NASA "Moon Bombing" mission -- DISAPPEARS

According to quantum theory by observing the experiment you have altered the outcome. So if nobody watched the crash it might have gone exactly as planned?

reply to post by Malcram


You're right -- in science there will always be some "spin" going on to make your science look better than your competitor's science -- it's human nature. However, there is no need for NASA to spin this so much that they would lie about whether they actually impacted the Moon or not.

There are people here who are saying that because the plume was not seen from Earth as expected, that must mean that the impact never occurred.

There would be no way for NASA to hide the fact that they didn't hit the Moon. There are too many people who will review the data they got from the impact. If the impact never occurred, then the people analyzing the data would know it.

I admit that among scientists, there will always be some spin -- trying to make themselves look good by exaggerating the results of an experiment a little. But those exaggerations would be esoteric in nature and not as all-encompassing as the difference between hitting the Moon and not hitting the Moon.

My point is not getting a big plume does NOT mean the experiment failed. It simply could mean that the stuff inside that crater is harder and drier than expected. That's not what they expected, but that doesn't mean the mission failed -- the point of the mission was to see what was there. If there is no water there, it's not NASA's fault -- it's just the way the Moon is (i.e., it's the Moon's fault )

[edit on 10/9/2009 by Soylent Green Is People]

mins at :43 u can see water on moon clearly.

reply to post by Malcram

Thanks for posting that video, it makes it easier to eval rather than searching on another site for it for the discussion. This is my first post here, but I find it odd that NASA, all of a sudden is launching rockets at the Moon with the excuse to find water. I usually pay pretty close attention to this subject matter, and the last thing I heard is that they were all excited that MARS showed evidence of water, even images of water vaporizing from a crater wall. I believe that theres a lot more to this project than the obvious excuses, and that the footage provided was tampered with halfway through. I find it interesting that they shot it at the location they did as well. This is also an interesting twist, .. Um yes, yes we will just build this rocket, launch it, hit the moon just to see what minerals come up out of it. Seriously, lets research the data and find out exactly how far you have to dig into the crust to get some good material, and just how far this machine they built could penetrate into the moons surface to produce results that another craft could fly by and take tests. Thanks for the opportunity to post.

Originally posted by Soylent Green Is People
reply to post by Malcram

 

You're right -- in science there will always be some "spin" going on to make your science look better than your competitor's science -- it's human nature. However, there is no need for NASA to spin this so much that they would lie about whether they actually impacted the Moon or not.

You don't know that at all. There are many scenarios that could lead to NASA lying about impacting on the moon. You just don't allow for them. What if they were destroyed prior to impact? I'm not saying that's what happened, but if it did, you can be certain that NASA would lie about it and claim they impacted anyway.

There are people here who are saying that because the plume was not seen from Earth as expected, that must mean that the impact never occurred.

It's not categorical proof that it didn't happen but it is evidence that can be used to build a case that it didn't. Especially as it was NASA's OWN statement that this plume being visible from earth with backyard telescopes WOULD be a sign of the impact. At this stage your acceptance that it did happen is based solely on your trust in NASA. You have faith.

There would be no way for NASA to hide the fact that they didn't hit the Moon. There are too many people who will review the data they got from the impact. If the impact never occurred, then the people analyzing the data would know it.

If the 'data' they are examining comes solely from NASA or agencies closely associated with NASA then 'they' would first have to assume that the data was legit and not faked - an act of faith. Many people are prepared to make that leap of faith on NASA's behalf, as are you. But this would have nothing to do with scientific objectivity or the soundness of the evidence provided and everything to do with blind trust in 'authorities'.

The 'believers' in this scenario, are NASA-believers.

[edit on 9-10-2009 by Malcram]

I say the aliens shot it down before it could impact.
Now there going to send something our way.

Maybe use some kind of sonic weapon to trigger nasty earthquakes?

hmmmm..

Originally posted by DoomsdayRex
Soylent Green you have done yeoman's work here defending science. But I fear there is little to do to penetrate the ignorance and closed-mindedness in this thread.

Your absolutely right. I can't believe the ignorance and close-mindedness from the skeptics now that the 'bomb' just DISAPPEARED...

That's one big point for ET, one big egg in face for NASA

I am sure this EPIC FAIL will do wonders for future public support for multimillion dollar bombing mission

[edit on 9-10-2009 by zorgon]

reply to post by Reticulian


The search for water on the Moon is different than the search for water on Mars. On Mars, NASA is searching for water because that's where they think they have the best chance of finding life. Their mantra for the search for life on mars has been "follow the water".

The search for water on the Moon is a different story. NASA isn't necessarily looking for life, they are strictly looking for water. If NASA ever plans to put bases on the Moon (possibly as a stepping stone to eventually put people on Mars), the presence of existing water on the Moon would be very important. Humans need water to survive, but water is very heavy to transport from the earth by spacecraft. Also, water can potentially be used to make rocket fuel -- whose components are hydrogen and oxygen. Potentially, NASA could devise a way to make this water into fuel. Someday, the Moon could be used as a spaceport (1/6 gravity makes launching from there easier).

For both of these reasons (water for human use, and water for fuel), it would be a big help and a big money-saver if the water was already there.

...of course, budget problems at NASA may mean we will not be putting bases on the Moon anytime soon, but when this LCROSS mission was launched, that was the general plan.

Originally posted by zorgon
...Your absolutely right. I can't believe the ignorance and close-mindedness from the skeptics now that the 'bomb' just DISAPPEARED...

Yeah -- it's fun for us all to say that the spacecraft disappeared, and NOBODY on Earth saw the impact, and we can all get a good laugh...

...but that would also be inaccurate, because the people at the Kitt Peak Observatory in Arizona DID see the impact, and they DID get the same spectrometer reading (the presence of sodium) that LCROSS got. (Linky)

Granted, the plume is not as large as expected, and could not be seen from Earth as expected, so that was a big disappointment to the "average citizen" who wanted to see a good show. However, like I said above, that's perhaps not NASA's fault -- perhaps that's just the way the moon is built at the impact site. Perhaps the Moon there is harder and more solid than expected.

...and, by the way "putting on a good show for the people" may have been a potential fringe benefit to this experiment (for the people and for NASA), but the "good show" is not necessary to get scientific data. The data was collected anyway even without the expected good show -- albeit that data was different than expected. Not "wrong", just "different".

[edit on 10/9/2009 by Soylent Green Is People]

Originally posted by Pinkarella
According to quantum theory by observing the experiment you have altered the outcome. So if nobody watched the crash it might have gone exactly as planned?

No. That's not right. Quantum theory explains phenomena at the quantum level. Not explosions on the Moon.

Originally posted by MOTT the HOOPLE
How much of a plume would expect if you fire a bullet into mud!

with near zero gravity and it wasnt a bullit it was designed to make a 5 mile crater! so yes we should of seen somthing!!!!!!

Originally posted by Soylent Green Is People
Even if they didn't see what they expected to see, hopefully they still got data.

They got plenty of data. they blew 79 million dollars on a headless missile essentially wasting MILLIONS of dollars, and got away with it

[edit on 9-10-2009 by stanlee]

Originally posted by Longtimegone
No. That's not right. Quantum theory explains phenomena at the quantum level. Not explosions on the Moon.

Wanna bet? Science just hasn't figured out yet that it applies on a macro scale as well.. but Ancient Secret societies have know this 'Secret' for thousands of years

"Reality is merely an illusion, albeit a very persistent one" Albert Einstein

HE knew

ok im not saying it vanished but come on guys. We didnt see nothing Nasa promise so much and as far as i could tell they zoomed in on the same image! every couple of seconds. We watched them watch the action, they did look a bit puzzled at the end aswell. Makes me laugh and wonder! They can put a bomb on the moon but they can not film it to even a half decent standard. Poor!!! and i am Dissapointed! and yes i do smell cheese, no pun intended

Originally posted by theflashor
ok im not saying it vanished but come on guys. We didnt see nothing Nasa promise so much and as far as i could tell they zoomed in on the same image! every couple of seconds. We watched them watch the action, they did look a bit puzzled at the end aswell. Makes me laugh and wonder! They can put a bomb on the moon but they can not film it to even a half decent standard. Poor!!! and i am Dissapointed! and yes i do smell cheese, no pun intended

when was the last time nasa held true to their statements, and promises.. sh*t they are still saying they know nothing of ET life.

yup, more bull# from them, but do you think they shall be challanged? hmm nope i dont think so. Have you heard they are sending a guy to light a fart on the moon tommorow whos tuning in

Originally posted by Chadwickus
reply to post by InfaRedMan

 

Well I'll be the first to say that it just went straight through the shell of the hollow moon and is now floating aimlessly about in the alien's recreation room.

Either that, or the Nazis zapped it from one of their secret Lunar laser nests.

Good morning Chadwickus. Long time no see mate

reply to post by theflashor

1/6 Earth gravity is not "near 0 gravity".
The Centaur booster was not designed to make any crater, much less a 5 mile one. It was designed to send a spacecraft to the Moon. Using it as an impactor was a free bonus.

Damn! Just posted from Chad's first page comment, and I end up on page 16!!!!!

I've got to get out of China ;-)

Originally posted by theflashor
ok im not saying it vanished but come on guys. We didnt see nothing Nasa promise so much and as far as i could tell they zoomed in on the same image! every couple of seconds. We watched them watch the action, they did look a bit puzzled at the end aswell. Makes me laugh and wonder! They can put a bomb on the moon but they can not film it to even a half decent standard. Poor!!! and i am Dissapointed! and yes i do smell cheese, no pun intended

They may have been puzzled because they thought there would be a large plume, but there wasn't.

However, that may be due to the fact that the bottom of that crater is not made up of the materials they expected to be there -- but that doesn't necessarily mean the experiment failed, it just means that the crater may not be loose soil and water-ice as expected.

You can do an experiment 100% right, but not get the result you expected because the initial conditions are not as expected. That could be what happened here.

It's to early to cry "EPIC FAIL", because perhaps the experiment worked perfectly (albeit the results were unexpected)