Dec 6 2002, 9:18 am
|
|
Dracon
 |
Tupac Shekuar is dead. My cat 'kaffed' up his head a little while ago.
|
Heh, a lot of good a parachute would have done with no atmosphere to slow it down...lol
Besides, the gravity of the moon is probably weak enough that a decently padded camera could have been dropped without needing a parachute... However, digitalmouse is correct...they didn't film from the surface as they landed... They filmed from inside the craft on the way down, and then filmed a launch with a camera left behind... | |
Skysaw wrote:
What you may be referring to is footage of the ascentstage of the lunar lander as it lifts off - there was a Argg...mixing up my words - 'first departure' I meant, not 'first landing'. The only footage of the first landing (actually this was probably true for all the landings since they did not know exactly where the would set down) was from on-board camera(s). | |
Since somebody started a thread about it, and a lot of people are participating in it, and there's websites all over the web covering both sides of the debate, and NASA just published a book on the subject... I'd say a lot of people.
| |
There are indeed traces of oxygen (and lots of other things) in space, but in the absence of a body of sufficient gravity, they don't form pockets. Gases expand to form the shape of their container. Space is a pretty big container... a "pocket" of oxygen in a vacuum would quickly distribute itself over a vast amount of space. It's not enough for a body to rotate to create wind. There has to be atmosphere. The moon has no atmosphere to speak of.
| |
Lesbian Assassin wrote:
Since somebody started a thread about it, and a lot of people are participating in it, and there's websites all over the web covering both sides of the debate, and NASA just published a book on the subject... I'd say a lot of people. I haven't read any of the other threads cause Im too lazy :) LOL hehe. But about that moon thingy. I think NASA didn't goto the moon and made it with a tech imagator. But they messed up on the film on porpuse so that by the time someone was smart enough to actually notice the film being wrong no one would notice the thing in which they used the film to cover up on. Like your walking along with coffie and spill it on someone else and argue that you didnt spill it on them and that someone pushed u. But in the time of spilling the coffie and saying some one pushed you you stole the persons wallet. Pretty cool trick if you ask me. Only thing that scares me is what the Gov is trying to hide O.o ooo lol LIMEY BEANS | |
If we have never walked on the moon, how do we know what it would look like? So how would we know if it's fake?
| |
OneFishDown wrote:
If we have never walked on the moon, how do we know what it would look like? So how would we know if it's fake? Yawns could u please ask better questions ur boaring me LOL LIMEY BEANS | |
oh yeah nasa the very people your doubting...i guess its a reliable source then...and this isnt a lot of people...its more like a group
| |
Lesbian Assassin wrote:
It's not enough for a body to rotate to create wind. There has to be atmosphere. The moon has no atmosphere to speak of. Not only that, but most wind is actually caused by differences in air pressure. Now if the Earth had big rotor blades on it, it might be a different story! | |
Yes, but the difference in air pressure is caused by the uneven heating of the earth, which does admitedly have a lot to do with the earth's rotation. Since rotation does have an impact on the wind, I wasn't going to argue the point, when the most important point is that no matter what causes the wind (heat, pressure, rotation, trees waving back and forth, electric fans, etc.), there still has to be air to be pushed around by these things.
| |
FuZzY DiCe wrote:
oh yeah nasa the very people your doubting... Now you're just choosing to be stupid. When have I evinced the slightest bit of doubt in NASA? You aren't even reading my posts, or if you are, you don't understand them. If you reply to something you haven't read or don't understand, you only make an ass of yourself. i guess its a reliable source then... Reliability isn't an issue here. You and I are not discussing what happened or whether it happened or how it happened. You questioned whether or not anyone cared... which is always a stupid question when there's a topic of discussion devoted to a subject. Someone doesn't have to be reliable to care about something. If Nutso the Whackjob published a book on the American electoral system, it wouldn't be reliable but it would show he was interested in it. and this isnt a lot of people...its more like a group My point isn't that NASA is interested. My point is that they published a book, which shows that OTHER people are interested in it. Yes, books do get published (often by government agencies) about subjects which don't interest anyone else, but this particular book was written to lay to rest the questions of skeptics. If no one was interested, then no one would be skeptical. Look... I'll make this simple... you said no one cares, you were obviously wrong, I pointed out that you were obviously wrong, but instead of saying, "Oh, my mistake.", you're just trying to dance around and bait me. It's what you've been doing for weeks. You're trying to establish that I jump on people for no reason. You don't realize that if you have to go out of your way to provoke me, that proves nothing... you might also consider that since you've been trying this forever and this is the most response you've ever got (or ever will get), you might as well give up. | |
Thats what I meant with the whole "Although you could be doing something better with your life then ivestigating mysteries Scooby-Doo style, and increase your universal knowlage more." comment.
-DogMan | |
We landed on the moon, and 2pac is dead. If you believe otherwise your stupid. Plain and simple. I would love to get soem encyclopedias, and wrack my brain to prove my point but I have stuff to do.
remember, stupid | |
cool i hope your happy theres nothing more exhillerating than pointing out the shortcomings of others is there?
| |
There's plenty of things more exhilirating than that. I can think of few things more pathetic, though, than trying to point out someone's shortcomings and failing.
| |