Apollo moon landing question

[GodisEnergy]

As you know im a 911 truther . However ive never beleived in the Jews are the NWO or the Moon landing concpiracy or the no planes theorys.
Ive always seen them as more prominent in the news than more solid theories like building 7. So i smelled a rat and beleive this is propaganda .

Anyhow, the Question was posed to me after a argument with a apollo truther.
Who filmed armstrong land on the moon if he was the first to land there?

i beleive there must be a camera attached to the spaceship somehow ?

[Redtail]

As you know im a 911 truther . However ive never beleived in the Jews are the NWO or the Moon landing concpiracy or the no planes theorys.
Ive always seen them as more prominent in the news than more solid theories like building 7. So i smelled a rat and beleive this is propaganda .

Anyhow, the Question was posed to me after a argument with a apollo truther.
Who filmed armstrong land on the moon if he was the first to land there?

i beleive there must be a camera attached to the spaceship somehow ?

Correct. IIRC it was attached to the LEM and Neil deployed it when he got out.

[JoeyDonuts]

Correct. IIRC it was attached to the LEM and Neil deployed it when he got out.

The camera's mounted. You can obviously tell by watching the image.

But O.J. Simpson knows better!!! (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capricorn_One)

[Sword_Of_Truth]

Ive always seen them as more prominent in the news than more solid theories like building 7.

BWAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!

You do know this is 2009, right?

Anyhow, the Question was posed to me after a argument with a apollo truther.
Who filmed armstrong land on the moon if he was the first to land there?

i beleive there must be a camera attached to the spaceship somehow?

Forgive my mocking tone, but this answer is kind of obvious, isn't it?

[Pantaz]

Moon Base Clavius (http://www.clavius.org/) is a good place for answers to Apollo related conspiracy theories.

[Tandem Thinking]

Moon Base Clavius (http://www.clavius.org/) is a good place for answers to Apollo related conspiracy theories.

My best friend told me that he believes in the moon-landing conspiracy theories, I basically went ballistic (because I'm studying to be an astronomer) and almost started shouting "Are you serious?!?!?!???"

Turns out he wasn't. :o

More on topic, that site really is pretty amazing, I've used it once or twice to educate some of my own suspicions when I was a little younger and a lot more naive, and also to persuade others that, yup, they were the real deal.

[Skeptic]

My best friend told me that he believes in the moon-landing conspiracy theories, I basically went ballistic

LIAR! NO human being could POSSIBLY stand the acceleration and deceleration of a BALLISTIC trajectory from the earth to the moon! You're covering up the conspiracy. Oh wait -- you're studying to be an astronomer. You have no choice. Otherwise THEY won't let you graduate.

[jaydeehess]

Moon Base Clavius (http://www.clavius.org/) is a good place for answers to Apollo related conspiracy theories.

More specifically this page (http://www.clavius.org/mesacam.html) explains where the camera was , how it was deployed and when. The page is specifically answering another question but answers the one posed to GiE as well.

[Biscuit]

To the OP. Yes, it was a robotic camera attached to the landers leg.

My favorite part of the lunar hoax is the confusion that conspiracy theorists have between lunar lander and what the astronauts traveled to the moon in. Yes the lunar lander was poorly built for passing through the van allan belts and that why they stayed inside the saturn V nose cone.

[Ranb]

Yes the lunar lander was poorly built for passing through the van allan belts and that why they stayed inside the saturn V nose cone.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but after the Saturn V reached the upper atmosphere, it jettisoned the escape tower exposing the service and command modules to the outside. After a short time in Earth orbit the third stage re-ignited, put it on a quick trip through the Van Allen Belts and into a free return trajectory. While the thin skin of the command module did little for gamma radiation, it was a little a bit better for secondary radiation and particles.

The main reason the astronauts were able to keep their exposure low is that they spent less than an hour in the belts and they were outside of the Earth's atmosphere for less than two weeks with no significant increase in solar activity during the trip.

Ranb

[RossFW]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but after the Saturn V reached the upper atmosphere, it jettisoned the escape tower exposing the service and command modules to the outside. After a short time in Earth orbit the third stage re-ignited, put it on a quick trip through the Van Allen Belts and into a free return trajectory. While the thin skin of the command module did little for gamma radiation, it was a little a bit better for secondary radiation and particles.

The main reason the astronauts were able to keep their exposure low is that they spent less than an hour in the belts and they were outside of the Earth's atmosphere for less than two weeks with no significant increase in solar activity during the trip.

Ranb


By "Nose cone" he is refering to the Command Module, which was much better shielded than the LEM.

That being said, the Apollo 13 crew stayed in the LEM until shortly before re-entry, with seemingly no ill effects.

[dudalb]

While the thin skin of the command module did little for gamma radiation, it was a little a bit better for secondary radiation and particles.

The Mercury, Germini and Apollo Astronauts has better shielding against gamma rays then that crappy spaceship that Reed Richards built did....

[JohnG]

As you know im a 911 truther . However ive never beleived in the Jews are the NWO or the Moon landing concpiracy or the no planes theorys.
Ive always seen them as more prominent in the news than more solid theories like building 7. So i smelled a rat and beleive this is propaganda .

Anyhow, the Question was posed to me after a argument with a apollo truther.
Who filmed armstrong land on the moon if he was the first to land there?

i beleive there must be a camera attached to the spaceship somehow ?


People often come up with all sorts of ridiculous notions when they begin theorizing about subjects they actually know little to nothing about.

[twinstead]

GiE, The 'moon hoax theory' has much in common with the '911 hoax theory'. If you were to delve deeper into the mindset of people who believe the moon landings never happened, you would be on pretty familiar ground ideologically with many of them. It's all based, as JohnG said above, on personal incredulity, distrust of the government (or, those lying bastards at NASA for all you moon hoax folks), and an almost religious ignorance of the overwhelming volume of evidence that supports either 'official story'.

Forget 911. I think you should start asking those NASA shills why the American flag is blowing in the wind, if there's NO WIND ON THE MOON!!!!1111!!!!!! ;)

[DGM]

GiE, The 'moon hoax theory' has much in common with the '911 hoax theory'. If you were to delve deeper into the mindset of people who believe the moon landings never happened, you would be on pretty familiar ground ideologically with many of them. It's all based, as JohnG said above, on personal incredulity, distrust of the government (or, those lying bastards at NASA for all you moon hoax folks), and an almost religious ignorance of the overwhelming volume of evidence that supports either 'official story'.

Forget 911. I think you should start asking those NASA shills why the American flag is blowing in the wind, if there's NO WIND ON THE MOON!!!!1111!!!!!! ;)
Now that's just mean. He is not a toy for us to play with.:D

[jaydeehess]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but after the Saturn V reached the upper atmosphere, it jettisoned the escape tower exposing the service and command modules to the outside. After a short time in Earth orbit the third stage re-ignited, put it on a quick trip through the Van Allen Belts and into a free return trajectory. While the thin skin of the command module did little for gamma radiation, it was a little a bit better for secondary radiation and particles.

The main reason the astronauts were able to keep their exposure low is that they spent less than an hour in the belts and they were outside of the Earth's atmosphere for less than two weeks with no significant increase in solar activity during the trip.

Ranb


Once again delve into the Clavius site(the search feature there is quite good) we find another page (http://www.clavius.org/envrad.html) that answers many questions concerning radiation. it is headed with this quote;
"The recent Fox TV show, which I saw, is an ingenious and entertaining assemblage of nonsense. The claim that radiation exposure during the Apollo missions would have been fatal to the astronauts is only one example of such nonsense." -- Dr. James Van Allen

and in this quote Jay explains the nature of the radiation in the VanAllen Belts and the type of sheilding best suited to attenuate it.
While such drastic measures ( ETA;the section begins with the AH contention that six feet of lead would be needed for sheilding)are needed to shield against intense, high-frequency electromagnetic radiation, that is not the nature of the radiation in the Van Allen belts. In fact, because the Van Allen belts are composed of high-energy protons and high-energy electrons, metal shielding is actually counterproductive because of the Bremsstrahlung that would be induced.

Metals can be used to shield against particle radiation, but they are not the ideal substance. Polyethylene is the choice of particle shielding today, and various substances were available to the Apollo engineers to absorb Van Allen radiation. The fibrous insulation between the inner and outer hulls of the command module was likely the most effective form of radiation shielding. When metals must be used in spacecraft (e.g., for structural strength) then a lighter metal such as aluminum is better than heavier metals such as steel or lead. The lower the atomic number, the less Bremsstrahlung


and in his primer (http://www.clavius.org/envradintro.html) on radiation we find;
Beta particles are very small and can penetrate centimeters into the body. But luckily they're too small to cause much damage if they hit anything. But there's a special problem here. When beta particles hit large atoms, the impact causes those atoms to give off x-rays. Metal atoms are usually quite heavy, and so are especially susceptible to this kind of re-radiation which is known by its German name "Bremsstrahlung". In fact, this is how x-rays are produced intentionally for medical applications.

[Tandem Thinking]

LIAR! NO human being could POSSIBLY stand the acceleration and deceleration of a BALLISTIC trajectory from the earth to the moon! You're covering up the conspiracy. Oh wait -- you're studying to be an astronomer. You have no choice. Otherwise THEY won't let you graduate.

Really? I thought it was just my poor study skills.
*OMINOUS MUSIC*

[jaydeehess]

Really? I thought it was just my poor study skills.
*OMINOUS MUSIC*

That's just what THEY want you to think.

Its the ones who do not stay up all night drinking or playing video games that they want to join the secret club of science masters

,,,,,,,,,,,,, oh yeah, um,,,,


MU-HAHAha!!

[moon1969]

Apollo hoax CT was started by the russians because Yuri Gagarin was the first man in space and not in the moon. :D

[MG1962]

Apollo hoax CT was started by the russians because Yuri Gagarin was the first man in space and not in the moon. :D

Actually the Russians have their own CT regarding the Moon. For a very long time there was a rumour that this

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lunokhod_1

Was actually driven by a KGB trained dwarf....I kid you not

[Sword_Of_Truth]

Actually the Russians have their own CT regarding the Moon. For a very long time there was a rumour that this

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lunokhod_1

Was actually driven by a KGB trained dwarf....I kid you not

Not entirely off in lala-land, actually.

In the Soviet Union, where military service was mandatory, everyone under a certain height was sent into the armored corps. This allowed soviet tank designers to design for a crew that had a significantly smaller average height compared to those western forces had to work with.

Working with smaller people would have more advantages for spacecraft designers (reduced life support and less weight) than it would for armored fighting vehicles.

In spite of this, the dwarf driven Lunokhod is still absurd, however.

[Corsair 115]

Apollo hoax CT was started by the russians because Yuri Gagarin was the first man in space and not in the moon. :D


First man in the moon? As far as I'm aware, here's (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0058100/) the story of the first men in the moon. ;)

[Biscuit]

By "Nose cone" he is refering to the Command Module, which was much better shielded than the LEM.

That being said, the Apollo 13 crew stayed in the LEM until shortly before re-entry, with seemingly no ill effects.

Yes thats what I was thinking of. I had several guys at ATS under the impression that the Lunar lander was what they used on its own to get to the moon.

[Travis]

Yes thats what I was thinking of. I had several guys at ATS under the impression that the Lunar lander was what they used on its own to get to the moon.

Wow, how shocking.:rolleyes:

[Caustic Logic]

Yes thats what I was thinking of. I had several guys at ATS under the impression that the Lunar lander was what they used on its own to get to the moon.

But guys, if that's NOT the ship they flew in... then where is that ship? And where did this weird thing come from? :boggled:

Fun thread, I want to see that movie now too. Thanks GiE for starting it!

[Safe-Keeper]

Someone dig up the long thread with rev or rev7 or whatever his name was, a now-banned user. It discussed a lot of things at length and is a very educating read, if you can stomach rev's incredibly annoying debate style (think "fingers in ears").

[stickyfingers]

...geez Pantaz... that Moon Base Clavius link is great to read... thanks for posting the link... cheers... Stickyfingers.:)

[Tomblvd]

Wow, how shocking.:rolleyes:

That's nothing, one nutcase "proved" Apollo was fake because there was no way for the "astronots" (heh) to get from the "Command Module to the conical space capsule, as the heat shield would obstruct them. It would have also been impossible for them to get out at the conical/pointed end of space capsule, as this section was occupied by the 3 large reentry parachutes, which ejected from the conical end."

Yea, he thought the CM was both the CM AND the Service Module, and they climbed between the two.

[Biscuit]

I also love the Van Allen belt arguments. When you show them the quotes from Van Allen they claim he was forced to say it or that he was paid to say it by the NWO or something equally stupid.

I will echo the claim that it is a shame there are so few lunar conspiracy nuts around. Stupid 9/11 has stolen the stage.

[Tomblvd]

I also love the Van Allen belt arguments. When you show them the quotes from Van Allen they claim he was forced to say it or that he was paid to say it by the NWO or something equally stupid.

I will echo the claim that it is a shame there are so few lunar conspiracy nuts around. Stupid 9/11 has stolen the stage.


Yep.

The "Golden Age" of moon hoax debunking were the months after that insipid Fox show on the hoax that featured Bart "I got waxed by a 70 y.o. man" Sibrel. They were everywhere after that show.

Talk about a target-rich environment.

My all time favorite was a small-time radio host named Clyde Lewis. We used to go on his website and rip him to shreds on a daily basis. After getting his behind handed to him, he'd always post these long, barely comprehensible screeds lamenting how much pressure he's under, being monitored by the government, and, you know, "just asking questions".

Man, those were good times.

[twinstead]

I also love the Van Allen belt arguments. When you show them the quotes from Van Allen they claim he was forced to say it or that he was paid to say it by the NWO or something equally stupid.

I will echo the claim that it is a shame there are so few lunar conspiracy nuts around. Stupid 9/11 has stolen the stage.

Yea, the Van Allen Belt argument was a perfect Cloak of Undebunkabilitytm. If in their minds the entire trip was impossible due to the "deadly radiation", they could safely ignore every single piece of evidence the missions happened as advertised.

Actually, 911 truthers do the same thing when declaring the collapses "impossible". It must be some kind of circuit breaker.

[Ranb]

One thing that all HB's who claim the VA belts prevented manned missions to the moon have in common is that they have no idea what the radiation levels were. If you try to pin them down on a radiation level, then they claim that since NASA was the one who measured them, the data can not be trusted. When you tell them that other organizations have measured radiation levels in space, then that data can not be trusted because NASA is making them supply the wrong data.

If you ask them how they determined what the radiation levels were, then they accuse you of being a NASA disinformation agent. Some of the 9/11 truthers behave the same, they just try to elevate themselves above the rest of the kooks by saying that the Apollo missions were real, but that we need to be ashamed of them because the USA used a Nazi to get men to the moon.

Ranb

[Biscuit]

Another common trait between twoothers and Apollo hoax folks is the culprit. The evil and omnipotent government of the U.S.*sigh*

I loved when NASA began working on a new method of getting to the moon and the logic hounds out there starting shouting, "See! See! We told you they never went or they wouldn't need to build a new way to get there! Just dust off the old apollo stuff in the storage shed."

The total confusion they have about what the space shuttle is designed to do is also quite charming.

[defaultdotxbe]

Not entirely off in lala-land, actually.

In the Soviet Union, where military service was mandatory, everyone under a certain height was sent into the armored corps. This allowed soviet tank designers to design for a crew that had a significantly smaller average height compared to those western forces had to work with.

Working with smaller people would have more advantages for spacecraft designers (reduced life support and less weight) than it would for armored fighting vehicles.

In spite of this, the dwarf driven Lunokhod is still absurd, however.
i would also say since (according to the wiki article) Lunokhod was the first remote-controlled rover ever sent out there might be some disbelief about it, the notion that "there must be someone driving it" would likely be very strong

[twinstead]

Then there's the "fake" moon rocks that were secretly harvested in Antarctica. Of course, to those HBs who believed the rocks are genuine, even that is more likely than the army of unmanned rock collecting spacecraft that were sent in secret to get real moon rocks they declare with a straight face. ;)

[Ranb]

i would also say since (according to the wiki article) Lunokhod was the first remote-controlled rover ever sent out there might be some disbelief about it, the notion that "there must be someone driving it" would likely be very strong

It is interesting that some HB's claim that the moon landing is fake because the LM was not tested before Apollo 10. When it is pointed out that Apollo 9 and 10 tested it, the argument becomes it was not tested unmanned first. When they learn it was tested twice unmanned before Apollo 7, they say it was not tested unmanned in lunar orbit or unmanned on the moon. When asked if any aircraft designed to be manned was tested in flight unmanned prior to Apollo 11, they forget that the unmanned surveyor spacecraft landed on the moon. When told of the surveyor program, they say it was faked because it was not tested in flight on Earth. They also use the "it was never done before" argument, seemingly forgetting that everything had to have been done once.

This is usually the point were they abandon the discussion and go on to something else; like radiation or Von Braun. Does this sound like the “steel towers have never collapsed in a fire before” argument?

Ranb

[Lxj]

By "Nose cone" he is refering to the Command Module, which was much better shielded than the LEM.

That being said, the Apollo 13 crew stayed in the LEM until shortly before re-entry, with seemingly no ill effects.
Didn't Jack Swigert, the command module pilot die of cancer in 1982?

[Skeptic Guy]

Then there's the "fake" moon rocks that were secretly harvested in Antarctica. Of course, to those HBs who believed the rocks are genuine, even that is more likely than the army of unmanned rock collecting spacecraft that were sent in secret to get real moon rocks they declare with a straight face. ;)

I remember someone, Joe Rogan(?), arguing this with Phil Plait on Penn Jillette's now defunct radio show. The most frustrating thing was listening to Penn humor the guy.

Didn't Jack Swigert, the command module pilot die of cancer in 1982?

He did. But I don't think that you could firmly link it to his Apollo 13 experience. There are a lot of risk factors for bone cancer. Radiation is one of them, but I don't know if the radiation he was exposed to could have caused it.

Another good resource is Phil Plait's badastronomy.com. He goes through all the moon hoax issues and debunks them.

[Gaspode]

I will echo the claim that it is a shame there are so few lunar conspiracy nuts around. Stupid 9/11 has stolen the stage.


This year is the 40th anniversary of the Apollo 11 moon landing. So we might start seeing a few more of the moon landing CTers.

[AJM8125]

This year is the 40th anniversary of the Apollo 11 moon landing. So we might start seeing a few more of the moon landing CTers.

Then we should refer them all to Buzz Aldrin.

ZOo6aHSY8hU

[Skeptic Guy]

You're a coward and a lier and...POW...

Way to go Buzz!

[Cuddles]

Didn't Jack Swigert, the command module pilot die of cancer in 1982?

There are two points here. Firstly, as Skeptic Guy says, one astronaut dying of cancer does not show that radiation exposure while in space was responsible. People die of cancer all the time, and there just haven't been enough astronauts to make any kind of sensible statistical analysis of that sort of thing.

Secondly, astronauts certainly do get exposed to larger doses of radiation than normal. However, saying that astronauts are exposed to more radiation than most people and therefore may have a higher chance of suffering from certain ailments is a long way from the claims that humans can't have been into space because the Van Allen belts would have killed them.

[MG1962]

There are two points here. Firstly, as Skeptic Guy says, one astronaut dying of cancer does not show that radiation exposure while in space was responsible. People die of cancer all the time, and there just haven't been enough astronauts to make any kind of sensible statistical analysis of that sort of thing.

Secondly, astronauts certainly do get exposed to larger doses of radiation than normal. However, saying that astronauts are exposed to more radiation than most people and therefore may have a higher chance of suffering from certain ailments is a long way from the claims that humans can't have been into space because the Van Allen belts would have killed them.

That easy for us now after 40 odd years. But there was a real expectation that the guys could suffer ill effects. Some us will still remember the quarantine proceedures the first couple of flights had to go through. Again (thankfullly) time has shown that both issues were over stated

Mind you being dosed on radiation has done nothing to diminish Buzz Aldrin's right hook :p

[Obviousman]

Actually, if you look at all the astronauts, there are people who made multiple journeys (Cernan, Lovell, Young) who are still alive today.

My layman opinion is there is no relationship between space travel through the Van Allen Belts and cancer.

[Belz...]

Didn't Jack Swigert, the command module pilot die of cancer in 1982?

My grandfather died of a heart attack. His last few jobs were being a janitor.

Well, I guess this proves that cleaning floors and toilets causes heart conditions!

[steve s]

One of the hoaxers favorite claims is that there aren't any stars visible in the shots. Earlier this evening the program Moon Machines was on the Science Channel (episode 5, the lunar rover.) I've seen this show before, but what I never noticed was that stars are visible in a few of the shots.

There was one quick shot taken with the video camera (not the Hassy still camera.) It was a rather awkward angle. The camera was pointed up a bit and captured nothing but black sky, but a few stars were visible. The camera must have had an autoexposure feature that opened up the aperture all the way to let in as much light as possible. Then an astronaut walked past the camera and he was totally overexposed, just a bright blob with no detail.

They had another shot from the remote controlled camera capturing the launch from the moon. The camera panned up but the lunar module wasn't in the frame. But you could see some stars. It was probably due to the same autoexposure problem. When the scene was mostly darkness the camera tried to let in as much light as possible. When the scene consisted of plenty of bright areas, the aperture was reduced to limit the amount of light, thus making the stars invisible.

Steve S.

[jaydeehess]

IIRC there are a lot of photos taken by mistake. The astronauts accidentally tripping the shutter release when the camera was not pointed at anything in particular and that a few of these are pointed stright down or up to the sky. They are available somewhere I believe but of course were not part of the general release to the public as they were not considered worth anything. Much like the holiday snaps of the ceiling of the hotel room or your right shoe, that don't make it to the album.

[Jiddu]

Mind you being dosed on radiation has done nothing to diminish Buzz Aldrin's right hook :p

Nor the value of Dave Scott's stamp collection

[jaydeehess]

My grandfather died of a heart attack. His last few jobs were being a janitor.

Well, I guess this proves that cleaning floors and toilets causes heart conditions!

My mother had cancer and lived. She's about the same age as the Apollo astronauts. Here's a thought then, getting old increases one's chances of developing cancer. Holy carp, I gotta call the NIH!:eek:

[dafydd]

My grandfather died of a heart attack. His last few jobs were being a janitor.

Well, I guess this proves that cleaning floors and toilets causes heart conditions!
To the tune of My Bonnie Lies Over The Ocean

My Father's a s***house attentand
He works all the day and the night
And when he comes home in the evening
He's always covered in
Shhhhine up your buttons with Brasso
Only three ha'pence a tin
You can buy it or steal it from Woolworths
It's always full up to the brim

Now some say he died of a fever
Some say he died of a fit
But I know what my father died of
He died of the smell of the
Shhhhine up your buttons with Brasso
Only three ha'pence a tin
You can buy it or steal it from Woolworths
It's always full up to the brim

[Eddie Dane]

The total confusion they have about what the space shuttle is designed to do is also quite charming.

I'm going to regret asking this, but what do they think the Space Shuttle is supposed to do?

[grmcdorman]

I don't know that they think it's supposed to anything. They do think, however, that it is capable of reaching the moon. (Basically, the argument is we've got the shuttle, it's loads more sophisticated than the Apollo craft - I mean, it's got wings and everything - but it doesn't go to the moon, so Apollo was a fake. :rolleyes:)

[Klimax]

I don't know that they think it's supposed to anything. They do think, however, that it is capable of reaching the moon. (Basically, the argument is we've got the shuttle, it's loads more sophisticated than the Apollo craft - I mean, it's got wings and everything - but it doesn't go to the moon, so Apollo was a fake. :rolleyes:)

That's argument from idiocy!! :eek:

[sts60]

I don't know that they think it's supposed to anything. They do think, however, that it is capable of reaching the moon. (Basically, the argument is we've got the shuttle, it's loads more sophisticated than the Apollo craft - I mean, it's got wings and everything - but it doesn't go to the moon, so Apollo was a fake. :rolleyes:)

...and NASA's already studied it: NASA Technical Memorandum 104084, Feasibility Analysis of Cislunar Flight Using the Shuttle Orbiter (http://hdl.handle.net/2060/19910014907) concludes that you kinda-sorta could fly the Shuttle to the Moon. If you didn't mind developing a Shuttle-derivative unmanned refueling vehicle, changing and requalifying the SSMEs, Orbiter crew compartment, ET, and OMS, and making about a dozen launches of the new unmanned system just to haul the fuel the Shuttle would need to carry almost no payload to lunar orbit (never mind actually landing on the Moon).

[jaydeehess]

...and NASA's already studied it: NASA Technical Memorandum 104084, Feasibility Analysis of Cislunar Flight Using the Shuttle Orbiter (http://hdl.handle.net/2060/19910014907) concludes that you kinda-sorta could fly the Shuttle to the Moon. If you didn't mind developing a Shuttle-derivative unmanned refueling vehicle, changing and requalifying the SSMEs, Orbiter crew compartment, ET, and OMS, and making about a dozen launches of the new unmanned system just to haul the fuel the Shuttle would need to carry almost no payload to lunar orbit (never mind actually landing on the Moon).

So basically its possible if they were to 'pimp' the ride.

The theory that I have heard goes like this;
"Today's technology is so much more sophisticated that designing and building a vehicle that could go to the Moon and back should be much easier and cheaper than in the 1960/70's. The fact that we have only stayed in orbit with manned flight using a vehicle that is many times greater in all technical respects, than the Apollo craft, is proof then that it cannot actually be done."

Yes, an arguement from incredulity and idiocy (or, if you will, incredible idiocy).

ETA: of course there's also the "we did it once but were warned not to do it again by the BEM's. The other missions were faked."

[Travis]

What they fail to understand is that it's not so much a lack of technology in the orbiting equipment so much as it's a lack of a big honking Saturn V that limits manned space flight to orbit.

[ArmillarySphere]

Hey, they adjust the gravitational constant of the universe every other week on Star Trek, so why can't NASA do the same?

[tsig]

Hey, they adjust the gravitational constant of the universe every other week on Star Trek, so why can't NASA do the same?

different writers

[Klimax]

Hey, they adjust the gravitational constant of the universe every other week on Star Trek, so why can't NASA do the same?

Evidence? :D

[Biscuit]

I don't know that they think it's supposed to anything. They do think, however, that it is capable of reaching the moon. (Basically, the argument is we've got the shuttle, it's loads more sophisticated than the Apollo craft - I mean, it's got wings and everything - but it doesn't go to the moon, so Apollo was a fake. :rolleyes:)

Thats 100% correct. I have had many people wonder aloud why they don't take the space shuttle to the moon and then conclude that not even the space shuttle could pass through the Van Allen belts thus the apollo missions were faked.

I believe its this little beauty that will take detailed photos of the apollo landing sites showing some of the larger equipment left behind. Of course these photos will be declared fakes on sight.
http://lunar.gsfc.nasa.gov/hardware/23launchpad.html

[dafydd]

The modern Star Trek is very funny,one deus ex machina after another.
''Captain if I reverse the ionic flow and boost the tachyon field we can get enough energy in the secondary coils to break through the radiation barrier that way we won't risk disturbing the anti-matter flow''

'Let it be so''

[JohnG]

The modern Star Trek is very funny,one deus ex machina after another.
''Captain if I reverse the ionic flow and boost the tachyon field we can get enough energy in the secondary coils to break through the radiation barrier that way we won't risk disturbing the anti-matter flow''

'Let it be so''


"Modern"? You're mocking The Next Generation, which premiered 22 years ago and hasn't been on any screen, large or small in seven years.

The only "modern" Star Trek is the retro reboot movie in which there is thankfully less of that sort of technobabble.

And it's "Make it so", not "Let it be so". If you're going to mock something, do it right.

Pedantic Bore out:p

[Klimax]

"Modern"? You're mocking The Next Generation, which premiered 22 years ago and hasn't been on any screen, large or small in seven years.

The only "modern" Star Trek is the retro reboot movie in which there is thankfully less of that sort of technobabble.

And it's "Make it so", not "Let it be so". If you're going to mock something, do it right.

Pedantic Bore out:p

From memory,at least it was internally selfconsistent.But last episodes of TNG were aired here five years.(then they aired TOS and that was last ST to be seen)

iKlimax-borg

[dafydd]

"Modern"? You're mocking The Next Generation, which premiered 22 years ago and hasn't been on any screen, large or small in seven years.

The only "modern" Star Trek is the retro reboot movie in which there is thankfully less of that sort of technobabble.

And it's "Make it so", not "Let it be so". If you're going to mock something, do it right.

Pedantic Bore out:p

I only saw them over the last two years on Dutch tv.I didn't know when they originally filmed.Could have two years ago for all I knew.

[Dog Town]

I only saw them over the last two years on Dutch tv.I didn't know when they originally filmed.Could have two years ago for all I knew.

So you had never heard of it before, you saw it? Thinking it was new, even once you got into it? Really?

[dafydd]

So you had never heard of it before, you saw it? Thinking it was new, even once you got into it? Really?

Vaguely,perhaps.I don't watch a lot of tv,I only saw it because my daughter used to watch it.It used to make me laugh.I play a lot on the American quiz site,Interactrivia.You can chat as you play and the folks on the other side of the pond are always amazed and amused by my ignorance in these matters.For example,I had never heard of someone named Ally McBeal.I have now.
In my defense I would like to say that I live in Belgium and I don't have cable.I would not have read about these programmes because I don't take a newspaper,and I am not interested in knowing a lot about tv,I have better things to do.Thank you for correcting the 'Make it so' quote,if that comes up on the quiz site,I'll know the answer now.

[Geezer]

That easy for us now after 40 odd years. But there was a real expectation that the guys could suffer ill effects. Some us will still remember the quarantine proceedures the first couple of flights had to go through. Again (thankfullly) time has shown that both issues were over stated

Mind you being dosed on radiation has done nothing to diminish Buzz Aldrin's right hook :p

Isn't obvious, Buzz got superpowers from the radiation :D

[pgwenthold]

The modern Star Trek is very funny,one deus ex machina after another.
''Captain if I reverse the ionic flow and boost the tachyon field we can get enough energy in the secondary coils to break through the radiation barrier that way we won't risk disturbing the anti-matter flow''

'Let it be so''

It wasn't a good Next Generation episode unless it had a tachyon pulse of some sort.

[Alferd_Packer]

The modern Star Trek is very funny,one deus ex machina after another.
''Captain if I reverse the ionic flow and boost the tachyon field we can get enough energy in the secondary coils to break through the radiation barrier that way we won't risk disturbing the anti-matter flow''

'Let it be so''

That should be: "Make it so."

[Foster Zygote]

GiE, The 'moon hoax theory' has much in common with the '911 hoax theory'. If you were to delve deeper into the mindset of people who believe the moon landings never happened, you would be on pretty familiar ground ideologically with many of them. It's all based, as JohnG said above, on personal incredulity, distrust of the government (or, those lying bastards at NASA for all you moon hoax folks), and an almost religious ignorance of the overwhelming volume of evidence that supports either 'official story'.
Another factor that seems to me to be common among the various "conspiracy theory" groups is a sense of satisfaction in what they perceive to be their own superior cleverness. They see themselves as among the very few who aren't fooled. They think that they know something that most everyone else is too thick-headed or self-deluded to understand.

[JohnG]

The modern Star Trek is very funny,one deus ex machina after another.
''Captain if I reverse the ionic flow and boost the tachyon field we can get enough energy in the secondary coils to break through the radiation barrier that way we won't risk disturbing the anti-matter flow''

'Let it be so''

And it's "Make it so", not "Let it be so". If you're going to mock something, do it right.

Pedantic Bore out:p

That should be: "Make it so."


Is this thing on? Thump thump thump. Testing one, two, one two sibilancccccce. Sibilanccccccce... Can you hear me in the back?

[pgwenthold]

Another factor that seems to me to be common among the various "conspiracy theory" groups is a sense of satisfaction in what they perceive to be their own superior cleverness. They see themselves as among the very few who aren't fooled. They think that they know something that most everyone else is too thick-headed or self-deluded to understand.

We call that "Dale Gribble Syndrome"

[jaydeehess]

We call that "Dale Gribble Syndrome"

I'm old enough to remember it as a "Les Nessman Syndrome"

"Think about it"

[jaydeehess]

Another factor that seems to me to be common among the various "conspiracy theory" groups is a sense of satisfaction in what they perceive to be their own superior cleverness. They see themselves as among the very few who aren't fooled. They think that they know something that most everyone else is too thick-headed or self-deluded to understand.

http://community.theblackvault.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=25&start=170

Poster Cole Trickle is a prime example
Think~~~I've done enough of it to conclude that the enormity of the event was well beyond 19 or so guys with box cutters, anyone who can't see though that is either being paid to trumpet the OFFICIAL STORY or seriously challenged from a mental aspect.


In this thread he is posting concerning 911 but he says similar things concerning the space missions.
For instance;
What purpose did putting a man on the moon serve? What purpose does the shuttle serve. How many dead in that dieing program of a dog and pony show? How many billions of dollars pissed away?

You believe that the technology existed back then to place a man on the moon, well that's great, so why is it that when someone doubts that it did exist that they get labeled a kook or nut job?

[Redtail]

I'm old enough to remember it as a "Les Nessman Syndrome"

"Think about it"

:jaw-dropp I completely forgot about him! :D

[dafydd]

Vaguely,perhaps.I don't watch a lot of tv,I only saw it because my daughter used to watch it.It used to make me laugh.I play a lot on the American quiz site,Interactrivia.You can chat as you play and the folks on the other side of the pond are always amazed and amused by my ignorance in these matters.For example,I had never heard of someone named Ally McBeal.I have now.
In my defense I would like to say that I live in Belgium and I don't have cable.I would not have read about these programmes because I don't take a newspaper,and I am not interested in knowing a lot about tv,I have better things to do.Thank you for correcting the 'Make it so' quote,if that comes up on the quiz site,I'll know the answer now.

Thanks again