It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Exuberant1
reply to post by ngchunter
If you had bothered to read my post on the subject, you would note that I have been clear that the soviet probe was cited as a proof of concept - and to show that it could be done (weedwacker denied such a thing was done at all).
*The infamous and oft-cited laser reflector could also have been placed by an unmanned probe. I gave an example of a soviet probe that did just this.
This does not mean the Apollo missions were faked, it just shows that certain objectives on that mission could have been accomplished via unmanned probe.
Why do you dedicate so much of your time to suppressing speculation of the sort I engage in?
Originally posted by ngchunter
Please show where I surpressed your opinion. Mitigating with facts is not surpression.
Originally posted by Exuberant1
I should have said "attempting to suppress" as you clearly have not had any affect on his member.
were it not for the propensity of certain members to launch attacks and treat every discussion as a debate, we would have many more participants and it would be to our benefit.
solely to avoid being slagged and attacked and engaged by persons using tactics more commonly associated with pre-ban trolls than respectful fellow members.
*In hindsight, I would even go so far as to replace "attempting to suppress" with "actively discouraging", which more aptly describes the sort of behaviour that I have witnessed on this board.
Originally posted by ngchunter
Not that I addressed this in my initial response to you, but one of them failed. None of the apollo retroreflectors failed in spite of a greater number of total reflectors (larger as well) because humans are intrinsically far more reliable at performing such technical tasks with good judgement.
Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by letthereaderunderstand
You aren't really typing this in seriousness, are you?
Because, if someone wished to display a blatant lack of scientific knowledge and embarass themselves, I can think of no better way to do it.
Take a moment, have some coffee (it is early AM there) or...maybe you had too much???
Read that stuff you wrote, and then tell us you actually believe it!!!
*SIGH*....IF one cannot even understand how the Moon stays in orbit around the Earth, then there is simply no hope. If one truly does not understand the simplest basics of celestial mechanics, gravity, mass, velocity and, not to mention, photography, geology...the list goes on.
IF one is unable or unwilling to actually open one's eyes and learn, then that person will NOT find it here, on a web Forum. It would take years, it would seem, of one-on-one tutoring to get an education into the cracks that have developed in that person's skewed understanding of reality.
How about an educational video to share?
[edit on 5/3/0909 by weedwhacker]
Originally posted by Gawdzilla
reply to post by letthereaderunderstand
"The Russians, Brits, and even us. Have you ever seen the leaders of the countries go to war with one another? This may not seem on topic but it will come around. I'm not talking old republics, but since space flight. Have you ever seen one leader of another country have a fight with another leader from a different country. Two men with only the fists on their bodies?"
So ALL the Russians, Brits and US scientists are under the control of the government? And NONE of them spoke out in all those years? Perhaps they were all killed in June 1969 and replaced with doppelgangers? Or, no, the robotics industry made a great leap forward in 1968 and they were replaced with animatronics. That would tie Disney in nicely.
Sheesh.
Originally posted by evil incarnate
That is just blatantly not true.
Our reflectors and rovers were of better design and fucntioned better.
Are you saying it is not possible that we did the same as the Russians just that we did it better?
Please show me some evidence that proves humans have ever been considered more capable or accurate at such complex tasks.
If that were true, you should be making millions on a speaking tour explaining to millions of institutions world wide that they need to replace their machines and computers with humans because humans are more accurate.
Originally posted by letthereaderunderstand
I would say by your attitude and pitch with maybe a little yaw, you are unwilling weed. What do you propose I learn? Calculations? Theory? Laws with imaginary lines?
Why would 11 of the astronauts not swear they went and accept 5 grand for their favorite charity refusing on the basis of bad taste of the interviewer if they went?
Why does earths gravity which holds the moon not effect objects on the moon as to strengthen its gravity to more then 1/6th? Very strait forward question, should be simple to answer yourself and not with a childs science video.
Originally posted by FX44rice
reply to post by ngchunter
"The failure rate of robotic missions to human missions says otherwise"
Why have we not put man on mars if this is true?
We would only have needed to increase our "manned" distance ability 15063% in 40 yrs time from supposed Apollo 11 mission to today putting man on mars.
What? Money? That would be BS otherwise we would not have sent multiple unreliable robotic missions to Mars.