Workplace Solutions Editors' Holiday Gift Picks Amazon Fashion nav_sap_plcc_ascpsc Electronics Holiday Gift Guide Starting at $39.99 12 Days of Deals Gifts for Him Get up to $100 back on House Cleaning services pet pet pet  All-New Echo Dot Starting at $89.99 Kindle Oasis bourne Shop Outdoor Deals on Amazon Baby Gift Guide
Customer Discussions > Science forum

was the moon landing real or fake, and why?


Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 3276-3300 of 1000 posts in this discussion
Posted on Jul 10, 2012 7:49:05 PM PDT
Of course the LEM wasn't tested on Earth--it was built for 1/6th G, it couldn't work on Earth. It's the same thing with the arm on the Shuttle--it couldn't be tested on Earth because it's built only for zero-G. It can't hold it's own weight in a 1G field.

As for the rover--it wasn't on the side. As you say, lopsided doesn't fly. It was put underneath--remember, the space outside the pressure hull is nothing like solid. The LEM was built for vacuum only, there was no need for anything resembling streamlining. Just drag it out when you need to. 435 pounds on the moon is within what they could handle by muscle power alone.

Posted on Jul 11, 2012 2:50:03 AM PDT
Wolfgirv says:
Is it possible for iruri to comprehend that once the LEM and its LRV were in space they weighed...nothing, and on the moon the LRV only weighed 77.2 lbf /35.0 Kgf ? Of course he still ignores me for this very reason, that he simply has no comprehension for anything technical. The LRV was folded up and strapped into the cavity on the modified LEM descent stage. What on earth, or in space, is so difficult about that engineering concept that our village ...India delta India Oscar Tango, cannot understand??

Posted on Jul 11, 2012 4:24:21 AM PDT
Wolfgirv says:
Notice also the iruri seems to have a fair idea of the weight of the LRV, 435 lbs, although actually 463 lbs was closer, yet knowing this weight, he still insists that it is a 'heavy car'? Makes you wonder what he thinks a Sherman 'light tank' would weigh doesn't it? Amazing how he feigns ignorance on some issues, but then appears to just know enough on others. I think Lj is correct, there is only one thing fake on this forum, and it isn't the illusion that we went to the moon, it is the deceitful egomaniac that is named iruri.

In reply to an earlier post on Jul 11, 2012 4:30:45 AM PDT
Bubba says:
It depends upon the search engine used; Google tracks and logs your searches so that it can do this, Duck Duck Go doesn't track your searches -- so it can't do this. I am very uncomfortable using a search engine that logs my searches.

In reply to an earlier post on Jul 11, 2012 4:36:09 AM PDT
Bubba says:
Article with video on the LRV

http://science.nasa.gov/science-news/science-at-nasa/2000/ast10apr_1m/

In reply to an earlier post on Jul 11, 2012 8:51:57 AM PDT
Lisareads says:
"I am very uncomfortable using a search engine that logs my searches. "
=======================
Cookies do the same thing.

In reply to an earlier post on Jul 11, 2012 11:57:43 AM PDT
Last edited by the author on Jul 11, 2012 12:04:05 PM PDT
Lj3d says:
Iruri: Well, yall kept telling me the walls of the LM were paper thin to save weight.

Lj3d: ROFML, I called it right when I first decided not to post anything to show you how the LRV was stowed on the LM. I posted anyway and here you are blowing it right off as fully expected! How utterly predictable you have shown yourself to be.

Iruri: Then nasa puts that heavy car on there which weighs what? 435lbs.

Lj3d: Wow, is it that heavy lol...a whole whopping 435 lbs or 72 lbs in 1/6th G no less! This is the heavy car you talk of? I can see now why you are so concerned. They really should have just put a 3,000 lb 1967 Chevrolet Impala on the LM and left it at that! Or maybe one of the futurama cars so prevalent in the concept cars that never get built showrooms of the 60s.

Iruri: Ya, just slap it on the side and away we go to the moon. What a frigin joke.

Lj3d: The joke is your absolute inability to comprehend technical designs and operations. Nobody just slapped it onto the side of anything. It was mounted to the side for ease of access for the astronauts. It was fit checked several times. It was tested several times. Deployed and stowed by the astronauts as part of their training. Unfortunately, the joke here is your argument. Its a total comedy. I still cannot believe I have found an LHA this ridiculous after decades of wondering.

Iruri: Don't change anything just bolt it on the side.

Lj3d: What would there be to change? If your designing while keeping the original LM weight manageable, you look for the simplest possible way to accomplish your goals.

Iruri: With that Goofy Contraption on the side of the LM, Did it change the load patern? Yes, it would shift the center of gravity and then how to control that sucker when landing on the moon?

Lj3d: Do you even know what the LM load pattern was? Yet you claim it would shift the center of gravity and ask how it would be controlled. Obviously it changed the CG, but not enough to affect the LMs overall flight characteristics. Is "Goofy contraption" the best we can hope for from you as far as technical understanding? When we hear or read goofy contraption, is that supposed to make us see something or have an epiphany?

Iruri: This is just another Laughable Joke that yall just seem to Blow Off as a non nasa problem.

Lj3d: The laughable joke I'm blowing off here is your argument. Its no challenge whatsoever. You call yourself a doctor and this is the best you can do?

Iruri: Nothing to worry about, just slap in on and go to the moon, what's to worry?

Lj3d: In your absolutely untechnical world that seems like what they did. On July 30th, 1971...someone thought, why not build a rover that's too heavy and will shift the LM CG and send it to the moon? To which Gene Kranz replies, "Yes, the tinfoil LM should do just fine and Apollo 15 launches tomorrow...we can tape the rover to the LMs side" In your world, Iruri, this must be how its done.

The 747 was never successfully flown before its first flight either. It was tested on the ground in various ways. The same kinds of ground structural testing the LM underwent as well as various other tests. You know Iruri, if I suddenly decided I wanted to be a rock star and claimed I could do better than "Aerosmith", "Rush" or any number of great bands...I'd be laughed at, and told I was not qualified to even try unless I knew how to play music, read music, play instruments etc. Here you are deciding you are going to expose the lunar hoax to the world while revealing just how unqualified you are to do so. Don't you ever wonder at all why people think you do this on purpose? Why I don't think you care if we landed on the moon one way or the other? Why your just trying to be controversial? Your lucky some folks think this instead of the alternative that they could be thinking.

Iruri: Nobody was worried, why, because they didn't go to the Dam Moon. It was all filmed in the desert and some studio somewhere.

Lj3d: Polly wanna cracker, Polly wanna cracker...It was filmed in the desert, it was filmed in the desert! Bill Kaysing said so, Bill Kaysing said so braaahhhh! You just parrot the usual silly LHA stuff trying to be a controversial figure. It may work here, but your a long way from stardom!

Iruri: All we have to do is slap that car on the side, take it out to the desert and start filming. How hard is that?

Lj3d: Obviously, you have never made anything beyond a home movie if even that.

Iruri: There won't be any balance problem or any rocket engine problem landing and no rocket engine problem taking off.

Lj3d: Of course not. Nor would there be any chance the problem is manageable with thruster compensation built into the original LM design because someone may well have anticipated a rover would be required someday. You have shown you do not understand how the LM design was approached with growth in mind. If the LM were tasked to carry an 18 wheeler to the moon, I'd agree with you that it couldn't be done. But were talking little more than a frame, two lawn chairs, piano wire tires...it doesn't even look like a Ford Galaxy fer Pete's sake!

Iruri: Quit fighting it, we went to the moon, be proud, be patriotic, be cool, sit down and be quiet.

Lj3d: More parroting of the standard conspiracy theory line that people who support something are being told to sit down and shut up. This is all you have isn't it. Parroting other LHAs, cutesy soundbites like goofy contraption, no engineering or design understanding whatsoever. No technical rationale of your own whatsoever. You'd think you could just leave it alone since your arguments have failed miserably and repeatedly to convince anyone but other LHAs. But this is apparently all you have.

If you want to be controversial, go on "American Idol". If your some kind of masochist who enjoys being made a fool of, get help. If your a child/teen who is still grappling with adult concepts, continue your education and listen rather than just talk over people...You have brought nothing to the table here in over half a year. It's time to end this charade of a debate.

In reply to an earlier post on Jul 11, 2012 12:10:25 PM PDT
Last edited by the author on Jul 11, 2012 12:11:56 PM PDT
Bubba says:
Yup, that is why I seldom accept cookies and I periodically go through my browser cookies. I also have a daily cron job that clears Flash player cookies. Flash cookies can be NASTY.

https://www.mozilla.org/projects/security/pki/psm/help_21/using_priv_help.html

http://www.wired.com/business/2009/08/you-deleted-your-cookies-think-again/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cron

In reply to an earlier post on Jul 11, 2012 2:40:46 PM PDT
Wolfgirv says:
I feel your frustration Lj. Time to end this and put iruri on ignore. That will end his charade. Join me. I am pressing the 'stop tracking this discussion' button now. He doesn't read my posts so I can still check any progress but If he sees that no one is following his nonesense, nor responding to it, his ego will deflate completely.
See you on the far side of the moon. Transmission concluded.

In reply to an earlier post on Jul 11, 2012 4:37:04 PM PDT
Lj3d says:
I'm not really frustrated as much as I would just like to see Iruri come forward and tell us his real agenda or just drop the whole thing and realize we won't be changing our minds because of anything he says. I personally do not like using the ignore button and so far, I haven't had to in the Amazon forums. I've seen far worse than Iruri here. Ever see a Christopher Haynes post? Those actually make Iruri posts look well researched and thought out lol.

The secret for me is that I only think about this when I'm here or writing a post. I leave it all behind when I go working on animations or story ideas. Then I drop in to see if the forum is active or not. I'll still drop in because I still think nonsense must be balanced out. Maybe if you can adapt a tactic of just coming here with humor in mind and the knowledge we won't ever win an LHA over, then the game sort of changes. I'd hate to see us loose your well thought out posts. But if you must, I can understand and I can't claim I will do this indefinitely anyway.

Posted on Jul 12, 2012 1:47:11 AM PDT
Wolfgirv says:
I am still keeping check of your posts and anyone elses additions. I just felt it could be a good tactic if we all just stopped tracking this forum to see if iruri bothered to continue his game if he realised or thought that no one was listening. I will certainly be adding my two cents worth if it all comes to the crunch We may not be able to convince iruri that his theories are wrong, but we can make him fully aware that his foolishness can be ignored.

In reply to an earlier post on Jul 12, 2012 9:07:57 AM PDT
Lj3d says:
That sounds like a good idea. I suspect Iruri is about to gove up the ghost with us anyway. I won't put him on ignore but I will try to ignore the kinds of nonsensical posts he has put out in the past.

In reply to an earlier post on Jul 12, 2012 11:39:26 AM PDT
Bill M. says:
>>Yup, that is why I seldom accept cookies and I
>>periodically go through my browser cookies. [Bubba]

Thanks for the links, I'll check these out. I already use Firefox as my main browser, one of the main reasons being I like the simplicity of the cookie control.

I just had to play tech support on the phone last night for my parents, since they got hit by one of those spyware pieces that spams everybody in your address book. To this day they still insist on doing everything through AOL's desktop program. My father also got rid of his only anti-virus protection on his machine under the argument that it was slowing everything down. Getting them to just dump their cookies and change their passwords (both probably for the first time ever) was a challenge. I'm trying to talk them into just using Firefox and going to "aol.com" for their mail.

In reply to an earlier post on Jul 12, 2012 12:22:20 PM PDT
Last edited by the author on Jul 12, 2012 12:27:02 PM PDT
Bubba says:
For on-demand spyware detection and removal tools for Windows, I like Ad-Aware and Spybot Search & Destroy -- they both have a free version. When I ran Windows I used both of them because sometimes one will catch something that the other doesn't.

Ad-Aware
http://www.lavasoft.com/products/ad_aware_free.php/

Spybot
http://www.safer-networking.org/en/spybotsd/index.html

I haven't used Windows in about a year. One or both of them has an option to continuously monitor for spyware; watch during installation to make sure that you don't turn that on if you don't want it running in the background. Make sure to check for detection rule updates every time you run either program.

Cookies make things convenient if you trust the website that sets them. E.g., I allow amazon.com and paypal.com to put cookies on my computer and I don't remove them.

In reply to an earlier post on Jul 14, 2012 7:31:37 PM PDT
Customer says:
"I been busy with my 3D animations this week. "

What do think of these Moon formation videos?

http://www.boulder.swri.edu/~robin/moonimpact/

In reply to an earlier post on Jul 14, 2012 10:49:15 PM PDT
Lj3d says:
Very cool. They use a supercomputer to do those. That is, one that actually simulates the physical properties of the collision of the earth and planet colliding with it based on the respective masses etc. These videos are probably not far off of how something like this can actually occur. When I do an animation, I have to manually keyframe the objects I build or use because the program is not powerful enough to simulate actual gravity affected motion or impacts. An example could be two cars crashing. If I made two cars head towards each other to crash, they would simply pass through each other. A supercomputer will actually calculate the impact based on the properties of the cars programmed into it. I do have some limited software capability in this area, but it usually means longer times to calc the images. That is, the images take much longer to render. So I only use it selectively.

Posted on Jul 16, 2012 6:57:28 PM PDT
iruri says:
[Customers don't think this post adds to the discussion. Show post anyway. Show all unhelpful posts.]

In reply to an earlier post on Jul 16, 2012 8:01:39 PM PDT
Bill M. says:
>>Apollo 9 astronot Jim McDivitt [iruri]

"AstroNOT" pretty much sums up iruri's arguments. How many times does the difference in atmosphere have to be explained in this thread?

Posted on Jul 16, 2012 10:04:53 PM PDT
Jeff says:
[Customers don't think this post adds to the discussion. Show post anyway. Show all unhelpful posts.]

In reply to an earlier post on Jul 17, 2012 2:59:30 AM PDT
Wolfgirv says:
Jeff says: "Obviously it was fake"..... Sorry Jeff, but I stopped reading after your opening statement, which completely failed to give you any credibility.

In reply to an earlier post on Jul 17, 2012 12:06:25 PM PDT
Bill M. says:
>>Sorry Jeff, but I stopped reading after your opening
>>statement [Christopher Girvan]

Though the closer of his post said it all.

In reply to an earlier post on Jul 17, 2012 2:36:09 PM PDT
Last edited by the author on Jul 17, 2012 2:37:40 PM PDT
Lj3d says:
Lets get this straight, the Russians, Japan and other countries simply allowed the US to get away with this alleged hoax? None of these countries called for an official investigation of any kind? The US expanded government because it could do so regardless of what other countries thought. No lunar hoax required.

If your going to claim lunar fakery, you might wish to show evidence of your claim beyond nebulous talk of the USA trying to be superior over other countries. Start with the question of why is it so hard to go to the moon? Then look at the actual history of human spaceflight which started in 1957 as a space race and became a moon race in 1961. The moon race ending in 1969 and the space race ending more or less with the Apollo Soyuz Test Project (ASTP) in 1975. The US has emphasized international collaboration in spaceflight beginning with Spacelab, a shuttle dependant laboratory serving as an interim station until a few years before the International Space Station (ISS) became operational.

Claiming the US hoaxed a moon landing to claim superiority over other nations is just another tired worn out Lunar Hoax Advocacy (LHA) claim. Furthermore, if you don't care what we think, why are you posting here?

Posted on Jul 17, 2012 2:43:02 PM PDT
iruri says:
[Customers don't think this post adds to the discussion. Show post anyway. Show all unhelpful posts.]

In reply to an earlier post on Jul 17, 2012 2:50:55 PM PDT
I grew up in Arizona. The desert there looks nothing like the moon. I have seen some terrain that looks rather moon-like but it was on another continent.

Posted on Jul 19, 2012 2:04:18 AM PDT
Last edited by the author on Jul 19, 2012 12:43:05 PM PDT
iruri says:
[Customers don't think this post adds to the discussion. Show post anyway. Show all unhelpful posts.]
[Add comment]
Add your own message to the discussion
To insert a product link use the format: [[ASIN:ASIN product-title]] (What's this?)
Prompts for sign-in
 


Recent discussions in the Science forum

  Discussion Replies Latest Post
Special needs children.......How can we help them? 14 2 minutes ago
Knowledge 5901 23 minutes ago
Global warming is the most serious problem of our generation, part 4 (reboot) 8509 44 minutes ago
Cookies can cost you higher prices? 0 1 hour ago
L-Dopa: From Schizophrenia to Parkinsonism 1 1 hour ago
Archaeology Plus Other Fohrbidden Sciences. 1418 18 hours ago
This is NOT a new discussion-- but it almost is. It is proof positive, like a Richard Feynman proof, that money grows on trees and subsidies not taxes can make a nation rich and make its citizens even richer! 3 20 hours ago
What triggers big cats to kill their trainer? 9 1 day ago
What cause turkey neck? 12 1 day ago
Chinese astronaut puzzled by 'knocking sound' in space 8 1 day ago
Plain Language Search -- an Open school to deliver what has been promised 29 1 day ago
The Multi-verse 11 1 day ago
 

This discussion

Discussion in:  Science forum
Participants:  219
Total posts:  5500
Initial post:  Nov 23, 2010
Latest post:  Jul 1, 2015

New! Receive e-mail when new posts are made.
Tracked by 9 customers