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: 257
377
<< 254  255  256    258  259  260 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 4 2010 @ 12:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by FoosM


Why isn't it puffed out due to it being in the vacuum of space?




They should have been blown out like balloons, unable to even move as they did. Supposedly they had 3-5psi of pressure in the suits.

Our atmospheric pressure is 14.7 psi. Put on a space suit and pressurize it to 3x atmospheric pressure to simulate being in space and having 3x the outside pressure in the suit.

If you pressurized a suit to 45psi you wouldn't be able to move in said suit, not enough to walk.

This is a VERY easy expirement to replicate. Look at all Shuttle SpaceWalk Missions. Notice how their suits are ballooned and all their movements are very little, they struggle to even do basic actions.

Why were all the Shuttle SpaceWalk data showing humans are invalids in a pressurized space suit?

The Apollo missions have astronauts running and jumping around. Yet on the shuttle spacewalks it's as if they are blocks and can't move.
edit on 4-12-2010 by Pervius because: to to do




posted on Dec, 4 2010 @ 12:54 PM
link   
reply to post by Pervius
 


This thread is a little like watching a caveman struggling to discover the function of a handgun. Just when they might have learned something, they end up shooting themselves in the foot.

Have you considered the possibility that you don't have a clue how spacesuits work?
Here, let me help you with that. lmgtfy.com...



posted on Dec, 4 2010 @ 01:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by Pervius


This is a VERY easy expirement to replicate. Look at all Shuttle SpaceWalk Missions. Notice how their suits are ballooned and all their movements are very little, they struggle to even do basic actions.

Why were all the Shuttle SpaceWalk data showing humans are invalids in a pressurized space suit?


Can you link to this data? Because for invalids, they sure did accomplish a lot during those spacewalks.


The Apollo missions have astronauts running and jumping around. Yet on the shuttle spacewalks it's as if they are blocks and can't move.
edit on 4-12-2010 by Pervius because: to to do


Do you think that the difference in movement just might have something to do with the weightlessness vs. lunar gravity?


edit on 4-12-2010 by Tomblvd because: added ?



posted on Dec, 4 2010 @ 01:07 PM
link   
reply to post by FoosM
 





The Van Allen belts is an electrified fence... of 10 million volts.


Small potatoes to the 216,000,000,000 volts on the Sun.
1935-08-18: Expanding Sun Will Explode Someday

Astrophysics way back then, too bad NASA doesn't pick up a few vibes about their own business.
Well divide 216Bv by the Earth to Sun distance and why worry.
Looks like 1v/m but 10Mv before hitting the Moon has to do something incredible.
ED: Also to note the atmosphere provides 36" of lead shielding based on sea level and
various altitude measurements, stated in New York Times Feb. 6 1932
edit on 12/4/2010 by TeslaandLyne because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 4 2010 @ 01:11 PM
link   
reply to post by Pervius
 


Wrong. Wrong. And....wrong. Every time. You seem to be making this up, based only on some sort of "gut" feeling?? Instead of doing research, reading, learning. Further, false assumptions and incorrectly assessing what is seen in videos?


They should have been blown out like balloons, unable to even move as they did.


Wrong.

Wait!!! You got one right!!



Supposedly they had 3-5psi of pressure in the suits.


THAT is correct.

Alas, this next analogy goes off the deep end of illogic, and irrelevance....it is NOT a valid comparison, at all:


Our atmospheric pressure is 14.7 psi. Put on a space suit and pressurize it to 3x atmospheric pressure to simulate being in space and having 3x the outside pressure in the suit.

If you pressurized a suit to 45psi you wouldn't be able to move in said suit, not enough to walk.


If you cannot understand why that is such a wrong comparison, then there is little that could convince you, just by writing it here. Hence, you need more research, either online (easiest, but not as good as...) from books.


This is a VERY easy expirement to replicate. Look at all Shuttle SpaceWalk Missions. Notice how their suits are ballooned and all their movements are very little, they struggle to even do basic actions.


THIS was what was referred to in the start, about incorrect assessments of videos. There is NO such event occurring, with Shuttle or ISS EVA videos.


Why were all the Shuttle SpaceWalk data showing humans are invalids in a pressurized space suit?


They aren't. You are confused. ZERO G situations, versus a gravitational field environment (on the Moon). Sorry you cannot seem to realize why they are so different, the two environments, and people's actions and movements.

I can drop a hint: FRICTION. Stability. Inertia. Gravity.


The Apollo missions have astronauts running and jumping around. Yet on the shuttle spacewalks it's as if they are blocks and can't move.


Poor understanding of the videos, and what you think you are observing.

The more modern suits, today, actually have improved mobility abilities. However, NOT all EMUs are the same. A bit of research, and this becomes clear rather quickly.

Working, performing the maintenance and other tasks they have achieved? NOT possible if the suits were as you seem to think.

The "hard-shell" upper torso section is common on modern suits, as used on ISS and Shuttle missions.
These systems are referred to as the "EMU":

www.nasa.gov...
AND,
en.wikipedia.org...

Apollo-era ---- the PDF manual was linked, already...guessing that was insufficient? Most people find it adequate, but just in case, here's more:

apollomaniacs.web.infoseek.co.jp...
AND,
The Apollo and Skylab styles
AND,
For further reference, a history of various "space suits".


THOSE were just easy-to-find links, from simple Internet searches. Not meant to be the entire (and final) word on the topic. BTW.....with that to chew on, and (hopefully) learn from....did "Jarrah White" (you know, the topic of this thread??) have any 'problems' with Apollo EVA suits???


Here's a video for you, to see the modern-era suit, and its actual ability to move, at the waist, wrist, elbow, shoulder, etc. Again, the "hard-shell" torso design.....unlike the Apollo suits (that were all tailored for each Astronaut) these can be in various sizes, to accommodate different people's bodies:

www.pbs.org...


A short (there are many more to choose from, on UTube) video, showing the free mobility of their arms, as they work on EVA. Being able exert force, and do work, when in free-fall (Zero G) requires a firmer footing, because of the absence of gravity, that normally provides a basis for a person to resist the forces of physics, and Newton's "equal but opposite" laws of motion:



(Think about trying to, say, push a car or turn a wrench when you're standing on a very slick, very icy surface, as example....)
edit on 4 December 2010 by weedwhacker because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 4 2010 @ 01:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by Pervius
They should have been blown out like balloons, unable to even move as they did. Supposedly they had 3-5psi of pressure in the suits.

Our atmospheric pressure is 14.7 psi. Put on a space suit and pressurize it to 3x atmospheric pressure to simulate being in space and having 3x the outside pressure in the suit.

If you pressurized a suit to 45psi you wouldn't be able to move in said suit, not enough to walk.
It doesn't work like that. Inflate a bicycle inner tube and it's still easy to bend. It's hard to compress the whole volume, but to simply manipulate the volume is not difficult.



posted on Dec, 4 2010 @ 05:07 PM
link   
Lunarcy: Devil's Advocate VS Jarrah White



Last year when Jarrah came to visit, I interviewed him. The first section of the interview is kind of rough because we did it rather late at night after a busy day/evening running out to Area 51. Another great story that may be told one day! Anyhow, we decided to do the second portion of the interview in the fashion presented here. Realize both Jarrah and I were rather knackered so forgive the minor errors you'll notice in some of the information we present.

Big thanks to Jarrah for being such a great sport as I verbally abused him!

If you don't watch the final video, you'll miss out on the comic conclusion...Don't miss it...








jra

posted on Dec, 4 2010 @ 05:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by FoosM
Why dont you do some research and explain why the fabric doesnt puff out?


This is absurd. Why don't you do some research! Although nataylor already gave you a big head start. And I'll leave you with this image and see if that helps.



posted on Dec, 4 2010 @ 05:24 PM
link   
reply to post by FoosM
 


SIGH.....


"Lunarcy" (aka YouTube screenname "un4g1v3n1") and "Jarrah White", together???

Looks like a remake of "Dumb and Dumber"....

A casual glance into the junk videos made by "un4g1v3n1" will reveal the same appalling lack of reason, understanding, and research as seen in the crap "Jarrah White" spews from his less-than-fertile little mind.....

...."Darwin Awards" material, if ever I saw any.....



posted on Dec, 4 2010 @ 05:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by FoosM
 


SIGH.....


"Lunarcy" (aka YouTube screenname "un4g1v3n1") and "Jarrah White", together???

Looks like a remake of "Dumb and Dumber"....

A casual glance into the junk videos made by "un4g1v3n1" will reveal the same appalling lack of reason, understanding, and research as seen in the crap "Jarrah White" spews from his less-than-fertile little mind.....

...."Darwin Awards" material, if ever I saw any.....


Is there ANYTHING in that post other than personal attacks??? No.......
Why do you insult rather than debate?



posted on Dec, 4 2010 @ 05:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by backinblack


Is there ANYTHING in that post other than personal attacks??? No.......
Why do you insult rather than debate?


Did you see the warning from the Moderator 2 pages back?


Posts that consist entirely of external material with no original commentary are likely to be deleted and warnings given to the posters.


All Foos does is post video after video, with absolutely no discussion on his part. It is the height of laziness, and deserves nothing but derision.



posted on Dec, 4 2010 @ 05:53 PM
link   
reply to post by Tomblvd
 



Did you see the warning from the Moderator 2 pages back?


And you post that to me and not WW??
Hmm...



posted on Dec, 4 2010 @ 05:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by backinblack
reply to post by Tomblvd
 



Did you see the warning from the Moderator 2 pages back?


And you post that to me and not WW??
Hmm...


Which post has no original content?
Hmmmm........



posted on Dec, 4 2010 @ 05:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by FoosM
 


SIGH.....


"Lunarcy" (aka YouTube screenname "un4g1v3n1") and "Jarrah White", together???

Looks like a remake of "Dumb and Dumber"....

A casual glance into the junk videos made by "un4g1v3n1" will reveal the same appalling lack of reason, understanding, and research as seen in the crap "Jarrah White" spews from his less-than-fertile little mind.....

...."Darwin Awards" material, if ever I saw any.....


This post is entirely off topic and merely an attack on personality rather than content..



posted on Dec, 4 2010 @ 06:03 PM
link   
reply to post by backinblack
 


Pay close attention.....my remarks are reserved for the content, in the posts, and references to the NON-members of ATS. As far as any of us know, neither of those YouTube video posters are ATS members.

Direct insults of ATS members? Those are outside the T&Cs, of course.

Still....pointing out when members walk that fine line of T&Cs, well....certainly within rights. To point it out.

Action (if any) is undertaken by those above my pay grade......

Still.....in fairness, since the videos DID include "Jarrah White", on that level they were (somewhat) pertinent, and shall be addressed (in due course, for it will take some time). The "Lunarcy" bloke?? Pffft!! Fair game!

AS IS "JW", since his "merits" have been exposed/discussed/demolished multiple times here, already.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Forgot to add: Video #1, before beginning to de-construct and "debate" it. Does anyone else think that the ATS member who linked that video should have, in addition to providing some personal commentary as to the nature of the presentations, ALSO ISSUED A WARNING regarding its content?? Anyone??

I refer, of course, to the text which appears in the first FIVE SECONDS. Which, for obvious reasons, I will not type here....but, at least mainstream motion pictures have a very clear "R" rating, to warn others of the sorts of words used within them......
edit on 4 December 2010 by weedwhacker because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 4 2010 @ 06:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by backinblack


This post is entirely off topic and merely an attack on personality rather than content..


There is no content. If there are people here on computers with dial-up service or behind a restrictive firewall they won't be able to watch Foos' many useless videos, which is why you are expected to make an attempt to post a discussion of what you are posting. Over and over again Foos ignores that. Which is why he gets the grief he so richly deserves.

Since you missed it, here is what the Mod posted:


This thread is completely out of hand.

There is too much posting of external sources and way too many quotes of entire posts from this thread.

I suggest that members read these links and get it together on the posting rules of ATS.

This is a very large thread and as it is, it is not easy to moderate.

When the violations reach the magnitude that they have reached here, the thread's viability becomes threatened.

Please use the "Reply to" option at the top of posts to be referred to and keep quotes from external sources to a minimum as outlined in the links provided below.

Posts that consist entirely of external material with no original commentary are likely to be deleted and warnings given to the posters.

Posting work written by others. **ALL MEMBERS READ**

ABOUT ATS: Warnings for excessive quoting, and how to quote

Mod Edit: No Quote/Plagiarism – Please Review This Link.

Mod Edit: External Source Tags Instructions – Please Review This Link.


Quite simple.



posted on Dec, 4 2010 @ 06:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by backinblack


This post is entirely off topic and merely an attack on personality rather than content..


As opposed to your first post to this thread:


Exactly what are YOUR qualifications Weedwacker??
You continually say others are fools and hoaxes but what of yourself?

But please, we all know your have been flying for 40 years..You sprout that bit often enough..

I mean, what further education, PHD's or Diplomas do you have?
What experience outside of flying a plane do you have??

BTW, any uneducated fool can fly a plane..
Even you admit that in the 9/11 threads so it isn't really a recomendation now is it??


Pot, kettle, etc.......

In fact, have you made even ONE on topic post to this thread???



posted on Dec, 4 2010 @ 07:42 PM
link   
I'll gladly concur with these statements;
Reaper2137 - Trust no one..

Smack - Simple logic will suffice to expose a falsehood. It does not require any 'qualification', other than the ability to read and reason.

Tomblvd - I don't depend on anyone to tell me what the truth is. As far as things like the Apollo landings go, I trust the science. If someone tells me something, I only believe it if I can confirm it from other sources. NOBODY has a monopoly on the truth.

That would be X-Files, Descartes and ..... er .... um Canadian Supreme Court?


FoosM - nice scoop on the JW interview Dec 3 upload by un4g1v3n1 but the pt.3 and pt.4 didn't seem to make it up. FYI.
edit on 12201012/4/1010 by SayonaraJupiter because: edit to add a smiley



posted on Dec, 5 2010 @ 01:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by nataylor

Originally posted by Pervius
They should have been blown out like balloons, unable to even move as they did. Supposedly they had 3-5psi of pressure in the suits.

Our atmospheric pressure is 14.7 psi. Put on a space suit and pressurize it to 3x atmospheric pressure to simulate being in space and having 3x the outside pressure in the suit.

If you pressurized a suit to 45psi you wouldn't be able to move in said suit, not enough to walk.
It doesn't work like that. Inflate a bicycle inner tube and it's still easy to bend. It's hard to compress the whole volume, but to simply manipulate the volume is not difficult.


Well your talking about applying outside forces to it.
And a bike tube is thin.
But what if your fingers were in the tube and you had to bend it from the inside.
I think you would have a problem:

Straight out of an astro's mouth:



posted on Dec, 5 2010 @ 01:41 AM
link   
reply to post by FoosM
 


The suit used on Gemini 7 was significantly different than the Apollo suits. As that quote mentioned, it didn't even have joints in it. It was meant to be used in the pressurized environment of the capsule. It was never meant to be used for surface EVAs. The pressurized portion of the Apollo suits were tight fitting and tailored to have flexible joints. Hence, they had far more mobility.



new topics

top topics



 
377
<< 254  255  256    258  259  260 >>

log in

join