Jump to content
nolram

IBMs 50th aniversary moon exhibit has our 2600!!

Recommended Posts

True dat. As much as I cling to the notions of silk scarves and steely eyed missile men, even I have to admit that the reality of space exploration lies in on the ground research, hardware manufacturing developments, and robotic probes. Space and time are inhospitable to organic life, at least until we develop technologies far beyond what we're capable of for the foreseeable future. More likely artificial intelligence will replace us before we accomplish the maturity to go beyond a few nearby rocks. That still shouldn't stop us from learning enough to protect our feeble selves from smaller rocks in the neighborhood getting thrown at us.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Keatah said:

Space is hard. Space currently requires a lot of people teaming together. And this means the reasons for doing space must be true to the heart and soul. The heart and soul of exploration and discovery.

 

The Mercury Gemini Apollo stuff happened because of political posturing and one-upmanship. NOT because of true-to-the-heart reasons of discovery. Getting to the moon was solely to beat the Russians. Science was a 2nd afterthought. Once we won the race there was no reason to keep running it. And that is why the space program has been low-key ever since.

 

Not only that but space attracts a lot of dreamy eyed idealists. The public masses aren't interested in those idealists' objectives. The public drowns itself in petty distractions with a vengeance.

 

Your average kid today (leader of tomorrow) is more interested in Dua Lipa and Miley Cyruss and collecting likes on social media. And the young men of today are too interested in doing funky non-functional mods to their cars rather than looking up with a telescope.

 

So, in other words, you admit to trolling, with your previous comments.  Great.

 

But nobody landed on the dark side of the moon either, right?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, JBerel said:

There's no controversy, just whack jobs and wing nuts as there will always be since we stopped letting them get eaten first. Hubble can't due to it's optics, but it's been done. Empty headed nutters will simply continue denying reality though. If not for their insistence on piecing together some delusional realities to feel special, insightful or a bizarre interpretation of intelligent, they would have little else to give them any self esteem.  

 

https://www.skyandtelescope.com/observing/how-to-see-all-six-apollo-moon-landing-sites/

17229073722_0325e33482_o.jpg

You paint with a broad brush, i.e., that everyone who disagrees with you is a whack job or a wing nut.  But if there was little else to be garnered from these ultra-resource intensive and highly expensive moon missions other than more and more piles of geologically similar rocks, why was it necessary to keep returning so many times?  You don't have even an infinitesimal iota of suspicion about that?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you're taking a position of willful ignorance in denying the Moon landing, then this will be my only response to you, as engaging with such deliberate absence of critical thought is completely pointless. I have asked no one to agree with me on what facts are. Fact are facts, which you can agree with or bury your head and pretend don't exist. 

 

We've done pretty much everything we have in space for the same reasons humans do pretty much anything. To prove we could, to flex our might, because it felt good, because we had to survive, to learn something, and at times to make money. Six successful missions hardly even demonstrated competency. I could lay out a thousands arguments why it being faked is laughable, most notably because it requires everyone, including Russia to be in on it. But, that's a pointless exercise with a person who's goal is self indulgent narcissism rather than rational discussion. 

 

I have interviewed multiple astronauts in my broadcast days. I have witnessed, and felt the heat of rocket and shuttle launches from the press area 1 mile from the pad. I regularly use satellite technology. I have been part of a hobby group who bounced a laser off instruments left on the moon. I can see man made satellites on the horizon with my bare eyes. I can deduce, reason, and display congnitive functions without another person's permission or agreement. I can't help you, and have no desire to try.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To quote Apollo 17 astronaut Harrison Schmitt who I was privileged to meet a few decades ago: “If people decide they’re going to deny the facts of history and the facts of science and technology, there’s not much you can do with them. For most of them, I just feel sorry that we failed in their education.”

 

I also interviewed Alan Shepard back in the day, and he was much more on point about these people, but far less generous and diplomatic. Funny as hell, but not diplomatic.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, NostAlgae37 said:

why was it necessary to keep returning so many times?

 

To map the globe?  They just went to check out the other side of the moon, why not?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, JBerel said:

To quote Apollo 17 astronaut Harrison Schmitt who I was privileged to meet a few decades ago: “If people decide they’re going to deny the facts of history and the facts of science and technology, there’s not much you can do with them. For most of them, I just feel sorry that we failed in their education.”

 

I also interviewed Alan Shepard back in the day, and he was much more on point about these people, but far less generous and diplomatic. Funny as hell, but not diplomatic.

I recall Buzz Aldrin doesn't really have a high opinion of these people either. Too bad I can't find a video of him punching somebody.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Bakasama said:

I recall Buzz Aldrin doesn't really have a high opinion of these people either. Too bad I can't find a video of him punching somebody.

 

I just wish everyone who talks shit about the moon landings could have the chance to tell Mr. Aldrin to his face that they don't believe he walked on the moon. Well, as long as at least one other person is there to film it so we can all watch and rewatch the video of Buzz punching them in the head. Preferably once for each time they talked shit about him, the space program as a whole and all it's amazing accomplishments. Even in his advanced age I'm sure the little bitches who deny the moon landings wouldn't be able to handle even a single one of the well deserved shots in the head from Mr. Aldrin.

 

EDIT: The video you where looking for is aptly titled "Buzz Aldrin Punches Asshole" on YouTube :)

 

 

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I never got to meet Dr. Aldrin, but I was always a fan of him punching these dweebs. Little known trivia; Anyone who's set foot on the moon gets a little gold card that authorizes them to do that and a number of other things. You didn't hear it from me, but if you're ever having lunch in the same room with any of them, be sure to hide your pudding cups.

  • Like 2
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, CPUWIZ said:

So, in other words, you admit to trolling, with your previous comments.  Great.

 

A little sarcasm to rile the conspiracy theorists.. why not?

 

 

3 hours ago, CPUWIZ said:

But nobody landed on the dark side of the moon either, right?

Wrong. I'm sure a Chinese lander is there. As are all the the Apollo sites and Surveyors and Ranger debris and S-IVB debris. Even the crashed LM ascent stages.

 

The "darkside" is misnomer. Any one point on the Moon's surface is going to see 14 days of daylight and 14 days of night, more or less. I did not bother to check the precise timing.

 

That is because it's tidally locked and the orbital path takes about 28 days to do a complete circle. In other words it rotates on axis very slowly. And has day/night cycles like any other planet.

 

The landings were chosen at time when the Sun was lower on the horizon instead of it being exactly overhead. If it was overhead, there would be little contrast & contour relief and craters would not be visible. Especially if you were right inside one.

 

 

Edited by Keatah

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, NostAlgae37 said:

 But if there was little else to be garnered from these ultra-resource intensive and highly expensive moon missions other than more and more piles of geologically similar rocks, why was it necessary to keep returning so many times?

 

Missions 12-20 were about inertia and science. It naturally took time to wind down from the early missions. You just don't flip a switch and turn everything off instantly. The J-missions were about technology development and had a 3 day stay on the surface. 18-20 were canceled because direction of the space program had changed. The race was won and Space Stations, Shuttle, and Colonies were the focus.

 

We learned they rocks were geologically similar because we returned several times. 5 Missions was enough to prove that.

 

They DID want to go to the farside. But budgetary constraints axed it. And the farside is different.

Edited by Keatah

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/20/2019 at 12:32 AM, Andrew Davie said:

There is a brilliant youtube 'series' I've been following over the past few weeks showing the restoration of an Apollo Guidance Computer (AGC). Aside from the amazingly brilliant guys doing this restoration, it's really interesting to learn about the computer technology and how it worked. Artefacts from the moon program like the AGC are still around and functional today (they ran code on it from the Apollo program of 1960s, including - and this is the amazing bit - recovering from core memory what the display was showing when it was last switched off probably in the early 1970s). The amount of work involved in developing this stuff back in the 1960s is staggering.
 

 

 

Supposedly this is supposed to be the only functional AGC in existence. Well what about all the capsules that returned the men? Didn't they have AGC units in them? Yes. And I don't see why they wouldn't be functional with minimal restoration and repair? Afterall, they were were working right up to the last minutes of the mission. AND they would have all their memory and flight software intact. And of course Snoopy's unit is likely functional too! Mmm...

 

To see what was involved in making one of the these units see this. Especially toward the middle.

 

And for more check:

https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=mit+science+reporter

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's true the "Tone" key of the internet doesn't work and the "Sarcasm Detector" can be spotty...And some people haven't gotten the Update to the Satire app...

 

And not everyone has a dry or sardonic sense of humor, but, long story short (too late, I know) I took Keatah's very first "fake" comment to be very tongue in cheek.  I didn't see how it could be anything but a joke.  I realize that since a few flat earthers have crawled from the rubble, that suddenly we're cautious...But I think he unintentionally ruffled a few feathers then just ran with it.  It would have made for great television, if we weren't on the internet...

 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/31/2019 at 12:18 PM, JBerel said:

There's no controversy, just whack jobs and wing nuts as there will always be since we stopped letting them get eaten first. Hubble can't due to it's optics, but it's been done. Empty headed nutters will simply continue denying reality though. If not for their insistence on piecing together some delusional realities to feel special, insightful or a bizarre interpretation of intelligent, they would have little else to give them any self esteem.  

 

https://www.skyandtelescope.com/observing/how-to-see-all-six-apollo-moon-landing-sites/

17229073722_0325e33482_o.jpg

Those photos are unrecognizable to the point you have to want to believe - I couldn't sell those as legitimate in a Science Fiction story, and Science Fiction fans tend to have an excellent imagination. 

 

For those able to visually recogize the tiny objects in those pictures, what do you think of these two pictures that show easily recognizable objects from space:

 

The great Pyramid in Egypt is on the left with the shadow from the sun clearly shown - the Pyramid on the right looks exactly the same - the angles and the shape match, even the shadows match.

 

It seems to me the explanation the shadow is really an "extra side" and that objects of that size and precise geometric dimensions can get created by sandstorms should be equally applicable to the great Pyramid in Egypt. 

 

PyramidsViewedFromSpace.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, CPUWIZ said:

 

 

But nobody landed on the dark side of the moon either, right?

 

Pink Floyd did.

 

 

 

 

I crack myself up 😈

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, GoldLeader said:

 

Pink Floyd did.

 

 

 

 

and Syd Barrett never made it back :(

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Keatah said:

 

A little sarcasm to rile the conspiracy theorists.. why not?

 

 

Wrong. I'm sure a Chinese lander is there. As are all the the Apollo sites and Surveyors and Ranger debris and S-IVB debris. Even the crashed LM ascent stages.

 

The "darkside" is misnomer. Any one point on the Moon's surface is going to see 14 days of daylight and 14 days of night, more or less. I did not bother to check the precise timing.

 

That is because it's tidally locked and the orbital path takes about 28 days to do a complete circle. In other words it rotates on axis very slowly. And has day/night cycles like any other planet.

 

The landings were chosen at time when the Sun was lower on the horizon instead of it being exactly overhead. If it was overhead, there would be little contrast & contour relief and craters would not be visible. Especially if you were right inside one.

 

 

 

Your "sarcasm" was not well received, hence my sarcasm about the Chinese, just recently landing on the other side of the moon.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

..which was not apparent at all.

 

But then lack of knowledge about the space program is spread far and wide on the internet now that everyone is allowed on.

 

 

 

Edited by Keatah
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, JBerel said:

If you're taking a position of willful ignorance in denying the Moon landing, then this will be my only response to you, as engaging with such deliberate absence of critical thought is completely pointless. I have asked no one to agree with me on what facts are. Fact are facts, which you can agree with or bury your head and pretend don't exist. 

 

We've done pretty much everything we have in space for the same reasons humans do pretty much anything. To prove we could, to flex our might, because it felt good, because we had to survive, to learn something, and at times to make money. Six successful missions hardly even demonstrated competency. I could lay out a thousands arguments why it being faked is laughable, most notably because it requires everyone, including Russia to be in on it. But, that's a pointless exercise with a person who's goal is self indulgent narcissism rather than rational discussion. 

 

I have interviewed multiple astronauts in my broadcast days. I have witnessed, and felt the heat of rocket and shuttle launches from the press area 1 mile from the pad. I regularly use satellite technology. I have been part of a hobby group who bounced a laser off instruments left on the moon. I can see man made satellites on the horizon with my bare eyes. I can deduce, reason, and display congnitive functions without another person's permission or agreement. I can't help you, and have no desire to try.

No sir, I never denied that the moon missions took place, so perhaps your hasty assumption was absent of critical thought.  I merely questioned the stated purposes for them.  I am open to the notion that there may be reasons for them that were classified and undisclosed to the general public.  It is not uncommon for governments to keep secrets from their citizenry, but if that statement makes me a foil-hat conspiracy theorist, so be it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The more I read about the program the more amazing and amusing it becomes. Pretty neat that there were jumper cables aboard the LM. Yup. A pair of heavy-duty wires to connect the Ascent stage to the Descent stage for a jump-start. It's an official contingency plan if the Ascent stage didn't have enough power to fire off the pyrotechnics and light the engine.

 

Thing is they would need to leave the door open and have the wires dangling behind while flying to the CM. And they would have only 30 minutes of air in their backup PLSS - because they threw their full-size backpacks on the surface to save weight on takeoff.

 

What would be even cooler is if that jump-start procedure failed, then they'd have to retrieve the LR and use its batteries. Now you have real car jump-starting a real spacecraft. Ha!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
On 7/31/2019 at 6:18 PM, JBerel said:

There's no controversy, just whack jobs and wing nuts as there will always be since we stopped letting them get eaten first. Hubble can't due to it's optics, but it's been done. Empty headed nutters will simply continue denying reality though. If not for their insistence on piecing together some delusional realities to feel special, insightful or a bizarre interpretation of intelligent, they would have little else to give them any self esteem.  

 

https://www.skyandtelescope.com/observing/how-to-see-all-six-apollo-moon-landing-sites/

17229073722_0325e33482_o.jpg

I can even see an Atari VCS up there

Edited by high voltage

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...