Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Were Midgets Asronauts ...sent to the moon after Apollo missions?

page: 2
10
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join

posted on Sep, 26 2012 @ 06:02 AM
link   
reply to post by Dr Expired
 


That explains why we cannot see the stars lol ? seriously i could go on but i wont, i just think you
need to re-think this hypothesis again..

1 camera shots
2 movement-no offense


edit on 26-9-2012 by denver22 because: (no reason given)




posted on Sep, 26 2012 @ 06:07 AM
link   
Whilst I did not intend this thread to demonstrate such predjudice, it is plain to all?...how labels can confuse even skeptical minds?

The word "midget" a crude descriptor of human beings who are below a facist decreed inch size?

The word "midget " brings out all the ....biased ....space exploration interested ATS members?

Neil Armstrong was tall, too midgets a giant, was he funny or not because of his height?

Think about it.



posted on Sep, 26 2012 @ 06:07 AM
link   
reply to post by Dr Expired
 


Have you changed your name from blocula to dr expired maybe....? A typical blocula thread if not...outstanding thats for sure.

Back to the topic...seriously..it will not surprise me if some scientist pondered the option when solving all the technical hurdles to overcome.



posted on Sep, 26 2012 @ 06:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by Dr Expired
Whilst I did not intend this thread to demonstrate such predjudice, it is plain to all?...how labels can confuse even skeptical minds?

The word "midget" a crude descriptor of human beings who are below a facist decreed inch size?

The word "midget " brings out all the ....biased ....space exploration interested ATS members?

Neil Armstrong was tall, too midgets a giant, was he funny or not because of his height?

Think about it.
you mentioned the word midget sir/mam in your first post did you not?



posted on Sep, 26 2012 @ 06:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by Dr Expired
Whilst I did not intend this thread to demonstrate such predjudice, it is plain to all?...how labels can confuse even skeptical minds?

The word "midget" a crude descriptor of human beings who are below a facist decreed inch size?

The word "midget " brings out all the ....biased ....space exploration interested ATS members?

Neil Armstrong was tall, too midgets a giant, was he funny or not because of his height?

Think about it.


Ummm... you had better count yourself amongst the "biased" space exploration interested ATS members then. You kicked off the thread by stating that it would be more cost effective to use midgets by making reference to smaller rocket boosters, spacesuits and even toilet facilities - not to mention the not needing as much oxygen line at the beginning.



posted on Sep, 26 2012 @ 06:16 AM
link   
You would want to be as heavy as possible in a low gravity environment, for health and mobility.
edit on 26-9-2012 by SpearMint because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 26 2012 @ 06:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by Dr Expired
Whilst I did not intend this thread to demonstrate such predjudice, it is plain to all?...how labels can confuse even skeptical minds?
Explain how a midget could take camera shots of anything but lunar soil and
lunar landing pads?



posted on Sep, 26 2012 @ 06:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by denver22

Originally posted by Dr Expired
Whilst I did not intend this thread to demonstrate such predjudice, it is plain to all?...how labels can confuse even skeptical minds?
Explain how a midget could take camera shots of anything but lunar soil and
lunar landing pads?



Jump.



posted on Sep, 26 2012 @ 06:19 AM
link   
One man's view may be another one's man truth.

Not that I believe the things about the Moon and travelling there.

But what if the Chinese went to the Moon?

They are normal people just like us.



posted on Sep, 26 2012 @ 06:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by Dr Expired
Whilst I did not intend this thread to demonstrate such predjudice, it is plain to all?...how labels can confuse even skeptical minds?

read how you should re-think your posts

Together they decided to measure the metabolic rates of children and adults, ranging from 5 to 32 years old, weighing between 15.9 kg and 88.7 kg and ranging in height from 1.07 m to 1.83 m, to try to find out why big people are more economical walkers than smaller people (p. 3972). First Weyand and colleagues filmed male and female volunteers as they walked on a treadmill at speeds ranging from a slow 0.4 ms–1 up to 1.9 m s–1. Meanwhile, they simultaneously measured the walkers' oxygen consumption and carbon dioxide production rates to obtain their total metabolic rate. Next the team calculated the amount of energy that each person used for walking by subtracting the basal metabolic rate (energy required to maintain the body's basic metabolic functions) from the total metabolic rate. Finally, the team compared the way each person walked, measuring the walkers' stride lengths, stride durations and the proportion of each stride they spent in contact with the ground (duty factor) to find out if large and small people walk differently. Analysing the walkers' styles, the team found that all of them moved in exactly the same way regardless of their height. Essentially, if you scaled a 5 year old up to 2 m, the giant child would walk in exactly the same way as a 2 m tall adult. So large people are not more economical because they walk differently from smaller people. Next the team calculated the metabolic cost of a stride as each walker moved at their most economical pace and they discovered that walkers use the same amount of energy per stride regardless of their height. So, big people do not become more economical because they walk in a more economical style. Something else must account for their increased economy. Finally, the four scientists plotted the walkers' heights against their minimum energy expenditure and they were amazed when they got a straight line with a gradient of almost –1. The walkers' energy costs were inversely proportional to their heights, with tall people walking more economically than smaller people because they have longer strides and have to take fewer steps to cover the same distance. So smaller people tire faster because each step costs the same and they have to take more steps.


Little people tire faster needing more oxygen not like you claim about needing less jeb.biologists.org/content/213/23/i.1.full

All that walking about on the moon would require more oxygen not less
edit on 26-9-2012 by denver22 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 26 2012 @ 06:24 AM
link   
i believe the folks you speak of like to be called little people.
your whole thread reaks of someone with a 'little' mind!
is it your mission to try to piss off many different people at the same time?
i'd like to think the people on this site are intelligent,and perhaps you are bored and wanted attention.
maybe you should learn haw to knit,or some other harmless hobby.
how can we grow as humans if we keep singleing out and judging others
by your standards?
legend has it that the great pyramid in egypt,and the pyramid of the sun
were both raised and built by 'dwarfs'.



posted on Sep, 26 2012 @ 06:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by SpearMint
You would want to be as heavy as possible in a low gravity environment, for health and mobility.
edit on 26-9-2012 by SpearMint because: (no reason given)
exactly
1/6 of the earths gravity to take into context with the height/ weight/ suit ..
Camera position and movement is a must factor too..



posted on Sep, 26 2012 @ 06:39 AM
link   
reply to post by reficul
 


My mind is little as you correctly guess, but only a smaller mind would fail to smell the steak from the onions, ok it can be confusing.
In the end e are all in this universe together, big or small, white or yellow, black, ect.
Love , hate, its up to us.



posted on Sep, 26 2012 @ 06:40 AM
link   
reply to post by Dr Expired
 


They most likely would have also taken Shetland Ponies, pot belly pigs, miniature and teacup breed dogs etc.

At least there is no grass on the moon (yet) so they don't have to constantly worry about it always tickling their balls.

Also... because the dwarf torso is generally normal sized, logic would then have it that so would be the dwarf anus. So usually a dwarf would need to consume as much food and liquid as a regular human being would. Requiring that they would produce full size excrement thus requiring same if not larger sized toilets.

But mark my words I do find the premise of a new bi-species of human's living on the moon horribly exciting. s&f

Stars and Flags you genius



posted on Sep, 26 2012 @ 06:48 AM
link   
reply to post by Dr Expired
 


ATS reaching rock bottom status. Soon the prime source of ignorance on Internet. At least something to be proud of.



posted on Sep, 26 2012 @ 06:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by Dr Expired
reply to post by reficul
 


My mind is little as you correctly guess, but only a smaller mind would fail to smell the steak from the onions

If you smelt the coffee you would come to realize that your hypothesis has just expired...dr...
Read my posts please



posted on Sep, 26 2012 @ 07:07 AM
link   
I'd like this to be true. Midget chicks are Hot. Midget Chicks on the Moon would be doubly Hot. Imagine sex with a Hot Midget chicks in the Moon's gravity. NASA could have the best porn Ever.



posted on Sep, 26 2012 @ 09:35 AM
link   
reply to post by Dr Expired
 





posted on Sep, 26 2012 @ 09:41 AM
link   
They should send Bridget the Midget up to the moon so all the little people have a lady friend to spend time with.

First porn shoot on the moon a midget flick... I love it.
edit on 26-9-2012 by knowledgedesired because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 26 2012 @ 09:59 AM
link   
reply to post by Dr Expired
 


Listen to this guy ! Ha ha !

Midgets on the
you
with that
midgets. Ha ha !
Because..............

What are you nauts ?

Send em all there ! Lil bugggers.
edit on 26-9-2012 by randyvs because: (no reason given)





new topics

top topics



 
10
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join