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: 264
377
<< 261  262  263    265  266  267 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 15 2010 @ 06:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by nataylor

Originally posted by FoosM

Nat that is a circular argument.
If NASA was going to fake a moonlanding, which they did, of course they would also fake
the data that came with it.

Where is your proof that NASA was prepared for any radiation that they would encounter space?


Were is your independent data that indicates the NASA data is somehow wrong? If you think the NASA data is wrong, you have to base that on SOMETHING.

My proof has been posted numerous times already. Radiation, shielding, and proper procedures were a serious concern, and much effort was expended to give acceptable protection to the crews for their short journeys.


What data are you referring to prior to Apollo 8?
What are the hard numbers for all forms of radiation that encountered in space and on the moon?




posted on Dec, 15 2010 @ 07:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by theability
reply to post by FoosM
 



A spectacular crash would serve as a deterrent for any other civilians wanting to go into space.
Or to stall the progress of any true moon missions.
But that is not to say that I necessarily believe it was intentional.


Foosm Your friend Jarrah White's days are done number here. That comment about purposefully destroying a multi-billion dollar spacecraft to silence Challenger astronauts has to be the most vile of claim made by the anyone to date in this thread.

Without fail you have lost any and all credibility for supporting pathetic excuses of human beings like JW.

I see that fools lead fools, and Foosm you must feel right at home with Jarrah White!

The grandson of the Apollo Moon hoax is a ignorant Fool!


edit on 14-12-2010 by theability because: add quote


JW is far more credible than you are.
I would be a fool to follow you.



posted on Dec, 15 2010 @ 07:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by nataylor

Originally posted by FoosM
What photos of stars from the ISS and shuttle?


There are hundreds, if not thousands of them. I suggest following the ISS astronauts on Twitter. They post many wonderful photos. Here are just a couple of beautiful ones (click through to go view the full-size images):




edit on 14-12-2010 by nataylor because: Fixed link


Now that begs the question where are the starry pictures from any of the Apollo, Gemini, Mercury pictures, and lunar probes?



posted on Dec, 15 2010 @ 07:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by Smack

Originally posted by nataylor

Originally posted by FoosM
What photos of stars from the ISS and shuttle?


There are hundreds, if not thousands of them. I suggest following the ISS astronauts on Twitter. They post many wonderful photos. Here are just a couple of beautiful ones (click through to go view the full-size images):




edit on 14-12-2010 by nataylor because: Fixed link


Wow! Thanks for that twitter link. Such beauty! I want to go to space, dammit!

Oh, and FoosM, you were wrong. Will you finally admit it for once? Or perhaps you think those photos are fake.
Those NASA people are such duplicitous swine, aren't they? I mean the gall of them faking stars in outer space.

Hey, where is Sayonara? Curiouser and curiouser....


Oh wow how beautiful, wonderful those stars!
Thats right.
How can anyone not be impressed by them?
I mean, you impressed by photos


But the Apollo astronauts?
Did they declare to the world the beauty of the starry heavens?
On the moon, going to the moon, going around the Earth, going around the moon?

Google Video Link


Nahhhh only about the desert.



posted on Dec, 15 2010 @ 08:01 AM
link   
reply to post by FoosM
 


So you concede that you were wrong? It is possible to see stars in space. Hallelujah!



posted on Dec, 15 2010 @ 08:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by Smack
reply to post by FoosM
 


So you concede that you were wrong? It is possible to see stars in space. Hallelujah!


When did I say it wasnt?



posted on Dec, 15 2010 @ 08:31 AM
link   
reply to post by FoosM
 


Why are you bringing the whole stars issue up again? It all depends on whether your eyes are dark adapted or whether the camera is set on a lower or higher exposure. We covered all that 150 pages ago. The point is that Bill Kaysing was so ignorant that he thought it so important that NASA would commit murder. Kaysing was a sociopath; his suicide was intended to hurt the people who cared for him most, that's why he sent them all post cards. Vile, evil man.



posted on Dec, 15 2010 @ 08:39 AM
link   
reply to post by FoosM
 


here you go a nice website:

Why Jarrah White Is Wrong About Apollo

On this website you'll see Foosm that your god Jarrah White cannot even figure out days of the years Correctly.

As in this Video here!

Another Claim about forging video, then using fake images in an Australian news paper. The only problem is, JW cannot count and he gets his days mixed up as usual.

I love how basic skills of everyday life exceed Jarrah's ability of comprehension.

Great stuff!
edit on 15-12-2010 by theability because: spelling



posted on Dec, 15 2010 @ 11:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by FoosM
What data are you referring to prior to Apollo 8?
What are the hard numbers for all forms of radiation that encountered in space and on the moon?


I suggest you look at things like the Particles and Fields chapter of the Review of Space Research, Report of the Summer Study (1962), the proceedings of the Second Symposium on Protection against Radiations in Space (1964), the radiation and energetic particles sections of the United States Space Science Program: Report to COSPAR (1964), the report on Radiobiological Factors in Manned Space Flight (1967), and Physiology in the Space Environment (1968).
edit on 15-12-2010 by nataylor because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 15 2010 @ 12:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by nataylor

Originally posted by FoosM
What data are you referring to prior to Apollo 8?
What are the hard numbers for all forms of radiation that encountered in space and on the moon?


I suggest you look at things like the Particles and Fields chapter of the Review of Space Research, Report of the Summer Study (1962), the proceedings of the Second Symposium on Protection against Radiations in Space (1964), the radiation and energetic particles sections of the United States Space Science Program: Report to COSPAR (1964), the report on Radiobiological Factors in Manned Space Flight (1967), and Physiology in the Space Environment (1968).
edit on 15-12-2010 by nataylor because: (no reason given)


Like I said, show me the numbers.
If you have gone through all those documents,
you can provide summaries and page numbers that support your conclusions.



posted on Dec, 15 2010 @ 12:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by DJW001
reply to post by FoosM
 


Why are you bringing the whole stars issue up again? It all depends on whether your eyes are dark adapted or whether the camera is set on a lower or higher exposure. We covered all that 150 pages ago. The point is that Bill Kaysing was so ignorant that he thought it so important that NASA would commit murder. Kaysing was a sociopath; his suicide was intended to hurt the people who cared for him most, that's why he sent them all post cards. Vile, evil man.


Which was all quite possible with a trip to the moon.



posted on Dec, 15 2010 @ 12:07 PM
link   
reply to post by FoosM
 



Like I said, show me the numbers.
If you have gone through all those documents,
you can provide summaries and page numbers that support your conclusions


Reminds me of the cardinal who refused to look through Galileo's telescope..



posted on Dec, 15 2010 @ 12:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by FoosM
Like I said, show me the numbers.
If you have gone through all those documents,
you can provide summaries and page numbers that support your conclusions.


I'm not doing your homework for you. Suffice it to say, the Second Symposium on Protection against Radiations in Space document is packed full of actual measurement data from spacecraft. And the data is far too voluminous and varied to be summed up into a couple numbers. The data is there; look through it and point out what you think is incorrect.



posted on Dec, 15 2010 @ 12:23 PM
link   
No no. Nasa facricated and completely made up the radiation numbers in space. Then no scientist or 3rd party figured that out in the coming +50 years...



posted on Dec, 15 2010 @ 12:34 PM
link   
reply to post by FoosM
 



Hey Foosm is this a goal of your IDOL Jarrah White?


The Moon Hoax Prize is an award assigned annually, to the BEST PROOF on demonstrating NASA HAD REALLY SENT ASTRONAUTS TO THE MOON. The preliminary guidelines have been determined by the Moon Hoax Rules Jury. The amount for the prize-winner competitor is US$ 2500 (two thousand five hundred dollars) for the first edition. The Moon Hoax Prize is not a hoax, the $2500 amount will go to the prize-winner paid through the winning entrant’s Paypal™ account.


International Moon Hoax Prize

Ohh look who is on the Jury Panel!!!

Classic, more fraud from Jarrah White!

...and more to come!

Sure sounds like a phishing expedition to me, wonder where he gets his data for his videos now.



posted on Dec, 15 2010 @ 01:27 PM
link   
reply to post by theability
 


And in the fine print at the bottom we find:



Contest is open to anyone world-wide who has an e-mail (excluding Jury members and their relatives). In order to manage fees and awards, we require the entrants have a Paypal™ account. Alternately, entrants can use a friend or family member’s account used with permission.


Is there any question that JW is a crook and a liar?



posted on Dec, 15 2010 @ 01:38 PM
link   
reply to post by FoosM
 


I'm so glad you are beginning to see the light.

Just for fun - impress us all with your expertise by answering this second year physics question:

A spherical cell nucleus, 4 μm in diameter, is traversed at its thickest point by a single galactic cosmic ray: an iron particle () with energy 1.96 GeV and LET 951 keV/μm. Fe5626
a) Calculate the dose, in Gy, to the entire nucleus. State any assumptions you make.
b) If the G value for OH radical production is 0.25, how many OH radicals are produced in the nucleus?

I know you can do it, because you know so much about radiation that you've single handedly rendered 100 years of research invalid with a single internet post.
Awaiting your answer.



posted on Dec, 15 2010 @ 03:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by nataylor

Originally posted by FoosM
Like I said, show me the numbers.
If you have gone through all those documents,
you can provide summaries and page numbers that support your conclusions.


I'm not doing your homework for you. Suffice it to say, the Second Symposium on Protection against Radiations in Space document is packed full of actual measurement data from spacecraft. And the data is far too voluminous and varied to be summed up into a couple numbers. The data is there; look through it and point out what you think is incorrect.


Of course you wont, you dont want to stick your neck out to get it chopped.



posted on Dec, 15 2010 @ 03:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by Smack
reply to post by theability
 


And in the fine print at the bottom we find:



Contest is open to anyone world-wide who has an e-mail (excluding Jury members and their relatives). In order to manage fees and awards, we require the entrants have a Paypal™ account. Alternately, entrants can use a friend or family member’s account used with permission.


Is there any question that JW is a crook and a liar?



I dont know about Jarrah, but Im waiting for you to answer my question.



posted on Dec, 15 2010 @ 03:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by Smack
reply to post by FoosM
 


I'm so glad you are beginning to see the light.

Just for fun - impress us all with your expertise by answering this second year physics question:

A spherical cell nucleus, 4 μm in diameter, is traversed at its thickest point by a single galactic cosmic ray: an iron particle () with energy 1.96 GeV and LET 951 keV/μm. Fe5626
a) Calculate the dose, in Gy, to the entire nucleus. State any assumptions you make.
b) If the G value for OH radical production is 0.25, how many OH radicals are produced in the nucleus?

I know you can do it, because you know so much about radiation that you've single handedly rendered 100 years of research invalid with a single internet post.
Awaiting your answer.


Well keep waiting because your post is nothing but a distraction.



new topics

top topics



 
377
<< 261  262  263    265  266  267 >>

log in

join