*

Offline Tom Bishop

  • Zetetic Council Member
  • **
  • Posts: 6508
  • Flat Earth Believer
    • View Profile
Re: Wiki article of the day: LM Closer Look
« Reply #20 on: May 22, 2019, 09:59:00 PM »
Quote
Something looking trashy doesn't mean it is trash

Quote
Does a car's "trashiness" affect its ability to function as a car?

I just see agreements with the premise of the Wiki.

The added "it only looks like a rubbish heap, but really it's a super advanced spaceship" isn't very compelling, to me.

Re: Wiki article of the day: LM Closer Look
« Reply #21 on: May 22, 2019, 10:33:43 PM »
The thing you are missing, Tom, is that NASA doesn't give a damn about aesthetics. The only people they're selling to is their own engineers, and making the LM look pretty would not have appealed to an engineer in the way that a sleek-looking laptop might appeal to a consumer. It was contained in a fairing at launch, so streamlining it wasn't necessary.
Recommended reading: We Have No Idea by Jorge Cham and Daniel Whiteson

Turtle Town, a game made by my brothers and their friends, is now in private beta for the demo! Feedback so far has been mostly positive. Contact me if you would like to play.

Re: Wiki article of the day: LM Closer Look
« Reply #22 on: May 22, 2019, 10:34:37 PM »
Quote
Something looking trashy doesn't mean it is trash

Quote
Does a car's "trashiness" affect its ability to function as a car?

I just see agreements with the premise of the Wiki.

The added "it only looks like a rubbish heap, but really it's a super advanced spaceship" isn't very compelling, to me.

And I just see someone ignoring the arguments presented. First off all, those aren;t agreements, they're observations about "trashiness" in general and what it means in relation to function, it doesn't mean we agree with you. Second, the premises of the wiki are faulty. It's based on one photograph. We all know what the FAQ says about photographs.
Quote
In general, we at the Flat Earth Society do not lend much credibility to photographic evidence. It is too easily manipulated and altered.
What happened to that diehard zeteticism of yours that you, the glorious leader of TFES, would stoop down to the level of accepting a photograph as evidence? What wanton hypocrisy! Have you ever observed the lunar lander in person, did you go up to it and personally inspect the parts? Did you find scotch tape and curtain rods?  If you didn't, how can you conclusively say that the lunar lander is just a big prop?

Second, this is a point you've not addressed, but what's up with the quotes at the bottom of the wiki page? Is that supposed to be evidence? The opinions of random people on the Internet is not evidence, they're just opinions and it only further degrades the wiki page.
We are smarter than those scientists.
I see multiple contradicting explanations. You guys should have a pow-wow and figure out how your model works.

*

Offline Tumeni

  • *
  • Posts: 1388
    • View Profile
Re: Wiki article of the day: LM Closer Look
« Reply #23 on: May 23, 2019, 06:12:00 AM »
Quote
Something looking trashy doesn't mean it is trash

Quote
Does a car's "trashiness" affect its ability to function as a car?

I just see agreements with the premise of the Wiki.

The added "it only looks like a rubbish heap, but really it's a super advanced spaceship" isn't very compelling, to me.

I refer you back to #6 and #13.
==============================
==============================
Pete Svarrior "We are not here to directly persuade anyone ... You mistake our lack of interest in you for our absence."

Tom Bishop "We are extremely popular and the entire world wants to talk to us. We have better things to do with our lives than have in depth discussions with every single curious person. You are lucky to get one sentence dismissals from us"

Re: Wiki article of the day: LM Closer Look
« Reply #24 on: May 25, 2019, 09:20:08 PM »
None of the Wiki gives an opinion, and is merely a collection of sources The opinions are from third parties.

Tom, given this statement from the Bishop Experiment thread, would you care to clarify what the Lunar Module wiki article is then?
We are smarter than those scientists.
I see multiple contradicting explanations. You guys should have a pow-wow and figure out how your model works.

*

Offline Tom Bishop

  • Zetetic Council Member
  • **
  • Posts: 6508
  • Flat Earth Believer
    • View Profile
Re: Wiki article of the day: LM Closer Look
« Reply #25 on: May 25, 2019, 09:23:35 PM »
Multiple people are agreeing in this thread that it looks trashy. What more is there to discuss?

Re: Wiki article of the day: LM Closer Look
« Reply #26 on: May 25, 2019, 09:29:04 PM »
Multiple people are agreeing in this thread that it looks trashy. What more is there to discuss?

You said yourself none of the wiki is an opinion, yet the lunar module article provides no evidence but your and several others' opinions of the lunar module photo. This also simultaneously invalidates the claim that the wiki sources are third party, unless you consider yourself, and other forum users a third party source? Either you think opinions are evidence, or your claims are wrong. Which is it?
We are smarter than those scientists.
I see multiple contradicting explanations. You guys should have a pow-wow and figure out how your model works.

*

Offline stack

  • *
  • Posts: 1253
    • View Profile
Re: Wiki article of the day: LM Closer Look
« Reply #27 on: May 25, 2019, 09:44:33 PM »
Multiple people are agreeing in this thread that it looks trashy. What more is there to discuss?

The wiki states:

"Upon close inspection one might notice that the Lunar Lander, a supposed six billion dollar hallmark of American engineering, is in truth made out of cardboard paper, a few old curtain rods, a roll of roofing paper, some floodlight holders, gold foil, and lots and lots of scotch tape to hold it all together on the hostile environment of the moon's surface."

Where is the evidence that the lander is, in truth, made out of things you mentioned:
- cardboard paper
- a few old curtain rods
- a roll of roofing paper
- some floodlight holders
- gold foil
- scotch tape

Or is the wiki just lying?
Not much is known about the celestial bodies and their distances.

*

Offline Tumeni

  • *
  • Posts: 1388
    • View Profile
Re: Wiki article of the day: LM Closer Look
« Reply #28 on: May 25, 2019, 09:54:22 PM »
Multiple people are agreeing in this thread that it looks trashy. What more is there to discuss?

The fact that it was not made of the materials that you listed in the Wiki.

Oh, hang on - I did that already.
==============================
==============================
Pete Svarrior "We are not here to directly persuade anyone ... You mistake our lack of interest in you for our absence."

Tom Bishop "We are extremely popular and the entire world wants to talk to us. We have better things to do with our lives than have in depth discussions with every single curious person. You are lucky to get one sentence dismissals from us"

*

Offline Tim Alphabeaver

  • *
  • Posts: 143
  • That's no beaver
    • View Profile
Re: Wiki article of the day: LM Closer Look
« Reply #29 on: May 25, 2019, 10:07:00 PM »
Multiple people are agreeing in this thread that it looks trashy. What more is there to discuss?
> Ignore that the wiki article states that it's made out of cardboard
> Pretend this discussion is about how trashy it looks, rather than what it's made of
> /thread

And we can all make it home in time for dinner!
**I move away from the infinite flat plane to breathe in

*

Offline markjo

  • Purgatory
  • *
  • Posts: 3805
  • Zetetic Council runner-up
    • View Profile
Re: Wiki article of the day: LM Closer Look
« Reply #30 on: May 25, 2019, 10:39:50 PM »
Multiple people are agreeing in this thread that it looks trashy. What more is there to discuss?
What, if anything, the "trashy" appearance of the LM has to do with its legitimacy or functionality?
Abandon hope all ye who press enter here.

Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.

If you can't demonstrate it, then you shouldn't believe it.