SnailyBoy Posted July 23, 2015 Share Posted July 23, 2015 Please tell us about the overwhelming mass of evidence that a person has set foot on the moon. Don't tell us about flags/reflectors/landing stages/artifacts on the moon, there is no denying that stuff is there Photographs and video are just as unreliable (as you point out) Name just one thing that proves a person set foot on the moon... What evidence would convince you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
altus Posted July 23, 2015 Share Posted July 23, 2015 What evidence would convince you? I suspect if we sent him up there to look at the footprints, etc, himself when he got back he'd only claim to have been the victim of a massive, elaborate, Truman Show type, hoax. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whiteowl Posted July 23, 2015 Share Posted July 23, 2015 I suspect if we sent him up there to look at the footprints, etc, himself when he got back he'd only claim to have been the victim of a massive, elaborate, Truman Show type, hoax. Nothing will convince them, I learnt a long time ago it's not worth discussing with conspiracy theorists as they won't change their minds not matter what proof is put in front of them. Leave them in their own little bubble. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SnailyBoy Posted July 23, 2015 Share Posted July 23, 2015 I suspect if we sent him up there to look at the footprints, etc, himself when he got back he'd only claim to have been the victim of a massive, elaborate, Truman Show type, hoax. Nothing will convince them, I learnt a long time ago it's not worth discussing with conspiracy theorists as they won't change their minds not matter what proof is put in front of them. Leave them in their own little bubble. That's why I asked what would convince. It tends to highlight intellectual dishonesty. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Annie Bynnol Posted July 23, 2015 Share Posted July 23, 2015 Please tell us about the overwhelming mass of evidence that a person has set foot on the moon. Don't tell us about flags/reflectors/landing stages/artifacts on the moon, there is no denying that stuff is there Photographs and video are just as unreliable (as you point out) Name just one thing that proves a person set foot on the moon... Physics. A feather and a hammer are dropped by Apollo 15 Commander David Scott. In one hand, he took a 1.32kg aluminium geological hammer and in the other a 30g falcon feather. On the Earth (in a vacuum) the hammer and feather would hit the ground at the same time at a velocity governed by the acceleration caused by the gravity of the Earth. On the Moon (in a vacuum) the hammer and feather would hit the ground at the same time at a velocity governed by the acceleration caused by the gravity of the Moon. The time taken could be slowed by the trick camera work available. But: Observation of the acceleration of the hammer and feather dropped by Scott establish that the they were influenced by a force exactly the same as that caused by gravity on the Moon. There was no camera or software available then that could mimic this and no place on Earth, Earth orbit, Moon orbit where the force of acceleration could be mimiced for the length of time required. Obsevation of other activities involving motion, acceleration and gravity agree with a gravitational force the same as that of the Moon, these include: golf ball walking style bouncing vehicle launches from Moon distribution of debris on board filming rate of deceleration Other Physics involves communication gaps caused by the distances between the Lunar Orbiter, Earth and Moon these triangulate correctly for a Moon landing and with Earth signals recieved by independent stations on Earth eg radio signals were sometimes redirected by via the orbiter and to different Earth stations arriving at Houston control with the appropriate delay. To manage a fraud on live broadcasts on this scale would have been technologically impossible and easily observed by Australian, British, Canadian, Chilean, French, Soviet and other civilian and military people listening in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
apelike Posted July 23, 2015 Share Posted July 23, 2015 (edited) Nasa have built a new rocket to get people back to the moon, why then was their last statement we've just got work out how to get people/humans through this radiation belt? The actual quote is "“we must solve these challenges before we send people through this region of space.” Have a look at my post 39 as it also explains it a bit and why it is important. You, and a lot of others, seem not to understand much about the radiation in the Van Allen belts and what it is mostly comprised of. It is nothing at all like Nuclear radiation (intense, high-frequency electromagnetic radiation) and consists mainly of high energy protons and electrons, so no thick lead shielding is necessary. I did read that someone said it would need 3 feet of lead to shield against but contrary to popular belief metals are the worst kind of shielding to have in that case.. look up Bremsstrahlung. In fact similar radiation is bombarding the Earth all the time and is what causes the visible Auroras. Humans can be shielded against its main effects by using light weight polyethylene sheets or fibres (think space suits here) and magnetism can deflect it. Unfortunately some stray protons or electrons can still pass through which can permanently damage modern miniature electronics. The astronauts also confirmed this when they stated that they occasionally saw the phenomena of bright flashes of light even when their eyes were closed. This radiation is not like Nuclear radiation where long exposures to it can permanently damage DNA and can kill. Edited July 23, 2015 by apelike Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
martin6 Posted July 23, 2015 Share Posted July 23, 2015 Its that statement right there "we must solve these challenges" what does this mean, wasn't it solved before, why do we need to solve it again, unless of course it was never solved. NASA is a government body, the same government that tells the truth all the time? I admit I dont know jack about space radiation and neither does anyone else on here, but that statement is bugging me Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Longcol Posted July 24, 2015 Share Posted July 24, 2015 “NASA is still seeking to develop technology to safeguard humans for spaceflight into radiation-laden space within and beyond the Van Allen Radiation belts, and the protection provided by our magnetosphere.” I think you need to focus on the bolded - we are after all talking about the Orion mission to Mars here - a journey about 7 times longer than the journey to the Moon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
apelike Posted July 24, 2015 Share Posted July 24, 2015 Its that statement right there "we must solve these challenges" what does this mean, wasn't it solved before, why do we need to solve it again, unless of course it was never solved. NASA is a government body, the same government that tells the truth all the time? I admit I dont know jack about space radiation and neither does anyone else on here, but that statement is bugging me As you admit to not knowing much maybe you should try some research instead and not assume that others are as thick as you. Its really not too difficult to understand unless you don't want to.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
melthebell Posted July 24, 2015 Share Posted July 24, 2015 He doesn't want to, just prefers random words and sound bites and uses them as evidence Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now