I really wonder why people still believe we have send men to the moon.

[bknight]

How hilarious the whole nasa company is!

What's keeping us from Mars? Space rays, say experts
http://www.reuters.com/article/2008/04/01/us-space-radiation-idUSN3139657820080401

Didn't read the whole article?  They are discussing the need for better/more protection for a mission that last many moths.  Apollo missions were less than 14 days, so the capsules protected them from all the radiation.

[Tindarormkimcha]

How hilarious the whole nasa company is!

What's keeping us from Mars? Space rays, say experts
http://www.reuters.com/article/2008/04/01/us-space-radiation-idUSN3139657820080401

Why?  Because they know that a longer mission such as to Mars, would result in far more exposure?

lol

Nice try! But wrong!

Please read the whole article? Why not?

[frenat]

can't sleep yet. so, for a short litle while...


What a lot of hogwash again.

Anyway, now it is clear that the rock with the "c" is indeed a prop and fake. we can continue

You still haven't proven it is a prop.  You STILL have to provide evidence of official photos from BEFORE the magazine was published, AND evidence that movie sets label props that way.  You have FAILED in both respects.

You just want to think whatever you wan to think.
You only want it all in line with your religion or BELIEF system.

what else is new, mate?

You just don't 'grok' it.


btw that is okay with me.

Translation:  Of course I never proved those things.  I was hoping nobody could notice so I could move on to something different.  Perhaps I can sling a few insults about religion and they'll forget about how I can't prove diddly.

[raven]

DOCUMENTS DON'T PROOF A THING!

If you really think they do, please be so kind and explain why? Thank you.

If documents don't prove a thing, why did you quote (mine) one when Doctor Van Allen says that they exist?
Incidentally, how long was the exposure in the Van Allen Scientific American document?
*new post*
Poison is on the dose,Tindarormkimcha. A three year long journey to Mars is going to expose the astronauts to a lot more radiation from cosmic rays than Apollo's, fortnight at most, brief sorties. And, again, you are quoting a document!

[bknight]

You still haven't proven it is a prop.  You STILL have to provide evidence of official photos from BEFORE the magazine was published, AND evidence that movie sets label props that way.  You have FAILED in both respects.

You beat me to it!

[frenat]

How hilarious the whole nasa company is!

What's keeping us from Mars? Space rays, say experts
http://www.reuters.com/article/2008/04/01/us-space-radiation-idUSN3139657820080401

Why?  Because they know that a longer mission such as to Mars, would result in far more exposure?

lol

Nice try! But wrong!

Please read the whole article? Why not?

I did read it.  Obviously you did not.

Any mission to Mars using current technology would take three years, van Hoften said. That long in space would subject astronauts to too much radiation

That's from your article. 

[Tindarormkimcha]

How hilarious the whole nasa company is!

What's keeping us from Mars? Space rays, say experts
http://www.reuters.com/article/2008/04/01/us-space-radiation-idUSN3139657820080401

Didn't read the whole article?  They are discussing the need for better/more protection for a mission that last many moths.  Apollo missions were less than 14 days, so the capsules protected them from all the radiation.

As I have written before, you even don't recognise your own circular reasoning,



But I think I have a clue why that is.


I think most we-went-to-the-moon-believers, are too close to the whole thing and can't see the forest for the trees. They need more distance to really see how ridiculous it all is.

[Tindarormkimcha]

I did read it.  Obviously you did not.

I did, but it is still circular reasoning.

[DD Brock]

Think the intention was clear, he/she is on a fishing expedition and getting the bites.

He/she will never present evidence, cannot and will not.

Starve the fire.

Agreed. Ignoring this troll seems to be the best course of action.

[Tindarormkimcha]

DOCUMENTS DON'T PROOF A THING!

If you really think they do, please be so kind and explain why? Thank you.

If documents don't prove a thing, why did you quote (mine) one when Doctor Van Allen says that they exist?
Incidentally, how long was the exposure in the Van Allen Scientific American document?
*new post*
Poison is on the dose,Tindarormkimcha. A three year long journey to Mars is going to expose the astronauts to a lot more radiation from cosmic rays than Apollo's, fortnight at most, brief sorties. And, again, you are quoting a document!

about quoting, ah well, what's a guy going to do, mate?



Further more, unrecognised circular reasoning.

[Tindarormkimcha]

Think the intention was clear, he/she is on a fishing expedition and getting the bites.

He/she will never present evidence, cannot and will not.

Starve the fire.

Agreed. Ignoring this troll seems to be the best course of action.

Really? based on what? That I see the whole thing as one big Hoax?

Does that scare you, or what?

[frenat]

I did read it.  Obviously you did not.

I did, but it is still circular reasoning.

No, it is not.  Should I use shorter sentences?  Apollo short, Mars long.  short less bad rays.  long more bad rays.  More bad rays bad.

[DD Brock]

Think the intention was clear, he/she is on a fishing expedition and getting the bites.

He/she will never present evidence, cannot and will not.

Starve the fire.

Agreed. Ignoring this troll seems to be the best course of action.

Really? based on what? That I see the whole thing as one big Hoax?

Does that scare you, or what?

Scare me? Hardly. You are merely tiresome. Crying "FAKE!!" over and over again gets old really fast.  Good day to you.

[Tedward]

Scare me? Hardly. You are merely tiresome. Crying "FAKE!!" over and over again gets old really fast.  Good day to you.

Don't forget the casual chucking around of "ad hominem" as if it were some scared talisman to ward of the unknown.

Like I said, he/she brings nothing and can provide nothing. And that is all it will be.

[DD Brock]

I did read it.  Obviously you did not.

I did, but it is still circular reasoning.

No, it is not.  Should I use shorter sentences?  Apollo short, Mars long.  short less bad rays.  long more bad rays.  More bad rays bad.

OK, "More bad rays bad" made me laugh for real, lol!