Why I suspect Apollo was a hoax.

[mako88sb]

Despite coming to the conclusion that the world revolves around you, the fact is your wants and opinions are irrelevant. It would be almost criminal of NASA to even contemplate agreeing to this test of yours since you have made it clear that nothing will satisfy you until your ultimate goal of getting a 9/11 investigation result that suits you is complete. You can have hissy fits about it for the rest of your life but you best get used to that fact.

[Bob B.]

No photo (although there's one now) and still there's absurdly only one.

There's been more than one photo posted in this thread.  See reply #8 and reply #51.  And I believe I saw additional photos in some of the links provided.

ETA:  This page, https://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/plss.html, has no less than 6 photos showing the sublimator from different angles.

most absurdly, no video.

I don't care about video.  The other documentation is more than adequate to demonstrate that porous plate sublimators have been tested and work as advertised.

I argue that it's preposterous to expect an astronaut to wait until they're at the ISS before experiencing high vacuum in a spacesuit and many of the Antagonists on the site argue that it would be "immoral" to do so because it would unnecessarily jeopardize the lives of the astronauts.

You're the only one who keeps harping about the "I" word.  The important point is that human testing in high vacuum is "unnecessary".  The equipment can be tested without a human presence.

I'll admit that this whole "immoral" argument has taken me by surprise.

Then stop obsessing about it.
 
 

[gillianren]

OR shown that document X actually exists, just jump right over it as it never happened and start right over again.

Indeed.  Everything Neil demands for the Holocaust has already been shown, too, and he's wrong there, of course.  I'd also like to point out that it isn't just the 6 million Jews who died, either; estimates include about 6.5 million gentiles of various types--Gypsies, homosexuals, Communists, and so forth--who were also killed in the camps.  Probably including some of my own relatives, though tracing that branch of the family has proved difficult.

Is it just me who's not allowed to talk about the holocaust or should everyone be threatened about it?

Really?  Really?  That's the first post of mine you respond to, and it isn't even anything substantive?  Neil.  You are wrong about just boatloads of things, including how evidence works.  I don't expect you to understand that, goodness knows, but I would like you to acknowledge that each piece of evidence--in anything--has to be weighed on its own merits.  Limiting it strictly to Apollo, proving that this one piece of equipment doesn't work as advertised doesn't explain the rocks.  The film.  The reflectors.  The telemetry.  The personal testimonials of actual freakin' astronauts.  Every single piece of evidence has been scrutinized by people working in relevant fields for literally decades.  In order to have a working claim of an Apollo hoax, you have to explain all of them, not merely demand one test that, to be blunt, wouldn't actually show anything.  What exactly do you think would show up on film in that test?

[Abaddon]

Is it just me who's not allowed to talk about the holocaust or should everyone be threatened about it?

You have been informed by the owner of this site that said aforementioned topic is inappropriate for this thread and not allowed on this site anyway.

This applies to you, me, and every member of this site, without fear or favour. If you want to raise such matters for discussion, take it elsewhere to some other site which will entertain such nonsense. It is explicitly prohibited here.

[JayUtah]

I doubt it's operation because when in 2007 I asked myself...

That wasn't the question.  The question was what physical law prevents the nickel porous plate sublimator from working.  You are a degreed engineer, questioning an engineering item.  You can -- and will -- be expected to provide an engineering rationale for your claim of its non-operation, complete with any quantitative computations and citations to standard references.

You were not asked simply to repeat your claim, which has already been debunked as your obvious ineptitude at research.  It is quite obvious that your conspiracy theory is motivated far more by your desire to be a hero than by any specific, articulable scientific fact.  You don't get to accuse NASA of being unaccountable when you are unable to account for your accusation by means of a scientific proof.  Simply whining that you couldn't find information on the internet is inadequate, lazy, and unprofessional.

I argue that it's preposterous to expect an astronaut to wait...

Asked and answered.  You demonstrate no competence in aerospace training and testing.  Your opinion over its propriety, as conducted by those who are qualified, is therefore irrelevant.  Alluding to your also-debunked claims regarding the ISS does not salvage your overall argument from ignorance.

I'll admit that this whole "immoral" argument has taken me by surprise.

Indeed it has.  It's obviously an aspect of your long-standing, often-repeated dog-and-pony show that you have not yet faced.  However, mocking it does not refute it.  Nor would various state authorities agree that you are an authority on what is moral.  You are clearly unable to deal with its effect on your claim that the test you propose would be a necessary and prudent step in validating a sublimator for space -- a goal you insist on conflating with personnel training despite several attempts to explain to you the difference.

I probably have one of the cheapest cellphones on the market and it takes great photos and video.

Try to get it into a secure NASA facility.  Especially you try to get it into a secure NASA facility.

Further, you were asked several times why you consider photo and video credible evidence of a human space-suited astronaut in a vacuum, cooled by sublimation, when you dismiss already-existing photos and video by speculatively claiming the vacuum (or some other aspect of the test) has been faked.  Your inconsistency and evasion in formulating the test you say is essential and probative reveals your ploy simply to be constantly moving goalposts.  You're demanding a specific activity that you know will never be undertaken, simply so you can get rhetorical mileage of complaining that it won't be.

And why are we having this debate?

Because you want attention, and are willing to stoop even to criminal activity to get it.

Fundamentally, it's because NASA refuses to be accountable.

NASA is fully accountable to the extent it is expected to be, and to an extent you simply refuse to acknowledge.  Without any justification, you simply want their accountability to include acquiescing to the demonstrably ignorant demands from a single crackpot.  You are simply not that important.

...and most of all allowing independent witnesses to observe spacesuit with ice sublimator testing or training in a high vacuum chamber on Earth duplicating environmental conditions of orbit.

Asked and answered.  Your argument for the necessity of that test is predicated entirely on your delusional denial, which no one else shares.  Your argument for the practicality of that test is predicted on a colossal level of ignorance for what it would actually entail.  You have addressed neither of these objections, except to state and restate the same ignorant beliefs.  Further, you have assiduously ignored every other form of documentary, eyewitness, and circumstantial evidence that has been placed before you, and which serves to convince literally the entire educated population of the planet that space suit cooling works as advertised.  You have sought to assuage that unanimity by claiming that everyone except you is a coward for not agreeing with you.  That is not persuasive.

[Luke Pemberton]

Neil, I want you to produce numbers showing why the PLSS sublimator  does not work. So no, you have not answered the question about the physics of the sublimator. You've made demand after demand and been shown wrong at every hurdle and dodged some important questions. If I had made the pre-2007 info claim and received the shellshacking you did, I'd have walked away tail between legs by now. Surely someone with the power of the anti-Christ must realise that each link that was posted was a nail in the coffin of your opening gambit. You came here with 7 high and got shown a full house. You were found out early doors my pedigree chum. Forgive the slang, I'm sat having a beer in old London town. Walk through Hyde Park tomorrow to see the Apollo 10 CM. So excited.

Sent from my C2105 using Tapatalk

[smartcooky]

One person argues that video recording is too expensive and although that may have once been true it certainly isn't true now. I probably have one of the cheapest cellphones on the market and it takes great photos and video.

1. Cellphones and video cameras didn't exist in 1965

2. Why would NASA need to test spacesuits and video those tests when they have successfully used them for 50 years and thousands of hours of EVA without incident?

It is only delusional nut-cases like you who make preposterous demands for this level of testing.

What level of trust do you have in technology?

Do you do a full test drive of your car, on a test track, complete with video for analysis before you drive down to the bodega for a pint of milk and a pack of cookies?

Do you haul your television set onto a test bench and carry out a full systems test and calibration,  complete with video for analysis, before turning it on to watch your favourite programmes?

Do you carry out a full functional and electrical safety check on your oven every morning complete with video for analysis before grilling you breakfast sausages and bacon?

[raven]

Do you go to the doctor every morning to get a check-up to make sure you're in fit health?

[smartcooky]

Do you go to the doctor every morning to get a check-up to make sure you're in fit health?

....and video the doctor doing the check-up for later analysis?

[raven]

Do you go to the doctor every morning to get a check-up to make sure you're in fit health?

....and video the doctor doing the check-up for later analysis?

Obviously!

[Luke Pemberton]

Do you go to the doctor every morning to get a check-up to make sure you're in fit health?

...and insist that the prescribed drugs are tested?

[Allan F]

Do you go to the doctor every morning to get a check-up to make sure you're in fit health?

That would be a "no".

[Abaddon]

I've answered this question already but I'm happy to answer again.
None.

Oh goody. Now you admit there is now reason the sublimator would not work as advertised, yet...

I doubt it's operation because

Wait a minute, you just admitted that there is no physical reason to doubt it's operation. WTF?

when in 2007 I asked myself the question, "How can we prove we went to the moon?", I stumbled upon the spacesuit cooling system. I discovered that they allegedly cooled the suits using ice sublimators. Initially, I was amazed and fascinated. But then I sought more information, specs, procedures, photos, video and although I found some stuff like a patent, line drawings and

And you discovered that you are really rubbish at any research, even the most basic, as has been demonstrated in this very thread. Not only has it been demonstrated, you have posted plaintive "How did you find that?" posts illustrating how utterly useless you are.

some elementary information sent to me by the alleged manufacturer Hamilton Sunstrand,

Which company was formed in 1999 some thirty plus years after Apollo. Is there anything you can get right?

little of the abundance of information expected could be found by me.

Because you are an incompetent researcher.

No photo (although there's one now) and still there's absurdly only one.

You have been providede with many in this very thread. Why must you lie?

And most absurdly, no video.

You have been provided with many in this very thread. Why must you lie?

Plus, calls to NASA and Hamilton Sunstrand resulted in no additional information despite promises made by NASA to do so.

Crank callers tend to be treated thusly. You have only yourself and your reputation to blame.

I also failed to find any academic-level book mentioning them but have since after a better search identified one published in 1993 that does.

You were provided with many in this very thread. Why must you continue to lie?

Now, it's revealed in the technical information about sublimators shared on this thread that only sublimators and not manned spacesuits are placed in vacuum chambers during their test.

Except that manned test have been performed and you have been provided with that data. Why must you continue to lie about this?

This has led to the discussion and speculation about whether any manned spacesuit is ever brought under high vacuum prior to actual ISS EVA. I argue that it's preposterous to expect an astronaut to wait until they're at the ISS before experiencing high vacuum in a spacesuit and many of the Antagonists on the site argue that it would be "immoral" to do so because it would unnecessarily jeopardize the lives of the astronauts.

Reading comprehension fail. I can only assume it is intentional given the preceding 48 pages.

My response is that if it's immoral to practice wearing the suit in high vacuum on Earth in a vacuum chamber, it's even more immoral during an ISS EVA where nothing of vital importance is being performed. Better to deconstruct or deflate a basically worse than worthless liability than it is to risk a single life performing experiments of highly questionable value. (There I go kicking the hornets nest again)

Nope. There you go making crap up again.

Plus it's just absolutely absurd to think that NASA would have so little confidence in their spacesuits that they wouldn't allow astronauts to use them in high vacuum chambers but would allow them to be used on an ISS EVA.

Full up test of the sort you demand have been performed. You have been provided with photo evidence, video evidence, documentary evidence,  Peer reviewed scientific evidence, eyewitness evidence, qualified engineers evidence, what the hell more could you want?

I'll admit that this whole "immoral" argument has taken me by surprise. For a while during this debate, I metaphorically felt like I was on the ropes being pummeled. But then all of the sudden my opposition, in a surreal fashion, backed off to the center of the ring and started pummeling themselves bloody with a laughable argument. And on top of it, even if you believe NASA tested the sublimators in a vacuum chamber attached to a man wearing a spacesuit outside the vacuum chamber running on a treadmill, where's the video? Where's the photo?

I find this unsurprising. Given your history, you are not an individual who demonstrates any moral awareness whatsoever.

One person argues that video recording is too expensive and although that may have once been true it certainly isn't true now. I probably have one of the cheapest cellphones on the market and it takes great photos and video.

Does it have a vacuum chamber?

And why are we having this debate? Fundamentally, it's because NASA refuses to be accountable.

Because you are too dense to read responses. That's why.

As a government agency making certain claims of achievement to taxpayers that fund them, there is nothing inappropriate about asking questions and receiving answers, requesting video and getting video, and most of all allowing independent witnesses to observe spacesuit with ice sublimator testing or training in a high vacuum chamber on Earth duplicating environmental conditions of orbit.

Whose government? Roscosmos had no issue demonstrating it's suits, nor did ESA, nor did NASA for that matter. Just because you paid no attention doesn't mean diddly squat. Just because you have some crackpot gripe with your government does not mean anything. Your government represents a mere sub 5% of humanity. Your government is not my government.

[Neil Baker]

What level of trust do you have in technology?

That's not the correct question. The correct question is "What level of trust do you have in the government?"

And the answer to that is very little especially after 9/11 when 3000 Americans were murdered in our faces to manipulate Americans into sending about 7000 service members to their tragic deaths in illegal preemptive wars and a preponderance of evidence indicates that it was a Zionist job.
http://bollyn.com/solving-9-11-the-book/

I have just as little trust for most others in my engineering profession (and other professions) who went wretchedly silent even though World Trade Center forensic crime scene evidence was illegally removed and criminally destroyed and an official designated liar MIT professor of welding Thomas Eagar was trotted out after 9-11 to publicly pontificate on PBS NOVA about Structural Engineering that he wasn't an expert in, a clear violation of the Code of Ethics of the Society of Professional Engineers. I'm also disappointed that MythBusters and National Geographic have any credibility left after the superb Materials Engineer Jonathan Cole made them look like absolute tools with this most important video.

Also, I think the discussion about spacesuits and sublimators has become almost unbelievably ridiculous since it's taken such a huge metaphysical direction.
Immoral? Please!

[raven]

Do you go to the doctor every morning to get a check-up to make sure you're in fit health?

...and insist that the prescribed drugs are tested?

. . . On yourself. Filmed.