A FAIR DEBATE

[DAKDAK]

I'm growing impatient, DAKDAK. Answer our questions, or I will ban you.

BAN ME DELETE MY POSTS

NO HARD FEELNGS

PLEASE

[DAKDAK]

PLEASE UNLOCK OR DELETE THIS !!  ALL DAKDAK

[DAKDAK]

PLEASE  ASK MODERATOR TO UNLOCK OR DELETE THIS !! ALL DAKDAK



Topic: Videos of the vehicle that took (supposedly) took Apollo 11 to the moon 

[DAKDAK]

Please ask the moderator to delete

Topic: Videos of the vehicle that took (supposedly) took Apollo 11 to the moon 

And any and all things posted by DAKDAK

Please ask the moderator too ban DAKDAK

[DAKDAK]

Please ask the moderator to delete

Topic: Videos of the vehicle that took (supposedly) took Apollo 11 to the moon 

And any and all things posted by DAKDAK

Please ask the moderator too ban DAKDAK

[Mr Gorsky]

You can ask all you want ... the chances of LunarOrbit agreeing to delete your posts lie somewhere between "incredibly slim indeed" and "totally non-existent". You are not allowed to simply expunge the evidence of your presence on the board. If memory serves, one of the issues that finally prompted LO to move from Proboards to host the board on his own was a previous seagull poster giving up and getting Proboards to delete all of his posts without reference to the board administrator.

You don't get to come on here, throw some crud around, make a fool of yourself and then cover your tracks when you slink away.

[Trebor]

seagull

Well, this ended up in a predictable way.

[Abaddon]

Please ask the moderator to delete

Topic: Videos of the vehicle that took (supposedly) took Apollo 11 to the moon 

And any and all things posted by DAKDAK

Please ask the moderator too ban DAKDAK

Absolutely not. It is important that your stupidity is hung out to dry for all to see.

[sts60]

Please tell your BOSS to delete the post.

DAKDAK, LunarOrbit is not our "boss".  He runs this forum, and we - including you - get to participate on it if we choose, at no cost.  That's it.

And, no, no one is going to delete your posts and cover your tracks for you.  You came on here of your own free will and did the following:
1. Made a lot of ridiculous claims which showed you not only knew nothing about Apollo, or spaceflight in general, but you also had absolutely no clue as to the most basic facts about anything, really, to do with the observable world.  Dropping out in 9th grade is no excuse; any elementary-school child should know, for example, that the Moon does not shine by itself.
2. You failed to pay any attention to knowledge already available to you.  You say you observe the Moon and take pictures of it, which necessarily means you see shadows cast by the mountains and crater rims, which should immediately tell you that the Moon is illuminated by something else. 
3. You then arrogantly told everyone they were right and you were wrong, and touted your Christian worldview as justification.  I am a Christian, and while I don't pretend to be a better Christian or better person than anyone else, I do seem to remember some lessons about humility.
4. You told people who actually had studied the subject that they were wrong, and claimed you had made an extensive study of Apollo 11 - but you clearly had done nothing of the sort, and in fact it is painfully obvious you don't even have any idea how much information is available on the subject.
5. You told people that actually learning about the subject was inferior to your common sense, which is arrogance slopping over into delusion.  You also told people who actually do this for a living that you knew better.
6. You never addressed most of the challenges put to you.
7. The few answers you gave were vague and mostly wrong, and showed you had not extensively studied the subject as you claimed.
8. You turned and ran, and tried to get the forum administrator to cover your tracks for you.

If you wish to reapply for access to the forum, I will support that, provided you apologize to LunarOrbit (the forum administrator) for your childish behavior and actually attempt to learn something next time.  Otherwise,... frankly, I think you need professional help.

[sts60]

Here is DAKDAK's original post as titled on this thread, reconstructed from others' quotes.
*****

I have been told by the extremely biased members of this site that I do not reply, to the explanations  given to me regarding what I personally think about THE OFFICIAL APOLLO RECORD,and that I just move on to another APOLLO conspiracy subject,and disregard the posts disputing the uneducated ideas that I originally posted.I have also been called a Seagull Poster. I don't know what a Seagull Poster is,but I don't believe that I am one.

I have also been criticized by members who say that I use poor grammar and punctuation,this is true remember I dropped out of High School in the 9Th grade,and English was my worst subject.

I believe that there are LITERALLY THOUSANDS of inconsistencies and even FLAT OUT LIES in the official record of APOLLO 11.

I also believe that I can prove this beyond a shadow of a doubt if given enough space to fully explain my arguments.
It doesn't seem fair to me to have to limit your responses to a few lines of text and a few attachments with a maximum of
4 per post, maximum total size 192KB, maximum individual size 128KB

I think to avoid confusion that we should debate only one APOLLO mission at a time.

I think that it would be appropriate since APOLLO 11 was supposedly the first time man landed on the moon,and supposedly mans greatest science and technological achievement that APOLLO 11 would be a good mission to  start this debate.

Below are numbered reasons that I have already posted, as to why I believe that the official record of APOLLO 11 is completely untrue. I have many more reasons to believe this, but these are the ones I have mentioned so far in order to the best of my recollection. I will respond in great detail as the extremely biased members of this site do to any reply. REMEMBER ONLY APOLLO 11I have started many replies already and will answer your rebuttals quickly

LETS DEBATE

1. The APOLLO 11 Command Module was not large enough to fit what the official record says was inside.
2. The APOLLO 11 on-board computer was not sufficient to preform the tasks that the record says it did.
3. The APOLLO 11 trajectories are completely inaccurate(CRAZY EIGHT
4. The Apollo 11 audio record is also completely inaccurate(HOUSTON WE HAVE A ROLL PROGRAM)
5 The Apollo 11 videos and still pictures are completely inaccurate(FAKED)
6. That the moon emits light and would have blinded the APOLLO 11 astronauts if they went which  I don't believe they did.
7. That the scientific findings of APOLLO 11 are completely innacurate(FALSE)
8. That the APOLLO 11  water cooled SpaceSuits were completly inadequate (THE ASTRONAUTS WOULD FREEZE)

[VincentMcConnell]

DAKDAK, I will gladly have a fair debate with you. If LunarOrbit likes the idea, we can set up a thread just for the two of us to have a structured discussion and debate.

[gillianren]

I don't know if Dakdak would, even leaving aside that he's been banned.  But it doesn't matter, because that's a terrible idea.

[frenat]

All Dakdak proved when he was here was that he was uninterested (and probably uncapable) in actually learning anything. 

[bobdude11]

3. The APOLLO 11 trajectories are completely inaccurate(CRAZY EIGHT)

There is no such thing as a "crazy eight" trajectory.  All spacecraft follow trajectories that are one of four conic sections - circle, ellipse, parabola, or hyperbola.  The circle and parabola are special cases that are virtually nonexistent in practice, thus we are left with elliptical and hyperbolic orbits.  An elliptical orbit occurs when the spacecraft is traveling at a velocity below that necessary to escape the gravity of the body about which it is orbiting.  Examples include the Moon's orbit around Earth and Earth's orbit around the Sun.  A hyperbolic orbit occurs when a spacecraft is traveling at a velocity exceeding escape velocity.  In this case the spacecraft will follow a curved path past the planet (or moon) and then fly off into space, not to return.

The trajectory flown by the Apollo spacecraft started out as an Earth-centric elliptical orbit with an apogee (the part of the orbit farthest from Earth) that was about 1.5 times the Earth-Moon distance.  A spacecraft in such an orbit will reach the distance of the Moon in about three days.  If the orbit was not timed to encounter the Moon when it reached the appropriate distance, the spacecraft would have continued in its elliptical orbit.  However, the orbit was timed so that when the spacecraft neared the Moon's orbit, the Moon was approaching so that it and the spacecraft arrived at the same location in space at the same time.  As the spacecraft drew close to the Moon, the Moon's gravity began to dominate over Earth gravity, thus the spacecraft transitioned from an Earth-centric elliptical orbit to a Moon-centric hyperbolic orbit.  The Moon-centric hyperbolic orbit took the spacecraft on a path that flew behind the Moon, as observed from Earth.

On a normal mission, the spacecraft would fire its engine when it reached its closest distance to the Moon on the far side from Earth.  This would slow the spacecraft to below lunar escape velocity so that the orbit would transition from Moon-centric hyperbolic to Moon-centric elliptical.  However, if the engine wasn't fired, the spacecraft would continue on its hyperbolic trajectory and fly past the Moon, eventually to escape its gravity.  Had the spacecraft entered orbit, to leave orbit it would again fire its engine, but this time to speed up.  Adding velocity would cause the Moon-centric elliptical orbit to transition back to Moon-centric hyperbolic.  As the spacecraft flew away from the Moon, Earth gravity again began to dominate over lunar gravity.  As this occurred, the spacecraft trajectory transitioned from Moon-centric hyperbolic back to Earth-centric elliptical.  The spacecraft was now on the inbound part of its elliptical orbit heading back to Earth.

What you consider to be a "figure 8" trajectory is actually three different trajectories that are patched together.  The spacecraft simply transitions from one to the next.

 Wow! I never knew this, at least not in this kind of way. Thank you for clarifying this - I have always thought of the orbits as one bigger one, but now it helps me understand the term Trans-Lunar Injection (hope I wrote that right).

[bobdude11]

2. The APOLLO 11 on-board computer was not sufficient to preform the tasks that the record says it did.

Another guy with a CS degree here. Worse, not only have I been educated, I program embedded systems of similar capabilities to the Apollo computer professionally and for personal pleasure.

So, I would also be interested in knowing what specific tasks the record says the Apollo AGC performed that could not be done by the hardware. There's copious amounts of documentation available about the hardware, enough for various people to have built simulators and actual physical replicas of the machine, as well as source code listings for the software, so you should be able to point out exactly what parts of the system fail to work as advertised.

3. The APOLLO 11 trajectories are completely inaccurate(CRAZY EIGHT)

What specifically is inaccurate about it?

 Two questions:
1. Was it truly called "Core Rope Technology" (I hope I am not misremembering the term I heard)?
2. Is this similar to multi-threading (or perhaps multi-tasking) or does it just allow the system to pull in the appropriate program at the correct time? (assuming I am not merely confused by the Hollywood aspect of 'From the Earth to the Moon' - Episode was 'We have cleared the tower' - it was during the interview of the computer technician that I remember him mentioning Core Rope Technology or something along those lines)

Additionally, are the schematics and source code listing available to the general public? I am trying to find everything I can about Apollo (and some WW2 aircraft) for light reading in my off hours.