Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


* * * - - 6 votes

[Merged] Did we land on the moon?

nasa apollo hoax

This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
2593 replies to this topic

#91    Waspie_Dwarf

Waspie_Dwarf

    Space Cadet

  • 34,224 posts
  • Joined:03 Mar 2006

Posted 27 May 2012 - 11:26 AM

View Postand then, on 27 May 2012 - 08:04 AM, said:

That little boom was to welcome me into the world!  I was born that day.  
Can you imagine anyone being stupid enough to use welding equipment around a fully fueled rocket?  Apparently one did not have to be particularly bright to be a General officer in Russia at the time....oooops   :w00t:
Marshall Nedelin's actions were the result of intense political pressure, not stupidity. No welding was involved, the accident was caused by the accidental ignition of the 2nd stage.

"Space is big. Really big. You just won't believe how vastly, hugely, mind-boggingly big it is. I mean, you may think it's a long way down the street to the chemist, but that's just peanuts to space." - The Hitch-Hikers Guide to the Galaxy - Douglas Adams 1952 - 2001

Posted Image
Click on button

#92    postbaguk

postbaguk

    Conspiracy Theorist

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 997 posts
  • Joined:17 Aug 2006

Posted 27 May 2012 - 01:13 PM

View PostChrlzs, on 26 May 2012 - 04:58 AM, said:

I'd just like to PUBLICLY point out, rather than via mod.. what an unbelievable WASTE of space posts like that one from Turbonium are.  He (again) brought absolutely nothing to the debate, and simply reposted content (ironically proving him wrong) presumably simply to annoy people and waste bandwidth.

Personally, I think it is probably best to just ignore that sort of nonsense non-debate.  The space suit 'issue' was a non-starter from the first post...

I agree. He's shown in recent months he's incapable of debating in good faith. The latest debacle over the spacesuit (non-)issue is further proof of that. I've suspected for a long time that he doesn't even believe his own arguments, and is only interested in wearing people down, presumably so he can claim some kind of victory. I'm sorely tempted to follow Obviousman's advice and stick him on ignore.


#93    booNyzarC

booNyzarC

    Forum Divinity

  • Closed
  • 13,536 posts
  • Joined:18 Aug 2010

Posted 27 May 2012 - 01:36 PM

View Postpostbaguk, on 27 May 2012 - 01:13 PM, said:

I agree. He's shown in recent months he's incapable of debating in good faith. The latest debacle over the spacesuit (non-)issue is further proof of that. I've suspected for a long time that he doesn't even believe his own arguments, and is only interested in wearing people down, presumably so he can claim some kind of victory. I'm sorely tempted to follow Obviousman's advice and stick him on ignore.
If it's any consolation, your efforts have been noted and admired.  The spacesuit debate was over long ago thanks to several people, and every possible angle the argument could take has been dealt with thanks primarily to your contributions.  Anyone seeking information about this will now be able to find it.

Cheers.  :tu:


#94    MID

MID

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 14,490 posts
  • Joined:06 Aug 2005

Posted 27 May 2012 - 04:24 PM

View PostWaspie_Dwarf, on 27 May 2012 - 11:26 AM, said:

Marshall Nedelin's actions were the result of intense political pressure, not stupidity. No welding was involved, the accident was caused by the accidental ignition of the 2nd stage.

I'd advance the opinion that one could reasonably attribute any or all of the Soviet catastrophies/failures during those years to intense political pressure.
I've often said that when a communist nation's government / military is in functional control of something like this, and calling the shots...far too often orders don't take into consideration complexity or technical issues, and, disaster results.  That's really the sole reason why we won the race to the Moon.   It had nothing to do with the Soviets not being capable.   It had to do with government and military pressure  to take risks that weren't managed.


#95    MID

MID

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 14,490 posts
  • Joined:06 Aug 2005

Posted 27 May 2012 - 04:37 PM

Posted Image How'd Buzz's knees bend that far?


#96    and then

and then

    Abyssus Abyssum Invocat

  • Member
  • 17,785 posts
  • Joined:15 Dec 2011

Posted 27 May 2012 - 05:17 PM

View PostWaspie_Dwarf, on 27 May 2012 - 11:26 AM, said:

Marshall Nedelin's actions were the result of intense political pressure, not stupidity. No welding was involved, the accident was caused by the accidental ignition of the 2nd stage.

I stand corrected on the welding.  I just remembered the problem was caused by an electrical issue and the General in charge deferred from safely defueling the rocket prior to the repair or test.  Debatable whether you could call that stupid or not, I think.  But yes, I'm sure he did have intense pressure being applied during that time.  Anyway... his mistake was a monumental one and cost the Russians dearly in talent.

Edited by and then, 27 May 2012 - 05:18 PM.

  We've cast the world, we've set the stage,
  for what could be, the darkest age...
“This is like playing poker with a guy who cheated you twice before. You know who does that, a moron.

#97    MID

MID

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 14,490 posts
  • Joined:06 Aug 2005

Posted 27 May 2012 - 08:47 PM

View Postand then, on 27 May 2012 - 05:17 PM, said:

I stand corrected on the welding.  I just remembered the problem was caused by an electrical issue and the General in charge deferred from safely defueling the rocket prior to the repair or test.  Debatable whether you could call that stupid or not, I think.  But yes, I'm sure he did have intense pressure being applied during that time.  Anyway... his mistake was a monumental one and cost the Russians dearly in talent.

The Soviets had great talent.
They had inadequate leadership.  This is illustrated by a General being able to defer de-tanking prior to repairing a vehicle.

We in the U.S. had a slightly different situation, a situation wherein the people who were charged with accomplishing something were also empowered to do it, and totally responsible for doing it.
A launch director in the U.S. would've been 100% in charge of such an operation, and no one could tell him what to decide or how to manage a launch vehicle;  not any government official, including  the President of the United States.  Flight directors were (and are) empowered similarly as pertains to all mission operations.*




* This is why we won the "space race".

Edited by MID, 27 May 2012 - 08:55 PM.


#98    postbaguk

postbaguk

    Conspiracy Theorist

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 997 posts
  • Joined:17 Aug 2006

Posted 27 May 2012 - 11:35 PM

View PostbooNyzarC, on 27 May 2012 - 01:36 PM, said:

If it's any consolation, your efforts have been noted and admired.  The spacesuit debate was over long ago thanks to several people, and every possible angle the argument could take has been dealt with thanks primarily to your contributions.  Anyone seeking information about this will now be able to find it.

Cheers.  :tu:

Thanks for the words of support, booNy. I agree, the 'debate' about the suit, if there ever was one, was over a long, long time ago!


#99    MID

MID

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 14,490 posts
  • Joined:06 Aug 2005

Posted 27 May 2012 - 11:41 PM

View Postpostbaguk, on 27 May 2012 - 11:35 PM, said:

Thanks for the words of support, booNy. I agree, the 'debate' about the suit, if there ever was one, was over a long, long time ago!

Roger that, , posty!

:tsu:


#100    postbaguk

postbaguk

    Conspiracy Theorist

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 997 posts
  • Joined:17 Aug 2006

Posted 28 May 2012 - 12:14 AM

View PostMID, on 27 May 2012 - 11:41 PM, said:

Roger that, , posty!

:tsu:

The real mystery is... why does he persist? Why not show a smidgen of humility and honesty, save face, gain back some long lost credibility, and just concede the issue?

Here's an interesting article on Neil Armstrong's view on the Apollo conspiracy theorists.

http://www.dailymail...-walk-moon.html


#101    Czero 101

Czero 101

    Earthshattering Kaboom

  • Member
  • 5,620 posts
  • Joined:24 Dec 2007

Posted 28 May 2012 - 02:21 AM

View Postpostbaguk, on 28 May 2012 - 12:14 AM, said:

Here's an interesting article on Neil Armstrong's view on the Apollo conspiracy theorists.

http://www.dailymail...-walk-moon.html

You can view the interview referenced in the article here:

http://thebottomline...stralia.com.au/






Cz

"You can't convince a believer of anything; for their belief is not based on evidence, it's based on a deep seated need to believe..." - Carl Sagan
"I'm tired of ignorance held up as inspiration, where vicious anti-intellectualism is considered a positive trait, and where uninformed opinion is displayed as fact." - Phil Plait
"For it is the natural tendency of the ignorant to believe what is not true. In order to overcome that tendency it is not sufficient to exhibit the true; it is also necessary to expose and denounce the false." - H. L. Mencken

#102    MID

MID

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 14,490 posts
  • Joined:06 Aug 2005

Posted 28 May 2012 - 03:26 PM

those two pieces illustrate the kind of man Neil Armstrong is.
The man's class is un-heard-of in a man of his stature.

Further, his take on HBs and the CTs surrounding the Apollo effort are much more gracious, in general, than I am.
I think he graciously said all that he needs to when he said that people like conspiracy theories. "They're very attractive."


#103    MID

MID

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 14,490 posts
  • Joined:06 Aug 2005

Posted 28 May 2012 - 04:00 PM

View Postpostbaguk, on 28 May 2012 - 12:14 AM, said:

The real mystery is... why does he persist? Why not show a smidgen of humility and honesty, save face, gain back some long lost credibility, and just concede the issue?

Here's an interesting article on Neil Armstrong's view on the Apollo conspiracy theorists.

http://www.dailymail...-walk-moon.html

He could gain alot of wisdom just by  taking in Neil's manner, humility, and intellect.


I think I once devoted some length to the question of why an HB persists when his/her argument is completely shredded.

I suspect a psychological blocking / shielding mechanism of sorts.  Perhaps it's brought on by an inability to accept that one is wrong,..made more intense by repeated people coming aboard and shredding his arguments into small bits.
I guess it feels better to ignore what's been taught to you in favor of posting the illusion that you know something you don't know at all.

About all I can think of.   Otherwise, Posty, I would have a hard time explaining that someone could be that obstinate in posting unsubstantiated fantasy in the face of people who actually know something about what they're speaking to.


It's a tough question to answer, and as I said before, I don't think I have the appropriate education and degree qualifications  to analyze it much more.

Edited by MID, 28 May 2012 - 04:01 PM.


#104    Waspie_Dwarf

Waspie_Dwarf

    Space Cadet

  • 34,224 posts
  • Joined:03 Mar 2006

Posted 28 May 2012 - 05:12 PM

View PostMID, on 28 May 2012 - 04:00 PM, said:

I suspect a psychological blocking / shielding mechanism of sorts.  Perhaps it's brought on by an inability to accept that one is wrong,..made more intense by repeated people coming aboard and shredding his arguments into small bits.
I guess it feels better to ignore what's been taught to you in favor of posting the illusion that you know something you don't know at all.

I think this behaviour is quite common. It's the behaviour of someone with a strong belief system, you will find it in every forum on that site and we are probably all guilty of it to some degree, whether it be a strongly held religious belief, astrology, flying saucers, fairys at the bottom of the garden, a superstition or a conspiracy theory. He believes so strongly in the hoax theory that he is simply unable to entertain the idea that he could be wrong. Any evidence that contradicts his position (ie all of it) is simply disregarded. His continuous habit of cherry picking evidence, presenting only a few, out of context paragraphs, whilst disregarding the vast majority of the document does not even register as intellectually dishonest with him, since anything that doesn't support him must be untrue and can therefore be ignored.

Belief with no supporting evidence is the basis of just about every religion on this planet, when it becomes a problem is when it becomes a belief in spite of the evidence. This is the stage turbonium is at. He is the equivalent of the preacher standing on a street corner shouting incoherently to a tiny and ever diminishing audience.

It has been evident for a very long time, the knee flex fiasco just its most recent apparition. Despite photographs and videos of spacesuits doing the exact thing he claims is impossible he continues to claim no evidence has been presented.

He dismisses the documentation that has been presented because it is of a prototype suit predating the Apollo landings. He dismisses the photo of a Soyuz Sokol suit as irrelevant. He seems unable to apply the simplest of logical reasoning to this evidence, if that degree of knee flexation was possible before Apollo and is possible after Apollo it doesn't take Sherlock Holmes to deduce it was possible at the time of Apollo

I suspect that, somewhere in the back of his mind, he knows this so he does something that most people would again consider intellectually dishonest, he sets the burden of proof to an impossible position.

He starts of this little gem:

View Postturbonium, on 26 May 2012 - 05:11 AM, said:



It's basic logic...

Apollo moon landings -  a hoax or not a hoax.

Like so much of turbonium's nonsense down the years it is difficult to determine if this is based on an ignorance of basic logic or deliberate misrepresentation. There are many people that believe Apollo was genuine, but some or all of the photos and movie footage were faked. Hence even here turbonium can not grasp the simplest of logical arguments. He believes that he only has to prove one photo or one piece of movie to be faked and he proves Apollo to have been faked. As usual he's wrong, but that is largely irrelevant as in the 43 years since Apollo not one single image has been shown to be faked. But to get back to his most outrageous piece of intellectual dishonesty (of the last few weeks anyway).. turbs goes on to say this:

View Postturbonium, on 26 May 2012 - 05:11 AM, said:

Knee flexion, as seen in those video clips, was either possible or impossible for astronauts to do, while on the moon.  If the evidence shows it can be done, then we can drop it. But if the evidence shows it cannot be done, it is proof of a hoax.

He says this right under the video of an Apollo suit doing exactly what he says can't, so he has subtly moved the goal posts. He wants proof it could be done ON THE MOON. Since he has rejected the video showing it can be done on Earth and he rejects ALL images taken on the moon as believes them to be faked he has set a task that he knows can not be proven TO HIS SATISFACTION.

The rest of us will just have to accept that we can have all the logic, all the evidence, all the expert opinion on our side but it will never move turbonium. He lives in a world of circular arguments where he says that something fake, rejects all the evidence as fake and then, because no one can present evidence he will accept, proclaim himself the winner.

What we can do is continue to post the logic, the evidence and the expert opinion. It is those that aren't sure but are capable of logic that will benefit, let turbonium have the victories in his own mind, because we can't change that. Just remember the old English proverb:

Quote

There's none as blind as those that will not see.


"Space is big. Really big. You just won't believe how vastly, hugely, mind-boggingly big it is. I mean, you may think it's a long way down the street to the chemist, but that's just peanuts to space." - The Hitch-Hikers Guide to the Galaxy - Douglas Adams 1952 - 2001

Posted Image
Click on button

#105    postbaguk

postbaguk

    Conspiracy Theorist

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 997 posts
  • Joined:17 Aug 2006

Posted 28 May 2012 - 07:37 PM

View PostMID, on 28 May 2012 - 04:00 PM, said:

He could gain alot of wisdom just by  taking in Neil's manner, humility, and intellect.

Couldn't we all MID, couldn't we all? :)