Posts: 1446
Threads: 77
Joined: October 1, 2008
Reputation:
11
RE: Did we really land on the moon in '69?
July 16, 2009 at 7:08 pm
(July 16, 2009 at 5:08 pm)Kyuuketsuki Wrote: (July 16, 2009 at 2:03 pm)bozo Wrote: Kyu,to " gullible" and " humourless " you can add " lazy " if you want, cause I ain't about to plough through those links you provided. Seeing as how you know all the answers about everything, please try to remove some of my doubts by simply providing answers. Thank you kindly.
Bozo,
Negative though my opinion of you may be you are not the enemy so, if you wish to be lazy, ill-informed, ignorant and to look foolish in the face of those who choose not to be then that is your prerogative ... you want to look like a Muppet then enjoy your life.
Kyu
All I will add, is that, thus far, none of you who are in no doubt that we landed on the moon have answered my 2 points. So who's the muppet?
 A man is born to a virgin mother, lives, dies, comes alive again and then disappears into the clouds to become his Dad. How likely is that?
Posts: 3989
Threads: 79
Joined: June 30, 2009
Reputation:
41
RE: Did we really land on the moon in '69?
July 16, 2009 at 7:55 pm
Bozo,
You should read the Wiki that Kyu posted it has some good start points for research. Granted, wiki articles are not accepted in acedemia and are certainly not the final word on anything but they do give good information usually that can be verified by the sources in the wiki.
I really liked the reflector bit, I have never heard that one before. Oh and by the way...
You're the muppet!  neener neener.  (I love that, is that even an insult? Kermit Thee Frog was awesome)
Rhizo
Posts: 1446
Threads: 77
Joined: October 1, 2008
Reputation:
11
RE: Did we really land on the moon in '69?
July 16, 2009 at 8:04 pm
(July 16, 2009 at 7:55 pm)Rhizomorph13 Wrote: Bozo,
You should read the Wiki that Kyu posted it has some good start points for research. Granted, wiki articles are not accepted in acedemia and are certainly not the final word on anything but they do give good information usually that can be verified by the sources in the wiki.
I really liked the reflector bit, I have never heard that one before. Oh and by the way...
You're the muppet! neener neener. (I love that, is that even an insult? Kermit Thee Frog was awesome)
Rhizo
Please offer an opinion on how a craft with a computer capacity less than is in today's mobile phones ( added to other basics inherent in the technology of the day ) went to the moon and back, including landing in a dodgy terrain, for the first time, without crashing,with a faulty speedo reading.
I don't ask much...just opinions.
A man is born to a virgin mother, lives, dies, comes alive again and then disappears into the clouds to become his Dad. How likely is that?
Posts: 14932
Threads: 684
Joined: August 25, 2008
Reputation:
143
RE: Did we really land on the moon in '69?
July 16, 2009 at 8:12 pm
(July 15, 2009 at 7:21 am)bozo Wrote: For example, given the timing, at the height of the cold war and with USA and USSR racing to be first on the moon, is it beyond the possible that the Americains could have staged it? Possible, although like phil said, the Russians would have been tracking the rockets and transmissions. If they had any evidence to suggest it was a hoax, they would have used it to make their enemy seem inferior.
Quote:Just recently I read that there is more computer stuff in today's washing machines than was in the computers controlling the moon shot. Is it credible that such basic computer power was sufficient?
Well these days washing machines can run versions of Linux and Java, so they are incredibly more powerful. It might sound like the apollo computers were pathetic, but if you look at them, they were quite powerful, it's just that by today's standards they are beaten by washing machines. This doesn't mean the apollo computers couldn't do the job though.
Two decades before, a computer was built that broke the Nazi enigma machine. The apollo computers seem to that machine as advanced as the washing machine computers do to them. It's all relative.
Quote:In the same programme it was admitted that as the eagle was landing, a malfunction led the astronauts to believe the eagle was travelling well faster than their speedo was indicating, yet they still managed to land softly, on suitable ground, in the moon landscape!
Well, if they were travelling slower than they actually thought they were, then it isn't much of a problem. It only gets very tricky if you are actually travelling faster than you think you are. Given that the moon has less than half the Earth's gravity, even if they did miscalculate their speed (and you don't mention by how much they were out), landing on the moon is made a lot easier due to the gravity.
Posts: 3989
Threads: 79
Joined: June 30, 2009
Reputation:
41
RE: Did we really land on the moon in '69?
July 16, 2009 at 8:12 pm
Bozo,
Oh, you want unfounded speculation? In that case, I would say that math has been around for a long time and we can do very complicated calculations on paper so...
They calculated it up on paper, stuck a moist finger in the air for windage, pushed a button and voila! BANG ZOOM To the moon!
America Fuck YEAH!
Improbable? yes! What about pulling a Robin Hood and splitting an arrow with another arrow? Improbable? yes! Have I seen arrows do that? yep!
Rhizo
Posts: 541
Threads: 16
Joined: May 24, 2009
Reputation:
7
RE: Did we really land on the moon in '69?
July 16, 2009 at 9:23 pm
Not only did we go to the moon, we destroyed all life that was there, then blew the moon up and replaced it with a plastic replica. I know I watched it on live TV.
"On Earth as it is in Heaven, the Cosmic Roots of the Bible" available on the Amazon.
Posts: 2721
Threads: 99
Joined: October 8, 2008
Reputation:
17
RE: Did we really land on the moon in '69?
July 17, 2009 at 5:45 am
(This post was last modified: July 17, 2009 at 5:53 am by Kyuuketsuki.)
(July 16, 2009 at 7:08 pm)bozo Wrote: (July 16, 2009 at 5:08 pm)Kyuuketsuki Wrote: Negative though my opinion of you may be you are not the enemy so, if you wish to be lazy, ill-informed, ignorant and to look foolish in the face of those who choose not to be then that is your prerogative ... you want to look like a Muppet then enjoy your life.
All I will add, is that, thus far, none of you who are in no doubt that we landed on the moon have answered my 2 points. So who's the muppet?
Check the links ... if you want to remain ignorant of this issue that's YOUR problem!
Kyu
(July 16, 2009 at 8:04 pm)bozo Wrote: Please offer an opinion on how a craft with a computer capacity less than is in today's mobile phones ( added to other basics inherent in the technology of the day ) went to the moon and back, including landing in a dodgy terrain, for the first time, without crashing,with a faulty speedo reading.
How much computer capability do you really need to calculate trajectories and velocities? These guys are smart, they could have done it with a calculator (a slide rule if they had to)! You're too influenced by the movies and what we're fortunate enough to have now ... the computers on the Space Shuttle are significantly less powerful than today's offerings, they are 1970's tech and have 1Mb RAM as far as I know (The Russian Soyuz craft computers have 6K). This isn't Star Trek you know!
Kyu
Angry Atheism
Where those who are hacked off with the stupidity of irrational belief can vent their feelings!
Come over to the dark side, we have cookies!
Kyuuketsuki, AngryAtheism Owner & Administrator
Posts: 1446
Threads: 77
Joined: October 1, 2008
Reputation:
11
RE: Did we really land on the moon in '69?
July 17, 2009 at 12:14 pm
ok guys my last words on the issue are these.
If I had to bet on it ( And I like a gamble ) I'd have to bet it happened.
But, if it were possible to go again, using the same technology, my bet would be that they wouldn't make it there and back.
Fair enough?
A man is born to a virgin mother, lives, dies, comes alive again and then disappears into the clouds to become his Dad. How likely is that?
Posts: 14932
Threads: 684
Joined: August 25, 2008
Reputation:
143
RE: Did we really land on the moon in '69?
July 17, 2009 at 12:20 pm
I'd take you up on that bet.
Astronauts have more training now; they would be able to deal with the equipment of ages past. How could you even back up an argument like that? I mean, it's as if you are saying that the people of 40 years ago had some kind of advantage we don't...
Posts: 1446
Threads: 77
Joined: October 1, 2008
Reputation:
11
RE: Did we really land on the moon in '69?
July 17, 2009 at 12:32 pm
(July 17, 2009 at 12:20 pm)Tiberius Wrote: I'd take you up on that bet.
Astronauts have more training now; they would be able to deal with the equipment of ages past. How could you even back up an argument like that? I mean, it's as if you are saying that the people of 40 years ago had some kind of advantage we don't...
I can't back it up. But if it happens, we have a bet!
A man is born to a virgin mother, lives, dies, comes alive again and then disappears into the clouds to become his Dad. How likely is that?
|
