I don’t know if man went to the moon in the sixties

[Glom]

Still the odds of DAKDAK being a seagull poster are getting shorter every minute.

I think you're probably right. I have wonder how many seagulls even bother to come back and read the responses to their posts.

Could be true. But its only been a few days. I'd wait a week before making a judgement. Not everyone checks for a frequently like we do.

[BertL]

Apollo was very roomy, you could get out of your seat and move around, which was impossible for Mercury and Gemini.

Especially in 0-g; practically every astronaut commented on how much roomier the thing became in space. It was common for one of the astronauts to sleep floating up in the tunnel.

I can see how that works. My 11m² room would be a lot spacy when I could just as easily move around in the third dimension.

[cjameshuff]

On the other hand, fuel cells produced drinking water that would have to be carried anyway. On the other other hand, they produced so much water that the excess had to be dumped.

IIRC, the Shuttle produced more than enough fuel cell waste water to keep the ISS supplied. (Disclaimer: I heard this before the Columbia disaster, when the station was much more incomplete, the crew smaller, and shuttle flights to the station more regular.)

[BazBear]

Ya know why my post count around here is still in the single digits?

People like DAKDAK. I get really tired of people wandering into various fora and boldly stating wrong things.

I hear you, but on the plus side his drive by did get a bit of discussion going.

[ka9q]

I hear you, but on the plus side his drive by did get a bit of discussion going.

That's why I hang around. There's not much to learn from the deniers, but I've learned a lot by researching rebuttals and reading those others have written.

[JayUtah]

That's why I hang around. There's not much to learn from the deniers, but I've learned a lot by researching rebuttals and reading those others have written.

This is what I can't get the stubborn folk over at BAUT to understand:  some people find that a debate framework is more effective at conveying and exploring important information.  They don't want to read a dry presentation; they want to watch people answer questions, challenge, and be challenged.

[Zakalwe]

That's why I hang around. There's not much to learn from the deniers, but I've learned a lot by researching rebuttals and reading those others have written.

This is what I can't get the stubborn folk over at BAUT to understand:  some people find that a debate framework is more effective at conveying and exploring important information.  They don't want to read a dry presentation; they want to watch people answer questions, challenge, and be challenged.

I personally find this format a great way of learning new stuff. The detail that some of you guys know is staggering, and seeing it applied to "real-world" scenarios is fascinating and very educational.

[Echnaton]

This is what I can't get the stubborn folk over at BAUT to understand:  some people find that a debate framework is more effective at conveying and exploring important information.  They don't want to read a dry presentation; they want to watch people answer questions, challenge, and be challenged.

It paradoxical to me that people would follow a thread for so long only to start complaining that is not getting anywhere, when the probability of the hoax proponent changing his mind is still the same as it was at the time of the first post.   Namely zero.    Online debate can be a great sport a for spectators and one that lets novices and pros to play in the same game. 

[ka9q]

Online debate can be a great sport a for spectators and one that lets novices and pros to play in the same game.

Not only that, but to be perfectly fair, at the core of most every Apollo hoax claim is actually the kernel of a good question. Why don't the stars appear in the Apollo pictures? Why didn't their suits puff up like Gemini's, and how did they operate their cameras while wearing them? Why do the distant lunar mountains look so close?

The deniers may not accept that perfectly good answers exist to all of these questions, but those who do can learn quite a bit. I often describe deniers as people who use questions as weapons, not as tools for learning answers.

[DAKDAK]

Let's examine the Apollo Command Module
please correct me if I claim anything that is not correct
The apollo command modules were the same size on all Apollo
missions

now I am only refering to the actual Command Module not the
Service module or the tower
please correct me if I claim anything that is not correct

[Post restored by LunarOrbit]

[DAKDAK]

If anybody disagrees with these numbers please let me know

I am not sure how you figure the cubic feet in a cone that is 154 inches wide and 127 inches tall. I asked one of the people that replied to my post screen name Chew He replied that he was not going to teach me GOOGLE “cube volume”
I am pretty sure this is a cone not a cube. The math is something like
(Radius( x) pie squared)times the height, this gives you a cylinder you divide that in half this gives you a cone.
The Smithsonian Institute says this comes out to 210 cubic feet.

DOES ANYBODY DISAGREE WITH THESE FIGURES???

[Post restored by LunarOrbit]

[DAKDAK]

SEE ATTACHMENT


[Post restored by LunarOrbit]

[gillianren]

Okay, so Google cone volume.  And remember that internal and external dimensions will not be the same thing.

[ChrLz]

Dak, what makes you think you can simply ignore the problems and errors already pointed out to you, and move on?

[DAKDAK]

LAST ATTACHED