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: 71
377
<< 68  69  70    72  73  74 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 24 2010 @ 04:55 PM
link   
reply to post by FoosM
 



How was it possible to hear Aldrin, or any other astros, while the engine was blasting?

If they had on their suits:
1. How effectively could they have controlled the craft?
2. How could the suit work in a pressurized environment?

If they were not wearing their suit
1. How could you hear Aldrin so clearly?


There is no sound in the vacuum of space remember: "In space no-one can hear you scream?"

You realize that there were microphones inside the helmets? In fact, the microphones were part of the "Snoopy hat," a lightweight cap worn under the helmet, or on it's own in a "shirtsleeves" environment.




posted on May, 24 2010 @ 05:00 PM
link   
reply to post by FoosM
 


Hoo, boy! (Go read a book....but, maybe, just maybe.... you will also learn a bit here. I normally would charge about $150 an hour for this, so consider yourself lucky).


Here is the problem:
How was it possible to hear Aldrin, or any other astros, while the engine was blasting?


Serious? You are seriously asking this?

Class??? Should we put FoosM out of his misery? No...I think I'll let you do that one, look it up and learn by doing.....

((I caved in, answer at bottom....SIGH....oh, and you ---- what makes you think the engine was that loud??? Comparing to a very DIFFERENT engine, such as a Saturn V motor, in the earth's atmosphere???
))


If they had on their suits:


YES, they had on their suits.



1. How effectively could they have controlled the craft?


Made SIX landings. Pretty effectively, I'd say. The LM also flew in shake-downs a few times before 11, and they wore the suits then, too.



2. How could the suit work in a pressurized environment?


What? I have to ask again...seriously? Class???



If they were not wearing their suit


Oh, "they" were...



1. How could you hear Aldrin so clearly?


I hate to repeat myself, here...but....... maybe a picture is the best medicine....

I give you (drumroll)......the "Snoopy Cap":


In NASA spacesuits, communications are provided via a cap worn over the head, which includes earphones and a microphone. Due to the coloration of the version used for Apollo and Skylab, which resembled the coloration of the comic strip character Snoopy, these caps became known as "Snoopy caps".

en.wikipedia.org...



NOW, please do try to catch up, ok? We can't keep dragging the rest of the class down, although questions are GOOD! Yes, they are GOOD!

(don't want to discourage the bloke.....)



[edit on 24 May 2010 by weedwhacker]



posted on May, 24 2010 @ 05:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by DJW001
reply to post by FoosM
 



How was it possible to hear Aldrin, or any other astros, while the engine was blasting?

If they had on their suits:
1. How effectively could they have controlled the craft?
2. How could the suit work in a pressurized environment?

If they were not wearing their suit
1. How could you hear Aldrin so clearly?


There is no sound in the vacuum of space remember: "In space no-one can hear you scream?"
---------
Ok but, what does the vacuum of space have to do with the inside of a cabin?


You realize that there were microphones inside the helmets? In fact, the microphones were part of the "Snoopy hat," a lightweight cap worn under the helmet, or on it's own in a "shirtsleeves" environment.
--------
So were they wearing their suits or not?





[edit on 24-5-2010 by FoosM]



posted on May, 24 2010 @ 05:35 PM
link   
Are people really quoting the Marcus Allen stuff??

He can't even provide his own material! He took all his ideas from Jack White.

Wow.

Talk about plagerism!



posted on May, 24 2010 @ 05:36 PM
link   
Late to the party again...


FoosM, do you really think you are helping the Apollo denial cause by blundering in with stuff like that above...? I mean, seriously...

Apart from not realising that operating in a vacuum means there was none of the atmospheric noise transmission (which means of course that the ONLY noise that could reach the helmet/microphone was that transmitted through the astronaut himself...), it seems you have also forgotten that this was in 1/6 gravity.

Now, Harrier pilots have no difficulties talking over the radio while landing. (Go on, go find some videos). So forgetting the vacuum issue for a moment, how does a Harrier compare?

The TOTAL weight of the LM (ascent+descent stages) was around 16,000kg (depending on mission.) A harrier? About 9,500kg (if used for vertical flight). But of course the LM operated in 1/6 gravity, so it required engines running at about 1/3 the thrust of the Harrier...

in a dead quiet vacuum.


That one is truly embarrassing. THINK before posting.

BTW, may I ask a simple but straight question..?

FoosM, are you Jarrah White?

I note you registered 5/5/10, and have posted nowhere else but here...



posted on May, 24 2010 @ 05:39 PM
link   
reply to post by FoosM
 



Originally posted by DJW001
reply to post by FoosM


How was it possible to hear Aldrin, or any other astros, while the engine was blasting?

If they had on their suits:
1. How effectively could they have controlled the craft?
2. How could the suit work in a pressurized environment?

If they were not wearing their suit
1. How could you hear Aldrin so clearly?


There is no sound in the vacuum of space remember: "In space no-one can hear you scream?"
---------
Ok but, what does the vacuum of space have to do with the inside of a cabin?


You realize that there were microphones inside the helmets? In fact, the microphones were part of the "Snoopy hat," a lightweight cap worn under the helmet, or on it's own in a "shirtsleeves" environment.
--------
So were they wearing their suits or not?


I refer you to Weedwhacker's post above. Incidentally, in order to head you off, the structure of the craft did transmit vibration. Use of the attitude control jets did often lead to a distinct "thump" sound in the cabin.



posted on May, 24 2010 @ 05:40 PM
link   
reply to post by CHRLZ
 



BTW, may I ask a simple but straight question..? FoosM, are you Jarrah White? I note you registered 5/5/10, and have posted nowhere else but here...


Ahh another ATS person who watches the habits and postings of others KUDOS!

Way to be on top CHLZ.

BTW is might be so, yet can someone not know about a vacuum?



posted on May, 24 2010 @ 05:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by weedwhacker



Here is the problem:
How was it possible to hear Aldrin, or any other astros, while the engine was blasting?



If they had on their suits:


YES, they had on their suits.



1. How effectively could they have controlled the craft?


Made SIX landings. Pretty effectively, I'd say.
----
circular argument


The LM also flew in shake-downs a few times before 11, and they wore the suits then, too.
------
Source- do you have any photos/videos?
Also, are you saying they were wearing suits with gloves? Did they have their helmets on too?




2. How could the suit work in a pressurized environment?


What? I have to ask again...seriously? Class???


If they were not wearing their suit


Oh, "they" were...
------
Ok, well you should know those suits could not work in a pressurized atmosphere.
Was the LM not pressurized?



1. How could you hear Aldrin so clearly?


I hate to repeat myself, here...but....... maybe a picture is the best medicine....

I give you (drumroll)......the "Snoopy Cap":
-------
This snoopy cap with mic does it have some kind of technology that reduces vibration in an astronauts voice during ascent and descent? Does it also drown out other sounds from inside the cabin? Why is this technology used wit h the shuttle astronauts?



posted on May, 24 2010 @ 06:00 PM
link   
reply to post by FoosM
 



This snoopy cap with mic does it have some kind of technology that reduces vibration in an astronauts voice during ascent and descent? Does it also drown out other sounds from inside the cabin? Why is this technology used wit h the shuttle astronauts?


No, it doesn't... that's why you hear the astronauts' voices so poorly during lift-off, when the atmosphere causes so much vibration. In space, of course, there is no atmosphere, and the thrust from the CSM and LM is negligible. What do you mean "drown out other sounds from the cabin?" Do you think they've got a juke box blaring up there?



posted on May, 24 2010 @ 06:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by DJW001

I refer you to Weedwhacker's post above.

So you dont want to answer for yourself?


Originally posted by DJW001
Incidentally, in order to head you off, the structure of the craft did transmit vibration. Use of the attitude control jets did often lead to a distinct "thump" sound in the cabin.


Do you disagree with CHRLZ:



Apart from not realising that operating in a vacuum means there was none of the atmospheric noise transmission (which means of course that the ONLY noise that could reach the helmet/microphone was that transmitted through the astronaut himself...), it seems you have also forgotten that this was in 1/6 gravity.




posted on May, 24 2010 @ 06:26 PM
link   
reply to post by FoosM
 


My answer is the same as Weedwhacker's, he's just a bit more specific. No, we don't disagree.



posted on May, 24 2010 @ 06:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by DJW001
reply to post by FoosM
 



This snoopy cap with mic does it have some kind of technology that reduces vibration in an astronauts voice during ascent and descent? Does it also drown out other sounds from inside the cabin? Why is this technology used wit h the shuttle astronauts?



Originally posted by DJW001
No, it doesn't... that's why you hear the astronauts' voices so poorly during lift-off, when the atmosphere causes so much vibration. In space, of course, there is no atmosphere, and the thrust from the CSM and LM is negligible.


Voices during lift-off was pretty clear for what was going on. And is clearer than Shuttle missions. Do you reject that evidence?


Originally posted by DJW001
What do you mean "drown out other sounds from the cabin?" Do you think they've got a juke box blaring up there?


Are you stating that during ascent and descent of the LM there would be no engine noise inside the cabin due to the LM being in the vacuum of space? This is your claim and you can back it up with what evidence?



posted on May, 24 2010 @ 06:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by DJW001
reply to post by FoosM
 


My answer is the same as Weedwhacker's, he's just a bit more specific. No, we don't disagree.


You just stated there were sounds in the LM (from engines)
do you retract that statement?



the structure of the craft did transmit vibration. Use of the attitude control jets did often lead to a distinct "thump" sound in the cabin.


edit for clarification

[edit on 24-5-2010 by FoosM]



posted on May, 24 2010 @ 06:42 PM
link   
reply to post by FoosM
 


Do you really not know? Honest, no game, no trick...are you actually curious, and not playing?

I realize that such things as space travel, and the science and technology involved are outside the realm of normal earthly experience...but I've read enough in my time to have a bit of a handle on it.

Obviously, any 'force' of the escaping gas used for any sort of thrusting wouldn't be 'heard'...not directly, since vacuum doesn't transmit sound waves.

However, of course the various components of the engine, RCS thrusters, etc., will produce vibrations, as they are operated, and THAT will transmit (to the human ear) as sounds. THROUGH the structure of the spacecraft, and IF the spacecraft cabin is pressurized, then through the air --- but in any case, also through the material that comprises the vehicle, and IF in a vacuum, would be perceived by direct physical contact, by a human.

IOW...let's look at the CSM and LM, after undocking...the Astronaut in the CSM could WATCH the LM's engine firing, but in no way would he ever HEAR anything at all (unless, in a completely unrealistic scenario, the engine thrust was washing over his capsule, and causing some vibrations...but, that would not have been a prudent thing to let happen, in space. Not if you want to return home in the thing!).


I'm afraid that too much popular Science fiction has forever poisoned the well of understanding, in most average people's minds.


Take another look at Kubrick's 2001: A Space Odyssey to see more realistic portrayals.



[edit on 24 May 2010 by weedwhacker]



posted on May, 24 2010 @ 06:52 PM
link   
reply to post by FoosM
 



You just stated there were sounds in the LM (from engines)
do you retract that statement?


Where did I say that, exactly? I said that sometimes you could hear a "thump" from the attitude control jets. This was in the CSM when the module was pressurized.



posted on May, 24 2010 @ 07:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by FoosM

Who cares if Stalin claimed if he knew
(You would really believe Stalin would tell the truth? And what is your source?)
Did he tell anyone? Did he tell American public? Announce it to the world?
If he knew, why didn't he warn the Japanese?

So was the Manhattan project a secret or not according to your definition of secret?



Sweet Jesus are you an imbecile.

Either that or the worst troll to ever infest a forum.

I'll spell it out for you only because it makes you look even more stupid than you already look, confusing the conditions of a Shuttle launch with the LM ascent.


Who cares if Stalin claimed if he knew


It was important that Stalin knew because there was no larger government project with as much security as the Manhattan Project. And even with the scientists sequestered, mail read, residences searched, the Soviets knew about it almost in real time.


You would really believe Stalin would tell the truth? And what is your source?


I'm not surprised you didn't know this. It's standard history. Definitely not one of your strong points.

www.pbs.org...

About a week after the bomb had gone off in New Mexico and it was clear that Truman was going to have this weapon, Truman approached Stalin at the Potsdam conference and very carefully said to Stalin that he had this new weapon. Much to -- to Truman's, ah, dismay, Stalin was very passive in response and Truman did not know exactly how to interpret this. This was not the reaction that Truman clearly wanted from Stalin. What we know now is that Stalin knew exactly about the development of the bomb because of Soviet spies at Los Alamos in New Mexico.


Did he tell anyone? Did he tell American public? Announce it to the world?
If he knew, why didn't he warn the Japanese?


Idiot.

He didn't warn the Japanese because he was in the process at that very moment of declaring war on them!


So was the Manhattan project a secret or not according to your definition of secret?


Not to the Soviet leadership, it wasn't.

Please, for the love of God, pick up a history book, and instead of repeatedly hitting yourself over the head with it, as you are apparently doing, READ IT.



posted on May, 24 2010 @ 08:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by Tomblvd

Originally posted by FoosM

Who cares if Stalin claimed if he knew
(You would really believe Stalin would tell the truth? And what is your source?)
Did he tell anyone? Did he tell American public? Announce it to the world?
If he knew, why didn't he warn the Japanese?

So was the Manhattan project a secret or not according to your definition of secret?




Again who cares if Stalin knew or what claimed he knew.
It was still a secret wasn't it?
Did the American people know?
And who did the US bomb? Russia?

Did it ever occur to you that maybe the USSR also knew that Apollo was faked?



posted on May, 24 2010 @ 08:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by DJW001
reply to post by FoosM
 



You just stated there were sounds in the LM (from engines)
do you retract that statement?


Where did I say that, exactly? I said that sometimes you could hear a "thump" from the attitude control jets. This was in the CSM when the module was pressurized.


So are you now saying that the LM during descent and ascent was not pressurized?



posted on May, 24 2010 @ 08:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by FoosM



Again who cares if Stalin knew or what claimed he knew.


Because it proves the claim by Ralph Rene of some sort of secret "Apollo Simulation Program" was fake, becuase it would be impossible for something that large to still be secret after all these years.



It was still a secret wasn't it?


No. Not even close.



Did the American people know?


Yea, about a month after Nagasaki.



And who did the US bomb? Russia?


History is letting you down again, eh Foos?



Did it ever occur to you that maybe the USSR also knew that Apollo was faked?


If they did, they would have told everyone, due to their own failure to get a manned mission to the moon. Absent that, we would have eventually heard about it from the many high-ranking defectors who spilled their guts upon leaving. And finally, the "truth" would have come to light in the reams of document and decrypts we got from the Soviets, such as the Venona papers or the Mitrokhin Archive.

I hope everyone reading this notes that Foos completely ignored the historical points I made in my post.



posted on May, 24 2010 @ 08:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by FoosM

Originally posted by DJW001
reply to post by FoosM
 



You just stated there were sounds in the LM (from engines)
do you retract that statement?


Where did I say that, exactly? I said that sometimes you could hear a "thump" from the attitude control jets. This was in the CSM when the module was pressurized.


So are you now saying that the LM during descent and ascent was not pressurized?


Following this discussion, I've noticed you have yet to make a cogent point. You continue to try (unsuccessfully) to play one poster off another, jumping on inconsistencies in their answers (much like Jarrah White does in his videos).

Do you have a larger point here, or are you just going to continue playing "gotcha"?



new topics

top topics



 
377
<< 68  69  70    72  73  74 >>

log in

join