Page 7 of 9
Re: Mars Landing, May 25th
Posted: Wed May 28, 2008 4:17 pm
by Akira
It's a perfectly good way to discredit someone, just change one word.
Re: Mars Landing, May 25th
Posted: Wed May 28, 2008 4:18 pm
by Doombrain
Akira wrote:andyman wrote:Explain why it's 'extremely easy' to take pictures of the landing sites, buzz lightyear
This is due to the fact that unlike a planet, the moon has no gravity, therefore satellites orbit at a much lower altitude, no friction to slow it down, and absolutely no atmospheric distortion on the lenses, therefore not requiring correction, meaning less weight. At the moon the satellites orbit reaches about 80km from the surface at Perigee, this requires lower power on the camera. This, coupled with the fact the moon is much smaller than a planetary body, thus requiring lower orbiting speeds, meaning even lower rez pictures come out sharper.
Now lets say you have a perfectly legit scientific mission like the upcoming NASA satellite and the Japanese one already there, they orbit around and take the pictures they need to accomplish that mission, meanwhile whole this satellite is orbiting the moon, it shifts it's orbit, like the Earth satellites, this would cause it to pass over the moon landing spots many times during this mission, giving them a perfect opertunity to take the photos, while not diverting them from their regular mission.
Let me just destroy your little fantasy.
It to pass over the moon landing spots many times during this mission - The moons surface area is 37.8 million square km.
the moon has no gravity - not true
meaning less weight. - rubbish
This requires lower power on the camera - lol, no.
meaning even lower rez pictures come out sharper. - rubbish
Re: Mars Landing, May 25th
Posted: Wed May 28, 2008 4:19 pm
by Nightshade
Akira wrote:It's a perfectly good way to discredit someone, just change one word.
Or, we could just rely on the fact that you're a moron and tend to discredit yourself.
Re: Mars Landing, May 25th
Posted: Wed May 28, 2008 4:19 pm
by Doombrain
Akira wrote:Doombrain wrote:Isn't it in a very low decaying orbit, as in a short term orbit? As in there's never been a man made object in a short term decaying orbit over the moon so no images could be taken.
There was a rather large number of moon orbiting satellites that where crashed in to the moon surface on purpose (decaying orbit) near the end of the mission. Both by NASA, Russia, and the European Space Agency.
None fitted with a camera with a lens the size of a cow.
Re: Mars Landing, May 25th
Posted: Wed May 28, 2008 4:20 pm
by andyman
Akira wrote:It's a perfectly good way to discredit someone, just change one word.
yeah you're really on to something
Re: Mars Landing, May 25th
Posted: Wed May 28, 2008 4:20 pm
by Akira
Doombrain wrote:
the moon has no gravity - not true
It was meant to say
no atmosphere.
Re: Mars Landing, May 25th
Posted: Wed May 28, 2008 4:20 pm
by Akira
Doombrain wrote:
None fitted with a camera with a lens the size of a cow.
True.
Re: Mars Landing, May 25th
Posted: Wed May 28, 2008 4:22 pm
by andyman
Akira wrote:Doombrain wrote:
the moon has no gravity - not true
It was meant to say
no atmosphere.
So instead of manning up to your typo you instead decide to try and pull the wool over everyone and say someone magically changed your post?
Re: Mars Landing, May 25th
Posted: Wed May 28, 2008 4:24 pm
by xer0s
STOP CHANGING POSTS AND DISCREDITING HIS INTELLIGENCE!!
Re: Mars Landing, May 25th
Posted: Wed May 28, 2008 4:26 pm
by andyman
It took him 5 minutes of us telling him he's a moron to go in and change it himself
Re: Mars Landing, May 25th
Posted: Wed May 28, 2008 4:28 pm
by Nightshade
Well, he admitted that he changed it. No fucking way that's not what he originally typed, though.
Re: Mars Landing, May 25th
Posted: Wed May 28, 2008 4:40 pm
by scared?
lol u guys r in major denial...tis funny...
Re: Mars Landing, May 25th
Posted: Wed May 28, 2008 4:45 pm
by Nightshade
So let's see all your 'proof', nutball. Oh wait, you'll just tell me to go research it myself.
I'll never understand why you get such enjoyment out of passing your time trolling people with your crackpot bullshit.
Re: Mars Landing, May 25th
Posted: Wed May 28, 2008 4:52 pm
by scared?
i don't have to prove...the onus is on the believers...
btw...the weight of the lenses needed for high rez pics need to view the apollo sites is not that heavy...
Re: Mars Landing, May 25th
Posted: Wed May 28, 2008 4:57 pm
by andyman
scared? wrote:i don't have to prove...the onus is on the believers...
I'm faster than Michael Johnson but I don't have to prove it
Re: Mars Landing, May 25th
Posted: Wed May 28, 2008 5:00 pm
by scared?
no really...christians try the same shit..."prove there isn't a god" uh. no...thats on u...
Re: Mars Landing, May 25th
Posted: Wed May 28, 2008 5:04 pm
by andyman
scared? wrote:no really...christians try the same shit..."prove there isn't a god" uh. no...thats on u...
yeah but god is more of the human condition. space exploration, not so much
Re: Mars Landing, May 25th
Posted: Wed May 28, 2008 5:08 pm
by scared?
u don't ask some to prove it isn't...or how it didn't....proving a negative is about as gay as theist who claim proving a negative is a misconception...lol idiots...
Re: Mars Landing, May 25th
Posted: Wed May 28, 2008 5:11 pm
by andyman
scared? wrote:u don't ask some to prove it isn't...or how it didn't....proving a negative is about as gay as theist who claim proving a negative is a misconception...lol idiots...
so since you can't prove that we did land on the moon, and won't prove that we didn't, ... wtf are you going on about?
Re: Mars Landing, May 25th
Posted: Wed May 28, 2008 5:27 pm
by Akira
Landing on the moon is very possible, and "easy". There is no doubt in my mind that we went there, it would be crazy to believe otherwise. However, I find in intriguing why they don't photograph the site for both historical and novelty reasons. Due to this fact, I love discussing the issue, but when it comes down to it, going to the moon is doable.
Re: Mars Landing, May 25th
Posted: Wed May 28, 2008 5:29 pm
by scared?
no dipshit...it's a logical fallacy to ask someone to prove a negative...so if they can't prove we landed on the moon(and they haven't) i'm not convinced we did....when i see some legit quality pics of the apollo sites i will believe...
Re: Mars Landing, May 25th
Posted: Wed May 28, 2008 5:33 pm
by Akira
But how can someone beleive that it's impossible to get to the moon, when you look at the math and the technology it it very doable. How about this, in their desperate need to beat the USSR they sent the landers there but with no people in them. So taking photos will show the sights but no footprints.
And once they got there and beat the USSR, the missions after that where with real people in the cockpit?
Do you accept that?
Re: Mars Landing, May 25th
Posted: Wed May 28, 2008 5:41 pm
by Nightshade
scared? wrote:u don't ask some to prove it isn't...or how it didn't....proving a negative is about as gay as theist who claim proving a negative is a misconception...lol idiots...
Nice try dipshit, but you're the one claiming the negative position here. There's shitloads of evidence proving the landings took place, and lots of nutjobs with nothing to back it up (like you) claiming we never went.
Re: Mars Landing, May 25th
Posted: Wed May 28, 2008 5:43 pm
by scared?
did u know there r almost 1000 BOXES of tapes now missing from the apollo era?...this was only revealed a few years ago...hmmmm...
Re: Mars Landing, May 25th
Posted: Wed May 28, 2008 5:44 pm
by Nightshade
Akira wrote:Landing on the moon is very possible, and "easy". There is no doubt in my mind that we went there, it would be crazy to believe otherwise. However, I find in intriguing why they don't photograph the site for both historical and novelty reasons. Due to this fact, I love discussing the issue, but when it comes down to it, going to the moon is doable.
Again, there's no reason to photograph it as the only people that have a vested interest in it are lunatic conspiracy theorists.
Do you assume that all the existing photos are fake?