Re: Moon landing hoax question
« Reply #40 on: May 04, 2022, 10:05:59 PM »
Tom, I think you need to do a lot more research into the Soviet space programme in the 50s, 60s and 70s before declaring there was 'no comptetion'. Lots of evidence out there, including books written by those involved.

Of course the USSR did not say there was.

In other news, the German Democratic Republic wasn't actually a democracy.

Shocking.

The evidence of what they were doing in "secret" and what they were focused on and prioritized on in "secret" is based on speculation though, based on decades-later archival digging and seeing that academics were putting some amount of research into lander and rocket designs.

During the Space Race they were clearly working on lots of different space projects.



It is clearly a matter of national coping to claim that it had to be a man on the moon to win the Space Race, much like the previous analogy given of after losing a foot race deciding that the REAL race is the race to your car in the stadium parking lot.


Tom,

It still doesn't make sense that the Soviet Union skipped faking #8 accomplishment above but then proceeded with faking accomplishments #9,10, and 11 if they had already thought that they had won the space race.

- Based on your reasoning that the Soviet's had no more to prove, why did the Soviet's invest so heavily in the Buran Space Shuttle program if the USA's Space Shuttle program came before and launched in 1980. The Buran was ultimately ditched after just 1 unmanned flight after it's first launch 8 years later (1988) and ultimately when a hanger collapsed on the Buran Shuttle I think in 1993. Why would they invest in faking a Shuttle Program that the USA already had 8 years prior? 

- Earlier in this thread, you stated something to the effect that the Soviet Union did not want to endanger lives which is part of the reason why they did not move forwards with trying to be the first manned lunar landing. This is not true, the Soviet's did indeed endanger lives; 6 Cosmonauts are know to have been killed, at least one of them could be classified as manslaughter.

- Later in the thread you reasoned that it wasn't called the 'First Man on the Moon' race; the Soviet's already thought they won the space race and therefore didn't need to perform to USA's own definition of a space race. But, at the same time, it also wasn't called:
    'put an animal in space' race
    'put a woman in space' race
    'do a spacewalk in space' race
    'land a spacecraft on the Moon' race

- Lastly, if space travel is a conspiracy (as you believe) and all of the Soviet's firsts of space accomplishments were faked (as you would also believe), why didn't the USA fake being first before many of the Soviet's firsts were faked?
    first to 'put an animal in space'
    first to 'put a woman in space'
    first to 'do a spacewalk in space'
    first to 'land a spacecraft on the Moon'

« Last Edit: May 04, 2022, 10:08:25 PM by GoldCashew »

Re: Moon landing hoax question
« Reply #41 on: May 24, 2022, 08:58:18 PM »
I dare to say that despite pretending to know so much about the moon and the hoaxes surrounding it, flat Earthers cannot make a single prediction about the moon. Am I wrong?

*

Offline Clyde Frog

  • *
  • Posts: 935
  • [kʰlaɪ̯d fɹɒg]
    • View Profile
    • Werepenguin
Re: Moon landing hoax question
« Reply #42 on: May 24, 2022, 09:32:44 PM »
I dare to say that despite pretending to know so much about the moon and the hoaxes surrounding it, flat Earthers cannot make a single prediction about the moon. Am I wrong?
You think a group of people could keep track of the behavior of the moon over a period of months or years and not be able to make a single prediction about its behavior? I dare to say I don't think you are actually using your head at all if you'd suggest such a thing. Anyone can take notes on the cycles of waxing and waning and look for patterns that repeat.

Re: Moon landing hoax question
« Reply #43 on: May 24, 2022, 09:55:06 PM »
I dare to say that despite pretending to know so much about the moon and the hoaxes surrounding it, flat Earthers cannot make a single prediction about the moon. Am I wrong?
You think a group of people could keep track of the behavior of the moon over a period of months or years and not be able to make a single prediction about its behavior? I dare to say I don't think you are actually using your head at all if you'd suggest such a thing. Anyone can take notes on the cycles of waxing and waning and look for patterns that repeat.

Yet, they don't. Isn't it strange? Everything is there. Whole tables of the positions of the stars and the moon and the sun, spanning centuries, and yet, they cannot put them down, study them, figure out the way they move, and make predictions. Why don't they even try? What do they luck? Would that be education, or proper understanding? For people who try to understand how the world works they put way too little effort on it.
« Last Edit: May 24, 2022, 10:21:00 PM by Aggelos »

*

Offline Pete Svarrior

  • e
  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 14893
  • (>^_^)> it's propaganda time (◕‿◕✿)
    • View Profile
Re: Moon landing hoax question
« Reply #44 on: May 24, 2022, 10:44:21 PM »
Yet, they don't.
Substantiate your assertion.
Read the FAQ before asking your question - chances are we already addressed it.
Follow the Flat Earth Society on Twitter and Facebook!

<Parsifal> I like looking at Chinese Wikipedia with Noto installed
<Parsifal> I don't understand any of it but the symbols look nice

*

Offline stack

  • *
  • Posts: 3096
    • View Profile
Re: Moon landing hoax question
« Reply #45 on: May 24, 2022, 11:08:15 PM »
I dare to say that despite pretending to know so much about the moon and the hoaxes surrounding it, flat Earthers cannot make a single prediction about the moon. Am I wrong?
You think a group of people could keep track of the behavior of the moon over a period of months or years and not be able to make a single prediction about its behavior? I dare to say I don't think you are actually using your head at all if you'd suggest such a thing. Anyone can take notes on the cycles of waxing and waning and look for patterns that repeat.

Yet, they don't. Isn't it strange? Everything is there. Whole tables of the positions of the stars and the moon and the sun, spanning centuries, and yet, they cannot put them down, study them, figure out the way they move, and make predictions. Why don't they even try? What do they luck? Would that be education, or proper understanding? For people who try to understand how the world works they put way too little effort on it.

What specific prediction do you think an FEr lacks?

*

Offline BillO

  • *
  • Posts: 873
  • Huh?
    • View Profile
Re: Moon landing hoax question
« Reply #46 on: May 24, 2022, 11:14:48 PM »
I dare to say that despite pretending to know so much about the moon and the hoaxes surrounding it, flat Earthers cannot make a single prediction about the moon. Am I wrong?
You think a group of people could keep track of the behavior of the moon over a period of months or years and not be able to make a single prediction about its behavior? I dare to say I don't think you are actually using your head at all if you'd suggest such a thing. Anyone can take notes on the cycles of waxing and waning and look for patterns that repeat.

Yet, they don't. Isn't it strange? Everything is there. Whole tables of the positions of the stars and the moon and the sun, spanning centuries, and yet, they cannot put them down, study them, figure out the way they move, and make predictions. Why don't they even try? What do they luck? Would that be education, or proper understanding? For people who try to understand how the world works they put way too little effort on it.

While the FE model for the moon cannot make predications they have adopted the ancient Saros Cycle method of making predications of lunar eclipses: https://wiki.tfes.org/Astronomical_Prediction_Based_on_Patterns#The_Eclipses
« Last Edit: May 24, 2022, 11:16:25 PM by BillO »
Quote from: Ironic Pete
I DO NOT NEED DATA, I'M PRETTY SURE I'M RIGHT!!!!

You think something is true, and that's good enough for you.

Re: Moon landing hoax question
« Reply #47 on: May 25, 2022, 04:57:01 AM »
I dare to say that despite pretending to know so much about the moon and the hoaxes surrounding it, flat Earthers cannot make a single prediction about the moon. Am I wrong?
You think a group of people could keep track of the behavior of the moon over a period of months or years and not be able to make a single prediction about its behavior? I dare to say I don't think you are actually using your head at all if you'd suggest such a thing. Anyone can take notes on the cycles of waxing and waning and look for patterns that repeat.

Yet, they don't. Isn't it strange? Everything is there. Whole tables of the positions of the stars and the moon and the sun, spanning centuries, and yet, they cannot put them down, study them, figure out the way they move, and make predictions. Why don't they even try? What do they luck? Would that be education, or proper understanding? For people who try to understand how the world works they put way too little effort on it.

While the FE model for the moon cannot make predications they have adopted the ancient Saros Cycle method of making predications of lunar eclipses: https://wiki.tfes.org/Astronomical_Prediction_Based_on_Patterns#The_Eclipses

Well, now you have several problems ahead of you.

a. Saros cycles do not predict the duration of the eclipse to the second.

b. Saros cycles cannot predict the path of totality.

c. There are multiple ongoing Saros cycles and you cannot know when a new Saros cycles will begin.

d. A Saros Series will finally end, and there will not be any more eclipses on that cycle.

e. You have to somehow explain why the Saros cycles happen, since you adopted them.

Good luck.
« Last Edit: May 25, 2022, 05:04:16 AM by Aggelos »

Offline SteelyBob

  • *
  • Posts: 678
    • View Profile
Re: Moon landing hoax question
« Reply #48 on: May 25, 2022, 06:39:00 AM »

Well, now you have several problems ahead of you.

a. Saros cycles do not predict the duration of the eclipse to the second.

b. Saros cycles cannot predict the path of totality.

c. There are multiple ongoing Saros cycles and you cannot know when a new Saros cycles will begin.

d. A Saros Series will finally end, and there will not be any more eclipses on that cycle.

e. You have to somehow explain why the Saros cycles happen, since you adopted them.

Good luck.


We’ve been around this buoy on several occasions before - here’s one:


https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=18054.msg237363#msg237363

FEers never explain how simple periodic data, like saros and inex, can be used to predict the start of new cycles - indeed in the thread I linked to the FE proponent’s own source clearly articulated the many limitations of the tables, and pointed to ephemeris data. Moreover, they also never explain how the precise geography of each eclipse is predicted with such precision. When all this is pointed out, with evidence, the thread usually ends with zero response, just as that last one did.

Re: Moon landing hoax question
« Reply #49 on: May 25, 2022, 06:44:36 AM »
We’ve been around this buoy on several occasions before - here’s one:


https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=18054.msg237363#msg237363

FEers never explain how simple periodic data, like saros and inex, can be used to predict the start of new cycles - indeed in the thread I linked to the FE proponent’s own source clearly articulated the many limitations of the tables, and pointed to ephemeris data. Moreover, they also never explain how the precise geography of each eclipse is predicted with such precision. When all this is pointed out, with evidence, the thread usually ends with zero response, just as that last one did.

As I thought so. Thanks for the feedback.

*

Offline Clyde Frog

  • *
  • Posts: 935
  • [kʰlaɪ̯d fɹɒg]
    • View Profile
    • Werepenguin
Re: Moon landing hoax question
« Reply #50 on: May 26, 2022, 06:49:30 PM »
So you're changing your argument then? Because initially, it was that FE can't make a single prediction about the moon, remember? Now that you've been asked to actually try and defend that laughably wrong statement, you want to move the goalposts to someplace more comfortable?

I dare to say that despite pretending to know so much about the moon and the hoaxes surrounding it, flat Earthers cannot make a single prediction about the moon. Am I wrong?

Offline scomato

  • *
  • Posts: 171
    • View Profile
Re: Moon landing hoax question
« Reply #51 on: May 27, 2022, 07:15:56 PM »
The true and factual history of moon missions is much more complex than is presented above.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_missions_to_the_Moon

Look at the chart of all moon missions, starting with Pioneer 0. It wasn't just a simple matter of who did what first. Both the US and the USSR experienced countless mission failures for every narrow success. There were different mission objectives, from orbiters to flybys, impactors and finally landers. The space race wasn't just one achievement, NASA didn't decide one day to put a man on the moon - it was the culmination of decades of rapid but incremental advancements in rocket science.

If space is a hoax, then does that mean every space professional is also in on the hoax? According to this source [1] "the global space sector employed around 1 million persons around the world in 2017. To give orders of magnitude, around 350 000 full-time employees are active in the United States, 200 000 in the Russian Federation and around 60 000 in Europe." 

That is quite a lot of people who are in on the conspiracy. It is quite incredible that 1 million people are able to keep the existence of a super secret criminal organization completely and utterly hidden. Imagine the life of fantastic wealth and luxury that they could afford by collectively embezzling tens of billions of dollars a year. Don't conspiracy theorists every feel jealous that they are being left out?




[1] https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/sites/c5996201-en/1/2/3/index.html?itemId=/content/publication/c5996201-en&mimeType=text/html&_csp_=ffe5a6bbc1382ae4f0ead9dd2da73ff4&itemIGO=oecd&itemContentType=book

Re: Moon landing hoax question
« Reply #52 on: May 28, 2022, 07:54:53 AM »
Was talking to a colleague who in a former job worked for the MoD moving various satellites so they covered areas needed for various operations. He was telling me how all that stuff is currently being used to support Ukraine.

So not sure if he’s “in on it” or was being employed in a spurious job and lied to for some reason.
Tom: "Claiming incredulity is a pretty bad argument. Calling it "insane" or "ridiculous" is not a good argument at all."

TFES Wiki Occam's Razor page, by Tom: "What's the simplest explanation; that NASA has successfully designed and invented never before seen rocket technologies from scratch which can accelerate 100 tons of matter to an escape velocity of 7 miles per second"

Offline jimster

  • *
  • Posts: 250
    • View Profile
Re: Moon landing hoax question
« Reply #53 on: June 06, 2022, 06:57:02 PM »
There is a reason the soviets were first in all those things. When they first developed their atom bombs, they were behind the US by years and their bombs were much bigger and heavier, The military missile race preceded the space race. Soviets always made big military stuff, ww2 tanks, pre-war bombers, big subs. In the early 50s when the space race started, the soviet ICBMs were simply much bigger and thus more capable when used for exploration. US did not get there until Saturn 5.

Russian culture does not do complicated and advanced very well. Their fighters in WW2 were less capable than Germany, US, UK, they did eventually have an overwhelming number of them. They succeed with mass, not with excellence and cleverness. Ref: Ukraine.

They shot their massive rocket to the moon before we could. But we had the advantage when the problem was no longer "shoot something at the moon and hit it." Add in the problems of keeping human alive and returning them and we beat them to it.
"Electromagnetic Acceleration" sounds so much more sciency than "bendy light".

Offline jimster

  • *
  • Posts: 250
    • View Profile
Re: Moon landing hoax question
« Reply #54 on: June 06, 2022, 07:06:30 PM »
Here is an interesting proof point re the moon landing: (and pretty entertaining)

"Electromagnetic Acceleration" sounds so much more sciency than "bendy light".

Re: Moon landing hoax question
« Reply #55 on: June 13, 2022, 11:57:45 PM »
They succeed with mass, not with excellence and cleverness. Ref: Ukraine.

I admit this is off topic, but wanted to interject, the Soviets of WW2 actually did succeed via excellence and cleverness. It's a common myth to repeat that they beat Germany with sheer numbers alone. That's too simplistic and is more inaccurate than correct. A better, yet still succinct explanation, is that the Germans were tactically superior to the Red Army, but that the Red Army was operationally superior. Turns out the operational level of war is a super important factor in winning a combined arms and mechanized war like WW2. (One could argue that the Red Army was strategically superior as well, but that's much more open to debate).

A way to explain Soviet operational superiority which ironically shows how the "overwhelming numbers" myth easily continues, is that the Soviets, by 1943, were able to mass far more rifles, tanks and assault guns on a much narrower front than the Wehrmacht. When you have a lot more men per mile in a small localized area, it's true that the Soviet's used "overwhelming numbers", but only in a limited area. In that area, the Germans were overwhelmed, but in other places which mattered less, the Germans would easily have more troops and units (though not decisively so). In other words, the Red Army continually put the right units in the right places at the right time more efficiently and consistently than the Germans. When you keep doing that over and over, you tend to win more and more battles and take more and more prisoners. Which is what happened. It was operational-level superiority.

In fact, the Soviets called this their "Deep Battle" doctrine. It was very similar to the concept of "Blitzkrieg," except more robust and frankly, better. In short, by 1945 the Red Army was out-Blitzkrieging the Germans everywhere and doing it better than the Germans ever did!

(Blitzkrieg was made famous because after the war, West Germany had plenty of former generals and other military historians publishing stuff in English, and of course they wanted to portray the evil Soviets as an overwhelming mass of soldiers, not an actually competent military, as that would lessen their prestige. And behind the Iron Curtain the Soviets obviously kept secret their own narratives and information as to how and why they were able to win against Hitler. After the fall of the USSR the military archives were opened in the 90s and Western military historians like David Glantz (and many others) have been able to better analyze how the Eastern Front really went down, and turns out the Red Army was a pretty good one after all).

Back to RET/FET stuff.   ;D

I agree Russia in Ukraine is an astonishingly poor showing, and clearly their military is nothing like it was in the 1940s.  Good thing, cuz Putin is a bastard for invading.



« Last Edit: June 13, 2022, 11:59:55 PM by existoid »

Re: Moon landing hoax question
« Reply #56 on: June 14, 2022, 10:39:52 AM »
Here is an interesting proof point re the moon landing: (and pretty entertaining)

I posted something similar here: https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=17989.0
It's a video of 3 VFX artists looking at Apollo footage and basically concluding that there was no way of faking those shots with 1960s technology.
Predictably in the rest of the thread the original video wasn't really addressed, there were instead various diversions about the fact that the astronauts looked uncomfortable in subsequent press conferences, and then a long rambling discussion on the Van Allen Belts.

It's noteworthy that the people who look at the pictures/video and declare them fake invariably don't know what they're talking about - in your video the bloke mentions not seeing stars, a common claim from people who say it was all fake. But if they did fake it then why wouldn't they have just put stars in the background? That would have been the easy bit to fake. Anyone who knows the first thing about cameras knows that you can't capture faint things and bright things well with the same exposure settings, you either capture the bright things with a low exposure - which means you can't see the dim things - or you capture the dim things and the bright things are an overexposed mess. It's such basic stuff.
Tom: "Claiming incredulity is a pretty bad argument. Calling it "insane" or "ridiculous" is not a good argument at all."

TFES Wiki Occam's Razor page, by Tom: "What's the simplest explanation; that NASA has successfully designed and invented never before seen rocket technologies from scratch which can accelerate 100 tons of matter to an escape velocity of 7 miles per second"

Offline SteelyBob

  • *
  • Posts: 678
    • View Profile
Re: Moon landing hoax question
« Reply #57 on: June 14, 2022, 01:15:43 PM »
Here is an interesting proof point re the moon landing: (and pretty entertaining)

I posted something similar here: https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=17989.0
It's a video of 3 VFX artists looking at Apollo footage and basically concluding that there was no way of faking those shots with 1960s technology.
Predictably in the rest of the thread the original video wasn't really addressed, there were instead various diversions about the fact that the astronauts looked uncomfortable in subsequent press conferences, and then a long rambling discussion on the Van Allen Belts.

It's noteworthy that the people who look at the pictures/video and declare them fake invariably don't know what they're talking about - in your video the bloke mentions not seeing stars, a common claim from people who say it was all fake. But if they did fake it then why wouldn't they have just put stars in the background? That would have been the easy bit to fake. Anyone who knows the first thing about cameras knows that you can't capture faint things and bright things well with the same exposure settings, you either capture the bright things with a low exposure - which means you can't see the dim things - or you capture the dim things and the bright things are an overexposed mess. It's such basic stuff.

The Van Allen belt arguments are one of the more ludicrous around here. If you think the earth is flat, and that NASA fakes everything, then you don't believe in Van Allen belts. Their detection was done using technology that FEers routinely claim cannot exist, travelling distances away from the earth that exceed the alleged height of the sun, moon and stars, according to FE.

*

Offline WTF_Seriously

  • *
  • Posts: 1097
  • When I grow up I wanna be like Markjo
    • View Profile
Re: Moon landing hoax question
« Reply #58 on: June 14, 2022, 04:15:20 PM »
Finally took the time to watch the video.  Have watched the other mentioned as well.  Aside from the analysis of why faking the landing is impossible I enjoyed these:

First, one of the more brilliant descriptions of the space race.

"It was a global dick wagging contest on a scale never seen before in human history."

Second

Flat-Earthers seem to have a very low standard of evidence for what they want to believe but an impossibly high standard of evidence for what they don’t want to believe.

Lee McIntyre, Boston University

*

Offline Tom Bishop

  • Zetetic Council Member
  • **
  • Posts: 9878
  • Flat Earth Believer
    • View Profile
Re: Moon landing hoax question
« Reply #59 on: June 14, 2022, 04:26:17 PM »
Because belief in the space agency claims doesn't come with belief in unattainable technologies you can never know, right.  ::)