Young Aussie genius whipping NASA in Moon Hoax Debate!

Originally posted by ppk55
Pinke, will you now retract your ping pong ball analogy?

It's not mine to retract. It was a quote from a video I was looking at. I've never pretended to be a physicist which is precisely some of the issue with this thread - quote mining!

Anyway, she seemed to be mostly adding to the information rather than frankly disagreeing with it, and the question you asked her was slightly misleading. You're generically asking her about shielding and radiation in space ... Any scientist from what I've gathered would say that radiation in space is dangerous to astronauts.

You're not asking your *real* question which is 'was the moon landing possible based on the shielding used by the Apollo craft and crew?'

Congrats on the research anyway PPK - these are the best posts I've seen you make and encourage me to continue investigating this area.



If you ask the doctor this and she says 'no it was not possible' I'll be converted immediately.

I do not think she will agree with you.

Originally posted by Pinke
You're not asking your *real* question which is 'was the moon landing possible based on the shielding used by the Apollo craft and crew?'
...
If you ask the doctor this and she says 'no it was not possible' I'll be converted immediately.

I do not think she will agree with you.

I'm glad that was noticed by others...

After all the posturing, and to emphasise the point I made about demanding that PPK explain his claim and how it pertains to his Apollo denial, PPK completely wimped out. What a limp effort that was, and it is perfectly clear why. If he had taken the issue any further at all, he knows what would be forthcoming.

This is why you guys are now wasting your time, arguing with the likes of foosm, dragnet and ppk - these deniers are simply playing stupid games.

PPK, added to all the other challenges you have wimped out on, here's another. Reply to Eleanor, and point her to this discussion, and show her exactly how you are using her words. If you don't, perhaps I will. To be specific, Eleanor, if you see this, ppk is claiming that your comments about secondary radiation prove Apollo was too dangerous to have taken place. Specifically, here is what he has said to date:

...can you comment on Eleanor Blakely's statement from Jarrah's video that aluminium shielding would cause particles to fragment, and rather than shielding it would exacerbate the problem...
...according to Eleanor Blakely ... The aluminium 'skin' of the spacecraft would pose more problems. Are you self appointed experts disputing her findings?
...I'm gathering that solar flares produce these charged particles. Therefore the Aluminium skin of the Apollo spacecraft would 'produce a shower of lower atomic number particles that presents a potential risk inside the shielding (depending on their atomic number and energy).' should it venture through these particles. ...
...Does this not mean that the Apollo spacecraft would have been affected by 'harmful levels' of charged particles even months after a solar event? And given that the spacecraft's aluminum skin would produce 'a shower of lower atomic number particles that presents a potential risk inside the shielding' Where could the Astronauts hide to avoid this problem? It would seem even if they had a warning, the Aluminum skin would not have provided any protection, in fact it would have worsened the situation.

Gee, that's not quite what his email to Eleanor said....

So, TELL US, PPK, WHY DIDN"T YOUR EMAIL TO ELEANOR INCLUDE THOSE CLAIMS AND INTERPRETATIONS???

Originally posted by andre18
Originally posted by FoosM

So what was the point of the reflectors?

But if the scientists use that method and it works then who are you to say it's fabricated???

Think about it! What made NASA think it would work in the first place?

This is a classic con job. Which has been exposed and you people still dont see it.

Here is a typical con job. A ruler has a shamans (keeper of scientific knowledge which is passed down generation to generation) who knows when the moon eclipses the Sun. When the time comes for the eclipse, to show his power, he hypes up fear, and says unless gets offerings for the Gods the world will end, because only he has contact with the gods. The eclipse comes, the natives get scared and quickly start to offer they wives, children, food, gold whatever in fear. Shaman does his mumbo jumbo and eclipse is over.

Fast Forward a thousand years, scientists claim that Earth is dying because of too much carbon. Government says pay us taxes and we can solve the problem. People pay to breath air.

Scientists claim Earth going to get hot, no wait, cold, no wait, hot.... ummm Earth's climate is going to change. Government says, pay us taxes and we can solve the problem. People pay and sit back and watch the world do what it will do regardless if it had humans on it or not. LOL.

Just incase you still dont get the NASA con job:

Some scientist bounced laser beam off the moon.
Average person didnt even pay attention to the news.

Some time later, NASA tells the public.
Guess what, we can bounce a laser on the moon if we put a special mirror up there.
But we need to send people there to do so.

Some time later NASA has scientists bounce a laser on a particular spot on the moon
and the public believes that NASA sent people to place a mirror there.



And by the way, anybody can get conned.
Doesn't matter if you are a scientist or not.
Dont forget, many scientists still believe in a God, or several gods.
Some are even superstitions. And you want to
bring up evolution to prove what? All scientists are atheists?
You know that isn't true, probably far from it.

Originally posted by DJW001
reply to post by FoosM

 

God Apollo is so easy to rip apart.

A typical FoosM decision tree:

If the NASA were a huge, monolithic bureaucracy, then it's easier to close ranks and keep secrets, therefore Apollo is a hoax.

Etc etc.



Sorry DJ, if that was your attempt to prove Apollo happened, then that was weak.
Why dont you make a decision tree for yourself.

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by DJW001

 

You forgot this one:
"The astronauts didn't go to the Moon because they didn't say they saw stars on the nightside of the moon."
"The astronauts are liars because they say they saw stars on the nightside of the moon."

edit on 9/21/2010 by Phage because: (no reason given)

Oh Phage, stop proving my point.

Yeah Collins said: I dont remember seeing any stars (only like a week or two being supposedly back), then you show me in some text where he claimed everyone could see stars.

Why do you suppose they hire people with such bad memories?
Or do you think those solar flares knocked out some braincells when there were out in space?

Originally posted by CHRLZ

Originally posted by Pinke
You're not asking your *real* question which is 'was the moon landing possible based on the shielding used by the Apollo craft and crew?'
...
If you ask the doctor this and she says 'no it was not possible' I'll be converted immediately.

I do not think she will agree with you.

I'm glad that was noticed by others...

Pinke and the B... CHRLZ,

of course she isnt going to jeopardize her career and say Apollo is a hoax.
Why would you guys even ask her to do that? Thats so stupid. She has to make a living
even if she has to live with a lie. PPK isnt stupid, s/he knows s/he better offer her
some retirement $$$ and a change of identity for her to claim Apollo is a hoax.

She will never say it publicly, but she probably has doubts about the program privately.
As do many scientists, but until an astronaut says they didnt land, scientists are not going
to press the issue. They will just work around Apollo. And thats what you are seeing.
Apollo is an afterthought in the scientific community.

Its like asking a drug dealer to snitch on his crew. Or a cop to snitch on another fellow cop.
It aint going to happen, but we all know the drug dealers and the cops are dirty. Man,
dont you guys know how the game is played. Do you guys live box?

But she is giving out the clues man, she is saying... read between the lines, connect the dotsssss. Aluminum and pure glass cannot protect space dudes on even short trips outside Earth's protective arms. You go outside mommies arms and you a dead baby... its harsh out there, its nature. Nature will eat you alive... spit you out, and eat you again homey.

Originally posted by FoosM


Some time later NASA has scientists bounce a laser on a particular spot on the moon
and the public believes that NASA sent people to place a mirror there.

Yeah, but what about the LRO images that NASA provided?

Those allegedly show artifacts on the Moon left by the Apollo Missions.

Or are you suggesting that perhaps the artifacts and tracks imaged by NASA's LRO were left there by robotic probes (which would have to self-destruct or something)? Or since the images are from NASA, that the Apollo artifacts have been digitally added?

reply to post by FoosM


I don't understand the logic that if Blakely is lying she is just defending her life style ... but the astronauts are horrible terrible liars???

And I'm pretty sure if a real scientist came out and unequivocally stated that the moon landing was fake they would have their time in the sun enough to retire. What you're saying doesn't make sense. I also don't see any line reading ... just quotes used out of context. She stated it could make it worse, depending on other factors. That doesn't appear to change anything we've been discussing.

Originally posted by Exuberant1

Originally posted by FoosM


Some time later NASA has scientists bounce a laser on a particular spot on the moon
and the public believes that NASA sent people to place a mirror there.

Yeah, but what about the LRO images that NASA provided?

Those allegedly show artifacts on the Moon left by the Apollo Missions.

Or are you suggesting that perhaps the artifacts and tracks imaged by NASA's LRO were left there by robotic probes (which would have to self-destruct or something)? Or since the images are from NASA, that the Apollo artifacts have been digitally added?

Considering it took so long for those photos to be released, I think NASA waited for faking it digitally.
But truly, how hard is it to fake blobs?

Originally posted by Pinke
reply to post by FoosM

 

And I'm pretty sure if a real scientist came out and unequivocally stated that the moon landing was fake they would have their time in the sun enough to retire.

Why don't you find us a scientist who believes that if a "scientist came out and unequivocally stated that the moon landing was fake they would have their time in the sun (whatever that means) enough to retire".

Go find us a scientist who believes that the career and income of a scientist would be positively affected by making such a statement.

Go on.



I'll wait.

Originally posted by Pinke
reply to post by FoosM

 

I don't understand the logic that if Blakely is lying she is just defending her life style ... but the astronauts are horrible terrible liars???

Where is Blakely lying? WTH are you talking about? How do they even compare?
Did Blakely claim she went to the moon?

Originally posted by FoosM

... Thats so stupid. She has to make a living
even if she has to live with a lie. PPK isnt stupid, s/he knows s/he better offer her
some retirement $$$ and a change of identity for her to claim Apollo is a hoax ...

“Of course we must fear evil men, but there is another evil that we must fear more… and that is the indifference of good men.”

Think the quote applies under this context. After 50 years of science more people with a science background would point it out no???

Where did the stars go?

1k.) Video links/embeds: You will not embed or post a link to a video without a reasonable description of its content and why it interests you, is germane to the topics discussed on ATS or the topic of an existing thread should you post it in a reply to an existing thread.

reply to post by FoosM


So why don't these "many scientists" publish anonymously? Not even one has published a decent article about this subject.

Originally posted by CHRLZ
1k.) Video links/embeds: You will not embed or post a link to a video without a reasonable description of its content and why it interests you, is germane to the topics discussed on ATS or the topic of an existing thread should you post it in a reply to an existing thread.

Oh right, you want to try to get me on that when you guys do it all the time?
I havent seen you complain before.

And I clearly stated the first video had to do with missing stars.
And the video title has Altered photos.
You cant connect the dots?



Pathetic, why dont you spend your precious time and
go work on your space radiation tome that you have
been talking about for weeks now.

None of you guys have so far brought anything to the table
proving JW wrong in his videos or that there has been actual
moon landing. Science doesn't support your theory.

reply to post by FoosM

None of you guys have so far brought anything to the table
proving JW wrong in his videos or that there has been actual
moon landing. Science doesn't support your theory.

What? You haven't been reading this thread, just replying with your nonsense and not paying attention?? :shk:

Because, EVERY assertion made by that piker (Jarrfah White) has been thoroughly trashed, and shown to be invalid. He is a NOBODY, a noise, a wet spot on the inanity of this entire "hoax" movement.

Originally posted by FoosM

Think about it! What made NASA think it would work in the first place?

Ummm, they're scientific understanding of how it works? lol. They figured out a way and that's all there is to it.

This is a classic con job. Which has been exposed and you people still dont see it.

It's really funny how you say that coz if you expect anyone to believe it's all some conspiracy that scientists have kept for 40 years and everyones in on it, then you need to rethink everything. You're the very definition of the word paranoia. It's no con job i mean lol, to say mirrors that we know are used routinely every month for the past 40 years for scientific works are fabricated, is just stupidity. That's 40 years dude. Calculations and experiments that have been made, and without these mirrors they couldn't have been done. That's 40 years of research that you say doesn't exist.

I mean i really think you need to rethink your position on all of this. Plus the very fact that they returned with moon rocks. Which is like the most obvious fact we went there in the whole shebang anyway. They returned with actual samples of the moon. I mean mirrors on the moon - you can try and discredit 40 years of research if you'd like lol, but actually physical evidence people have been there and come back with.....dude, give it a rest.

Scientists claim Earth going to get hot, no wait, cold, no wait, hot.... ummm Earth's climate is going to change.

Scientists say it's getting warmer. enough said.

Just incase you still dont get the NASA con job:

Some scientist bounced laser beam off the moon.
Average person didnt even pay attention to the news.

Some time later, NASA tells the public.
Guess what, we can bounce a laser on the moon if we put a special mirror up there.
But we need to send people there to do so.

Some time later NASA has scientists bounce a laser on a particular spot on the moon
and the public believes that NASA sent people to place a mirror there.

What actually is funny, is that you have no idea how anything works - this is how it really is:

Some scientist bounced laser beam off the moon.
Average person didnt even pay attention to the news.
(to add) - fun fact about scientific achievements - thats normal.

Some time later, NASA tells the public.
Guess what, we can bounce a laser on the moon (to add) - but for more precise estimates let's put reflective mirrors up there so we can get a better analysis of its distance to us on a regular basis. That way we can measure what effects it has on the earth on monthly basis instead of shooting random places and hoping once in a while we get a reading that doesn't tell us very good estimates of anything. (because in science - we like to be as precise as we can)

Some time later NASA has scientists bounce a laser on a particular spot on the moon (to add) - because it's efficient. and the public believes that NASA sent people to place a mirror there. (to add) - in order to better mankind's understanding of the moon.

Dont forget, many scientists still believe in a God, or several gods.
Some are even superstitions. And you want to
bring up evolution to prove what? All scientists are atheists?
You know that isn't true, probably far from it.

What does the issue of scientists believing in god or evolution have to do with anything?
My remark was that you think you have greater knowledge then the experts, just as creationists do when they try to challenge evolution in schools. The fact that you couldn't make that connection, and start rambling on about scientists believing in god shows so much about you. You shouldn't be here debating with people if you can't understand simple things like that.

reply to post by FoosM

Sorry DJ, if that was your attempt to prove Apollo happened, then that was weak.
Why dont you make a decision tree for yourself.

No, this was merely my attempt to help you understand why your arguments are so ineffective. Rather than present facts that support your thesis... whatever it is, you've never fully stated it for analysis... you simply twist any available information to support your pre-conceived conclusion: "Apollo was a hoax."

What exactly is your theory, anyway? The launch was real, but the spacecraft remained in low Earth orbit? Fine, prove it. Find one person, anywhere on Earth who spotted it. Stanley Kubrick "faked it" on a soundstage? Which soundstage, when? Provide some evidence. The moon rocks are really earth rocks? Produce an earth rock with the same composition. You can't do any of that.

All you do is play sophomoric games. Do you really think that anyone reading this thread can't see that?

Incidentally, I'm fully aware of the decision tree governing my responses to your post. I've actually stated part of it in a previous post. Can you figure it out?

Originally posted by FoosM

God Apollo is so easy to rip apart.

history.nasa.gov...

By that "logic" so is every major engineering project ever conceived in modern times.

I'll ask again - do you honestly believe that each astronaut who went to the Moon actually lied about it, and has continued to lie about it for the decades that followed? Men from the military who were committed to honor and truth, the very last men who would lie about such things. You think all of that was fake?

You would have to be delusional to even imagine the remotest possibility of one of those men perpetrating such a lie, but all of them, give me a break - it's beyond absurd.