistakes. |
|
Gazmik
User ID: 487277
8/28/2008 10:55 AM | | Re: Myth Busters is doing a show on the Moon Landing. | Quote |
THE LUNAR SURFACE IS RADIOACTIVE. from Nasa. Quoting: Anonymous Coward 492590
What's your point? The surface of the Earth is also radioactive. Has the radon fried your brain? |
|
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 88145
8/28/2008 11:00 AM | | Re: Myth Busters is doing a show on the Moon Landing. | Quote |
Currently mid-way through their NASA-funded study, the researchers are working to determine whether a set of electrically charged shield spheres atop 40-meter masts could deflect radiation from a populated moonbase.
If it proves possible, such a radiation-proof screen - called an electrostatic shield - could protect astronauts from the long-lasting, and possibly fatal, radiation hazards of spaceflight beyond the Earth's magnetic field.
[ link to www.space.com]
Why dont they just use the shield they had on Apollo?
Do you understand the difference between a permanent moonbase and the quick flight of Apollo? |
|
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 492590
8/28/2008 11:01 AM | | Re: Myth Busters is doing a show on the Moon Landing. | Quote |
Apparently you are thinking about ingesting materials that are still emitting alpha particle which is another matter entirely. Quoting: G. House
What happened the penny drop half way through writing this?
Another thing.
You keep going on and on and on about how radioactive the moon is.
Well, exactly how radioactive is it?
How many rads were they supposedly exposed to?
For instance what was it times normal background on earth?
Ten times, one hundred times?
Even at one hundred times they were not at terrible risk considering their short stay. Quoting: G. House
...& after dropping the penny, he looses it again.
INGESTED!!!
I'm not the one going on about how radioactive the moon is... that would be NASA. fact they are going on about it so much that they are sending a probe to find out & designing radiation shields.( if you can believe what they are saying, eh knarly?)
How radioactive is it? Again Nasa doesn't even know. That's why the probe, so if they dont know, but you do, doeas that make you Neil Armstrong?
More likely Alan Bean, who didnt even realise they had gone through the Van Allen belt, when he was asked.
You also mention a nuber of elements present, not the isotopes. What isotopes were present in what quantities?
You really need to bring this forward instead of making blanket statements.
|
|
StrandedSpaceMan
User ID: 492628
8/28/2008 11:06 AM | | Re: Myth Busters is doing a show on the Moon Landing. | Quote |
I saw a video called "Was it Only a Paper Moon?"
Focuses primarily on the cramped interior of the LEM.
Host of the video tries to get a cherry picker to look
inside the LEM at one of the Air and Space museums.
Hilarity ensues. Available on torrents for those who do
torrents. Will not post a link as it is easily found.
I am not decided either way...the arguments on both sides
are very good.
Please try to remain civil, we will not accomplish anything
by name calling and rancor. Remember you are all Earthlings. |
|
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 492590
8/28/2008 11:08 AM | | Re: Myth Busters is doing a show on the Moon Landing. | Quote |
Do you understand the difference between a permanent moonbase and the quick flight of Apollo? Quoting: Anonymous Coward 88145
Do you understand the difference between ingesting Radioactive material & being near it? |
|
G. House
User ID: 492619
8/28/2008 11:08 AM
| | Re: Myth Busters is doing a show on the Moon Landing. | Quote |
Apparently you are thinking about ingesting materials that are still emitting alpha particle which is another matter entirely.
What happened the penny drop half way through writing this?
Another thing.
You keep going on and on and on about how radioactive the moon is.
Well, exactly how radioactive is it?
How many rads were they supposedly exposed to?
For instance what was it times normal background on earth?
Ten times, one hundred times?
Even at one hundred times they were not at terrible risk considering their short stay.
...& after dropping the penny, he looses it again.
INGESTED!!!
I'm not the one going on about how radioactive the moon is... that would be NASA. fact they are going on about it so much that they are sending a probe to find out & designing radiation shields.( if you can believe what they are saying, eh knarly?)
How radioactive is it? Again Nasa doesn't even know. That's why the probe, so if they dont know, but you do, doeas that make you Neil Armstrong?
More likely Alan Bean, who didnt even realise they had gone through the Van Allen belt, when he was asked.
You also mention a nuber of elements present, not the isotopes. What isotopes were present in what quantities?
You really need to bring this forward instead of making blanket statements. Quoting: Anonymous Coward 492590
Maybe I should put it more simply.
You are claiming the moon is too radioactive for the missions to have been carried out.
Yet you don't say at all how radioactive it is to back that up.
Yet as I said beofre it could be a hundred times more radioactive than earth and yet a short stay of 2 days would not do significant damage.
understand?
HOW RADIOACTIVE IS IT?
If you can't answer the question, how can you make the blanket statement it was too radioactive for the missions to take place? |
|
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 492590
8/28/2008 11:14 AM | | Re: Myth Busters is doing a show on the Moon Landing. | Quote |
All you can do now is make the rest of us laugh. Quoting: Duncan Kunz
Oh look, its the "American way". Fuck the facts, just entertain us. |
|
Sireen-reborn
User ID: 491923
8/28/2008 11:21 AM | |
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 492648
8/28/2008 11:34 AM | | Re: Myth Busters is doing a show on the Moon Landing. | Quote |
Alright Barls or any other of you cheesy peckers want to step up to this one.
Lets see you use your awesome powers of science (or logic) to prove to me why the mission couldn't be faked. |
|
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 447638
8/28/2008 11:35 AM | |
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 492650
8/28/2008 11:35 AM | | Re: Myth Busters is doing a show on the Moon Landing. | Quote |
Maybe I should put it more simply.
You are claiming the moon is too radioactive for the missions to have been carried out.
Yet you don't say at all how radioactive it is to back that up.
Yet as I said beofre it could be a hundred times more radioactive than earth and yet a short stay of 2 days would not do significant damage.
understand?
HOW RADIOACTIVE IS IT?
If you can't answer the question, how can you make the blanket statement it was too radioactive for the missions to take place? Quoting: G. House
Maybe you should read.
I'm not claiming anything, just repeating what Nasa is saying, that they are concerned enough about radioactivity on the moon, that they are sending a probe to find out & paying money to others to build shields for space flight!
I'm just wondering why all this is necessary if Apollo was such a success? The answer is either a) Apollo was a fake crock of shit b) Apollo is real & that on returning to the moon it will take a lot longer than it did before ( I'm guessing there will be a speed limiter on new spacecraft like there used to be on my Audi) why else would space.com report that Nasa is spending money on this shield?
You are only making the "blanket" statement that it wasn't dangerous radioactivity wise, based on the knowledge that Nasa did go to the moon & the astro's returned safely. You cant tell me how radioactive it is any more than Nasa can. |
|
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 492650
8/28/2008 11:38 AM | | Re: Myth Busters is doing a show on the Moon Landing. | Quote |
So what was the final verdict? <not that I should have to ask> Quoting: Sireen-reborn
ATM you cant prove it either way. But this new probe has a camera that is at the correct resolution to see the lander sites, apparently.... so expect some fake photography in the very near future. |
|
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 492648
8/28/2008 11:48 AM | | Re: Myth Busters is doing a show on the Moon Landing. | Quote |
c'mon Kunz, g house, one of you chicken sh!ts aught to be able to tell me why it would be so impossible to fake a mission to the moon. |
|
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 492482
8/28/2008 11:56 AM | | Re: Myth Busters is doing a show on the Moon Landing. | Quote |
So what was the final verdict? <not that I should have to ask>
ATM you cant prove it either way. But this new probe has a camera that is at the correct resolution to see the lander sites, apparently.... so expect some fake photography in the very near future. Quoting: Anonymous Coward 492650
Not true. NASA just released their HD caps of the earth from the moon in response to these, showing the earth. The earth is 4X larger than the moon, and so should look 4X larger than what we see the moon as, yet, in the moon landing photos the earth is small, too small to be real.
4X size
[link to www.arcadiastreet.com]
small earth
[link to www.aulis.com]
[link to www.aulis.com]
some odd moon caps
[link to www.aulis.com]
[link to www.aulis.com]
Maybe some member will post them in the open for all to see.
It has never been debunked because we never went to the moon. There wasn't enough fuel to land and takeoff, the technology didn't exist, either. |
|
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 492658
8/28/2008 11:57 AM | | Re: Myth Busters is doing a show on the Moon Landing. | Quote |
we need to get punisher on this thread to make it really entertaining |
|
| Page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13 |
|
