We never went to the moon.

Discussion in 'Conspiracies' started by Ryndanangnysen, Mar 4, 2015.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. billvon Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    14,171
    That's exactly what you get when you use Vidicon and Plumbicon tubes for imagers instead of modern solid state imagers.

    Myth - BUSTED.

    Let's do the math!

    Landing weight of LM: 30,000 lbs (4800lbs in the Moon's weaker gravity)
    Diameter of engine bell: 59 inches
    Area of engine bell: 2800 square inches
    Pressure on the ground at hover if the landing bell were flush with the ground (which it isn't) - 1.7psi

    That's about the pressure you can create in your mouth when you blow hard.

    Try to go outside and "blow a crater" with your mouth. I bet you'll just end up blowing some dust around (which is exactly what happened.)

    Myth - BUSTED.

    Did you skip high school math?
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. FatFreddy Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    496

    ...says the guy who maintains that the Chinese spacewalk was real and agrees with Jay Windley's* lame analysis of the dust-free sand issue*. You can pretend all you want. Your stand on those two issues destroys your credibility. You obviously don't even believe your own arguments. I might as well just say it. I think you're a paid sophist*** who knows the moon missions were faked.

    Don't lamely say the Chinese spacewalk is off-topic. NASA's official position is that the Chinese spacewalk was real and NASA's credibility is part of this issue. Don't lamely say Jay Windley's analysis is off-topic. Jay Windly is the biggest Apollo-defender on the internet and his credibility is an Apollo-related issue.



    *
    http://clavius.org/about.html


    **
    http://www.sciforums.com/threads/we-never-went-to-the-moon.145207/page-48#post-3514700


    ***
    http://cryptome.org/2012/07/gent-forum-spies.htm
    https://openheartedrebel.com/2012/0...-confessions-of-a-paid-disinformation-poster/
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. FatFreddy Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    496
    At about the 12:35 time mark of this video...
    Apollo 11 landing - full sequence



    ...the astronaut says that they're at seventy five feet. The soil can be seen blowing from that height. That's a lot harder than the pressue you create in your mouth when you blow hard. Can you comment on this?
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. David C The print that nails this troofer Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    252
    Says the gigantic fraud who claims the Chinese space walk was filmed in a water tank. Says the person who arm waves away thousands of analyses on the lunar samples brought back from the Moon by Apollo. Says the person who posts spam post after spam post and completely ignores responses. Says the person who is afraid to admit they are wrong. Says the person who lies, evades, obfuscates and knows the Moon missions landed as stated.

    Hey Fats, answer my rebuttal. Answer Billvon's rebuttal. Gee, anyone would think you were once again getting your woeful butt kicked!

    Regarding the dust moving at 75ft, it's a vacuum. At that height the spread is over 75ft, the exhaust is 90 degrees. There is no air to stop the exhaust gasses. I would be surprised if it didn't occur earlier but not yet visible due to the LM pitch angle.
     
    Last edited: May 10, 2018
  8. David C The print that nails this troofer Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    252
    The same pressure just spread out more. Hey Fats, answer the maths in that post. Any comments on the Tv tubes? Or the video showing how curved plastic or glass diffuses the sun the same on Earth? Or the video showing that the diffused sun on the visor disappears completely when a metal rod barely 1/5 the width of the Sun blocks ALL the diffusion?

    No? Of course not - fraud.
     
  9. billvon Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    14,171
    Sure.

    Get the finest talcum powder you can find. Put it on the floor of a room 75 feet tall. Get a strong fan, put it on the ceiling and turn it on.

    Will it create a crater? Or will you see the powder blowing away from the area under the fan?

    (Of course this will be a much larger effect on the moon due to the lower gravity.)
     
  10. Michael 345 Bali in Nov closer Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,225
    As I understand SpaceX land part of their launch rockets on a platform out at sea.
    In the few landing videos I have seen the rocket engines appear to be much more powerful than a puny moon lander engine
    How strong would the floating landing pad need to be to prevent a crater being blown into it?

    Also the existing moon craters were made by meteors at high speed impact, not a softly blowing rocket motor

    Just a thought bubble

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  11. FatFreddy Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    496
  12. Michael 345 Bali in Nov closer Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,225
    As someone mentioned strange after seeing no crater under 11 the dumb ass studio crew repeated the same mistake 5 more times

    Hoax confirmed 6 times

    Hard to get quality studio film crews these days

    Wonder no hoax believer ever got a job on a film crew to show them tricks like
    • Putting stars in the background
    • How to work the puppet cables to get a realistic low gravity jump
    • How to get the moon rock dust just right for the perfect rooster tail
    • How to position the studio lights so only 1 shadow
    • And of course the granddaddy give away - turn off the airconditioning so the flag doesn't wave (how dumb is this one)
    OK kiddies story time over

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  13. David C The print that nails this troofer Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    252
    Listen up you evasive coward. You've armwaved the rocks away, posted a barrage of debunked spam and yet again fail to address the rebuttal.

    His maths is pretty spot on. If you disagree, show yours! Explain why the exhaust wouldn't hit the surface from 75ft and using physics explain why there would be a bloody crater. You are the most dishonest "truther" on the internet.

    What is the matter with you!? How can you post so much bullshit and ignore replies. There is a life out there away from the land of woooo. Go get it.
     
  14. Michael 345 Bali in Nov closer Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,225
    Don't get a coronary or stroke over it please

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  15. David C The print that nails this troofer Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    252
    So Fats, explain why these videos don't debunk the idiotic spotlight claim





    Another point: For a light that is supposedly really wide to impossibly illuminate acres of land, the shadows would be very much narrower than those cast by the Sun.

    Just ignore that as well.
     
  16. David C The print that nails this troofer Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    252
    I won't. Or a logical and coherent response.
     
  17. FatFreddy Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    496
    (from post #1021)
    Don't you see that this contradicts the official version? In the "Bogus" footage taken from the Apollo 11 window the soil is blown away at seventy five feet. Billvon committed a big slip-up when he tried to obfuscate this issue and you people are trying to obfuscate his slip-up. You people are pretty much washed up now. This slip-up is as big as Jay Windley's* slip-up**


    Here's something for the viewers to check out.

    MoonFaker: No Crater. PART 4

    (2:15 time mark)



    *
    http://clavius.org/about.html

    **
    Start reading at post #20 here.
    http://www.apollohoax.net/forum/index.php?topic=1118.15
     
  18. FatFreddy Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    496
    Those videos were made by Betamax. He's a known sophist. He tried to obfuscate the clear proof that the Chinese spacewalk was faked and he agreed with Jay Windley's lame analysis of the dust-free sand issue.
    http://www.sciforums.com/threads/we-never-went-to-the-moon.145207/page-48#post-3514700

    He's deliberately showing glare in the car rear windshield and calling it the actual reflection. There are two factors: glare and reflections. He's using glare to obfuscate this issue.


    edit
    ----------------------

    The second one has got me stumped. I'd need a big superlight to test this one and I don't have one. Anyway, it doesn't make the other anomalies go away and as it's untested, it's not proof.


    another edit.
    ----------------------

    Let's not forget about this.
    http://www.sciforums.com/threads/we-never-went-to-the-moon.145207/page-52#post-3518080
     
    Last edited: May 11, 2018
  19. billvon Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    14,171
    Nope. Not at all.
    Which makes perfect sense.

    Blow as hard as you can at a counter full of talcum powder from a foot away. See if you can blow any away.

    Now use the same pressure (1.5 psi) but make a "mouth" five feet across, or roughly 60 times the diameter of your mouth while blowing. Now try again from 75 feet. You'll see even more blowing of powder over a much wider area.

    So you've been proven wrong again. Why would anyone listen to you after you have been proven wrong time and time again? At some point even you have to realize you look like a fool.
     
  20. FatFreddy Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    496
    This thread is turning out to be a good study of sophistry.


    edit
    ---------------------

    Here's one I forgot to post.

    Physics of the Apollo Moon Reflection
     
  21. billvon Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    14,171
    Not a good study, but surely a very good example - from the very first post.
     
  22. sideshowbob Sorry, wrong number. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,248
    Yes.
     
  23. FatFreddy Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    496
    Well, billvon commited a big slip-up and it's too late to remove it so everybody's unashamedly agreeing with it. I suppose that's all you can do. Maybe I'll forget about it and it will get buried.

    Jay Windley* committed a big slip-up when he said that just transporting and placing dust-free sand would cause enough erosion to create enough dust to cause a dust cloud when the sand is driven over.

    (reply #26)
    http://www.apollohoax.net/forum/index.php?topic=1118.15


    He's lamely sticking to his story too. I suppose that's all you paid sophists can do when you get caught committing big slip-ups as you would look pretty silly if you admitted having been wrong too. He's all washed up because of that slip-up and all of the other pro-Apollo posters at the Clavius forum are all washed up for agreeing with him and you people are all washed up for ageeing with the guy who committed this slip-up. Now you're going to try to make me forget about it and hope it gets buried.


    *
    http://www.clavius.org/about.html
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page