Author Topic: Why I suspect Apollo was a hoax.  (Read 668069 times)

Offline JayUtah

  • Neptune
  • ****
  • Posts: 3814
    • Clavius
Re: Why I suspect Apollo was a hoax.
« Reply #1080 on: September 08, 2015, 03:59:48 PM »
The porous-plate sublimator has a nifty self-regulating feature. When the ice forms, it blocks the supply of feed water. As it sublimates, it reopens those pores and allows fresh feedwater to flow and freeze.

And to clarify, a practical sublimator is composed of many such elements.  Each element goes through its own individual feed-freeze-sublimate cycle, and will not perform its heat-rejection duties as effectively during the feed-sublimation step.  However, the elements are not in synch and therefore perform this cycle independently each at its own natural interval.  The overall cooling effect of the sublimator assembly is the cumulative effect of each of these elements, some of which are regenerating at any given instant.
"Facts are stubborn things." --John Adams

Offline bknight

  • Neptune
  • ****
  • Posts: 3136
Re: Why I suspect Apollo was a hoax.
« Reply #1081 on: September 08, 2015, 08:44:48 PM »
The porous-plate sublimator has a nifty self-regulating feature. When the ice forms, it blocks the supply of feed water. As it sublimates, it reopens those pores and allows fresh feedwater to flow and freeze.

And to clarify, a practical sublimator is composed of many such elements.  Each element goes through its own individual feed-freeze-sublimate cycle, and will not perform its heat-rejection duties as effectively during the feed-sublimation step.  However, the elements are not in synch and therefore perform this cycle independently each at its own natural interval.  The overall cooling effect of the sublimator assembly is the cumulative effect of each of these elements, some of which are regenerating at any given instant.
Are you referring to spacecraft systems? 
Truth needs no defense.  Nobody can take those footsteps I made on the surface of the moon away from me.
Eugene Cernan

Offline Dalhousie

  • Jupiter
  • ***
  • Posts: 621
Re: Why I suspect Apollo was a hoax.
« Reply #1082 on: September 08, 2015, 11:20:32 PM »
Fair point. I missed that one. By his argument, we might as easily claim that Jupiter and the Galilean moons are inflatables.

You mean they aren't? ::)
Sorry, I have said to much. Forget everything. Some well built gentlemen will be calling to your door. Do as they say and all will be well. Maybe.

 ;D ;D ;D ;D

Probably a flashing light thingy...

Mr Baker seems to have given us up as beyond hope....
« Last Edit: September 08, 2015, 11:25:34 PM by Dalhousie »

Offline smartcooky

  • Uranus
  • ****
  • Posts: 1968
Re: Why I suspect Apollo was a hoax.
« Reply #1083 on: September 09, 2015, 01:21:49 AM »
Mr Baker seems to have given us up as beyond hope....

More likely, since he is under moderation, he feels he's being censored (remember AWE130?) and he's worked out that LO won't allow his usual fare through to the board.

Since he came here, Baker has done little more than fire allegations and post falsehoods while he has studiously avoided answering questions put to him, or merely handwaved them away He may be able to get away with that kind of rubbish at GLP or ATS or Infowars and other related hangouts for the nut-jobs of this world, but that isn't going to pass muster here.

If you're not a scientist but you think you've destroyed the foundation of a vast scientific edifice with 10 minutes of Googling, you might want to consider the possibility that you're wrong.

Offline bknight

  • Neptune
  • ****
  • Posts: 3136
Re: Why I suspect Apollo was a hoax.
« Reply #1084 on: September 09, 2015, 07:04:43 AM »
Here's a nice picture of the ISS "balloon" across the Sun.
http://www.nasa.gov/image-feature/international-space-station-transits-the-sun
Truth needs no defense.  Nobody can take those footsteps I made on the surface of the moon away from me.
Eugene Cernan

Offline Apollo 957

  • Earth
  • ***
  • Posts: 182
Re: Why I suspect Apollo was a hoax.
« Reply #1085 on: September 10, 2015, 07:54:29 AM »
Here's a nice picture of the ISS "balloon" across the Sun.
http://www.nasa.gov/image-feature/international-space-station-transits-the-sun

Yes, quite effective, the way this 'lighted inflatable' goes dark when it transits the sun....


Offline bknight

  • Neptune
  • ****
  • Posts: 3136
Re: Why I suspect Apollo was a hoax.
« Reply #1086 on: September 10, 2015, 08:03:57 AM »

Yes, quite effective, the way this 'lighted inflatable' goes dark when it transits the sun....
A slap at Neil's absurd claim, of course.
Truth needs no defense.  Nobody can take those footsteps I made on the surface of the moon away from me.
Eugene Cernan

Offline Jason Thompson

  • Uranus
  • ****
  • Posts: 1601
Re: Why I suspect Apollo was a hoax.
« Reply #1087 on: September 10, 2015, 08:47:15 AM »
Yes, quite effective, the way this 'lighted inflatable' goes dark when it transits the sun....

While I'm all for treating the idea of the ISS being inflatable with all the scorn it deserves, I think we should ensure the arguments are sound. An object in front of the Sun doesn't have to actually be dark to appear dark against the background of the solar disc, it just has to be emitting less light than the unshielded nuclear fusion reactor behind it. Sunspots look black, but if isolated would still be almost as bright as the Sun. It's a function of the amount of light being filtered to allow the image to be taken.
"There's this idea that everyone's opinion is equally valid. My arse! Bloke who was a professor of dentistry for forty years does NOT have a debate with some eejit who removes his teeth with string and a door!"  - Dara O'Briain

Offline Apollo 957

  • Earth
  • ***
  • Posts: 182
Re: Why I suspect Apollo was a hoax.
« Reply #1088 on: September 10, 2015, 09:41:54 AM »
Yes, quite effective, the way this 'lighted inflatable' goes dark when it transits the sun....

While I'm all for treating the idea of the ISS being inflatable with all the scorn it deserves, I think we should ensure the arguments are sound.

Fair enough. In that vein, can I suggest considering the transit across the sun in tandem with a separate transit across the moon, and point out that the size of the ISS, when you consider that the Moon almost covers the Sun exactly in a solar eclipse, is remarkably consistent between the two - indicating that its height is consistent between the two series, and reinforcing the viewpoint that it's in a broadly fixed-height orbit above us.

Comparison photos here, for a start -

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-3227691/International-Space-station-photobombs-SUN-Stunning-image-tracks-laboratory-s-journey-hurtles-17-000mph.html

Offline Cat Not Included

  • Venus
  • **
  • Posts: 78
Re: Why I suspect Apollo was a hoax.
« Reply #1089 on: September 10, 2015, 11:36:59 AM »
Fair enough. In that vein, can I suggest considering the transit across the sun in tandem with a separate transit across the moon, and point out that the size of the ISS, when you consider that the Moon almost covers the Sun exactly in a solar eclipse, is remarkably consistent between the two - indicating that its height is consistent between the two series, and reinforcing the viewpoint that it's in a broadly fixed-height orbit above us.
Maybe I'm misinterpreting, but I had the impression that Neil thought the ISS was an inflatable object, but was fully the size of the ISS and in the same orbit. Just, ya know, inflatable. So it should behave in most ways like the ISS.

Of course, it is utterly baffling to me why he thinks we could put a giant inflatable device in orbit but not could possibly put an actual space station there.

And while I don't know exactly what, I'd be willing to bet there are quite a few engineering problems that could be solved or assisted if we COULD built giant inflatable devices capable of going in a stable orbit with less effort than it takes to launch a solid object.
The quote "Insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results" very clearly predates personal computers.

Offline bknight

  • Neptune
  • ****
  • Posts: 3136
Re: Why I suspect Apollo was a hoax.
« Reply #1090 on: September 10, 2015, 11:39:49 AM »
Maybe I'm misinterpreting, but I had the impression that Neil thought the ISS was an inflatable object, but was fully the size of the ISS and in the same orbit. Just, ya know, inflatable. So it should behave in most ways like the ISS.

Of course, it is utterly baffling to me why he thinks we could put a giant inflatable device in orbit but not could possibly put an actual space station there.

And while I don't know exactly what, I'd be willing to bet there are quite a few engineering problems that could be solved or assisted if we COULD built giant inflatable devices capable of going in a stable orbit with less effort than it takes to launch a solid object.
Just like NASA did in 1960.  The first man made orbiting satellite that could be viewed with the eyes
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Echo
Truth needs no defense.  Nobody can take those footsteps I made on the surface of the moon away from me.
Eugene Cernan

Offline Abaddon

  • Saturn
  • ****
  • Posts: 1132
Re: Why I suspect Apollo was a hoax.
« Reply #1091 on: September 10, 2015, 12:24:29 PM »
Fair enough. In that vein, can I suggest considering the transit across the sun in tandem with a separate transit across the moon, and point out that the size of the ISS, when you consider that the Moon almost covers the Sun exactly in a solar eclipse, is remarkably consistent between the two - indicating that its height is consistent between the two series, and reinforcing the viewpoint that it's in a broadly fixed-height orbit above us.
Maybe I'm misinterpreting, but I had the impression that Neil thought the ISS was an inflatable object, but was fully the size of the ISS and in the same orbit. Just, ya know, inflatable. So it should behave in most ways like the ISS.
Nope. You did not imagine it. That is indeed his claim. His only wiggle room is how big and how high the ethereal dirigible might be.

Of course, it is utterly baffling to me why he thinks we could put a giant inflatable device in orbit but not could possibly put an actual space station there.
I am minded of Moon Man's plaintive cry for an answer as to at what altitude above the moon's surface did the vacuum start and how did it extend all the way to Earth, and how far did this supposed vacuum extend. Those were actual questions asked.

There is a point at which one must ask "Is it possible to be this dense?" OR "Is this willful density?". Moon Man qualified as a complete loon who was beyond any education. Neil seems to be tending in that direction. Since Neil returned just yesterday, he may have some posts in the queue awaiting moderator judgment, I don't know.

And while I don't know exactly what, I'd be willing to bet there are quite a few engineering problems that could be solved or assisted if we COULD built giant inflatable devices capable of going in a stable orbit with less effort than it takes to launch a solid object.
I suppose you could do it were you willing to exercise some imagination. Still, it will require a pool of designers, test articles, test facilities, Engineers of various flavours, mission controllers, telemetry through various nation states, maintenance because no matter what you do it will leak some and require replenishment so multiply that by every ISS resupply mission, then you need the engineering and production to produce the gear to repressurise the blimp, not to mention the the various sub blimp modules which must be added over time, the hours of footage which must be faked, and on and on...

At this point, without even trying, there are many thousands of required co-conspirators, yet none revealed all.

And this leads right back to the inconsistent HB claim. The EBIL GUBBMINT is simultaneously so supremely powerful that it can silence any whistle blower by blandishment or assassination as required but at the very same time puts the evidence of their conspiracy on the intertubes for any moron to find.

Riddle me that.




Offline mako88sb

  • Mars
  • ***
  • Posts: 293
Re: Why I suspect Apollo was a hoax.
« Reply #1092 on: September 10, 2015, 12:52:32 PM »

Of course, it is utterly baffling to me why he thinks we could put a giant inflatable device in orbit but not could possibly put an actual space station there.


He came to this conclusion because he thinks that since the info on the sublimation system used for the Apollo PLSS was not to be found despite him looking everywhere, then they would not work the way they are supposed to. Therefore, since the suits used during the Shuttle era have the same type of cooling system, any eva performed in LEO must be fake. That includes the building of the ISS. I guess he figures the un-inflated module could be manipulated by the remote arm into position and then inflated. Also according to him, the Hubble repair missions were faked as well including the fact that Hubble had a flawed mirror to begin with.
« Last Edit: September 10, 2015, 12:54:05 PM by mako88sb »

Offline Kiwi

  • Mars
  • ***
  • Posts: 483
Re: Why I suspect Apollo was a hoax.
« Reply #1093 on: September 10, 2015, 01:51:49 PM »
Just like NASA did in 1960.  The first man made orbiting satellite that could be viewed with the eyes
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Echo

That's not right. I was just one of probably tens of thousands worldwide who watched Sputnik I with the naked eye.  For me, 8:06pm on 9 October 1957 NZST. Although its more likely we saw the rocket that put the tiny satellite up.
« Last Edit: September 10, 2015, 01:57:02 PM by Kiwi »
Don't criticize what you can't understand. — Bob Dylan, “The Times They Are A-Changin'” (1963)
Some people think they are thinking when they are really rearranging their prejudices and superstitions. — Edward R. Murrow (1908–65)

Offline bknight

  • Neptune
  • ****
  • Posts: 3136
Re: Why I suspect Apollo was a hoax.
« Reply #1094 on: September 10, 2015, 01:54:18 PM »
Just like NASA did in 1960.  The first man made orbiting satellite that could be viewed with the eyes
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Echo

That's not right. I was just one of probably tens of thousands worldwide who watched Sputnik I.  For me, 8:06pm on 9 October 1957 NZST. Although its more likely we saw the rocket that put the tiny satellite up.
I think you are correct about the rocket, not the satellite, it was too small to see with magnification.
Truth needs no defense.  Nobody can take those footsteps I made on the surface of the moon away from me.
Eugene Cernan