fleckneymike Posted 3 August 2012 Posted 3 August 2012 Are you really saying that we don't have scientific records of all this in universities scientific institutes and libraries all around the country . Are you really saying we'd have to start again from scratch ? sorry that's not very likely No he's not. Once again you are wilfully misrepresenting what he says. Just because we have the plans doesn't mean we have the skills or knowledge to build it.
fleckneymike Posted 3 August 2012 Posted 3 August 2012 yes but we didn't throw all the spectrums away until they were actually replaced with better We didn't throw away the Saturn V, it's sat outside in the Florida sun
breadandcheese Posted 3 August 2012 Posted 3 August 2012 Are you really saying that we don't have scientific records of all this in universities scientific institutes and libraries all around the country . Are you really saying we'd have to start again from scratch ? sorry that's not very likely All the nuclear scientists involved with building the nuclear power plants back in the 1950s and 1960s are no longer around. Therefore, we would have to train people to do the job. How long do you think it takes to train to be an engineer capable of designing and building a nuclear power station? Or do you give old plans to any old engineer without an understanding of the nuclear process (that sounds safe)? So we have to put infrastructure in place before even attempting to build the power stations. Then there's the actual building of the parts for the nuclear power station. How many of those companies that built components for the nuclear power plants are around? How many of those that are still around have their factories set-up to build the components (bearing in mind it's been decades since it was done and you need to train people and get machinery in place. This all takes time and money). So yes, we as a country, are unable to build our own nuclear power plants. That's why all the companies bidding for the potential work are from France and Germany (where there has been a continual investment in nuclear energy).
Captain... Posted 3 August 2012 Posted 3 August 2012 No it hasn't. Conspiracy theorists have decided that they need to invent new conspiracies to explain away the photo's on the landing sites, foot prints and rover tracks. It is hardly conclusive proof of anything, I have seen better pictures of big foot and the Loch Ness monster They have the technology to photograph distant galaxies, this should be easy.
marty78 Posted 3 August 2012 Posted 3 August 2012 This is the point that i find quite amazing , and the readiness of so many to accept it with just a shrug . I am new here but have been a member of BAUT for several years. I have seen many different approaches made by hoax believers to try and convince that community of a hoax and not one has ever offered more than circumstantial evidence and most last a couple of hours before they slump off to another, more gullible, section of the internet. There is lots of evidence that we landed on the moon, there is none that it was a hoax. That is why I can accept it with a shrug.
fleckneymike Posted 3 August 2012 Posted 3 August 2012 It is hardly conclusive proof of anything, I have seen better pictures of big foot and the Loch Ness monster They have the technology to photograph distant galaxies, this should be easy. No they don't, that is not how space telescopes work. They aren't like the telescopes you get at the sea side. What exactly caused the markings on the moon in the exact location where the moon landings took place?
Zingari Posted 3 August 2012 Posted 3 August 2012 All the nuclear scientists involved with building the nuclear power plants back in the 1950s and 1960s are no longer around. Therefore, we would have to train people to do the job. How long do you think it takes to train to be an engineer capable of designing and building a nuclear power station? Or do you give old plans to any old engineer without an understanding of the nuclear process (that sounds safe)? So we have to put infrastructure in place before even attempting to build the power stations. Then there's the actual building of the parts for the nuclear power station. How many of those companies that built components for the nuclear power plants are around? How many of those that are still around have their factories set-up to build the components (bearing in mind it's been decades since it was done and you need to train people and get machinery in place. This all takes time and money). So yes, we as a country, are unable to build our own nuclear power plants. That's why all the companies bidding for the potential work are from France and Germany (where there has been a continual investment in nuclear energy). That's all very well , but the technology is not "lost" is it ? In the same way they're aren't any craftsmen around to make suits of armour and swords , if the need arose it would not take long to train craftsmen provided the technology had been recorded . It wouldn't take the same amount of time that it took the original artisans to reach that level of expertise .
Babylon Posted 3 August 2012 Posted 3 August 2012 That's all very well , but the technology is not "lost" is it ? In the same way they're aren't any craftsmen around to make suits of armour and swords , if the need arose it would not take long to train craftsmen provided the technology had been recorded . It wouldn't take the same amount of time that it took the original artisans to reach that level of expertise . Who said the technology was lost? You keep putting it in quote marks but I can't remember anyone saying it was (other than you). Forgive me if there is but I couldn't see it. The technology isn't lost, it's all still there. But what we have on record is for building something that is now out of date. Technology moved on, we didn't.
Babylon Posted 3 August 2012 Posted 3 August 2012 yes but we didn't throw all the spectrums away until they were actually replaced with better And they were replaced with better because there was a want / need. The want / need was no longer there to put a man on the moon for the US after they had proved they could do it. There is nothing for us to learn there that a robot couldn't do now.
Zingari Posted 3 August 2012 Posted 3 August 2012 And they were replaced with better because there was a want / need. The want / need was no longer there to put a man on the moon for the US after they had proved they could do it. There is nothing for us to learn there that a robot couldn't do now. Look Babs I've told you before! I'm only looking after this shop til Empty gets back My job is just to stoke the flames here , not steer the locomotive !! ttfn
Rincewind Posted 3 August 2012 Posted 3 August 2012 There are people that could make suits of armour though. Things are made of metal and ironmongers stillexist. The technology for space travel has changed though. A lot more factors are taken into consideration.
Captain... Posted 3 August 2012 Posted 3 August 2012 No they don't, that is not how space telescopes work. They aren't like the telescopes you get at the sea side. What exactly caused the markings on the moon in the exact location where the moon landings took place? Most likely the flag and whatever else they say, that is not my point, I believe we landed on the moon, I also believe that NASA are happy to keep the conspiracy alive to serve their own purpose.
breadandcheese Posted 3 August 2012 Posted 3 August 2012 That's all very well , but the technology is not "lost" is it ? In the same way they're aren't any craftsmen around to make suits of armour and swords , if the need arose it would not take long to train craftsmen provided the technology had been recorded . It wouldn't take the same amount of time that it took the original artisans to reach that level of expertise . Simply not true. Chinese space agency was formed in 1993. It took them 19 years to achieve manned spacecraft docking, achieving this in June 2012. Why would it take so long to do something that is old technology? The space shuttle programme has been shelved by NASA after the cost and safety implications (Space Shuttle Colombia). Now the Americans do not have have the capability to launch manned spaceflight. How is this possible when they've sent people into space before? How long is it before America has manned spaceflight capability (answer: there is no planned date as there is arguments over funding)?
fleckneymike Posted 3 August 2012 Posted 3 August 2012 Most likely the flag and whatever else they say, that is not my point, I believe we landed on the moon, I also believe that NASA are happy to keep the conspiracy alive to serve their own purpose. Why would NASA want people to believe that they didn't do it?
marty78 Posted 3 August 2012 Posted 3 August 2012 Most likely the flag and whatever else they say, that is not my point, I believe we landed on the moon, I also believe that NASA are happy to keep the conspiracy alive to serve their own purpose. Why? Nasa have released lots of information that is in direct contradiction of hoax claims but still people believe and, even worse, they then try to convince others. The burden of proof lies with those that deny history not those that made it.
davieG Posted 3 August 2012 Posted 3 August 2012 Having been there, done that why would the USA need to continue to go to the Moon, as for other Countries there's no glory in being 2nd or 3rd. There has to be major benefits versus cost to continue. Seems to me the only financial rewarding benefit might come from the minerals there but you'd need to build a space station there, surely part of building the current space station is to allow them a potential cost effective launch pad for further more investigation and more distance exploration to see what's out there and with the development in robotics it doesn't really need a human to do it. The race to the Moon was exactly that just a race to demonstrate superiority during a time of "my dad's bigger than yours" and the Yanks won it.
The Doctor Posted 3 August 2012 Posted 3 August 2012 Why would NASA want people to believe that they didn't do it? It's run by the government, have the people arguing with each other as to what they did or did not do and your regime is fairly safe from the threat of revolution.
fleckneymike Posted 3 August 2012 Posted 3 August 2012 It's run by the government, have the people arguing with each other as to what they did or did not do and your regime is fairly safe from the threat of revolution. WTF? The last study found that 6%, thats SIX PERCENT of American doubted that they landed on the Moon. Are you asking us to believe that NASA have constructed a hoax story to keep that 6% and the small percentage who attempt to explain to them why they are completely wrong from engaging in civil disobedience? This just gets weirder.
The Doctor Posted 3 August 2012 Posted 3 August 2012 WTF? The last study found that 6%, thats SIX PERCENT of American doubted that they landed on the Moon. Are you asking us to believe that NASA have constructed a hoax story to keep that 6% and the small percentage who attempt to explain to them why they are completely wrong from engaging in civil disobedience? This just gets weirder. I didn't say it was a sensible idea, but did you expect much from Americans? Frankly, it's the only reason I could see for NASA wanting to keep the conspiracies alive.
marty78 Posted 3 August 2012 Posted 3 August 2012 I didn't say it was a sensible idea, but did you expect much from Americans? Frankly, it's the only reason I could see for NASA wanting to keep the conspiracies alive. A simpler explanation would be that they went to the Moon.
Zingari Posted 3 August 2012 Posted 3 August 2012 Sorry chaps , this is wildly off topic but one thing that always intrigues me in all of these conspiracy types of threads Why are so many posters concerned that some people believe that the moon landings etc were a hoax ? Why do they bother trying to convince those that believe them to be a hoax otherwise ? If they think they are mad, delusional , ill educated fools , why bother ? I don't go into asylums and try to convince everyone they aren't Napoleon , so what is the reason for it ? One can only assume that there is just a chink of doubt in their minds that they are hoping to dispel ? Or maybe it's because you care so deeply about them that you want to help and cure them of the demons in their heads? edit; I know , I do ask some strange stuff , sorry
Captain... Posted 3 August 2012 Posted 3 August 2012 Why would NASA want people to believe that they didn't do it? Why? Nasa have released lots of information that is in direct contradiction of hoax claims but still people believe and, even worse, they then try to convince others. The burden of proof lies with those that deny history not those that made it. Exactly my question, why have they not cleared it up without doubt? They could do easily, but all these things have gone "missing", another one along with the "missing" technology is the original broadcast from the moon. They seem very careless at NASA. Edit: And they didn't construct the conspiracy, but they certainly have let it grow.
marty78 Posted 3 August 2012 Posted 3 August 2012 To stop them spreading disinformation and trying to change historical fact. Also boredom.
davieG Posted 3 August 2012 Posted 3 August 2012 Sorry chaps , this is wildly off topic but one thing that always intrigues me in all of these conspiracy types of threads Why are so many posters concerned that some people believe that the moon landings etc were a hoax ? Why do they bother trying to convince those that believe them to be a hoax otherwise ? If they think they are mad, delusional , ill educated fools , why bother ? I don't go into asylums and try to convince everyone they aren't Napoleon , so what is the reason for it ? One can only assume that there is just a chink of doubt in their minds that they are hoping to dispel ? Or maybe it's because you care so deeply about them that you want to help and cure them of the demons in their heads? edit; I know , I do ask some strange stuff , sorry It's a forum everyone's looking for an argument and they're fed up talking about Beckford. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TEOvou30T_I Who could disbelieve Jonathan King?
fleckneymike Posted 3 August 2012 Posted 3 August 2012 Sorry chaps , this is wildly off topic but one thing that always intrigues me in all of these conspiracy types of threads Why are so many posters concerned that some people believe that the moon landings etc were a hoax ? Why do they bother trying to convince those that believe them to be a hoax otherwise ? If they think they are mad, delusional , ill educated fools , why bother ? I don't go into asylums and try to convince everyone they aren't Napoleon , so what is the reason for it ? One can only assume that there is just a chink of doubt in their minds that they are hoping to dispel ? Or maybe it's because you care so deeply about them that you want to help and cure them of the demons in their heads? edit; I know , I do ask some strange stuff , sorry Because conspiracy theories which ignore science are dangerous. As many of us have posted, scepticism is fine, adherence to dogma is dangerous. If you allow these things to creep into the public consciousness you are on a slippery slope to myth and fable in science.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.