Space shuttle Endeavour

TheDane
Posts: 150
Joined: Sat Nov 15, 2008 12:54 pm
Contact:

Post by TheDane »

lol, it's not the getting to tyhe moon that is hard, it's getting back alive that is the trick. The solar wind would have killed anyone who tried using the "bad" spacesuits they had back then. The solar wind was extremely harsch at that specific year, it goes up and down in a cycle of 11 years. That is knowledge we have today, it wasn't known back in 69, the spacesuits was just not made for that solar wind, and therefore walking on the surface of the moon would have killed the astronuats giving them zero chance of returning alive to the earth. The russians couldn't call their bluff as they didn't know anything about the radiation in space either.

Today, space missions are cancelled in last minute if the sun has a burst of solar wind, because still today they don't have the technology availbale to block the radiation is causes.

I'm an amateur astronomer, I follow the development in space exploration, there is nothing you can do or say that will make me change my mind about the biggest cover up of all times.

Now, lets pretend they did go to the moon. Nasa has planned another mission to the moon, their aim is to put austronauts back on the moon within the year 2020, now ... if they succeeded back in 69 in less than a decade to put a manned crew on the moon and get them back alive, then why would it take them 16 years today? their new mission was planned in 2004, so why will it take them 16 years today to do something they could do in like 5 years back then with much older technology?

Skillz
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 2608
Joined: Fri Aug 21, 2009 4:59 am
Contact:

Post by Skillz »

:lol:

PS
It's not a race anymore. ;)
Like this site? Consider a donation to help with server costs.

NinjaNali
Posts: 103
Joined: Tue Aug 12, 2008 5:41 pm
Location: England: Land of Harry Potter and TRUFFLES!

Post by NinjaNali »

While we're at it, was 9/11 an inside job or not?
Let's just rename the thread "conspiricy theories" while we're at it :lol:

Also, Skillz, I was only joking about the space craft thing.
BANZAI!!!!!!

TheDane
Posts: 150
Joined: Sat Nov 15, 2008 12:54 pm
Contact:

Post by TheDane »

Skillz wrote: PS
It's not a race anymore. ;)
wrong, if ESA beats Nasa to it we will all know they never went to begin with.

Skillz
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 2608
Joined: Fri Aug 21, 2009 4:59 am
Contact:

Post by Skillz »

:lolbow:
Like this site? Consider a donation to help with server costs.

Hellrazor
Posts: 153
Joined: Wed May 28, 2008 4:07 am
Location: Omaha, Nebraska
Contact:

Post by Hellrazor »

TheDane wrote:lol, it's not the getting to tyhe moon that is hard, it's getting back alive that is the trick. The solar wind would have killed anyone who tried using the "bad" spacesuits they had back then. The solar wind was extremely harsch at that specific year, it goes up and down in a cycle of 11 years. That is knowledge we have today, it wasn't known back in 69, the spacesuits was just not made for that solar wind, and therefore walking on the surface of the moon would have killed the astronuats giving them zero chance of returning alive to the earth. The russians couldn't call their bluff as they didn't know anything about the radiation in space either.

Today, space missions are cancelled in last minute if the sun has a burst of solar wind, because still today they don't have the technology availbale to block the radiation is causes.

I'm an amateur astronomer, I follow the development in space exploration, there is nothing you can do or say that will make me change my mind about the biggest cover up of all times.

Now, lets pretend they did go to the moon. Nasa has planned another mission to the moon, their aim is to put austronauts back on the moon within the year 2020, now ... if they succeeded back in 69 in less than a decade to put a manned crew on the moon and get them back alive, then why would it take them 16 years today? their new mission was planned in 2004, so why will it take them 16 years today to do something they could do in like 5 years back then with much older technology?
My roommate in college has a physics degree, and minor in astronomy and works for the planetarium in chicago, he would laugh his ass off at this comment!!! WOW!
[img]http://i417.photobucket.com/albums/pp257/teeg35/29pesqs.png[/img]

UTvixen
Posts: 69
Joined: Sun May 18, 2008 2:30 am

Post by UTvixen »

[img]http://img88.imageshack.us/img88/165/11111111111cccccccccccgz8.jpg[/img]

TheDane
Posts: 150
Joined: Sat Nov 15, 2008 12:54 pm
Contact:

Post by TheDane »

rofl very nice photo :) man, I can see it's a size 6 moonshoe right? Oh and look at the size of the landing gear, man it must have carried a lot of weight :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

oh, what is that to the right? is that a little green man? .. hmm .. no can't be, it's a black'n'white photo :bowdown:

Added after 33 minutes:

hehe lets turn in into a conspiracy now you'd brought up all the evidence?

look at this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y1tqZyZVoDM

or this : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sDdzNSXD ... re=related

youtube is a treasure chamber if you want conspiracy theories :) ... gees, now there is also UFO activity on the moon. It just gets better and better haha

Added after 2 minutes:
Hellrazor wrote: My roommate in college has a physics degree, and minor in astronomy and works for the planetarium in chicago, he would laugh his ass off at this comment!!! WOW!
and you have ofcause asked him about the radiation in space right? You have asked him what happens once a human gets out on the other side of our protective atmosphere? I'm not sure he will laugh that loud m8. At least not if he is what you claim.

Added after 6 minutes:

hey, just found a little about radiation on youtube also hehe : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pcytzf7PkRA&feature=fvsr ... hmm, the movie quotes some well documeted scientific lab tests that should be possible to confirm .... ahh .. the beauti of conspiracy :P

Added after 10 minutes:

ROFL, this one has great humor: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9tkB3raSbyo&NR=1

Flatus
Posts: 248
Joined: Mon May 19, 2008 5:27 pm
Location: Other side of your monitor

Post by Flatus »

Odd why people can't see for themselves what is left on the moon itself from those early missions via a strong telescope. Also some still say, if it was done before, why not right now? Well hello, it cost more than what could be afforded with the technologies made available. The best way would be a world-wide co-operation in resources, thus why the Space Station is there now.

Anyways, looks like some is also a firm believer of this too then: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V0UPF7ohC9w
[url=http://profile.xfire.com/flatus][img]http://miniprofile.xfire.com/bg/sf/type/2/flatus.png[/img][/url]
[img]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v461/Flatus/Flatus_CanadianBanner.png[/img]
[url=http://www.gametracker.com/flatus/][img]http://www.gametracker.com/profile/flatus/b_460x42_C000000-222222-333333-CCCCCC-FFCC00-FFCC00.png[/img][/url]

TheDane
Posts: 150
Joined: Sat Nov 15, 2008 12:54 pm
Contact:

Post by TheDane »

well, to be able to spot the remainings of the lunar landing would require quite a large telescope much bigger than what we have today. The biggest telescopes (optical) are the Keck telescopes at Hawaii, they are 10m in diameter if i remember correct. And they are only able to take photos of the moon with a resolution that will make 1 pixel = 50 x 50 meters or so, so the remainings of the lunar landings would not be detected. Also if they were to build a telescope large eneough it would be useless as the earths atmosphere are cluttering the image quality. Though they have made huge telescopes made of multiple pieces and have a coputer calculate each pieces correct position to adjust for the cluttering, I just don't know how far they are on that project yet. But one day maybe a telescope on earth would be big eneough to photoshoot details on the moon?

Holocaust ............ that's holy ground for me, I've got strong personal issues on that one so expect no debate from me.

Post Reply