Aluminum foil manufacturer thank you wrote:
Just want to thank the trolls in this thread for the many yards of aluminum foil purchased over the years to prevent government mind control.
Today, there are more environmental solutions.
Aluminum foil manufacturer thank you wrote:
Just want to thank the trolls in this thread for the many yards of aluminum foil purchased over the years to prevent government mind control.
Today, there are more environmental solutions.
Science bro wrote:
Bad Wigins wrote:
This sort of response is why skepticism remains. If there's actual proof, just show the facts, don't go running off to occam's razor like it's a question of science rather than history.
It's full of fallacies anyhow. A fake wouldn't need to be secret forever, only for a few years until the propaganda boost paid off. A fake also bore no risk of catastrophic failure causing dead astronauts and a long and crippling investigation of NASA. Apollo 13 (assuming it was real) proved that this risk was very high, making a real mission a genuine "moon or bust" thing.
That's what happened to the space shuttles. 40% of the fleet was ultimately destroyed in flight with entire crews lost, causing the fleet to spend years parked and ultimately retired. The program was so expensive that NASA was left without any heavy-lift rocket capable of manned launches.
And almost 50 years later none of the thousands and thousands of people that worked on Apollo, either at NASA or at the aerospace companies that built the systems, have given any indication that it was not actually real.
Catastrophic failure of a fake is getting caught, which would have been far far worse in the space race than 3 dead astronauts.
You're right. It is about evidence, which there is tons of. The decent stages of the 6 successful landings and other equipment are still on the moon and have been verified to be there. We have moon rocks and dust samples brought back by the missions. They left laser reflectors there on the moon.
Oh, and STS did not have a 40% failure rate. There were 135 shuttle missions and 2 catastrophic failures. NASA didn't stop at 7 dead astronauts, or even 14. They kept flying the shuttles for years after both Challenger and Columbia disasters.
There are no blast craters when the lunar modules landed. Oops, NASA forgot that one too, bro.
Aluminum foil manufacturer thank you wrote:
Just want to thank the trolls in this thread for the many yards of aluminum foil purchased over the years to prevent government mind control.
Other than trying to introduce comedy into the discussion, which fell flat. Explain to me how the lunar rover which used air filled rubber tires, didn't explode while in a vacuum on the moon? Please enlighten us.
Moon Shot wrote:
How does curry explain this:
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CcbcdDBUsAAMjGl.jpg
Ah, Photoshop & CGI. This is what the NASA believers fall for.
NASA- OneBigLie
Steph answered all of these questions. Just go home devastated.
I gave my employees the afternoon off for the total eclipse when I was running my business in north Georgia...
I asked a few brothers where the we’re going to watch the eclipse...
They said, ‘in my living room with the curtains drawn, only crazy white guys buy glasses to look at the damn thing!’
Brothers get it right...
Steph,
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third-party_evidence_for_Apollo_Moon_landings
Game day bucket go boom
Legit question wrote:
What you fail to realize is that I used to be exactly like you. I believed in the heliocentric model, the earth spun a 1000 miles and hour and we landed on the moon, etc. I didn't just wake up on one day and change my mind overnight.
I read, researched and studied countless articles and read everything on Flat Earth. You have not. You simply parrot NASA and what you were taught since elementary school- It all started with a globe at home or one on the teacher's desk.
Water does not curve, the horizon is flat, it does NOT curve away and down as one goes higher in altitude. Countless experiments with lasers and infrared cameras do not detect curvature even over hundreds of miles. The US Navy paints targets over the ocean up to 60 nautical miles without accounting for curvature. You have never researched flat earth and just reject the idea outright. You condemn without any investigation- that is foolish if not ignorant. You believe that a fisheye lens doesn't distort the view. No plane has ever circumnavigated the Earth from a North-South axis.
Do some research and explain to me how you continue cling to your ball when I have pointed out several items to debunk it.
+1
That's a key piece of evidence that is an important factor in this debate.
Hilarious. Somebody quotes "Wikipedia" as their so-called evidence of moon landings.
We have moon rocks and dust samples brought back by the missions.
Not any proof at all. Firstly, they can be faked. Secondly, even if originated at moon, is no proof of USA "Manned" Mission at all.
Moon rocks on Earth come from three sources: those collected by the United States Apollo program "manned" lunar landings from 1969 to 1972; samples returned by three Soviet Luna programme unmanned probes in the 1970s; and rocks that were ejected naturally from the lunar surface.
If the Russian did it a few years later, surely USA could do unmanned robotic sample collection during their fakery.
We even have rocks from Mars. Does that prove that USA Astronauts landed there?
One of the oldest Martian meteorites found on Earth, ALH84001, discovered in the Allan Hills of Antarctica, has been reported to have crystallized from molten rock 4.091 billion years ago.
One of my sons who is a working architect and a graduate of a top tier school only recently admitted that the moon landing was real. There appears to be a thing with some millennials who by all apperances are not stupid, they love saying stupid things and get a kick out of the attention and push back they get from people. I don't believe they truely believe the stupid things they say; believing in conspiracies is cool.
You're right. It is about evidence, which there is tons of. The decent stages of the 6 successful landings and other equipment are still on the moon and have been verified to be there. We have moon rocks and dust samples brought back by the missions. They left laser reflectors there on the moon.
Descent debris and equipment (laser reflectors) can easily be dumped w/o actually landing. Moon rocks and dust samples have been collected by Soviet unmanned probes.
I think it would say a lot about the retrogression of human intellect, if we were able to go to the moon 50 years ago, but have no idea how to do it now.
It makes you think that ancient civilizations of thousand (or millions) of years ago could likely be much smarter than us, and we've lost so much knowledge in the meantime.
Legit question wrote:
Aluminum foil manufacturer thank you wrote:
Just want to thank the trolls in this thread for the many yards of aluminum foil purchased over the years to prevent government mind control.
Other than trying to introduce comedy into the discussion, which fell flat. Explain to me how the lunar rover which used air filled rubber tires, didn't explode while in a vacuum on the moon? Please enlighten us.
Are you really THAT stupid? Seriously?
That is supposed to be a tough question? Really?
Air filled rubber tires will indeed explode if the difference in air pressure inside the tire and outside the tire exceeds certain limits. So, for example, an air-filled rubber tire which can handle a difference of 35 psi in air pressure will perform without issue (sorry, no explosions) if the internal pressure is 50 psi while the external pressure is 15 psi (typical air pressure on Earth). To use the same tire on the moon one would inflate to 35 psi internal pressure so that with the 0 psi external pressure (vacuum of the moon) the difference in air pressure remains at 35 psi (sorry, no explosions).
I repeat, are you really that stupid? Seriously?
Sorry, I refuse to believe anyone can be that stupid while apparently having sufficient cognitive skills to type some words and spell them mostly correctly. Of course, that makes you a . . . troll.
2/10. Good job!
Sand Dunes wrote:
winnr1 wrote:
Kyrie renounced the flat earth a while back
They got to him, you could tell by his body language in his confession he still believes the earth is flat.
Sand Duns renounced it as well a couple days ago. Blamed it on his veganism making him crazy.
Why do you have so much trouble keeping your lies straight SandDunes?
Explain to me how the lunar rover which used air filled rubber tires, didn't explode while in a vacuum on the moon? Please enlighten us.
The Lunar Rover was only used from Apollo 15 onward.
So anyway, you haven't proved that Apollos 11, 12, and 14 didn't land on moon yet.
Nope, the LRV had wire-mesh, the MET (Apollo 14) was the one with rubber inner tubes.
1.0 Introduction: Wheels on the Moon
In the early 1970s, three types of wheeled vehicles were used on the lunar surface. The missions for these vehicles were completely different, and accordingly they had dissimilar wheel designs. For comparison, Figure 1 lists the characteristics of these vehicles (Fig. 1(a)) and their wheels (Fig. 1(b)). The first was the Russian made robotic rover called Lunokhod (‘Moon Walker’ in English). This was an 800 kg remotely controlled vehicle that traveled at a maximum speed of 2 km/hr. Lunokhod had eight rigid-rim wire mesh wheels, with bicycle-type spokes.
The second vehicle, which was American made, was the Modularized Equipment Transporter (MET), a two-wheeled unpowered cart used to carry equipment and samples collected by the astronauts on Apollo 14. The MET was about 75 kg when loaded, and was pulled at speeds up to 4 km/hr. Its wheels were made of smooth rubber, and were supported by nitrogen filled inner-tubes. To make it easier to pull the cart through soft lunar soil and over rocks, the MET wheels were designed to be fairly compliant. The last vehicle to visit the Moon was the Lunar Roving Vehicle (LRV). This was a manned vehicle that could sustain a maximum speed of about 16 km/hr and had a total mass of approximately 700 kg when fully loaded (unloaded mass was 210 kg). The LRV had a 44 configuration (4 wheels, all driven) using large flexible wire mesh wheels with stiff inner frames to prevent over-deflection. Thin tread strips were attached to the carcass to enhance floatation in soft lunar soil yet still allow the carcass to deflect. Although each of these wheel designs were distinctly different, they all adequately served their respective functions.
Unfortunately, very little of the lunar wheel technology was transferred to the private sector. This is
because there are no Earth applications with similar mission and environmental constraints.
https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/20100000019.pdfR U R U Really? wrote:
So, for example, an air-filled rubber tire which can handle a difference of 35 psi in air pressure will perform without issue (sorry, no explosions) if the internal pressure is 50 psi while the external pressure is 15 psi (typical air pressure on Earth). To use the same tire on the moon one would inflate to 35 psi internal pressure so that with the 0 psi external pressure (vacuum of the moon) the difference in air pressure remains at 35 psi (sorry, no explosions).
Only off by a factor of 25x! (And you had air instead of nitrogen) Good job in dispelling the ignorance....
The MET tires were 4 inches wide and 16 inches in diameter, and were inflated with 1.5 psi nitrogen preflight. The tires were baked at 250 degrees F for 24 hours preflight to remove most of the antioxidants in the rubber. Operating limits for the MET tires are -70 deg. F to +250 deg. F.
It should be easier to fake it with today's technology than with 1960s.
Why hasn't Hollywood done a re-make yet?
Absolutely based