ApolloHoax.net
Apollo Discussions => The Hoax Theory => Topic started by: dwight on April 05, 2014, 05:40:52 AM
-
As it is quiet here at the moment, I thought I'd add my hard evidence that Apollo was faked - namely there are no stars in the photos. Discuss (you Apollogists, you).
-
Waving flag, you Government shill.
-
Of course there are no stars. Everyone knows the stars are not visible outside an atmosphere, where their transverse x-ray waves get downshifted to visible light or something....
-
As it is quiet here at the moment.
That's because we are all spending our hard earned shill wages on holidays. I for one have had a 6 month Caribbean cruise at the expense of NASA. I get $3 for each post I make anywhere on the internet, $5 if I post on The Blunder from Downunder's channel. Imagine what Jay and ka9q has earned, must be in the millions now.
-
Im happy to report that after much haggling, I have secured an attractive health benefit and pension plan for immediate relatives of paid shills. This enhances your existing shill contract. Also Luke, you'll be happy to hear there is now a 15% loading on holiday pay, backdated to January 1st.
-
Of course there are no stars. Everyone knows the stars are not visible outside an atmosphere, where their transverse x-ray waves get downshifted to visible light or something....
Transverse waves? Everyone knows starlight consists of plane waves. Anyway...it's all about Compton scattering! Oh, and gratings!
-
Transverse waves? Them the ones that across the beach? And I know all about gratings, they cover the holes where the water disappears when it rains, usually on the road.
Anyway. There is one overwhelming bit of evidence everyone is missing. I call it the "hmmm" evidence. Whenever that is uttered in a video or typed, you know they know the facts. Stands to reason.
Damn. Two bits of overwhelming evidence, "hmmm" and "stands to reason".
And not forgetting the "does not look right".
Damn damn... three bits of overwhelming evidence......
(shamelessly stolen idea)
-
Anyway. There is one overwhelming bit of evidence everyone is missing. I call it the "hmmm" evidence. Whenever that is uttered in a video or typed, you know they know the facts. Stands to reason.
Damn. Two bits of overwhelming evidence, "hmmm" and "stands to reason".
And not forgetting the "does not look right".
Damn damn... three bits of overwhelming evidence......
;D
I think there's a Bingo card in this. I'll contribute :
"NASA (or whomever) expects us to believe..."
-
Im happy to report that after much haggling, I have secured an attractive health benefit and pension plan for immediate relatives of paid shills. This enhances your existing shill contract. Also Luke, you'll be happy to hear there is now a 15% loading on holiday pay, backdated to January 1st.
Unfortunately. this doesn't apply to the Houston office, even though we are the home of the hoax. For two reasons. 1. We are deeply in debt from the overuse of our expense account to pay bar tabs. 2. All the drinking over the years has caused our collective health to decline and we have been unsuccessful in recruiting enough new young, alcohol tolerant members to offset the high cost of liver treatment for us long timers. Our health benefits were cut to save costs and our shadow government leaders conspired to get us rejected from Obama Care to prevent their callousness from being exposed. >:(
Our Houston group got together and decided to expose the hoax but realized that we (collectively) had done the job so well that no one was around to believe the truth anymore. Oh well, it was fun while it lasted, from what little I can remember. :P
-
Have not the aliens given you cloning technology for liver transplants..... no... wait..... beer that does not affect livers?
Anyway. Some bloke/blokess on the internet said so and I believe him/her and to be safe, it, there may be lizard overlords. Now, just have to send my details to this banking email.....
-
And I know all about gratings
I know about grating too. Its the feeling I get when I read anything Jarrah's Junkbox
-
Have not the aliens given you cloning technology for liver transplants.....
Aliens. Boy have you drunk the Koolaid.
-
Aliens. Boy have you drunk the Koolaid.
Well, of course, aliens gave us Koolaid. 8)
-
;D
I think there's a Bingo card in this. I'll contribute :
"NASA (or whomever) expects us to believe..."
It is a tombola with this lot, spin the tub, pick todays anti shill tirade. Wibble.
-
Koolaid, that is a visual joke from Family Guy.....
I assume it is a beverage, usually red and advertised in a nice big beverage dispenser made of glass?
Capturing Aliens had me thinking. There must be someone who is going to ask them about non taking over the planet stuff. Underwear that stays clean so you only need one pair of whatever. Better quality non stick socks, striped paint. The ultimate cake recipe. And looking at the news and a presenter with a suspect hair do at this moment, better fitting syrups.
-
Actually, Kool-Aid comes in a wide variety of colours not found in nature, but the Kool-Aid Man is a giant pitcher of the red stuff who bursts through walls shouting, "Oh, yeah!" The stuff itself is sold in powder form, either in small paper packets of unsweetened (add your own sugar) or large plastic tubs of sweetened. Add water, and you have a punch-like beverage.
Most notably, the People's Temple, led by Jim Jones, is known to have consumed its lower-cost rip-off, Flavor-Ade (grape, I believe), laced with as I recall cyanide. This was part of their mass suicide. It's worth noting, however, that a lot of people were pretty well forced at gunpoint to take it; they weren't as placid as the metaphor suggests. A fair number apparently didn't believe the stuff was poisoned until after they'd drunk it, too. I read a book that included survivor testimony.
-
Oh eck. Not much to say to that. How awful.
-
We need to start a "What do we want aliens to REALLY give us" thread.
My nomination: portable holes.
-
Oh eck. Not much to say to that. How awful.
I think it's very human to make a metaphor out of tragedy the way we have; "drinking the Kool-Aid" is an evocative image, even if it's the wrong beverage mix. You'd think the people at Kool-Aid would be angrier, but I bet they know there's nothing they can do. Kool-Aid is better known (in the US, at least) and frankly more mellifluous.
-
We need to start a "What do we want aliens to REALLY give us" thread.
My nomination: portable holes.
Nah. They have been around since the late 1940's!!!
-
Oh eck. Not much to say to that. How awful.
I think it's very human to make a metaphor out of tragedy the way we have; "drinking the Kool-Aid" is an evocative image, even if it's the wrong beverage mix. You'd think the people at Kool-Aid would be angrier, but I bet they know there's nothing they can do. Kool-Aid is better known (in the US, at least) and frankly more mellifluous.
Oh, mine was more a comment on the people forced to drink rather than the gallows humour. I know we abuse words and situations after the events and innocuous words are also used. Brown bread for example, short for dead in a roundabout way. Or doing a Lucan (Lord Lucan, google him).
As for getting brand names up the spout, in the UK, hoover is a thing that sucks the dirt up no matter the manufacturer, as we know Hoover is a brand name but it has stuck. Though asking our hosts in Germany once for the "hoover" we were greater with confusion. After a bit of charades, "Ah! aaageee!". Or AEG, being the dominate brand I suppose.
-
Oh, mine was more a comment on the people forced to drink rather than the gallows humour.
Yeah, reading that book was seriously disheartening. It was actually better when I thought they were all brainwashed, I think, though there was a certain amount of brainwashing involved. They'd agreed to move down from San Francisco to Guyana in the first place. But yeah, ouch.
-
As for getting brand names up the spout, in the UK, hoover is a thing that sucks the dirt up no matter the manufacturer, as we know Hoover is a brand name but it has stuck. Though asking our hosts in Germany once for the "hoover" we were greater with confusion. After a bit of charades, "Ah! aaageee!". Or AEG, being the dominate brand I suppose.
After three years of Deutsch in high school I find this story really unlikely, and de.Wikipedia seems to agree:
http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Staubsauger (lit. "dust sucker")
It's possible that the hosts shortened it to "Sauger", which sounds a bit like "aaaageee", especially if they don't roll the final r.
-
Well, it was in 1992 but it was as I say. Our German ran as far as ordering food and beer and their English was better but the the gist we had the understanding at the time as per what I said above.
Anyway. What do we want aliens to give us, silent aageehoversuckeruperers
-
So you have Hoovers in the UK too? I thought the Vax was the big vacuum cleaner brand.
Of course anybody in the computer field in the late 1970s through the 1980s knows that Digital Equipment Corporation (DEC) had a popular line of minicomputers called the VAX-11. Somebody found a UK advert for a Vax vacuum cleaner with the slogan "Nothing sucks like a Vax!" and the rest was history.
-
So you have Hoovers in the UK too? I thought the Vax was the big vacuum cleaner brand.
It was Hoover, but it is now Dyson.
-
Pedant mode;
The slogan was for Electrolux
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electrolux#Slogan
Though some may agree that VAXs sucked too (a bit harsh).
-
It can get a bit brandish. I still "I'll hoover up" yet use another brand. Not sure if it something that will last long.
-
A few years ago in NZ, a "vaguely racist" advert ran on TV for a Toshiba Vacuum Cleaner. It featured an obviously Japanese gentleman, dressed in a lab coat, speaking broken English with an obviously Japanese accent, extolling the virtues of the product. The advertisement finished with the catch-phrase....
"Toshiba! It have very sucky motor" (literal wording)
The phrase caught on, and "very sucky motor" became a meme for expressions of power for any machine or piece of equipment with a motor, not just vacuum cleaners. I've even heard someone refer to everything from power drills to jet airliners as having "very sucky motors"
-
It can get a bit brandish. I still "I'll hoover up" yet use another brand. Not sure if it something that will last long.
Plenty of examples where the trademark becomes the term for the generic act or product, though trademark holders hate this. Thermos, instead of vacuum flask, Kleenex, instead of disposable handkerchief, Aspirin, instead of acetylsalicylic acid, Band-aids instead of adhesive bandage. Googling and to Google instead of using an online search engine, etcetera, etcetera. Some of these have entered common speech to the degree that they can no longer be trademarked at all, and the companies fight tooth and nail for the rest.
-
It can get a bit brandish. I still "I'll hoover up" yet use another brand. Not sure if it something that will last long.
Plenty of examples where the trademark becomes the term for the generic act or product, though trademark holders hate this. Thermos, instead of vacuum flask, Kleenex, instead of disposable handkerchief, Aspirin, instead of acetylsalicylic acid, Band-aids instead of adhesive bandage. Googling and to Google instead of using an online search engine, etcetera, etcetera. Some of these have entered common speech to the degree that they can no longer be trademarked at all, and the companies fight tooth and nail for the rest.
Xerox copies for photocopying
Polaroids for instant photos
Dry Ice for solid carbon dioxide
and if you're a Kiwi or an Aussie, "Clayton's" for something that is a poor substitute for the real thing. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Claytons
-
My late grandmother always referred to her refrigerator as a "Kelvinator" even though she had a Frigidaire for as long as I could remember.
"Weed eater" for any brand of string trimmer also comes to mind.
-
My late grandmother always referred to her refrigerator as a "Kelvinator" even though she had a Frigidaire for as long as I could remember.
"Weed eater" for any brand of string trimmer also comes to mind.
Not to mention, I am pretty sure I've heard Frigidaire used as a generic term for refrigerator also.
-
Am I right in thinking that in some areas of the US, "coke" is used as a name for any carbonated beverage?
-
My late grandmother always referred to her refrigerator as a "Kelvinator" even though she had a Frigidaire for as long as I could remember.
Whenever I hear the words "The Fridge", the first thing that comes to mind is William Perry! 8)
-
Am I right in thinking that in some areas of the US, "coke" is used as a name for any carbonated beverage?
That is in the South, home of the industry dominant Coca Cola Company. In Texas we mostly now say soda but for natives, coke is understood as a generic term. It always disturbs me to go up North and have someone offer me a pop.
-
It was Hoover, but it is now Dyson.
This brings up a favorite question of mine. What is the difference between a Hoover and a Harley?
The location of the dirt bag.
-
Am I right in thinking that in some areas of the US, "coke" is used as a name for any carbonated beverage?
In some areas, it isn't used for a drink but a rather different consumable. No less healthy though.
-
It was Hoover, but it is now Dyson.
This brings up a favorite question of mine. What is the difference between a Hoover and a Harley?
The location of the dirt bag.
Oi!!!! >:(...... :D
-
That is in the South, home of the industry dominant Coca Cola Company. In Texas we mostly now say soda but for natives, coke is understood as a generic term. It always disturbs me to go up North and have someone offer me a pop.
I moved from a "soda" part of the country to a "pop" part of the country and had a hard time adjusting. Not the hardest time I've had, mind; moving from Los Angeles to rural Washington State was challenging in a lot of ways. But that was a small, frequent "I'm Not From Around Here" that I could have done without.
-
My late grandmother always referred to her refrigerator as a "Kelvinator" even though she had a Frigidaire for as long as I could remember.
Part of the problem is that the Kelvinator brand name has been resold so many times over the past few decades. I believe Nordyne owns it now. The owner of the brand at any time applied to any number of kinds of appliances loosely based on heat transfer.
-
The owner of the brand at any time applied to any number of kinds of appliances loosely based on heat transfer.
Talking of heat transfer, He Who Shall Not Be Named has recently presented Rene's calculations that 'show' the PLSS needed to contain 48 kg of water to cool the astronauts 'on a J-type mission.'
{EDIT: Change of word}
-
It was Hoover, but it is now Dyson.
This brings up a favorite question of mine. What is the difference between a Hoover and a Harley?
The location of the dirt bag.
I have to tell that one to my wife. She's a rider-coach.
And I gave her a Soft Tail Deluxe for our 15th...
-
Plenty of examples where the trademark becomes the term for the generic act or product, though trademark holders hate this. Thermos, instead of vacuum flask, Kleenex, instead of disposable handkerchief, Aspirin, instead of acetylsalicylic acid, Band-aids instead of adhesive bandage. Googling and to Google instead of using an online search engine, etcetera, etcetera. Some of these have entered common speech to the degree that they can no longer be trademarked at all, and the companies fight tooth and nail for the rest.
There used to be a long-running educational kid's TV programme in the UK called Blue Peter. It often had a segment showing the audience how to make something out of junk and household items, usually a low-cost version of a current, popular toy such as Tracy Island (though Advent Crowns would crop up with monotonous regularity). Because it was on the BBC, advertising wasn't allowed, so they used to black out the brand names on the cereal packets and washing-up liquid bottles they utilised. They also used to talk about using 'sticky-backed plastic' to secure everything. This term was so ubiquitous that it became a running joke in the UK whenever anyone mentioned the programme or interviewed one of the former presenters. It was years before I realised they were talking about Sellotape!
Why they didn't just use the more obvious, generic term 'sticky tape' baffles me to this day.
-
Plenty of examples where the trademark becomes the term for the generic act or product, though trademark holders hate this. Thermos, instead of vacuum flask, Kleenex, instead of disposable handkerchief, Aspirin, instead of acetylsalicylic acid, Band-aids instead of adhesive bandage. Googling and to Google instead of using an online search engine, etcetera, etcetera. Some of these have entered common speech to the degree that they can no longer be trademarked at all, and the companies fight tooth and nail for the rest.
There used to be a long-running educational kid's TV programme in the UK called Blue Peter. It often had a segment showing the audience how to make something out of junk and household items, usually a low-cost version of a current, popular toy such as Tracy Island (though Advent Crowns would crop up with monotonous regularity). Because it was on the BBC, advertising wasn't allowed, so they used to black out the brand names on the cereal packets and washing-up liquid bottles they utilised. They also used to talk about using 'sticky-backed plastic' to secure everything. This term was so ubiquitous that it became a running joke in the UK whenever anyone mentioned the programme or interviewed one of the former presenters. It was years before I realised they were talking about Sellotape!
Why they didn't just use the more obvious, generic term 'sticky tape' baffles me to this day.
I surmise from your post that you would have enjoyed "Billy & Johnny", Hale & Pace's take on Blue Peter?
-
I have always, and still do, use Sellotape in that vein. Took me till I was at legal drinking age to realise it was a brand.
-
I have always, and still do, use Sellotape in that vein. Took me till I was at legal drinking age to realise it was a brand.
Around here the equivalent is Scotch tape. The "generic" equivalent being cellophane tape...though of course "cellophane" is itself a trademark that's become generic, at least in the US.
For a fully generic term, just "tape" will generally do.
-
For a fully generic term, just "tape" will generally do.
The first time I used "tape" to my kids for tape that did not have adhesive, they insisted that it was not tape. When asked what to call it, they suggested "ribbon." I brought out an old cassette and showed them that tape need not be adhesive and reminded them we used VCR tapes all the time. That made sense to them.
-
Or there's bias tape, which is a sewing supply that I use now and again. (You know, on those occasions when I have a working sewing machine.) I'm pretty sure it predates sticky tape.
-
I'm pretty sure it predates sticky tape.
As does the proverbial red tape.
-
Talking of heat transfer, He Who Shall Not Be Named has recently presented Rene's calculations that 'show' the PLSS needed to contain 48 kg of water to cool the astronauts 'on a J-type mission.'
You're kidding me. Do the terms "heat of vaporization" appear anywhere? If you can merely get the correct figure for water, its relatively high evaporative cooling potential becomes rather obvious.
Or is he claiming the suit isn't as well insulated as it is?
Or are the astronauts each operating at a 10 kW metabolic rate?
Inquiring (and morbid) minds what to know: how does someone get such bogus results time after time without simply running away with his tail between his legs as any normal human would do when he's been as soundly and repeatedly thrashed in public as he has?
-
As does the proverbial red tape.
Indeed; I'm pretty sure there's a "red tape" reference in A Tale of Two Cities, which is set during the French Revolution.
-
Talking of heat transfer, He Who Shall Not Be Named has recently presented Rene's calculations that 'show' the PLSS needed to contain 48 kg of water to cool the astronauts 'on a J-type mission.'
You're kidding me. Do the terms "heat of vaporization" appear anywhere? If you can merely get the correct figure for water, its relatively high evaporative cooling potential becomes rather obvious.
Or is he claiming the suit isn't as well insulated as it is?
Or are the astronauts each operating at a 10 kW metabolic rate?
Inquiring (and morbid) minds what to know: how does someone get such bogus results time after time without simply running away with his tail between his legs as any normal human would do when he's been as soundly and repeatedly thrashed in public as he has?
This is the excerpt from NASA Mooned America. It's clear he has no understanding of heat exchangers. Some of the assumptions are staggering.
According to the authors of First On The Moon each PLSS was built to catch and disperse metabolic heat generated by the astronaut at an average rate of sixteen hundred British Thermal Units an hour.
Since a BTU equals .2928 watts we have a total of 368 Watts (René's arithmetic error.) This should be added to the Sun's heat value for a total heat input of 571 watts. However we should calculate the heat radiated by the shady side of the suit. Before proceeding we must determine a temperature for the air in the suit. The higher the temperature, the easier it is for the air cooler to do the job. Let's assume that their suits stayed at 100°F. Looking back to the Temperature Conversion chart we see that this temperature is 311° Kelvin which we need to know in order to use the Stefan-Boltzmann radiation equation. We must invert the original formula to look like this.
I (watts) = K4 x ( A x e x a)
Thus we find that there are 80 watts being radiated. This must be subtracted from the 571 total watts, which leaves us with 491 watts.
To round out the numbers we add 9 watts for radios, pump heat, etc. for a total of 500 watts.
Since there are 860 calories per watt and, assuming we can work at 100% efficiency we must make enough ice to carry off 430,000 calories per hour. " In 4 hours that adds up to 1,720,000 calories
To lower the temperature of one gram of water one degree C requires the loss of one calorie of heat. Upon the formation of ice, a gram of water loses 80 calories. Therefore a temperature drop from 100° F (38° C) down to freezing (0° C) entails the transfer of 38 calories, and when that gram freezes it absorbs another 80 calories for a total of 118 calories per gram vented out the blowhole. If we divide that 1,720,000 calories by 118 we get 14,576 gms of water that we must eject. This is 14.6 liters, which equals .514 cubic feet. That would take up 1/4 of the PLSS's volume. The weight of this is 32 pounds on Earth, which is or 38 % of the total claimed weight.
Using an efficiency of 40 %, which is still high compared to most mechanisms, and a suit temperature of 80° F, we find that 23.78 liters of throw away water is needed. This is 52.3 pounds on Earth, 62 % of the PLSS's total weight and .839 cubic feet which is 40 % of the unit's volume.
-
The level of fail in that excerpt is staggering.
-
Are they really so wrapped up in their frenzy to "prove" the "hoax" that they have completely lost their common sense filter??? Does he not realise that in normal activity a human male will need 2500 calories in 24 hours
-
Are they really so wrapped up in their frenzy to "prove" the "hoax" that they have completely lost their common sense filter??? Does he not realise that in normal activity a human male will need 2500 calories in 24 hours
Don't we need 2,500,000 calories per day? The RDA is cited in kCal.
-
Are they really so wrapped up in their frenzy to "prove" the "hoax" that they have completely lost their common sense filter??? Does he not realise that in normal activity a human male will need 2500 calories in 24 hours
Don't we need 2,500,000 calories per day? The RDA is cited in kCal.
Good point. There are two calories, the small calorie and the large calorie.When I was growing up, food intake was always measured in calories, but now it seems to be in kCalories.
It seems that I'm not the only one with this error
http://www.cnpp.usda.gov/publications/usdafoodpatterns/estimatedcalorieneedsperdaytable.pdf
^Extracted from the USDA Centre for Nutrition Policy & Promotion
-
Good point. There are two calories, the small calorie and the large calorie.When I was growing up, food intake was always measured in calories, but now it seems to be in kCalories.
I think it is easier to say we need 2500 calories per day when in reality we need 2500 kcals. The extra saying of 'kilo' has made its way out of calorie speak. Whenever I hear anyone speak on TV about daily calorific requirements, they always use the term calories. Food labels are marked kcals though. This confused me for a while, but once kJ was also added to the food package it made perfect sense.
Interestingly, the linked document shows that Rene was a long way out with his estimate for the required heat transfer if we assume that the astronauts were defined as being 'very active.'
Of course, it is not the only problem with the calculations either. I'm trying to find out how the LCVG worked, but drawing some dead ends with the detail.
-
I've known since... I guess around age 11, 12? (1976-77))... that dietary calories were actually kilocalories. I find it hard to believe Rene was ignorant of this, but then again he seemed to be ignorant about a lot of things.
-
Some useful round numbers for human metabolism:
Typical resting adult human metabolic power (basal metabolic rate): 100-200 W. 100 W is about 2000 kcal/day.
Even very active people burn most of their energy in their basal metabolism. 1/3 of that is just to drive the Na+/K+ pumps in every cell. Dunno how much is taken as overhead by the mitochondria (symbiotic remains of ancient bacteria, part of every cell, convert glucose to ATP for power.)
Average brain metabolic power: 20-25 W, roughly the same as a typical laptop computer. Yes, that's 25% of total resting metabolic rate. I would have guessed that the heart is the most power-intensive organ in the body, but no, it's the brain. The ancients didn't even know what it was for; they thought it cooled the blood.
-
Talking of heat transfer, He Who Shall Not Be Named has recently presented Rene's calculations that 'show' the PLSS needed to contain 48 kg of water to cool the astronauts 'on a J-type mission.'
For just a second I thought about listing all the mistakes in that analysis. But then I realized my hands would fall off from typing long before I was done.
-
Even very active people burn most of their energy in their basal metabolism. 1/3 of that is just to drive the Na+/K+ pumps in every cell.
Just out of curiosity if anyone is interested:
Na+/K+ pumps animation. (http://highered.mcgraw-hill.com/sites/0072495855/student_view0/chapter2/animation__how_the_sodium_potassium_pump_works.html)
-
I learned about this while studying neurology. As an EE I had to keep reminding myself that in biology there are several kinds of current flows, and they do not include the usual kind (electron flow) that I'm already familiar with. They include both positive (Na+, K+, Ca++, Mg++) and negative (Cl-) ion flows. Because of the non-equilibrium maintained by the pumps, these ions usually flow spontaneously when a channel opens for them, even when they flow "uphill" against the charge gradient. E.g., when a K+ channel opens, K+ will flow out of the cell and make the inside even more negatively charged because there's a much higher concentration of K+ inside than outside because of the pumps.
I did not realize right away that these ion pumps exist in every cell, not just neurons, so they must have evolved very early for mechanisms other than making nerves work. And true to the way evolution works like a third world junkyard, repurposing one mechanism for completely different purposes, some organisms have evolved special nerve cells that they use as offensive weapons, e.g., the electric eel. Fascinating stuff.
-
And true to the way evolution works like a third world junkyard, repurposing one mechanism for completely different purposes, some organisms have evolved special nerve cells that they use as offensive weapons, e.g., the electric eel. Fascinating stuff.
You might get into trouble with a biologist for your description of evolution. :P You might want to add the word 'with' in between 'evolved' and 'special' so not to draw the fire of my colleague. ;)
I have to concur with your fascination for such topics, I have become interested in evolutionary biology recently. I find it absolutely fascinating and also the topic of a real hoax, Piltdown Man. I guess the HBs could argue that Piltdown man fooled the establishment for years, so why is Apollo an exception. One of the YT regulars used to make such an argument.
-
The best answer to the Piltdown Man accusation is to ask who uncovered the hoax: conspiracy theorists with no scientific training or understanding, or other scientists?
-
And how soon were the first doubts voiced by other scientists? Because it's a lot sooner than most people realize.
-
The best answer to the Piltdown Man accusation is to ask who uncovered the hoax: conspiracy theorists with no scientific training or understanding, or other scientists?
A point that encapsulates my utter contempt for those that peddle the theory. The great Sensei Kaysing made a closing remark in his book, 'it will take many minds to solve the hoax theory once and for all.' However, it is quite apparent in the minds of some that only the 'intellect' of the conspiratorially aware will solve the hoax conundrum. I deplore the arrogance (egos) that fuels the unwillingness to explore the shortcomings of their arguments. I struggle with the idea that some have so little self awareness that they can profess to be an expert in every scientific field they encounter. Bob sums up my own feelings in his closing comments (http://www.braeunig.us/space/index.htm) section.
And how soon were the first doubts voiced by other scientists? Because it's a lot sooner than most people realize.
A lot sooner than I originally thought. I thought the hoax was uncovered in the 1950s, but this date appears to be when chemical tests were made that revealed chemical staining. A quick check demonstrates that doubt was cast immediately. Pesky scientists, they just can't be fooled. ;)
-
As it is quiet here at the moment <
Yep. May be time for an old video. A lot of questions regarding the Apollo program. And some music. :-)
-
The heat of sublimation is actually the governing property, and the heat of sublimation for water is prodigious. The astronauts actually complained about getting too cold.
Naturally Rene's computations are unbelievably ignorant, but we all know that. Not only does he get the arithmetic wrong, he gets the physics process wrong and makes irrelevant assumptions. And naturally our little Australian ignoramus can't do any better.
Nickel porous-plate sublimators are essentially commodity technology and have been used continuously to cool space suits used by all nations for decades. To somehow tie them to an Apollo-only hoax is pretty darned out of touch.
-
And how soon were the first doubts voiced by other scientists? Because it's a lot sooner than most people realize.
Right from the off there was an article published in "Nature" (in 1913, one year after the "discovery") which called it for what it was; an ape mandible combined with a human skull.
-
The heat of sublimation is actually the governing property, and the heat of sublimation for water is prodigious. The astronauts actually complained about getting too cold.
I found the relevant document about the LCVG and gained a better insight into its operation. Indeed, sublimation of ice is used to transfer the energy to the vacuum as I first thought but needed to check as I wanted to get my facts straight. A latent heat of 2.85 MJ/kg it is fairly prodigious.
I am sure the LCVG and PLSS have been discussed before and the complaint of the astronauts was discussed there. I cannot find a link, but I do remember that discussion. Do you have a reference to their complaints Jay, or is it anecdotal?
Naturally Rene's computations are unbelievably ignorant, but we all know that. Not only does he get the arithmetic wrong, he gets the physics process wrong and makes irrelevant assumptions. And naturally our little Australian ignoramus can't do any better.
I strongly believe that Rene had a world view that would have taken substantial shifting. Once he had a particular idea he had a canny knack of obfuscation, using a few equations and a bit of physics he had read about. He could make himself sound erudite to the less well informed with his calculations, as though he was a worldly sage.
Blind faith of others work is not critical thinking, and is about as far removed from science as one could possibly be. It seems to me the dice are loaded. What Sensei Kaysing and Sensei Rene said was the whole truth and nothing but the truth and any amount of ill conceived logic will be used to 'confirm' that truth. I thought they were critical thinkers and we were the sheeple?
Nickel porous-plate sublimators are essentially commodity technology and have been used continuously to cool space suits used by all nations for decades. To somehow tie them to an Apollo-only hoax is pretty darned out of touch.
I took a visit to the National Space Centre recently, and they a wonderful display of Russian space suits from the time that Helen Sharman boarded the Mir. I spoke to a curator and he confirmed that the technology was comparable to that used by the Apollo astonauts.
-
One thing I've wondered is why the Orlan suits are that light tan (like a lightly toasted marshmallow) compared to the bright white of NASA's EVA suits. Can anyone tell me the reason for the difference?
-
One thing I've wondered is why the Orlan suits are that light tan (like a lightly toasted marshmallow) compared to the bright white of NASA's EVA suits. Can anyone tell me the reason for the difference?
The colour is better for green screening.
-
One thing I've wondered is why the Orlan suits are that light tan (like a lightly toasted marshmallow) compared to the bright white of NASA's EVA suits. Can anyone tell me the reason for the difference?
The colour is better for green screening.
Ha ha, and I suppose the curator above was simply earning his NASA shill pay-cheque. ::) I am serious though, I really want to know why.
-
One thing I've wondered is why the Orlan suits are that light tan (like a lightly toasted marshmallow) compared to the bright white of NASA's EVA suits. Can anyone tell me the reason for the difference?
I was thinking the same thing when looking at the suits, it never occurred to me to ask why they should be light tan. Maybe it was Soviet fashion at the time ;)
-
I was thinking the same thing when looking at the suits, it never occurred to me to ask why they should be light tan. Maybe it was Soviet fashion at the time ;)
Maybe the USSR wanted to claim Soviet cosmonauts entered space in the buff. Coloured suits that is. But seriously, if anyone knows this, and why Soyuz capsules were green, I'd be most interested to know.
-
Perhaps the tan/beige/buff/off-white/ivory colour is because its the natural colour of the fabric, and they don't think its worth the time and expense of bleaching it white.
-
Maybe the USSR wanted to claim Soviet cosmonauts entered space in the buff. Coloured suits that is. But seriously, if anyone knows this, and why Soyuz capsules were green, I'd be most interested to know.
At least people are consistent. (http://cosmoquest.org/forum/showthread.php?129689-Why-Are-Russian-Orlan-Suits-Buff-Coloured)
-
At least people are consistent. (http://cosmoquest.org/forum/showthread.php?129689-Why-Are-Russian-Orlan-Suits-Buff-Coloured)
Heh, yeah. I found my old thread when I tried googling to see if I could get an answer after asking here. Even made the same 'lightly toasted marshmallow' comparison, wow, two years ago. Still no definitive answer though.
-
Perhaps the tan/beige/buff/off-white/ivory colour is because its the natural colour of the fabric, and they don't think its worth the time and expense of bleaching it white.
I think that this is the case also for the EMUs - they are not deliberately bleached or painted, it's just the original color of the material (Teflon?).
This is a short PDF document listing the layers of the EMU and the Orlan:
http://www.nasa.gov/centers/johnson/pdf/513053main_V1-eva_suit_layers.pdf
This is an Orlan manual in English:
http://www.colorado.edu/ASEN/asen3036/Orlan.pdf
Both list the outermost layer of the Orlan as made of "phenylon" or "phenilon", which is a latinization of "фенилон". Which, according to the Great Soviet Encyclopedia (http://slovari.yandex.ru/~%D0%BA%D0%BD%D0%B8%D0%B3%D0%B8/%D0%91%D0%A1%D0%AD/%D0%A4%D0%B5%D0%BD%D0%B8%D0%BB%D0%BE%D0%BD/), is the Russian name for the same stuff as used in Nomex.
P.S. I remember trying to find out about the green color too. But I don't remember what I found. :)
-
Either way, thank you kindly. :)
The EMU top covering is beta cloth, I believe, which is teflon coated woven glass fibre.