Moon Landings

[Lake Bells tits 1]

You have to keep in mind the moon landing is arguably mankinds greatest moment - most people would rather have a firm anchor in the harbours of ignorance rather than travel out on the sea of thought.

 

The Bible is most definately a load of bollocks as well yet noone even bothers trying to pick it apart anymore. People dont want to listen and I recon the US government knows its the same way with the moon landing.

 

In many ways it helped build the country and any critizism just or not is being labelled anti-american or conspiratory - actually pretty much in the same way americans dont really take offense at Michael Moore either, although he more often than not is spot on.

This is because he is so openly anti-american in his views that people simply dont take him seriously anymore.

 

Imagine a politician or someone with an actual career rather than the basement dwellers on various forums...

People would take offense and his professional life would pretty much be over.

[Monkeys Fist 42288]

Because I've already done it.

Now I'm away to bed, but! If you want to put a question to me about anything, one at a time, plus back it up with your reasons as to why what you say is true, then I'm game for it.

Fuck off man!

 

[The Fish 10832]

You have to keep in mind the moon landing is arguably mankinds greatest moment - most people would rather have a firm anchor in the harbours of ignorance rather than travel out on the sea of thought.

 

The Bible is most definately a load of bollocks as well yet noone even bothers trying to pick it apart anymore. People dont want to listen and I recon the US government knows its the same way with the moon landing.

 

In many ways it helped build the country and any critizism just or not is being labelled anti-american or conspiratory - actually pretty much in the same way americans dont really take offense at Michael Moore either, although he more often than not is spot on.

This is because he is so openly anti-american in his views that people simply dont take him seriously anymore.

 

Imagine a politician or someone with an actual career rather than the basement dwellers on various forums...

People would take offense and his professional life would pretty much be over.

Thing is LBT, the volume of evidence that supports the moon landings dwarfs the suppositions of the detractors to such a degree that people like wolfy take that as proof of it's impossibility. The more evidence that is presented, the further into their cave they retreat. You say people would rather 'anchor in the harbour of ignorance than set sail upon the sea of thought' as if it is those who have the evidence are ignorant and those with nothing but irrational conjecture are free-thinkers. This isn't the case. Those with evidence look for more; the photos aren't enough, how about video, video isn't enough how about we put a mirror on the moon so people on the Earth can fire a laser and mark the light's return, that's not enough how about.. and so on.

 

Where as the detractors fold their arms, stomp their feet and return to their one and only position "IT'S FAKE NANANANANANA".

 

Challenge ideas by all means, but do so armed with the ability to comprehend the results your challenges produce.

 

(This is not a reply to Wolfy)

[Christmas Tree 4725]

Fish, careful not to merge the two positions too much.

 

Questioning whether we had the technology to pull it off in the 60's during the cold war, propaganda etc is quite different to the last 60 pages where even satelites today are discounted.

[Gemmill 44658]

Fish: just when I thought I was out..... They pull me back in!

[Renton 21518]

Fish, careful not to merge the two positions too much.

 

Questioning whether we had the technology to pull it off in the 60's during the cold war, propaganda etc is quite different to the last 60 pages where even satelites today are discounted.

 

True enough, denying the existence of the building blocks of matter itself - atoms - is probably the most ridiculous viewpoint I have ever encountered.

 

So re: Apollo CT. do you honestly believe it was a hoax? If so, how many people were in on it and why has no-one spilled? It must have been ongoing for 50 years now and still being perpetuated to this day. The LRO project must involve hundreds of people quite high up. It clearly has photographed the landing sites. To deny Apollo happened means these people are still in on it.

 

I can't get my head round why any balanced person could believe such a cover up is possible. Personally, I think it's an insult to all those involved in mankind's greatest achievement, which is my main motivation to participate in this thread.

[Christmas Tree 4725]

I'm not fully entrenched in either camp tbh. On the day I started the thread it was following a news program about the moon landings in 1969. It then went on to talk about the fantastic technology going in to TRYING to get a little probe to land on Mars.

 

If for a moment you just discount "stuff" you've picked up and taken for granted over the years (as many of us have done with religion), and then think about it logically.

 

JFK promised the world America would do it.

 

Billions had been spent.

 

Wasn't Nixon now running the show.

 

Deadline was fast approaching.

 

Cold war Commie mindset at the time.

 

A massive belief that the USA had to be first.

 

Most of the above sets plausible reasons why they might do it. (even though I have no doubt a conspiracy wouldn't have been the plan from day 1).

 

Now return to our discussions of a few days ago and let's look at the technology available. If we'd never been and today they announced they had the technology to launch a rocket, get a craft to space, undock it, do a 3 point turn, re dock it, fly to the moon, undock, land on the surface, drive a car around, take off, dock again, travel home...,,,,

 

I would be mega impressed.

 

Then for a moment expect to believe we could do all this 50 years ago!

 

Add to this how in the massive breakthroughs since we have never been back.

 

Where I agree it falls down is keeping it stun for so long. But how many really had to be in the loop? A room full of Houston guys sitting at machines that go beep might be easily foolable.

 

And again, the USA mindset of the time and secrets act might have made the few who did know keep stumble.

 

After all they managed to keep Roswell quiet.

[Renton 21518]

I think realistically thousands would have had to have been in on it, and hundreds more today as you'd have to accept the staff (civilian I might add) of the LRO would have to be in on it too. Also astronomers who observed Apollo as it headed to the moon etc.

 

I agree it was an incredible achievement which to some may seem implausible but is it less plausible than the alternative? Really? And had there been any evidence at all to suggest it didn't happen which isn't easily debunkable? Not as far as I know.

 

Getting to Mars is a completely different kettle of fish and the technical difficulties in getting there are several magnitudes higher. It's more than 120 times further away from the moon at its closest point for one thing, and it has a much stronger gravity. Add this to the fact that NASAs income has been slashed since Apollo and it makes sense to me at least why present missions seem so modest in comparison.

[Happy Face 29]

We've been to the moon.

[Christmas Tree 4725]

I think realistically thousands would have had to have been in on it, and hundreds more today as you'd have to accept the staff (civilian I might add) of the LRO would have to be in on it too. Also astronomers who observed Apollo as it headed to the moon etc.

 

I agree it was an incredible achievement which to some may seem implausible but is it less plausible than the alternative? Really? And had there been any evidence at all to suggest it didn't happen which isn't easily debunkable? Not as far as I know.

 

Getting to Mars is a completely different kettle of fish and the technical difficulties in getting there are several magnitudes higher. It's more than 120 times further away from the moon at its closest point for one thing, and it has a much stronger gravity. Add this to the fact that NASAs income has been slashed since Apollo and it makes sense to me at least why present missions seem so modest in comparison.

 

No astronomers saw us go to the moon and no independents have confirmed it either.

[ChezGiven 0]

We've been to the moon.

[ChezGiven 0]

Scientists have for the first time used DNA to encode the contents of a book. At 53,000 words, and including 11 images and a computer program, it is the largest amount of data yet stored artificially using the genetic material. The researchers claim that the cost of DNA coding is dropping so quickly that within five to 10 years it could be cheaper to store information using this method than in conventional digital devices.

 

Deoxyribonucleic acid or DNA – the chemical that stores genetic instructions in almost all known organisms – has an impressive data capacity. One gram can store up to 455bn gigabytes: the contents of more than 100bn DVDs, making it the ultimate in compact storage media.

 

A three-strong team led by Professor George Church of Harvard Medical School has now demonstrated that the technology to store data in DNA, while still slow, is becoming more practical. They report in the journal Science that the 5.27 megabit collection of data they stored is more than 600 times bigger than the largest dataset previously encoded this way.

 

Writing the data to DNA took several days. "This is currently something for archival storage," explained co-author Dr Sriram Kosuri of Harvard's Wyss Institute, "but the timing is continually improving."

 

DNA has numerous advantages over traditional digital storage media. It can be easily copied, and is often still readable after thousands of years in non-ideal conditions. Unlike ever-changing electronic storage formats such as magnetic tape and DVDs, the fundamental techniques required to read and write DNA information are as old as life on Earth.

 

The researchers, who have filed a provisional patent application covering the idea, used off-the-shelf components to demonstrate their technique.

[Renton 21518]

 

 

No astronomers saw us go to the moon and no independents have confirmed it either.

 

On the iPhone so not going to back this up with links, but there is a huge amount of independent evidence. You're good with Google, look it up. The USSR had full surveillance of the missions, for instance. This might not prove a manned mission but do you honestly think a robotic mission was plausible with the computer technology back then. What about the mirrors? What about the rocks that were returned and have been analysed by geologists? 'All in on it?'. Howay man.

[Happy Face 29]

No astronomers saw us go to the moon and no independents have confirmed it either.

 

We've been to the moon

[Happy Face 29]

 

I joined in more for a few pages about 30 pages ago, can't believe it's still going tbh.

[wolfy 12]

I don't understand why people use rocks as evidence. One piece of rock was given to the Dutch as a gift and it turned out to be petrified wood.

Of course, the easy answer out of that is, 'it was switched'

Rocks can be gotten from remote places and mocked up in labs and who would know?

If no one else has been to the moon, who has the expertise to say they are real or not.

[ChezGiven 0]

I don't understand why people use rocks as evidence. One piece of rock was given to the Dutch as a gift and it turned out to be petrified wood.

Of course, the easy answer out of that is, 'it was switched'

Rocks can be gotten from remote places and mocked up in labs and who would know?

If no one else has been to the moon, who has the expertise to say they are real or not.

One of the most profound things i have ever read was that modern genetic science was a reflection that our DNA had become so evolved, it now had the ability to discover itself.

[Renton 21518]

I don't understand why people use rocks as evidence. One piece of rock was given to the Dutch as a gift and it turned out to be petrified wood.

Of course, the easy answer out of that is, 'it was switched'

Rocks can be gotten from remote places and mocked up in labs and who would know?

If no one else has been to the moon, who has the expertise to say they are real or not.

 

I wouldn't expect you to take the expert analysis of geologists on moon rocks as evidence since you don't believe in science basically. It should provide good evidence to people who are more balanced though.

[trophyshy 7083]

One of the most profound things i have ever read was that modern genetic science was a reflection that our DNA had become so evolved, it now had the ability to discover itself.

 

Nice, an extension of the notion that we are the universe experiencing itself subjectively. Even wolfy.

[wolfy 12]

Also people go on about the mirrors left of the moon and the reason they did it was so they could bounce a laser off it to see how far the moon was and yet, they should know how far it is as they landed a so called lander on it didn't they lol

 

Picture the scene.

 

N.A.S.A: Right Neil and Buzz, you're going to the moon and we want you to plant this mirror on it so we can bounce a laser off it so we know the distance to the moon, now off you go, your rockets just been filled up with fuel.

 

Neil: Wooooo, wooooooo, hang on a minute here! what do you mean stick this mirror on the moon to see how far it is...are you telling us , you've put some juice in our motor and are guessing it'll be enough?

 

N.A.S.A: Well, yeah. But it'll be ok lads, we've made some good guesses and we are N.A.S.A aren't we, plus , you lads are brave anyway and that's the least of your worries.

 

Neil: How do you mean like?

 

N.A.S.A: Well, firstly you have to get out of Earth's atmosphere whilst sat in an ICBM only a bit bigger with no steering. You then have to break through the atmosphere at super speed which in reality should burn up the unprotected rocket, then you have to hope all the bits fall off it at the right times, then you are in space.

You then have to travel to moon which has no atmosphere, un-dock from the little command module, head towards moons gravity in your 4 legged lander, then you have to somehow flip the ship so your nozzle is facing the moon and just use your thrusters to somehow land but don't worry about that bit because Eric here will be in the remote control mission room making sure your computer is doing all the necessary work as it's all automatic this lander like Neil and it knows the terrain of this moon like the back of it's cathode tube.

 

 

Neil: Yeah ok but what if we run out of fuel?

 

N.A.S.A: Stop worrying about fuel for God's sake, you will land, trust me and probably with a good few seconds to spare after you've realised the computer is sending you into a crater full of boulders and have to steer it sideways with those little made up RETRO booster aerosols that will sling you to the side even against all that power in that big nozzle on the bottom and you won't tip over either because we have built in a steadying mechanism that fires the little aerosols like crazy when you and buzz are getting flung about and knocking the lander off balance.

 

Neil: Oh ok, well I'm starting to feel a bit better about that now but how do we take off from the moon and will we have enough fuel in the kettle thing?

 

N.A.S.A: Ermmmm, yeah you should do but only if you manage to survive the oven like temperatures of 250 degrees because you don't have a comfy Earth atmosphere on the moon you know Neil but don't panic, you will be wearing a suit and a helmet which we have made white to reflect the heat away from you and we've hoyed a heat exchanger in your back pack which doesn't work but it's about the look and the feel good factor that counts.

 

Neil: So you're saying we will simply die on the moon?

 

N.A.S.A: Don't be daft man, you'll be ok. Oh and don't forget to take loads of pictures with your big chest mounted camera. It's got special film in it that doesn't crinkle up in the intense heat so all your exposures should be lovely.

 

Neil: If we get stuck on the moon is there any chance of rescue?

 

 

N.A.S.A: Of course there is man, this is 1969 and we can do anything we can... and we will even put the year 2000 and onwards to shame. We have loads of those Saturn V rockets in the hangar Neil and we'll just launch one of them to pick you up

 

 

Aye I'm sure they said something like this.

[wolfy 12]

One of the most profound things i have ever read was that modern genetic science was a reflection that our DNA had become so evolved, it now had the ability to discover itself.

Cn you elaborate a little bit on that Chez. Edited August 17, 2012 by wolfy

[wolfy 12]

I wouldn't expect you to take the expert analysis of geologists on moon rocks as evidence since you don't believe in science basically. It should provide good evidence to people who are more balanced though.

How can anyone be an expert on moon rock in 1969?

[Meenzer 15484]

(No reason, I just figured we needed an interval act after 60+ pages)

[Renton 21518]

Cn you elaborate a little bit on that Chez.

 

Why do you need elaboration, is it not clear enough?

 

Next: wolfy is DNA real or not?

[Renton 21518]

How can anyone be an expert on moon rock in 1969?

 

They weren't experts on moonrock in 1969. They were expert geologists though.