Who believes they landed on the moon? - Page 4 - Science and Technology - HWzone Forums
adplus-dvertising
Skip to content
  • Create an account
  • About Us

    Hello Guest!

     
    Please note - in order to participate in our community, comment and open new discussions, you must join as a registered member.

    Our members enjoy many advantages, including the ability to participate in discussions, enjoy raffles and promotions for members of the site, and receive our weekly content directly by email.

    Do not like being harassed by email? You can register for the site but do not submit your registration to the weekly email updates.

Who believes they landed on the moon?


chenrp

Recommended Posts

  • תגובות 142
  • Opens on
  • Last comment

Send a fund That you reach the moon, you will hit the mirror that is perpendicular to 100% to us and will return exactly to us .... right ... really makes sense.

For such inaccuracies, the appearance was supposed to be enormous.

"Go here and go there and ask for a picture."

Ask for a picture of the landing sites.

Link to content
Share on other sites

Send a fund That you reach the moon, you will hit the mirror that is perpendicular to 100% to us and will return exactly to us .... right ... really makes sense.

It does not show, it's reflector, it brings the beam back in the same direction, no matter what angle it came from.

And we do not have to prove anything to you. We're not NASA and I do not think anyone really cares what you believe or do not believe ... :P

Link to content
Share on other sites

Send a laser beam to the moon, hit the mirror that is perpendicular to 100% to us and come back to us right ... right ... really makes sense.

For such inaccuracies, the appearance was supposed to be enormous.

"Go here and go there and ask for a picture."

Ask for a picture of the landing sites.

1 - This is not a normal look.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corner_reflector

This is a surface that returns light directly to its source, regardless of the angle of light hit.

2 - You're the one who wants the proof, is not it? We have referred you to places where you can accept it. It is not that someone really attaches importance to some stupid conspiracy, if you choose to believe in it, that it is disruptive to you.

Link to content
Share on other sites

The problem is that convention lovers are just like that - confessor lovers.

They will prefer to believe in a consensus even if all the facts against them. And the problem is that for all 10 concepts there may be one that is half correct.

Then we did not land on the moon, Kennedy was murdered by the US government itself, the twins were deliberately toppled by the US to encourage war against Iraq, Rabin was murdered by the Mossad, Elvis Presley is still alive, the Jews are taking over the world and of course above All - Michael Jackson.

Link to content
Share on other sites

The problem is that convention lovers are just like that - confessor lovers.

They will prefer to believe in a consensus even if all the facts against them. And the problem is that for all 10 concepts there may be one that is half correct.

So we did not land on the moon, Kennedy was assassinated by the US government itself, The twins were deliberately toppled by the United States to encourage war against Iraq, Rabin was murdered by the Mossad, Elvis Presley is still alive, the Jews are taking over the world and, above all, Michael Jackson.

Not exactly the US government but interests (you can not argue with the fact that there is an entry hole and the exit hole of another bullet at a different angle)

Link to content
Share on other sites

Not exactly the US government but interests (you can not argue with the fact that there is an entry hole and the exit hole of another bullet at a different angle)

10 CONCEPTIONS There may be one half that is correct

Link to content
Share on other sites

What a ridiculous, simple discussion.

As someone has already written here (I think Scorn),

In the forty years since the landing on the moon there have been millions of people who had

It is more important than you and me to prove that landing on the moon was a forgery.

These people are called Soviets. If the government of the Soviet Union never claimed

And did not prove that landing on the moon was a forgery,

Why do you think some idiot who posts videos on Prove it?

All the arguments of the proponents of the conspiracy theory are simply ridiculous.

Just for example:

1. To say that astronauts are supposed to die from exposure to radiation in the Van Allen Belt is a very nice proposition.

On the other hand, none of those who claim this has any idea what radiation shields were for the spacecraft.

2. The fact that the shadow of the picture is in two different directions - here supporters of the conspiracy theory claim that it was filmed in the studio

And there is more than one light source (on which the moon is supposed to be the sun). So first of all, Myth Busters have shown easily

That using one light source can cause two objects to cast a shadow We'll see As if it were in two different directions.

Second, if there is more than one light source, then why does each object cast only one shadow rather than two shadows, each in a different direction? (Because there is no more than one light source!)

3. The fact that NASA's astronauts have died-well, does anyone have any doubt that being an astronaut is a dangerous job?

Even today it's a very dangerous job, and that was forty years ago and more ... not just someone who was chosen to be an astronaut in the early days

There were pilots of the American Air Force, who are used to taking risks and do not exactly survive in the job. Besides, even if someone killed

Them, that does not prove they did not land on the moon. Maybe the Russians murdered them in order to stop the American space program?

4. That there is no hole under a moon landing vehicle - well, after someone lands a spaceship on the moon and proves that it is supposed to make a hole,

And not just will he claim such a claim (what, obviously it's supposed to make a hole, do not you know that?) So there'll be something to talk about. (And of course it will not happen, because it is not supposed to make a hole)

Why should the spacecraft make a hole? Of course she would throw some dust out there, but why would she make a hole?

Besides, because of the conditions on the moon (conditions of gravity and lack of atmosphere)

So what will be there will be completely different from what we know about Earth.

5. The claims that took slow motion to walk and travel on the moon - if not, so walking and traveling on the moon should be seen, so what are they supposed to look like?

Of course, the proponents of conspiracy theory have no answer to this, because they do not know (because they can not test it), so any claim of theirs will be lagging behind.

You can not just say it should not look like that, you have to say how it should look, or at least why it should not look like that, and of course there is not

They have no proof or even an argument why it would not look like walking and traveling on the moon.

Well, sorry for the digging and for anyone who survived on here ...

So, who of the members of the forum believes the group of delusional people who claim that we did not land on the moon?

And more importantly, what "proof" does he have that it did not really happen?

Link to content
Share on other sites

: kopfpatsch: : kopfpatsch: : kopfpatsch: : kopfpatsch: : kopfpatsch: : kopfpatsch: : kopfpatsch: : kopfpatsch: : kopfpatsch: : kopfpatsch:

Are you serious?!

Take a look at your computer that you use to run games. It's much more complicated and its cost is a few thousand shekels and it sits in your house!

Link to content
Share on other sites

What a ridiculous, simple discussion.

As someone has already written here (I think Scorn),

In the forty years since the landing on the moon there have been millions of people who had

It is more important than you and me to prove that landing on the moon was a forgery.

These people are called Soviets. If the government of the Soviet Union never claimed

And did not prove that landing on the moon was a forgery,

Why do you think some idiot who posts videos on Prove it?

All the arguments of the proponents of the conspiracy theory are simply ridiculous.

Just for example:

1. To say that astronauts are supposed to die from exposure to radiation in the Van Allen Belt is a very nice proposition.

On the other hand, none of those who claim this has any idea what radiation shields were for the spacecraft.

2. The fact that the shadow of the picture is in two different directions - here supporters of the conspiracy theory claim that it was filmed in the studio

And there is more than one light source (on which the moon is supposed to be the sun). So first of all, Myth Busters have shown easily

That using one light source can cause two objects to cast a shadow We'll see As if it were in two different directions.

Second, if there is more than one light source, then why does each object cast only one shadow rather than two shadows, each in a different direction? (Because there is no more than one light source!)

3. The fact that NASA's astronauts have died-well, does anyone have any doubt that being an astronaut is a dangerous job?

Even today it's a very dangerous job, and that was forty years ago and more ... not just someone who was chosen to be an astronaut in the early days

There were pilots of the American Air Force, who are used to taking risks and do not exactly survive in the job. Besides, even if someone killed

Them, that does not prove they did not land on the moon. Maybe the Russians murdered them in order to stop the American space program?

4. That there is no hole under a moon landing vehicle - well, after someone lands a spaceship on the moon and proves that it is supposed to make a hole,

And not just will he claim such a claim (what, obviously it's supposed to make a hole, do not you know that?) So there'll be something to talk about. (And of course it will not happen, because it is not supposed to make a hole)

Why should the spacecraft make a hole? Of course she would throw some dust out there, but why would she make a hole?

Besides, because of the conditions on the moon (conditions of gravity and lack of atmosphere)

So what will be there will be completely different from what we know about Earth.

5. The claims that took slow motion to walk and travel on the moon - if not, so walking and traveling on the moon should be seen, so what are they supposed to look like?

Of course, the proponents of conspiracy theory have no answer to this, because they do not know (because they can not test it), so any claim of theirs will be lagging behind.

You can not just say it should not look like that, you have to say how it should look, or at least why it should not look like that, and of course there is not

They have no proof or even an argument why it would not look like walking and traveling on the moon.

If this is a ridiculous discussion then do not participate in it.

1. Yes, they know what shielding the spaceship has and say it requires a very wide shield of lead. And in any case, astronauts do not have a suit with such shields.

2.Myth Busters worked with a representative from NASA! Really proof ...

Astronomers died of accidents unrelated to their work! They died of a train accident and all sorts of mysterious accidents.

According to the traces they left, and according to the sand that the astronauts are flying, you can tell which route this area is and that it is supposed to be a pit. And there should be sand on the legs of the carrier and it should not be clean! that's for sure!

How should this show? There is 5 / 1 gravity and not half! You'll learn about it.

Everything you say is ridiculous and shows little knowledge of the subject.

: kopfpatsch: : kopfpatsch: : kopfpatsch: : kopfpatsch: : kopfpatsch: : kopfpatsch: : kopfpatsch: : kopfpatsch: : kopfpatsch: : kopfpatsch:

Are you serious?!

Take a look at your computer that you use to run games. It's much more complicated and its cost is a few thousand shekels and it sits in your house!

Are you serious?! The computer is not the issue here at all. There was a report of why 500 pages You will not be able to do this even in 10 years! Processing power is not related at all. You have to do a lot of technological things to solve the problems.

The anti-radiation shield in the Van Allen belts in the Apollo spacecraft was, if I am not mistaken, aluminum 6 foil and the glazes coated with gold, with unmanned satellites using 3 aluminum

aluminum?! Really does not protect against radiation there. Lead required.

The frequency and intensity of the radiation that exists in this area is really not stopped by aluminum.

Link to content
Share on other sites

Mr. Chenrp,

You're just a liar. Let's go back a minute to what you said was directly related to you:

"My lecturers of modern physics, nuclear, quantum ... at the Technion" - first mention that these subjects have nothing to do with the question of landing on the moon. Second, someone here corrected you and said that there are no such courses at the Technion because everything is incorporated in "Physics 3". You jumped up and said "I learned physics from 1, Physics from 2, Physics from 3" - only very unfortunate that there is no Technion course "physics from 3". There are 3, 3 and 3 in.

In short, you seem to be a pathological liar that the facts do not interest, and it's a pity people waste energy arguing with you.

Link to content
Share on other sites

ארכיון

This discussion has been archived and new comments can not be added.


  • Latest news

  • Buzz-Zone: Everything hot on the net

×
  • Create new ...

At the top of the news:

new on the site