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.
Originally posted by Zaphod58
reply to post by XaniMatriX
I didn't say that it cost them $100B to do it, when it only cost them $20B. I said in 2000s dollars it would have cost $100B. There was a comparison to how the Apollo program cost $20B in the 1970s, but the shuttle was $450M+ per launch in the 2000s. If they are going to be compared, then you have to account for inflation, and put the prior program into modern dollars to do so.
Originally posted by seabhac-rua
reply to post by XaniMatriX
Look, back in the 70's you could buy a lot more with a dollar than you can today, a whole lot more.
Originally posted by rolfharriss
We have already established a scale model was used for the the lunar rover footage, so the size of the vacuum chamber is not as important.
Originally posted by wmd_2008
Originally posted by rolfharriss
We have already established a scale model was used for the the lunar rover footage, so the size of the vacuum chamber is not as important.
NO what we have established is that Moon Hoax believers really believe the BS they spout and try to convince themselves by repeating it and it also seem that science was not a subject at the schools they attended!
Originally posted by wmd_2008
Originally posted by rolfharriss
We have already established a scale model was used for the the lunar rover footage, so the size of the vacuum chamber is not as important.
NO what we have established is that Moon Hoax believers really believe the BS they spout and try to convince themselves by repeating it and it also seem that science was not a subject at the schools they attended!
Originally posted by seabhac-rua
reply to post by rolfharriss
Apollo was a joined international effort. Scientists from all over the world worked on the program. I find a certain fact about moon hoax believers becomes plainly evident time after time in these debates, that fact is this: they usually know very little about the Apollo space program at all.
Originally posted by seabhac-rua
reply to post by XaniMatriX
Wrong on so many levels.
We are dealing in matters of verified data, verified by countless hundreds of thousands of academics and scientists worldwide since the sixties. Hoax believers are dealing in speculation, misconception, lack of comprehension(your failing to grasp what inflation means is a good example), pseudo science, and liars.
Do you know how many people worked on the Apollo missions?
edit on 5-11-2012 by seabhac-rua because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by seabhac-rua
reply to post by XaniMatriX
So are you saying that when a scientist from some university somewhere gets to study a lunar rock sample he is forewarned that these are not real rocks but THEORETICAL ones?
You really don't have a grasp on this subject at all.
edit on 5-11-2012 by seabhac-rua because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by seabhac-rua
reply to post by XaniMatriX
What "claims" have I made?
Originally posted by XaniMatriX
Originally posted by seabhac-rua
reply to post by XaniMatriX
What "claims" have I made?
That the moon footage is real, you seriously asking me that?
Everybody knows that the Apollo program costs $20 billion in 1970s dollars—the equivalent of $100 billion in today’s money.
Project Mercury spanned five years (1959–1963) and cost $277 million in 1965 dollars, which translate into $1.6 billion in 2010 dollars. Since six Mercury piloted missions were flown, that amounted to $265 million per flight in today’s money.
As for Gemini, the program costs $1.3 billion in 1967 dollars during its six-year lifespan (1962–1967). In today’s money, it would amount to $7.3 billion, or $723 millions for each of its 10 piloted missions. We thus could say that a Gemini mission cost twice as much as a Mercury’s.
After Apollo, there was the Skylab space station program, which cost $2.2 billion in then-year money ($10 billion in 2010 dollars) during its nine-year existence (1966–1974). Considering that three three-men crews spent a total of 510 person-days onboard Skylab, this mean that each day spent by a crewman costs $5.5 million. (We’ll compare this to living onboard ISS.)
Originally posted by XaniMatriXThey are not verified, they even state that all the data is THEORETICAL ...
A scientific theory summarizes a hypothesis or group of hypotheses that have been supported with repeated testing. If enough evidence accumulates to support a hypothesis, it moves to the next step—known as a theory—in the scientific method and becomes accepted as a valid explanation of a phenomenon.
When used in non-scientific context, the word “theory” implies that something is unproven or speculative. As used in science, however, a theory is an explanation or model based on observation, experimentation, and reasoning...
Originally posted by Zaphod58
reply to post by XaniMatriX
No it wouldn't cost $450M today. It would cost a lot more. Look at ANYTHING that compares something from earlier, to now, and they adjust for inflation. As was said a few posts ago, all you have to do is look at how far a dollar would go in 1970 as compared to 2010. It doesn't go nearly as far, because of inflation.
Notice how this article compares Apollo to now.
Everybody knows that the Apollo program costs $20 billion in 1970s dollars—the equivalent of $100 billion in today’s money.
And Mercury and Gemini to now.
Project Mercury spanned five years (1959–1963) and cost $277 million in 1965 dollars, which translate into $1.6 billion in 2010 dollars. Since six Mercury piloted missions were flown, that amounted to $265 million per flight in today’s money.
As for Gemini, the program costs $1.3 billion in 1967 dollars during its six-year lifespan (1962–1967). In today’s money, it would amount to $7.3 billion, or $723 millions for each of its 10 piloted missions. We thus could say that a Gemini mission cost twice as much as a Mercury’s.
And Skylab.
After Apollo, there was the Skylab space station program, which cost $2.2 billion in then-year money ($10 billion in 2010 dollars) during its nine-year existence (1966–1974). Considering that three three-men crews spent a total of 510 person-days onboard Skylab, this mean that each day spent by a crewman costs $5.5 million. (We’ll compare this to living onboard ISS.)
www.thespacereview.com...
The value of the dollar changes daily. If you're going to compare how much something costs, you have to adjust for that change. What's so hard to understand about that?