Young Aussie genius whipping NASA in Moon Hoax Debate!

reply to post by FoosM


You asked me how doofus, and in this public forum if yuo dont' put a name on a question you are asking everyone.

If I believed in god I'd ask him to save us from sanctimonius carp like this.....

And I'm pretty sure there's no polonium floating around the VAB.......

Originally posted by Aloysius the Gaul
reply to post by FoosM

 

You asked me how doofus,

Excuse me? You better retract that insult.

Secondly, you butted into a conversation.
And I simply clarified my question so that your post wouldn't side track the conversation.

Originally posted by FoosM

Originally posted by Aloysius the Gaul
reply to post by FoosM

 

Polonium 210 poisoning of course....sheesh.......why with the silly leading question?!

but how...

Here you go - this is where you asked me when you replied to a message I posted.

If you want to have a private conversation then make it U2U - otherwise stop whining

Originally posted by FoosM
Indeed, particles of alpha radiation can be breathed in.

You don't breathe in alpha particles. You'd have to breathe in a radioactive substance that emits alpha particles.

Originally posted by DJW001
reply to post by FoosM

 

Indeed, particles of alpha radiation can be breathed in.

Yes, if it somehow miraculously manages to work it's way through 3mm of aluminum.

Here we go again.

Thats not the point, its an example NASA and others tend to downplay the dangers of radiation.
We are currently seeing this with the Japanese nuclear disaster, and previous nuclear meltdowns.

With that in mind, the CM, LM, and Apollo suits were not robust enough to counter all the radiation found in space.

Originally posted by Aloysius the Gaul

Originally posted by FoosM

Originally posted by Aloysius the Gaul
reply to post by FoosM

 

Polonium 210 poisoning of course....sheesh.......why with the silly leading question?!

but how...

Here you go - this is where you asked me when you replied to a message I posted.

If you want to have a private conversation then make it U2U - otherwise stop whining

Try again, you're failing hard.

Originally posted by nataylor

Originally posted by FoosM
Indeed, particles of alpha radiation can be breathed in.

You don't breathe in alpha particles. You'd have to breathe in a radioactive substance that emits alpha particles.

and we know there's a whole lot of those in space........

Ooops...

Originally posted by nataylor

Originally posted by FoosM
Indeed, particles of alpha radiation can be breathed in.

You don't breathe in alpha particles. You'd have to breathe in a radioactive substance that emits alpha particles.

Same difference. Can you find such substances on the surface of the moon?

Originally posted by Aloysius the Gaul

Originally posted by nataylor

Originally posted by FoosM
Indeed, particles of alpha radiation can be breathed in.

You don't breathe in alpha particles. You'd have to breathe in a radioactive substance that emits alpha particles.

and we know there's a whole lot of those in space........

Ooops...

Sorry but you fail again, the moon is included in a moon landing.

reply to post by FoosM


But the moon is not included in the VAB

Keep Bad Astronomy close to your heart, and help make me filthy rich. Hey, it's either this or one of those really irritating PayPal donation buttons here. Source: badastronomy.com ©2008 Phil Plait. All Rights Reserved.
This page last modified Saturday, 05-Mar-2011 18:03:22 UTC

Isn't that cute how he uses UTC to make himself sound more "scientific"? It's down to the second. 18 hours 3 minutes and 22 seconds! You see that is what professional astronomers are good at : calculating time.

What's a "few minutes" amongst friends, eh?

It is hard to believe that Phil Plait would hedge on a "few minutes" when he's been researching the Apollo topic for years. Surely, as a professional astronomer he has already knows the exact time (the time Apollo astronauts were in the VAB's) figured down to the minutes and the seconds.... or does he??

I'd like to hear round 2 between Rogan and Plait. As I pointed out before Rogan is quite adept at keeping the Bad Astronomer on the edge. Even Penn Jillette the skeptical host of the show agreed that Rogan "held is own" against Plait. And what about Jarrah White?

Jarrah can sit back and take notes while Rogan is in the ring. Jarrah's the type of person who attends conferences and does experiments and makes documentaries. I don't think Jarrah would be suited to a one-on-one with Phil Plait. Not because one would destroy the other... but because Rogan is obviously a fighter with fighting instincts who will take a hit to score the knock out punch.

I think that the next user who uses the word "liar" in this thread should be deleted from ATS.

It is the most unproductive word and it's really getting in the way of the ideas and information flow in this thread. Just my opinion as a user of ATS.

Carry on.

reply to post by SayonaraJupiter

I think that the next user who uses the word "liar" in this thread should be deleted from ATS.

So what do you suggest we say when we think someone is deliberately ummm, not telling the truth??

Originally posted by backinblack
reply to post by SayonaraJupiter

 

I think that the next user who uses the word "liar" in this thread should be deleted from ATS.

So what do you suggest we say when we think someone is deliberately ummm, not telling the truth??

It is an inflammatory word. As an example : I don't believe that Rogan or Plait used that word at any time in the podcast they did with Jillette. Surely they jabbed at each other during the conversation but at the end - no winner was declared and each believed what they said was the best that they could do.

The podcast with Rogan and Plait embodies and encapsulates ALL 430 pages of this entire thread into "a few minutes" of audio.

Instead of going after Phil Plait as a falsifier of facts why don't we instead find it more to be more productive to simply point out different facts such as that Phil Plait is an astronomer and he does not know exactly how many hours-minutes-seconds the Apollo astronauts were in the VAB. That is a fact. We need not call someone as a falsifier of facts. The L-word.

Phil Plait is an astronomer who does not know the exact hours, minutes and seconds that any of the Apollo astronauts were exposed to the Van Allen Belt radiation. He is so far on the record as saying "a few minutes" but this does not make him a falsifier of fact. It does't make him the L-word.

Is there anyone in this thread who can quote the exact hours, minutes and seconds that each of the Apollo astronauts were exposed to the VAB? Should be easy enough to find a reliable source for it I would think.

reply to post by SayonaraJupiter

Phil Plait is an astronomer who does not know the exact hours, minutes and seconds that any of the Apollo astronauts were exposed to the Van Allen Belt radiation. He is so far on the record as saying "a few minutes" but this does not make him a falsifier of fact. It does't make him the L-word.

Well he actually clearly states 90 minutes on his website..

Figure that one into your thoughts..

Originally posted by backinblack
reply to post by SayonaraJupiter

 

Phil Plait is an astronomer who does not know the exact hours, minutes and seconds that any of the Apollo astronauts were exposed to the Van Allen Belt radiation. He is so far on the record as saying "a few minutes" but this does not make him a falsifier of fact. It does't make him the L-word.

Well he actually clearly states 90 minutes on his website..

Figure that one into your thoughts..

So that would 90 minutes for every mission, exactly 1 hour, 30 minutes and 0 seconds?
The point I'm getting at is that Plait is a professional. Where are his figures? He needs to show the math... and for every mission

"a few minutes" or "90 minutes" on his website doesn't cut it. This guy is an astronomer and his flagrant disregard for accuracy is impeaching on his credibility!

reply to post by SayonaraJupiter

So that would 90 minutes for every mission, exactly 1 hour, 30 minutes and 0 seconds?
The point I'm getting at is that Plait is a professional. Where are his figures? He needs to show the math... and for every mission

"a few minutes" or "90 minutes" on his website doesn't cut it. This guy is an astronomer and his flagrant disregard for accuracy is impeaching on his credibility

There are only three small problems with this. First, the ERBs are a field with a continuously varying flux; in other words, it's hard to say where they "begin" and "end." Second, this field expands and contracts depending on the pressure from the solar wind, so even if we could agree on where the field "begins" and "ends," it would be different for each mission. Finally, we don't have the data that would allow us to make this determination. "Ninety minutes" is a good rough estimate. Why this obsession with precision all of a sudden?

reply to post by DJW001

Why this obsession with precision all of a sudden?

Isn't it obvious?

Just lke their "idol", Jarrah White.....in the face of NO arguments, at all, no science, nothing to back up their claims, delusion of an Apollo "hoax", the only tactic left is to resort to deflection, subject change and strawman attempts.

Obfuscation, pure and simple.

Oh, geeze....and now? Idolizing that loon, Joe Rogan too? He used to be a talented comedian. Now? Meh.....

reply to post by weedwhacker

Just lke their "idol", Jarrah White.....in the face of NO arguments, at all, no science, nothing to back up their claims, delusion of an Apollo "hoax", the only tactic left is to resort to deflection, subject change and strawman attempts.

There's no deflection at all Weed..

Just the simple fact your hero Plait has no problems deceiving his audience to prove his point..

It's all there for you to read and see..

Talk facts, not BS deflections please..

Originally posted by FoosM
Same difference. Can you find such substances on the surface of the moon?

Sure. In about the same concentrations as you find on the surface of the Earth.

reply to post by backinblack


>sigh<

Didn't you just write, above, that Plait wrote on his site "90 minutes"???

Just the simple fact your hero Plait has no problems deceiving his audience to prove his point..

SO...you have just proven my point, from above. This ridiculous fixation on a turn of phrase, in a heated off-the-cuff (not scripted) discussion, when on the hot seat? Plait was not intending to "deceive"...NOT when he knows how utterly INSIGNIFICANT the issue is!!

But, isn't it obvious here? This is the ONLY "toe in the door" possible, in order to desperately attempt to skew the ever-increasingly weak "hoax" claims....it is pathetic; and in a way, also enlightening----

----Shows there is no foundation to stand on, for "hoax" arguers. Only the same petty nonsense and noise to distract....