The Moon Mission
Discussion
Jim H said:
Steady on chap.
I’m talking about actual Manned vehicles.
The Hubble repair was about at the limit of what was possible for the Shuttle.
This is what you saidI’m talking about actual Manned vehicles.
The Hubble repair was about at the limit of what was possible for the Shuttle.
Jim H said:
Nothing has been out of near earth orbit for decades.
Actually nothing has been that far ever!
Actually nothing has been that far ever!
Edited by 98elise on Saturday 1st June 14:50
98elise said:
OddCat said:
fatbutt said:
Mr E said:
OddCat said:
I'm half hoping it comes to light that the whole thing WAS faked just to see the reactions of the type of people who are posting on here.
“The type of people”?
Governments lie. Scientists get things wrong. Other than the absolute fundamentals of physics and chemistry which, nothing is certain.
It isn't beyond all possibility that the landing of men on the moon in the 1960's was faked. That isn't science. It is an event. No one is saying it wasn't possible to do it. But the odds, on so many levels, were against it. Otherwise no one would have been amazed that they did it.
Government lies are now subject to more exposure on the internet. They can't control the narrative so easily now. AI will further expose lies because it uses logic and isn't so susceptible to influence.
People who believe things tend to get very excited when someone else doesn't. Not sure why really. Bit like the covid vaccines. Those who didn't believe they were safe and effective were vilified. Normally reasonable people became rabid towards those who declined. Almost like no position other than the government narrative was acceptable.
Oh well. Not to worry. The truth will out.
Jim H said:
98elise said:
Jim H said:
Mr E said:
Jim H said:
But the whole Stanley Kubrick association with this is extremely interesting.
If Kubrick was filming it he’d insist on actually going to get the lighting right.
Guys, I really don’t want to upset anyone on here.
I really don’t.
I didn’t post without thinking. I just thought it was a valid talking point with some very intelligent people. And would provoke debate.
With our current understanding of technology.
Bloody hell I’ve been called out on this.
Sir Eric. (MC)
I will follow your advice.
He either doesn't exist, isn't a physicist, or is pulling your leg.
If he exists show him this thread and you can write his feedback.
OddCat said:
'The science' used to say that the sun revolved around the earth. And to say otherwise was heresy.
Governments lie. Scientists get things wrong. Other than the absolute fundamentals of physics and chemistry which, nothing is certain.
It isn't beyond all possibility that the landing of men on the moon in the 1960's was faked. That isn't science. It is an event. No one is saying it wasn't possible to do it. But the odds, on so many levels, were against it. Otherwise no one would have been amazed that they did it.
Government lies are now subject to more exposure on the internet. They can't control the narrative so easily now. AI will further expose lies because it uses logic and isn't so susceptible to influence.
People who believe things tend to get very excited when someone else doesn't. Not sure why really. Bit like the covid vaccines. Those who didn't believe they were safe and effective were vilified. Normally reasonable people became rabid towards those who declined. Almost like no position other than the government narrative was acceptable.
Oh well. Not to worry. The truth will out.
FFS.Governments lie. Scientists get things wrong. Other than the absolute fundamentals of physics and chemistry which, nothing is certain.
It isn't beyond all possibility that the landing of men on the moon in the 1960's was faked. That isn't science. It is an event. No one is saying it wasn't possible to do it. But the odds, on so many levels, were against it. Otherwise no one would have been amazed that they did it.
Government lies are now subject to more exposure on the internet. They can't control the narrative so easily now. AI will further expose lies because it uses logic and isn't so susceptible to influence.
People who believe things tend to get very excited when someone else doesn't. Not sure why really. Bit like the covid vaccines. Those who didn't believe they were safe and effective were vilified. Normally reasonable people became rabid towards those who declined. Almost like no position other than the government narrative was acceptable.
Oh well. Not to worry. The truth will out.
The Russians monitored the NASA missions.
They would have delighted in telling the world that the US faked it after the humiliation of the Cuban Missile Crisis.
The only way that would not have happened is if the USSR & NATO faked the entire Cold War to keep the people subservient & consuming like sheep.
Every single Western attempt at a conspiracy has been outed from Guatemala to MK-Ultra.
Edited by Stick Legs on Saturday 1st June 12:23
OddCat said:
No one is saying it wasn't possible to do it. But the odds, on so many levels, were against it.
Jim's friend saying its wasn't possible...Jim H said:
I had a good chat with a very accomplished physicist- and extremely wealthy guy because of.
He’d been working out, you actually need to know GPS on the moon.
You can kinda of work out vertical speed. But horizontal - no chance.
He’d been working out, you actually need to know GPS on the moon.
You can kinda of work out vertical speed. But horizontal - no chance.
I've concluded that there's little point trying to convince conspiracy theorists that they're wrong, as they have a worldview that isn't built on facts, logic, evidence and reasoning. They don't respect science and the scientific method, so they won't be convinced or swayed by the use of these in trying to persuade them.
Better just to sideline/ignore them. There's no poverty like ignorance.
Better just to sideline/ignore them. There's no poverty like ignorance.
Jim H said:
TeaNoSugar said:
Jim H said:
Have we had the wool pulled over our eyes?
I had a good chat with a very accomplished physicist- and extremely wealthy guy because of.
He’d been working out, you actually need to know GPS on the moon.
You can kinda of work out vertical speed. But horizontal - no chance.
Phones back then were like of cogs and ratchets. Nothing like the tech available now.
Nothing has been out of near earth orbit for decades.
Actually nothing has been that far ever!
To go that far ? I’m sorry.
The wisdom of Pistonheads.
Convince me.
What a ridiculous post. Nothings been out of near-earth orbit for decades?I had a good chat with a very accomplished physicist- and extremely wealthy guy because of.
He’d been working out, you actually need to know GPS on the moon.
You can kinda of work out vertical speed. But horizontal - no chance.
Phones back then were like of cogs and ratchets. Nothing like the tech available now.
Nothing has been out of near earth orbit for decades.
Actually nothing has been that far ever!
To go that far ? I’m sorry.
The wisdom of Pistonheads.
Convince me.
Why not spend 1 minute googling like I did.
1st result, Wikipedia -
List of solar system probes: hundreds in the last 30 years
Missions to Mars: there’ve been 20 mars orbiters or landers in the last 30 years.
What about the space telescopes? Hubble and James Webb telescopes.
I’m talking about actual Manned vehicles.
The Hubble repair was about at the limit of what was possible for the Shuttle.
How did they land the Retroreflectors on the moon if they couldn’t navigate there?
Jim H said:
98elise said:
Jim H said:
Mr E said:
Jim H said:
But the whole Stanley Kubrick association with this is extremely interesting.
If Kubrick was filming it he’d insist on actually going to get the lighting right.
Guys, I really don’t want to upset anyone on here.
I really don’t.
I didn’t post without thinking. I just thought it was a valid talking point with some very intelligent people. And would provoke debate.
With our current understanding of technology.
Bloody hell I’ve been called out on this.
Sir Eric. (MC)
I will follow your advice.
https://www.nasa.gov/history/alsj/a14/a14pendulum....
This link is a discussion of how a couple of physics nerds timed the swing of of a tape to work out the gravity using compound pendulum theory and compared it to a similar pendulum on earth. The results from the Apollo footage matched those expected for 1/6g.
fatbutt said:
Mr E said:
I wonder how big a telescope you’d need to see the landing site from earth?
There are many pics online from the moon orbital satellite http://lroc.sese.asu.edu/images/65
So, as an independent thinker and wanting to do my own research, how big a scope do I need to see evidence of the landing from my back yard?
I looked it up. Absurdly massive I think covers it.
The 8.2m VLT (one of the four) can resolve objects about 130m.
So, we’re not convincing people with a “look through this” in a back garden.
Jim H said:
I think I’ve ruffled a few feathers with this one
How so? It was as stupid a post as if you claimed that cancer wasn’t real or WWII didn’t happen.What’s interesting is the psychology of conspiracy theorists; you rarely believe only one, so which others are you taken in by? 9/11 was fake? Chemtrails, flat Earth or maybe the Holocaust was made-up?
Mr E said:
I wonder how big a telescope you’d need to see the landing site from earth?
From earth its not possible. Its 240,000 miles away, and for context that's about about 10 times the earth's circumference. What you can do is bounce a lazer of of the retroreflectors left behind. That proves we can navigate/travel to the moon and land.
The technology to keep a 3 people alive for two weeks is hardly science fictions so it's difficult to see where the doubt comes in.
Gassing Station | Science! | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff