Another look at the moon landing.

Strong in Him · Saturday at 10:24 AM

Apple Sky said:
This makes me wonder why your here on this thread.

I told you that on another thread.
i) I don't like the implication, or sometimes statement, that unless we believe the earth is flat, we do not have the truth and do not believe the Bible. And yes, that is relevant to moon landings because the earth was photographed from space. Accept the moon landings, and you have to accept a photo they took showing the shape of the earth.

ii) I don't like the fact that you have gone back on your acceptance of the moon landings and are saying that eye witnesses who are now born again Christians, are liars. You WERE moved by Charles Duke's testimony - deny it or ignore it, you can't go back in time and change the fact that you watched it and it affected you. In fact, you were so moved that you said 'sorry' to God for doubting.
Now you have apparently said 'sorry' to God for having said 'sorry' to him.
It gives you no credibility - but worse, it gives Christianity a bad name.
Believing/not believing in the moon landings is not a sin - saying one thing to God, changing your mind and calling other Christians liars, might well be.

iii) I live in hope that you will one day at least try to look at things reasonably.
Learn how to interpret the Bible - rather than saying "this word is/is not mentioned".
Learn some basics about science. Yes, it is difficult, but there are plenty of kids books, or "idiot's guide books" around if you really wanted to learn.
Stop saying that everyone/everything that does not accept your beliefs is lying, faking or actually involved in some conspiracy theory. Unless you genuinely suffer from paranoia, there is no reason to believe that experts can't be trusted.
People who have studied for years to get where they are or do what they are doing, know a little bit more about stuff that someone who "can't get my head around" science.

Apple Sky · Saturday at 10:53 AM

Strong in Him said:
Learn some basics about science. Yes, it is difficult, but there are plenty of kids books, or "idiot's guide books" around if you really wanted to learn.

You couldn't get more insulting if you tried.

Hentenza · Saturday at 11:02 AM

Apple Sky said:
Bart Sibrel - An author who wrote a book on space & NASA. Bill Kaysing is another author of of a book titled ' We Never Went to the Moon: America's Thirty Billion Dollar Swindle.'

Kaysing asserted that during his much earlier tenure at Rocketdyne he was privy to documents pertaining to the Mercury, Gemini, Atlas, and Apollo programs, and argued that one did not need an engineering or science degree to determine that a hoax was being perpetrated

NASA lacked the technical expertise to put a man on the Moon.

the absence of stars in lunar surface photographs was indicative of a hoax.[5]

there were unexplained optical anomalies in the photographs taken on the Moon.[6]

there was an absence of blast craters beneath the Lunar Modules, and that the rocket engines of the Lunar Modules should have generated an enormous dust cloud near their landing sites during the final seconds of descent.[7]

the death of Thomas Baron, a quality control and safety inspector for North American Aviation, was mysterious and indicative of a hoax.

He also noted that Dutch newspapers questioned the "authenticity" of the Moon landings.

The overwhelming proof of the moon landings prove these conspiracy theories totally wrong. You take the word if a cab driver over the pain truth.

d taylor · Saturday at 11:05 AM

Strong in Him said:
On the ground, maybe not.
But in the sky; a plane and the moon can be photographed together, A bird and the sun can be photographed together - as can a balloon and a cloud.

-

I do not believe you understand my point, it is not about photographing objects together.

The point is, to objects close to size and that are supposed to be at great distances apart. When photographed are not actually that different in their appearance.

These are mountains photographed from 275 miles away. So if they appear this small do you really think an ISS would be actually visible.

Hentenza · Saturday at 11:14 AM

d taylor said:
-

The ISS is not much bigger than an airplane and so photographing it. It is not 240+ miles difference in height, if it was that much difference in their distances. The ISS when photographed, would in no way be able to be zoomed in as close as i can. I mean there is a big difference from 6 miles high to 250 miles high and the difference is just not there.

The largest passenger airplane, 747-400 has 31285 cubic feet of pressurized space while the ISS has a max pressurize space of 35491.

Here is a zoomed picture of the ISS taken from earth. Can’t post it so you’ll have to go to the article to see it.

https://www.the-sun.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/6/2022/03/KS_OP_ISS_ASTRONAUTS1.jpg?w=1280&quality=44

Hentenza · Saturday at 11:17 AM

d taylor said:
-

I am happy because i no longer believe these moon trip lies.

Welcome to the land of nonsense.

d taylor · Saturday at 11:28 AM

Hentenza said:
The largest passenger airplane, 747-400 has 31285 cubic feet of pressurized space while the ISS has a max pressurize space of 35491.

Here is a zoomed picture of the ISS taken from earth. Can’t post it so you’ll have to go to the article to see it.

https://www.the-sun.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/6/2022/03/KS_OP_ISS_ASTRONAUTS1.jpg?w=1280&quality=44

-

I do not need your little link, i have taken my on photos of the iSS, so goodbye.

Hentenza · Saturday at 11:36 AM

d taylor said:
-

I do not need your little link, i have taken my on photos of the iSS, so goodbye.

lol let’s think what is actually little here. You don’t like the link because it shows a very clear picture of the ISS from earth that destroys your conspiracy garbage. Go figure.

Strong in Him · Saturday at 11:41 AM

Apple Sky said:
You couldn't get more insulting if you tried.

I'm not trying to be insulting.
Children's books explain things simply. And there is a whole series of books called "The idiot's guide to ......." . Look them up, they cover all sorts of subjects, and explain things simply and thoroughly.

There's no point in suggesting you start with Einstein when you find science difficult.

Apple Sky · Saturday at 11:44 AM

Hentenza said:
https://www.the-sun.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/6/2022/03/KS_OP_ISS_ASTRONAUTS1.jpg?w=1280&quality=44

This picture looks like an overgrown satellite gone wrong.

Apple Sky · Saturday at 11:46 AM

Strong in Him said:
I'm not trying to be insulting.
Children's books explain things simply. And there is a whole series of books called "The idiot's guide to ......." . Look them up, they cover all sorts of subjects, and explain things simply and thoroughly.

There's no point in suggesting you start with Einstein when you find science difficult.

Okay - Thank you.

prodromos · Saturday at 1:25 PM

d taylor said:
I do not believe you understand my point, it is not about photographing objects together.

I understood the point you were making, and it was pointless, seeing as you provided no details of lens, focal length, etc.

d taylor said:
The point is, to objects close to size and that are supposed to be at great distances apart. When photographed are not actually that different in their appearance.

Yeah, your fuzzy blob image of the ISS looks exactly like the clear, sharp image of the passenger jet :doh:

d taylor said:
These are mountains photographed from 275 miles away. So if they appear this small do you really think an ISS would be actually visible.

View attachment 370722

275 miles through consistently dense atmosphere, as opposed to rapidly decreasing density straight up? Yes, but it appears as a bright dot to the naked eye, since the reflected sunlight contrasts so much with the darkness of the night sky.

prodromos · Saturday at 1:38 PM

d taylor said:
The ISS is not much bigger than an airplane and so photographing it. It is not 240+ miles difference in height, if it was that much difference in their distances. The ISS when photographed, would in no way be able to be zoomed in as close as i can. I mean there is a big difference from 6 miles high to 250 miles high and the difference is just not there.

Please present the calculations you performed to determine this.

Strong in Him · Saturday at 1:39 PM

Apple Sky said:
This picture looks like an overgrown satellite gone wrong.

But you don't believe in satellites.

Hentenza · Saturday at 1:54 PM

Apple Sky said:
This picture looks like an overgrown satellite gone wrong.

Nope. Is the ISS.

Apple Sky · Saturday at 2:23 PM

Strong in Him said:
But you don't believe in satellites.

No I don't, so what is that thing that is supposed to be up there ? It's laughable ^_^

Apple Sky · Saturday at 2:28 PM

Hentenza said:
Nope. Is the ISS.

It does make giggle a bit

Hentenza · Saturday at 2:30 PM

Apple Sky said:
No I don't, so what is that thing that is supposed to be up there ? It's laughable

International Space Station and about 11,000 satellites.

Hentenza · Saturday at 2:32 PM

Apple Sky said:
It does make giggle a bit

Giggle away. But then don’t get insulted when people here suggest kid books for you to learn from.

Apple Sky · Saturday at 2:44 PM

Hentenza said:
Nope. Is the ISS.

The stupidity on the supposed ISS.

Another look at the moon landing.

Great is thy faithfulness

In Sight Like Unto An Emerald

I will fear no evil for You are with me

Well-Known Member

I will fear no evil for You are with me

I will fear no evil for You are with me

Well-Known Member

I will fear no evil for You are with me

Great is thy faithfulness

In Sight Like Unto An Emerald

In Sight Like Unto An Emerald

Senior Veteran

Senior Veteran

Great is thy faithfulness

I will fear no evil for You are with me

In Sight Like Unto An Emerald

In Sight Like Unto An Emerald

I will fear no evil for You are with me

I will fear no evil for You are with me

In Sight Like Unto An Emerald

Similar threads