Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 61 to 90 of 106

Thread: How many years, until...

  1. #61
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    11,179
    Quote Originally Posted by Ely View Post
    ... The shielding required is far too heavy. ...
    So boiling it down, your issue is with radiation. What's your source for exposure levels and the required shielding to cope?

    And, do you expect the dearMoon project must also fail (or be faked)?
    Measure once, cut twice. Practice makes perfect.

  2. #62
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Norfolk UK and some of me is in Northern France
    Posts
    10,224
    The thing about conspiracies is that we do put emphasis on living memory and so after a century or so, facts can be challenged using various ploys . In wars, the winner writes the history. Physical evidence can be faked after the event.

    We dig up fossils which cannot lie because of carbon dating and other techniques and yet there are people who even challenge that citing supernatural forces. As Ely says, you cannot prove a negative, or non existence. In wartime there are major deceptions requiring thousands of people to keep a secret.

    In the past there were so few ways to challenge a conspiracy, now we have too many ways to promote them. For any advanced technique, the issue of trust in science and government arises. The early scientists really struggled to overcome dogma from religion.

    The evidence today is that a large minority will choose to believe a commentator, or influencer as they are now known, over an authority such as an institution. Gossip over the fence wins over pamphlets. As in the long reality thread, reality is what we believe in our heads, the models we make, the confirmations we choose.
    sicut vis videre esto
    When we realize that patterns don't exist in the universe, they are a template that we hold to the universe to make sense of it, it all makes a lot more sense.
    Originally Posted by Ken G

  3. #63
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    7,414
    Quote Originally Posted by Ely View Post
    Number one reason, the rocket equation. I doubt combustion engines, for now and the foreseeable future, will ever be able to safely send humans to the lunar surface. The shielding required is far too heavy. The only way the ruse could be successfully perpetrated is, a unified effort of the USA, its allies and Russia and China. Artemis will fail. Bank it.
    OK, so the claim you intend to defend is that the Apollo missions didn't go to the moon. And your reasoning is that the shielding payload required is too heavy to get there. Can you please lay your reasoning and calculations out? What shielding do you think is required, why do you think this and what are the calculated results that have led you to this conclusion?

  4. #64
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    16,952
    This is actually a bit vintage, I think it’s been a while since we had a thread on this topic. Almost makes me feel like it’s 2010 again!
    The greatest journey of all time, for all to see
    Every mission makes our dreams reality
    And our destiny begins with you and me
    Through all space and time, the achievement of mankind
    As we sail the sea of discovery, on heroes’ wings we fly!

  5. #65
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    The beautiful north coast (Ohio)
    Posts
    50,945
    Quote Originally Posted by profloater View Post
    The thing about conspiracies is that we do put emphasis on living memory and so after a century or so, facts can be challenged using various ploys . In wars, the winner writes the history. Physical evidence can be faked after the event.

    We dig up fossils which cannot lie because of carbon dating and other techniques and yet there are people who even challenge that citing supernatural forces. As Ely says, you cannot prove a negative, or non existence. In wartime there are major deceptions requiring thousands of people to keep a secret.

    In the past there were so few ways to challenge a conspiracy, now we have too many ways to promote them. For any advanced technique, the issue of trust in science and government arises. The early scientists really struggled to overcome dogma from religion.

    The evidence today is that a large minority will choose to believe a commentator, or influencer as they are now known, over an authority such as an institution. Gossip over the fence wins over pamphlets. As in the long reality thread, reality is what we believe in our heads, the models we make, the confirmations we choose.
    profloater

    If you want to have a discussion about the nature of conspiracy evidence, start your own thread. Don't derail this one. Let's keep this specific to Ely's claims.
    At night the stars put on a show for free (Carole King)

    All moderation in purple - The rules

  6. #66
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Nowhere (middle)
    Posts
    39,923
    Ely, a direct question: How much mass of shielding do you believe is required?
    "I'm planning to live forever. So far, that's working perfectly." Steven Wright

  7. #67
    Join Date
    Jul 2021
    Posts
    99
    Quote Originally Posted by Shaula View Post
    OK, so the claim you intend to defend is that the Apollo missions didn't go to the moon. And your reasoning is that the shielding payload required is too heavy to get there. Can you please lay your reasoning and calculations out? What shielding do you think is required, why do you think this and what are the calculated results that have led you to this conclusion?
    I apologize. The Rocket Equation was a direct answer to, pzkpfw, on why future missions would fail. The Saturn V, the largest, most powerful, and arguably the safest rocket ever built was sufficient. Unfortunately, NASA, much like the lost telemetry tapes, lost some build design specifications for the Saturn V.

    The Apollo telemetry tapes for the greatest achievement in the history of man kind, were used to film an office bachelor party. Saturn V build design specifications were used as placards for the adult entertainers. Now this is just a rumor, the telemetry tapes and design specs could have just been lost?

    There is countless circumstantial evidence to argue Apollo never landed on the moon but the greatest proof is, it has never been done again. No man has even left earth's atmosphere and no man or woman ever will. It has been OVER HALF A CENTURY since and we aren't even close.

  8. #68
    Join Date
    Jul 2021
    Posts
    99
    Quote Originally Posted by Noclevername View Post
    Ely, a direct question: How much mass of shielding do you believe is required?
    That is not part of my premise why Apollo is a hoax. I apologize for the confusion. However, to placate the rules, my answer is, I Don't Know. That is not a discussion I care to have.

  9. #69
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Nowhere (middle)
    Posts
    39,923
    Quote Originally Posted by Ely View Post
    That is not part of my premise why Apollo is a hoax. I apologize for the confusion. However, to placate the rules, my answer is, I Don't Know. That is not a discussion I care to have.
    Why then do you believe Apollo was a hoax?
    "I'm planning to live forever. So far, that's working perfectly." Steven Wright

  10. #70
    Join Date
    Jul 2021
    Posts
    99
    Quote Originally Posted by Noclevername View Post
    Why then do you believe Apollo was a hoax?
    It has now been OVER HALF A CENTURY since NASA purportedly put boots on the moon. Since, no human has left earth's atmosphere. Now there is an interesting post on the SLS. No one born after the purported Apollo missions, will ever see a human leave earth's atmosphere. Bank it.

  11. #71
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    The Great NorthWet
    Posts
    17,824
    Again with the atmosphere nonsense. There's no hard cutoff, it just sort of peters out. Even the moon can be argued to be in some fringe of the atmosphere. But the ISS is above 99% of it.
    Oh, and you know who said the Van Allen belts weren't a problem? James Van Allen.
    Cum catapultae proscriptae erunt tum soli proscript catapultas habebunt.

  12. #72
    Join Date
    Jul 2021
    Posts
    99
    Quote Originally Posted by Trebuchet View Post
    Again with the atmosphere nonsense. There's no hard cutoff, it just sort of peters out. Even the moon can be argued to be in some fringe of the atmosphere. But the ISS is above 99% of it.
    Oh, and you know who said the Van Allen belts weren't a problem? James Van Allen.
    If you believe the Karman Line, or NASA's 80km, or The FAA, or any other static demarcation of where space begins, is anything other than a demarcation for the awardence of space wings and or international treaties, feel free to do so. If you believe a "plane" can fly into "space", I won't try to convince you otherwise;

    https://www.nasa.gov/home/hqnews/200...s_honored.html

    However, saying no human, sans the purported Apollo missions, has ever left earth's atmosphere is scientifically and semantically correct.
    Last edited by Ely; 2021-Aug-02 at 03:35 PM. Reason: Added planes

  13. #73
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Olympia, WA
    Posts
    32,096
    Quote Originally Posted by Ely View Post
    It has now been OVER HALF A CENTURY since NASA purportedly put boots on the moon. Since, no human has left earth's atmosphere.
    So what? What does that prove? It doesn't take much looking to see all kind of things that were done once and then not for a half-century or more. Is that really convincing? How does it outweigh the masses of physical evidence?
    _____________________________________________
    Gillian

    "Now everyone was giving her that kind of look UFOlogists get when they suddenly say, 'Hey, if you shade your eyes you can see it is just a flock of geese after all.'"

    "You can't erase icing."

    "I can't believe it doesn't work! I found it on the internet, man!"

  14. #74
    Join Date
    Jul 2021
    Posts
    99
    Quote Originally Posted by Gillianren View Post
    So what? What does that prove? It doesn't take much looking to see all kind of things that were done once and then not for a half-century or more. Is that really convincing? How does it outweigh the masses of physical evidence?
    Feel free to enlighten me with this purported, "evidence".

  15. #75
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    The beautiful north coast (Ohio)
    Posts
    50,945
    Quote Originally Posted by Ely View Post
    Feel free to enlighten me with this purported, "evidence".
    Wikipedia - third-party evidence for the Apollo lunar landings

    I don't expect any of it will change your mind.
    At night the stars put on a show for free (Carole King)

    All moderation in purple - The rules

  16. #76
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Norfolk UK and some of me is in Northern France
    Posts
    10,224
    Quote Originally Posted by Ely View Post
    It has now been OVER HALF A CENTURY since NASA purportedly put boots on the moon. Since, no human has left earth's atmosphere. Now there is an interesting post on the SLS. No one born after the purported Apollo missions, will ever see a human leave earth's atmosphere. Bank it.
    The moon program estimate, according to the Planetary Society was 28 Billion, which they say is equivalent to 280 Billion USD today.
    There was a space race, and USA was riding high after WW2. There was a science component of course. It is not really a surprise to me that having done it, it was , and is, much more difficult to justify another manned mission. plenty of expensive unmanned missions have been done since.

    So the fifty year anniversary with no other manned landings is not an argument in itself.

    Do you believe in the prior Gemini program? Or do you just believe it was too difficult so they faked it? I happen to judge manned missions as very expensive for the science value, but that does not mean I doubt it could be done, as SpaceX is trying to do very soon.

    I have also seen reflected laser experiments from the corner reflector left up there, but also amateur VHF morse bounced off the moon, so I suppose you could discount the corner reflector as proof?

    How do you divide the thousands of people involved in Apollo into the necessary conspiracy groups, those who did the fake and those who were left in the dark?
    sicut vis videre esto
    When we realize that patterns don't exist in the universe, they are a template that we hold to the universe to make sense of it, it all makes a lot more sense.
    Originally Posted by Ken G

  17. #77
    Join Date
    Jul 2021
    Posts
    99
    Quote Originally Posted by Swift View Post
    Wikipedia - third-party evidence for the Apollo lunar landings

    I don't expect any of it will change your mind.
    I formerly wrote and edited on, Wikipedia. My best work is on the, Real ID Act, written by, James Sensenbrenner, former congressman of, WISCONSIN! Go Bucky!

    Please, post individually, any evidence you may have of a purported human manned moon landing. I cannot address ALL the claims in one post and still answer other direct questions in a timely manner.
    Last edited by Ely; 2021-Aug-02 at 04:46 PM. Reason: Amended per moderators post

  18. #78
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    21,455
    Quote Originally Posted by Ely View Post
    If you believe the Karman Line, or NASA's 80km, or The FAA, or any other static demarcation of where space begins, is anything other than a demarcation for the awardence of space wings and or international treaties, feel free to do so. If you believe a "plane" can fly into "space", I won't try to convince you otherwise;

    https://www.nasa.gov/home/hqnews/200...s_honored.html
    The X-15 actually makes everyone's point for us. It was a hybrid aircraft/spacecraft, which used aircraft-style control surfaces in atmosphere, but needed RCS thrusters to change attitude at the apex of its ballistic trajectory. So it moved from aeronautics to astronautics and back again. Hence its importance to spaceflight development, and the appropriateness of marking the fact the pilots had entered into a whole different regime of vehicle control.

    Grant Hutchison
    Science Denier and Government Sponsored Propagandist. Here to help.
    Blog

  19. #79
    Join Date
    Jul 2021
    Posts
    99
    Quote Originally Posted by profloater View Post
    The moon program estimate, according to the Planetary Society was 28 Billion, which they say is equivalent to 280 Billion USD today.
    There was a space race, and USA was riding high after WW2. There was a science component of course. It is not really a surprise to me that having done it, it was , and is, much more difficult to justify another manned mission. plenty of expensive unmanned missions have been done since.

    cut to include only Apollo arguments

    I have also seen reflected laser experiments from the corner reflector left up there, but also amateur VHF morse bounced off the moon, so I suppose you could discount the corner reflector as proof?

    How do you divide the thousands of people involved in Apollo into the necessary conspiracy groups, those who did the fake and those who were left in the dark?
    Reflector? The Russians also have a reflector on the moon. As far as I am aware, Russia/USSR never put a human on the moon.

    How do you divide thousands of people...? Please see, The Manhatten Project. Did you know, Harry S Truman, as President of the United States, had to be informed, the U.S. had invented an atomic weapon?

  20. #80
    Join Date
    Jul 2021
    Posts
    99
    Quote Originally Posted by grant hutchison View Post
    The X-15 actually makes everyone's point for us. It was a hybrid aircraft/spacecraft, which used aircraft-style control surfaces in atmosphere, but needed RCS thrusters to change attitude at the apex of its ballistic trajectory. So it moved from aeronautics to astronautics and back again. Hence its importance to spaceflight development, and the appropriateness of marking the fact the pilots had entered into a whole different regime of vehicle control.

    Grant Hutchison

    Once again, believe what you want. However, writing, sans the Apollo missions, no human has ever left earth's atmosphere, is scientifically and semantically correct.

  21. #81
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    The beautiful north coast (Ohio)
    Posts
    50,945
    Quote Originally Posted by Ely View Post
    Please, no Wikipedia, post individually, any evidence you may have of a purported human manned moon landing.
    No, I'll pass. Nothing against you, but I feel no obligation to work to convince you of the Moon landings. The wikipedia article contains lots of links, and a google search will find lots more. I feel no obligation to do all that work. I mostly posted the wikipedia link for any silent observer who might be interested.

    I could start arguing about specific pieces of evidence. I am probably most expert about the rock samples (my background is solid-state chemistry), but you'll probably hand-wave those away (I apologize in advance if you do have a sincere interest in discussing the synthesis and analysis of such materials).

    Don't worry; you don't need to respond to this post.
    At night the stars put on a show for free (Carole King)

    All moderation in purple - The rules

  22. #82
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    21,455
    Quote Originally Posted by Ely View Post
    Once again, believe what you want. However, writing, sans the Apollo missions, no human has ever left earth's atmosphere, is scientifically and semantically correct.
    I'd use the word "defensible", rather than "correct". But useless and indeed perverse from the standpoint of astronautics, for reason well exemplified by the X-15. It's not a matter of believing what one wants, but of using technical terms appropriately. There are terms of art in all specialties, and they mean exactly what the specialists say they mean, not what you'd like them to mean.

    Grant Hutchison
    Science Denier and Government Sponsored Propagandist. Here to help.
    Blog

  23. #83
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    23
    Quote Originally Posted by Ely View Post
    Once again, believe what you want. However, writing, sans the Apollo missions, no human has ever left earth's atmosphere, is scientifically and semantically correct.
    That isn't correct. There are various aspects which show the operations didnt occur on earth. The behaviour of the dust in the Apollo video's 1 and the fact that all of the vehicles were actually tracked to the moon and back. Jodrel bank which is roughly 1 hours drive from my home tracked the LM down onto the lunar surface. How did this happen.

    How did NASA manage to get the dust in the Apollo videos to behave like it was in a vacuum.

    Then there are the non-scientific reasons. How did NASA and the companies who built all of the vehicles and other equipment manage to keep all of the engineers quiet for all this time. There has yet to be 1 deathbed confession.

  24. #84
    Join Date
    Jul 2021
    Posts
    99
    I am sure most moon rocks are real and not petrified wood like, Niel Armstong, gave to the Dutch under the pretense of it being authentic. Sure, you can argue provenance but no one is sure.

    It is no secret, NASA and others, search Antarctica and find, moon rocks. could moon rocks with atmospheric decay be manipulated to appear being hand collected from the moon? I don't know.

  25. #85
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    23
    Quote Originally Posted by Ely View Post
    I am sure most moon rocks are real and not petrified wood like, Niel Armstong, gave to the Dutch under the pretense of it being authentic. Sure, you can argue provenance but no one is sure.

    It is no secret, NASA and others, search Antarctica and find, moon rocks. could moon rocks with atmospheric decay be manipulated to appear being hand collected from the moon? I don't know.
    Firstly i didn't mention rocks but since you have brought it up. As normal as a CT you have read half a story. The rock to which you refer was never claimed to be a moon rock. It was assumed by the dutch that it was. No moon rocks were given out by astronauts to my knowledge. Also why would a rocket enginner in Von Braun be given the task to find these rocks back in the day. Why not a geologist. Do you know how many moon rocks have been found. Do you know how much moon rock has been returned to the earth by Apollo.

  26. #86
    Join Date
    Jul 2021
    Posts
    99
    Quote Originally Posted by benparry1 View Post
    That isn't correct. There are various aspects which show the operations didnt occur on earth. The behaviour of the dust in the Apollo video's 1 and the fact that all of the vehicles were actually tracked to the moon and back. Jodrel bank which is roughly 1 hours drive from my home tracked the LM down onto the lunar surface. How did this happen.

    How did NASA manage to get the dust in the Apollo videos to behave like it was in a vacuum.

    Then there are the non-scientific reasons. How did NASA and the companies who built all of the vehicles and other equipment manage to keep all of the engineers quiet for all this time. There has yet to be 1 deathbed confession.
    Dust? Videos? Obviously you have never seen the first generation videos taken of the Apollo missions. No worries, no one on this board has. The slow scan videos were not compatible with TV broadcasts at that time. Chances are, you will never see the slow scan videos, NASA lost them. Purportedly, they taped a bachelor party over them. I cannot substantiate this rumor. However, the video broadcast to the world, could never substantiate your claim of dust in a vacuum.

    Engineers? Rarely does anyone who builds or designs something, know how the end user applies it. I don't understand this claim.

  27. #87
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    7,414
    Quote Originally Posted by Ely View Post
    It has now been OVER HALF A CENTURY since NASA purportedly put boots on the moon. Since, no human has left earth's atmosphere. Now there is an interesting post on the SLS. No one born after the purported Apollo missions, will ever see a human leave earth's atmosphere. Bank it.
    In 2012 would you have argued that no one has ever been to Challenger Deep and that it was clearly impossible? Fifty year gap there too.
    Kuh-e Bandaka hasn't been climbed in 45 years, according to records.
    It's been more than thirty years since anyone launched a large space telescope like Hubble.
    Uranus hasn't been visited by a probe since 1986.
    The surface of Venus hasn't been landed on in nearly 30 years.

    When something is expensive and difficult with no powerful drivers to make it happen it's not a shock that there are long gaps. If your argument boils down to one of incredulity it's tough to know what could convince you. There are convincing records of it happening and pieces of physical evidence, if you are dead set on discarding them in favour of your feelings it's hard to know where to go with this.

  28. #88
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    Peters Creek, Alaska
    Posts
    14,318
    Quote Originally Posted by Ely View Post
    Please, no Wikipedia, post individually, any evidence you may have of a purported human manned moon landing.
    If you disagree with a Wikipedia reference, you can address that in your rebuttal. However, you will not be creating any ad hoc rules limiting evidences or their sources.
    Forum Rules►  ◄FAQ►  ◄ATM Forum Advice►  ◄Conspiracy Advice
    Click http://cosmoquest.org/forum/images/buttons/report-40b.png to report a post (even this one) to the moderation team.


    Man is a tool-using animal. Nowhere do you find him without tools; without tools he is nothing, with tools he is all. — Thomas Carlyle (1795-1881)

  29. #89
    Join Date
    Jul 2021
    Posts
    99
    Quote Originally Posted by Shaula View Post
    In 2012 would you have argued that no one has ever been to Challenger Deep and that it was clearly impossible? Fifty year gap there too.
    Kuh-e Bandaka hasn't been climbed in 45 years, according to records.
    It's been more than thirty years since anyone launched a large space telescope like Hubble.
    Uranus hasn't been visited by a probe since 1986.
    The surface of Venus hasn't been landed on in nearly 30 years.

    When something is expensive and difficult with no powerful drivers to make it happen it's not a shock that there are long gaps. If your argument boils down to one of incredulity it's tough to know what could convince you. There are convincing records of it happening and pieces of physical evidence, if you are dead set on discarding them in favour of your feelings it's hard to know where to go with this.
    Can you enlighten me with the most "convincing records of it happening" or "pieces of physical evidence"?

  30. #90
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Posts
    1,358
    Quote Originally Posted by Ely View Post
    I apologize. The Rocket Equation was a direct answer to, pzkpfw, on why future missions would fail. The Saturn V, the largest, most powerful, and arguably the safest rocket ever built was sufficient. Unfortunately, NASA, much like the lost telemetry tapes, lost some build design specifications for the Saturn V.
    What about the Rocket Equation prevents launching a mission to the Moon? You have already said that its not the mass of the shielding so what is it?

    Also you need to remember that the single launch method used for Apollo is not the one way to do a Moon mission with multiple launches and rendevouzes in low Earth orbit or Lunar orbit, or orbital refueling, are options for doing it with smaller rockets than the Saturn V

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •