PDA

View Full Version : What if they are correct?



odysseus0101
2002-Jan-24, 09:43 PM
I'm not sure where to place this post, so I'm putting it here. It includes more than moon hoax stuff, so I didn't think it belonged in that category. My apologies if I have chosen poorly.

I was reading some of today's posts and I started wondering how things would be different if moon hoax believers (both of the "we didn't go" and "military base on far side of the moon" variety), and alien conspiracy believers were actually correct.

Here are a few preliminary thoughts, not intended to be at all complete:

1) What if we actually never sent manned missions to the moon, and the whole thing was a hoax? NASA would be embarrassed, history books would have to be changed, and if the moon rocks were faked then we would have to throw out a great deal of the knowledge we claim to have about the moon. Of course, if the rocks are real, having been retrieved by a robotic mission, then the revisions required in our moon knowledge are substantially less. Other than these three pretty minor things, nothing much changes. We still have the advantage of all the NASA spin-off science and technology from the period (although now that sci/tech had its origins in the creation of a hoax rather than the completion of a successful Apollo program). The world wouldn't really be any different. It seems to me, at least at this point, that the major stakes in disproving lunar conspiracy theories are pride in NASA's achievements and the debunking of flawed reasoning and misinformation. If we all just stipulated the accuracy of the hoaxers' arguments, the rest of humanity probably wouldn't know or care, and nothing much would change.

2) What if the US does have a military base on the far side of the moon? Great! I would be very happy to know that the US military has a presence on the moon, thus giving us a truly survivable second-strike nuclear capability (even better than SSBNs). This is especially important given the continued quantitative and qualitative growth of China's strategic nuclear arsenal. The existence of such a base would not have to be divulged to the general public in order for it to have a deterrent effect. High-level diplomatic channels can be used to convey this information. The spin-off technology from such a moonbase would also be wonderful.

3) What if Apollo astronauts (or whoever)did actually see (or meet with) aliens, and have been hiding that fact for all these years? Great! That information probably should be hidden, given the sort of behavior most peoply display upon, for example, hearing that their favorite sports team has just won a championship. The general population should never be made aware of such a massive discovery because most people would simply go crazy, but the scientific advantages of such contact are likely to be amazing.

I would really like to hear your thoughts on these and other topics.

Silas
2002-Jan-24, 10:42 PM
I think the most serious thing that would follow such revelations is that we would all be forced to reassess our trust in our fellow man. It would reveal something about human nature itself.

I also suspect that the "pseudo-science" loonies -- I mean the REALLY loony ones, like hollow earthers, would consider themselves validated. At the same time, a lot of good kids would be dissuaded from studying science, since "It's all fake; everything is fake; who cares?" (As if that feeling isn't already too prevalent!)

It would propel us into a new (although small) Dark Age of Ignorance.

(Sigh... There's a lot of money to be made from ignorance...)

Silas

Wiley
2002-Jan-25, 12:03 AM
On 2002-01-24 16:43, odysseus0101 wrote:
We still have the advantage of all the NASA spin-off science and technology from the period (although now that sci/tech had its origins in the creation of a hoax rather than the completion of a successful Apollo program).


Au Contraire! Your so called NASA spin-off science is really technology stolen from the aliens living on the moon. /phpBB/images/smiles/icon_wink.gif

ljbrs
2002-Jan-25, 01:10 AM
It would propel us into a new (although small) Dark Age of Ignorance.

(Sigh... There's a lot of money to be made from ignorance...)

Silas


I find the hoaxers pathetically ignorant. To be like that would be so very sad. They are more to be pitied than censured, because they are missing out on all of the fun in life. The money made from all of this silliness seems to go contrary to the enjoyment of life. Very, very sad...

ljbrs /phpBB/images/smiles/icon_frown.gif /phpBB/images/smiles/icon_cry.gif /phpBB/images/smiles/icon_frown.gif

AstroMike
2002-Jan-25, 04:08 AM
ljbrs: I find the hoaxers pathetically ignorant. To be like that would be so very sad.

Agreed. Will they ever wake up and smell the tea? And look at the mountain of evidence that Apollo did get to the Moon, and getting it from an historian's point of view.

2002-Jan-25, 04:12 AM
I pick up from the string
"3) What if Apollo as"
"with) aliens, and ha"
That as my position i'll say I for 1 do NOT
rule out the existance of ET's
abd `poise furthor that there may be some
here in this port city. It seams to me that
the fundimantal characturistic of the is VOICE
although the {i'll call them Clone's}
I find the hoaxers pathetically ignorant. To be like that would be so very sad. They are more to be pitied than censured, because they are missing out on all of the fun in life. The money made from all of this silliness seems to go contrary to the enjoyment of life. Very, very sad...
come in all sizes shapes and configurations
the VOICE {lack of notabel accent's} seams
universally genaric. as if the VOCALS were
not easy programed and one program chip was all no mater what the Clone form? HU?b''

Chip
2002-Jan-25, 04:45 AM
On 2002-01-24 16:43, odysseus0101 wrote:

1) What if we actually never sent manned missions to the moon, and the whole thing was a hoax?.....Of course, if the rocks are real, having been retrieved by a robotic mission, then the revisions required in our moon knowledge are substantially less.....If we all just stipulated the accuracy of the hoaxers' arguments, the rest of humanity probably wouldn't know or care, and nothing much would change.


Chip: The evidence is overwhelming that human beings actually went to the moon. A robotic rock retrieval mission would be technologically very difficult to do in those days. I do however favor a robot lunar rover that can be controlled from Earth. That would be fun! It would need a long “battery life” so we could send it over many kilometers into different terrain. It would probably not cost as much as the Apollo program did. Checkout the Bad Astronomer's Moon hoax page on this subject elsewhere on this website. /phpBB/images/smiles/icon_wink.gif



odysseus0101:

2) What if the US does have a military base on the far side of the moon? Great! I would be very happy to know that the US military has a presence on the moon, thus giving us a truly survivable second-strike nuclear capability (even better than SSBNs).....The spin-off technology from such a moonbase would also be wonderful.


Chip: Who wants to increase nuclear arms?
Anyway, the US military functions very well on Earth. A conventional aircraft as well as
missiles are actually far more accurate and less expensive than the enormous technological problems with launching weapons from the moon, and building a base there in lower gravity.
I would favor a small science base on the moon some day. A lunar version of science stations in Antarctica.



odysseus0101:

3) What if Apollo astronauts (or whoever) did actually see (or meet with) aliens, and have been hiding that fact for all these years? Great!.....the scientific advantages of such contact are likely to be amazing.
I would really like to hear your thoughts on these and other topics.


Chip:
If aliens want to meet us, and they came all this way, maybe lightyears, why not come just a few more miles to the Earth rather than stop short on our moon?

If we're very lucky, we'll probably discover microbial life off the Earth long before we discover intelligent life in the galaxy. Anyway, all the amazing aviation technology you might read about in new books and flying magazines was developed on Earth by human beings during and long after World War II, and is not the result of an alien spinoff. In fact, current technology by it’s historical evolution runs counter to the idea of an alien influence.

Argos
2002-Jan-25, 09:39 AM
2) What if the US does have a military base on the far side of the moon?


I would like best a scientific base. Lets keep the Moon sound. Let our children grow in a peaceful universe.

ChallegedChimp
2002-Jan-25, 12:13 PM
Take this from the peanut galley from the guy working his fabulous new "grass stalk mark II" into the termite mound for lunch. My take , not that it matter, is:

History wouldn't change much. Some new paragraphs on 1969 and 2002 would be added. If we couldn't get to the moon then, we sure as heck could today. Moot point, I know, since we did get there.

A military base on the moon....nope. As anyone knows, it is a heckuva lot easier to kill your enemies up close than it is from far away. Launching a missle from 300K would give the bad guys a lot of time to evacuate. Our conventional weapons do the job, and our large nuclear armory means no one would want to invite a response. Even the Taliban begged for us not to nuke them as soon as 911 happened (when it most likely could have happened had cooler heads not prevailed). The only launches we want coming from the moon and space exploration ones (that reduced gravity sure help;s on the fuel bills, but we have to figure out how to do that) Building a base on the moon would literally stagger the US economy.

Aliens? If they are here and have met with us, would have gotten past Einstein's universal speed limit somehow. Either way, if they are only 1000 years ahead of us, think about the world's technology circa 1002 CE vs 2002 CE. What do think humanity will be using come 3002 CE? Nah, if the aliens are amonst us, we'd never know it (but then again cats are something suspicious anyways /phpBB/images/smiles/icon_smile.gif )

But in a hostile universe that, other than Earth, seems hellbent on being against life, I would rule nothing out. Till then I'll go back to my Stalk Mk 2.

David Hall
2002-Jan-25, 01:24 PM
Nice post, Chimp. I agree that in the looong run, such a thing would be mostly a footnote in history, but I'm sure it would cause a huge stir in the short-term, both politcally and scientifically.

Any discovery of falsified data puts everything it relates to out of whack. As a slightly tangenital case-in-point, a couple of years ago here in Japan it was discovered that a prominent archeologist had faked several of his findings. As a result, much of what had been accepted in Japanese pre-history has been put into doubt. I believe they are still suffering from the fallout effects even now.

That was all caused by just one man. Something with the size and impact of the Moon landings would probably take years to sort out--if ever. The domino effect would be quite sizable.

I agree about the military base idea too. Only the most far-fetched science fiction reasoning can even begin to justify such an endeavor. And I truly doubt such a thing could be kept secret anyway. I mean, strange coded radio messages originating from the lunar surface and an earth-bound infrastructure capable of maintaining such a project would be impossible to hide.

How much have we advanced in 1000 years? Heck, how about how far we've come in just the last century?! The 100th anniversary of the Wright brothers' first flight isn't until next year. And the pace of technological progress seems to even be accellerating. Actually, I'm pretty heartened by some of the recent progress. Many things are not only getting better and faster, but also less stressful on the environment. I'm talking especially about new manufacturing techniques and the like. I say, bring on progress!

I've got to disagree with your assertion that aliens would have had to have FTL travel though. Who's to say what an alien species would be capable of?

For example, I just finished rereading Larry Niven's "Protector", and his signature alien travelled to Earth from the galactic core, having a lifespan of hundreds of thousands of years and an ability to focus on one task for weeks or months at a time. Other writers have also had aliens who travel at N-space speeds (A.C. Clarke comes to mind).

Now, as for cats, they are from a bit closer to us: http://www.catsarefrommars.com/index.html
(With thanks to the person who gave us this link) /phpBB/images/smiles/icon_smile.gif /phpBB/images/smiles/icon_smile.gif

And hey, I've been using a Grass Stalk Mk. I for a while now, but it keeps getting bent out of shape on those hard mound walls. The grip also leaves a little to be desired. Do you think it would be worth my while to upgrade? /phpBB/images/smiles/icon_biggrin.gif

odysseus0101
2002-Jan-25, 04:31 PM
A quick clarification on my original post, just to make sure that we are all on the same page: I don't believe a word of what I said in that post. Apollo DID actually reach the moon, more than once. There is NO base anywhere on the moon. Humanity is NOT in contact with any aliens (except that one ex-girlfriend, who is decidedly not from Earth).

I'd also like to make a quick mention of the military moonbase thing. As I just said, I am certain that there is NO base of any sort on the moon. That said, there is actually a pretty decent Cold War-era argument for putting a nuke-laden military base on the moon. US nuclear deterrence theory was based on the principle of Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD), the idea that even if country X launches all its nukes at the US and destroys the US, the US has the ability to respond with a second and even third strike. Our second strike's missiles actually pass the incoming missiles in mid-air, so that both countries are destroyed. This has a deterrent effect because other countries know that even if they kill us we still kill them. This raised the issue of the sabotage of nuclear facilities immediately before a nuclear strike, or the destruction of such facilities during a conventional war, before it escalates to a nuclear war. These issues led to a consideration of "force survivability," that is, the dispersement and protection of nuclear forces so that there is no way the enemy could surprise the US and wipe out its second strike MAD capability. That is why the US developed its 'Nuclear Triad' of bombers, land-based missles (ICBMs, IRBMs, SRBMs, etc.), and submarine-based missiles (SLBMs). Certainly all of these options are more effective that trying to launch a nuclear strike from the moon, but given the great importance placed on force survivability and the ability to deliver post-nuclear attack counter-strikes (even after most of the surface of the Earth has been fried to a crispy golden brown), one can easily see how military planners would consider the moon a potential option. The form taken by a moon-based nuclear strike would probably not include missles launched form the moon, but rather piloted vehicles that would deploy their weapons in the upper atmosphere. Sure, it would take a couple days to get to earth, but that is the whole idea behind MAD. Even after all warring states (and most other states) have been destroyed, there is still another attack on the way because it has survived.

That said, let me re-iterate that I am completely certain that there is NO base of any sort on the moon.

Kaptain K
2002-Jan-25, 04:48 PM
First of all, I agree that there is no moonbase of any kind. But FWIW, it is not necessary to put nukes on the Moon to have a delayed strike capability. "All" you need is a solar powered catapult capabile of accelerating a 100 tons of rock to 1.6 mi/sec (lunar escape velocity). 100 tons @ 7 MPS (Earth terminal velocity) gives a "blast yield" of about 5 Ktons w/o nasty side effects such as radiation and fallout.
See "The Moon is a Harsh Mistress" by Robert A. Heinlein (The source of my signature.).

ChallegedChimp
2002-Jan-25, 05:01 PM
First David /phpBB/images/smiles/icon_smile.gif

On historical impact, you are gosh darn right there would be many, many, many monkeys screamin here in the short term, I was going off the larger historical impact of many moons from now. As a historian, I sure as heck hope the Monica word will be slowly but surely eradicated from US history in the course of many generations /phpBB/images/smiles/icon_smile.gif The good thing is, when it comes to astronomical data, there are a lot of smart orangutans with big bulging brains out there looking over the data (that is why we know the moonshot wasn't a hoax), but when it comes to human history, it can be reguraly reinvented depending on which nation state is in charge (ie... might makes right and he who wins writes history.

Aliens without FTL? Ack...you just made my neat orderly trekkie based view of the universe at large go into chaos. Non FTL aliens I think would be of the Independance Day variety. IE we just got here, took a long darn time, and guess what? You got what we need. Larry Nivens Protector? Sounds like a good read and I'll take a gander at it.

As for the link.... ROFLMAO! That'll keep me in stitches for days...

Odysseus0101... I never took your post as you saying we believed in a base there on the cheese. You went into the what if mode, and I kinda tried to remain chimplogical on it. Besides,at least in my country the USA, I do believe my government to be sneaky enough to have nuke launch sites placed in other areas besides the US mainland and old European bases. China doesnt have the sufficient nuclear capability to eradicate all our homeland, neither does any other nuclear power besides the old USSR. Just like 911 and 127, they might hit us when we ain't looking and bloody our nose a bit, but no-one has the capability to completely catch us offguard and eradicate us without us getting in our payback return salvos. If you want second strike capabilities, I got three words for you: " Trident nuclear submarines". Them bad boys ARE second, third, fourth, etc power return strikers. /phpBB/images/smiles/icon_smile.gif
Logic says a sub surfacing 50 miles off your coast with a payload of nukes will do a good bit o damage a heckuva lot quicker than striking from 300K out.
Scary ain't it?

But thankfully, we actually gotten past the primal scream of our forebears and do try to reason things out afore making the world glow in the dark. /phpBB/images/smiles/icon_smile.gif (no offense was meant in anything typed, I tried to do it in the cheerful and upbeat manner that I am, but we humans do lose so much of our non verbal skills whenst typing... inflection, tone, body language and all that whatnot)

Azpod
2002-Jan-25, 08:41 PM
Great, great thread! I would preface this by saying that nothing I am about to say is true, blah, blah, blah. But I won't. It's all true. Face it. Cats do come from Mars, they have a base on the Moon to take us all over, we made contact with them via the holograms we send in place of real astronauts, and the US govt is in league with them.

If you had met my cat, you'd believe all of that, too.

Seriously, I wanted to address the idea of non-FTL aliens visiting the Earth. If FTL travel is impossible, it is entirely possible than an extra-terrestrial intelligence could be in the form of machines. Such machines could visit a star system, build more machines there and spread to other star systems. Such a system would have exploration as the primary purpose, not conquest.

That said, it is entirely possible that one or more alien species may have machines on the Moon facing the Earth or in Earth orbit, and we would have no way of detecting them. They wouldn't have to resort to FTL travel (especially if the species is billions of years old); they would likely be only a few bacterium in size, and they could be sending an ultra-perfect laser to communicate with their homeworld.

If that were the case, when would they opt for first contact? Likely never. There would be no need, because by the time we have the ability to approach any systems that they inhabit, we would be the ones that would have to initiate the contact, not them.

How many probes could there be watching and studying us? There could be a probe for every star system in the galaxy. There could be none.

odysseus0101
2002-Jan-25, 08:53 PM
Odysseus0101... I never took your post as you saying we believed in a base there on the cheese. You went into the what if mode, and I kinda tried to remain chimplogical on it. Besides,at least in my country the USA, I do believe my government to be sneaky enough to have nuke launch sites placed in other areas besides the US mainland and old European bases. China doesnt have the sufficient nuclear capability to eradicate all our homeland, neither does any other nuclear power besides the old USSR. Just like 911 and 127, they might hit us when we ain't looking and bloody our nose a bit, but no-one has the capability to completely catch us offguard and eradicate us without us getting in our payback return salvos. If you want second strike capabilities, I got three words for you: " Trident nuclear submarines". Them bad boys ARE second, third, fourth, etc power return strikers. /phpBB/images/smiles/icon_smile.gif
Logic says a sub surfacing 50 miles off your coast with a payload of nukes will do a good bit o damage a heckuva lot quicker than striking from 300K out.
Scary ain't it?


I wasn't totally certain if some people thought I meant I actually believed in moon bases and hoaxes, so I thought I'd just re-iterate those points in general. E-mail's always tough that way...no paralinguistic cues.

If no one minds, I'd like to continue talking about this nuclear issue, just because it's one of the things I do. I'll do it in point form, so it's quicker to read:

1) While to you and me today a nuclear moonbase doesn't seem necessary, the Defense Dept. of the 60s and 70s was a whole different world. Maybe I'll put in a FOIA request for documents dealing with this, because I'm sure it at least crossed the minds of the JCS at some point.

2) While the current US SSBN of choice, the Ohio Class, is the undisputed master of the ocean, basically completely undetectable, Cold War nuclear deterrence planners were always trying to find new ways to deploy nukes so that the US deterrent force would be as diversified as possible. And for much of the 60s and 70s there was US concern that Soviet submarine technology was outpacing our own, such that our SSBN force could become vulnerable. It turns out that there wasn't much to that fear, but at the time... Interesting bit of trivia on the Ohio Class - each sub carries more firepower than all the munitions fired by all the countries in WWII.

3) While at this point China does not present a major nuclear threat to the US, current published Defense Dept. estimates (backed up by private reports) indicate that with at its current enhanced rate of growth China will have achieved nuclear parity with the US within 10-15 years. While their force is unlikely to be as survivable as ours by that point, mostly given their severe lack of submarine technology for the foreseeable future, this isn't a gamble that nuclear deterrence strategists like to take.

4) In reference to Kaptain K's awesome point about firing a big rock - I think I heard something about this as an idea to move a huge asteroid off of a collision course with the Earth. It was called a "mass engine" andwas proposed as one possibility (if we got there fast enough). The idea was that by firing large chunks off the asteroid we would simultaeously change its direction and its mass. It seemed plausible to me, but then again I have no idea about any of this astrophysics stuff.