SpacedX

Says that...then this - Because social media said so? Continuous footage of 1/6th gravity and a vacuum would have been a technical impossibility whilst Kubrick would never have filmed in slow scan (ten frames a second). Stanley Kubrick was not responsible for the special effects in his films and if you have watched 2001: A Space Odyssey for which Douglas Trumbull did a wonderful job, the limitations are nonetheless immediately obvious. Allied to the fact that if you knew anything about Kubrick himself, the you'd understand that the stubborn nature of the man would have prevented him from compromising his entire career as a filmmaker in addition to his artistic integrity. That and the fact that his projects and whereabouts are fully accountable during the entire Apollo Programme. The closest that Stanley Kubrick ever got to NASA was for the making of 'Barry Lyndon' in which he had scoured trade journals on optics to find a lens that could capture interior night scenes lit by only candlelight. He read about that Planar 50mm f/0.7 that was designed for NASA to capture the far side of the moon and purchased 3 of them from Carl Zeiss. There was no contact between Kubrick and NASA involved in the acquisition of the lenses. This has to be one of the most staggering stupid, ludicrous conspiratorial claims on the entire internet - and astonishingly, in spite of your claimed suspicion, you have evidently allowed yourself to be completely hoodwinked by it.

Why? Not in the slightest. The USA stopped going to the moon because in the midst of an expensive foreign war, growing public apathy and disquiet, a lack of political will and the looming OPEC crisis, Congress prematurely withdrew the funding in 1972. They saw little benefit in continuing to plough in what had been at its peak, 4% of the annual federal budget into continuation of something that had already been achieved. The Apollo Programme was cancelled meaning that the manufacturing plants, the processes, the bespoke tooling, the expertise was either retired or moved on, whilst production of the heavy lift capability ceased and no one build a replacement for the Saturn V after the production cycle had not been renewed in 1970. Powerful lobbying for the folly of the Space Shuttle Programme shifted the emphasis upon low Earth orbit and the subsequent construction of the ISS meant that space exploration became the preserve of much cheaper unmanned probes and landers that did not require a heavy lift rocket. The old technology of Apollo has become obsolete and defunct. Project Artemis was not approved until as recently as 2018. Meanwhile the Soviet moon landing programme stuttered from the off and was doomed from the onset due to a budget a fraction that of Apollo, the consistent failure of the N1 rocket and arguably, the untimely death of Sergei Korolev. India and China have lagged behind the US and Russia for decades - China directing resources into the construction of Tiangong, whilst in terms of going to the moon, both nations have pursued the cheaper option of impacts, together with unmanned probes and landers. Then why comment? I'm genuinely interested in why you would make a statement based upon what conspiracy theorists have told you to think about a subject you clearly have zero knowledge of whatsoever? Therein lies everything that's wrong with belief in conspiracy theories.You encapsulate it in a sentence. Firstly, they are belts, in the plural, due to the fact that there are two, plus a third that is transitory. Secondly, if you have integrity and humility, I'd like you to genuinely ask yourself the following questions: 1/ How much do I genuinely know about the Van Allen Belts? - their shape extent and distribution? Energies and intensity? Type of radiation? 2/ What do I actually understand by alpha and beta particle radiation and shielding against it? 3/ What have I understood about the actual structure of the Command Module and the materials that it was fashioned from? 4/ What have I learnt about the trajectories flown by each of the Apollo missions and their passage through the belts? 5/ What do I know about what James Van Allen himself, (and his soviet counterpart Sergei Vernov) had to say about the belts and the Apollo missions? 6/ Why do I think that I know better than them? 7/ Compared to the 68 minute transit of the Apollo missions, how long did last year's Polaris Dawn mission spend in the more dangerous inner belt and how long was the hatch open for? 8/ What have I done to challenge my preconceptions and the claims made by online conspiracy theorists in relation to the VABs? If the answer to these questions is nothing or "I don't know" then you have one additional question to ask of yourself - why did I feel the need to comment in the first place? Of course governments lie, deceive and conspire. No one in their right mind would suggest otherwise. But simply because they do that does not then logically follow that claims of faked moon landings or any random conspiracy theory of one's arbitrary choosing, devising or consequence of personal bias/agenda should automatically be assumed to be true. A lazy syllogistic logical fallacy. And meanwhile the online conspiracy theory that you refer to is entirely and unfailingly honest, unwaveringly accurate and consistent, not in the least bit intentionally deceptive, misleading, fallacious, exploitative, opportunistic monetised or manipulative and with your best interests at heart is completely free of vested interest and agenda? Are you sure about that? You say you have a "suspicious nature". It never ceased to amuse me how conspiracy believers suspend this claimed scepticism when it comes to accommodating the outright lies and deception that are the stock in trade of con artists such as Bart Sibrel. These people harvest gullibility, ignorance and personal incredulity for their own personal gain. Surely you don't wish to place yourself in that target market?

Yes but...

Surely not? You don't say? And there was me all along thinking that it was an advanced scouting party from the 10th Plejaren Battlefleet under the direction of General Azlok commander of the 2nd Galactic Quadrant returning to mutilate cattle and abduct rednecks from trailer parks in Arkansas.

Trump is a huge admirer of William McKinley and pledges the deliver the second 'gilded age' - the protectionist and imperialist model which will be extolled by his return to office. As an anti-establishment figure and promoter of Native American displacement he also appears to be Trump's role model. History tells us that "The Gilded Age" was actually a fake golden age, with the shine hiding the misery. It was a time of immense fortunes and the growth of industrial empires, but accompanied by widespread political corruption, violent social strife, segregation in the South and a subservient press. Karl Marx is often credited with saying, “history repeats itself, first as tragedy, second as farce”. Indeed.

It's called Holy Mackerel and it was written by Brian Bennett the drummer in The Shadows. He also wrote another that you'd definitely recognise as a keen golfer...

Oh for the days of Rugby Special and Nigel Starmer-Smith. (So sad that he is now in a nursing home for dementia).

Sounds more like a construct to me. Apologies, I'm not with you. As explained, the study design is justified and defended. The conscious choices made by the researcher to narrow the scope of their study and define its boundaries, making it more manageable and focused are known in research as delimitations. It is not "my paper". The lead author and PI is Pierre Masselot (er.al) a a statistician and environmental epidemiologist whose research agenda/interests examines the association between various environmental exposure and human health. It is published in 'Nature Medicine' a Q1/four star journal with an exceptionally high impact factor and third in the ranking of primary research journals. Due to its reputation, Nature has a very stringent peer-review process, ensuring only exceptional rigorous and robust research is accepted. On the contrary, the direction and aims and objectives of the paper are abundantly clear - to explore how the balance between increased heat-related and decreased cold-related mortality would change with various degrees of adaptation to heat and address a question in climate change epidemiology, specifically about whether the increase in heat-related mortality will be offset by a reduction in cold-related death. It recommends that further research is needed to focus on the understanding of the interplay between local factors and vulnerability to temperature and on how to quantitatively integrate it into projections of temperature-related mortality. No I didn't - and I would argue that this too is a very valid point although not a stand alone panacea to the climate change crisis which requires a range of solutions, technologies, socio-political and socio-economic perspectives and significant political and public will. Eh? I know that. Again you are making unfounded assumptions about me. Why on Earth would I "flip my lid"? I value and appreciate your constructive input here and I have endeavoured to address and answer your questions and counterpoints to the best of my ability. Not at all. Practical solutions are as important as theoretical and even hypothetical studies. I value and recognise the worth of both. However, I think, with respect, you need to read the paper again with appreciation to its defined objectives with particular attention to its strengths, purpose, delimitations and objectives. Thanks again for your input.

Don't be. That is purely a figment of your imagination (or possibly projection?) I am ok too thanks. Nothing to do with "what I think". The experimental design/methodology is clearly articulated in the paper in which the rationalisation of three SSPs is clearly defined together with the four different heat adaptation scenarios. within the context of the study. A very potent question and observation. Thank you. As part of its limitations, the authors acknowledge that the work is limited in terms of its treatment of adaptation and attenuation. Scenarios were defined as general adaptation without factoring geographical differences in the level of risk attenuation and without reference to specific drivers of adaptation or the variables governing this. On an urban scale, there is potential for solar radiation management through albedo modification, alongside the addition of green spaces and waterways to mitigate against the rising urban heat island effect. To make buildings more resistant to heat-related deaths, key strategies include incorporating passive design elements such as adequate shading, good ventilation, high-performance windows, and strategic building orientation, alongside active cooling systems like efficient air conditioning when necessary, whilst considering urban design elements that I mentioned such as green spaces and tree canopies to mitigate outdoor temperatures. This costs time and money. On of our PGRs is currently basing their doctoral thesis upon how to adapt our ageing UK schools and classrooms to be more resistant to heat-related illness. Also, awareness and advocacy can to an extent guard against heat-related illness by educating and informing the public about the risks of extreme heat, promoting preventative behaviours such as staying hydrated, seeking cool environments, and checking on vulnerable populations, in so doing, empowering individuals to take proactive measures to protect their health during hot weather. At the global scale together with the phasing out of fossil fuel dependence, GGR/DAC is likely to be the most effective geoengineering strategy but the high costs and investment associated with this eludes developing nations. However, this particular study aims to address a major question in climate change epidemiology, specifically about whether the increase in heat-related mortality will be offset by a reduction in cold-related deaths, and about the role of adaptation in future temperature-related health impacts - to dispel theories that climate change might be a net lifesaver in Europe by reducing the number of people dying from cold. Bluntly put, the increase in hot weather will kill more people than the decrease in cold weather will save. Thank you for your reply.

What a frankly bizarre response. Seriously, are you ok? Blimey, I'd forgotten about him. Whenever someone challenged his claims with evidence, as opposed to a rebuttal he's simply place a laughing emoji beneath. That's all I'm referring to. Curious as to why people feel the need to do it. Back on topic, I was reading this paper today suggesting that in the most extreme scenario, climate change rising temperatures threaten to kill millions of European urban dwellers by 2099. Without “stringent” efforts to mitigate and adapt to climate change would lead to 2.3mn additional temperature-related deaths, mostly in southern European cities such as Athens, Madrid and Rome. But those fatalities could be cut by at least two-thirds if preventive measures were taken. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41591-024-03452-2

On the contrary, the uptight one is clearly you. I suggest that we return to the topic of the thread though in the interest of ourselves and all concerned.

And yet we've known about both for decades. The failure to act for so long is inexcusable.

Your entire comment was a false premise and actually, a strawman fallacy. No you assumed that this was getting under my skin, That said, I find the notion of placing a laughing emoji under a post to discredit it not only in itself disparaging, but yes, rather dumb. And no, I did not call him that, I suggested that it made him look rather dumb. My question remains, what was it accomplishing? No intention of any hostility but there was really no need for you to comment was there? But then, that's never stopped you before. I'm particularly relaxed tonight. Winning away at Spurs imbues me with a inner warmth and well being - a comforting zen like glow and oneness with the universe. Perhaps you should follow his lead? And when you inevitably do post again instead of perhaps refraining from commenting, as opposed to engaging you in discourse, when I place a laughing emoji beneath it, do appreciate that it's actually very "endearing". (fumbles for an emoji)

Agree; it's a football forum and of little consequence in spite of the fact it can be regarded as a microcosm of popular belief and perception. On this topic though Mac, as you are well aware "humorous denial" could result in nature having the last laugh, whilst a laughing emoji in response to a post is the last refuge of the witless and the vacuous

There is nothing disparaging and disrespectful about my observation at all, and it was a genuine question. In fact I'd contend that placing a laughing emoji beneath a post whilst declining to comment is precisely the latter..."disparaging and disrespectful" and there are quite a few members that are prone to it. @Phil Bowman is a sharp contributor to this forum and posts when he has something pertinent or worthwhile to say - instead of feeling the need to comment on absolutely bloody everything such as, it has to be said, yourself.

@Posthorn54 Is there any particular reason why you feel to need to place laughing emojis under member's posts on this thread? Perhaps you have something worthwhile to say or something constructive to bring in the way of refutation? It makes you look rather dumb.

Christ, it's no different to attempting to reason with @Otis or @Legend_in_blue

Actually, no. I'm sure there were others that I wasn't aware of, but it really wasn't the prevailing view given our outstanding form.

Given the form that we finished the previous season in, most of them predicted mid-table. Percy was lampooned for suggesting that the only thing we'd come out with was the wooden spoon.

Oddly most seem to have forgotten or are completely oblivious to the fact that John Percy predicted prior to the 2015/16 season, that we would not only be relegated, but finish bottom of the table.

And culled from the June 1966 edition - "whenever they appeared on the balcony before cheering crowds in Australia, the boys couldn't help giving Hitler-type salutes."

Can't stand the bloody things. Plus the fact that many of the pricks that ride these infernal contraptions insist on dressing like ninjas for some unfathomable reason.

A remarkable work designed by Ed Hawkins at the University of Reading is about to be displayed in the New York Museum of Modern Art as part of an exhibition about how design has been an agent of change. Hawkins' contribution is called Climate Stripes and is deceptively simple. It employs coloured stripes to illustrate how the average temperature of the Earth has warmed each year over the past 175 years recounting the change purely by colours with shades of blue representing the cooler years and reds indicating the warming. The result is a stark reminder of the rapidity of climate change. Apparently he stripes have already had to be updated prior to being exhibited with a new darker shade of red to reflect the extreme heat in 2023, followed by the record global average of 2024 - the warmest year ever recorded. That is the year in which the the Earth's average temperature surpassed the 1.5°C warming level over a year for the first time and was also the benchmark temperature identified in the 2015 Paris agreement which the United States have now shunned. 'Climate Stripes' has been acclaimed throughout the world ad the stripes have been adapted for individual continents, countries and cities. To generate the colours, Hawkins paid homage to the work of climate science and over a billion temperature readings all condensed into and comprising the differing shades. A very simple concept, but highly involved in preparation and execution. As a graphic representation of the pace of climate change, Climate Stripes has achieved outstanding global success in raising awareness and recognition of the crisis . Now it aims to achieve its ultimate aim in helping to avert it and send a message to the growing ambivalence Stateside.

And speaking of which, Garth Hudson - the sole remaining founder member of The Band passed away on the 21st. (Although they were The Hawks at this point).