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: 408
377
<< 405  406  407    409  410  411 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 1 2011 @ 07:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by exponent

Originally posted by backinblack
Radio waves could be beamed from satellites..
Who the hell knows what a moon rock is ?
NO country has taken pics that isn't NASA affiliated..

This is just ignorance, you didn't even bother reading your post or you'd see that I already preempted your point. People know what moon rocks are because they are geologists. Their whole expertise is in rock, pretty sure they'd realise if a rock came across their microscope that was entirely different to anything terrestrial.


Please watch from
5:20


"they came back in a box marked from the moon"




posted on Apr, 1 2011 @ 07:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by backinblack
We were discussing throwing an object vertically on the moon..
If you think gravity will not affect that equation then it is not me being arrogant..

We were trying to illustrate the difference between mass and weight to you. Not give you accurate values for someone throwing something on the moon.

How you can now turn around and have a go at us for using simple calculations is beyond me. Mass and Weight are taught at any school, and we should rightly at this point mocking you for your mis-statements, but we instead tried to help.

Thanks for that.



posted on Apr, 1 2011 @ 07:16 AM
link   
reply to post by exponent
 

Here is Nat's post..

I've shown that to throw a ball 6 times as high on the moon, which is the height we expect with 1/6 gravity, you need to have the same initial velocity on the earth and moon. Since F=ma, to get the same amount of speed out of a ball with 6 times the mass, you'd need to exert 6 times the force. If he could generate 6 times the force, that means he would be able to throw a regular baseball with 6 times the speed. But if he could do that, then he could throw the ball straight up to a height of over 22 km. We know that's not possible.


Where does he take into account the force of gravity being 1/6 ??



posted on Apr, 1 2011 @ 07:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by FoosM
"they came back in a box marked from the moon"

"They could not be generated on the earth".

Do you think that they dug the total recovered mass out from Antarctica? Do you have any evidence from someone with expertise to suggest this is accurate? Do you have any evidence at all or are you just speculating, then believing your own speculation over documented evidence ("they could not be generated on the earth").



posted on Apr, 1 2011 @ 07:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by backinblack
reply to post by exponent
 

Here is Nat's post..

Where does he take into account the force of gravity being 1/6 ??

In the previous post, right here: www.abovetopsecret.com...

Now as you've decided to keep fighting this, I will illustrate your ignorance in the most polite way possible.

Originally posted by backinblack
So a ball with six times more mass that weighed the same as a lighter ball on earth could only be pitched at about 17mph rather than the 100mph of a normal ball on earth...?

Please take basic high school physics lessons again, because you obviously didn't pay enough attention.

See how rude that was? See how it was uncalled for? Why do you have to take that attitude?



posted on Apr, 1 2011 @ 07:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by exponent

Originally posted by FoosM
How would JW be treated if he actually came here to defend his videos?


We would be polite with him until he started calling people dullards or idiots or 'apollo propagandists' etc. Just like we are with everyone else.

People are still polite to you Foos.





You havent been here long



posted on Apr, 1 2011 @ 07:24 AM
link   
reply to post by exponent
 


Honestly mate, you are wrong..
I'm tired of discussing basic math with people that don't want to listen..



posted on Apr, 1 2011 @ 07:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by FoosM


You havent been here long

Why do you feel the forum rules don't apply to you? You ignore questions (including the latest from me still), you post videos with no context at all, you post one liners?

Your actions are rude, your tone is abrasive and your arrogance difficult to deal with. Still many people are polite to you, me included.



posted on Apr, 1 2011 @ 07:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by backinblack
Honestly mate, you are wrong..
I'm tired of discussing basic math with people that don't want to listen..

Then do the maths. Show us how we are wrong.

I'm pretty sure the qualifications I have in physics are still valid, and while I'm not about to go posting them, I did the simplest of calculations for you.

Now show how you'd change the calculations I linked to, to include the force of gravity. Perhaps you can show us how a ball that weighs the same on earth and the moon can both be accelerated to 100mph.

I doubt you can.



posted on Apr, 1 2011 @ 07:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by exponent

Originally posted by backinblack
Honestly mate, you are wrong..
I'm tired of discussing basic math with people that don't want to listen..

Then do the maths. Show us how we are wrong.
I'm pretty sure the qualifications I have in physics are still valid, and while I'm not about to go posting them, I did the simplest of calculations for you.
Now show how you'd change the calculations I linked to, to include the force of gravity. Perhaps you can show us how a ball that weighs the same on earth and the moon can both be accelerated to 100mph.
I doubt you can.


If you can't understand that gravity is a FORCE and thus MUST be taken into account in the equation F=MA then you wasted your time in physics class..
When discussing throwing a ball vertically Nat said this.

You'll notice that the height is 6 times as high on the moon, exactly as we'd expect. And the initial velocity of the ball was the same in both cases.


I'm tired of this BS..
Get someone that actually knows math to talk please..



posted on Apr, 1 2011 @ 07:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by exponent

Originally posted by FoosM
"they came back in a box marked from the moon"

"They could not be generated on the earth".

Do you think that they dug the total recovered mass out from Antarctica? Do you have any evidence from someone with expertise to suggest this is accurate? Do you have any evidence at all or are you just speculating, then believing your own speculation over documented evidence ("they could not be generated on the earth").


They didnt have to.
They only had to show to the world a small amount.
That small amount could have came from a meteorite.


It is possible to capture the pioneering legacy of the Apollo Space Program and solar system exploration by bringing the physical geology of lunar and meteorite studies into the classroom. Samples of lunar rocks (brought to Earth by Apollo astronauts) and meteorites are available on loan to certified educators for classroom use.


www.nasa.gov...



posted on Apr, 1 2011 @ 07:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by backinblack
If you can't understand that gravity is a FORCE and thus MUST be taken into account in the equation F=MA then you wasted your time in physics class..

Not only do I know this, I did the calculations you asked for on the last page.


When discussing throwing a ball vertically Nat said this.
...
I'm tired of this BS..
Get someone that actually knows math to talk please..

If you think you understand physics, then why did you say this?

Originally posted by backinblack
So a ball with six times more mass that weighed the same as a lighter ball on earth could only be pitched at about 17mph rather than the 100mph of a normal ball on earth...?



posted on Apr, 1 2011 @ 07:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by backinblack
I'm tired of this BS..


Yes, the moon hoax nonsense posted here is tiring BS!



posted on Apr, 1 2011 @ 07:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by FoosM
They didnt have to.
They only had to show to the world a small amount.
That small amount could have came from a meteorite.

Ok so you don't actually have any evidence for this, it's just more speculation.

It's not really that convincing you know. Anyone can speculate. Maybe NASA got them by arranging for aliens to go pick them up for them. I'm sure I can find you many people on this site that would consider that plausible.



posted on Apr, 1 2011 @ 07:39 AM
link   
reply to post by backinblack
 



If you can't understand that gravity is a FORCE and thus MUST be taken into account in the equation F=MA then you wasted your time in physics class..


Force is a vector quantity. If you are moving sideways, gravity has a force vector of 0, unless you wish to take friction into account.



posted on Apr, 1 2011 @ 07:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by exponent

Originally posted by backinblack
If you can't understand that gravity is a FORCE and thus MUST be taken into account in the equation F=MA then you wasted your time in physics class..

Not only do I know this, I did the calculations you asked for on the last page.


When discussing throwing a ball vertically Nat said this.
...
I'm tired of this BS..
Get someone that actually knows math to talk please..

If you think you understand physics, then why did you say this?

Originally posted by backinblack
So a ball with six times more mass that weighed the same as a lighter ball on earth could only be pitched at about 17mph rather than the 100mph of a normal ball on earth...?


Because we were discussing a horizontal throw then..
Do you have a problem with the math in that instance mate???



posted on Apr, 1 2011 @ 07:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by exponent

Originally posted by FoosM


You havent been here long

Why do you feel the forum rules don't apply to you? You ignore questions (including the latest from me still), you post videos with no context at all, you post one liners?

Your actions are rude, your tone is abrasive and your arrogance difficult to deal with. Still many people are polite to you, me included.


My tone is how you interpret it through reading. Thats mostly in your own mind. I could be writing all this in good humor. I dont ignore question, but you tend to repeat questions that I have already answered. And you are not the only one I have discussions with. So questions do get missed or bypassed to keep up with fast moving conversations like the last one between you and BiB.



posted on Apr, 1 2011 @ 07:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by DJW001
reply to post by backinblack
 



If you can't understand that gravity is a FORCE and thus MUST be taken into account in the equation F=MA then you wasted your time in physics class..


Force is a vector quantity. If you are moving sideways, gravity has a force vector of 0, unless you wish to take friction into account.


Sheesh DJW, please read the posts..
We were discussing throwing vertically..



posted on Apr, 1 2011 @ 07:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by dereks

Originally posted by backinblack
I'm tired of this BS..


Yes, the moon hoax nonsense posted here is tiring BS!


I wonder if one day you may actually add to a debate rather than useless drivel...



posted on Apr, 1 2011 @ 07:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by exponent

Originally posted by FoosM
They didnt have to.
They only had to show to the world a small amount.
That small amount could have came from a meteorite.

Ok so you don't actually have any evidence for this, it's just more speculation.

It's not really that convincing you know. Anyone can speculate. Maybe NASA got them by arranging for aliens to go pick them up for them. I'm sure I can find you many people on this site that would consider that plausible.


How is what I posted not evidence?
Its evidence through action and behavior.

Or dont you know what evidence (that which tends to prove or disprove something) means?

So in other words, if all NASA is doing is showing off the same sample then they have no proof they have the amount in storage they claim they have. And so the evidence points to them having a small sample, say taken from Antarctica, for which the evidence is stronger, than say from getting it from the moon.




dictionary.reference.com/browse/evidence



new topics

top topics



 
377
<< 405  406  407    409  410  411 >>

log in

join