Moon light - the word of God vs falsely so called science

Radagast said:

The drop bear, Thylarctos plummetus, is indeed a problem. But I can guarantee you that all tourists who spread vegemite behind their ears will be 100% safe from drop bear attacks.

Click to expand...

That is what the umbrella is for.

Kate30 said:

Hi Ophiolite that’s very ennoble of you that you look apon Radagast with such high regard as a gentlemen. And than to come to his aid because you feel he was being mocked as well, which was never the case. You say that both you and I know that the post wasn’t funny. Really. Ophiolite your not me. And you don’t know what I found funny about the post. No I won’t be removing my funny award any time soon because mocking in a vandictive way was never my intent. And if people get kicked off the site for posting funny’s. Well so be it.

Click to expand...

Well, you obviously have a radically different sense of humour to me (and place a different value on paragraph structure). If you have the time I would be interested to learn what you found amusing about the post.

Kate30 said:

As to the rocket blast you mentioned blowing up dust but also blowing it away. Yes I did consider that. That’s why I never mentioned a crater beneath the Luna module for that very reason. But many do believe strongly that there should have been a crater there as well. My issue was always the amount of dust lacking on the pads of the Luna module. You say because the rocket blew it away. That fine I simply disagree. Now I must be back to work.

Click to expand...

Belief is irrelevant in science. What counts are observations, hypotheses and tests. Facts, not fancy. The moon landings happened. Feel free to live in a duller world where they didn't and where facts don't count.

Ophiolite said:

Well, you obviously have a radically different sense of humour to me (and place a different value on paragraph structure). If you have the time I would be interested to learn what you found amusing about the post.

Belief is irrelevant in science. What counts are observations, hypotheses and tests. Facts, not fancy. The moon landings happened. Feel free to live in a duller world where they didn't and where facts don't count.

Click to expand...

Ophiolite you think I have a radically different sense of humour. My sense of humour is just fine. And no I won’t be addressing what I found funny about Radagasts post. Because the funny sticker was not addressed to you. Sorry to hear that your world would be a rather dull place without the moon landings.

Kate30 said:

Ophiolite you think I have a radically different sense of humour. My sense of humour is just fine. And no I won’t be addressing what I found funny about Radagasts post. Because the funny sticker was not addressed to you. Sorry to hear that your world would be a rather dull place without the moon landings.

Click to expand...

1. Do you have reading comprehension difficulties? I did not say that a radically different sense of humour was not fine, just that is seemed radically different. Those are quite different things.
2. You placed the "funny sticker" publicly, visible to all members and lurkers. As such it was addressed to me.
3. Reading comprehension again: I suggested the world would be a duller place without the moon landings, not that it would be a dull place.
4. I highlight the issues of reading comprehension not to provoke you, not to be a pedantic nitpicker, but to suggest if these are symptomatic of the precision with which you absorb information it could account for the peculiar notions you hold regarding the moon landings. Perhaps you could reflect on that, though I doubt you will.
5. If you feel my posts to you are patronising you may be right. When one has made as many mistakes as I have it difficult not to recognise them in others. I'm sure you can rise above any feeling of being slighted.

Ophiolite said:

1. Do you have reading comprehension difficulties? I did not say that a radically different sense of humour was not fine, just that is seemed radically different. Those are quite different things.
2. You placed the "funny sticker" publicly, visible to all members and lurkers. As such it was addressed to me.
3. Reading comprehension again: I suggested the world would be a duller place without the moon landings, not that it would be a dull place.
4. I highlight the issues of reading comprehension not to provoke you, not to be a pedantic nitpicker, but to suggest if these are symptomatic of the precision with which you absorb information it could account for the peculiar notions you hold regarding the moon landings. Perhaps you could reflect on that, though I doubt you will.
5. If you feel my posts to you are patronising you may be right. When one has made as many mistakes as I have it difficult not to recognise them in others. I'm sure you can rise above any feeling of being slighted.

Click to expand...

1 do I have reading comprehension difficulties. No 2 I placed a funny sticker on another members post: Not yours but publicly yes. Ophiolite there are a awful lot of funny’s on peoples posts including some on mine . I never really thought of it that way. But since you believe they all do belong to you, than please do question everyone’s funny on the site and not just mine. 3 You mention reading comprehension once more. You said ( the moon landings happened. Feel free to live in a duller world where they didn’t and the facts don’t count. ) In my reply I said ( rather dull ) And you said duller. Is there really much difference you think. 4 As to the way one absorbs information that we all must do. To the peculiar notions you think I hold.. Ophiolite I simply look at things like temperatures. Your dealing with temperatures of over 250 on the moon. Water boils at around a hundred. I just don’t see how those water cooling systems that the astronauts had would have made any difference. They would have been fried or boiled alive. The minus temperature at night does not look much more inviting either. Then you have radiation along with the vacuum of deep space. They did experiments with a vacuum chamber here on earth . Within in a matter of a minutes the person nearly died . And the very reason they stopped experimenting with humans under such conditions. So there are genuine reasons why people don’t believe that we went to the moon including myself. 5 Yes we do all make mistakes. I’m not sure how many mistakes you do. But you live long time so far so you must have fixed really quick. Wishing you a nice day.

Kate30 said:

3 You mention reading comprehension once more. You said ( the moon landings happened. Feel free to live in a duller world where they didn’t and the facts don’t count. ) In my reply I said ( rather dull ) And you said duller. Is there really much difference you think.

Click to expand...

Well, I shall take that as a serious reply. If you genuinely believe there is not "much difference" between the two then really further discussion would be pointless. I limit my forum communications to English. Thank you for your time. (Do tune in for the next moon landing in October 2026. We've already started filming.)

You would think the Russians would be the first to scream the moon landing was a fake given they lost the race.
Perhaps the Russians had something the armchair conspiracy theorists didn't possess; the ability of tracking the Apollo missions themselves and finding the lunar module(s) didn't end up in some Hollywood studio.
It's much the same case the Americans didn't scream conspiracy when Sputnik 1 was launched.

sjastro said:

You would think the Russians would be the first to scream the moon landing was a fake given they lost the race.
Perhaps the Russians had something the armchair conspiracy theorists didn't possess; the ability of tracking the Apollo missions themselves and finding the lunar module(s) didn't end up in some Hollywood studio.
It's much the same case the Americans didn't scream conspiracy when Sputnik 1 was launched.

Click to expand...

I read some time ago an "explanation" of why the Russians kept quite. I don't recall the details, but - as you might imagine - it was unlikely conspiracy, piled on top of unfounded speculation, making a Dan Brown novel look like a scholarly study by a top historian.

Ophiolite said:

I read some time ago an "explanation" of why the Russians kept quite. I don't recall the details, but - as you might imagine - it was unlikely conspiracy, piled on top of unfounded speculation, making a Dan Brown novel look like a scholarly study by a top historian.

Click to expand...

Here is what the Russians thought of Apollo 11.
The Moon Landing through Soviet Eyes: A Q&A with Sergei Khrushchev, son of former premier Nikita Khrushchev

sjastro said:

Here is what the Russians thought of Apollo 11.

Click to expand...

...

The KGB officer had just returned from Africa, and he had brought a small telescope. So we looked through the telescope, but we didn’t see any moon landing! So it was still questionable to us! (laughs).

Click to expand...

SelfSim said:

...

Click to expand...

The KGB officer had just returned from Africa, and he had brought a small telescope. So we looked through the telescope, but we didn’t see any moon landing! So it was still questionable to us! (laughs).

Click to expand...

Those Russians have always boasted their Maksutov telescopes are superior to any decadent Western designed system.

Kate30 said:

Your dealing with temperatures of over 250 on the moon. Water boils at around a hundred. I just don’t see how those water cooling systems that the astronauts had would have made any difference.

Click to expand...

1. The moon has no air, so there's no air temperature.

2. The surface temperature is about 120 degrees Celsius (250 Fahrenheit). Thick boots are enough. They had thick boots.

3. The sunlight is extremely hot, but insulation, cooling, and a reflective white outer layer handle that.

4. The spacesuits were also resistant to vacuum.

Radagast said:

1. The moon has no air, so there's no air temperature.

2. The surface temperature is about 120 degrees Celsius (250 Fahrenheit). Thick boots are enough. They had thick boots.

3. The sunlight is extremely hot, but insulation, cooling, and a reflective white outer layer handle that.

4. The spacesuits were also resistant to vacuum.

Click to expand...

I am not saying that anyone is a Flat Earth advocate here, but one thing I have noticed about them is that they do not seem to be able to do any math at all. One way that one tried to "disprove" space was to take a look at the largest man made vacuum chamber on the Earth. It has very very thick concrete walls. He thought that was to "keep the vacuum out". Actually they have to be thick to be strong since pressure is a force exerted on a surface. In the English system it is roughly 15 lbs per square inch. That means that each square foot has to be able to support over a ton.

World's Largest Vacuum Chamber

With vertical walls of 122 feet and a diameter of 100 feet that building has to be able to support inward forces of roughly 40,000 tons. Meanwhile a spacesuit only has to support the air pressure within it which is roughly at a third of an atmosphere. The average man on the other hand has a surface are of 2 square yards, 18 square feet. And only a third of that pressure it takes much less material to keep the air in. The fabric would have to support roughly 600 pounds per square foot. In tons it would have to be able to support only about six of them as opposed to the astronomical figure needed for the chamber.

At any rate the flat Earther seemed to think that one would need just as thick of a fabric as those concrete walls to "keep the vacuum out" of the space suit.

Subduction Zone said:

I am not saying that anyone is a Flat Earth advocate here, but one thing I have noticed about them is that they do not seem to be able to do any math at all.

Click to expand...

And that says something about the state of STEM education.

Radagast said:

And that says something about the state of STEM education.

Click to expand...

Since we are talking about Lunar Landing deniers here is a link to one of my favorites. Makes sure that anti-facepalming protocols are observed. This is a high risk of concussion site:

Ralph Renés' Website about the NASA/Apollo moon hoax and how they faked their science and physics

Subduction Zone said:

Ralph Renés' Website about the NASA/Apollo moon hoax and how they faked their science and physics

Click to expand...

Right up there with the legendary Usenet personality known as Archimedes Plutonium.

Subduction Zone said:

Since we are talking about Lunar Landing deniers here is a link to one of my favorites. Makes sure that anti-facepalming protocols are observed. This is a high risk of concussion site:

Ralph Renés' Website about the NASA/Apollo moon hoax and how they faked their science and physics

Click to expand...

Any website that uses Comic Sans as its base font can safely be ignored as nonsense. This is an immutable law of the universe, baked into the fabric of the cosmos during the first moments of the Big Bang.

Subduction Zone said:

I am not saying that anyone is a Flat Earth advocate here, but one thing I have noticed about them is that they do not seem to be able to do any math at all.

Click to expand...

You can count on that. . . . Well, you can. Them, not so much.

Gene2memE said:

Any website that uses Comic Sans as its base font can safely be ignored as nonsense. This is an immutable law of the universe, baked into the fabric of the cosmos during the first moments of the Big Bang.

Click to expand...

Why all the hate for Comic Sans?

Comic Sans is the Green Ink of the internet. It's the go-to font for the absolute edge of the lunatic fringe.

The only other font that comes close to its legendary awfulness is Papyrus, and that is usually limited to new-agers and similar touchy-feely woowoo.