Originally posted by falconhulk: I agree I dont feel overly smart. My point is that I am not some dufus that saw a Fox TV sho and thinks he is a master of all things space travel.
Ahh... Don't worry... It was more a crack at the WAIS than a crack at you
For interesting reading, go look for the book "The Physics of Star Trek"
The author's name escapes me. VERY neat read on space travel.
Man could have EASILY gotten to the moon. Most of the "evidence" to the contrary isn't evidence... Nor all that contrary
for the record WE WENT TO THE MOON I saw the launch remember all the !/4, 1/2 ,stages and orbit trips why do all that to fake it?????? FOX is NAZI NEWS tv IQ is just A test very much culture biased
------------------ Question wonder and be wierd
IP: Logged
06:01 PM
Mach10 Member
Posts: 7375 From: Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada Registered: Jan 2001
The Cydonia Mensae region of Mars houses several interesting rock formations, the most famous of which is "the Face." Taken in 1975 by the Viking lander (I forget which one,) the face went on to fuel alien theories for years. In 1999 NASA promised to take a better picture of the face to prove otherwise. The picture they took is now known as the "catbox" picture, and few people who compare it the original say it is the same formation.
However, the weird stuff sits east of the Face. Known as the town, there is a group of structures clustered together with several interesting attributes. Several of them appear to be 5-sided pyramids, and there are four hills that in the center of the structures that are in a diamond pattern. TONS of interesting theories abound about these structures...it does raise questions, but I don't do it justice. Interesting stuff, anyway.
Read City on the Edge of Forever, an excellent book, though several theories in the book are completely bogus.
The pics I saw of "the face" Don't show all that much. First of all, it's a 2d top-down image. Not much can be said in terms of scale and height of the features that make up the face.
It would be VERY difficult to say what a picture at a different angle would look like. I'm willing to bet that it is a very obscure natural formation.
But I'm open minded. I just don't tend to go into these theories much.
No, I am sure we aren't alone... I'm just not so sure that aliens built a huge face as a signal, a la "Red Planet"
That said, I have to wonder this;
WHY ARE THERE NO PRIVATE SECTOR SPACE EXPLORATION VENTURES?!?
If at any point, we decide to reach out (so to speak), you' think that it would be a HUGE advantage to have an active space program of not only government agencies, but private-sector, too...
Hell, there is PLENTY of money to be made in the research market for commercial boosts, satelites, and use of micro-gravity stations...
So why has no-one bothered?
Don't tell me a launch is that expensive... That'd be my FIRST step; MAKE IT CHEAPER AND SAFER...
Don't ask me how... I'm not a rocket-scientis... But common sense tells me that a vertical launched rocket isn't the most economical way to do it
SpaceDev offers fixed-price missions as commercial products, innovative earth-orbiting or deep space mission design solutions, small and affordable spacecraft subsystems (e.g. miniature flight computers and S-band transceivers), a portable MicroSat Operating System, and affordable Internet-based mission control and operations from the SpaceDev Mission Control Center.
SpaceDev has what you've been looking for, at a price you can afford. If you are looking for a reliable, low-cost space solution, contact us today. Info@SpaceDev.com
[This message has been edited by maryjane (edited 08-09-2002).]
IP: Logged
10:19 PM
GTFiero1 Member
Posts: 6508 From: Camden County NJ Registered: Sep 2001
I believe the flag was nylon and held with a frame, but not a full frame, just the side poll and a bar along the top (like some house For Sale signs)If the flag moved when he stuck it in or holding it its because he was moving it. If the flag was blowing in the wind, the dust would be blowing also, and maybe the astronaut's suits also. Too high quality pictures? Those pictures looked like crap, luckily we can improve the quality. The moon has gravity, not as much as the earth but it has enough (was is it? like 60 percent less gravity then the earth? I forget). Also, perhaps there were lights on the lunar lander aimed at them so you can see whats going on better.
I wouldnt listen that much to a fox program like that. Remeber the one that tried to prove that cars have A.I. , the Hydrosolator? . They cam up with some pretty convincing stuff but we all know it was BS
------------------ --Adam-- 1987 Blue GT 5-speed IM AOL: GTFiero
IP: Logged
11:25 PM
Mach10 Member
Posts: 7375 From: Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada Registered: Jan 2001
The "face" on Mars is a great one. I've seen a book of a collection of such pics. Basically it's showing how natural formations can look like man made creation.
Ever been to Ruby Falls in Tennessee? There's a rock formation there that looks like a plate of bacon and eggs. Formed by nature.
I've also seen a pic of chlorophyl that was shaped like a smiley face. If that's evidence of aliens, I don't think we need to worry, as the entire alien invasion force could be swallowed by a small dog.
IP: Logged
01:24 AM
PFF
System Bot
Formula88 Member
Posts: 53788 From: Raleigh NC Registered: Jan 2001
Originally posted by LZeitgeist: I was wondering how long it would take for you to poke your head in here, John...
Oh, I was following this from the begining, but Maryjane's post fully answered the question about the flag, so I didn't feel the need to reply until the drivel-fest began.
For all you naysayers, go watch a Space Shuttle launch and then try to disbelieve. It's the same people (I've worked with many who were on the Mercury and Gemini programs, as well as Apollo), the same dream, and the same goal of human space exploration. Talk to a NASA employee and look in their eyes. You can see the reality of it because they believe in what they do. People supporting a conspiracy aren't as convincing.
IP: Logged
01:31 AM
Leper No longer registered
Report this Post08-10-2002 01:36 AM
Leper
posts Member since
Even if the flag has turned to dust, it doesn't mean that it isn't still attached to the pole like the mantle is on a gas lantern.
[This message has been edited by Leper (edited 08-10-2002).]
Formula88-that is actually one of my many goals in life(what little there is left of it). To watch a shuttle launch, preferrably a night launch. Of course I would also like to see a thermonuclear device detonated, but seeing Anna Kornikova sans clothing is a close third choice Drivel??? me???
IP: Logged
01:51 AM
Smoooooth GT Member
Posts: 8823 From: Lake Palestine, Texas Registered: Jun 2001
Originally posted by Ken Wittlief: (1) If I remember right the flag was a plastic material held square by a metal frame.
(2) As for the hoax stuff - thats nonsense - the flag was waving when the lander took off from the engine gasses blasting out -
(3) The quality of the photos from the Hasselbad cameras was TOO GOOD?! give me a break! do you know how much a Hasselbad camera costs?!
Just MY opinion's: Number: 1. Never heard that one. 2. If number 1. IS true, then how was it blowing from the engine gases blowing out..?? 3. You can buy a $150,000.00 F-50... But you would still have to "Aim it" straight down the street right..?? Just like "aiming" the camera.. right??
I'm not sure if it's a hoax or not... would like to think that it was true!!
------------------ Under Construction.... Still!! SmoothFieroGT@Yahoo.com
IP: Logged
03:34 AM
jesterfox' Member
Posts: 660 From: Midwest, USA Registered: Apr 2002
Originally posted by maryjane: Anna Kornikova sans clothing is a close third choice
This is the third time today I have seen the word sans used in the middle of an english sentance. Hmm... Dont know what I think of this. I endorse it because I know what it means, and know it is latin, and know that the average Joe probably doesnt understand it. Revelling in the shortcomings of others always makes one feel good.
But I had just gone off about non english words, and words that werent really words, and ebonics infiltrating our beautiful language.
Gonna have to think this one over.
JesterFox
IP: Logged
03:51 AM
Leper No longer registered
Report this Post08-10-2002 06:10 AM
Leper
posts Member since
quote
Originally posted by Smoooooth GT: Just MY opinion's: Number: 1. Never heard that one. 2. If number 1. IS true, then how was it blowing from the engine gases blowing out..?? 3. You can buy a $150,000.00 F-50... But you would still have to "Aim it" straight down the street right..?? Just like "aiming" the camera.. right??
I'm not sure if it's a hoax or not... would like to think that it was true!!
1&2 the flag was supported by one side and the top not around all 4 sides. 3 You may have to point a f-50 down the street and hold on, but you have to keep steering a worn out Yugo because it's gonna be all over the road. And it's not going to go down the street as well when you hit the gas either. http://spaceflight.nasa.gov/mars/reference/flag/flag.html About the moon flag, including how the flagstand was made, how it was packed on the lander, and an explaination on why the flag looks like it's waving.
Originally posted by jesterfox': This is the third time today I have seen the word sans used in the middle of an english sentance. Hmm... Dont know what I think of this. I endorse it because I know what it means, and know it is latin, and know that the average Joe probably doesnt understand it. Revelling in the shortcomings of others always makes one feel good.
But I had just gone off about non english words, and words that werent really words, and ebonics infiltrating our beautiful language.
Gonna have to think this one over.
JesterFox
As you are thinking this one over, and "revelling in the shortcomings of others", please consider that the grammar police do not look kindly on the excessive use of the word 'and', the omission of punctuation marks, and excessivly long 'sentances' with mis-spelled words. The phrase "people in glass houses..." comes to mind for some reason.
IP: Logged
09:25 AM
AusFiero Member
Posts: 11513 From: Dapto NSW Australia Registered: Feb 2001
On the IQ thing I had a test a few years back when I copped a hand injury and I was getting assessed for retraining. Well I got 167 and on the mathematics side of it I scored in the top 5% based on USA stats. So after all this guess what they figured I would be good to be retrained at........... Retail sales
So let me get this straight... The conspiracy people think it was all a very elaborate hoax, involving hundreds of people, kept a secret for over 30 years? It seems like actually going to the moon would have been far easier.
IP: Logged
11:15 AM
PFF
System Bot
fogglethorpe Member
Posts: 4828 From: Valley of the Sun Registered: Jul 2001
Here's an interesting look at the alleged Apollo landings. I do not claim to be an authority on this matter, but without compelling proof, I tend to be skeptical of things. Could this be another great hoax like the Evolution Theory of Man, and Global Warming?
IP: Logged
11:30 AM
Formula88 Member
Posts: 53788 From: Raleigh NC Registered: Jan 2001
Hundreds of people? Try ten of thousands, or more. Heck, there are over 2,500 people working at KSC on any given day. Not to mention all the other centers, etc. I just don't believe it's possible for a hoax that large to be kept for that long.
Of course, there is a lot of hardware on the moon. The LEM base from each landing. The lunar rovers, etc. Those would still be there. If we go back to image the moon, I'm sure you'll see them if you look for them.
IP: Logged
11:40 AM
Formula88 Member
Posts: 53788 From: Raleigh NC Registered: Jan 2001
Here's an interesting look at the alleged Apollo landings. I do not claim to be an authority on this matter, but without compelling proof, I tend to be skeptical of things. Could this be another great hoax like the Evolution Theory of Man, and Global Warming?
What would be "compelling proof"? We can't bring the moon back to the earth. Oh, wait, we did that - with rocks at least. But seriously, other than all the data that's been release about the landing, not to mention the TV broadcasts from the moon, what could possibly be considered compelling?
If you, or anyone, don't believe it given the evidence that's been presented, what could possibly be shown to prove it?
It's like arguing water isn't wet, and wanting compelling evidence that it is.
IP: Logged
11:43 AM
Formula88 Member
Posts: 53788 From: Raleigh NC Registered: Jan 2001
Here's an interesting look at the alleged Apollo landings.
This is an interesting read. Backed up with what appears to be solid scientific evidence. But it's missing a few key points. There are multiple sources of light on the moon. Light from the sun, light reflected from the earth, light from the stars. To expect light to behave on the moon as it does in earth's atmosphere is a huge scientific blunder.
Also, the high contrast of the pics. Obviously the lighting was very harsh, and photo adjustments of brightness and contrast had to be made. If you've ever played with a photo taken in less than ideal conditions, you have experienced the same effects.
There is also the problem of perspective on the moon. In an alien environment, you have no visual cues for depth perception, and since the photos are 2-D, it's easy to misjudge the apparent location of items.
If the evidence of the moon landings is insufficent, how can the smattering of pseudo-science explanations debunking it be sufficient evidence?
Here's an interesting look at the alleged Apollo landings. I do not claim to be an authority on this matter, but without compelling proof, I tend to be skeptical of things. Could this be another great hoax like the Evolution Theory of Man, and Global Warming?
INTRESTING THAT YOU LINK THE MOON TO OTHER RIGHTWING BS positions like evolution THAT CAN AND WILL BE PROVED by DNA records very soon!!!! as the DNA containes all the records of what DID EVOLVE into WHAT, WHEN and we are very close to reading it NOW!!!! and global warming that is right NOW raising sea levels a FACT that even RE-RUN admitted resently!!!! want to wait till miami goes under?????? I prefure not TO!!!!!!! FACTS ARE FACTS even IF YOU DONOT LIKE THEM!!!!
Originally posted by Formula88: Hundreds of people? Try ten of thousands, or more.
I assumed everybody at NASA wouldn't have been in on the supposed hoax. If it were a hoax, a lot of people supporting the missions could have been fooled just like the public. Still a LOT of people would have to be in on it. It's very hard to believe it could be kept quiet for over 30 years. They couldn't even cover up much smaller things like Watergate, the botched Iranian hostage rescue, Iran-Contra, Bill and Monica, etc...
IP: Logged
04:58 PM
AusFiero Member
Posts: 11513 From: Dapto NSW Australia Registered: Feb 2001
On the IQ thing I had a test a few years back when I copped a hand injury and I was getting assessed for retraining. Well I got 167 and on the mathematics side of it I scored in the top 5% based on USA stats. So after all this guess what they figured I would be good to be retrained at........... Retail sales
Don't forget that the majority of people (conspiracy theorists and conspirators alike) are fallible, make mistakes, and are generally not very competent. Case in point: I was working at a book store 2 years ago, and an old man came into the store asking for a book. (Drudge Manifesto or something.) I looked up the book in the computer, which said we had 3 copies. (Or 4, it was 2 years ago after all.) I went to the shelf, but the book was gone. Immediately the old man started huffing and puffing about how it is all a government conspiracy, that the book speaks truth and so the store I was working at was purposefully making it unavailable, etc. I explained to the guy that I can still look in the back of the store, and that it is here somewhere - or the computer is wrong. He rolled his eyes and I left to find his book. Sure enough, it was in the back, but not where it was supposed to be, but on a V-cart (a dolly that holds books.) That doesn't mean it was a conspiracy, it means whoever put the books there didn't know where they were supposed to go, or didn't care enough to put them there. The old man mistook conspiracy and imcompetance.
- Flamberge
IP: Logged
10:01 PM
PFF
System Bot
Aug 12th, 2002
fogglethorpe Member
Posts: 4828 From: Valley of the Sun Registered: Jul 2001
Originally posted by ray b: INTRESTING THAT YOU LINK THE MOON TO OTHER RIGHTWING BS positions like evolution THAT CAN AND WILL BE PROVED by DNA records very soon!!!! as the DNA containes all the records of what DID EVOLVE into WHAT, WHEN and we are very close to reading it NOW!!!! and global warming that is right NOW raising sea levels a FACT that even RE-RUN admitted resently!!!! want to wait till miami goes under?????? I prefure not TO!!!!!!! FACTS ARE FACTS even IF YOU DONOT LIKE THEM!!!!
Ray, you admit above that evolution has not yet been proven. Therefore, I need not refute what you said. Your next statement concerning global warming is barely understandable. However, I will say that the measurement and recording of weather trends and events is relatively recent compared with all of history. Therefore, anyone who claims the earth is warming up does so on the basis of speculation, because there is no hard proof.
As I said, I'm no expert, but anyone who makes preposterous claims without a shred of evidence is a charlatan.
And Ray, one more thing...perhaps having an English dictionary available while you type would better help you communicate in what I'm assuming is your native language.
IP: Logged
07:37 PM
Sep 29th, 2002
Scott_M Member
Posts: 84 From: Northridge, CA Registered: Jun 2000
Hey, according to this, I can drive faster than a speeding bullet. From the link in the post above: "[In the air and at ground-level, the highest speed is 1.190km/hr . High in the sky and only at the equator and only with a flight to the west, airplanes can get 2.860km/hr and nothing more, due to the rotation of the earth (40.000km in 24 hours = 1.666km/hr). This is the reason why the Concorde is NOT supersonic from NY to Paris.
I will give all my money (and even my life) to the first person who knows a scientific publication, f.i. in PHYSICAL REVIEW, that contradicts the current 28.800km/hr-limit.]"
IP: Logged
12:27 AM
Steve Normington Member
Posts: 7663 From: Mesa, AZ, USA Registered: Apr 2001
Originally posted by fogglethorpe: Your next statement concerning global warming is barely understandable. However, I will say that the measurement and recording of weather trends and events is relatively recent compared with all of history. Therefore, anyone who claims the earth is warming up does so on the basis of speculation, because there is no hard proof.
As I said, I'm no expert, but anyone who makes preposterous claims without a shred of evidence is a charlatan.
Using the ice from the artic regions and Greenland, the temperature is known to be very unstable, untill the last 10,000 years... So if the temperature is stable now, what would happen if the former condition returned? And could it have been due to the energy output of the sun changing? As we are now watching the solar output 24 hours a day, we now know the solar energy is NOT constant, but changes every second... Besides, if it were to warm up, the best way to beat the heat is to wear LESS clothes!
IP: Logged
03:30 AM
Smoooooth GT Member
Posts: 8823 From: Lake Palestine, Texas Registered: Jun 2001
