Topic: Moon travel (Read 11358 times)

SIMON :-) · « **Reply #30 on:** October 03, 2004, 17:11:59 »

Don't know about the moon thing, although the whole light/shadow story was proved correct. :?
I do know Sir Richard Branson will have the first commercial flights into space by the end of 2006. :shock:

Wanderer · « **Reply #31 on:** October 03, 2004, 17:28:26 »

I take it they'll be doing return tickets :)

Ed

m0awb · « **Reply #32 on:** October 03, 2004, 17:52:40 »

Quote from: "Andy."

Check out some of the pictures for yourselves.

It must have taken 1000's of pounds of thrust to lower something that heavy, gently to the surface without rattling the drivers fillings and not a single crater in sight.

Anyone ever accidently sneezed into an ashtray without blasting ash all over their desk?

Fantastic night sky in the background, no light pollution from any city street lamps. Just the right conditions for looking at the stars... Pity there isn't a single star in any shot whatsoever though isn't it?

As for that flag flapping in the breeze, do the laws of physics not apply in 1/6th gravity and absolute zero atmosphere?

Landed on the moon in 1969? I don't think so... But that's just my opinion, and few million others :roll:

Andy. · « **Reply #33 on:** October 03, 2004, 18:28:12 »

Hmm..........why are there no stars :?:

m0awb · « **Reply #34 on:** October 03, 2004, 18:37:40 »

Quote from: "Andy."

Hmm..........why are there no stars :?:

Because NASA forgot to paint them in on the backdrop thinking that us mere thicko civilians wouldn't notice.

SIMON :-) · « **Reply #35 on:** October 03, 2004, 18:39:41 »

Quote from: "m0awb"

Quote from: "Andy."
Hmm..........why are there no stars :?:

Because NASA forgot to paint them in on the backdrop thinking that us mere thicko civilians wouldn't notice.

No No No No Yes :arrow: it was cloudy

Wanderer · « **Reply #36 on:** October 03, 2004, 18:42:05 »

Well silly....

They took the photos during the day.
They only come out at night.

:? 8) :roll:

Ed

ian_s · « **Reply #37 on:** October 03, 2004, 19:01:45 »

can you see the stars in daylight? nope. so the guys on the moon wouldnt either, and the ambient level of light on moon is actually far higher than it is on earth, cos theres no atmosphere to absorb it.

i think the moon lander weighed about 17 tons, in earths gravity, so on the moon that would make it a bit less than 3 tons, which is less than something like a helicopter. do they leave craters when they land on sand?

SIMON :-) · « **Reply #38 on:** October 03, 2004, 19:59:14 »

Would have thought so, you should see the size creater when me and Paj hit the ground :shock:
Huge 8)
The sand gets in my brakes though :P

m0awb · « **Reply #39 on:** October 03, 2004, 21:47:11 »

Quote from: "ian_s"

can you see the stars in daylight? nope. so the guys on the moon wouldnt either, and the ambient level of light on moon is actually far higher than it is on earth, cos theres no atmosphere to absorb it.

Or reflect it so one cancels out the other. The shear blackness and lack of any detail in the background of the photo's is I believe a bit suspect to say the least.

Quote from: "ian_s"

i think the moon lander weighed about 17 tons, in earths gravity, so on the moon that would make it a bit less than 3 tons, which is less than something like a helicopter. do they leave craters when they land on sand?

Given that a helicopter relies on lift rather than thrust I'd say it would make one hell of a crater if it tried to land on the moon from the same height.

A better analogy would be a Harrier jump jet and they would make a bloody great crater landing vertically on sand. The moon surface was said to be "firm and powdery". Even the level of thrust needed to land a 3 ton object from that height softly on the moon would blast away most if not all the powder from the immediate vicinity and leave the "firm" (possibly) bedrock exposed. It doesn't take a NASA scientist or a photographic laboratory wizz kid to work out all the inconsistencies that are clearly visible in the photo's. In fact you can discount NASA scientist completely as they all missed them completely.

Facinating subject though and given the urgency at the time, a few porkies, propaganda, from the USA government should'nt suprize anyone :)

ian_s · « **Reply #40 on:** October 04, 2004, 09:13:48 »

Quote from: "m0awb"

Given that a helicopter relies on lift rather than thrust I'd say it would make one hell of a crater if it tried to land on the moon from the same height.

it still relies on something being thrust downwards at a vast rate of knots

Quote from: "m0awb"

Facinating subject though and given the urgency at the time, a few porkies, propaganda, from the USA government should'nt suprize anyone :)

given the american governments ability to cover things up, and keep them secret, this would have been proved to be true years ago.
cmon, they couldnt even plant some WMD's in iraq, and thats all thats needed to justify the iraq war.
then theres Watergate, and the abuse of the iraqi soldiers, and Bush winning the last election. they are useless at covering things up. unless of course they are letting those through to hide the fact that they are actually very good at hiding things, and theres alot that we dont know about. now theres a decent conspiracy theory. that one could run for years :)

m0awb · « **Reply #41 on:** October 04, 2004, 09:40:34 »

Quote from: "ian_s"

it still relies on something being thrust downwards at a vast rate of knots

The downdraft of a chopper is spread over a larger area than a rocket engine and because of the lift factor would only be a fraction of the downward thrust needed to support the chopper given the abscence of lift.

Either way, I watched it again last night and now I'm even more convinced it didn't happen.

Until some independant body lands on the moon at the same site and verifies the existance of the LEM, flag and footprints I don't think we'll ever really know the truth.

Quote from: "ian_s"

they are useless at covering things up.

So, who was it that really shot Kennedy then :?:

m0awb · « **Reply #42 on:** October 04, 2004, 12:04:21 »

For those that missed it, it's on again on Wednesday, Discovery channel number 551 at 10pm and again at 11pm Discovery+1 channel 552.

Wanderer · « **Reply #43 on:** October 04, 2004, 12:38:29 »

They would claim that the LEM was stolen by a weather balloon.....

With technology these days you'd think we could soon see the LEM from Hubble or something like that.

Ed

m0awb · « **Reply #44 on:** October 04, 2004, 13:20:47 »

Quote from: "Wanderer"

With technology these days you'd think we could soon see the LEM from Hubble or something like that.

Fully agree with you 100%. They know the coordinates, Hubble is powerful enough to see to the edge of the galaxy but they can't spot a bloody great space ship a few 1000 (Maybe a bit more) miles away.

And before anyone says they can't see it because it's on the dartk side, if it was they couldn't have photographed the Earth from the moon surface... Unless they took the photo's before they didn't land on the moon :)

Wanderer · « **Reply #45 on:** October 04, 2004, 15:52:29 »

I had that problem on my driving test. THe guy asked if I could see a number plate at 20 whatever yards and I said I can see the sun and that's 93 million miles away. What more do you want :)

Ed

ian_s · « **Reply #46 on:** October 04, 2004, 22:05:58 »

Quote from: "m0awb"

So, who was it that really shot Kennedy then :?:

dont look at me, i was born 18 years after he died

datalas · « **Reply #47 on:** October 04, 2004, 22:21:03 »

I think the answer you're looking for lies within this picture...

muddyweb · « **Reply #48 on:** October 04, 2004, 22:27:03 »

:lol: :lol:

Took me a while...

LMAO

m0awb · « **Reply #49 on:** October 04, 2004, 22:28:26 »

Quote from: "ian_s"

dont look at me, i was born 18 years after he died

The point I'm making is Kennedy was shot 6 years before the "Moon Landing" and it's still not public knowlege who shot him.

So can the Yanks keep a secret? I would say keeping the "Moon Landing" a secret would be a doddle compaired to the Kennedy shooting and they've done a pretty good job at that so far.

Closest men ever to come close to walking on the moon is Sting or Michael Jackson, and he's a real Space Cadet :)

ian_s · « **Reply #50 on:** October 05, 2004, 08:27:44 »

kenedy was shot by lee harvey oswald.
okay, he might not have fired the fatal shot, but he did shoot him.

m0awb · « **Reply #51 on:** October 05, 2004, 08:35:29 »

Quote from: "ian_s"

kenedy was shot by lee harvey oswald.

He was hiding in a big silver weather balloon made of balsa wood wasn't he :roll:

datalas · « **Reply #52 on:** October 05, 2004, 08:41:04 »

no, but he had CIA training....

Wanderer · « **Reply #53 on:** October 05, 2004, 22:27:59 »

Took me ages but now I know who really did it!

Brilliant. Solved after all these years.

Ed

Landieman · « **Reply #54 on:** October 06, 2004, 22:56:24 »

wayo, i was born in 1986 so i cant *really* get the blame for this one!!!! but still you never know... :roll:

Paul · « **Reply #55 on:** October 06, 2004, 22:59:27 »

But isn't that you in the photo Ben..?

The one with the hat.. :lol:

Landieman · « **Reply #56 on:** October 06, 2004, 23:03:15 »

well yeah but we all know what daz can do with photoshop....

bouncyman · « **Reply #57 on:** October 07, 2004, 17:42:44 »

hello missed it again last night .. doh!!please tell me somebody recorded it?

anyways hubble couldnt see the moon coz its to close its designed to look into deep space.

will i ever get to see this proggy :(

bouncy aka flappy happy chappy

davidlandy · « **Reply #58 on:** October 07, 2004, 19:13:50 »

only just twigged that Ben is in the photo!

very , very funny!!! :D :D :D

well done Daz

we could do with a few more of these kind of pics on this forum.

Wanderer · « **Reply #59 on:** October 07, 2004, 20:03:53 »

Yep excellent stuff.
I spent ages trying to work out what was happening even working who the guys in the car were and trying to work out what the guy in the top left hand corner was doing. Then Kev dropped me a hint about a hat.

Brilliant

Ed

News:

AuthorTopic: Moon travel (Read 11358 times)

SIMON :-)

SIMON :-)

SIMON :-)

bouncyman