PDA

View Full Version : A new thought on the Lunar "Hoax"



Jim_McBrearty
2002-May-03, 06:31 PM
Greetings earthlings,

I emailed this to Phil a while ago, but he probably didn't think it warranted admission on his scientifically minded site. My reason for accepting the Moon landings, beside the OVERWHELMING amount of stuff to support them, is based on Foreign policy.

As Tom Lehrer once said "Several million to put some clown on the moon". But that clown, as he stepped out of the Eagle, misquoting his lines, he also joined America in giving a wholeheated "Up Yours" to the Soviet Union.

RADAR is a wonderful thing; it can track objects with direction, range, speed etc. And the same principals exist in space. Suppose for a minute, that Nikita Khrushev is sitting drinking Vodka in the Kremlin. Science Adivisor burst in the door: "Comrade! The Capatalist dogs have faked a moon landing!". Say Khrushev had released the news, America would have mocked beyond belief, and heads at NASA and in the in Government would have rolled. We are therefore left with two possibilities:

1. NASA did land on the moon /phpBB/images/smiles/icon_biggrin.gif
2. The Soviets missed the perfect opportunity to spit on America. (Not likely in the late 60s)

The fact is, the Soviets tracked the mission from liftoff to touchdown. Forget the ** about the van Allen belts, about the flag, about the backgrounds: If there was no moon landing, the Soviets would have known about it from their blank radar screens.

Oh yes, I would be interested to know where the Appollo budget money went if it wasn't speed on R&D. And....And.....And..... Fools. All of them.

Peter B
2002-May-05, 08:18 AM
Jim

The sad thing about your logic (impeccable as it is) is that Hoax Believers have already covered this angle.

According to them, the USSR couldn't say anything about the landings being faked, because the USA supposedly had information about the hoaxes perpetrated by the USSR (Gagarin wasn't their first man in space, merely the first who survived, etc).

Sigh...

(BTW Jim, Rangers or Celtic?)

David Hall
2002-May-05, 12:23 PM
I thought it was because we bought off their silence with grain shipments.

2002-May-05, 02:01 PM
I don't really care much any longer
about what "earthLIngs" could do in the
Late 60's Early 70's. This is the Next
CENTURY already. Its what I can't do !
like read My Hard Drive parameters.
I don't even know how MANY parameters
?my? Hard Drives have.. oh sure I know
THEY have SIZE? i think this on {386} is
80 Meg devided up into C:D:E:F: but I call it
FED.C and while at Read & RIGHT . iits still Night ? 5:58 A.M. U see.

Jim_McBrearty
2002-May-05, 06:38 PM
On 2002-05-05 04:18, Peter B wrote:
Jim

The sad thing about your logic (impeccable as it is) is that Hoax Believers have already covered this angle.

According to them, the USSR couldn't say anything about the landings being faked, because the USA supposedly had information about the hoaxes perpetrated by the USSR (Gagarin wasn't their first man in space, merely the first who survived, etc).

Sigh...

(BTW Jim, Rangers or Celtic?)


Rangers or Celtic? You what! Scumbags the lot of them. My Dad's from Greenock and I support their team: Morton. I may be Catholic, but that doesn't mean I have to tie myself to those Irish Kling-ons (sorry for the pun)(and the rant /phpBB/images/smiles/icon_biggrin.gif)

Anyway, Communism in general had no respect for the individual, as shown through the Gulag; but would it have shocked America to know this through their space programs?

Anyway; how would we have non-stick frying pans if we hadn't gone to the moon?

The Bad Astronomer
2002-May-05, 06:43 PM
On 2002-05-03 14:31, Jim_McBrearty wrote:
I emailed this to Phil a while ago, but he probably didn't think it warranted admission on his scientifically minded site.

Did I reply to your email? I get a lot of mail, and my mailer is flaky. I lose a few every week.

Jim_McBrearty
2002-May-05, 07:00 PM
Lol - you never replied /phpBB/images/smiles/icon_frown.gif

Anyway, I didn't really expect a reply from Mr. Grand-Daddy Hoax Slayer /phpBB/images/smiles/icon_biggrin.gif Like writing off the President and expecting a reply I suppose.

CJSF
2002-May-06, 02:06 PM
Anyway; how would we have non-stick frying pans if we hadn't gone to the moon?


Teflon (http://www.dupont.com/teflon/newsroom/history.html) predates the "space-age".

CJSF

_________________
"Be very, very careful what you put into that head, because you will never,
ever get it out."
--Thomas Cardinal Wolsey (1471-1530)

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Christopher Ferro on 2002-05-06 10:07 ]</font>

SpacedOut
2002-May-06, 02:39 PM
On 2002-05-05 14:38, Jim_McBrearty wrote:
Anyway; how would we have non-stick frying pans if we hadn't gone to the moon?


From the article provided by Christopher Ferro:



...one thing is certain: PTFE revolutionized the plastics industry and, in turn, gave birth to limitless applications of benefit to mankind.


Maybe the question should have been “If we didn’t have non-stick frying pans how would we have gone to the moon?”

BTW – Chris, thanks for the info on Teflon – I never would have guessed 1938!!!

Jim_McBrearty
2002-May-06, 06:13 PM
I was ALMOST right...

temporary40
2002-May-13, 04:22 PM
I thought of something else:

In the mid-sixties we were spending billions of dollars on hoaxing the moon landing with huge sets, a soundstage at area 51, etc. We eventually realized that it would be far cheaper to hold the hoax on the moon itself, thus lending an air of realism to our version of the hoax. Since our hoax got completed under budget, (the moon with its 1/6 gravity makes it easier to do special effects) the Soviets gave up on their moon hoax and our hoax won the Moon Hoax Race.

The Rusty Lander
2002-May-14, 02:18 AM
I still find it hard to believe that no other country, especially Russia for the sake of its own national pride, has ever repeated the moon landing feat. And don't give me that argument about it costing too much money. I think that if it was really possible for a manned moon landing, money would be no object.

Kizarvexis
2002-May-14, 03:29 AM
On 2002-05-13 22:18, The Rusty Lander wrote:
I still find it hard to believe that no other country, especially Russia for the sake of its own national pride, has ever repeated the moon landing feat. And don't give me that argument about it costing too much money. I think that if it was really possible for a manned moon landing, money would be no object.


But they wouldn't be first. Can you name who took the silver medal in the 100 meter dash in the 1996 Olympics? Who cares, he came in second. Humans are about being first. Not to mention, Russia was trying very hard to keep up, but they had problems with hardware. The least of which was the explosion of the big rocket that was to take them to the moon.

Going to the moon was also very dangerous. Why do something that risky if you aren't going to be first? It could backfire and then the people in your country could call for your head for wasting the money.

Don't worry though. China is working on a manned space program. Rumors are that they want to go to the moon too. When they get close, I'm betting the American people get real interested in space again. /phpBB/images/smiles/icon_smile.gif

Kizarvexis
Besides a Japanese probe will photograph the moon in a few years. The resolution is supposed to be good enough to see the landing sites. You'll get your hard proof then, as if the proof now isn't hard enough. /phpBB/images/smiles/icon_smile.gif

edited for spelling


<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Kizarvexis on 2002-05-13 23:30 ]</font>

Peter B
2002-May-14, 03:39 AM
Rusty Lander

May I ask how old you are? Were you alive in the late 1960s or early 1970s? Do you understand what it was like to live in the world of the Cold War? Have you read any background material about why President Kennedy committed the USA to go to the Moon?

Never mind the "not because it is easy, but because it is hard" rhetoric. He ordered it because the USSR was winning one aspect of the Cold War. For whatever reason, the USSR's technology seemed to be more successful than America's, and Kennedy was determined to win a propaganda victory for the USA.

In other words, the initial decision to go to the Moon was PURELY political. That NASA was able to squeeze some science out of the whole project was a bonus.

The USSR joined the race because another propaganda victory would've been priceless, on top of Sputnik, Gagarin, Tereshkova and others. But when it looked like the USSR would be unable to beat the USA to the Moon, they said that they had never intended to go to the Moon, and golly, isn't it expensive to go there. We're concentrating instead on space stations, which are much cheaper and more useful. In other words, the USSR played politics, as would be appropriate in the cirsumstances - if I can't come first, I say I wasn't interested in running anyway.

If you look at the Moon landings in terms of Cold War propaganda, coming second is pointless.

Incidentally, if you read newspapers at the time, you'll find that about half the letters to the Editor regarding the Moon landings considered them a waste of money. It wouldn't surprise me if Soviet officials picked up on this opposition and based their own propaganda on it.

JayUtah
2002-May-14, 04:17 AM
especially Russia for the sake of its own national pride, has ever repeated the moon landing feat.

Um, Russia can barely afford the status quo for its current space program. Where are they going to find the money to develop a moon landing program? What other countries have those resources? Can you name them?

There is very little pride to repeating what someone else has done. Who was the second man to fly solo nonstop across the Atlantic?

And don't give me that argument about it costing too much money.

Why not? What's wrong with it?

I think that if it was really possible for a manned moon landing, money would be no object.

So you reject the argument on the grounds that you think it's false. Did I miss something?

It's more a matter of national will than of money. We spend $2 billion a day on the war on terror because that's what the American people want to spend their money on this year. I have no problem with the notion that Apollo was largely motivated by politics. And these days politics are different. And politics determines funding.

Conspiracy theorists like to simplify all those issues down to straw men. They want to believe it's purely a technical matter, or purely a financial matter.

JayUtah
2002-May-14, 04:31 AM
Going to the moon was also very dangerous. Why do something that risky if you aren't going to be first?

Or if there weren't something of value to obtain. We're in the process of mapping and remote-sensing the moon to see if there's any point to sending profitable manned expeditions.

The risk was considerable. Apollo hardware was never considered anything more than experimental technology. There were long-range plans to develop reliable Apollo technology, but public interest waned. The program was cut short partly because Apollo 13 frankly scared the bejeebers out of NASA. They wanted to quit while they were ahead.

Risk is one of the main reasons we won. We were willing to take more risk in terms of astronaut safety. The Soviet Union originally went to very unsafe lengths to achieve space records. Under Brezhnev there was a sort of backlash to that. He essentially mandated that a cosmonaut would not fly a mission until that mission had been accomplished by a fully automated spacecraft first. And the Soviets' inability to produce a fully automated lunar lander in time killed their efforts.

Additional factors included the untimely death of their chief designer Korolev, and the resulting stalling of the N-1 booster program.

The Apollo designers were perfectly happy with their accelerated development schedule, and the firm requirement that the Apollo equipment wouldn't have been able to land on the moon without its human crew.

So where do the Chinese fit in? They probably want an excuse to develop their technology. Great if you've got the money to do it. We developed our technology by going to the moon. We don't need to go back for that reason. The Russians found a different way to develop their technology, and they know it's on par with ours, so they've got nothing to prove. The Chinese don't have that luxury. They'll have to go through the same process we did -- although probably a bit faster -- to land a man on the moon.

David Hall
2002-May-14, 12:36 PM
I'd say the Chinese are doing it for a purely political purpose also. Of course they can't be first, but they can gain something else from a sucessful moon mission. What better way to say "See, we've joined the big boys now!" than with a very expensive and technically difficult space mission? The whole world would certainly sit up and take notice at that feat.

2002-May-14, 01:12 PM
<a name="20020514.5:00"> page 20020514.5:00 aka Oregon Governor
On 2002-05-14 08:36, David Hall wrote: To: ?
http://www.dailyemerald.com/archive/
So anyway in the 2 00 2 World political Sceenee
I posted my notice that I was a write in CAN-Date
in all 5 peimaries Red]=RepoCrat Or]LibREtarian Yell_0] Pacific
Green] Green {go figure?} Blue] Demo_in_Public_Kans
so far its been reported that only 6 million's$ have been raise
to keep me out? Now compare/contrast that to
My IBM 110 call that netted a 25Billion 240 million _-$-_ one week re$tatment of my IBM's worth[ political Boo.2'UO]