So, flat Earthers...

135

Replies

  • 81Katz
    81Katz Posts: 7,077 Member
    All the outer space mice ate the moon because it's made of cheese, don't cha' know?
  • caco_ethes
    caco_ethes Posts: 11,962 Member
    caco_ethes wrote: »
    JerSchmare wrote: »
    OMG. I’m sorry I started this.

    I hope you guys are kidding and that I don’t understand the sarcasm.

    The moon landing happened. There’s is nothing that is suspect.

    Not trying to shake up anyone’s world view, I just think it’s odd that NASA wants to go back to the moon and is hoping to have the technology to do so by 2020. Ehh.. what?

    Don't you want to find the moon beasts?

    I don’t understand the question :sweat_smile:
  • JeromeBarry1
    JeromeBarry1 Posts: 10,185 Member
    edited May 2018
    JerSchmare wrote: »
    For real?

    As far as I can discern, the people who proclaim that the earth is flat and that the product of multiplying mass and the square of the speed of light does not exist are choosing a way of proclaiming their individuality, their resistance to the conformity demanded of going along and getting along.
  • caco_ethes
    caco_ethes Posts: 11,962 Member
    Uh oh. There are lines being drawn in the sand..
  • ChaelAZ
    ChaelAZ Posts: 2,240 Member
    caco_ethes wrote: »
    Uh oh. There are lines being drawn in the sand..

    x8BdEXi.gif
  • caco_ethes
    caco_ethes Posts: 11,962 Member
    ChaelAZ wrote: »
    caco_ethes wrote: »
    Uh oh. There are lines being drawn in the sand..

    x8BdEXi.gif

    I love this so much
  • caco_ethes
    caco_ethes Posts: 11,962 Member
    JerSchmare wrote: »
    @caco_ethes I admire and applaud genuine curiosity. I think The person you heard wasn't wrong, but misspoke.

    When we sent Apollo 11 to the moon they weren't actually sure we could get back. It was very risky. I'd think they would want to be sure they could actually get our astronauts safely back now.

    Back then they would've needed way more advanced technology (and money) to recreate the moon landing on earth than to just go to the moon

    Fuel is a big issue, even today. The jet propulsion that is required to take off is tremendous. Think about it, there is nothing that goes into space, lands on a planet, moon, or star, and comes back. It’s really hard to do. Most things are left, or they orbit their way back, without having landed anywhere.

    What about the radiation danger?
  • caco_ethes
    caco_ethes Posts: 11,962 Member
    @caco_ethes I admire and applaud genuine curiosity. I think The person you heard wasn't wrong, but misspoke.

    When we sent Apollo 11 to the moon they weren't actually sure we could get back. It was very risky. I'd think they would want to be sure they could actually get our astronauts safely back now.

    Back then they would've needed way more advanced technology (and money) to recreate the moon landing on earth than to just go to the moon

    The fact that they weren’t actually sure they’d get back is what makes me wonder. Because tensions with the Soviet Union were sky high and JFK made a bold promise that we’d have boots on the moon by the end of the decade. Failure was not an option. They had to exert their dominance over Russia. It was a power play.

    So imagine how these astronauts feel when they have to tell the president ehhh this thing that you promised.. we aren’t confident it’s even possible at this point. What government mission doesn’t have a plan B? So just in case they can’t make it, they film it ahead of time. Given the political climate, losing this race was tantamount to nuclear war. I don’t think they’d bat an eye at a plan B.

    So they shoot them off into space where they encounter terrifying effects of radiation early on in their flight. They’re seeing what looks like sparks exploding when their eyes are shut and recognize immediately that they don’t have enough protection against radiation to pursue it. They come back down to low earth orbit. They stage a shot of the earth from a distance using paper over the window. Plan B it is.

    The astronauts dejectedly come back. This was worst case scenario. To keep up appearances they are whisked away to ‘decontamination’ where they are sworn to secrecy and are made to commit the story to memory.

    They emerge for the news conference, not looking at all like men who have just accomplished the most astonishing thing in the history of the world and made it back with life and limb intact. No, they look guilty and scared. They elbow each other when one answers incorrectly. They answer everything with ‘we’ even when asked directly for their specific viewpoint. Neil Armstrong goes on to be a recluse practically. In one interview he does give, he never gives a firsthand account and instead answers in a very dodgy way, like he’s trying his damnedest to tell the truth within the confines of the lie he’s expected to live out the rest of his life.

    I don’t know. That seems more realistic to me than our failing space program miraculously getting this thing right just when they needed to.

    Anyway, I find that a lot of people think it’s unamerican to even question it. That anyone who has doubts is a foaming-at-the-mouth conspiracy theorist. If that’s how I strike you, okay. I just know that it’s no skin off my back to check out something that goes against what I currently believe. I’ve checked out the flat earth argument too. It’s compelling. I find it interesting to speculate.. what if? What if my worldview has been wrong all along? Does that make me a kook or just curious and open-minded? If you never hear what people of opposing viewpoints have to say, you’ll never be able to really discuss anything in a meaningful and enjoyable way. I prefer to hear all sides. I think it’s silly that in this day and age a person should feel defensive of that.
  • caco_ethes
    caco_ethes Posts: 11,962 Member
    That post is not directed at you personally @MeeseeksAndDestroy but at a general audience. :blush:
  • JetJaguar
    JetJaguar Posts: 801 Member
    It's true that we weren't sure that the Apollo 11 astronauts would be able to get back home - Nixon even had a speech prepared for such a contingency. The real reason we haven't been back to the Moon is a lack of political will. Congress lost interest and didn't even want to finish the Apollo program as planned. There were supposed to be 20 missions, the last three were cancelled and we stopped at Apollo 17. Also, NASA is tremendously risk-adverse now, far more than in the 60's. In today's political climate, an Apollo-type program is impossible.

    Also, we still have the plans for the Saturn V, it's a myth that they were destroyed. They are stored on microfilm in the NASA archives. The reason we can't just start cranking out new copies is that a lot of the components are obsolete and haven't been manufactured in 40+ years, by contractors that may have also been out of business for as long. Even seemingly simple things, like transistors, fasteners, connectors, metal alloys, and such. The amount of engineering rework that would be involved to modernize the Saturn V is about the same as designing an all-new system from scratch.

    (BTW, the Russians did land unmanned probes on the Moon. They beat us, in fact.)