|
I dont believe that the US (pg. 5)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| washout |
i rockets that fly into space like the bugs from starship troopers movie.
but instead of blue rockets they are brown and messy. |
|
|
| pvdAngel |
| quote: | Originally posted by Omega_M
that you have anyways, so you might as well post your opinion about the moon :p |
OK then. I want to know why neither the Earth nor the stars are shown in the background of any of the shots. :rolleyes:
A 'rocket' landing in this moon is more believable. 
:p |
|
|
| Omega_M |
| quote: | Originally posted by pvdAngel
OK then. I want to know why neither the Earth nor the stars are shown in the background of any of the shots. :rolleyes:
|
In the first place, Earth need not be in the picture at all. It is out there. It just did not get captured in this shot. The sun's out there right ? Do you see it in the picuture ? So does that mean it's not there ??
The reason you don't see any stars:
All pictures taken by the astronauts on the moon were shot during the daytime, in glaring sunlight. Because there is no atmosphere on the moon, sunlight is reflected here more intensely than on earth. Therefore, the astronaut's cameras had to be adjusted so that the objects photographed would not be totally over-exposed. The aperture was at a minimum, the exposure time extremely short. There was not enough time for the dim light of the stars to leave a trace on the film. Should anybody take a photo on earth in the black of night using the same camera settings as the astronauts, the results would be equal: no stars. :rolleyes: |
|
|
| washout |
| quote: | Originally posted by pvdAngel
OK then. I want to know why neither the Earth nor the stars are shown in the background of any of the shots. :rolleyes:
A 'rocket' landing in this moon is more believable.
:p |
| quote: | Originally posted by Omega_M
In the first place, Earth need not be in the picture at all. It is out there. It just did not get captured in this shot. The sun's out there right ? Do you see it in the picuture ? So does that mean it's not there ??
The reason you don't see any stars:
All pictures taken by the astronauts on the moon were shot during the daytime, in glaring sunlight. Because there is no atmosphere on the moon, sunlight is reflected here more intensely than on earth. Therefore, the astronaut's cameras had to be adjusted so that the objects photographed would not be totally over-exposed. The aperture was at a minimum, the exposure time extremely short. There was not enough time for the dim light of the stars to leave a trace on the film. Should anybody take a photo on earth in the black of night using the same camera settings as the astronauts, the results would be equal: no stars. :rolleyes: |
owned. |
|
|
| pkcRAISTLIN |
| quote: | Originally posted by Lira
A few (if not all) individuals need irrational beliefs (to some degree), in order to satisfy some fear and or finitude of existence: superstition, religion, conspiracy theory... it's all the same. |
nah, i dont buy that. and Enlightenment thinkers would be turning over in their grave to hear you utter such words :p
its simply easier to read a few lines on a nutcase website than it is to do your own thinking and research on the subject. belief is there to fill the void created by ignorance.
for instance:
| quote: | Originally posted by pvdAngel
OK then. I want to know why neither the Earth nor the stars are shown in the background of any of the shots. |
see, it sounds like a legitimate question, doesnt it? but Omega_M's reply merely highlights the fact that pvdAngel doesnt know what the theyre talking about. as if nobody would notice the lack of stars but this hotshot detective finally worked it out 40 years later.
it just gets tired watching these spotty-faced highschool students parading their stupidity for all to see, just coz they found some weird website that they dont have the knowledge to critique in the first place. (not directed at anyone in particular before any of you babies start crying).
rule #1- if youre gonna fly in the face of accepted history and science, have a ing clue what youre on about. indeed, be a ing expert on the subject. the amount of work and effort put into landing on the moon would have been ridiculous, yet these armchair QBs sit there and have it all debunked after 5 minutes on www.ihavenoingidea.com :rolleyes:
if these clowns were people of note during the Enlightenment we'd all still be ruled by monarchs and superstition. |
|
|
| Orbax |
| dude like...rockets still blow up and yet almost 40 years ago they flew the first perfect mission? :rolleyes: |
|
|
| tribu |
Im not yet sure what I believe on this toipic but I do find it curious that American mission to the moon stopped soon after the Soviets acquired the abaility to view the moon's surface telescopically
(simply repeating so if im wrong, give me a rational cockslapping to make yourself feel better!) |
|
|
| Danny Ocean |
| quote: | Originally posted by Orbax
dude like...rockets still blow up and yet almost 40 years ago they flew the first perfect mission? :rolleyes: |
cars still crash yet 40 years ago there was someone who was never in a automobile accident. your point? |
|
|
| pkcRAISTLIN |
| quote: | Originally posted by Orbax
dude like...rockets still blow up and yet almost 40 years ago they flew the first perfect mission? :rolleyes: |
a perfect example of a non-expert providing no coherent analysis whatsoever, devoid of meaning or substance. thanks for proving my point.
so like, what exactly was sent into space and tracked by the world's satellite dishes?
oh, and it wasnt the first mission either. there were several rockets sent up by the USSR & US before the actual moon landing. |
|
|
| jdat |
| quote: | Originally posted by Orbax
dude like...rockets still blow up and yet almost 40 years ago they flew the first perfect mission? :rolleyes: |
I wonder what the stats are on failed rocket launchs ..... I bet they are fairly slim! |
|
|
| Lira |
| quote: | Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN
nah, i dont buy that. and Enlightenment thinkers would be turning over in their grave to hear you utter such words :p
its simply easier to read a few lines on a nutcase website than it is to do your own thinking and research on the subject. belief is there to fill the void created by ignorance. |
Exactly, and this is what I'm saying and, as a matter of fact, I'm not the only one saying this.
Edgar Morin once said that "The ideas we have are capable of having us", and this is sadly true. This is where extremism comes from. In fact, this so-called belief can easily be combined with most (if not all) other -isms: that's the birth of blind Vegetarianism, Christianism, Atheism, Marxism, Racism, Existentialism and so on. Unfortunately, you can't help having people crave for an ideology/belief. I find Camus' ideas on philosophical suicide quite interesting, and it concerns this issue.
It's a philosophical suicide really, and that's why you sometimes witness irrational acceptance or refusal of a proposition. Emotions play an important role in our life. If we're physically threatened, we feel fear (and find ourselves in a fight or flight situation, be it physically or mentally). Now, if you have an emotional need for a belief - if finding out the truth is painful to you for some reason, and this belief is threatened, you feel a similar fear.
There was this bus driver I knew that could accept the fact that the men landed on the moon because that would go against God's will, according to him. He needed that protection... "God" knows why ;)
| quote: | Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN
see, it sounds like a legitimate question, doesnt it? but Omega_M's reply merely highlights the fact that pvdAngel doesnt know what the theyre talking about. as if nobody would notice the lack of stars but this hotshot detective finally worked it out 40 years later.
it just gets tired watching these spotty-faced highschool students parading their stupidity for all to see, just coz they found some weird website that they dont have the knowledge to critique in the first place. (not directed at anyone in particular before any of you babies start crying). |
I, once again, agree with you.
That's why I'd like to have the right not to vote (here in Brazil voting is compulsory). I've never meet the governor, I don't know anything about politics in general - unless you're a political scientist, deeply involved in the process, or someone who actually does as much research as possible by yourself, how the hell do you think you're competent to talk about politics? That's the most dangerous thing about doxa/"opinion" I can see.
People sometimes think they should have an opinion a priori, which often leads to pure non-sense, as you've explained here:
| quote: | Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN
rule #1- if youre gonna fly in the face of accepted history and science, have a ing clue what youre on about. indeed, be a ing expert on the subject. the amount of work and effort put into landing on the moon would have been ridiculous, yet these armchair QBs sit there and have it all debunked after 5 minutes on www.ihavenoingidea.com :rolleyes: |
There are countless other examples we can find. I know that, being into linguistics, I've heard several absurd theories and prejudices.
| quote: | Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN
if these clowns were people of note during the Enlightenment we'd all still be ruled by monarchs and superstition. |
I wouldn't be this optimistic about having defeated "monarchs" and "superstition" as rulers. |
|
|
| Omega_M |
| quote: | Originally posted by tribu
give me a rational cockslapping to make yourself feel better!)
|
ok so its cool to post bull but "cockslapping" to give rational answers.
wow. |
|
|
|
|
