• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Merged Apollo "hoax" discussion - continuation thread

Standby for six sigma of stupid...

Kyoon said:
... Talk of holograms, technological feasibility and the "moon landing":

The use of computing technology to get there is frequently alluded to, but exactly kind of hardware and software was required?
A troubling question - just think about the exponential progress in computer software and in particular computer hardware since Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin allegedly landed on the moon, in 1969. Something anyone can understand.
The answer is not easy to find. Actually NASA apparently doesn't care about the key piece of evidence - the software source code.
For anyone that believes the "greatest achievement of Mankind" to be a fake, this is not surprising.
Let's review the answer of NASA. If you have a minimal knowledge of hardware and software and afterwards you still believe in the moon landing hoax, then you are a victim of the BIG LIE technique.
Otherwise the REAL question now is: how was it possible that you believed such a lie so long ? ...
Click to expand...
Make room in the sub-basement of the pit of ignorance.
There is hope... he might not find the thread, even with a link.

{brought to you buy the alliance for moving insane claims to the upper CT forum...}
 
Last edited:
Yeah. One of my colleagues worked on the first digital fly-by-wire aircraft, an F-8 Crusader - controlled by an Apollo Guidance Computer.

It's so cute when conspiracy believers think they can bluff their way on this topic.
 
beachnut said:
Make room in the sub-basement of the pit of ignorance.
There is hope... he might not find the thread, even with a link.

{brought to you buy the alliance for moving insane claims to the upper CT forum...}
Click to expand...

Oh, it's worse than that. Just think about a B-52! 8 engines, all controlled constantly throughout the entire flight. More movable control surfaces than I can count, plus navigation systems, radar, weapons control - it would take vastly more computing power to manage a B-52 than an Apollo, and yet supposedly the first B-52 flight was 17 years before the moon landing!

So we can only conclude that the B-52 was a hoax, too.
 
Tin foil from NASA

670800.GIF


Supposedly this poorly staged sixties piece of crap went to the moon ...
... NASA posing wearing the "scientific" version of tin foil caps: white caps.
Talk about tin foil hat theories.

Anyway, if brainwashing has been so successful that so many people still want to believe this crap, then about ANY PaintShop work will do the job for Mars.
 
beachnut said:
Make room in the sub-basement of the pit of ignorance.
There is hope... he might not find the thread, even with a link.

{brought to you buy the alliance for moving insane claims to the upper CT forum...}
Click to expand...

It's a fascinating example of the Dunning-Kruger effect. It's like he can't conceive of anyone knowing more about this than he does, so he thinks his gibberish will pass for high-level technical analysis. He doesn't even know that AGC emulators are being run on people's home computers.
 
I wonder if Kyoon knows the provenance of the photo he posted. Are the guys in the white hats NASA, or are they Grumman? I don't imagine it crossed Kyoon's mind for a moment that NASA didn't actually build the LM.
 
Jack by the hedge said:
I wonder if Kyoon knows the provenance of the photo he posted. Are the guys in the white hats NASA, or are they Grumman? I don't imagine it crossed Kyoon's mind for a moment that NASA didn't actually build the LM.
Click to expand...

Most hoax-nuts can't see past the outer layers of Kapton (which they think is "aluminum foil") to research what a state-of-the-art aerospace structure the LM had.
 
Last edited:
Kyoon said:
[qimg]http://science.ksc.nasa.gov/history/apollo/images/670800.GIF[/qimg]

Supposedly this poorly staged sixties piece of crap went to the moon ...
... NASA posing wearing the "scientific" version of tin foil caps: white caps.
Talk about tin foil hat theories.
Click to expand...

You think you're looking at the structure! Hahahahaha!

Kyoon said:
Anyway, if brainwashing has been so successful that so many people still want to believe this crap, then about ANY PaintShop work will do the job for Mars.
Click to expand...

How many spacecraft have you, personally, worked on? I want a number.

Oh, wait, that's right; you have no idea at all what you're talking about. You're just regurgitating the same ignorant drivel hoax believers have repeated for years, without understanding any of it - while you talk about how other people are "sheep". Hilarious.
 
Kyoon said:
[qimg]http://science.ksc.nasa.gov/history/apollo/images/670800.GIF[/qimg]

Supposedly this poorly staged sixties piece of crap went to the moon ...
... NASA posing wearing the "scientific" version of tin foil caps: white caps.
Talk about tin foil hat theories.

.
Click to expand...

It was inside the biggest rocket ever built, which was the responsible for accelerating this to orbit. Then the Command Module would take this thing to Lunar orbit.

Have you seen other spacecraft and such? No need for aerodynamics in space.
 
Kyoon said:
NASA, the real conspiracy theorists selling that "lunar module".
Click to expand...

Post evidence to support your suggestion that it was not capable of doing the job for which it was designed.

"It looks kinda funny" is not evidence.
 
If he bothered to look there are plenty of pictures of the actual hull without the insulation. It's construction is quite elegant.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom