Giant steps are what you take....

[Big Dave]

...walking on the moon.

Did it happen? Conspiracy or fact?

I hope my legs don't break....

[McJim]

Can't be arsed arguing the conspiracies but the presence of reflectors on the surface of the moon and visible from the Earth that were placed there by people suggests to me that they went there.

Next stop Mars....I wonder if there's oil on Mars?

[Mully]

Mythbusters tested all the moon conspiracy theories a while back. It all checked out.

[piston broke]

...walking on the moon.

Did it happen? Conspiracy or fact?

I hope my legs don't break....

tis b.s
oh yeah and the u.s didn't kill jfk or plan 9/11.
tis all b.s.
beware of the illuminati

[piston broke]

it's a happening thing,
and it's a happening too you

[Mully]

beware of the illuminati

Mmm, apparently, they steal capital letters from posts.

[piston broke]

Mmm, apparently, they steal capital letters from posts.

get a life

[Usarka]

mythbusters!

[McJim]

mythbusters!

Shouldn't it be conspiracytheoristbusters?

[Usarka]

Actually the mythbusters episode was up to their usual scientific standard.

Myth: NASA faked the moon landing.
Theory: Footprints on the moon would not make sharp indents like the photos because there is no moisture in the moon surface due to the vacuum on the moon.

Test: Get some equipment and moon sand from NASA (hello????? if they faked it don't ya think they might just....never mind), and quickly put it in a vacuum. Because putting sand in a vacuum chamber instantly removes all moisture. Quite where it goes no one knows.

[LBD]

Can't be arsed arguing the conspiracies but the presence of reflectors on the surface of the moon and visible from the Earth that were placed there by people suggests to me that they went there.

Next stop Mars....I wonder if there's oil on Mars?

Or piston brokes bum crack....

Always find oil in the most hostile of places:laugh:

[Big Dave]

Always find oil in the most hostile of places:laugh:

Greymouth?

[Usarka]

I've always had an open mind about conspiracy theories - anythings possible.

But if it's not real then the astonauts interviewed in the doco movie "In the Shadow of the Moon" are bloody excellent actors. Top watching btw. http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0925248/

[Usarka]

Greymouth?

Even oil isn't that low.

[BMWST?]

no conspiracy,with the people that would have to have been involved,someone would have sold the story for money by now...

[puddytat]

Maybe mythbusters need to do a show on Evolution....or God?:nono::argue::2guns::ar15::thud::innocent::wee p::weep::yawn:

[piston broke]

Or piston brokes bum crack....

Always find oil in the most hostile of places:laugh:

yep my bum crack is hostile alright,exit only

def no oil near there

[piston broke]

no conspiracy,with the people that would have to have been involved,someone would have sold the story for money by now...

if they were left alive

[LBD]

Greymouth?

I always took Greymouth for Mellow:doobey: not agro...:angry2:

And the oil is off Bluff last I heard...

[Okey Dokey]

Somewhere there is a lovely video of Buzz Aldrin punching a journalist who calls him a liar and a coward. It is a classic!

[pzkpfw]

That was Bart Siebrel ("BS").

See: http://thrdgll.tripod.com/buzz.htm

http://img40.exs.cx/img40/2276/buzzavatar.gif


Also:
http://www.bautforum.com
http://apollohoax.proboards21.com
...are good places to get more info. That mythbusters episode only touched on some of the stuff - and of course couldn't spend the time to be totaly "scientifical" about it. They still did more than any hoax believer - who generally just says (e.g.) "that photo doesn't look right to me".


Summary: none of the pro-hoax "evidence" holds up to scrutiny. All the hoax people end up with is inuendo and rumour.

[Tank]

Summary: none of the pro-hoax "evidence" holds up to scrutiny. All the hoax people end up with is inuendo and rumour.

Yet - that is enough for the shallow minded, educationally sub normal, mouth breathing inbreed, single digit IQ, loud mouths out there to put it forward as fact whilst at the same time not listening to actual evidence.

Bless em.

[Fooman]

Because putting sand in a vacuum chamber instantly removes all moisture. Quite where it goes no one knows.

If you really want to know, the boiling point of a liquid decreases as pressure decreases. So, in the vacuum all the water boiled off. If they maintained the vacuum, the water vapour would head out the pump creating the vacuum over time. If not, an equilibrium would be reached between the gaseous phase and the liquid phase, slightly reducing the vacuum. Simple really.

Cheers,
FM

[Sparrowhawk]

Next stop Mars....I wonder if there's oil on Mars?

Not sure about oil, but I've heard there may be Autonomous Robots there :whistle:

[Burtha]

Happy pills vs no happy pills.
conspiracy = happy pills.
no conspiracy = no happy pills.
:eek:

[HenryDorsetCase]

I've always had an open mind about conspiracy theories - anythings possible.

But if it's not real then the astonauts interviewed in the doco movie "In the Shadow of the Moon" are bloody excellent actors. Top watching btw. http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0925248/

I really liked that film. Buzz Aldrin was a real character: you dont expect them to have such great senses of humour.

No, the moon landings were not fake.

[Usarka]

If you really want to know, the boiling point of a liquid decreases as pressure decreases. So, in the vacuum all the water boiled off. If they maintained the vacuum, the water vapour would head out the pump creating the vacuum over time. If not, an equilibrium would be reached between the gaseous phase and the liquid phase, slightly reducing the vacuum. Simple really.

Cheers,
FM

Nice one. But in regards to the test the key point is "over time". Put sand in a chamber and decompress it doesn't instantly make it dry. Overwise I'd replace my stupid 1hour cycle clothes dryer with a vacuum chamber.

[Big Dave]

Overwise I'd replace my stupid 1hour cycle clothes dryer with a vacuum chamber.

They suck.

[Usarka]

And the quality of the jokes takes another tumble :lol:

[cave weta]

Mmm, apparently, they steal capital letters from posts.

DAUEBBZCCDOYPDKLLS W E EHGHDG- here is my collection

Im putting them on trademe when Ive got the full set:wari:

[3L4NS1R]

It troubles me. Still. After many years of seeing the doco that put it in peoples heads that it may not have happened.

The two bits of evidence that trouble me most are

1: Where did the wind come from that made the flag wave?

2: How did they film the lunar module blasting off the surface. FROM the surface? AND have it pan up perfectly, keeping the module in center of frame?

If anyone can answer those, I'd LOVE to know.

[Laava]

The flag thing is easy! Because of gravity and NO wind, the flag has a crossarm. As the astro naut wiggles his hand/wrist, the crossarm moves and appears to wave the flag. The absence of aptmosphere is irrelevant, the flag material is following the laws of physics.
The 2nd one? No idea! Anyone? Bueller?

[Fooman]

Nice one. But in regards to the test the key point is "over time". Put sand in a chamber and decompress it doesn't instantly make it dry. Overwise I'd replace my stupid 1hour cycle clothes dryer with a vacuum chamber.

"over time" can be pretty quick, depending on the actual pressures (absolute) and temperatures. Flash drying either using going from high pressure to ambient at high temperatures (e.g. milk powder production) or from ambient pressure to vacuum at ambient temperature is reasonably common.

In the experiment, if the sand was introduced into the vacuum chamber, and then the chamber evacuated, then the time it took for the chamber to pump down could be enough to removed the moisture. I never saw the program, so can't really comment on the actual experiment or if they appeared to edit anything out.

Vacuum does cool stuff - literally. One of the better physics demo's at uni that I saw involved freezing of liquid nitrogen by boiling it!

The dehumdifying driers work by removing moisture by removing it through condensation - dry air is used to maintain non-equilibrium transport from the clothes to the air, rather than vacuum.

Cheers,
FM

[Fooman]

The flag thing is easy! Because of gravity and NO wind, the flag has a crossarm. As the astro naut wiggles his hand/wrist, the crossarm moves and appears to wave the flag. The absence of aptmosphere is irrelevant, the flag material is following the laws of physics.
The 2nd one? No idea! Anyone? Bueller?

Actually the absence of the atmosphere is vaguely relevant - there is less damping on the flag, so it would wave/waggle/vibrate for a lot longer after any excitation.

Number 2. If it is possible for somebody to build somthing to land and return from the moon, I suggest it is possible for them to mount a video camera on a tripod with a remote trigger and some sort of panning mechanism that would track the LM - radar + stepper motor. The acceleration of the LM would be known, such that it could follow it if activated at the right time.

Cheers,
FM

[pzkpfw]

2: How did they film the lunar module blasting off the surface. FROM the surface? AND have it pan up perfectly, keeping the module in center of frame?


This was only done in the later J missions that took a rover. (e.g. NOT Apollo 11).

There was a camera on the rover that was remotely controllable from Earth.

(It's also how there is footage of the two crew who landed picking up rocks etc. - if you watch the entire footage from the Moon you'll see times when the camera on the rover pans around a bit.)

The guy was Ed Fresnel or something (I'll look it up for you).

From: http://www.clavius.org/bibmilne.html


2. A camera panned upwards to catch Apollo 16's lunar lander lifting off the moon. Who did the filming?

Ed Fendell, the camera operator at Mission Control, by remote control. It's fairly common knowledge that the television cameras on Apollos 15, 16, and 17 were operated by remote control from Houston. And the video footage from those missions is rife with pans, tilts, and zooms with both astronauts away from the camera (indeed, in the frame).


He knew when the lander would take-off and how quick it would move - and practiced.

In any case, it was not so good on the first attempt! He got better at it.

[3L4NS1R]

Well, now I'm satisfied. Glad our race has gotten somewhere. Was a bit depressed for a few years there...

[Skyryder]

NASA has landed a man on Mars but since they can not convince half the world that they landed a man on the moon they have not advertised this success other than paying the Brits to produce LIFE ON MARS.:spanking:

Skyryder

[McJim]

You do realise that all the rockets, space shuttles and man made satellites are all just a conspiracy? There is a small army of people that run around after people with so called "satellite technology" such as satellite 'phones, global positioning devices and even your basic navigation equipment. They have huge rolls of wire that connect them to their base and through these they transmit with walkie talkies to your equipment making you think that there really are man made satellites in space.

So there.

[Timber020]

The whole "moon landing was a hoax" is simply the last gasps of the flat earth society. Everyone loves a conspiracy. Everyone can prove or disprove things if you just use the right evidence.

[fire eyes]

I have always wondered ... if they did land on the Moon ... why are they still not constantly making trips there? And dont you bastards shoot me down either because it's a serious question .. it's in the Human nature to consume everything within it's path ... why havent they made more trips and exhausted whatever resources available or even just to stroke the ego a little more???? hmmmmmmmm

[EJK]

They are gonna film another one shorthly. This time with CGI.

Comming soon to DVD and Blu Ray.

[pzkpfw]

I have always wondered ... if they did land on the Moon ... why are they still not constantly making trips there? And dont you bastards shoot me down either because it's a serious question .. it's in the Human nature to consume everything within it's path ... why havent they made more trips and exhausted whatever resources available or even just to stroke the ego a little more???? hmmmmmmmm

Just having done it - does not make it easy or cheap.

There could be gold bars lying around on the lunar soil, ready to be just picked up, and it would still be more expensive to bring it back to Earth than to just mine more, here.

Trips to the bottom of the Oceans are still pretty rare, too.

[fire eyes]

Just having done it - does not make it easy or cheap.

There could be gold bars lying around on the lunar soil, ready to be just picked up, and it would still be more expensive to bring it back to Earth than to just mine more, here.

Trips to the bottom of the Oceans are still pretty rare, too.ue

Fair point .. but I still don't buy it .. I don't believe money would be an issue .. old boys club and all .. those in that position of power can get their hands on anything. :oi-grr:

[Oakie]

Always find oil in the most hostile of places:laugh:

My mother-in-law has oil?

[Robbo]

It troubles me. Still. After many years of seeing the doco that put it in peoples heads that it may not have happened.

The two bits of evidence that trouble me most are

1: Where did the wind come from that made the flag wave?

2: How did they film the lunar module blasting off the surface. FROM the surface? AND have it pan up perfectly, keeping the module in center of frame?

If anyone can answer those, I'd LOVE to know.

I think i can help you there.

1) The boys had been eating baked beans the night before the landing and there were excessive bouts of flatulance after landing, hence the flag waving.

2) Simple really, they just filmed a landing and then played the film backwards so it looked like a lift off.

Mmmmm!!! Maybe i should have been a rocket scientist. :2thumbsup

But seriously, it Really Did Happen.

[Usarka]

"over time" can be pretty quick, depending on the actual pressures (absolute) and temperatures. Flash drying either using going from high pressure to ambient at high temperatures (e.g. milk powder production) or from ambient pressure to vacuum at ambient temperature is reasonably common.

In the experiment, if the sand was introduced into the vacuum chamber, and then the chamber evacuated, then the time it took for the chamber to pump down could be enough to removed the moisture. I never saw the program, so can't really comment on the actual experiment or if they appeared to edit anything out.

Interesting stuff (sorry cut the rest out for space reasons excuse the pun). So are you saying that you could dry sand out in a vacuum chamber through the process of lowering the pressure at a rate that doesn't suck the sand out also?



They are gonna film another one shorthly. This time with CGI.

Comming soon to DVD and Blu Ray.

Bang on! That's why they haven't "been back". Special effects improved heaps since the original - a scratchy half arsed b&w job won't cut the mustard anymore, but SF isn't quite good enough to be 100% believable yet. I heard they are going to hire Peter Jackson. :whistle:

[dipshit]

fair point .. but I still don't buy it .. I don't believe money would be an issue .. old boys club and all .. those in that position of power can get their hands on anything. :oi-grr:

The space race was largely a pissing match with the former USSR. Once the political desire dropped away... so did the $$$.

Interestingly China will be having manned missions into orbit in a couple of years at a time when the US will have none as it is phasing out the space shuttle programme.

And this is a good site explaining all the BS of the moon conspiracy nonsense.
http://www.badastronomy.com/bad/tv/foxapollo.html

[Fooman]

Interesting stuff (sorry cut the rest out for space reasons excuse the pun). So are you saying that you could dry sand out in a vacuum chamber through the process of lowering the pressure at a rate that doesn't suck the sand out also?

Pretty much, yeah. Vacuum pumps tend not to have a particularly high flow rate, rather, they have rather good seals! If the vacuum chamber was chocka full of sand, then some may get sucked up - bad for pump unless it had a filter.

There may also be a bit of bubbling - they sand may be a fluidised bed for a bit as the moisture boils off, but if I was to put a layer of wet sand in one of the vacuum chambers we have in out labs downstairs, I would not expect it to be sucked out (The liquids we de-gas in them aren't sucked out). It's not a vacuum cleaner! You have to remember that there is no flow into the vacuum chamber (it is sealed), so once the initial atmosphere is removed, there are no aerodynamic forces on the particles inside (other than from boiling as mentioned above) .

Cheers,
FM

[Oscar]

Oscar's Standard Moon Landing Conspiracy Answer:

Are you telling me that a Government that couldn't keep a secret about a blow-job in the Oval Office has managed to fool the entire world for 40 years with a faked moon landing?


Yeah right...

[Big Dave]

Maybe, just maybe the Astronauts had a good dry cleaner.