23 Dec 2012, 05:17
Arouet wrote:Misha: its the practical joke version, made popular by Ashton Kutcher's MTV show:
23 Dec 2012, 05:25
ProfWag wrote:It was actually formed as a result of thrown rock from a meteor, Syd.
23 Dec 2012, 05:41
Misha wrote:Since everyone is throwing around the word "punked" or "punking" I thought it best to find out what you fellas mean by this. I'm from New York and it means only one thing:
1. a male prison inmate blank another male prison inmate in the ass
2. succesfully playing a practical joke on someone
Originally, the word "punk" was prison slang, meaning the first defintion. the second comes from the idea that blank someone in the ass is a sign of disrespect (such as male dogs humping one another to show dominance, instead of sexual attraction, which could very well be the motive behind prison rape as well)
"here come' bubba, you 'bout to get f'd in the a' ok?"
Now I haven't been to prison and I also don't find the same sex attractive. What gives?
23 Dec 2012, 06:21
23 Dec 2012, 06:36
Only one ‘genuine’ setting can be valid – each one is mutually exclusive. This scene with seriously HUGE and FORBIDDING mountains might well be the most valid representation of what it's like on the Moon – but apparently not what NASA wanted as a backdrop for the photo action scenes. It would appear that a suitable 'arena' was created for both the action photography and for recording the TV coverage.
Why would NASA even want to make the transition between the less intimidating mountains (behind the LM and astronauts in the previous pictures) to the HUGE and FORBIDDING mountains taken from around five miles away? – Perhaps because when used on their own, images like 139-21203/4 convey SCALE and IMPRESS. Exactly what was needed back in December 1972 as Project Apollo came to an end – powerful images in magazines such as National Geographic promoting the awesome achievements of NASA’s space program – manned or otherwise.
23 Dec 2012, 06:52
NASA has recently released a video of the test firing of a 7,500 lb thrust LOX/Methane rocket engine. This new NASA test inadvertently demonstrates the effect of a 7,500-lb thrust engine on dust and dirt, a stark comparison to the claimed effect the 10,500-lb thrust Hydrazine engine had during the Apollo 11 landing.
Dietrich von Schmausen* has pointed out that as the LM descended it reduced its thrust from 9,800 lbs to approx 7,000 lbs for three minutes, then down to approx 2,600 lbs. As seen in the above photos/video link, and considering what a 7,500-lb engine will do to loose material on the surface, Dietrich von Schmausen considers that a vertical 2,600-lb thrust plume at several feet should do far more than just ‘waft’ the surface.
During the Apollo missions the LM approached and landed at a descending angle, and not straight down. The descent engine had sufficient energy to raise dust at 100 feet, and dust kick up from the LM engine was commented on by the Apollo crew at 40 feet. Deep dust was present near and around the landing site.
Mr von Schmausen says the lander was approaching the target at a 16-degree angle with a decent rate of 60 feet per second forward to 16 fps down from an altitude of 500 feet. Descending from 100 feet at that rate the dust disturbance markings would have become increasingly deeper for the last 100 feet to the landing site. He calculates that there should have been a blast trench at least 32 feet long.
Yet, no such landing approach trail was ever photographed or discussed. The LM would have left not only a visible crater (if not actually wiping the area clear) but also a visible trail approaching the landing site. In Dietrich von Schmausen's view if this did not occur, then the down-looking video showing dust movement at forty feet was totally fake.
Mr von Schmausen speculates that the so-called ‘Apollo conspiracy’ was ultimately the benevolent application of the generally noxious idea that the “end justifies the means”. In his view this time it truly did, for the failure of Apollo would have theoretically set the United States Space Program back by decades.
Politicians would have been hard pressed to justify continued funding for NASA programs. “I don’t harbour any ill will towards NASA or the United States,” says Mr von Schmausen. “I do, on the other hand, believe that politicians are a deceitful breed, and conspiracies do exist, especially in agencies that suckle those politicians.”
Dietrich von Schmausen concludes however, that no humans have ventured beyond Low Earth Orbit – other than those who claim to have been sent to the Moon yet refuse to discuss the adventure candidly.
* Dietrich von Schmausen was employed at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory Pasadena, CA, between March 1974 to April 1982 as a category "A" contractor.
While I’m at it, I think that it should be mentioned that there were collapsible surface contact probes attached to the bottoms of the Apollo 11 landing pads. Since the LM (as the record states) came in at an angle and those contact probes did not retract upon surface contact but rather dragged along the lunar surface, what happened to the drag marks left by the surface contact probes?
Furthermore, if the contact probes were dragged along the lunar surface on a straight course, why are they shown in photographs sticking out at odd angles? (see photo above) It's as though the LM had landed straight down and was rotated in opposite directions during landing, consistent with being lowered by a crane.
23 Dec 2012, 07:51
23 Dec 2012, 17:24
23 Dec 2012, 17:36
23 Dec 2012, 17:42
23 Dec 2012, 17:52
23 Dec 2012, 21:43
SydneyPSIder wrote:Where's the reticules on this one?
23 Dec 2012, 21:52
Misha wrote:At this point in time if someone gave me a choice by putting a gun to my head on whether Apollo was real or hoaxed I would have to say hoaxed.
24 Dec 2012, 02:27
ProfWag wrote:Misha wrote:At this point in time if someone gave me a choice by putting a gun to my head on whether Apollo was real or hoaxed I would have to say hoaxed.
Wow. You are willing to put your life on the line because of what Jarrah White says on a website that has already been shown to have misrepresentations? C'mon Misha, you appear smarter than that.
24 Dec 2012, 02:38
Misha wrote:When you finally come to terms that what has been fed to the masses on this planet is about control then your world will truly open up.