We landed on Mars... again? [Mod note post #1]

Daz747

Deagol wrote:

Of course they have technology to go to the moon - you're willfully ignoring the difference between sending a one way, dispensable 1 ton 'robot' to Mars and the challenge of safely sending 6 tons of machine and extremely fragile humans to the moon AND safely returning them to Earth.

I think some are missing the point, whether they the technology or not, the question is did they have it way back? No. Van Allen belts would have toasted the Astronauts back in the 60's as there was no effective lightweight materials developed to protect them from the radiation. They would have had a lethal dose and certainly would not be alive and well as some still are.

Ger Roe

Quackster wrote: »

Exactly. It's hilarious when folk give out about the crappy photos. It should be abundantly obvious to anyone with any degree of intelligence that the signal bandwidth and latency over such a long distance is absolutely horrific.

True, but for those particular first photos, they are specific spectrum restricted cameras, taking shots through a protective lens cover that has been exposed to the dust raised on landing.

They are engineering cameras used for the automated landing process only. They were only released as a curiosity, and are not intended to be used for scientific investigation.

While bandwidth and latency is a factor in higher quality transmission, the pics from these cameras were always going to be of limited quality, because their primary use was for specific engineering function. The best is yet to come.

Still, its mad to have people complaining about picture quality coming back immediately from vehicles that we sent to another planet. I remember seeing the Apollo 11 moon landing live, when you had to squint to imagine you were seeing a human figure on a 405 line black and white TV signal, and we still thought it was a miracle at the time.

People are harder to impress these days, for all our advances and supposed intelligence, we are strange creatures.

I regurgitate the news

King Mob wrote: »

No, I called you a Flat Earther.
You are proposing the idea that all space mission are faked.
This is a very very silly and childish thing to believe. It's on the same level as believing the world is flat. They are both about equally as silly.
And many flat earthers also agree with your conspiracy theory that all space missions are faked.

I asked if you believed that the earth was flat, and as typical for conspiracy theorists you were evasive about your beliefs. So I assumed that you were a flat earther and did not want to admit as much.
It's not an insult. Simple statement of fact.

If you don't believe the earth is flat, simply say so.
No need for the constant dodging and running away.

I did not propose anything and I'm not a flat earther.

You're again, trying to move away from the discussion to name calling because you lost the discussion

I quoted a guy from NASA and you thought it was bullsh!t

Then I showed the video of him speaking and you went on your tirade of calling me a flat earther or conspiracy crap.

That's the only place you can go now because you won't comment on the video of the NASA guy saying what you had thought was bullsh!t

Booya!

King Mob

Daz747 wrote: »

No. Van Allen belts would have toasted the Astronauts back in the 60's as there was no effective lightweight materials developed to protect them from the radiation. They would have had a lethal dose and certainly would not be alive and well as some still are.

How much radiation is a lethal dose and how much radiation does someone recieve going through the Van Allen belts? Please provide your sources.

Conspiracy theorists keep claiming this, but they can never actually supply numbers or any reason to take this claim seriously.

Ger Roe

Daz747 wrote: »

I think some are missing the point, whether they the technology or not, the question is did they have it way back? No. Van Allen belts would have toasted the Astronauts back in the 60's as there was no effective lightweight materials developed to protect them from the radiation. They would have had a lethal dose and certainly would not be alive and well as some still are.

James Van Allen himself, dismissed the 'they would be toasted theory' as 'nonsense'.

https://science.thewire.in/the-sciences/apollo-11-van-allen-radiation-belts-translunar-injection/

King Mob

I regurgitate the news wrote: »

I did not propose anything

You're proposing that all space missions are faked.

I regurgitate the news wrote: »

and I'm not a flat earther.

Ok. You're just proposing something equally silly.
You should have just stated this directly rather than become offended.

I regurgitate the news wrote: »

I quoted a guy from NASA and you thought it was bullsh!t

But you haven't quoted him. You are misrepresented him. I explained this in my last post, but you ignored this.

You even edited out those points in the parts of the post you quote, yet you falsely claim I don't address your claim.
You are now lying.

I regurgitate the news wrote: »

Booya!

Lol...:rolleyes:

magicbastarder

Daz747 wrote: »

I think some are missing the point, whether they the technology or not, the question is did they have it way back? No.

why ddn't the russians reveal the subterfuge so? the radio signals from the moon landings were either coming from the moon or not.

SoapMcTavish

bfa1509 wrote: »

Not one bit offended, sorry to tell you.

But I'd rather be a mentally ill, flat earth believing, tin-foil hat wearing conspiracy theorist in your eyes than to be a righteous NASA fanboy who posts thousands of times in a forum with desperate (and honestly weak) attempts to debunk conspiracy theories.

I thought it was a joke about you and a flat earth ! Seriously ? Such denial.:D:D:D:D:D

Hotblack Desiato

Daz747 wrote: »

I think some are missing the point, whether they the technology or not, the question is did they have it way back? No. Van Allen belts would have toasted the Astronauts back in the 60's as there was no effective lightweight materials developed to protect them from the radiation. They would have had a lethal dose and certainly would not be alive and well as some still are.

Needless to say, this is complete and utter bullshít.

From the Wikipedia Van Allen belt article :

The Apollo missions marked the first event where humans traveled through the Van Allen belts, which was one of several radiation hazards known by mission planners.[35] The astronauts had low exposure in the Van Allen belts due to the short period of time spent flying through them. Apollo flight trajectories bypassed the inner belts completely, passing through the thinner areas of the outer belts.[27][36]

Astronauts' overall exposure was actually dominated by solar particles once outside Earth's magnetic field. The total radiation received by the astronauts varied from mission-to-mission but was measured to be between 0.16 and 1.14 rads (1.6 and 11.4 mGy), much less than the standard of 5 rem (50 mSv)[c] per year set by the United States Atomic Energy Commission for people who work with radioactivity.[35]

namloc1980

Mr_Muffin wrote: »

We can send a robot to mars but instead of equipping it with a decent camera, we attach the same black and white camera my grandparents used on their wedding day in 1934.

Wow so much ignorance in one post. Impressive.

namloc1980

I regurgitate the news wrote: »

I provided evidence to my claim that NASA can no longer go back to the moon because they destroyed the technology and it would be a painful process to build it back again.

You were sneering before I provided NASA Astronaut Don Pettit's video confirming what I said but then you stopped debating it and calling me a flat earther.

Funny that.

When you lost the argument you went to name calling.

:pac::pac::pac::D

You do realise NASA are currently building the next generation hardware to return humans to the Moon by 2025 or so?

MadYaker

namloc1980 wrote: »

You do realise NASA are currently building the next generation hardware to return humans to the Moon by 2025 or so?

Sure he won't believe it then either

Mr_Muffin

namloc1980 wrote: »

Wow so much ignorance in one post. Impressive.

Thank you

I regurgitate the news

King Mob wrote: »

But you haven't quoted him. You are misrepresented him. I explained this in my last post, but you ignored this.

How can I misrepresent what he said when I posted the video of what he said?

He represented himself.

I never said anything really on any topics. I just said NASA said they can't go to the moon but they can go to Mars....and I wondered why.

I don't know why they can't go to the moon other than the reason Don Pettit provided. They destroyed the technology and it would be painful to build it back again.

If they are going to the moon in 2025 that's great. Maybe they rebuilt the technology. I know very little on the topic and can only go by what NASA say (or said as in the video)

Here's the video again. It is 55 seconds long

What part do you think I am misrepresenting? I am directly quoting Don.

King Mob

I regurgitate the news wrote: »

How can I misrepresent what he said when I posted the video of what he said?

He represented himself.

And I explained this in the post you are ignoring and you lied about.

I regurgitate the news wrote: »

I never said anything really on any topics.

Then you are once again being evasive and dishonest about your position.

Do you believe the premise of this thread?
Do you believe that the current Mars mission or any other space mission are faked?
Yes or no?

I regurgitate the news wrote: »

What part do you think I am misrepresenting? I am directly quoting Don.

The part when you say he agrees with the notion that we don't have to technology to send probes to Mars and therefore all those missions are fake.

BTW, the video is posted by a Flat Earth youtube channel. Funny that.

I regurgitate the news

King Mob wrote: »

And I explained this in the post you are ignoring and you lied about.


Then you are once again being evasive and dishonest about your position.

Explain it again or point me to the post. I am stupid remember. I only go by what NASA say.

Here is the quote again

"I'd go to the Moon in a nanosecond. The problem is we don't have the technology to do that anymore. We used to but we destroyed that technology and it's a painful process to build it back again."

I regurgitate the news

King Mob wrote: »

The part when you say he agrees with the notion that we don't have to technology to send probes to Mars and therefore all those missions are fake.

We went to Mars. He said we would and they did.

The part I am asking about is his words, not mine

"I'd go to the Moon in a nanosecond. The problem is we don't have the technology to do that anymore. We used to but we destroyed that technology and it's a painful process to build it back again."

King Mob

I regurgitate the news wrote: »

Explain it again or point me to the post. I am stupid remember. I only go by what NASA say.

It's in the post you ignored. You wouldn't have this issue if you didn't do the typical conspiracy theorist thing and ignore points you don't want to address.
Go back and read it.

I regurgitate the news wrote: »

We went to Mars.

Ok. So you believe the conspiracy theory is wrong.
Cool.

I regurgitate the news

King Mob wrote: »

It's in the post you ignored. You wouldn't have this issue if you didn't do the typical conspiracy theorist thing and ignore points you don't want to address.
Go back and read it.


Ok. So you believe the conspiracy theory is wrong.
Cool.

What conspiracy theory? I don't have a clue about what you are talking about?

You keep talking about flat earth Mars.

I don't know anything about Flat Earth. The first time I heard about it is you going on and on about it....and we went to Mars a few days ago....end of.

I am asking people why they think Nasa said what they said. Here is a 20 second clip. Much shorter. Maybe you will not evade answering this time but alas I think you will.

King Mob

I regurgitate the news wrote: »

What conspiracy theory? I don't have a clue about what you are talking about?

The conspiracy theory proposed by the OP at the start of thread. The conspiracy theory that is the topic of the thread.

Have you not read the thread?

I regurgitate the news wrote: »

I don't know anything about Flat Earth. The first time I heard about it is you going on and on about it....and we went to Mars a few days ago....end of.

And yet, you post videos from a flat earth youtube page...

I regurgitate the news wrote: »

I am asking people why they think Nasa said what they said.

And this has been answered. You are now lying and claiming this wasn't answered.
You saw the answer and edited it out of your reply.

https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=116347028&postcount=45

It's funny how you're now accusing people of being evasive given that you ignored this post, edited it to ignore it, pretended it didn't exist all while not being direct about your beliefs.

namloc1980

I regurgitate the news wrote: »

I am asking people why they think Nasa said what they said. Here is a 20 second clip. Much shorter. Maybe you will not evade answering this time but alas I think you will.

I'm not sure why you are so hung up on this.

Anyway NASA changed track in the 70s after landing on the moon. The space shuttle programme took over as the main human spaceflight effort for the next 30+ years. The military had a big hand in the shuttle as they saw significant military applications. As a result the very expensive Apollo programme was defunded. No more Saturn V or any Apollo era hardware was built. Facilities were converted to cater for the shuttle.

Now a new generation of space hardware is being built i.e. SLS, Orion, Lunar Gateway to take people back to the Moon by the middle of this decade.

Blackhorse Slim

So NASA guy says NASA no longer use 1960s or 1970s technology... is this supposed to be shocking? I no longer have the technology to play my betamax tapes.

I remember when conspiracy theories used to be somewhat plausible, those were the days.

Das Reich

Blackhorse Slim wrote: »

So NASA guy says NASA no longer use 1960s or 1970s technology... is this supposed to be shocking? I no longer have the technology to play my betamax tapes.

I remember when conspiracy theories used to be somewhat plausible, those were the days.

But that means we don't have technology to build betamax player or betamax tapes? Because that's what they say. Going to the moon again would be so much simplier now than 52 years ago. The main reason I believe on moon landings are because too much people involved on it to be fake, and even Soviet Union never said a thing about it. They would also not do another 5 fake landings. But those kind of things are very strange.

King Mob

Das Reich wrote: »

But that means we don't have technology to build betamax player or betamax tapes? Because that's what they say.

That's not what they say though.

To build new betamax machines and tapes in the same way and same magnitude would require a massive effort to prepare the infrastructure to do that. You would have to do things resource appropriate materials and components. You'd have to source the people with the experience in the manufacturing process or train them up. You'd have to either rebuilt factories or alter current factories to the point that you're rebuilding them.

The plans and knowledge for the Apollo era equipment wasn't burned on a big fire. People with inside knowledge weren't put against the wall.
The Technology just wasn't kept in production.

By contrast, the Russian have been using Soyuz this entire time, upkeeping the infrastructure and updating it as required.

Das Reich wrote: »

But those kind of things are very strange.

Why is it strange?

Das Reich

King Mob wrote: »

That's not what they say though.

To build new betamax machines and tapes in the same way and same magnitude would require a massive effort to prepare the infrastructure to do that. You would have to do things resource appropriate materials and components. You'd have to source the people with the experience in the manufacturing process or train them up. You'd have to either rebuilt factories or alter current factories to the point that you're rebuilding them.

The plans and knowledge for the Apollo era equipment wasn't burned on a big fire. People with inside knowledge weren't put against the wall.
The Technology just wasn't kept in production.

By contrast, the Russian have been using Soyuz this entire time, upkeeping the infrastructure and updating it as required.


Why is it strange?

But the purpose of betamax was not watching videos? We can do that much easy today. And I doubt that to produce that technology today would require massive effort. Chinese would do it in no time if anyone wanted to buy it for few dollars. Things are hard to do and expensive only on the beggining. There are people that builds airplanes or rockets on the back of their homes. What I mean is that to rebuild a program better than Apollo would cost a fraction than it did in the 1960's. Sorry but no one can deny this, that it would be much cheaper, faster and better to go to the moon today than before.

King Mob

Das Reich wrote: »

But the purpose of betamax was not watching videos?

Yes. But to rebuild betamax production in the same way it was at its height would require a massive effort. Please read my post fully.

Das Reich wrote: »

What I mean is that to rebuild a program better than Apollo would cost a fraction than it did in the 1960's. Sorry but no one can deny this, that it would be much cheaper, faster and better to go to the moon today than before.

Yes. But you don't seem to have a very good idea of just how much money and power was behind the Apollo program.

So could you please answer my question directly?
Why is it strange?
What specifically is strange, what's strange about it and what do you believe is the real explanation?

Maybe you could explain what you believe was "destroyed" and why it was "destroyed"?

Das Reich

King Mob wrote: »

Yes. But to rebuild betamax production in the same way it was at its height would require a massive effort. Please read my post fully.


Yes. But you don't seem to have a very good idea of just how much money and power was behind the Apollo program.

So could you please answer my question directly?
Why is it strange?
What specifically is strange, what's strange about it and what do you believe is the real explanation?

Maybe you could explain what you believe was "destroyed" and why it was "destroyed"?

It would not, Chinese would dissassemble an old machine and build a copy in not time if there is demand. They do that with anything. And we still can watch videos with better quality in devices that cost nothing in comparison to the betamax at that time.

I not believe was destroyed, is not the Nasa that says that? You don't find strange that a man landed on the moon after few years the first man went to space, but they can't do it now? You not find strange that before Apollo 8 no one had been more than 1.600 km from Earth, then they went to 380.000 km and they did nearly 1 million km going and returning, and after 1972 they never went far than a 1.000 km? You not find strange that they sent the man to the moon only 7 months after the Apollo 8? And they did the Apollo 9 and Apollo 10 in between? And why landing 6 times in 3 years? And then never again? Its strange that you not find strange those numbers. The fact I BELIEVE in moon landings doesn't mean I can't question things that not add up. Regarding the real explanation I not have any answer as I not believe on the theory of fake landings, but would like to know.

King Mob

Das Reich wrote: »

It would not, Chinese would dissassemble an old machine and build a copy in not time if there is demand. They do that with anything. And we still can watch videos with better quality in devices that cost nothing in comparison to the betamax at that time.

Leaving aside your odd obsession with China, you are still ignoring the point I made.
Please read my previous post more carefully.

Das Reich wrote: »

I not believe was destroyed, is not the Nasa that says that?

That's not what Nasa said, as explained several times.
You don't accept that, but that's fine.

Please explain then what do you think that Nasa is referring to exactly?
What technology?

Das Reich wrote: »

The fact I BELIEVE in moon landings doesn't mean I can't question things that not add up.

Your posts are becoming very ranty and incoherent.
Could you please explain what you believe "doesn't add up"?
What has this to do with the claim that the Martian landings and other space missions are faked.

Das Reich wrote: »

Regarding the real explanation I not have any answer as I not believe on the theory of fake landings, but would like to know.

Maybe the explanation is that there's no conspiracy and you just personally don't have a complete understanding of a complex topic?

Das Reich

King Mob wrote: »

Leaving aside your odd obsession with China, you are still ignoring the point I made.
Please read my previous post more carefully.


That's not what Nasa said, as explained several times.
You don't accept that, but that's fine.

Please explain then what do you think that Nasa is referring to exactly?
What technology?


Your posts are becoming very ranty and incoherent.
Could you please explain what you believe "doesn't add up"?
What has this to do with the claim that the Martian landings and other space missions are faked.

Maybe the explanation is that there's no conspiracy and you just personally don't have a complete understanding of a complex topic?

I did answered with numbers what is strange or not. You didn't aswered if you not find those numbers strange or not. Who said Martian landings are fake? Definately not me. Probably you are right about the non existence of conspiracy theory, but are proud enough to not question some things. I don't have the fear to question things, I did grow up in a VERY CHRISTIAN country and when I was a child family members were very upset when I doubt about the existence of god. And 30 years later they are all non believers now. I would be called a conspirationist then.

So now I had answered all your questions, please answer the followings:

1 - You not find strange that they did 10 travels to the moon in a very short period, and on the very starting of human space exploration, making a million km and after that they never went beyond the low Earth orbit? 50 after that? You don't find it strange? I do. Period.

2 - You don't think that to build another program to go to the moon would be much easier, cheaper, safer, faster etc... etc... etc... with all the technology we got in 50 years? Why going to the moon every few months and never again after that?

Wanderer78

bfa1509 wrote:

I always cringe when I see these monumental events unfold on the 6 o' clock news. Why is this big news? I thought we already did this 10 or 15 years ago?

Errr emmmm, because it is big news, we haven't sent all that much outside of our own orbit, and yes we done this a few years ago, so it's time to further those findings!

bfa1509 wrote:

Do people actually believe this crap?

It's not crap, it really is happening!