Author Topic: Faking the moon landings  (Read 59450 times)

Offline MBDK

  • Earth
  • ***
  • Posts: 237
  • BANNED
Re: Faking the moon landings
« Reply #540 on: August 21, 2019, 12:50:25 AM »
It's just that I also wish we'd, you know, have enough low-cost treatment options so that I could be in therapy for my chronic mental health condition.
Understood, and wish you the best.
"It ain't what they call you, it's what you answer to." - W. C. Fields

"Laugh-a while you can, monkey-boy." - Lord John Whorfin

Offline ka9q

  • Neptune
  • ****
  • Posts: 3010
Re: Faking the moon landings
« Reply #541 on: August 24, 2019, 02:35:18 AM »
Despite being a mad-keen astronomy enthusiast for years, I did not know that Kitt Peak had radio telescopes. I wouldn't have even considered the possibility.
A friend (now retired) ran NASA's VLBI program for many years, and he once (late 1980s?) arranged a tour of Kitt Peak for us when we were having a conference in Tucson. Living in NJ at the time, I always looked forward to visiting Tucson in February. But being an east coaster I kinda forgot about the effect of altitude. When we left Tucson, it was raining. When we reached the site it was snowing -- heavily -- and I'd forgotten to bring a sufficiently heavy coat. Site utility power was off but it was running on propane, which was apparently a routine occurrence. We clambered around the dishes, looking at the feed rooms with their low noise amplifiers and helium refrigerators going "klump klump", occasionally clearing out so the operator could dump the accumulated snow in the dish without dumping us out too.

The "screen room" was where most of the electronics were located in the building. Because they generated radio noise, the room itself had copper mesh in the walls and door to keep that noise from escaping and getting into the antennas. I saw my first hydrogen maser there. It was a rather unassuming small rack of equipment with some lights flashing at what I presumed was exactly 1 Hz.

At that time, each location recorded data on high speed digital tape and shipped them all to a central correlator at Socorro NM, where the radio images were actually processed. Later those became shipments of pallets of hard drives, and I understand that finally they have fiber lines over which they can send data in real time.

This being before GPS, one of the main uses of the VLBI network at that time was, surprisingly enough, measuring the movement of the earth's tectonic plates. (My friend's group at NASA was called "Crustal Dynamics".) They'd all observe some distant, strong radio source in a known celestial location and compute the exact straight-line "baseline" distance (to millimeter accuracy) between the phase centers of each pair of antennas. The first map I ever saw of the annual movements of the plates in the state of California was produced by this network. I think they still determine the precise rotational position of the earth and the locations of the earth's rotational poles (they wander by a few tens of meters, IIRC).
« Last Edit: August 24, 2019, 02:38:42 AM by ka9q »

Offline bknight

  • Neptune
  • ****
  • Posts: 2951
Re: Faking the moon landings
« Reply #542 on: August 24, 2019, 11:46:33 AM »
Is this VLBI(I had to look that one up) capable of predicting earthquakes by studying the past movement of the Earth prior to earthquakes?
Truth needs no defense.  Nobody can take those footsteps I made on the surface of the moon away from me.
Eugene Cernan

Offline ka9q

  • Neptune
  • ****
  • Posts: 3010
Re: Faking the moon landings
« Reply #543 on: August 26, 2019, 05:12:51 AM »
No one (and nothing) can, as yet, predict earthquakes. VLBI, like GPS, can only measure the relative motions of the observing stations on the ground as they move with the crustal plates.

VLBI can in addition measure the precise orientation of the earth's rotational poles relative to the stars and its precise rotational position and angular velocity. Because the earth's rotational angular momentum is known (constant except for what it's slowly losing via tides) this can tell you interesting things about how mass moves within, on and near the earth (e.g., the ocean and atmosphere). I think it has even been able to detect sudden changes after major earthquakes. But it still can't predict them.
 
« Last Edit: August 26, 2019, 05:14:33 AM by ka9q »

Offline bknight

  • Neptune
  • ****
  • Posts: 2951
Re: Faking the moon landings
« Reply #544 on: August 26, 2019, 02:15:25 PM »
I agree that earthquake prediction at the present is not predictable. I guess what I was thinking was measure and study movements prior to an earthquake, this would happen after the earthquake then develop a dB of movements that then would be used to predict future ones.
Truth needs no defense.  Nobody can take those footsteps I made on the surface of the moon away from me.
Eugene Cernan

Offline ka9q

  • Neptune
  • ****
  • Posts: 3010
Re: Faking the moon landings
« Reply #545 on: August 27, 2019, 09:48:09 AM »
I'm sure it's not for a lack of trying that this hasn't been done.

The problem is that while earthquakes are statistically predictable in the long term (there will be more earthquakes along the Pacific/North American plate boundary) they are very chaotic and unpredictable in the short term. Even the aftershocks after a large earthquake can only be predicted statistically, although those statistics do change in known ways.

Offline cambo

  • Venus
  • **
  • Posts: 45
  • BANNED
Re: Faking the moon landings
« Reply #546 on: January 13, 2020, 08:53:48 PM »
I can't at all see anything "ridiculously insane" about this boot print argument. Could you please enlarge on that comment? I would like to understand why you've said that. Perhaps you just don't know enough about it (which is the most common trait of hoax-believers)

The question asked was “How did the regolith produce the famous bootprint if dry sand was used?”

Maybe it’s the original question that’s the confusing part, as it implies that I’m suggesting that dry sand was used in the photo. My claim is that dry sand was used in the film footage, so I’m pretty sure that the question he was asking should have read “How did the regolith produce the famous bootprint if dry sand was used in the film footage?” So to me, it implies that he is under the illusion that the boot print photo had to be taken under the same conditions as the film footage, and therefore disproving the dry sand claim. I’m sorry, but I can’t think of a way to make it any clearer, and if I could, then I suspect my neighbours’ cat would understand. Maybe the gentleman who asked the question could clarify what he meant, as I’m sure that paint should have dried by now.

You see, this is the problem with you people, as you take everything you are told as the gospel truth and therefore no one is allowed to question it, even though there is no real evidence to support these alleged facts. Your arguments are all based on the assumption that your idols would never lie to us, so you only see what you want to see. There are people who swear they have seen the earths curve from a plane, but they only see it because they want to see it, simply because their minds are too gullible and weak to distinguish between reality and fantasy. (I’m still not a flat-earther, but I’m getting there).

You are told that the alleged moon regolith, as you wannabe scientists like to call it, reacts differently than it would on earth, which blinds you to the fact that it reacts in exactly the same way as sand does in an indoor environment on earth. You think a short video segment showing people in Zero G proves that they are in space because you are assured that only 30 seconds max is possible in a Zero G plane. You accept that the moons’ surface is so reflective that we can see a man descending a ladder on the shadow side of the LM, lit up like a Christmas tree, while the picture below shows a rock with its shadow side in total darkness. Did the person taking that photo forget to don his ultra-reflective spacesuit?



You think the moon rocks are genuine because you believe that geologists from around the world have confirmed their authenticity, but they’ve confirmed nothing of the sort. The only people that could possibly vouch for their authenticity are the people directly involved in the alleged collection of the samples. An alleged moon rock doesn’t contain one single property that can’t be found or manufactured on earth, but you still insist that they would be impossible to fake. We are assured that it would be impossible to find or manufacture 850 pounds of moon rock, but you have no proof of this amount of rock and soil actually existing.

You assume that steering a craft in space is easy because you are told so, and you think you have the science to back you up, and there is even one “dude” on here that seems to think a jet aircraft would work in space. People like that should be locked up for their own safety. Let’s take the Trans-lunar injection as an example, because when that rocket engine bursts into life, the sudden jolt would be like inflating a party balloon and releasing it, and that on-board computer coupled with those mechanical gimbals wouldn’t stand a chance of keeping up with the corrections that would be required, and the same goes for the lift-off from the moon. I have now came to the conclusion that if space does in fact exist in the manner we have been educated to believe, then all space flight would be pointless, as controlled navigation would be impossible due to there being no air to stabilize the craft.

You think I’m talking out of my rear end, simply because you believe I lack the intelligence to understand how things work as you perceive them to work, but receiving a higher education and passing your exams, just means that you had a good enough memory to put down on paper all the BS fed to you in class. Intellect isn’t something you learn in class as we are all born with a smidgen of intellect, which grows as we get older and wiser, but sadly for some, this intellect is suppressed and not allowed to grow, probably due to a sheltered upbringing and a lack of real life experiences.

So listen carefully, it was 1969, do you understand? Ok I’ll say it again, it was 1969, you children have been conned. You are simply too young to understand, as you were born after the indoctrination started back in the sixties, and you have no first-hand experience of those events. Anyone my age who believes in the moon landings must have been too high on LSD to take any notice and the rest of you have been conditioned to think in a way that ignores logic. You have the right to have an opinion, but until you come up with some hard evidence to back up your theories, then that’s all you have, an opinion and nothing more.

Edit: I wrote the above comment some months back, but never got around to posting it as I had grew bored arguing with a bunch of fools who’s only defence is blind faith. Since then however it suddenly hit me that I myself were only half awake, as I now realise the full extent of this “global” deception, so I’ll leave you to live out this ridiculous fantasy that you call reality. We will all go to our graves, not knowing the true reason for our existence, but at least I won’t go to my grave as dumb as the day I was born. In case I don’t see ya, good afternoon, good evening and goodnight!


Offline AtomicDog

  • Mars
  • ***
  • Posts: 368
Re: Faking the moon landings
« Reply #547 on: January 13, 2020, 10:10:22 PM »
Ignorant of photography, ignorant of physics, ignorant of geology, ignorant of history, proud of his ignorance, and no desire to learn.

Cambo, if you desire to make this flounce permanent, you won't be missed.
"There is no belief, however foolish, that will not gather its faithful adherents who will defend it to the death." - Isaac Asimov

Offline JayUtah

  • Neptune
  • ****
  • Posts: 3438
    • Clavius
Re: Faking the moon landings
« Reply #548 on: January 13, 2020, 10:35:12 PM »
...until you come up with some hard evidence to back up your theories, then that’s all you have, an opinion and nothing more.

The hard evidence is what you're frantically trying to explain away.  And your "explanations" are vacuous expressions of ignorant disbelief.  I'm not a "wannabe scientist."  I've been a professional aerospace engineer for nearly 30 years.  I don't understand Apollo because I've been "told" things.  I understand it because I live its legacy every day.
"Facts are stubborn things." --John Adams

Offline Count Zero

  • Mars
  • ***
  • Posts: 361
  • Pad 39A July 14,1969
Re: Faking the moon landings
« Reply #549 on: January 13, 2020, 11:00:30 PM »
"What makes one step a giant leap is all the steps before."

Offline Obviousman

  • Jupiter
  • ***
  • Posts: 568
Re: Faking the moon landings
« Reply #550 on: January 13, 2020, 11:19:16 PM »

Offline VQ

  • Earth
  • ***
  • Posts: 146
Re: Faking the moon landings
« Reply #551 on: January 14, 2020, 02:49:41 AM »
I have now came to the conclusion that if space does in fact exist in the manner we have been educated to believe, then all space flight would be pointless, as controlled navigation would be impossible due to there being no air to stabilize the craft.

And you alone were smart enough to figure it out. Yup.

Quote
You think I’m talking out of my rear end, simply because you believe I lack the intelligence to understand how things work as you perceive them to work, but receiving a higher education and passing your exams, just means that you had a good enough memory to put down on paper all the BS fed to you in class.

Testing memorization sounds more reminiscent of grade school than higher ed to me.

Offline smartcooky

  • Uranus
  • ****
  • Posts: 1802
Re: Faking the moon landings
« Reply #552 on: January 14, 2020, 04:10:40 AM »
<irrelevant ignorance snipped>

Edit: I wrote the above comment some months back, but never got around to posting it as I had grew bored arguing with a bunch of fools who’s only defence is blind faith. Since then however it suddenly hit me that I myself were only half awake, as I now realise the full extent of this “global” deception, so I’ll leave you to live out this ridiculous fantasy that you call reality. We will all go to our graves, not knowing the true reason for our existence, but at least I won’t go to my grave as dumb as the day I was born. In case I don’t see ya, good afternoon, good evening and goodnight!

Projection; the last resort of conspiracy theorists everywhere.

Good night and good riddance. I hope your flounce is permanent!
► What you can assert without evidence, I can dismiss without evidence
► When you argue with idiots you risk being dragged down to their level and beaten with experience.
► Conspiracism is a shortcut to the illusion of erudition

Offline Bryanpoprobson

  • Jupiter
  • ***
  • Posts: 759
  • Another Clown
Re: Faking the moon landings
« Reply #553 on: January 14, 2020, 06:31:02 AM »
I always try to produce rational arguments with conspiracy theorist, but sometimes you just have to laugh at them. This is one of those occasions.   
"Wise men speak because they have something to say!" "Fools speak, because they have to say something!" (Plato)

Offline TippedIceberg

  • Mercury
  • *
  • Posts: 13
Re: Faking the moon landings
« Reply #554 on: January 14, 2020, 07:58:49 AM »
the picture below shows a rock with its shadow side in total darkness. Did the person taking that photo forget to don his ultra-reflective spacesuit?



AS17-145-22163 - High resolution version shows the rock is illuminated, likely by the reflective spacesuit.