The Moon Mission
Discussion
https://youtu.be/GZegwJVC_Pc?si=Z_8rkFyvhqqoMKCB
By coincidence I just watched this video. Something tells me that several on here would find Terrence Howard’s idea “revolutionary” and “not to be dismissed”…
By coincidence I just watched this video. Something tells me that several on here would find Terrence Howard’s idea “revolutionary” and “not to be dismissed”…
Skeptisk said:
https://youtu.be/GZegwJVC_Pc?si=Z_8rkFyvhqqoMKCB
By coincidence I just watched this video. Something tells me that several on here would find Terrence Howard’s idea “revolutionary” and “not to be dismissed”…
Terence is a legend. By coincidence I just watched this video. Something tells me that several on here would find Terrence Howard’s idea “revolutionary” and “not to be dismissed”…
He's created his own logical reasoning language, which proves 1x1 = 2!
Simir said:
Thanks Eric, I greatly appreciate you taking the time to explain this.
I can believe that it's probably a trick of the camera given the low resolution. I thought there may be a more intriguing answer given the flag is still and then waves after the astronaut passes by - perhaps something I didn't understand about vibrations in space as the footage from 2:36 from 2:39 is fascinating and I can't stop watching it.
Newton said an object stays at rest unless it is acted on by a force.I can believe that it's probably a trick of the camera given the low resolution. I thought there may be a more intriguing answer given the flag is still and then waves after the astronaut passes by - perhaps something I didn't understand about vibrations in space as the footage from 2:36 from 2:39 is fascinating and I can't stop watching it.
The surface of the moon is effectively almost pure vacuum - as ably demonstrated by David Scott in the video I posted the link too. So the only natural forces acting on any material sitting on the surface would be -
gravitational
electromagnetic
solar wind particles
micrometeorite impacts
Gravity is the most important one of these - at least of the ones that we can see in action in real time.
The flag would move under gravity. Say if the wire support was removed. It would immediately fall limply to hang draped alongside the flag staff. It would wave about for a couple of seconds until the motion damped out.
It MIGHT move if acted on by some sort of electromagnetic field, especially if it had picked up some sort of a static charge. The flags were made of nylon so they could very well pick up a charge. However, the moon has no strong magnetic field like the earth's (the moons core is not as magnetised as the earth's is due to it being smaller, cooler and the moon not rotating at the speed the earth does) so movement due to some magnetic interaction is low.
The solar wind (high velocity particles shooting out from the sun) impacts directly on the lunar surface. This has noticeable effects over long periods of time but the particles exert a very low force due to their very low mass. They are therefore not strong enough to cause a heavy (in comparison) flag to move.
Over the 4.5 billion year history of the moon it has been bombarded by meteorites ranging in size from almost planetary size to microscopic. The craters of the moon and the powdery texture of the upper two inches of the surface (the regolith) are direct evidence of this constant and long history of bombardment. There is a remote chance that the flag might have been hit by a micrometeorite just at the moment it was in camera view - but I doubt it.
On a bit of a side note, when humans manage to visit the old Apollo sites - which I fully expect to happen in the next 10 to 15 years - the state of the flags will be of extreme interest to many. The flags will have been on the moon over 60 years by then and they will have deteriorated to a large extent - mainly due to the effects of the extremely strong sunlight and massive temperature changes and I expect some, if not all, of the flags will exhibit some damage due to micrometeorite impacts.
We do know for sure that the Apollo 11 flag is lying face down in the dust because it was seen to fall over due to the exhaust blast from the Lunar Module's ascent engine during lift off.
Let's hope they stay that way 
I love discussing the Apollo programme and would be willing to talk all day about it. I think it is one of the most amazing undertakings ever performed by mankind and will be a stand out event in human history for millennia, in my opinion.
I followed the events in real time as I was old enough back then to read and understand what they were doing and how they were doing it and, since then, of course, I've learned so much more about the behind the scenes aspects of the programme - especially the politics and decision making processes - as well as the engineering and science involved.
I love discussing the Apollo programme and would be willing to talk all day about it. I think it is one of the most amazing undertakings ever performed by mankind and will be a stand out event in human history for millennia, in my opinion.
I followed the events in real time as I was old enough back then to read and understand what they were doing and how they were doing it and, since then, of course, I've learned so much more about the behind the scenes aspects of the programme - especially the politics and decision making processes - as well as the engineering and science involved.
smn159 said:
It's the lack of an ability to weigh evidence and to consider the validity of sources and a need for self importance (look at me, 'they' are keeping stuff from you but I'm special and can see through it). It absolutely is a lack of basic intelligence. I suspect that the posters pushing this nonsense are no surprise to anyone given their contributions elsewhere.
Oh, and there are not 'both sides' to a discussion on whether the Earth is flat or the Moon landings were faked FFS
There absolutely are two sides, the correct one and incorrect one. Oh, and there are not 'both sides' to a discussion on whether the Earth is flat or the Moon landings were faked FFS
It is not a lack of intelligence, it is fundamentally a trust issue. I have heard some very complex and intricate ideas shared to question these things which are clearly the work of much thought, but they remain fundamentally incorrect. Put it this way, it would be extremely difficult to be convincing in suggesting that the earth is flat when all the evidence is conclusive that is is not. To even come up with the beginnings of a cogent hypothesis is not easy, so they cannot be stupid. Very misguided and misusing their intelligence yes, but not stupid.
Calling someone an idiot is not persuasive at all, neither is saying that someone is a zealot or indoctrinated. It's what people do when they cannot actually explain what they know.
Form polite, calm and cogent arguments, without emotion, and we may all get somewhere.
Eric Mc said:
Let's hope they stay that way
I love discussing the Apollo programme and would be willing to talk all day about it. I think it is one of the most amazing undertakings ever performed by mankind and will be a stand out event in human history for millennia, in my opinion.
I followed the events in real time as I was old enough back then to read and understand what they were doing and how they were doing it and, since then, of course, I've learned so much more about the behind the scenes aspects of the programme - especially the politics and decision making processes - as well as the engineering and science involved.
I feel the same way, although it was before my time. I see the sort of almost proud ignorance that we’ve seen displayed here as enormously disrespectful. I love discussing the Apollo programme and would be willing to talk all day about it. I think it is one of the most amazing undertakings ever performed by mankind and will be a stand out event in human history for millennia, in my opinion.
I followed the events in real time as I was old enough back then to read and understand what they were doing and how they were doing it and, since then, of course, I've learned so much more about the behind the scenes aspects of the programme - especially the politics and decision making processes - as well as the engineering and science involved.
I’d really like to thank Eric sincerely for all his posts on this - fascinating stuff.
Like I said, I was a little bit worse-the-wear. Bored. And I needed some entertainment and reading material.
Do I think it actually happened?
Come on gents? I’m not that stupid.FFS.
Couple of things that I’d like to say: my friend that everyone doubts. And I’m not going to reveal.
I’d say he’s on the spectrum somewhat.There is, a very fine line between a genius - and a madman.
Lastly, there are some very nasty posters on here. Particularly some of the newer ones.
I thought NP&E could be fairly toxic. This one has really opened my eyes.
Like I said, I was a little bit worse-the-wear. Bored. And I needed some entertainment and reading material.
Do I think it actually happened?
Come on gents? I’m not that stupid.FFS.
Couple of things that I’d like to say: my friend that everyone doubts. And I’m not going to reveal.
I’d say he’s on the spectrum somewhat.There is, a very fine line between a genius - and a madman.
Lastly, there are some very nasty posters on here. Particularly some of the newer ones.
I thought NP&E could be fairly toxic. This one has really opened my eyes.
We are in the "Science" forum. Most people who post here have low tolerance for ignorance and stupidity.
So, once the topic got switched to here (which I admit might have been my fault), an antagonistic reaction should not have been too surprising.
Trying to pull down what is, in my view, one of mankind's greatest feats, is insulting to all those who worked on the project - and particularly to those who died in trying to make it happen.
On the other hand, if you want a sensible discussion on Apollo and are keen to learn about the multifarious aspects of it, then by all means ask away - as long as the questions are sensible and borne out of a willingness to learn about the programme and how it achieved its aims - and not out of some sort of weird and eccentric standpoint that thinks it never really happened.
I have no time for that type of person, to be honest. Intellectually, they are the lowest of the low.
So, once the topic got switched to here (which I admit might have been my fault), an antagonistic reaction should not have been too surprising.
Trying to pull down what is, in my view, one of mankind's greatest feats, is insulting to all those who worked on the project - and particularly to those who died in trying to make it happen.
On the other hand, if you want a sensible discussion on Apollo and are keen to learn about the multifarious aspects of it, then by all means ask away - as long as the questions are sensible and borne out of a willingness to learn about the programme and how it achieved its aims - and not out of some sort of weird and eccentric standpoint that thinks it never really happened.
I have no time for that type of person, to be honest. Intellectually, they are the lowest of the low.
Jim H said:
I’d really like to thank Eric sincerely for all his posts on this - fascinating stuff.
Like I said, I was a little bit worse-the-wear. Bored. And I needed some entertainment and reading material.
Do I think it actually happened?
Come on gents? I’m not that stupid.FFS.
Couple of things that I’d like to say: my friend that everyone doubts. And I’m not going to reveal.
I’d say he’s on the spectrum somewhat.There is, a very fine line between a genius - and a madman.
Lastly, there are some very nasty posters on here. Particularly some of the newer ones.
I thought NP&E could be fairly toxic. This one has really opened my eyes.
He maybe on the spectrum but he's not a physicist. Like I said, I was a little bit worse-the-wear. Bored. And I needed some entertainment and reading material.
Do I think it actually happened?
Come on gents? I’m not that stupid.FFS.
Couple of things that I’d like to say: my friend that everyone doubts. And I’m not going to reveal.
I’d say he’s on the spectrum somewhat.There is, a very fine line between a genius - and a madman.
Lastly, there are some very nasty posters on here. Particularly some of the newer ones.
I thought NP&E could be fairly toxic. This one has really opened my eyes.
MikeM6 said:
There absolutely are two sides, the correct one and incorrect one.
It is not a lack of intelligence, it is fundamentally a trust issue. I have heard some very complex and intricate ideas shared to question these things which are clearly the work of much thought, but they remain fundamentally incorrect. Put it this way, it would be extremely difficult to be convincing in suggesting that the earth is flat when all the evidence is conclusive that is is not. To even come up with the beginnings of a cogent hypothesis is not easy, so they cannot be stupid. Very misguided and misusing their intelligence yes, but not stupid.
Calling someone an idiot is not persuasive at all, neither is saying that someone is a zealot or indoctrinated. It's what people do when they cannot actually explain what they know.
Form polite, calm and cogent arguments, without emotion, and we may all get somewhere.
If your definition of intelligence includes an ability to arrive at evidence based conclusions, including evaluating the validity of the sources that you're using, then some posters are clearly very lacking.It is not a lack of intelligence, it is fundamentally a trust issue. I have heard some very complex and intricate ideas shared to question these things which are clearly the work of much thought, but they remain fundamentally incorrect. Put it this way, it would be extremely difficult to be convincing in suggesting that the earth is flat when all the evidence is conclusive that is is not. To even come up with the beginnings of a cogent hypothesis is not easy, so they cannot be stupid. Very misguided and misusing their intelligence yes, but not stupid.
Calling someone an idiot is not persuasive at all, neither is saying that someone is a zealot or indoctrinated. It's what people do when they cannot actually explain what they know.
Form polite, calm and cogent arguments, without emotion, and we may all get somewhere.
Jumping through hoops to try and justify irrational beliefs is not a sign of a great intellect iIMO
TGCOTF-dewey said:
Skeptisk said:
https://youtu.be/GZegwJVC_Pc?si=Z_8rkFyvhqqoMKCB
By coincidence I just watched this video. Something tells me that several on here would find Terrence Howard’s idea “revolutionary” and “not to be dismissed”…
Terence is a legend. By coincidence I just watched this video. Something tells me that several on here would find Terrence Howard’s idea “revolutionary” and “not to be dismissed”…
He's created his own logical reasoning language, which proves 1x1 = 2!
That bloke is a nutter !
Someone who disregards basic fundamental mistakes and goes on to build a whole theory, ignoring those who try to point out the obvious flaws in their grand theory
Sounds familiar...
Eric Mc said:
I think it is one of the most amazing undertakings ever performed by mankind and will be a stand out event in human history for millennia, in my opinion.
I agree wholeheartedly. As a kid, watching Apollo missions take off was mesmerising (I can't imagine how it must have been for those who were there)its only near contemporary would be the Manhattan Project which while having some...err... downsides, has is suppose led to nuclear power.
Jim H said:
Hi Eric. I hope you are ok.
I posted in the lounge originally ( as you know) Because I wasn’t being entirely serious.I’d never insult anyone in the science section.
I'm fine.I posted in the lounge originally ( as you know) Because I wasn’t being entirely serious.I’d never insult anyone in the science section.
I was thinking that if you were after sensible answers to sensible questions, the Science Forum would be the best place. The problem is that the loons followed the topic over here.
If you genuinely want to learn about Apollo, this is the right place to be.
I have given a number of public talks on various aspects of Apollo (and the related parallel; programmes (Mercury, Gemini, Lunar Orbiter, Lunar Surveyor) so, even if I say so myself, I have a pretty good understanding and background knowledge of most aspects of the American space programme from 1958 (the formation of NASA) right through to today.
Jim H said:
I’d really like to thank Eric sincerely for all his posts on this - fascinating stuff.
Like I said, I was a little bit worse-the-wear. Bored. And I needed some entertainment and reading material.
Do I think it actually happened?
Come on gents? I’m not that stupid.FFS.
Couple of things that I’d like to say: my friend that everyone doubts. And I’m not going to reveal.
I’d say he’s on the spectrum somewhat.There is, a very fine line between a genius - and a madman.
Lastly, there are some very nasty posters on here. Particularly some of the newer ones.
I thought NP&E could be fairly toxic. This one has really opened my eyes.
We forgive you.Like I said, I was a little bit worse-the-wear. Bored. And I needed some entertainment and reading material.
Do I think it actually happened?
Come on gents? I’m not that stupid.FFS.
Couple of things that I’d like to say: my friend that everyone doubts. And I’m not going to reveal.
I’d say he’s on the spectrum somewhat.There is, a very fine line between a genius - and a madman.
Lastly, there are some very nasty posters on here. Particularly some of the newer ones.
I thought NP&E could be fairly toxic. This one has really opened my eyes.
I've said before on PH that my dad was very closely involved in a few Apollo missions, including Apollo 11. He was an arse, but he wasn't a mug, and if he had any suspicion it was faked, he'd have told me.
I've seen or heard nothing in the intervening 55 years to make me doubt the Moon landings happened, and this thread just shows what it takes to be a disbeliever.
I've seen or heard nothing in the intervening 55 years to make me doubt the Moon landings happened, and this thread just shows what it takes to be a disbeliever.
I think, as punishment, Jim H needs to stand in the corner and learn, off by heart, the crew names of all the Apollo moon missions i.e.
Apollo 8,10,11,12,13,14,15,16 and 17.
I'll cut him a break by not forcing him to learn the names of the crews who didn't fly to the moon i.e. -
Apollo 7 - Schirra, Cunningham, Eisle
Apollo 9 - Scott, Schweickart, McDivitt
(I'm ignoring Skylab and ASTP).
Apollo 8,10,11,12,13,14,15,16 and 17.
I'll cut him a break by not forcing him to learn the names of the crews who didn't fly to the moon i.e. -
Apollo 7 - Schirra, Cunningham, Eisle
Apollo 9 - Scott, Schweickart, McDivitt
(I'm ignoring Skylab and ASTP).
MikeM6 said:
smn159 said:
It's the lack of an ability to weigh evidence and to consider the validity of sources and a need for self importance (look at me, 'they' are keeping stuff from you but I'm special and can see through it). It absolutely is a lack of basic intelligence. I suspect that the posters pushing this nonsense are no surprise to anyone given their contributions elsewhere.
Oh, and there are not 'both sides' to a discussion on whether the Earth is flat or the Moon landings were faked FFS
There absolutely are two sides, the correct one and incorrect one. Oh, and there are not 'both sides' to a discussion on whether the Earth is flat or the Moon landings were faked FFS
It is not a lack of intelligence, it is fundamentally a trust issue. I have heard some very complex and intricate ideas shared to question these things which are clearly the work of much thought, but they remain fundamentally incorrect. Put it this way, it would be extremely difficult to be convincing in suggesting that the earth is flat when all the evidence is conclusive that is is not. To even come up with the beginnings of a cogent hypothesis is not easy, so they cannot be stupid. Very misguided and misusing their intelligence yes, but not stupid.
Calling someone an idiot is not persuasive at all, neither is saying that someone is a zealot or indoctrinated. It's what people do when they cannot actually explain what they know.
Form polite, calm and cogent arguments, without emotion, and we may all get somewhere.
There are lots of areas of science that are unresolved and where existing theories seem lacking and where people have come up with alternatives. However there is a clear distinction to be made between people who aren’t expert in the field and don’t (and aren’t clever enough) to understand the current models, who are making proposals and scientists who fully understand the current best models but suggest something radically different. The latter may not be right but they deserve to be listened to, unlike the former.
People who raise these types of queries around the moon landings and hold such beliefs are almost always very ignorant. Specifically ignorant about the subject they are criticising. You don’t tend to find people like Eric, with an almost encyclopaedic knowledge of the US space program, raising such doubts.
Gassing Station | Science! | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff