Welcome to
Science a GoGo's
Discussion Forums
Please keep your postings on-topic or they will be moved to a galaxy far, far away.
Your use of this forum indicates your agreement to our terms of use.
So that we remain spam-free, please note that all posts by new users are moderated.


The Forums
General Science Talk        Not-Quite-Science        Climate Change Discussion        Physics Forum        Science Fiction

Who's Online Now
0 members (), 141 guests, and 2 robots.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Latest Posts
Top Posters(30 Days)
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 12 of 16 1 2 10 11 12 13 14 15 16
Max #37662 03/03/11 04:25 PM
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 1,840
R
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
R
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 1,840
"Alarmtard"? Dear me Max, perhaps I should apologize for the the use of the word denialist, since you are obviously going to outgun me on abusiveness. But seriously, in my non-abusive opinion, any adult of reasonable intelligence and access to freely available information who believes that the Moon landing was fake is out of touch with reality to an extent that perhaps inspires sympathy rather than ridicule.


"Time is what prevents everything from happening at once" - John Wheeler
.
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 93
M
Max Offline
Member
Offline
Member
M
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 93
Looking...No, I don't see where I asked for your opinion of my mental state. I'm sorry that you are so prejudiced against non-believers. That comes from your alarmist mentality. I have already predicted that you alarmists would try character assassination, and there you are...attempting to insult my intelligence. I read you like a book.

"freely available information"...Yes, that's where I found the evidence to suggest that Apollo 12 was fake.

BTW, an apology followed by more insults is meaningless. The 'denialist" doesn't bother me. The rest of your post doesn't bother me. Your 2nd post doesn't bother me. Your method to attack those who don't agree with you is why I won't bother to debate with an alarmtard.

No amount of debate on this forum is going to prove or disprove a moon landing. I have strong reasons for not believing, you have your reason for believing. We'll leave it at that for now.

Take some pointers from Bill. He is capable of having a constructive debate.

Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 3,570
B
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
B
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 3,570
OK, Max, lets have a definition of "alarmtard". I like the sound of it, but wouldn't dare use it without a clear definition. smile


There never was nothing.
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 93
M
Max Offline
Member
Offline
Member
M
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 93
A nonsensical word without meaning. I like this one...

Alarmtard
1...
2. An alarmist wearing a leotard.

Max #37673 03/04/11 02:27 AM
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 3,570
B
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
B
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 3,570
Originally Posted By: Max
An alarmist wearing a leotard


Your imagination does you credit. smile


There never was nothing.
Max #37681 03/04/11 07:38 PM
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 1,840
R
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
R
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 1,840
Originally Posted By: Max
Looking...No, I don't see where I asked for your opinion of my mental state. I'm sorry that you are so prejudiced against non-believers. That comes from your alarmist mentality. I have already predicted that you alarmists would try character assassination, and there you are...attempting to insult my intelligence. I read you like a book.

"freely available information"...Yes, that's where I found the evidence to suggest that Apollo 12 was fake.

BTW, an apology followed by more insults is meaningless. The 'denialist" doesn't bother me. The rest of your post doesn't bother me. Your 2nd post doesn't bother me. Your method to attack those who don't agree with you is why I won't bother to debate with an alarmtard.

No amount of debate on this forum is going to prove or disprove a moon landing. I have strong reasons for not believing, you have your reason for believing. We'll leave it at that for now.

Take some pointers from Bill. He is capable of having a constructive debate.

I can see you're upset, but I gave an honest "opinion" that the only factor that can account for a view such as yours on this matter is a deficient grasp of certain realities recognized as self-evident by most people. This might understandably occur among some people of low intelligence, and that's certainly no negative reflection on their personalities. It's neither an insult to their intelligence, nor assassination of their characters.

Okay yes, I confess, I find it impossible to have a reasonable debate with you on this topic. I'll leave you to debate with those better equipped to accommodate you.


"Time is what prevents everything from happening at once" - John Wheeler
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 3,570
B
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
B
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 3,570
Max.
One thing I am not clear about is why you classify as alarmists (with, or without, leotards), those who accept the moon landings as genuine.


There never was nothing.
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 93
M
Max Offline
Member
Offline
Member
M
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 93
Red, You're funny. Looking...No, I only see three deranged posts from you that do not even touch the topic. It is no wonder that you're having problems with any type of debate. This thread is about moon landings. It is not,
"The Redewenur Psychoanalysis and Evaluation of Max"
Use that superior intelligence of yours and tell everyone what happens inside a magnetotail and why we shouldn't have any concerns. Use scientific explanations...IF you are capable. If not, more insults will be fine. I'll understand.

Bill,
The moon landings aren't part of it. It's a style of "debate" used by most alarmists. I have no idea if they really are alarmists. If not, they've been arguing with too many and it's rubbing off on them. lol. Astroturfers all use the same method. I call it The Alarmist Method. Very transparent and easy to spot. I don't have any problems with the moon landing believers. Most of my friends are moon landing believers and so was I, for many years. I don't have any friends that are alarmists, never met any except on the internet.

I could see where this was going from the first reply. I could have posted a few links, they are easy to find, but the scientists don't deserve to get beaten up by internet bullies with bad case of Grandiosity. Megalomania is a big problem these days.
shocked

Max #37687 03/05/11 02:12 AM
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 3,570
B
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
B
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 3,570
Quote:
Megalomania is a big problem these days.


Of course, it's rife, what else would you expect? The internet has suddenly given the ordinary person, with opinions and often with attitude, a chance to take those opinions out of the pub, off the street corner and right across the world. It's still a novelty, and will take a while to settle out.

Its probably important for those with a modicum of common sense to set a sane(ish) example. smile


There never was nothing.
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 93
M
Max Offline
Member
Offline
Member
M
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 93
Full Moons Get Electrified by Earth's Magnetic "Tail"
Effect "could bring about serious damages to the human missions," expert says.

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2010/11/101118-science-space-full-moon-electric-charge/

Max #37695 03/05/11 01:56 PM
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 3,570
B
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
B
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 3,570
Max, Interesting article. As you will be aware, it contains the quote "Apollo astronauts never landed on a full moon and they never experienced the magnetotail."

Would I be right in thinking that there are official statements that say the opposite?

Could there be a distinction between a full moon as perceived from Earth, and a full moon as perceived by the astronauts who might not be in a direct sun - Earth - moon line?


There never was nothing.
Joined: Mar 2010
Posts: 1,100
K
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
K
Joined: Mar 2010
Posts: 1,100
Originally Posted By: Bill S.
Could there be a distinction between a full moon as perceived from Earth, and a full moon as perceived by the astronauts who might not be in a direct sun - Earth - moon line?

No. The relevance of the full moon is that's when it's in the Earth's magnetotail. I rather think somebody got misquoted or confused between "passing through the plasma sheet on the night side of the moon" and "anywhere on the moon any time while it was full."

But even if they in the right spot at the time, all the stories about the effects are quite mild, clearly suggesting that people could survive fine, but just there might be some inconveniences or possible, but unquantified damage to some types of instruments.

And we happened to be there during very quiet plasma conditions," ... "Things might be very different during a solar storm, or during a passage through the plasma sheet, the region that was looked at in this study," he said.

"Certainly when you have big electric fields, you start to worry about damage to sensitive electronics, etc. And if those electric fields mobilize dust, that could become an additional problem."


Oh, what's a libertarian? Someone who believes in freedom?? Well I'm not a slave trader if that's what he was thinking.

Last edited by kallog; 03/12/11 04:36 PM.
kallog #37799 03/13/11 08:24 AM
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 93
M
Max Offline
Member
Offline
Member
M
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 93
More speculation. I could speculate about a static discharge between the lunar lander and the surface of the moon when landing.

Try to focus on the salient points, Kallog.

"And we happened to be there during very quiet plasma conditions," ... "Things might be very different during a solar storm, or during a passage through the plasma sheet, the region that was looked at in this study," he said.

Max #37800 03/13/11 10:00 AM
Joined: Mar 2010
Posts: 1,100
K
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
K
Joined: Mar 2010
Posts: 1,100
Originally Posted By: Max
Try to focus on the salient points, Kallog.

"And we happened to be there during very quiet plasma conditions," ... "Things might be very different during a solar storm, or during a passage through the plasma sheet, the region that was looked at in this study," he said.


So? Were the Appollo 11 astronauts supposed to be have passed through the plasma sheet? Is this another contradiction?

kallog #37817 03/14/11 07:38 PM
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 93
M
Max Offline
Member
Offline
Member
M
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 93
I haven't checked Apollo 11. Apollo 12 would have had to of spent 6 days inside the magnetotail and passed through it from one side to the other. This is an interesting topic. There is much more to it than a faked moon landing. Imagine traveling through space with lame 20th century technology, then..."ZAP"...Oops, we just got hit by a magnetic reconnection. "What was that?"

Max #37818 03/14/11 11:50 PM
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 4,136
P
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
P
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 4,136
Im not replying to anything anyone has posted in this thread.

but I do have a genuine question concerning the
1ST ( American ) moon landing Apollo 11

in the below video there is a distinct lack of lag between
communication from the lunar lander to the earth.

there are immediate responces , and what seems to be houston stepping on a communication with a reply to the communication that is in progress.

anyone that watches the news experiences a few seconds of lag from their country to countries far away on earth , so at 180,000 miles distance from the earth to the moon
means that the communication is traveling at the speed of light.

or more!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2BvbD-1qZtc

if you listen to the entire video all the way through
you will find the immediate replies from houston but at the very end of the video , when the lunar lander reports
houston tranquility base here the eagle has landed
houston immediately replies
roger tranquility we copy your on the ground.

notice while the eagle (lunar lander) was flying the call sign of the sender (radio) was eagle.

but only after the lunar lander (eagle) landed would
the call sign change from (eagle)to (tranquility).

this shows the instant communication better than anything.

my question is could the heated electrons in the magnetotail somehow increase communication speeds.

looks like it moved a bit Max , think about it.

now its over 220,000 miles to the moon.

well that certainly breaks the speed of light.

because its only 186,000 miles per second.







3/4 inch of dust build up on the moon in 4.527 billion years,LOL and QM is fantasy science.
paul #37821 03/15/11 03:11 PM
Joined: Mar 2010
Posts: 1,100
K
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
K
Joined: Mar 2010
Posts: 1,100
Can't watch the video because of my internet connection. But couldn't it have been edited for viewer convenience?

Another possibility is they just preempted the delays and started speaking 2s sooner. You did mention "stepping on.. with a reply". Obviously they're not communicating backwards in time!!!!

Max #37822 03/15/11 03:17 PM
Joined: Mar 2010
Posts: 1,100
K
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
K
Joined: Mar 2010
Posts: 1,100
Originally Posted By: Max
This is an interesting topic. There is much more to it than a faked moon landing. Imagine traveling through space with lame 20th century technology, then..."ZAP"...Oops, we just got hit by a magnetic reconnection. "What was that?"


Yes, I'd like to find out what's the cause of this inconsistency. Obviously something, somewhere must be wrong. And as you say it gives a bit of opportunity for retrospective worrying!

kallog #37823 03/15/11 04:06 PM
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 4,136
P
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
P
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 4,136
its a conspiracy in its infancy.

but it appears to be true until you think about it.

the voice recording was obviously made in houston and not

in the lunar lander.


3/4 inch of dust build up on the moon in 4.527 billion years,LOL and QM is fantasy science.
paul #37825 03/15/11 07:08 PM
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 3,570
B
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
B
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 3,570
Originally Posted By: K
Obviously they're not communicating backwards in time!!!!


Kallog, what's happened to your imagination!


There never was nothing.
Page 12 of 16 1 2 10 11 12 13 14 15 16

Link Copied to Clipboard
Newest Members
debbieevans, bkhj, jackk, Johnmattison, RacerGT
865 Registered Users
Sponsor

Science a GoGo's Home Page | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Contact UsokÂþ»­¾W
Features | News | Books | Physics | Space | Climate Change | Health | Technology | Natural World

Copyright © 1998 - 2016 Science a GoGo and its licensors. All rights reserved.

Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5