 sj |
||
|
||
BS: The Moon Landings: Real or Fake?
|
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Moon Landings: Real or Fake? From: GUEST,Chongo Chimp Date: 21 Sep 12 - 09:20 PM I keep wonderin' when he'll shave off his hair off on the sides, get it done in a Mohawk cut, and finally "clean up" the neighborhood good and proper. - Chongo |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Moon Landings: Real or Fake? From: frogprince Date: 21 Sep 12 - 09:06 PM I'll glady repeat: The major disconnect with reality that I'm observing here is the apparent inability of some folks to realize that Henry Snap-Krinkle-and-Pop doesn't believe the least bit of the stuff he is tossing out here as bait. happ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Moon Landings: Real or Fake? From: Jack the Sailor Date: 21 Sep 12 - 03:06 PM "I'm still not convinced we ever went to the moon. (:-( ))= " I'm pretty sure that you didn't. Or should we call you "Krinkle Aldrin?" |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Moon Landings: Real or Fake? From: Don Firth Date: 21 Sep 12 - 03:00 PM But beware of halitosis!! Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Moon Landings: Real or Fake? From: Donuel Date: 21 Sep 12 - 12:44 PM Semanticly it was both real and fake. To my knowledge the moon has never landed. On the other hand the men and moon materials that have returned provide incontravertable proof. Unassailable facts however don't mean spit to a fun conspiracy. as long as people "breathe" "together" there will be conspiracies. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Moon Landings: Real or Fake? From: beardedbruce Date: 21 Sep 12 - 08:17 AM Henry Krinkle, You are entitled to believe whatever you want. However, you have presented no valid facts to lead the rest of us to agree with your opinion. Nor have you addressed the points brought up as to why you opinion appears, when looking at the facts, to be incorrect. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Moon Landings: Real or Fake? From: Don Firth Date: 21 Sep 12 - 02:48 AM Some people are still convinced that the earth is flat. Well, Krinkle, like most members of an affluent society, when the astronauts went to the moon, they left quite a bit of litter laying around. Several lunar module bases, a couple of lunar rovers, a golf ball. . . . If you seriously doubt this, go and take a look for yourself. Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Moon Landings: Real or Fake? From: Henry Krinkle Date: 21 Sep 12 - 02:36 AM I'm still not convinced we ever went to the moon. (:-( ))= |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Moon Landings: Real or Fake? From: beardedbruce Date: 20 Sep 12 - 06:51 AM ANY "Transporter" device implies a replication device- just record the signal and replay it as needed. And there is no limitation about living vs non-living, IF there is enough storage space for the template. But that does bring up the problem that the copy IS a copy- and in the Star Trek transporter, the ORIGINAL is destroyed. A person dies and is recreated at another location. Some stories have been written about this aspect of "transporters" |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Moon Landings: Real or Fake? From: Henry Krinkle Date: 19 Sep 12 - 08:58 PM Protoplasm. It will be another form of cloning. (:-( ))= |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Moon Landings: Real or Fake? From: Don Firth Date: 19 Sep 12 - 08:58 PM "Tea. Earl Grey. Hot." Don (Capt. Jean-Luc Picard) Firth [Well, at least we have the same hairline.] |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Moon Landings: Real or Fake? From: Little Hawk Date: 19 Sep 12 - 08:47 PM Well, my feeling is that we will eventually work it out, Don, but I hope it doesn't happen until we put war behind us. The other interesting device on Star Trek is the Replicator, a device that can reproduce a perfect copy of any static object (but not of living things, I don't think). We already have a semi-replicator...a machine a bit like a photocopier which can scan a 3-dimensional object and produce a virtually perfect 3-dimensional copy of it as far as the shape and dimensions go...but only in one material: a form of resin. I've seen film of this being done and it's fascinating. Even a tool with numerous separate moving parts can be meticulously reproduced, and the parts will function. On the show I saw, they did this with a vice-grip type wrench for example, produced a resin copy of it in about a minute, and used that copy to tighten bolts of varying sizes, just like the regular metal wrench would. The resin is quite strong. They will probably soon move to using other materials in this device. It's still a long way from being a true replicator as on Star Trek, but it's a start. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Moon Landings: Real or Fake? From: Don Firth Date: 19 Sep 12 - 07:19 PM The possibility of any kind of teleportation device, I am quite sure, is very remote, if possible at all. It would take far greater knowledge of quantum physics than we have right now, or even in the far distant future, unless some amazing breakthroughs occur along the way. Then, if we finally reach a point where objects can, indeed, be converted to energy and beamed like a radio signal to another specific point, there is the problem of how to reassemble it again. Then, if this can actually be accomplished with inanimate matter, there is the problem of transporting living matter—such as a human being—without them being killed as they're being disassembled on a quantum level at the sending end, then reassembling them as the same human being, intact and alive, at the receiving end. And, of course, the small matter of those things Dr. McCoy was concerned about. Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Moon Landings: Real or Fake? From: Henry Krinkle Date: 19 Sep 12 - 07:12 PM Paranoid. Mom's been dead over 20 years. Bless her soul. (:-( o)= |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Moon Landings: Real or Fake? From: Don Firth Date: 19 Sep 12 - 05:31 PM Krinkle is paranoid. Or up to all kinds of stuff he's ashamed to have his mom find out about. Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Moon Landings: Real or Fake? From: Ed T Date: 19 Sep 12 - 04:50 PM ""Yea, too much room for abuse. FBI teleporting into your home to sneak and peek while you're away. Cops crashing your loud orgy to see what's going on...Lots of embarrassing situations might unfold."" Is this thread about the moon, or the daily exploits of a royal family? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Moon Landings: Real or Fake? From: Bernard Date: 19 Sep 12 - 08:06 AM Captain Kirk arrives back on the Transporter Deck, covered from head to toe in a nasty rash... "I said 'Beam me up, SCOTTY!'" |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Moon Landings: Real or Fake? From: MGM·Lion Date: 19 Sep 12 - 05:45 AM Yay. Beam me away, Scotty... ~M~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Moon Landings: Real or Fake? From: Henry Krinkle Date: 19 Sep 12 - 05:26 AM Yea, too much room for abuse. FBI teleporting into your home to sneak and peek while you're away. Cops crashing your loud orgy to see what's going on. Your mom teleporting in unexpectedly. Lots of embarrassing situations might unfold. (:-( O)= |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Moon Landings: Real or Fake? From: Don Firth Date: 19 Sep 12 - 02:53 AM To fine-tune the above post a bit. In the '58 version, the scientist emerges from the second booth obviously part human, part fly. In the '86 rendition, the entity that emerges from the second booth looks the same--at first! But since his DNA is mixed with the fly's DNA, changes start happening gradually, and his fly characteristics, both physical and personality-wise, begin to appear. GREAT horror flick!! Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Moon Landings: Real or Fake? From: Don Firth Date: 19 Sep 12 - 02:42 AM Just about everyone who was not living in a cave while the various incarnations of "Star Trek" were on the tube or running in theaters are familiar with "beaming" (teleporting) here, there, and everywhere frequently and quite casually. Except for Dr. McCoy, who had all kinds of philosophical and methodological misgivings about the bloody contraption. "If the transporter disassembles our molecules, turns them to energy, and beams them to another point, how do we KNOW that the person who entered the transporter is not killed when he is energized, and that the person who rematerializes is not an entirely new person who just has the same appearance, characteristics, and memory as the original, and thinks he or she is the same person? Or how do you know that the transporter is not going to simply malfunction and scatter your molecules all over the galaxy!??" Well, um. . . . In 1958, there was a movie called "The Fly," with David Hedison, Patricia Owens, and Vincent Price—and a remake in 1986, a much better production with a more sophisticated version of the same plot, starring Jeff Goldblum and Geena Davis—in which a scientist constructs a couple of "teleportation booths" (like high-tech telephone booths) where one steps into one booth, pokes the appropriate buttons, then disappears from the first booth and rematerializes in the second. It works after some tests and a few wrinkles get ironed out. So the scientist tries the ultimate test: he steps in and "phones" himself from one booth to the other. Small problem: a fly enters the booth with him, both of them are disassembled, and the entity that rematerializes in the other booth is a mixture of human and fly DNA!! Great horror flicks, both. But as I said, of the two, the more recent one does it much better. Teleportation is a great idea. But there are a few small details that have yet to be worked out. Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Moon Landings: Real or Fake? From: Little Hawk Date: 19 Sep 12 - 12:46 AM The worrisome thing about teleportation is this: the first people to develop and perfect it would almost certainly be the military and the government, and what would they do with it? I imagine that they would probably start using it to teleport spies and military operatives into other nations to carry out espionage and sabotage and wage warfare. I bet they would reserve it all for themselves at first and not even tell the public they had it. This would cause a great deal more trouble and instability in the world and would probably result in more wars. One hell of a bad situation! Better hope they do not work it out anytime soon. We don't have a mature enough or peaceful enough society yet to be playing around with stuff like that. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Moon Landings: Real or Fake? From: Don Firth Date: 19 Sep 12 - 12:20 AM Yeah, teleportation would make it a lot easier to get to and from work without having to worry about traffic gridlock. Golly gee! Why didn't anybody think of THAT!!? Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Moon Landings: Real or Fake? From: Ed T Date: 18 Sep 12 - 04:34 PM Power from the moon? Microwave and laser transmission |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Moon Landings: Real or Fake? From: Henry Krinkle Date: 18 Sep 12 - 04:32 PM The moon would be a perfect spot for a telescope. Teleportation would make travelling there a snap. (:-( ))= |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Moon Landings: Real or Fake? From: Don Firth Date: 18 Sep 12 - 04:15 PM It would be one helluva lot more expensive to man and maintain a station on the moon than it is to do the same for a space station in earth orbit. It ain't rocket science! Or. . . ? Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Moon Landings: Real or Fake? From: gnu Date: 18 Sep 12 - 03:07 PM Hank... "So why didn't they just build the Space Station on the moon?" The moon kinda gets in the way of the telescopes. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Moon Landings: Real or Fake? From: GUEST,Lighter Date: 18 Sep 12 - 12:37 PM The Mars landings are the real fakes. No canals? No super civilization? No saucers? No tripods? Give me a break. The Martians would have blown those contraptions out of the sky. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Moon Landings: Real or Fake? From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 18 Sep 12 - 10:02 AM With pics. http://science.nasa.gov/science-news/science-at-nasa/2004/21jul_llr/ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Moon Landings: Real or Fake? From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 18 Sep 12 - 09:56 AM Those laser reflectors are still in use. The last surviving bit of Project Appollo is an observatory in Texas where they use a laser to measure the distance to the moon by reflecting it back from that reflector. Read here. http://www.lpi.usra.edu/lunar/missions/apollo/apollo_11/experiments/lrr/ -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Moon Landings: Real or Fake? From: GUEST,redhorse at work Date: 18 Sep 12 - 08:44 AM Look on the back (and if you're American, on the sides)of your car, Sminky You'll find arrays of corner cubes to reflect headlamps. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Moon Landings: Real or Fake? From: beardedbruce Date: 18 Sep 12 - 07:42 AM Sminky, Look up "corner cube" The reflected beam is returned parallel to the initial one, regardless of the initial angle ( within VERY broad limits. From my years with GLTN on Crustal Dynamics, I can verify that they work. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Moon Landings: Real or Fake? From: GUEST, Sminky Date: 18 Sep 12 - 05:25 AM Re: those laser reflectors. Surely, if they were so much as a millionth of a millimetre out of alignment then any beam directed at them from earth would bounce off into outer space. How did they achieve such precision? Genuinely curious. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Moon Landings: Real or Fake? From: Henry Krinkle Date: 18 Sep 12 - 04:57 AM So why didn't they just build the Space Station on the moon? It would be the most logical thing to do. Maybe build a half a dozen of them there. I think they've never done more than orbit the earth. It's what the focus has been on mostly. That and telescopes and unmanned contraptions. (:-( ))= |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Moon Landings: Real or Fake? From: Henry Krinkle Date: 17 Sep 12 - 09:15 PM Your pal is right about the power companies and solar, Donnie Boy. And the government is in cahoots with them. They don't want individuals generating solar power. Loss of tax revenue. They want to build giant solar power plants amd keep billing and taxing us. Capitalist Pigs. (:-( ))= |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Moon Landings: Real or Fake? From: Bee-dubya-ell Date: 17 Sep 12 - 05:44 PM Of course the moon landings are fake! The moon has always flown, never landed. If it were to land it would really screw things up royally. Displace an ocean or two, crush a few cities. Take my word for it, we don't ever want to see a real moon landing! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Moon Landings: Real or Fake? From: gnu Date: 17 Sep 12 - 04:58 PM "In other words, kiss me"... arse. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Moon Landings: Real or Fake? From: Don Firth Date: 17 Sep 12 - 04:55 PM International treaties have banned the use, or testing, of nuclear weapons in space. Why would we need to test any more nukes? We already know they work. All too well!! Who needs 'em? #### Ebbie, I'm sure it IS possible. There have been a number of experiments here on earth of people attempting to live in an enclosed, self-sustaining environment. "Archologies." I think Buckminster Fuller was involved in some of these schemes. There have been a number of good science fiction stories based on the idea of self-sustaining colonies on the moon, probably most notably, Robert A. Heinlein's The Moon is a Harsh Mistress. Some of these stories contain some fairly detailed ideas on how this can be done. A friend of mine came up with a renewable power source that, once constructed, would produce electrical power on the cheap in great quantities. He was thinking of the idea of building such a lash-up (which doesn't use solar cells) in the American southwest, or anywhere else in the world where the sun shines fairly constantly (Sahara? Kalahari?). It consists of piping containing some kind of fluid buried in the ground, turbines, and a large—huge!—sheet of insulating fiberglass or other insulating material mounted on rails. All his figures (and he was an engineer) said that it would work like a champ in someplace like Arizona or New Mexico—but would be most efficient someplace like on the moon! After the initial installation, it would cost next to nothing to maintain, and it keep right on pouring out the gigawatts. Nobody's ever done anything like this. Doug commented that, "You won't see anything much using solar power efficiently until the electric companies figure out how to run a sunbeam through a meter!" This sort of easy power source combined with hydroponic gardens and such for food, and—if it can be done on a large space station, it would be even easier on the moon. Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Moon Landings: Real or Fake? From: Henry Krinkle Date: 17 Sep 12 - 03:57 PM Nuclear weapons testing on the moon? Safer than here on Earth. (:-( ))= |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Moon Landings: Real or Fake? From: Ebbie Date: 17 Sep 12 - 03:24 PM I have often wondered if it would be possible to have an 'underground' colony on the moon, a closed environment, in other words. I would imagine the logistics of preparation would be formidable- but would it be do-able? And feasible? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Moon Landings: Real or Fake? From: Elmore Date: 16 Sep 12 - 07:53 PM Rev Moon landed this week. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Moon Landings: Real or Fake? From: Ed T Date: 16 Sep 12 - 11:46 AM Since China now "makes everything in the world" Why not take over the moon? Chinese man in the moon |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Moon Landings: Real or Fake? From: Ed T Date: 16 Sep 12 - 11:37 AM Turn-key moon colonies: Moon River |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Moon Landings: Real or Fake? From: Bernard Date: 16 Sep 12 - 11:29 AM The Discovery Channel programme 'Mythbusters' dedicated an entire hour-long episode (No. 104, 2008) to investigating the moon landings. They conducted a number of experiments to 'confirm' or 'bust' theories claiming it was faked, and seemed quite convinced it really did happen. I'd recommend anyone to view this episode before making their mind up one way or the other. The clincher was when they interviewed an astronomer who revealed that special prismatic mirrors had been planted on the moon, at which she proceeded to point a laser - the moon's surface of random particles could not reflect the laser back, but the mirrors could. My only regret about this particular episode is that they did not attempt to blow up the moon - they've blown up just about everything else 'in the interests of science'!! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Moon Landings: Real or Fake? From: Jack the Sailor Date: 15 Sep 12 - 03:32 PM Sandy Springs GA would have the kind of bug fauna and poison ivy alluded to. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Moon Landings: Real or Fake? From: Ebbie Date: 15 Sep 12 - 03:28 PM You may be onto something. Given the kind of guitar and the fact that the user was banned from the site. Not that I'm pointing. :) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Moon Landings: Real or Fake? From: Bill D Date: 14 Sep 12 - 07:52 PM HA! Missed that one! *shrug* perhaps there's 3-4 of 'em. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Moon Landings: Real or Fake? From: Stilly River Sage Date: 14 Sep 12 - 07:48 PM Bill D, Check this out. SRS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Moon Landings: Real or Fake? From: Bill D Date: 14 Sep 12 - 07:43 PM Because, Don... he loves stirring up controversy and seeing if he can get you going.... I 'think' he uses the name on other forums, but can never be sure. Maybe it's a common fake name because it is an iconic fake made famous in the movies. Like a LSU forum where 'some' Henry Krinkle plugged a restaurant in New Orleans. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Moon Landings: Real or Fake? From: Don Firth Date: 14 Sep 12 - 06:35 PM I dug deeper and all I found was a Neanderthal skull. Figures…… Why didn't we go back to the moon? A couple of reasons. NASA wanted to send out other probes, such as Voyager and the Mars landers. Also, build the International Space Station and the Hubble telescope, among other things. To do a lot of this required the Shuttle program. Wasn't enough money to do it ALL, especially after the Republicans cut NASA's funding. A matter of priorities. #### As a KID, I read Willy Ley's articles on space travel, and his book, "Rockets - the Future of Travel Beyond the Stratosphere" (1944), which describes early rocket experiments, Oberth, Goddard and others, and more "futuristic" projects to reach the moon using a 3-stage rocket "as high as 1/3 of the Empire State Building" - a very good estimate of the height of the Saturn V rocket designed 20 years later. I also read, and still have, a copy of his book, "The Conquest of Space." It's no longer "futuristic." It's a matter of history. ONGOING history! I have a whole library of books on cosmology and space science. AND I know the SCIENCE behind space travel. I was elated, but not at all surprised, when the Apollo 11 astronauts landed on the moon. I knew it would happen sooner or later. Anyone who believes that the moon landings were faked is still living with THIS mind-set (CLICKY #1), and is afraid to venture out for fear of THIS happening: CLICKY #2! Don Firth P. S. Why am I wasting my time arguing with this |
