Why I suspect Apollo was a hoax.

[JayUtah]

No, I didn't say that.
I said I had no proof. Neither do you.

And I said, I have no burden to produce any in order to question your claim.  You seem to be arguing that we are on equal footing, or in some sort of standoff or stalemate.  Not true, as regards your claim.  You have the burden to prove it.  If you say you cannot, it fails forthwith.

We both have plenty of evidence.

You've presented no evidence.  You've presented only speculation and bare denial.  You've also made subsidiary affirmative claims which proved false.

That which makes my argument unique, and the reason you should support it, is that I describe something that can be scientifically validated on Earth today.

And has been, to the satisfaction of the relevant professional fields.  In contrast you present only your denial, based on an argument from silence.  You maintain this despite having been informed numerous times why your argument is not convincing.

[JayUtah]

This is a direct claim that the photo has been faked, the ISS is a nice prop and the spacesuits are fake with a fake back ground.

Probably

Weasel words.  Either the photo is genuine and provides evidence your theory does not account for or it is fake, as you have suggested.  The only way this evidence does not defeat your claim is if you can prove your accusation that it's fake.

[Abaddon]

My evidence is that the spacesuits shown have never in their over 50 years of alleged use been publicly demonstrated by NASA to work in a high vacuum chamber on Earth duplicating environmental conditions of orbit.

Except that such tests have been performed and you have been provided with the very video and photographic evidence you demanded.

Only until recently after my agitation could a photograph of a spacesuit ice sublimator be seen on the Internet.

You have been demonstrated to be completely wrong on this. You have been provided with evidence which predates your "agitation". It is nobodies fault but yours that you are an incompetent researcher.

And despite representing one of the most interesting and exotic heat transfer devices ever contrived,

There is nothing exotic about sublimation, nor it's principles, nor it's scientific provenance, nor the devices used to implement it as a cooling system. Just because you are ignorant of such things does not perforce mean that everyone else must be.

no spacesuit ice sublimator is mentioned in any academic-level heat transfer or thermodynamics book.

Funny how it was covered in thermodynamics 101 in my first year uni text books 25 years ago. How do you explain that?

It's evidence of anomalous spacesuits.

No, it is evidence that you know nothing Neil Baker.

[Kiwi]

You think  that image is on the web because of you?
I hate to break it to you, but that image was available at the latest in 1997, when the Internet Archive archived it.

Neil Baker:  Did you notice that particular post (reply 27 on page 2)? The link proves the photo you claim recent responsibility for, was actually on the internet back on 17 June 1997, at the Apollo Lunar Surface Journals.

[Luke Pemberton]

no spacesuit ice sublimator is mentioned in any academic-level heat transfer or thermodynamics book. It's evidence of anomalous spacesuits.

As a physicist I fail to understand why anyone would explicitly write about a bespoke engineering system in a heat transfer or thermodynamics book. Your understanding of the interface between academic books and real world engineering projects is distinctly flawed.

The PLSS works on a simple heat exchanger, and the engineer needs an understanding of thermodynamics to design the system. Once designed that system may be patented (its working is protected under patent law) or as with the Apollo project, a description of the PLSS is published as a technical document along with all the other project documentation.

There is no interest in the academic author writing about a bespoke system. I have a heat exchanger in my car, right at the front of the car, I have never seen it written about in any academic book. I can assure you that my car is parked on my drive and the said heat exchanger exists.

[raven]

That would be quite a feat in itself, sending up and inflating such a large, complex structure in orbit. Who built this alleged structure, Neil Baker? Who were the engineers and scientists involved? Can you name even one?

I think it might have been Bigelow Aerospace in Las Vegas. The website says they've been around since 99 but I suspect much longer probably as a black ops. 1999 was probably the year they came out of stealth mode after building the ISS balloons. Pretty impressive operation for a company that hasn't sold anything.

OK, evidence? Bigelow sent up a couple inflatable satellites as proof of concept for their inflatable module design, but they are far simpler than the  ISS complex's shape, seen in the photos anyone with access to the right consumer level hardware. Besides, one could 'think' and 'suspect' anything, I could 'say' it was Tiny, world's largest circus clown and I could 'suspect' it was done with Santa Claus' help, and we'd both be on equal footing evidence-wise.

[Neil Baker]

And I said, I have no burden to produce any in order to question your claim.  You seem to be arguing that we are on equal footing, or in some sort of standoff or stalemate.  Not true, as regards your claim.  You have the burden to prove it.  If you say you cannot, it fails forthwith.

Yes you do. You claim there's a manned ISS and spacewalks and moonwalks were made.
I say PROVE it.
Yes, I accept a burden of proof also but, unfortunately, I'm still seeking the required assistance from NASA.
We both have burdens of proof and, fortunately, we can both use the same method of PROOF---public demonstration before independent witnesses of a NASA spacesuit with sublimator in a high vacuum chamber on Earth duplicating environmental conditions of orbit.

[Neil Baker]

Weasel words.  Either the photo is genuine and provides evidence your theory does not account for or it is fake, as you have suggested.  The only way this evidence does not defeat your claim is if you can prove your accusation that it's fake.

I don't have proof. I have to say "probably."
You don't have proof either but you don't say "probably."
Who's the weasel?

[Gazpar]

I say PROVE it.

You were provided with photos of the ISS taken by amateurs and their telescopes.
Its up to you to prove that such aerodynamical shape can fly over the skies at high speed

[JayUtah]

My evidence is that the spacesuits shown have never in their over 50 years of alleged use been publicly demonstrated by NASA to work in a high vacuum chamber on Earth duplicating environmental conditions of orbit.

False according to evidence presented, and in any case a narrowly-tailored straw man.  Your contrived personal definition of a "public demonstration" does not create a controversy that others are bound to respect.

Only until recently after my agitation could a photograph of a spacesuit ice sublimator be seen on the Internet.

Records were produced proving otherwise.  You are not responsible for the publication on the internet of photographs of sublimators.

And despite representing one of the most interesting and exotic heat transfer devices ever contrived...

Phase-change cooling is far from "exotic."  Have you ever heard of swamp cooler?  And sublimation cooling is no more exotic than, say, a Joule-Thompson device, which is also commonly used on spacecraft.

...no spacesuit ice sublimator is mentioned in any academic-level heat transfer or thermodynamics book.

The most widely referenced free textbook (Lienhard) on heat transfer, from an MIT professor, has an entire chapter on phase-change methods of heat transfer.

Further this is another straw man.  Heat transfer and thermodynamics textbooks rarely describe any commercial products that effect the principles they describe.  They are primarily physics textbooks.  The standard engineering reference on spacecraft design (Fortescue et al.) has an entire chapter on thermal design, including a discussion of both practical phase-change mechanisms and limits on practical testing of thermal control methods on Earth.  Looking in the wrong places and handwaving about allegedly suspicious omissions does not create an argument those skilled in the art are obliged to respect.

It's evidence of anomalous spacesuits.

No, the more parsimonious interpretation is that you overstate the degree of research you have done as well as misrepresent the findings, and present only a fairly easily refutable argument from silence.  Your personal incredulity and your personal ineptitude at research is not probative of anything except those things.

[Neil Baker]

Did you notice that particular post (reply 27 on page 2)? The link proves the photo you claim recent responsibility for, was actually on the internet back on 17 June 1997, at the Apollo Lunar Surface Journals.

I saw it and I believe you. I imagine it was buried in cyberspace somewhere. But it didn't appear to me and others until much later.

[Abaddon]

And I said, I have no burden to produce any in order to question your claim.  You seem to be arguing that we are on equal footing, or in some sort of standoff or stalemate.  Not true, as regards your claim.  You have the burden to prove it.  If you say you cannot, it fails forthwith.

Yes you do. You claim there's a manned ISS and spacewalks and moonwalks were made.
I say PROVE it.
Yes, I accept a burden of proof also but, unfortunately, I'm still seeking the required assistance from NASA.
We both have burdens of proof and, fortunately, we can both use the same method of PROOF---public demonstration before independent witnesses of a NASA spacesuit with sublimator in a high vacuum chamber on Earth duplicating environmental conditions of orbit.

It has been done, you have been shown technical documents, pictures and videos, all of which you were unable to find on your own, all of which were spoon fed to you, all of which you ignore in favour of stamping your feet and demanding that a "special" demonstration be undertaken just for you. Because you are "special".

As for ISS spacewalks, they have been observed from earth using backyard telescopes by amateurs. Had you undertaken the most basic of research you would know this, but apparently even google surpasses your abilities.

Neil Baker, a man whose talents truly know no beginning.

[Bob B.]

...no spacesuit ice sublimator is mentioned in any academic-level heat transfer or thermodynamics book.

Here a text book titled Advanced Heat and Mass Transfer that asks its students a question about porous plate sublimators (question #4.2.1).

https://books.google.com/books?id=yxMnotbAAz4C&pg=PA436#v=onepage&q&f=false

[Gazpar]

Did you notice that particular post (reply 27 on page 2)? The link proves the photo you claim recent responsibility for, was actually on the internet back on 17 June 1997, at the Apollo Lunar Surface Journals.

I saw it and I believe you. I imagine it was buried in cyberspace somewhere. But it didn't appear to me and others until much later.

But It was there regardless of your observation.

[Neil Baker]

I say PROVE it.

You were provided with photos of the ISS taken by amateurs and their telescopes.
Its up to you to prove that such aerodynamical shape can fly over the skies at high speed

That's not proof. That's evidence. Those photos could be fake and even if they're not, the thing photographed could be fake.