• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Apollo 11 Moon Landing Revisited: Hoax ~vs~ Debunk

First, the lunar gravity thing was known AND TAUGHT in junior high schools, and high schools in the 1920s and 1930s. It was an easy and fun ratio that told kids if we ever got to the moon we could lift heavy things. It was assumed by students that gravity and muscle mass are two different concepts, which they are. Also, all things are relative. A man on the moon is strong because he was born on earth where gravity is stronger. Someday there will be people who will be BORN AND RAISED ON THE MOON. Guess what happens when they fly down to Florida to visit Disney World? Yup, they'll need a wheel chair, and I'm not a medical doctor, but I doubt their bodies would do very well.

It's a simple concept, one that's been around since 1938 when Action Comics introduced Superman, a guy from a distant planet with a gravity anywhere from 10 to 30 times earth's gravity.

The Lunar Lander was designed to land on the moon, or some place with similar gravity. Its legs would collapse on earth, and it's rocket, and thrusters are designed for lunar landing. I'm not a rocket scientist, but I understand gravity, and there are days I wish I was in a 1/6 environment.

Now the important stuff. So what we're saying is an African Swallow can carry up to three coconuts on the moon.
 
wollery said:
I'm not sure how to put this nicely, but, the mistakes that Vixen is making are so fundamental, that the vast majority of students have grasped them by the end of year 9 (when they're 14 years old).
Click to expand...
There are nice ways of pointing out that some people's talents evidently do not lie in certain areas. There are nice ways of correcting the errors that inevitably follow from venturing into those areas anyway. Cloaking one's ignorance in conspiracy theories is even forgivable up to a point. But I see no beneficial purpose—either to skepticism in general or to the various topics in particular—in coddling aggressively willful ignorance. At a certain point, bad-faith arguments deserve little more than pointing and laughing. Up to that point, yes, a calm dispassionate answer is the rule. But one can only cast so many pearls.

When the point at issue is the most impressive scientific and technical achievement of the modern age, it is simply not appropriate to challenge it according to expectations that rise no higher on the proficiency scale than that of a not-very-bright child. When such claimants ignorantly sit in judgment over their betters, you have to address the hubris as well as the error. When one can see that the carefully presented answers have no effect, the next step is not just slinking away and letting willful ignorance and insolent provocation win the day. Bad actors need to be called out when bad faith is egregiously obvious.
 
Vixen said:
Given this is 1960's technology - land lines, no software, and all the banks of screens you see in 'Houston' are tv monitors, NOT computers, everything was done to a pre-prepared script. Precision was absolutely key. For example, in docking and undocking. Think about it, Collins orbiting the Moon whilst the guys were 'collecting rocks' needed to be in exactly the right place at the right time for when the capsule took off from the Moon, etc. So, ditto, the "live" tv broadcast. Had there been a satellite geopositioned (=at the same speed of orbit as the Moon so that in effect, it is stationary to it, per position) nil problemo. But it had to ensure a localised satellite was ready in place at the right time - how incredibly logistically efficient would one need to be to have it there just when you need it?

And then Richard "Tricky Dicky" Nixon ringing Apollo by landline and chatting to the astronauts in person...yes, radio technology was absolutely marvellous: signals bouncing from one station to another to make this possible... Yes, mate! It's possible if we all just think hard enough.
Click to expand...
Translation: this sounds incredible to me, so I'll just decide it didn't happen, instead of, you know, trying to figure how how they did it.

Do you think every magician's trick is real magic, too?
 
Safe-Keeper said:
Translation: this sounds incredible to me, so I'll just decide it didn't happen, instead of, you know, trying to figure how how they did it.

Do you think every magician's trick is real magic, too?
Click to expand...
It's the essence of the Dunning Kruger effect. "I don't immediately understand how it was done, therefore it can't be done."

But in the case of most conspiracy theorists I think there's also an unhealthy measure of resentment toward people with real expertise because of a psychological need to be perceived as being on equal intellectual footing with everyone in the room.
 
Vixen said:
An Apollo astronaut weighing 180lbs carrying 180lbs on his back (ratio 1:1) on Earth, carries exactly that same ratio on the Moon, for the umpty-ninth time.
Click to expand...
Have you ever been on a rollercoaster? Or anything else where you experience increased g. I've experienced about 3g and it's noticeably harder to simply lift my arm due to its increased weight.

Why do you think the reverse case of reduced g have no impact?

it might take time to get the balance sorted and inertia might cause issues but that's not really anything directly related to the ratio of masses (or weights).
 
Axxman300 said:
You realize half the posters here have now mentally designed both a space suit, and rocket pack for this swallow while the rest must be wondering how many more rocks we could have collected had NASA thought to bring African Swallows along.
Click to expand...

The rest of are mentally planning the Saturday Morning Cartoon Series...

"Is it a bird?"
"Is it a plane?"

"IT'S... SPACE SWALLOW!!!"
"African or European?"
 
PSXer said:
Has anyone here even seen the Moon? It's about the size of my thumb. Yet you expect me to believe that people walked on it? Absolutely ridiculous.
Click to expand...

Andy_Ross said:
A 2p coin at arms length almost exactly covers it
Click to expand...
And the sun is almost exactly the same size! Think about it Sheeple! The sun and moon are in the same orbit!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom