Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - Tumeni

Pages: < Back  1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 120  Next >
41
Flat Earth Investigations / Re: VFX Artists React to the Moon Landing
« on: August 07, 2021, 06:06:21 PM »
What we do know though is the command module shielding was nowhere near sufficient enough to protect the astronauts from the amount of radiation in the belts ...

Citation and detail, please.

What was the "amount of radiation"

Why was the CM shielding insufficient?

no one's been to the moon

Third-party confirmations;

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third-party_evidence_for_Apollo_Moon_landings

First-hand evidence includes data, film, photo, live broadcasts, lunar samples retrieved from the surface, anecdotal evidence from participants, etc, etc.

42
I am stating there is going to be interference with line of sight caused by objects arising from the earth with these stars and it is an impossibility for it to be otherwise.

Yes, but ... so what?


43
The stars don't look COMPLETELY different because, in the big scheme of things, we're hardly moving at all. We spin around once every 24 hours or so, cycle around the Sun once every 365 days, but in galactic terms, we're a drop in the ocean. A grain of sand on a big beach.

I've heard this size explanation before but it still sounds odd. If you were standing on a grain of sand flying through space I reckon your view is going to change dramatically from one moment to the next.[/quote]

Which is what happens to us here on Earth; specific constellations move across the sky overnight, according to our speed of rotation. In my case, they start in the south-east and arc over to south-west and beyond. That's a pretty drastic change in view, even though it takes a few hours to occur. They also appear differently according to the seasons.

But overall, the constellation stays exactly the same, year after year. Because it's so far away.

44
Flat Earth Investigations / Re: VFX Artists React to the Moon Landing
« on: August 07, 2021, 05:33:31 PM »
For some strange reason though, it wasn't a problem 50 years ago

Different systems. Rope-core memory in the computers. Not the same degree of miniaturisation that we have today.

Again, Apollo took a trajectory which avoided the dense areas of the belts, and this is not/may not be optimum for Orion's projected missions, and Orion is expected to spend longer in the belts than Apollo did.

Again, the Apollo astronauts' dose was recorded, and was far below dangerous levels. Why would they feel ill-effects?  (See AATW's comment about effects later in life, though)

Why don't they rebuild the Apollo systems? Because they want the systems on Orion to do more than they did then, and do things differently, surely?


45
Flat Earth Investigations / Re: VFX Artists React to the Moon Landing
« on: August 07, 2021, 05:26:27 PM »
NASA engineer admits they can’t get past the Van Allen Belts

That's the title of the video, not a verbatim quote from what the guy said. I did ask for a verbatim quote from NASA, not from the YouTuber titling the video.


...we must solve these challenges before we send people through this region of space

The challenges referred to are engineering challenges. For the crew to travel safely, they must rely on the engineering of their craft, and it's this which is being tested.

From the YouTube transcript of his speech; I added punctuation for clarity, and omitted non-relevant sections (...) but have not changed any words, so it's essentially verbatim;

Quote
my name is Kelly Smith ... before we can send astronauts into space on Orion we have to test all of its systems and there's only one way to know if we got it right - fly it in space. For Orion's first flight no astronauts will be aboard; the spacecraft is loaded with sensors to record and measure all aspects of the flight in every detail. It all begins with launch
...  as we get further away from Earth, we'll pass through the Van Allen belts. An area of dangerous radiation. Radiation like this can harm the guidance systems, onboard computers, or other electronics. On Orion naturally we have to pass through this danger zone twice - once up and once back but Orion has protection; shielding will be put to the test as the vehicle cuts through the waves of radiation.  Sensors aboard will record radiation levels for scientists to study. We must solve these challenges before we send people through this region of space

Again, he's referring to the engineering challenges of making sure the systems work OK - for the astronauts have to depend on them. If the systems go awry, astronauts could die.

There is nothing here which even hints that Orion flights are being prevented by adverse effects on the astronauts.



46
Flat Earth Investigations / Re: VFX Artists React to the Moon Landing
« on: August 07, 2021, 01:03:32 PM »
They said Orion couldn't get through the belts. Didn't they?

Don't think so.

You can show us a verbatim quote, can't you?

47
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Coronavirus Vaccine and You
« on: August 07, 2021, 12:54:42 PM »
Quote from: stack
To be honest, I'm not virologist, so I'm not sure exactly how it works.
Ah, so you have progressed to the "I don't know what I'm talking about" argument. Very persuasive.

Please tell us what qualifications you have, Tom.

48
You will see 20 degrees up if that is the angle at which your eyes are aimed. But it matters not when those stars you claim should be visible to you are below a 20 degree position. You act as if your unfamiliar with a protractor.

Are you suggesting the stars between zero elevation and 20 degree elevation are not visible?

Why?

Please explain the protractor reference. perhaps with a diagram to show what you mean.

49
Flat Earth Investigations / Re: VFX Artists React to the Moon Landing
« on: August 07, 2021, 12:37:34 PM »
It was Dr. Van Allen who discovered them not NASA.

How did he send instruments up to measure them, if not on NASA rocketry?

(EDIT - https://ir.uiowa.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1579&context=annals-of-iowa)

I trust them (NASA) when they say they can't get into space because of the radiation.

... but you're misquoting them. They did not say this.

50
Flat Earth Theory / Re: I'm new here! A bunch of generic questions?
« on: August 07, 2021, 10:01:05 AM »
It would be a better argument if it wasn't just the same thing done again.

If Rowbottom's Bedford Canal was done again with laser pointers instead of human line of sight, would that be "same thing done again", or would it be something new?


51
Flat Earth Theory / Re: I'm new here! A bunch of generic questions?
« on: August 07, 2021, 09:56:51 AM »
It would be a better argument if it wasn't just the same thing done again.

Norwood and the French Geodesic used different methods, as I recall.

Norwood measured from London to York, the distance on the surface, accounting for hills and diversions, then used that, along with angular difference, to calculate degrees of arc he had covered.

The French triangulated between hilltops and used this network of triangles with angular difference.

And they arrived at the same figure, given reasonable bounds for error given their methods.



Want a different method?

Take the documented speed and height of the ISS to calculate a circumference based on its orbit radius. Confirm the orbital time corresponding to the speed by personal observation. 

Deduct the height above the surface and recalculate to give a surface circumference, and you get the same figure as Norwood et al, within reasonable bounds of error.



52
Flat Earth Theory / Re: I'm new here! A bunch of generic questions?
« on: August 07, 2021, 09:47:08 AM »
The first determinations of a circumference of the Earth, from the work of both Norwood and the French Geodesic Mission, were made in the 1600s and 1700s. Within reasonable bounds of error for the time, their results agreed, and further work since then has simply refined the figure.

The Greek astronomer Eratosthenes calculated the size within 5% of todays value in ~200BC.
BWHAHAHA!

The fact with all of these high falootin gadgets of today and some joker, that you have no objective evidence of actually existing, is magically within five percent of our most precise instruments speaks more to the reluctance of needing accuracy than it does the imagined rotundity of the earth.

We do have objective evidence that Norwood existed. He wrote a book detailing his findings;

https://archive.org/details/norwood-1699-the-sea-man-s-practice

That's every bit as much evidence as we have that Rowbotham existed and did stuff.

- - -



53
I want to know why it doesn't look completely different every night if we're spinning around through space like they say we are. All that supposed movement still the position of the stars remains pretty much the same each night. Something about that seems off if you ask me.

The stars don't look COMPLETELY different because, in the big scheme of things, we're hardly moving at all. We spin around once every 24 hours or so, cycle around the Sun once every 365 days, but in galactic terms, we're a drop in the ocean. A grain of sand on a big beach.

But Orion is still there isn't it? Just strikes me as odd that we're supposedly going in circles around the sun which in turn is spinning around the galaxy which also is likely doing something similar and all the time our night sky never seems to change that much.

I refer again to my last statement, now bolded.

I can only suggest you think bigger. Our little circuit around the Sun is a minor blip, a nothingness in galactic terms.

54
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Coronavirus Vaccine and You
« on: August 05, 2021, 05:34:04 PM »
I have no trusted source of news in particular.

Can you define what a mainstream source is?

55
I want to know why it doesn't look completely different every night if we're spinning around through space like they say we are. All that supposed movement still the position of the stars remains pretty much the same each night. Something about that seems off if you ask me.

Don't know about you, but the most recognisable constellation in my sky, at least over winter, is Orion. It doesn't stay still in my sky, in general terms I clearly see it at first to my South East, and it doesn't take long for it to have moved to South West and beyond over the course of a night.

Certainly doesn't stay still. Neither does the Moon, which shows the same sort of behaviour, crossing my sky exactly as would be expected with us rotating around, bringing it into view and taking it out of view, appearing in broadly the same spot once every 24 hours. The spot varies long-term, according to the seasons. 

The stars don't look COMPLETELY different because, in the big scheme of things, we're hardly moving at all. We spin around once every 24 hours or so, cycle around the Sun once every 365 days, but in galactic terms, we're a drop in the ocean. A grain of sand on a big beach.

56
... will eventually be obscured by objects arising from the flat earth plane.

... and these objects are .... what?

57
Flat Earth Investigations / Re: VFX Artists React to the Moon Landing
« on: August 05, 2021, 05:21:35 PM »
Which conference? The Apollo 11 post-mission?

The VABs are not "preventing space flight", nobody has said this.

Since Orion is projected to spend longer in the belts than Apollo, and because the electronics are of a totally different design, a testing regime is required to ensure that all behaves as it should.

And, as was said, the only reason you actually know about the VABs in the first place is because NASA sent up Van Allen's monitoring equipment on one of their missions. So ... you trust them when they say they are there, but distrust them on other stuff?

EDIT - further reading as to how Apollo avoided the dense regions - https://science.thewire.in/the-sciences/apollo-11-van-allen-radiation-belts-translunar-injection/


58
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump
« on: August 05, 2021, 02:03:50 PM »
LOL! This document is to be taken as legitimate?

Do you have a valid reason to regard it as illegitimate?

59
The following comment I found online a while back might be helpful to you in explaining the stars question:

'2 people are standing on the opposite walls of a room, one wall is north, the other is south, and the moon is a picture on the ceiling. The top of the picture will be top for the one observer and the bottom of the picture will be top for the other observer...'

If the picture on the ceiling is a circle, both observers will see an ellipse. If it is drawn to appear to one as a circle, the other will not see it as such.

60
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump
« on: August 04, 2021, 09:03:12 PM »

Pages: < Back  1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 120  Next >