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.

 

Young Aussie genius whipping NASA in Moon Hoax Debate!

page: 105
377
<< 102  103  104    106  107  108 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 13 2010 @ 10:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by weedwhacker
ppk55, with all DUE respect, could you please inform the readers so that they can follow the logic in this statement?


I corrected my mistake very early on. I admit I got it wrong.
It was only up for a few minutes before I corrected it as you can see above.
We all make mistakes, and I'm happy to admit mine on this one, so apologies.




posted on Jun, 13 2010 @ 10:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by debunky

Originally posted by DJW001
reply to post by Komodo
 



Gee, it's too bad that people that haven't decided to do their research a bit more instead of listening to to proproganist about there being a 'mirror' on the moon to 'measure' the distance..

WOW.. how pathetic..

it took all about 30secs to find this data.. sheeseh .. and you're still gonna believe that 'mirror' lie .. ?? and yes...some people will believe anything, no matter how asinine the belief itself is. ]


How does this prove that there are no mirrors on the Moon? Just because I can measure a distance by trigonometry, does that prove yardsticks don't exist?


No, I think it proves GPS doesnt exist. Because who would shoot satelites into space, if you can just as well just count your steps.


Not to mention there are obviously no atomic clocks which are necessary to calibrate the satellites. I mean why bother with atomic clocks when we have perfectly good spring-driven wristwatches?



posted on Jun, 13 2010 @ 02:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by zvezdar

Originally posted by FoosM

You know what, why dont you tell us how the US managed to land men on the moon within 10 years? And how they proved they did it.


Lets see:


1966:

After the ranger missions, the next step was to land on the moon to demonstrate proof of concept and gather surface data. Surveyor 1 was the first non-impact landing and proved NASA's ability to achieve a controlled landing.


Wow... 4 years left to land two men on the moon and NASA manages to launch seven Surveyor missions where two crash land. That sure is confidence building. LOL. But it sounds realistic.

So what NASA proved is that they could land occasionally a Surveyor probe, but not a LM on the moon. But most importantly, how many probes managed to get back to Earth? I mean, thats what the Soviets were concerned about, getting people back home. At least they proved they could send a probe back.
And how much biology was was sent?


Lunar Orbiter 1 and 2 were NASA's missions to achieve a lunar orbit and collect further data on the moon in preparation for a manned mission. They collected images for possible landing sites, data on radiation intensity, micrometeroid impacts and other relevent data.


Ah yes this interesting program.
So where is this data on Radiation and micrometeorites?
And how does this radiation data compare to current studies?


1967:

There were 6 missions to the moon in 1967. Lunar Orbiter 3, 4 and 5 continued to collect the data that the first 2 Orbiter probes had been acquiring, to build a reasonable database of possible landing sites and collect enough data on radiation and other issues.

Surveyor 3, 5 and 6 gathered further data on the surface of the moon, as well as engineering data on things like strain on components on landing etc.


Now the fake stuff:


1968:

Apollo 8 was NASA's first manned lunar orbiter. The data gathered on previous missions confirmed that lunar orbit was acheivable and that it was safe enough for humans. This was a test of the command module and its functionality as well as continuing to obtain photos and other lunar data.


1969:

Apollo 10 was the second manned orbiter, and was the first test of the lunar module. The LM test was manned, and navigated to within 50,000 feet of the lunar surface before returning to the command module and docking.

Apollo 11, obviously, was the first manned landing.

All of the above missions have reams of data collected and are extensively documented. Information was shared with outside agencies, including the Soviet Union. All you have to do is read it for yourself and see how extensive it is.


Well lets see if you can find that radiation data.
And is that the best you can do? Where are Apollo 7? 9? Aren't they important?


It is clear that the sheer number of missions and manpower is what made the landing possible. There was something like 55 missions carried out in the above programs to get Apollo 11 to the moon. It was a clear step by step process to acheive the landing.


Ive clearly showed there were plenty of steps missing.
They were no where near a survivable moonshot prior to Apollo 8.
Sending a thousand probes taking a thousand pictures doesn't get you anywhere closer to landing a man on the moon.



The USSR did not complete anywhere near this number of missions, as they did not possess the resources that NASA was able to muster from the US govt during the 1960's.


Yet they have more than 5.000 more hours in manned spaceflight than the US.

1959: First firing of a rocket in Earth orbit, first man-made object to escape Earth's orbit, Luna 1
1959: First man-made object to pass near the Moon, first man-made object in Solar orbit, Luna 1
1959: First probe to impact the Moon, Luna 2
1959: First images of the moon's far side, Luna 3
1960: First animals to safely return from Earth orbit, the dogs Belka and Strelka on Sputnik 5.
1961: First person in space (International definition) and in Earth orbit, Yuri Gagarin on Vostok 1, Vostok programme
1964: First multi-man crew (3), Voskhod 1
1965: First extra-vehicular activity EVA, by Aleksei Leonov, Voskhod 2
1966: First probe to make a soft landing on and transmit from the surface of the moon, Luna 9
1966: First probe in lunar orbit, Luna 10
1967: First unmanned rendezvous and docking, Cosmos 186/Cosmos 188. (Until 2006, this had remained the only major space achievement that the US had not duplicated.)
1969: First docking between two manned craft in Earth orbit and exchange of crews, Soyuz 4 and Soyuz 5
1970: First samples automatically returned to Earth from another body, Luna 16
1970: First robotic space rover, Lunokhod 1

These are only firsts, they dont include follow up missions. This is a comparable progression to a possible manned lunar landing to what you posted prior to Apollo 8.
But in my eyes more realistic, yet the russians still havent made it.
The Russians also had a Space Shuttle: Buran. They took and take space exploration seriously. The USSR took the US bait for landing a man first on the moon. And they wasted time going for fools gold. While the US focused on spy and communication satellite technology. The US won the PR war.



posted on Jun, 13 2010 @ 02:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by FoosM


Yet they have more than 5.000 more hours in manned spaceflight than the US.




The rest of this mess you call evidence will be dealt with eventually, but I thought I'd call you on this lie. When you say "have", are you talking about now, or during Apollo? Because it matters very little the accumulated hours AFTER the Apollo missions.

Let's let Wikideal with this:


Before the first manned Earth-orbiting Apollo flight (Apollo 7), the USSR had made nine spaceflights (seven with one cosmonaut, one with two, one with three). The U.S. had made sixteen flights (six with one astronaut, ten with two). The USSR and U.S. each had six spaceflights in 1961-63, each with one astronaut or cosmonaut. The USSR had only three spaceflights in 1964-67 (each only a little longer than one day) whereas the U.S. had ten in this period (averaging over four days each). In terms of spacecraft hours, the USSR had 460 hours of space flight; the U.S. had 1,024 hours. In terms of astronaut/cosmonaut time, the USSR had accumulated 534 hours of manned spaceflight whereas the U.S. had accumulated 1,992 hours. By the time of Apollo 11, the United States's lead was much wider than that. (See List of human spaceflights, 1960s.)


Honestly, whoever is feeding you your information isn't doing you any favors.



posted on Jun, 13 2010 @ 02:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by FoosM


1959: First firing of a rocket in Earth orbit, first man-made object to escape Earth's orbit, Luna 1
1959: First man-made object to pass near the Moon, first man-made object in Solar orbit, Luna 1
1959: First probe to impact the Moon, Luna 2
1959: First images of the moon's far side, Luna 3
1960: First animals to safely return from Earth orbit, the dogs Belka and Strelka on Sputnik 5.
1961: First person in space (International definition) and in Earth orbit, Yuri Gagarin on Vostok 1, Vostok programme
1964: First multi-man crew (3), Voskhod 1
1965: First extra-vehicular activity EVA, by Aleksei Leonov, Voskhod 2
1966: First probe to make a soft landing on and transmit from the surface of the moon, Luna 9
1966: First probe in lunar orbit, Luna 10
1967: First unmanned rendezvous and docking, Cosmos 186/Cosmos 188. (Until 2006, this had remained the only major space achievement that the US had not duplicated.)
1969: First docking between two manned craft in Earth orbit and exchange of crews, Soyuz 4 and Soyuz 5
1970: First samples automatically returned to Earth from another body, Luna 16
1970: First robotic space rover, Lunokhod 1

These are only firsts, they dont include follow up missions. This is a comparable progression to a possible manned lunar landing to what you posted prior to Apollo 8.


Most of those "firsts' have nothing to do with getting a manned mission to the moon.

Now THIS is how to get to the moon:


May 1961: First manual control of a manned spacecraft USA Freedom 7
March 1965: First manned spacecraft to change orbit USA Gemini 3
August 1965: First mission over seven days long (long enough for a mission to the Moon and back) USA Gemini 5
December 1965: Two spacecraft maneuvering to close proximity under fine control. The first rendezvous in space. USA Gemini 6A
December 1965: Longest flight of the decade (13 days, 18 hours) USA Gemini 7
March 1966: First docking with another spacecraft USA Gemini 8
June 1966: First extended EVA USA Gemini 9A
December 1968: First manned mission to leave Earth orbit, first to orbit the Moon USA Apollo 8
March 1969: First successful manned flight of a spacecraft capable of landing on the Moon (Apollo Lunar Module) USA Apollo 9
July 1969: First manned landing on the Moon USA Apollo 11

[edit on 13-6-2010 by Tomblvd]



posted on Jun, 13 2010 @ 05:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by Komodo
reply to post by MacAnkka
 


Yeeeah.. you can stop with the' Since we dont' know anything about the belts" crap..., but you might want to listen to the data Van Allen already did.. and yes.. we've KNOWN about them for 50years.. .. derp !! welcome to the matrix


In one of the videos that you posted
Dr. Frank Greening is quoted as saying Dose Equivalent rate of electrons in the heart of the VA BELT is 280,000 rads a day. So about 3 rads a second.

Does anybody disagree with these numbers?



posted on Jun, 13 2010 @ 06:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by FoosM

Originally posted by Komodo
reply to post by MacAnkka
 


Yeeeah.. you can stop with the' Since we dont' know anything about the belts" crap..., but you might want to listen to the data Van Allen already did.. and yes.. we've KNOWN about them for 50years.. .. derp !! welcome to the matrix


In one of the videos that you posted
Dr. Frank Greening is quoted as saying Dose Equivalent rate of electrons in the heart of the VA BELT is 280,000 rads a day. So about 3 rads a second.

Does anybody disagree with these numbers?




Do you realize how pathetic that question is?

What is it about HBs that make them utterly unable to look up numbers for themselves? Are you so tethered to your TV culture that you can only believe something if it is spoonfed to you by someone on TV or youtube?



Are you that deviod of intellectual curiosity? Are you that emotionally and intellectually beholden to Jarrah White and his ilk that they have to tell you what to have for breakfast???

My God, you would think after JW essentially lied to your face (electonically), and made you look like a fool. you would look at all "argument by youtube" vidoes with caution. But not you. Nope, you'll keep opening that same door into your face over and over and over.......

_____________________

NOW, look up the actual answer (hint: there isn't just one) and ask the question again.



posted on Jun, 13 2010 @ 06:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by Tomblvd

Originally posted by FoosM


Before the first manned Earth-orbiting Apollo flight (Apollo 7), the USSR had made nine spaceflights (seven with one cosmonaut, one with two, one with three). The U.S. had made sixteen flights (six with one astronaut, ten with two). The USSR and U.S. each had six spaceflights in 1961-63, each with one astronaut or cosmonaut. The USSR had only three spaceflights in 1964-67 (each only a little longer than one day) whereas the U.S. had ten in this period (averaging over four days each). In terms of spacecraft hours, the USSR had 460 hours of space flight; the U.S. had 1,024 hours. In terms of astronaut/cosmonaut time, the USSR had accumulated 534 hours of manned spaceflight whereas the U.S. had accumulated 1,992 hours. By the time of Apollo 11, the United States's lead was much wider than that. (See List of human spaceflights, 1960s.)


Honestly, whoever is feeding you your information isn't doing you any favors.






Thanks for just proving my point.
You've done more to verify the hoax than anybody else here.

It only takes 2.000 hours to get to the moon?


with those kinds of numbers we should be heading to Jupiter by now, it is 2010 after all


But I must admit you are right Tom I made a mistake, Russia doesn't lead the US by 5.000 hours, its 5.000 days!

Rank Nation Total person-days
1 USSR / Russia 19,795.50 * **
2 USA 14,613.17 * **
3 ESA 1,725.118



So lets take a looks at this again.

It took the US around 100 days of manned space flight to send a man to the moon within 10 years during the 1960's.

The US now has 14 thousand manned hours in space and they need 20 odd years to go "BACK" to the moon in the 21st century?





And you want people to believe we went to the moon?




posted on Jun, 13 2010 @ 06:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by Tomblvd

Originally posted by FoosM

Originally posted by Komodo
reply to post by MacAnkka
 


Yeeeah.. you can stop with the' Since we dont' know anything about the belts" crap..., but you might want to listen to the data Van Allen already did.. and yes.. we've KNOWN about them for 50years.. .. derp !! welcome to the matrix


In one of the videos that you posted
Dr. Frank Greening is quoted as saying Dose Equivalent rate of electrons in the heart of the VA BELT is 280,000 rads a day. So about 3 rads a second.

Does anybody disagree with these numbers?




Do you realize how pathetic that question is?

What is it about HBs that make them utterly unable to look up numbers for themselves? Are you so tethered to your TV culture that you can only believe something if it is spoonfed to you by someone on TV or youtube?



Are you that deviod of intellectual curiosity? Are you that emotionally and intellectually beholden to Jarrah White and his ilk that they have to tell you what to have for breakfast???

My God, you would think after JW essentially lied to your face (electonically), and made you look like a fool. you would look at all "argument by youtube" vidoes with caution. But not you. Nope, you'll keep opening that same door into your face over and over and over.......

_____________________

NOW, look up the actual answer (hint: there isn't just one) and ask the question again.


Oh man you are a natural born coward.
If you are going to bother to reply then be brave enough to offer an answer.
*hint* What is your answer?



posted on Jun, 13 2010 @ 06:54 PM
link   
reply to post by FoosM
 


Please....instead of attacking a fellow ATS member...try to explain the point of this last posted comment???

We are anxiously awaiting......
~~~~~~

edit for 'DTS'....dyslexic typing syndrome....




[edit on 13 June 2010 by weedwhacker]



posted on Jun, 13 2010 @ 08:16 PM
link   
reply to post by FoosM
 


I already dealt with most of that in a previous post, which you obviously didnt read.

I gave you a link in that post to NASA's data service where you can find all the data you like. Feel free to go look at it, there are thousands of US and Soviet documents on there with all the data you want. If a document you want isnt online, simply request it from NASA.

As for your assertion regarding the Soviet program and their supposed man-hours lead in space exploration, you've already been shown to be wrong. Bringing up the current statistics mean nothing; what is your point? All you do is bring up random facts and laugh at people without being able to put a coherent argument together.

You dont seem to understand that not continuing to go to the moon has nothing to do with technological limitations, its due to cost-benefit. There is a limited amount of money for space programs, and so you prioritise based on cost-benefit. Revisiting the moon has not been a priority over the past 25 years has not been a priority, because we have been there and can use unmanned craft to collect data if required.

The focus has obviously been on space stations and developing a long-term human prescence in space, not going to the moon. Space platforms are the next step towards having human exploration of deep space.

Again this is something thats pretty obvious; why would NASA simply repeat the Apollo missions without having a new mission to fulfill? We will revisit the moon once it is necessary for a larger mission, for example if a moon base is to be established on the way to human exploration of other planets.

When people talk about NASA being unable to replicate Apollo, its simply because the factories and production centres are no longer tooled for Apollo. Hence NASA would need to 'start again' to get to the moon in terms of being able to build and fund the missions.

PS: if its so impossible, how come so many countries want to go to the moon and Mars? shouldnt the "radiation" make it impossible now acording to your beliefs?



posted on Jun, 13 2010 @ 11:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by FoosM


Thanks for just proving my point.
You've done more to verify the hoax than anybody else here.

It only takes 2.000 hours to get to the moon?


with those kinds of numbers we should be heading to Jupiter by now, it is 2010 after all





And we got a tad farther than that ...
20 years ago Voyager passed neptune.
Hasn't met any other planets since 1989 since there aren't any anymore.

Maybe it sinks in if i say it really big?
We dont send people anymore because we can build better robots than in the 60ies




posted on Jun, 14 2010 @ 12:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by Tomblvd

Originally posted by Komodo

and IF these aren't enough for you ..there's always Wikiepedia

yea.. and Wiki even agrees !!!

The belts are a hazard for artificial satellites and are moderately dangerous for human beings, but are difficult and expensive to shield against
(from source above)



Calling someone a "moron" is against terms, but spamming with FIFTEEN youtube videos isn't???

Anyway, if the VA belts are so dangerous to satellites, how is it that we have literally hundreds of satellites (from many countries) happily residing in them for decades without trouble?


nope.. my so called 'spamming' isn't against the rules and totally within the thread.. and ..

you didn't read the wiki link i see .. wow.. derp



posted on Jun, 14 2010 @ 12:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by Komodo
 


Komodo....I noticed your signature....

Ummm....if THAT is the basis of your "reality"...then, I can only say...I fear for your grip on reality.

NOT intended as a 'personal' attack, please don't see it in that way.....

THIS is a generalized comment, to describe the overall "mindset" that tends to inhabit within the brains of the true, true "conspiracy theorist" that is initially drawn to these Boards....

A LOT of 'venting' goes on, here...BUT.....I would hope, once some levelhead rationality is introduced, the ever "casual" reader (aka 'lurker') will come way with some improved awareness....and a better perpective to be able to sort the "crap" from the chaff....


and what does that have ANYTHING TO DO WITH THIS THREAD.. nothing.. it's a personal attack! .. grow up and stick to the subject not the personality .. !!!

yea.. I got a pretty good grip on reality .. shoot me a U2U .. and i'll give you all you ever need !!!! LOL .. /cheers



posted on Jun, 14 2010 @ 12:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by DJW001
reply to post by Komodo
 



Gee, it's too bad that people that haven't decided to do their research a bit more instead of listening to to proproganist about there being a 'mirror' on the moon to 'measure' the distance..

WOW.. how pathetic..

it took all about 30secs to find this data.. sheeseh .. and you're still gonna believe that 'mirror' lie .. ?? and yes...some people will believe anything, no matter how asinine the belief itself is. ]


How does this prove that there are no mirrors on the Moon? Just because I can measure a distance by trigonometry, does that prove yardsticks don't exist?


and it doesn't prove there are either does it?


If we already HAVE a way to measure .. since the EARLY 1600ad, then why stick the 'mirrors' on the moon. and .. hmmm.. since when did we have the tech in the 60's to 'shoot' a laser and pricisly hit a mirro that is what.. all of 2ft square; since the computing power in a calualator now days is more powerfull than was in the Apollo LMAO .. yeeeeeah ..



posted on Jun, 14 2010 @ 12:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by Tomblvd

Originally posted by debunky

Originally posted by DJW001
reply to post by Komodo
 



Gee, it's too bad that people that haven't decided to do their research a bit more instead of listening to to proproganist about there being a 'mirror' on the moon to 'measure' the distance..

WOW.. how pathetic..

it took all about 30secs to find this data.. sheeseh .. and you're still gonna believe that 'mirror' lie .. ?? and yes...some people will believe anything, no matter how asinine the belief itself is. ]


How does this prove that there are no mirrors on the Moon? Just because I can measure a distance by trigonometry, does that prove yardsticks don't exist?


No, I think it proves GPS doesnt exist. Because who would shoot satelites into space, if you can just as well just count your steps.


Not to mention there are obviously no atomic clocks which are necessary to calibrate the satellites. I mean why bother with atomic clocks when we have perfectly good spring-driven wristwatches?


good point! however my point being .. was it really neccessary to put them on the moon to 'measure' the distance when simple trig will suffice enough



posted on Jun, 14 2010 @ 01:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by FoosM

Originally posted by Tomblvd

Originally posted by FoosM


Before the first manned Earth-orbiting Apollo flight (Apollo 7), the USSR had made nine spaceflights (seven with one cosmonaut, one with two, one with three). The U.S. had made sixteen flights (six with one astronaut, ten with two). The USSR and U.S. each had six spaceflights in 1961-63, each with one astronaut or cosmonaut. The USSR had only three spaceflights in 1964-67 (each only a little longer than one day) whereas the U.S. had ten in this period (averaging over four days each). In terms of spacecraft hours, the USSR had 460 hours of space flight; the U.S. had 1,024 hours. In terms of astronaut/cosmonaut time, the USSR had accumulated 534 hours of manned spaceflight whereas the U.S. had accumulated 1,992 hours. By the time of Apollo 11, the United States's lead was much wider than that. (See List of human spaceflights, 1960s.)


Honestly, whoever is feeding you your information isn't doing you any favors.






Thanks for just proving my point.
You've done more to verify the hoax than anybody else here.

It only takes 2.000 hours to get to the moon?


with those kinds of numbers we should be heading to Jupiter by now, it is 2010 after all


But I must admit you are right Tom I made a mistake, Russia doesn't lead the US by 5.000 hours, its 5.000 days!

Rank Nation Total person-days
1 USSR / Russia 19,795.50 * **
2 USA 14,613.17 * **
3 ESA 1,725.118



So lets take a looks at this again.

It took the US around 100 days of manned space flight to send a man to the moon within 10 years during the 1960's.

The US now has 14 thousand manned hours in space and they need 20 odd years to go "BACK" to the moon in the 21st century?





And you want people to believe we went to the moon?



and multi-billions worth of tax payer $$$$$$$$ as well.. WAY more than in the 60's .. and we haven't even made a human landing on Mars..

NOW that's halarious !!!!
and GREAT points !!!!!



posted on Jun, 14 2010 @ 05:57 AM
link   
reply to post by Komodo
 



and it doesn't prove there are either does it?

If we already HAVE a way to measure .. since the EARLY 1600ad, then why stick the 'mirrors' on the moon. and .. hmmm.. since when did we have the tech in the 60's to 'shoot' a laser and pricisly hit a mirro that is what.. all of 2ft square; since the computing power in a calualator now days is more powerfull than was in the Apollo LMAO .. yeeeeeah ..


If it doesn't prove they didn't, why did you bother to post it? And then act like it did? As for hitting a mirror on the Moon with a laser: you realize that a laser beam isn't perfectly parallel, don't you? By the time the beam hits the Moon it's over a kilometer wide... no need for pinpoint accuracy, really. Laser measurements have allowed astronomers to calculate that the Moon is receding from the Earth at a rate of 3.8 centimeters per year. Can you calculate that with a trig table? Since you clearly know all the answers, there would be little point in reading this:

news.bbc.co.uk...



posted on Jun, 14 2010 @ 06:23 AM
link   
reply to post by Komodo
 



you didn't read the wiki link i see .. wow.. derp


And neither did you, apparently:


A satellite shielded by 3 mm of aluminium in an elliptic orbit (200 by 20,000 miles) passing through the radiation belts will receive about 2,500 rem (25 Sv) per year. Almost all radiation will be received while passing the inner belt. [12]


2,500 rems/year= 6.85 rems/day

(Or did you simply not understand it?)



posted on Jun, 14 2010 @ 06:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by Komodo

Originally posted by Tomblvd

Originally posted by debunky

Originally posted by DJW001
reply to post by Komodo
 



Gee, it's too bad that people that haven't decided to do their research a bit more instead of listening to to proproganist about there being a 'mirror' on the moon to 'measure' the distance..

WOW.. how pathetic..

it took all about 30secs to find this data.. sheeseh .. and you're still gonna believe that 'mirror' lie .. ?? and yes...some people will believe anything, no matter how asinine the belief itself is. ]


How does this prove that there are no mirrors on the Moon? Just because I can measure a distance by trigonometry, does that prove yardsticks don't exist?


No, I think it proves GPS doesnt exist. Because who would shoot satelites into space, if you can just as well just count your steps.


Not to mention there are obviously no atomic clocks which are necessary to calibrate the satellites. I mean why bother with atomic clocks when we have perfectly good spring-driven wristwatches?


good point! however my point being .. was it really neccessary to put them on the moon to 'measure' the distance when simple trig will suffice enough




Erm... nobody went to the moon just to put a mirror there.
Every inch on the apollo was filled with equipment for experiments and documentation, one being a mirror.

Of course, selenography could have just looked at the sky, said "kinda greyish white, and up there" and went back to doing more important stuff, like, discussing american idol.
A lot of people do. Some don't. And I am greatfull for that. Because thats basically how the neolithical revolution started.



new topics

top topics



 
377
<< 102  103  104    106  107  108 >>

log in

join