Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 30 of 106

Thread: How many years, until...

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jul 2021
    Posts
    99

    How many years, until...

    Another Apollo anniversary has come and gone. It has now been OVER HALF A CENTURY since man purportedly first set boots on the lunar surface. The argument can also be made, it has been OVER HALF A CENTURY since a human being has left earth's atmosphere.

    I am curious, for those who believe, how many years would have to eclipse without another human boot standing on the moon, for you to question the veracity of the Apollo moon lamding(s)?

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    Peters Creek, Alaska
    Posts
    14,254
    Are you making a claim, Ely? While the CT forum may be used for objective discussion, analyis, and questions regarding another someone else's CT claims, it is primarily intended for the presentation and defense of one's own CT claims. If you haven't already done so please read our rules, linked in my signature line below.
    Forum Rules►  ◄FAQ►  ◄ATM Forum Advice►  ◄Conspiracy Advice
    Click http://cosmoquest.org/forum/images/buttons/report-40b.png to report a post (even this one) to the moderation team.


    Man is a tool-using animal. Nowhere do you find him without tools; without tools he is nothing, with tools he is all. — Thomas Carlyle (1795-1881)

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    21,195
    Would never happen.
    I believe (non-avian) dinosaurs existed, and we haven't had any of them around the place for 65 million years.
    Elapsed time without something happening doesn't undo the evidence that it actually happened, when it happened.

    Grant Hutchison
    Science Denier and Government Sponsored Propagandist. Here to help.
    Blog

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    16,907
    Personally, I think art-nouveau-styled buildings are fake because nobody has built a new one in a while. [/sarcasm]
    The greatest journey of all time, for all to see
    Every mission makes our dreams reality
    And our destiny begins with you and me
    Through all space and time, the achievement of mankind
    As we sail the sea of discovery, on heroes’ wings we fly!

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jul 2021
    Posts
    99
    Quote Originally Posted by PetersCreek View Post
    Are you making a claim, Ely? While the CT forum may be used for objective discussion, analyis, and questions regarding another someone else's CT claims, it is primarily intended for the presentation and defense of one's own CT claims. If you haven't already done so please read our rules, linked in my signature line below.
    I have read the forum rules and the "advice" sections. I take them seriously and literally.

    I have made two claims in my original post. One is obvious and the second is, sans the purported Apollo missions, no human has ever been in "space".

    I apologize if this weekend I cannot answer, in what this forum subjectively classifies as, "a timely manner", even if it is under "Advice".

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    21,195
    Quote Originally Posted by Ely View Post
    I have read the forum rules and the "advice" sections. I take them seriously and literally.

    I have made two claims in my original post. One is obvious and the second is, sans the purported Apollo missions, no human has ever been in "space"
    So now you need to tell us why you would believe such things. The onus is on you to defend the claims.

    Grant Hutchison
    Science Denier and Government Sponsored Propagandist. Here to help.
    Blog

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Norfolk UK and some of me is in Northern France
    Posts
    10,114
    Half a century does not seem so long from my perspective, memory does not tag the date, more the emotional arousal. So I clearly remember watching the landings on television and marvelling not only on the rocketry, but the transmission of pictures. I was not alive for Marconi to send a crude signal across the Atlantic but I can imagine the excitement. My grandfather witnessed the first airplane to cross the English channel. I am pretty sure all these things really happened even though I was not there. Now I can talk to a friend the other side of the world, 12 hours away, on a communicator envisioned for a Startrek fiction about space travel. It’s partly personal evidence, partly consensus, partly an extrapolation of physical principles, partly consideration of the effort required to fake it. I doubt that I shall ever doubt the moon landings.
    sicut vis videre esto
    When we realize that patterns don't exist in the universe, they are a template that we hold to the universe to make sense of it, it all makes a lot more sense.
    Originally Posted by Ken G

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jul 2021
    Posts
    99
    The international space station, an obvious misnomer, contends with atmospheric drag. Is there atmospheric drag in space?

    Sans Apollo, has any human manned vehicle, not contended with atmospheric drag?

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Nowhere (middle)
    Posts
    39,923
    Quote Originally Posted by Ely View Post
    The international space station, an obvious misnomer, contends with atmospheric drag. Is there atmospheric drag in space?

    Sans Apollo, has any human manned vehicle, not contended with atmospheric drag?
    So you dispute the legal definition of space? Interesting choice.
    "I'm planning to live forever. So far, that's working perfectly." Steven Wright

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    21,195
    Quote Originally Posted by Ely View Post
    The international space station, an obvious misnomer, contends with atmospheric drag. Is there atmospheric drag in space?

    Sans Apollo, has any human manned vehicle, not contended with atmospheric drag?
    Yes, there's atmospheric drag in space. As a working definition, space is the region in which orbital dynamic forces predominate over aerodynamic forces, not the region in which aerodynamic forces are absent.
    People argue about the precise altitude, but there seems to be general agreement on the usefulness of the definition. There's quite a nice discussion here.

    And why do you believe Apollo did not land on the moon?

    Grant Hutchison
    Science Denier and Government Sponsored Propagandist. Here to help.
    Blog

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    Peters Creek, Alaska
    Posts
    14,254
    Quote Originally Posted by Ely View Post
    The international space station, an obvious misnomer, contends with atmospheric drag. Is there atmospheric drag in space?

    Sans Apollo, has any human manned vehicle, not contended with atmospheric drag?
    This post is as problematic as the first. If you you have claims to make, do so clearly and directly; support and defend them; and answer questions put to you. If you do not, this thread will be closed.
    Forum Rules►  ◄FAQ►  ◄ATM Forum Advice►  ◄Conspiracy Advice
    Click http://cosmoquest.org/forum/images/buttons/report-40b.png to report a post (even this one) to the moderation team.


    Man is a tool-using animal. Nowhere do you find him without tools; without tools he is nothing, with tools he is all. — Thomas Carlyle (1795-1881)

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Nowhere (middle)
    Posts
    39,923
    Quote Originally Posted by Ely View Post
    I have read the forum rules and the "advice" sections. I take them seriously and literally.

    I have made two claims in my original post. One is obvious and the second is, sans the purported Apollo missions, no human has ever been in "space".

    I apologize if this weekend I cannot answer, in what this forum subjectively classifies as, "a timely manner", even if it is under "Advice".
    The statement that "one is obvious" does not eliminate your obligation to explain all your claims. Spell it out, please.
    "I'm planning to live forever. So far, that's working perfectly." Steven Wright

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Jul 2021
    Posts
    99
    Declaratively and definitively, the ISS contends with, ATMOSPHERIC DRAG;

    https://space.stackexchange.com/ques...s-the-iss-drag

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Jul 2021
    Posts
    99
    Postscript; I apologize, I will be gone for a day, maybe two? Although forum rules and advice do not state what a , "timely manner" is, forewarned is forearmed.

    Please have patience.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    The Great NorthWet
    Posts
    17,512
    And nobody claims it doesn't. It has to get orbital reboosts occasionally because of it.
    Cum catapultae proscriptae erunt tum soli proscript catapultas habebunt.

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Nowhere (middle)
    Posts
    39,923
    Quote Originally Posted by Ely View Post
    Declaratively and definitively, the ISS contends with, ATMOSPHERIC DRAG;

    https://space.stackexchange.com/ques...s-the-iss-drag
    Yes. In space.

    The atmosphere has no sharp boundary, it trails off. May I ask, where do you personally draw the line? ISS is in orbit, that's good enough for me.
    "I'm planning to live forever. So far, that's working perfectly." Steven Wright

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    2,092
    Are implying that beause the ISS contends with atmospheric drag, it's not really in space?

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    20,572
    Quote Originally Posted by Noclevername View Post
    Yes. In space.

    The atmosphere has no sharp boundary, it trails off. May I ask, where do you personally draw the line? ISS is in orbit, that's good enough for me.
    Also, some molecules from Earth’s atmosphere naturally make it to the Moon and beyond, so if that’s your argument, you could say the astronauts on the Moon weren’t in space either. But it strikes me as a pointless argument.

    "The problem with quotes on the Internet is that it is hard to verify their authenticity." — Abraham Lincoln

    I say there is an invisible elf in my backyard. How do you prove that I am wrong?

    The Leif Ericson Cruiser

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Jul 2021
    Posts
    99
    Quote Originally Posted by Van Rijn View Post
    Also, some molecules from Earth’s atmosphere naturally make it to the Moon and beyond, so if that’s your argument, you could say the astronauts on the Moon weren’t in space either. But it strikes me as a pointless argument.
    Agreed, some atmospheric gasses can escape. Usually those gasses are hydrogen and helium released when a meteor creates a momentary passageway. Implying molecular escape is atmospheric is really, reductio ad absurdum.

  20. #20
    Join Date
    Jul 2021
    Posts
    99
    Quote Originally Posted by Superluminal View Post
    Are implying that beause the ISS contends with atmospheric drag, it's not really in space?
    I am not implying, it is a simple fact. Do you require a citation or three? Feel free to name any credible atmospheric journal, I'll post a citation from your choice of accredited atmospheric journal.

    Do you think the voyager probe is currently encountering Atmospheric drag?
    Last edited by Ely; 2021-Jul-31 at 06:23 AM. Reason: Add accredited

  21. #21
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Norfolk UK and some of me is in Northern France
    Posts
    10,114
    Quote Originally Posted by Ely View Post
    I am not implying, it is a simple fact. Do you require a citation or three? Feel free to name any credible atmospheric journal, I'll post a citation from your choice of accredited atmospheric journal.

    Do you think the voyager probe is currently encountering Atmospheric drag?
    You are not dealing with simple facts but semantics. Voyager is running into particles , hence drag, but we don’t usually call them an atmosphere, nor atmospheric drag. Drag is conventionally the force opposing the direction of motion. In an atmosphere there is form drag and skin friction drag. There can be other drag forces from EM, ES , gravity or gravity tidal effects too. Conventionally the particles in space are not regarded as an atmosphere. Definitions of space are pragmatic depending on context. The semantics game is just confusing, unless you have some point to make about atmospheres stretching between stars and the mass that represents , or something.
    sicut vis videre esto
    When we realize that patterns don't exist in the universe, they are a template that we hold to the universe to make sense of it, it all makes a lot more sense.
    Originally Posted by Ken G

  22. #22
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Posts
    1,358
    Quote Originally Posted by Ely View Post
    Agreed, some atmospheric gasses can escape. Usually those gasses are hydrogen and helium released when a meteor creates a momentary passageway. Implying molecular escape is atmospheric is really, reductio ad absurdum.
    A passageway through what? Do you think that there is some kind of physical barrier that keeps the atmosphere in?

  23. #23
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Nowhere (middle)
    Posts
    39,923
    Quote Originally Posted by Ely View Post
    I am not implying, it is a simple fact. Do you require a citation or three? Feel free to name any credible atmospheric journal, I'll post a citation from your choice of accredited atmospheric journal.

    Do you think the voyager probe is currently encountering Atmospheric drag?
    No one here has denied atmospheric drag! That's already been pointed out to you.

    What's contentious is your claim that this means orbiting bodies are not in space if they experience atmospheric drag. If they are in orbit at all, they are by definition in space.
    "I'm planning to live forever. So far, that's working perfectly." Steven Wright

  24. #24
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    21,195
    Not that it will change the internationally agreed boundaries between aeronautics and astronautics, but there's an obvious question for Ely at this point:

    Ely, if you don't accept the Kármán line as a functional definition of where space begins, what is your definition?

    And as a follow-up question: Ely, why should we accept any definition of yours, in preference to Theodore von Kármán's?

    Grant Hutchison
    Science Denier and Government Sponsored Propagandist. Here to help.
    Blog

  25. #25
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    The beautiful north coast (Ohio)
    Posts
    50,857
    Quote Originally Posted by Ely View Post
    <SNIP>
    I am curious, for those who believe, how many years would have to eclipse without another human boot standing on the moon, for you to question the veracity of the Apollo moon lamding(s)?
    Ely, two questions for you. The first question is much more important.

    Do you believe the Apollo astronauts landed on the Moon?

    What does the discussion about where the atmosphere ends have to do with that?
    At night the stars put on a show for free (Carole King)

    All moderation in purple - The rules

  26. #26
    Join Date
    Jul 2021
    Posts
    99
    Quote Originally Posted by grant hutchison View Post
    Not that it will change the internationally agreed boundaries between aeronautics and astronautics, but there's an obvious question for Ely at this point:

    Ely, if you don't accept the Kármán line as a functional definition of where space begins, what is your definition?

    And as a follow-up question: Ely, why should we accept any definition of yours, in preference to Theodore von Kármán's?

    Grant Hutchison
    So you do not accept NASA's 50 mile (80km) requirement for space/astronaut wings? Which infers "planes" can fly into space.

    https://www.nasa.gov/home/hqnews/200...s_honored.html

    You do not accept the FAA's interpretation of "space"?

    https://www.space.com/faa-commercial...gs-rule-change

    Not to mention, attempts to lower the altitude to as low as 18 miles? Obviously there is no consensus on where "space" space begins. I am not even positive, Karman, thought "space" began there. His calculations were mostly about where lift was insufficient and orbital velocity would be required. Also, his work was used, at the time, to create international treaties.

    I believe, space begins where atmosphere ends...

  27. #27
    Join Date
    Jul 2021
    Posts
    99
    Coincidentally, it is now OVER HALF A CENTURY, since NASA first purportedly flew to the moon, unloaded a rover with the wheelbase of a mid size car, drove around on the lunar surface, caught some rad air while wearing home made space suits, played a little golf, loaded ~100lbs of lunar rock into the capsule and went home.

    Now, OVER HALF A CENTURY LATER, NASA can't even transport a human into low earth orbit.

  28. #28
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    21,195
    Quote Originally Posted by Ely View Post
    I believe, space begins where atmosphere ends...
    And where is that, exactly?

    Grant Hutchison
    Science Denier and Government Sponsored Propagandist. Here to help.
    Blog

  29. #29
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    21,195
    Quote Originally Posted by Ely View Post
    Coincidentally, it is now OVER HALF A CENTURY, since NASA first purportedly flew to the moon, unloaded a rover with the wheelbase of a mid size car, drove around on the lunar surface, caught some rad air while wearing home made space suits, played a little golf, loaded ~100lbs of lunar rock into the capsule and went home.

    Now, OVER HALF A CENTURY LATER, NASA can't even transport a human into low earth orbit.
    Writing it in capital letters doesn't make it any more relevant.

    Grant Hutchison
    Science Denier and Government Sponsored Propagandist. Here to help.
    Blog

  30. #30
    Join Date
    Jul 2021
    Posts
    99
    Grant, all caps may not make it more relevant but it does add humor. For me, and others like me.

    I have no issues answering your questions, even though in a CT forum that obligation is recommended but not required. So before I do, why do you not answer my questions?

    I believe in the universal truths of science. Obviously, the Karman line would not be universally true. However, the statement, "where atmosphere ends, space begins", would be universally true. Do you believe in universal truths?
    Last edited by Ely; 2021-Aug-01 at 07:24 PM. Reason: Oxford comma

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •