Moon Landings

[Park Life 71]

@ the synchronised periods among posters in this thread. Mint.

 

As I said earlier. Apollo 13 is the ONLY non-fiction space movie to make any significant money. Even that was a relatively small budget film for 1995 ($50m compared to $60m on Under Seige 2, $100m on Batman and $175m Waterworld). Interested to hear why that can be dismissed so easily as a reason that apollo movies don't receive more investment Chez?

 

Wouldn't dismiss the dramatic reasons so easily either tbh, though I don't think they are primary. It all went wrong on the Apollo 13 mission and NASA defied the odds to bring home the endangered astronauts, loads of drama top play with there. While Apollo 11 was arguably our greatest achievement, it went swimmingly. If you add drama to it that wasn't there you'll get hammered, but if you stick to the facts, it's pretty dry, much more effective as documentary than drama. The reality is greater than any fictionalised version could be.

 

There have been a couple of Apollo 11 movies though, TV versions only, sub-par as you'd expect...

 

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0115560/

 

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1251357/

 

If it was so easy and cushty to do it in the 60's why has no fucker been back? Shuld be a doddle now with or all the high tech..cogh* stuff...

[Happy Face 29]

If it was such an important race, and both countries knew it was a hiding to nothing, why didn't the Russians just fake it sooner than the US did? They had 8 years.

[Park Life 71]

I'm sure (if true) Apollo 11 will have loads to offer. The sheer drama of landing on the moon, seeing earth etc etc should be enough on it's own however I'm sure there will be lots of real life moments in space, at mission control and with families to bulk it up.

 

There's always drama in every historical event that can be used be that JFK, Nixon etc etc.

 

I'm going to tweet Spielberg and get him on the case.

 

Spudberg knows it was faked.

[Happy Face 29]

I'm sure (if true) Apollo 11 will have loads to offer. The sheer drama of landing on the moon, seeing earth etc etc should be enough on it's own however I'm sure there will be lots of real life moments in space, at mission control and with families to bulk it up.

 

There's always drama in every historical event that can be used be that JFK, Nixon etc etc.

 

I'm going to tweet Spielberg and get him on the case.

 

Commit to putting down $100m yourself and he might reply.

[Park Life 71]

If it was such an important race, and both countries knew it was a hiding to nothing, why didn't the Russians just fake it sooner than the US did? They had 8 years.

 

This is Olympic level straw manning right here...

[wolfy 12]

In reply to Fish:

 

I'm not here to shoot anyone down mate and I'm not here to ridicule anyone. Maybe I'm stead fast in my thoughts and take some convincing otherwise, yet it's the same with you. You believe they landed on the moon and won't accept the alternative, that it was all faked and I really have no problem with that, as that is what you believe.

 

The fact is, I'm going to put my points across as to why I don't believe Man went to the moon and my thoughts also extend to not believing some physics laws that may apply on Earth but wouldn't apply in space as far as I'm concerned.

 

park life said that rockets would work better in a vacuum and stated that they would actually work better. I'm simply disputing that, not ignoring his statement.

He's telling me what he believes and I'm telling him what I believe, which I think is what debates are all about.

 

You say that I'm ignorant of everything because I go against the official grain on many subjects, yet, what am I supposed to do?

 

Do I sit here and say, " Oh, I believe they landed on the moon" even though I'm 100% sure in my mind that they didn't?

 

You have accepted the official story and go with it, like millions of others and MANY of those who believe it happened are more patriotic for their country and like to believe that everything the Government do is for the betterment of them, their status and their freedom, which makes them feel proud of any achievement their country makes, Including the so called amazing moon landing feat.

 

I appreciate what Park life is saying about rocket propulsion and his experiment of using a medicine ball whilst sat on an office chair and pushing that medicine ball away from you, forcing you to move backwards.

 

On Earth, you see that experiment work and believe it's got nothing to do with the atmosphere, yet I can see how easy it is to believe that and most people do believe that.

I don't believe it but I don't disbelieve it based on nothing or to be an irritant, I just prefer to look at the simpler method of how stuff works because by using simple logic, things become a bit clearer as opposed to a chalk board full of equations and calculations to try and prove something that simple logic and a small experiment (which anyone can do) can discount.

 

 

A lot of people get dazzled by science and baffled to death with the maths behind it and because of that, they accept what's told, simply because the maths have been made far to outlandish for them to even bother contesting.

 

We can play all day with x=yxz (y) blah blah blah to arrive at an answer that in many cases you can arrive at simply by using simple logic.

 

What I'm saying is, to you...going to the shops is a straight walk with one left turn and there's the shops.

 

If a scientist sends you, it's forward one quarter, take two steps to the side then forward one quarter, then take 4 steps to the opposite side and one step back, then carry on one more quarter.

 

Take a left turn and two steps sideways, one step forward and a further step sideways. Walk forward for the last quarter and you arrive at the shops.

 

That is science.

[Happy Face 29]

If it was so easy and cushty to do it in the 60's why has no fucker been back? Shuld be a doddle now with or all the high tech..cogh* stuff...

 

We went there 6 times. The cost to knowledge enahncement ratio offers dwindling returns ultimately. The notions of a colony or a staging post to further destinations haven't panned out as being particularly plausible. We look beyond the moon now.

 

What reason would you give for a 7th manned visit?

 

EDIT: Even if NASA saw the value in it, ultimately that's a political decision rather than a scientific one anyway.

[Park Life 71]

We went there 6 times. The cost to knowledge enahncement ratio offers dwindling returns ultimately. The notions of a colony or a staging post to further destinations haven't panned out as being particularly plausible. We look beyond the moon now.

 

What reason would you give for a 7th manned visit?

 

Well I'm still waiting for the first one. (From Nasa that is)...

[Happy Face 29]

This is Olympic level straw manning right here...

 

How is that a straw man? Both countries invested billions in being the first to land on the moon and spent almost a decade on doing it. As soon as Russia had a notion that the US were ready to fake it, what reason did they have to allow them to do that?

 

Or are you saying the entire international political discourse over 4 decades after WW2 was fake too?

[Happy Face 29]

Well I'm still waiting for the first one. (From Nasa that is)...

 

Flagging

 

[Happy Face 29]

In reply to Fish:

 

I'm not here to shoot anyone down mate and I'm not here to ridicule anyone. Maybe I'm stead fast in my thoughts and take some convincing otherwise, yet it's the same with you. You believe they landed on the moon and won't accept the alternative, that it was all faked and I really have no problem with that, as that is what you believe.

 

The fact is, I'm going to put my points across as to why I don't believe Man went to the moon and my thoughts also extend to not believing some physics laws that may apply on Earth but wouldn't apply in space as far as I'm concerned.

 

park life said that rockets would work better in a vacuum and stated that they would actually work better. I'm simply disputing that, not ignoring his statement.

He's telling me what he believes and I'm telling him what I believe, which I think is what debates are all about.

 

You say that I'm ignorant of everything because I go against the official grain on many subjects, yet, what am I supposed to do?

 

Do I sit here and say, " Oh, I believe they landed on the moon" even though I'm 100% sure in my mind that they didn't?

 

You have accepted the official story and go with it, like millions of others and MANY of those who believe it happened are more patriotic for their country and like to believe that everything the Government do is for the betterment of them, their status and their freedom, which makes them feel proud of any achievement their country makes, Including the so called amazing moon landing feat.

 

I appreciate what Park life is saying about rocket propulsion and his experiment of using a medicine ball whilst sat on an office chair and pushing that medicine ball away from you, forcing you to move backwards.

 

On Earth, you see that experiment work and believe it's got nothing to do with the atmosphere, yet I can see how easy it is to believe that and most people do believe that.

I don't believe it but I don't disbelieve it based on nothing or to be an irritant, I just prefer to look at the simpler method of how stuff works because by using simple logic, things become a bit clearer as opposed to a chalk board full of equations and calculations to try and prove something that simple logic and a small experiment (which anyone can do) can discount.

 

 

A lot of people get dazzled by science and baffled to death with the maths behind it and because of that, they accept what's told, simply because the maths have been made far to outlandish for them to even bother contesting.

 

We can play all day with x=yxz (y) blah blah blah to arrive at an answer that in many cases you can arrive at simply by using simple logic.

 

What I'm saying is, to you...going to the shops is a straight walk with one left turn and there's the shops.

 

If a scientist sends you, it's forward one quarter, take two steps to the side then forward one quarter, then take 4 steps to the opposite side and one step back, then carry on one more quarter.

 

Take a left turn and two steps sideways, one step forward and a further step sideways. Walk forward for the last quarter and you arrive at the shops.

 

That is science.

 

You understand that the rocket doesn't just appear in space and then begin propulsion towards the moon right?

 

I mean, you get that it is propelled out of the atmosphere of earth and is already moving as it enters the vacuum of space?

[Renton 21983]

'That is science'

 

Science is what makes the modern world around you work, you can't just cherry pick the bits you don't understand and use this lack of understanding as the basis for your own, self admittedly simple, beliefs.

 

Whether you are consciously doing it or not, you're basically saying you have a superior intellect to Gallileo and Newton. Think about how arrogant and absurd that is for a minute.

[Park Life 71]

Flagging

 

 

Distracted by the rowing...

[wolfy 12]

Couple of things. An Apollo conspiracy is much less plausible than the official story on every level. I haven't heard of one fact the conspiracy believer's have made that hasn't been adequately debunked; I've read quite extensively about it. I can see no plausible motive or means of 'getting away with it' either. If the fact that the landers and footprints can now be visualised isn't enough to persuade the doubters, there really is no hope.

 

Secondly, anyone who believes the Universe revolves around the Earth is either monumentally stupid or on a wind up, however polite they are. It's an attack on enlightened thinking and they should get off the Internet and go live in a cave.

It's only monumentally stupid because you have been taught otherwise that's all, like we all were.

We are born and trained to think what we are taught.

[wolfy 12]

If it was such an important race, and both countries knew it was a hiding to nothing, why didn't the Russians just fake it sooner than the US did? They had 8 years.

If Russia had Stanley Kubrick, maybe they would have..

[Park Life 71]

The germans working for Russia and America worked together right from the late 40's onward. Some of the documents make fascinating reading. It's another level tho folks and too tiring to explain to larger lads.

[wolfy 12]

You understand that the rocket doesn't just appear in space and then begin propulsion towards the moon right?

 

I mean, you get that it is propelled out of the atmosphere of earth and is already moving as it enters the vacuum of space?

I'm talking about propulsion supposedly in space, not Earth, so we can discount any propulsion on Earth, just the propulsion in a vacuum.

[Renton 21983]

It's only monumentally stupid because you have been taught otherwise that's all, like we all were.

We are born and trained to think what we are taught.

 

There are simple empirical truths that show your geocentric hypothesis of the Earth isn't possible. You could see for yourself if you wanted.

 

The importance of this discovery cannot be understated either as it kick started our understanding of our place in the Universe and ultimately provided the technology that lets you spout your inanities on the Internet.

[Happy Face 29]

If Russia had Stanley Kubrick, maybe they would have..

 

They had Tarkovsky.

[Park Life 71]

A computer from the future is talking right now to the Pentagon...How does that work?

[Park Life 71]

They had Tarkovsky.

 

My fav dir.

[Happy Face 29]

I'm talking about propulsion supposedly in space, not Earth, so we can discount any propulsion on Earth, just the propulsion in a vacuum.

 

 

Do you believe you get sky telly from a satellite?

[wolfy 12]

'That is science'

 

Science is what makes the modern world around you work, you can't just cherry pick the bits you don't understand and use this lack of understanding as the basis for your own, self admittedly simple, beliefs.

 

Whether you are consciously doing it or not, you're basically saying you have a superior intellect to Gallileo and Newton. Think about how arrogant and absurd that is for a minute.

I don't think I have any more intelligence than anyone else but let's put things into context.

 

Newton, Galileo and any other yesteryear person who theorised on things, did so because they were curious thinkers.

Curious thinkers exists today and so do inventors, yet here is where it differs.

 

In the old times, the thinkers could look at the moon and study the stars and the sky above them and make assumptions on what's doing what, then write it down and submit their findings to people that at best could only listen without having a clue, so this supposed genius is accepted for what he's wrote and revered until someone else comes along and says," oh no, you got this wrong"..it's then up to the powers that be to accept one or the others story as being the right one and as often happens, it's always the one that eventually would fit best.

 

These days, it's drummed into us that one theory is the right theory and to ridicule any other theory put forward because history has already been written and we cannot and will not be allowed to change it, unless the powers that be change it for whenever the time comes that their early science comes back to bite them on the arse.....in other words, they will have a contingency plan, just in case some bright spark blatantly proves them wrong on their teachings.

 

You can be the brightest scientist on the planet and figure out many things that are wrong with science today but how do they submit their thoughts without being ridiculed then losing their jobs and status or worse?

 

We are programmed to follow what we are programmed to follow but there will always be people that question it. The way to cater for these people is to ridicule them and call them weirdo's and nut jobs long enough and loud enough to make them either stop or conform to mass belief.

 

You try telling a kid to go to these new schools that are being built now and say he/she doesn't believe in God....

 

You set any kid an exam with the question," who was the first man to step onto the moon" and all will say Neil Armstrong and will get a tick. If anyone wrote, 'No man has landed on the moon', they will be marked wrong and ridiculed, yet that person, arguably could be the next young genius, yet because of their beliefs, they will probably be rendered a simpleton and end up being taunted because of it..denying them of any chance of achieving their desired aim in life.

 

That's the way it works.

[Kid Dynamite 7169]

Anyone sussed who Wolfy really is yet?

 

[wolfy 12]

Do you believe you get sky telly from a satellite?

Absolutely not.

 

Let's PRETEND satellites are up there for our dear sky telly..What would be their objective?

The simple answer is... they would merely be an object to catch a signal from Earth and rebound it down to another part of Earth from where the sky broadcasting stations are .

That's all their function would be.

 

We do all that perfectly well on Earth with transmitters and various other ways, even bouncing signals from the atmosphere and such.

 

The simple answer is, there are no magical man made chunks of metal whizzing about up- there, unless they are in our atmosphere under propulsion or held up by helium balloons e.t.c. (in my opinion)