Radiation

[timfinch]

We are burning up daylight here.  Can anyone refute the flight paths or is it time to acknowledge the truth of the matter?

You haven't provided an Apollo flight path to refute. You provided Apollo Earth orbit data.

Refer to the links in the post.  The entire flight path history of all apollo flights are there waiting for your discovery.  Review the TLI and it explains why the inclination of the orbit is selected.  It explains why they orbit through the SAA and not an equatorial orbit with much less radiation.

[timfinch]

I don't want to seem impatient but does anyone have anything?  Bueller?  Anyone?

[Al Johnston]

Tim, your pomposity is embarrassing.  You go on about how you're going to completely school everyone, but when you're asked to do tiny amounts of work, you can't do it.  You frequently resort to claiming that everything you don't understand about Apollo is magic.  Your insistence that you are smarter than everyone and that everyone else is just stupid doesn't actually make you look smarter.  It makes you look obnoxious.  Especially because you still haven't answered how you're certain that the answer to your issues is "I have made a mistake."

Gillianren,  It is not that I cannot do the calculations.  Surely I have demonstrated and superior level of knowledge in he subject matter to all interested parties.  I see these attempts as mere distraction to prevent from engaging the elephant in the room.  They would lead down a meandering path to know where for no other reason than to prevent addressing the real topic.  They lack the intellectual integrity to address these issues because their entire beliefs system is built on a foundation of obvious lies aqnd will crumble with the slightest nudge.  I am nudging....

You are clearly not smarter than a broom. If your claims were true then ISS is fake, as was MIR, as is every satellite ever claimed. Satellite TV is a myth and NASA is in collusion with ESA, Roscosmos, ISRO, CSNA, JAXA, and so forth to achieve...what?

Do you not comprehend that NASA was reduced to renting seats on Soyuz to even get to the ISS because of cranks like you?

When I made the statement that you were mentally challenged, I was suspended.  Let's see if the moderators are fair and balanced.  "Dumb as a broom" is a much more egregious offense don't you think?

Only to brooms

[benparry]

No. You have provided an OPINION based solely on your lack of understanding and inability to read the material.

Is the secondary radiation EM or particles?

You lie like a cheap  rug.  I have provided you with flight profiles for both the Orion EFT and all the Apollo missions.  Show some intellectual integrity and either accept it or refute it and desist in the obfusticating.

again you have offended. lie like a cheap rug. Tim you have been shown the flight path of the Apollo vehicles. they did not interact with the VAB inner belt. they skirted the outer belt.

I will repeat what Gillian has said quite a few times.

the entire scientific community, thousands of people over 5 decades all agree that this is the case and the manned lunar landings were real. you keep saying that there has been a desire to push dis information and lies but cant it be true that you are simply wrong.

I believe I said this next quote earlier in this thread and was shot down (by Gillian I think). the disbelief of the lunar landings is psychological.

Ben you are confusing me.  Are you implying that disagreeing with a woman is the misogynistic.  Gillian is a sniper on the hill taking pot shots and refusing to engage.  Most assuredly I have little respect for her position but that does not imply a lack of respect for her gender.

Certainly not but you have made comments that perhaps you wouldn't say to a man. You also say she is taking pot shots. One particular potshot which you haven't answered yet is could it simply be that you are wrong.

[timfinch]

Tim, your pomposity is embarrassing.  You go on about how you're going to completely school everyone, but when you're asked to do tiny amounts of work, you can't do it.  You frequently resort to claiming that everything you don't understand about Apollo is magic.  Your insistence that you are smarter than everyone and that everyone else is just stupid doesn't actually make you look smarter.  It makes you look obnoxious.  Especially because you still haven't answered how you're certain that the answer to your issues is "I have made a mistake."

Gillianren,  It is not that I cannot do the calculations.  Surely I have demonstrated and superior level of knowledge in he subject matter to all interested parties.  I see these attempts as mere distraction to prevent from engaging the elephant in the room.  They would lead down a meandering path to know where for no other reason than to prevent addressing the real topic.  They lack the intellectual integrity to address these issues because their entire beliefs system is built on a foundation of obvious lies aqnd will crumble with the slightest nudge.  I am nudging....

You are clearly not smarter than a broom. If your claims were true then ISS is fake, as was MIR, as is every satellite ever claimed. Satellite TV is a myth and NASA is in collusion with ESA, Roscosmos, ISRO, CSNA, JAXA, and so forth to achieve...what?

Do you not comprehend that NASA was reduced to renting seats on Soyuz to even get to the ISS because of cranks like you?

When I made the statement that you were mentally challenged, I was suspended.  Let's see if the moderators are fair and balanced.  "Dumb as a broom" is a much more egregious offense don't you think?

Only to brooms

Your remark is without merit or substance.  It addresses the issue not at all.  Be contributor and not a detractor, if for no other reason than to provide ammo for the gun that shoots me off my pedestal.  Teach me humility that I might loose my arrogance.

[timfinch]

No. You have provided an OPINION based solely on your lack of understanding and inability to read the material.

Is the secondary radiation EM or particles?

You lie like a cheap  rug.  I have provided you with flight profiles for both the Orion EFT and all the Apollo missions.  Show some intellectual integrity and either accept it or refute it and desist in the obfusticating.

again you have offended. lie like a cheap rug. Tim you have been shown the flight path of the Apollo vehicles. they did not interact with the VAB inner belt. they skirted the outer belt.

I will repeat what Gillian has said quite a few times.

the entire scientific community, thousands of people over 5 decades all agree that this is the case and the manned lunar landings were real. you keep saying that there has been a desire to push dis information and lies but cant it be true that you are simply wrong.

I believe I said this next quote earlier in this thread and was shot down (by Gillian I think). the disbelief of the lunar landings is psychological.

Ben you are confusing me.  Are you implying that disagreeing with a woman is the misogynistic.  Gillian is a sniper on the hill taking pot shots and refusing to engage.  Most assuredly I have little respect for her position but that does not imply a lack of respect for her gender.

Certainly not but you have made comments that perhaps you wouldn't say to a man. You also say she is taking pot shots. One particular potshot which you haven't answered yet is could it simply be that you are wrong.

The only remark that I made to her was to apologize  for the perceived insult to her gender.  It is true that I would not make such an apology to a man but other than that there has been no indiscretion on my part.  Ben, you like the others obfuscate to distract from the subject matter.  You want to make gender bias the subject when it is really nothing to do with gender.  This is about lunar trajectory and anything else is a diversion.  Stay on point.

[timfinch]

I don't want to seem impatient but does anyone have anything?  Bueller?  Anyone?

[Abaddon]

I am placing the admins on notice.  Until Abaddon is disciplined as I frequently am, I will not respond to him.  He no longer exist in my mind or sight.

to be fair Tim you have also not answered in an adult way. thinks like shall I color in the reply and do you need help with the big words doesn't do anything for you. it shows you up quite a bit.

I am not here to massage ego's and placate sensibilities.

Wrong. You are massaging your own ego.

I am here to shine the light of truth on the deception.

Wrong. You have failed to demonstrate any deception beyond your own.

I have not been offensive

Wrong. You have hurled abuse left right and center.

and I would not be unkind except for the constant barrage of insults.

Wrong. you get push back BECAUSE you hurl insult at every step.

I am a counter puncher.

Wrong. You have no punch to start with.

I am never the first striker.

Wrong. You are clearly the first striker.

Is there anything else you would like to get comprehensively wrong? Spatial reasoning, perhaps? Log and Linear scales, perhaps? Google, maybe? Orbital inclinations, maybe? Orbital mechanics, it might be?

Naaa. Your real problem is that I will not allow you away with the industrial grade baloney you spew and you don't much like that I hold your feet to the flames. And when you cannot answer, you seek suppression of dissent. Who went that route you or I?

[Allan F]

No. You have provided an OPINION based solely on your lack of understanding and inability to read the material.

Is the secondary radiation EM or particles?

You lie like a cheap  rug.  I have provided you with flight profiles for both the Orion EFT and all the Apollo missions.  Show some intellectual integrity and either accept it or refute it and desist in the obfusticating.

Will you answer this very simple question: Is the secondary radiation particle or EM?

Or will you by evading again or use personal insults again admit you don't know the difference?

[onebigmonkey]

We are burning up daylight here.  Can anyone refute the flight paths or is it time to acknowledge the truth of the matter?

You haven't provided an Apollo flight path to refute. You provided Apollo Earth orbit data.

Refer to the links in the post.  The entire flight path history of all apollo flights are there waiting for your discovery.  Review the TLI and it explains why the inclination of the orbit is selected.  It explains why they orbit through the SAA and not an equatorial orbit with much less radiation.

I did. I also have the book. If you look hard enough you'll find the actual TLI data. You're just demonstrating that you are another hoax believer who is convinced he is the only one who knows anything. You're nowhere near the level of understanding required to claim expertise in any of this.

When you're finished you can explain how it is that a hand held camera filmed an exactly correct view of Earth from cislunar space, or how Chinese images show evidence of human activity at the Apollo landing sites.

[Abaddon]

No. You have provided an OPINION based solely on your lack of understanding and inability to read the material.

Is the secondary radiation EM or particles?

You lie like a cheap  rug. 

What was it you said about hurling insults? Remind me.

I have provided you with flight profiles for both the Orion EFT and all the Apollo missions. 

No, you have not. At best, you have provided 2D representations of 3D topography and proudly proceeded to demonstrate that 3D spatial reasoning is somehow beyond your comprehension.

Show some intellectual integrity

More insults? How refreshing.

and either accept it or refute it and desist in the obfusticating.

Ever stick your finger through a hole in a donut? You are telling us that you cannot figure out how to do that. This is the level of your discourse.

[timfinch]

No. You have provided an OPINION based solely on your lack of understanding and inability to read the material.

Is the secondary radiation EM or particles?

You lie like a cheap  rug.  I have provided you with flight profiles for both the Orion EFT and all the Apollo missions.  Show some intellectual integrity and either accept it or refute it and desist in the obfusticating.

Will you answer this very simple question: Is the secondary radiation particle or EM?

Or will you by evading again or use personal insults again admit you don't know the difference?

It is both but what has that to do with accepting the illustration or rejecting it.  You have eluded addressing this simple point all day.  Take a position.

[Abaddon]

I don't want to seem impatient but does anyone have anything?  Bueller?  Anyone?

Sure. We have all of the evidence and you have nothing.

[Abaddon]

No. You have provided an OPINION based solely on your lack of understanding and inability to read the material.

Is the secondary radiation EM or particles?

You lie like a cheap  rug.  I have provided you with flight profiles for both the Orion EFT and all the Apollo missions.  Show some intellectual integrity and either accept it or refute it and desist in the obfusticating.

Will you answer this very simple question: Is the secondary radiation particle or EM?

Or will you by evading again or use personal insults again admit you don't know the difference?

It is both but what has that to do with accepting the illustration or rejecting it.  You have eluded addressing this simple point all day.  Take a position.

Snigger. Missionary or what?

[timfinch]

We are burning up daylight here.  Can anyone refute the flight paths or is it time to acknowledge the truth of the matter?

You haven't provided an Apollo flight path to refute. You provided Apollo Earth orbit data.

Refer to the links in the post.  The entire flight path history of all apollo flights are there waiting for your discovery.  Review the TLI and it explains why the inclination of the orbit is selected.  It explains why they orbit through the SAA and not an equatorial orbit with much less radiation.

I did. I also have the book. If you look hard enough you'll find the actual TLI data. You're just demonstrating that you are another hoax believer who is convinced he is the only one who knows anything. You're nowhere near the level of understanding required to claim expertise in any of this.

When you're finished you can explain how it is that a hand held camera filmed an exactly correct view of Earth from cislunar space, or how Chinese images show evidence of human activity at the Apollo landing sites.

Try to remain on point.  Do you reject the flight similarities of the Orion EFT and the Apollo's and if so what is the basis and where are the facts?