Author Topic: Did the man really land the moon?  (Read 5975 times)

HSE

  • Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 532
  • <AMD>< 7-32>
Re: Did the man really land the moon?
« Reply #15 on: September 06, 2016, 10:57:48 PM »
and the Moon lander

Remember that only the upper part fly again, the heavy part remain in the moon.

And inferior part can fly in earth (still very dangerous):

caballero

  • Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 760
    • Abre Ojos Ensamblador
Re: Did the man really land the moon?
« Reply #16 on: September 07, 2016, 12:44:21 AM »
Hmmmm. It could be. Then, it would be an electric turbine. The upper part would be some kind of battery? The turbine with enough power to keep the weight (heavy + light parts) to avoid the impact with the lunar surface, having no atmosphere can not be used parachutes to slow the fall. Discarding batteries to raise the artifact to a level where the mothership would be orbiting, perhaps lower than in Earth taking advantage of the lower Moon gravity.

I assumed that the escape of the moon would be similar to Earth, with combustion turbines
En un lugar de la Mancha de cuyo nombre no quiero acordarme

HSE

  • Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 532
  • <AMD>< 7-32>
Re: Did the man really land the moon?
« Reply #17 on: September 07, 2016, 01:11:45 AM »
The baloons are the tanks. They contain Aerzine 50. Some kind of vodka I think  :biggrin:.  Just Nasa can't use russian names at that time  :eusa_naughty:.

caballero

  • Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 760
    • Abre Ojos Ensamblador
Re: Did the man really land the moon?
« Reply #18 on: September 07, 2016, 01:30:52 AM »
Very interesting. I just wonder why this method (it seems) is so different from that used in rockets launched from the Earth.
>some kind of vodka. Sure, you have a drink and at the first fart you reach the orbit
En un lugar de la Mancha de cuyo nombre no quiero acordarme

HSE

  • Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 532
  • <AMD>< 7-32>
Re: Did the man really land the moon?
« Reply #19 on: September 07, 2016, 01:47:29 AM »
why this method (it seems) is so different from that used in rockets launched from the Earth

Look like a turbine but it's a reactor, like the rocket. Drinking all the vodka there is no difference  :biggrin:. (and you see double because there is one in each part)

MichaelW

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1209
Re: Did the man really land the moon?
« Reply #20 on: September 07, 2016, 03:51:20 AM »
IIRC only the Ascent module left the lunar surface, and there was no need to achieve escape velocity because it only needed to reach, and dock with, the Command module in lunar orbit.

The Cavorite was needed to handle the mass of the extra large cojones on board.
Well Microsoft, here’s another nice mess you’ve gotten us into.

caballero

  • Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 760
    • Abre Ojos Ensamblador
Re: Did the man really land the moon?
« Reply #21 on: September 07, 2016, 05:53:29 PM »
> the extra large cojones on board
Ahh, so you speak Spanish. Sí, supongo que para meterse en algo así hay que llevar los cojones en carretilla. Yo no conocía todos estos detalles y creo que mucha otra gente tampoco, símplemente me llama la atención que creamos ciegamente en lo que nos digan sin conocer nada de los detalles. Creo que la cavorita es el aerzine 50, sin lo cuál habría sido imposible sacar de allí a los cojones del espartero  :t
En un lugar de la Mancha de cuyo nombre no quiero acordarme

PauloH

  • Regular Member
  • *
  • Posts: 10
Re: Did the man really land the moon?
« Reply #22 on: September 08, 2016, 06:53:59 AM »
Moon landing deniers are like every other kind of deniers. See, there are nuclear weapons/energy deniers too:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sULjMjK5lCI

A lot of misconceptions and bad science. By the way, this kind of "conspiration theory" is about misconceptions about chemistry, physics and mathematics.

cman

  • Member
  • **
  • Posts: 199
Re: Did the man really land the moon?
« Reply #23 on: September 08, 2016, 07:06:13 AM »
You should read Conspiracy Theories And Other Dangerous Ideas by Cass R. Sunstein. An interesting book. The author argues that most conspiracy theories come about from the fact that we all have to rely on the word of experts and witnesses to events to some extent ( because no one can be an expert in everything ) and this is the root of most conspiracy theories ( do we trust the experts or not ) . I guess one could open a textbook on World History and wonder if any of the events contained within really happened ( most of weren't around to witness any of it  :biggrin: ).

rrr314159

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1381
Re: Did the man really land the moon?
« Reply #24 on: September 08, 2016, 11:54:23 AM »
Many of these conspiracy theories are obviously wrong. But it's a big mistake to reject all such ideas.

The US gov't, for one, has lied about many things and is still doing so. How many world leaders have they assassinated? I don't know, a dozen minimum. Back in the days of Mossadegh they at least tried to keep meddling interference secret; today they openly arrange coups in many 3rd world countries. The Lusitania, Pearl Harbor, the Maine, are all examples of incidents that may have been deliberately allowed by the gov't to get the country into a war. The 2008 crash was probably a deliberate strategy of people like Goldman Sachs - they made vast amounts of money. Other gov'ts, and organizations, employ covert ops also. A lot of modern theoretical physics is so ridiculous I wonder if that also is a con (but most likely it's just sheer stupidity).

Anyway there's no doubt that quite a few "conspiracy theories" are real.

The moon landing, flat earth, WTC and some other popular theories are, I agree, silly (sorry caballero!). I wouldn't be surprised if such are promoted by the Powers That Be to keep you people snoozing peacefully. Since they're false, you figure others are also. If Cass R. Sunstein tells you to trust your gov't and media, throw the book across the room. They are feeding you an exclusive diet of garbage. Even their "news" about Kim Kardashian is just arranged PR; when they tell you about important world events, don't believe a word of it. That's the safest course. For one example, Assad's chemical weapons were probably a frame-up.

If you knew the true history of the world (which, BTW, I don't) you'd be amazed.
I am NaN ;)

cman

  • Member
  • **
  • Posts: 199
Re: Did the man really land the moon?
« Reply #25 on: September 08, 2016, 12:39:57 PM »
That's exactly the reason that conspiracy theories are so dangerous ( sometimes they're true and sometimes they're not - and it's not always easy to tell the difference between the two cases ). The problem is that the conspiracy theories themselves , more often than not , are being used to mislead and manipulate persons rather than any actual conspiracy. That's what I don't like about these types of theories. But I also think it's a good idea to question authority , so I guess I'm somewhere in the middle on this issue.  :biggrin:

caballero

  • Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 760
    • Abre Ojos Ensamblador
Re: Did the man really land the moon?
« Reply #26 on: September 08, 2016, 06:11:45 PM »
If we all believed at face value anything that they tells us, the world would never have evolved. In my opinion the scientific method is based on curiosity and thinking the impossible is achievable. Sure, don't believe in something is based on not all have enough knowledge to understand that something is possible, in fact very few people possess that knowledge. What most surprise me is that there are so many people firmly secure on such things without the knowledge even to understand it. With all that we have learned about the landing on the moon we can assume that indeed it took place, but I think that none of us traveled on that trip or have enough data to know if it is feasible to think that it was. Adding the fact that, in addition, USA, according to the revelation of his own secrets, has lied several times significantly throughout its history, framing it in an era of the Cold War.

Recently, there was a plane crash and blamed the co-pilot, although the researchers confirmed that there was nothing conclusive in the black boxes, but the media reinforced this hypothesis with images made by computer on the official hypothesis. Surprisingly for me, I found myself more inclined to trust me the official hypothesis seeing such images. The truth is that the official culprit is the copilot and there was an accident.

That the earth is flat is stupid. Okay, that's what you say because now you see it in perspective, but in the fifteenth century, people had it not so clear. When Columbus claimed he knew an alternative route to trade with India surrounding the earth to reach India taking the advantage that the earth was round, no one believed him. In fact he came to Spain only Castile supported him and entrusted such project, Aragon would have none of such madness (Spain was formed by the crowns of Castile and Aragon).

Perhaps you believe that we are well advanced in these times and cherish great knowledge, but I would challenge you to prove the Pythagorean theorem, for example, without looking any documentation, I remind you that this theorem is proved before Christ. It's simple, but you have to throw some imagination  :biggrin:
En un lugar de la Mancha de cuyo nombre no quiero acordarme

caballero

  • Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 760
    • Abre Ojos Ensamblador
Re: Did the man really land the moon?
« Reply #27 on: September 08, 2016, 06:29:18 PM »
A joke a propos of that:
Quote
Three scientists traveling by train in England and see a flecked cow through the window. The engineer says: "Ah, how interesting, there are flecked cows in England", to which the physicistl responds: "No, at least one cow in England is flecked". Finally, the mathematician sentences: "No, gentlemen, at least one side of a cow in England is flecked"
« Last Edit: September 09, 2016, 02:29:34 AM by caballero »
En un lugar de la Mancha de cuyo nombre no quiero acordarme

GoneFishing

  • Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 950
  • Gone fishing
Re: Did the man really land the moon?
« Reply #28 on: September 08, 2016, 07:01:56 PM »
Quote
Three scientists traveling by train in England and see a flecked cow through the window. The engineer says: "Ah, how interesting, there are flecked cows in England", to which the physical responds: "No, at least one cow in England is flecked". Finally, the mathematical sentences: "No, gentlemen, at least one side of a cow in England is flecked"


Philosopher who was standing nearby, joined their conversation: "If at least one side of a cow is flecked, the whole cow is flecked"

caballero

  • Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 760
    • Abre Ojos Ensamblador
Re: Did the man really land the moon?
« Reply #29 on: September 08, 2016, 07:27:52 PM »
 :biggrin:
Then only physicists can philosophize for life, what I feared  :icon_confused:
En un lugar de la Mancha de cuyo nombre no quiero acordarme