| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Were The Moon Landings Real or Hollywood? |
| Real! |
|
23% |
[ 11 ] |
| Special Effects! |
|
51% |
[ 24 ] |
| I Like Sitting On Fences, I Feel Safer... |
|
6% |
[ 3 ] |
| I Neither Know Nor Care! |
|
4% |
[ 2 ] |
| What Has This Poll Got To Do With 911? |
|
14% |
[ 7 ] |
|
| Total Votes : 47 |
|
| Author |
Message |
Ignatz
Moderate Poster
Joined: 14 Sep 2006
Posts: 918
|
 Posted: Mon Mar 19, 2007 10:34 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| rodin wrote: | | The no stars on film issue is a no-brainer given the narrow dynamic range of the medium but what Eric was saying was the astronauts never mentioned seing them - and they would in zero atmosphere would they not? If they looked directly at the sky they would see no reflected light from the surface of the moon. |
Dunno if it's that simple, is it?
They were on the moon for a day or so, in full sunlight with heavily darkened visors. The moon's surface is very reflective.
It's a pure guess but I reckon their eyes would never have accommodated to starlight. If I go out from the moderate light levels of my house on a clear night, it still takes a few seconds to see the stars. On the moon, surrounded by bright reflected sunlight, it wouldn't surprise me if they were never able to see stars through the dark visors.
Just guessing though. A very quick search doesn't come up with any info about the visor.
_________________
So remember - next time you can't find a parking spot, go to plan B: blow up your car |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
rodin
Validated Poster
Joined: 09 Dec 2006
Posts: 2224
Location: UK
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 19, 2007 10:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Why don't we ask an Apollo astronaut? Oh - I forgot - protected species...
_________________
Belief is the Enemy of Truth www.dissential.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
blackcat
Validated Poster
Joined: 07 May 2006
Posts: 2376
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 20, 2007 6:17 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Ignatz wrote: | | The moon's surface is very reflective. |
| Quote: | | Just guessing though. |
And you tell me to do research!! The moons surface is not "very reflective" and only about 12% of light falling on it is reflected. It is about as reflective as a dark grey surface would be expected to be. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ignatz
Moderate Poster
Joined: 14 Sep 2006
Posts: 918
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 20, 2007 7:43 am Post subject: |
|
|
| blackcat wrote: | | Ignatz wrote: | | The moon's surface is very reflective. |
| Quote: | | Just guessing though. |
And you tell me to do research!! The moons surface is not "very reflective" and only about 12% of light falling on it is reflected. It is about as reflective as a dark grey surface would be expected to be. |
Nice work.
I was just giving an opinion, blackcat, and letting you know that's all it was.
But 12% of sunlight that's undimmed by atmosphere or clouds ... astronauts regularly looking sunwards ... highly reflective objects ... dark visors ... OK, I'll be dogmatic if you're more comfortable with that. It's highly unlikely their eyes would have accommodated enough at any point to see stars. Well, very unlikely, let's say. 95% probablility they wouldn't, is my guess.
_________________
So remember - next time you can't find a parking spot, go to plan B: blow up your car |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
flamesong
Major Poster
Joined: 27 Jul 2005
Posts: 1305
Location: okulo news
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 20, 2007 9:37 am Post subject: |
|
|
The reason that it takes so long to adjust one's eyes when one goes out at night time is simply that the levels of light are dramatically different and unless you are living in the middle of Dartmoor the light pollution reflected within the atmosphere will reduce the ambient contrast. This does not happen on the Moon as their are no atmospheric conditions to re-reflect light.
Some of the brighter stars (and the Moon) are often visible from Earth during the daytime. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ignatz
Moderate Poster
Joined: 14 Sep 2006
Posts: 918
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 20, 2007 11:14 am Post subject: |
|
|
| flamesong wrote: | The reason that it takes so long to adjust one's eyes when one goes out at night time is simply that the levels of light are dramatically different and unless you are living in the middle of Dartmoor the light pollution reflected within the atmosphere will reduce the ambient contrast. This does not happen on the Moon as their are no atmospheric conditions to re-reflect light.
Some of the brighter stars (and the Moon) are often visible from Earth during the daytime. |
The pupil adjusts very quickly to darkness (a few seconds). The retina takes 30 minutes to adapt fully to darkness, though most of the adaptation occurs in about 10 minutes.
The astronauts would have needed to keep stock still for several minutes with their vision turned totally away from even reflected sunlight for their retinas to have the time to adapt well. On top of this they had dark visors on their helmets to protect their eyes from the sunlight.
So, it isn't that simple.
Incidentally - which stars do you claim to be able to see in sunlight?
So far you Moon-Truthers haven't come up with a single piece of evidence that bears scrutiny. What else have you got?
_________________
So remember - next time you can't find a parking spot, go to plan B: blow up your car |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
flamesong
Major Poster
Joined: 27 Jul 2005
Posts: 1305
Location: okulo news
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 20, 2007 12:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Ignatz wrote: | The pupil adjusts very quickly to darkness (a few seconds). The retina takes 30 minutes to adapt fully to darkness, though most of the adaptation occurs in about 10 minutes.
The astronauts would have needed to keep stock still for several minutes with their vision turned totally away from even reflected sunlight for their retinas to have the time to adapt well. On top of this they had dark visors on their helmets to protect their eyes from the sunlight.
So, it isn't that simple.
Incidentally - which stars do you claim to be able to see in sunlight?
So far you Moon-Truthers haven't come up with a single piece of evidence that bears scrutiny. What else have you got? |
Er... it was you that said, 'it still takes a few seconds to see the stars' - it was this period of time, emphasised by you with the word 'still' to which I referred when I said 'so long'.
Personally, I find that closing my eyes for a few seconds helps them to adjust.
Your next point ignores the fact that it is re-reflected sunlight which normally prevents us from seeing stars during daylight. If the astronauts were to lie on their backs they would not be able to see the 'reflected sunlight' on the surface (which you contend is the obstacle here) and would therefore be able to see the stars quite clearly as there are no atmospheric conditions to reflect the reflected light back.
Your replacement of my word 'daytime' with 'sunlight' indicates what a mendacious approach you have to debate. I don't have an encyclopaedic knowledge of stars so the fact that I cannot name them is completely irrelevant. But even with my limited knowledge I know that some stars are far brighter than those around them and that millions of stars are only visible from Earth in ideal conditions. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
johndoe
Wrecker
Joined: 03 Mar 2007
Posts: 181
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 20, 2007 12:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| umm.... i don't know if you lot are being incredibly dense but the missions were all in the moon daytime. stars don't show during the day time. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Craig W
Validated Poster
Joined: 22 Feb 2007
Posts: 485
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 20, 2007 12:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| flamesong wrote: | | Ignatz wrote: | The pupil adjusts very quickly to darkness (a few seconds). The retina takes 30 minutes to adapt fully to darkness, though most of the adaptation occurs in about 10 minutes.
The astronauts would have needed to keep stock still for several minutes with their vision turned totally away from even reflected sunlight for their retinas to have the time to adapt well. On top of this they had dark visors on their helmets to protect their eyes from the sunlight.
So, it isn't that simple.
Incidentally - which stars do you claim to be able to see in sunlight?
So far you Moon-Truthers haven't come up with a single piece of evidence that bears scrutiny. What else have you got? |
Er... it was you that said, 'it still takes a few seconds to see the stars' - it was this period of time, emphasised by you with the word 'still' to which I referred when I said 'so long'.
Personally, I find that closing my eyes for a few seconds helps them to adjust.
Your next point ignores the fact that it is re-reflected sunlight which normally prevents us from seeing stars during daylight. If the astronauts were to lie on their backs they would not be able to see the 'reflected sunlight' on the surface (which you contend is the obstacle here) and would therefore be able to see the stars quite clearly as there are no atmospheric conditions to reflect the reflected light back.
Your replacement of my word 'daytime' with 'sunlight' indicates what a mendacious approach you have to debate. I don't have an encyclopaedic knowledge of stars so the fact that I cannot name them is completely irrelevant. But even with my limited knowledge I know that some stars are far brighter than those around them and that millions of stars are only visible from Earth in ideal conditions. |
Well said, flamesong. Ignatz appears to be wasting your time.
Ignatz, have you seen these yet? I would be interested in your critical analyses:
"Did we really land men on the moon?"
http://video.google.co.uk/videoplay?docid=-2265515730495966561&q=moon+ landing+hoax
"A funny thing happened on the way to the moon"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q3-QIlsWhaw
JarrahWhite's films on youtube. He does an excellent job of debunking the debunkers with his simple, straight-forward Aussie style. This is the first of a number of films he has made:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LTm66nu6dGI
_________________
"Nothing can trouble you but your own imagination." ~ Sri Nisargadatta Maharaj
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Craig W
Validated Poster
Joined: 22 Feb 2007
Posts: 485
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 20, 2007 12:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| johndoe wrote: | | umm.... i don't know if you lot are being incredibly dense but the missions were all in the moon daytime. stars don't show during the day time. |
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz 
_________________
"Nothing can trouble you but your own imagination." ~ Sri Nisargadatta Maharaj
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
flamesong
Major Poster
Joined: 27 Jul 2005
Posts: 1305
Location: okulo news
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 20, 2007 1:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| johndoe wrote: | | umm.... i don't know if you lot are being incredibly dense but the missions were all in the moon daytime. stars don't show during the day time. |
Only for the reasons explained. But don't bother to read the preceding posts - just open your mouth and let the shÃt spew forth!
Incidentally, I don't know if you are being incredibly dense but there ain't no such thing as lunar daytime as the moon does not spin on its axis. Duh!
  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ignatz
Moderate Poster
Joined: 14 Sep 2006
Posts: 918
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 20, 2007 1:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| flamesong wrote: |
Incidentally, I don't know if you are being incredibly dense but there ain't no such thing as lunar daytime as the moon does not spin on its axis. Duh!
|
You are so funny.
The moon does spin on its axis. That's why it keeps one face towards us. Did you think that the permanent "dark side of the moon" was anything other than a figure of speech that relates to our perceptions, from the earth? All parts of the moon are illuminated by sunlight on a regular cycle i.e. it has a day and night.
And you dare to insult johndoe and post pictures of knobs? What an ignoramus you are.
_________________
So remember - next time you can't find a parking spot, go to plan B: blow up your car |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Celtic King
Minor Poster
Joined: 12 Sep 2006
Posts: 42
Location: Kent
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 20, 2007 1:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Well worth watching those documentarys - Bart Sibrel is great on his film "A Funny thing happened on the way to the moon" - I like his "John Conner - aka Mark Dice" "activist" approach towards the astronauts... Its clear those astronauts are lying - they were following orders to lie - and even today they still dont have the guts to admit they never actually went. I mean its so so so so obvious everything about the Apollo missions was staged except the fact they launched the astronauts into Earths Orbit...thats all they managed to do.
I recommend another great documentary film called "Secret Space" came out in 2005 - i believe there is a sequel coming out this year. This is one of the most clear cut revealing documentaries I have ever seen about what has REALLY been going on with the whole "space exploration" deal. There is powerful evidence on this film that shows "UFOs" being "attacked" by "plasma beam" weapons fired from the earth's surface. Just what the HELL is going on???? This just might explain all of the "UFO crashes" this god-forsaken planet has been witnessing since post WW2.....the US military have been shooting them down!!! Its like the secret "government" of Planet Earth is trying to "control" space too...
"Any ETs out there we'll blow their assess right back to the little green planets they came from... yeeeeee haaaawwww...." This is OUR solar system - dont f*** with us....
Its like I woken up in a bad dream.... we are living in a dictatorship, a proper Nazi style brian-washing collective psyche that dictates that "We Humans are the best....we went to and conquered the moon!!!! Arent we clever??? Neo-con extemist right wing fascist leaders who dont like "inferior" races.... with criminal minds they create terrorism and instill fear on an unsuspecting world....
"You are either with us, or you are with the terrorists...including ET!!"
Jesus Christ beam me up, I want to get off of this god forsaken planet...please, I'll do anything...get me out of here!!!! Cheers 
_________________
Where the hell is my country gone? What PLANET am I on? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
flamesong
Major Poster
Joined: 27 Jul 2005
Posts: 1305
Location: okulo news
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 20, 2007 1:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Ignatz wrote: | | The moon does spin on its axis... blah blah blah |
It spins?
On its axis?
And you call me an ignoramus? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Thermate
Angel - now passed away
Joined: 13 Nov 2006
Posts: 445
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 20, 2007 2:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Ignatz wrote: | You are so funny.
The moon does spin on its axis.. |
"Both the rotation of the Moon and its revolution around Earth takes 27 days, 7 hours, and 43 minutes. This synchronous rotation is caused by an unsymmetrical distribution of mass in the Moon, which has allowed Earth's gravity to keep one lunar hemisphere permanently turned toward Earth."
http://www.solarviews.com/eng/moon.htm
_________________
Make love, not money. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
johndoe
Wrecker
Joined: 03 Mar 2007
Posts: 181
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 20, 2007 2:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
"It spins?
On its axis?
And you call me an ignoramus?"
yes it spins. really basic facts here people. this isn't a kindergarten. if you don't know anything then leave this debate to people who do. it is awfully tiresome to have to teach idiots as well as debate. visit here:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/cbeebies/ then come back in 12 years when you are up to it.
and stars just don't show up in daytime. nothing else much to it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ignatz
Moderate Poster
Joined: 14 Sep 2006
Posts: 918
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 20, 2007 2:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| flamesong wrote: |
| Ignatz wrote: | | The moon does spin on its axis... blah blah blah |
It spins?
|
Correct. Once per lunar month (from the earth's perpective). Once per lunar day (from the moon's perspective).
| flamesong wrote: |
On its axis? |
Yep. It's a great thing to spin on.
| flamesong wrote: |
And you call me an ignoramus? |
With good reason. You keep proving it.
_________________
So remember - next time you can't find a parking spot, go to plan B: blow up your car |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ignatz
Moderate Poster
Joined: 14 Sep 2006
Posts: 918
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 20, 2007 3:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Thermate wrote: | | Ignatz wrote: | You are so funny.
The moon does spin on its axis.. |
"Both the rotation of the Moon and its revolution around Earth takes 27 days, 7 hours, and 43 minutes. This synchronous rotation is caused by an unsymmetrical distribution of mass in the Moon, which has allowed Earth's gravity to keep one lunar hemisphere permanently turned toward Earth."
http://www.solarviews.com/eng/moon.htm |
What is your point, Thermate?
_________________
So remember - next time you can't find a parking spot, go to plan B: blow up your car |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
blackcat
Validated Poster
Joined: 07 May 2006
Posts: 2376
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 20, 2007 4:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Ignatz wrote: | The moon does spin on its axis. That's why it keeps one face towards us. Did you think that the permanent "dark side of the moon" was anything other than a figure of speech that relates to our perceptions, from the earth? All parts of the moon are illuminated by sunlight on a regular cycle i.e. it has a day and night.
And you dare to insult johndoe and post pictures of knobs? What an ignoramus you are. |
Don't forget to add that johndoe is being a bit of a knob stating that it all happened in "daylight" then. There was plenty of dark for the stars to be visible. Oh - you did forget!! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
flamesong
Major Poster
Joined: 27 Jul 2005
Posts: 1305
Location: okulo news
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 20, 2007 5:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Thanks for demonstrating the futility of engaging in any kind of debate with you, Ignatz and johndoe. When the definition proves inconvenient, change the definition - a little manoevre which you seem to enjoy employing.
Stick around 'til telecasterisation has finished decorating. Maybe he has got time to waste playing your silly games but I haven't. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Johnny Pixels
Moderate Poster
Joined: 23 Jul 2006
Posts: 932
Location: A Sooper Sekrit Bunker
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Johnny Pixels
Moderate Poster
Joined: 23 Jul 2006
Posts: 932
Location: A Sooper Sekrit Bunker
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 20, 2007 5:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| blackcat wrote: | | Ignatz wrote: | The moon does spin on its axis. That's why it keeps one face towards us. Did you think that the permanent "dark side of the moon" was anything other than a figure of speech that relates to our perceptions, from the earth? All parts of the moon are illuminated by sunlight on a regular cycle i.e. it has a day and night.
And you dare to insult johndoe and post pictures of knobs? What an ignoramus you are. |
Don't forget to add that johndoe is being a bit of a knob stating that it all happened in "daylight" then. There was plenty of dark for the stars to be visible. Oh - you did forget!! |
I'll think you'll find that during a full moon on Earth you can see fewer stars because of the bright moon affecting your vision, which is why astronomers prefer moonless nights to look at the stars. It will totally obscure any nearby stars.
_________________
I have come to believe that the whole world is an enigma, a harmless enigma that is made terrible by our own mad attempt to interpret it as though it had an underlying truth. - Umberto Eco
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ignatz
Moderate Poster
Joined: 14 Sep 2006
Posts: 918
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 20, 2007 5:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| flamesong wrote: | Thanks for demonstrating the futility of engaging in any kind of debate with you, Ignatz and johndoe. When the definition proves inconvenient, change the definition - a little manoevre which you seem to enjoy employing.
|
Changed definition?
You said the moon doesn't have days, because it doesn't rotate.
It does rotate, therefore it has a day/night cycle. You denied this about 3 times as far as I can see.
If you'd just put "lunar day" into any known search engine you could have spared yourself all this embarrassment. You should have checked, blushed (I suspect you did) but then shut up for a while.
So ... which definition am I supposed to have changed?
_________________
So remember - next time you can't find a parking spot, go to plan B: blow up your car |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ignatz
Moderate Poster
Joined: 14 Sep 2006
Posts: 918
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 20, 2007 5:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| blackcat wrote: |
Don't forget to add that johndoe is being a bit of a knob stating that it all happened in "daylight" then. There was plenty of dark for the stars to be visible. Oh - you did forget!! |
johndoes argument wasn't my argument. I just chipped over flamesong's error.
However, I believe johndoe is wrong about the lunar "daylight" obscuring the stars, as the moon has no atmosphere to scatter sunlight. It's blackness except directly towards the sun.
My point was about sunlight wrecking the night vision you'd need to see the stars, and about dark helmet visors making matters worse.
Hope that clears things up for you blackcat.
_________________
So remember - next time you can't find a parking spot, go to plan B: blow up your car |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
johndoe
Wrecker
Joined: 03 Mar 2007
Posts: 181
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 20, 2007 6:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
"There was plenty of dark for the stars to be visible."
so because it's dark it's not daylight? tell me what would happen if we removed earth's atmosphere? what colour would the sky be?
"When the definition proves inconvenient, change the definition - a little manoevre which you seem to enjoy employing."
no it's really simple flamesong, the moon spins. it has days and nights, it's dark and cold at night and warm and light during the day. however the sky will always remain black. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
rodin
Validated Poster
Joined: 09 Dec 2006
Posts: 2224
Location: UK
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 21, 2007 11:03 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Ignatz wrote: | | It's highly unlikely their eyes would have accommodated enough at any point to see stars. Well, very unlikely, let's say. 95% probablility they wouldn't, is my guess. |
_________________
Belief is the Enemy of Truth www.dissential.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
rodin
Validated Poster
Joined: 09 Dec 2006
Posts: 2224
Location: UK
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 21, 2007 11:05 am Post subject: |
|
|
| johndoe wrote: | "There was plenty of dark for the stars to be visible."
so because it's dark it's not daylight? tell me what would happen if we removed earth's atmosphere? what colour would the sky be?
"When the definition proves inconvenient, change the definition - a little manoevre which you seem to enjoy employing."
no it's really simple flamesong, the moon spins. it has days and nights, it's dark and cold at night and warm and light during the day. however the sky will always remain black. |
Of course the moon spins in sync with orbit. One or 2 truthers slipped up there. As to what colour the sky would be absent atmo = pitch black with visible celestial objects
_________________
Belief is the Enemy of Truth www.dissential.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ignatz
Moderate Poster
Joined: 14 Sep 2006
Posts: 918
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 21, 2007 11:27 am Post subject: |
|
|
| rodin wrote: |
Of course the moon spins in sync with orbit. One or 2 truthers slipped up there. As to what colour the sky would be absent atmo = pitch black with visible celestial objects |
Define "visible".
With retinas bleached out by long exposure to bright sunlight?
With a dark visor?
This is what we're talking about, in case you'd missed that.
_________________
So remember - next time you can't find a parking spot, go to plan B: blow up your car |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
rodin
Validated Poster
Joined: 09 Dec 2006
Posts: 2224
Location: UK
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 21, 2007 11:59 am Post subject: |
|
|
I think that something physical went to the moon but probably did not land and I am sure did not take off from the surface. Lunar rocks for example match those from Antartica. The transmissions would be relatively easy to fake.
_________________
Belief is the Enemy of Truth www.dissential.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ignatz
Moderate Poster
Joined: 14 Sep 2006
Posts: 918
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 21, 2007 12:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| rodin wrote: |
.... Lunar rocks for example match those from Antartica... |
Why do Thruthers just blurt out bits of nonsense they picked up on a CT site somewhere, as though they represent actual science? And without taking 5 minutes to verify these "facts"???
A few key words in any search engine would have saved you your demonstration of gullibility, rodin.
Certain moon rocks have no earth equivalent.
The solar wind - uninterrupted on the moon, unlike earth - results in unique effects on lunar rock samples.
The oldest moon rocks are older than the earth's oldest.
Most are characterised by a total lack of water, unlike on earth.
Virtually all are characterised by low levels of volatile elements - like sodium and potassium - an effect derived from their method of formation.
_________________
So remember - next time you can't find a parking spot, go to plan B: blow up your car |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Chat
Usergroups
Calendar
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
