At sceptimatic's request...

  • 678 Replies
  • 129204 Views
?

tappet

  • 2162
  • +0/-0
Re: At sceptimatic's request...
« Reply #180 on: February 24, 2014, 06:36:33 PM »
I am going to go out on a limb and say
1) The moon buggy is moving like at 10 miles per hour
2)The moon buggy has suspension that helps dampen the bouncing, just like cars on earth.
3)The moon buggy has little upward momentum.  The astronaut is actively jumping.
Number 3 is a fail. Watch the video again.

?

BJ1234

  • 1931
  • +0/-0
Re: At sceptimatic's request...
« Reply #181 on: February 24, 2014, 06:42:28 PM »
Are you saying the astronaut is not actively jumping? ;D

OK so the third one might not be the best reason, that is why I did put it on the bottom.  However, if one wheel is bouncing up, there are three other ones available to absorb the shock.  4 wheels on the ground is a very stable configuration. 

I just re-watched the video of the moon buggy again.  As the front end is raising, you can see the rear suspension flexing.  This is actively holding the front end down.  Just as on a car on earth does.
« Last Edit: February 24, 2014, 06:45:46 PM by BJ1234 »

?

tappet

  • 2162
  • +0/-0
Re: At sceptimatic's request...
« Reply #182 on: February 24, 2014, 06:44:03 PM »
You see here is the problem. You watch a video and see something and what you see is influenced by what you are told.

But it is impossible to get dust and dirt to behave the same way on earth as it does in the Apollo footage, you've seen it yourself, and so have I. What is the explanation? Were they using special dirt that would fall faster through air without creating dust clouds, and special tires that picked it up and threw it in the air more effectively than normal tires? Were they inside a giant vacuum chamber doing the filming? Or were they actually on the moon?

As for the bouncing moon buggy and the jumping astronaut, BJ1234 makes good points.

Also, an understanding of physics would be useful when viewing all of these videos. I'm not talking about an understanding gained solely from textbooks, but one gained from actual experimentation and experience, just so that we're clear on that.
I have only seen a limited amount of moon photo/video footage so far. And it already springs to mind the different types of soil I have seen already. From cement dust type soil with shoe imprints, to fill sand flying off buggy wheels.

?

tappet

  • 2162
  • +0/-0
Re: At sceptimatic's request...
« Reply #183 on: February 24, 2014, 06:54:50 PM »
Are you saying the astronaut is not actively jumping? ;D

OK so the third one might not be the best reason, that is why I did put it on the bottom.  However, if one wheel is bouncing up, there are three other ones available to absorb the shock.  4 wheels on the ground is a very stable configuration. 

I just re-watched the video of the moon buggy again.  As the front end is raising, you can see the rear suspension flexing.  This is actively holding the front end down.  Just as on a car on earth does.
Did I not read somewhere recently that this buggy weighs bugger all?
If this is true then think. Light buggy, no weight on the front and weak gravity. This thing if it is on the moon it would bounce around like popping corn. Are you guy's insane? you don't need physics to figure this out.

?

BJ1234

  • 1931
  • +0/-0
Re: At sceptimatic's request...
« Reply #184 on: February 24, 2014, 06:56:50 PM »
You see here is the problem. You watch a video and see something and what you see is influenced by what you are told.

But it is impossible to get dust and dirt to behave the same way on earth as it does in the Apollo footage, you've seen it yourself, and so have I. What is the explanation? Were they using special dirt that would fall faster through air without creating dust clouds, and special tires that picked it up and threw it in the air more effectively than normal tires? Were they inside a giant vacuum chamber doing the filming? Or were they actually on the moon?

As for the bouncing moon buggy and the jumping astronaut, BJ1234 makes good points.

Also, an understanding of physics would be useful when viewing all of these videos. I'm not talking about an understanding gained solely from textbooks, but one gained from actual experimentation and experience, just so that we're clear on that.
I have only seen a limited amount of moon photo/video footage so far. And it already springs to mind the different types of soil I have seen already. From cement dust type soil with shoe imprints, to fill sand flying off buggy wheels.
That is pretty impressive being able to tell the type of soil being flung off the buggy wheels.
Even if they are different types of soil, why would that be strange?

?

Starman

  • 3860
  • +0/-0
  • Never miss a day to learn something
Re: At sceptimatic's request...
« Reply #185 on: February 24, 2014, 07:04:31 PM »
Look, I have watched this video quite a few times now and every time I watch it  gets more ridiculous, my mouth is sore from laughing. Are all of these moon video's going to be like this?

On the moon it seems funny but the rover with the astronaut has a mass of 850 lb. It may feel like 1/6 the weight. It is like pushing a small 3 ton boat on the water. It may be easy to push but you will feel the mass if you try to moving fast. Does that make sense?

?

tappet

  • 2162
  • +0/-0
Re: At sceptimatic's request...
« Reply #186 on: February 24, 2014, 07:15:18 PM »
Perfect.

?

tappet

  • 2162
  • +0/-0
Re: At sceptimatic's request...
« Reply #187 on: February 24, 2014, 07:16:55 PM »
And here I was looking at ships on water. This moon stuff is killer.

?

SirSpankalot

  • 601
  • +0/-0
Re: At sceptimatic's request...
« Reply #188 on: February 24, 2014, 07:19:49 PM »
And here I was looking at ships on water. This moon stuff is killer.

 :D

If it were easy, we'd all be up there frolicking about.. wouldn't we..

?

Starman

  • 3860
  • +0/-0
  • Never miss a day to learn something
Re: At sceptimatic's request...
« Reply #189 on: February 24, 2014, 07:22:49 PM »
And here I was looking at ships on water. This moon stuff is killer.

 :D

If it were easy, we'd all be up there frolicking about.. wouldn't we..

I usually say: "If it was easy it would be boring"

?

SirSpankalot

  • 601
  • +0/-0
Re: At sceptimatic's request...
« Reply #190 on: February 24, 2014, 07:28:08 PM »
OK well lets say both points are true.. :)

?

tappet

  • 2162
  • +0/-0
Re: At sceptimatic's request...
« Reply #191 on: February 24, 2014, 10:05:07 PM »
Look at this ridiculous video. I have no interest in what he is blowing on. I want you to look how he can hardly stay on the surface. Especially 17 seconds to 35 second mark, no traction whatsoever he is just about to do handstands. Has he got cable connected to his back or something? Then you expect me to believe they can drive a buggy on the moon let alone steer the thing.
If the buggy is on the same moon as this astronaut the steering would not work especially when it hits a bump. The buggy would do constant wheelies. I am watching this and crying with laughter.
 #" class="bbc_link" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Moon Landing Hoax Apollo 16 : Astronaut Blows on a Rock Through a Hole in His Helmet For Breathing

?

SirSpankalot

  • 601
  • +0/-0
Re: At sceptimatic's request...
« Reply #192 on: February 24, 2014, 10:20:31 PM »
Given I've never been in space, I am not an expert, non of us here are.. but there was nothing in that video that stands out as being even slightly unusual, given the environment they are in.

The blowing on the rock thing is weird - no idea what that's about.

Edit - Just watched it again.. the blow on it comment was a joke - they were messing around.  And yeah he's moving around a bit, he's trying to bounce himself back up... imaging what 1/6th gravity might feel like... I know in planes when you push the nose down, even 0.5G's feels weird and would look very strange trying to walk and move around...

So again, to quote from the first Austin Powers movie - every...thing.....seeeeeems......tooooo.....be..in..ooorrrrrrrrdddeeeeeerrrrrr......  ;D
« Last Edit: February 24, 2014, 10:24:32 PM by SirSpankalot »

?

tappet

  • 2162
  • +0/-0
Re: At sceptimatic's request...
« Reply #193 on: February 24, 2014, 10:26:53 PM »
And why do they have to jump and hop? Why cant they walk?

?

SirSpankalot

  • 601
  • +0/-0
Re: At sceptimatic's request...
« Reply #194 on: February 24, 2014, 10:28:41 PM »
And why do they have to jump and hop? Why cant they walk?

That I do know.. It's because the suits are very bulky and hard to walk in - it was sometimes easier to bounce about. Plus wouldn't you bounce around if you were up there? I would!  You'd feel like superman!

*

ausGeoff

  • 6091
  • +0/-0
Re: At sceptimatic's request...
« Reply #195 on: February 24, 2014, 11:45:55 PM »
I basically question just about everything now.
So do I, absolutely.  This is one of the reasons I so strongly question the flat earth theorists, and repeatedly seek evidence from them to support those theories.  Unfortunately, that evidence is seldom forthcoming in any way consistent with the tenets of contemporary astrophysics and/or geophysics.  Many of the flat earthers (not necessarily yourself) seem to blindly accept all sorts of bizarre, non-scientific, and totally unevidenced notions about the universe and the planet.  Many of them would appear to be just (literally) making stuff up on the spot in order to best suit their "argument of the day".  There's a noticeable lack of conformity from one flat earther's basic theory to another's.

Quote
You appear to accept without question what is put on your plate, which is fair enough, if that's how you view it all.
I may "appear" to be that way inclined, but it couldn't be further from the truth!  Only after carrying out my own due diligence have I concluded that there is no viable evidence in support a flat earth model in any way, shape or form.  On the other hand, every bit of available, viable evidence supports a spherical planet model—whichever way you look at it.

There is nothing involved with and/or supporting the so-called round earth model that defies the laws of physics, motion, energy, chemistry, petrology, hydrology, glaciology, astronomy, or geomorphology.

Quote
To be honest, I wish I did but it's got to the stage where I see the media for what it is. A disinfo organisation.
Agree totally.  The media are almost totally untrustworthy at most levels both nationally and globally.  Most of the media (at least in Australia) are now hugely influenced by both the corporatists and the government.  And which is why I don't read daily newspapers; I pick my stuff off the interwebs (which can, of course also be suspect as accurate sources).

Quote
The fact that most of you accept a of of stuff that deserves serious questioning, astounds me to be honest.
No need to be astounded my friend.  The very fact that the majority of the planet's 7 billion population and an absolute majority of its 6 million scientists accept totally a spherical planet should tell you something.  And that is that the flat earth theory is totally unsupported by nearly every living human being—other than a few hundred flat earth theorists.

Are you familiar with Occam's Razor?  That clarifies this scenario more than adequately, and extremely succinctly.

Quote
You can take all of it to the grave, fighting if you wish and it's fine by me, as I'll take what I know in my own mind to the grave.
The majority of the world's population is not "fighting" over any particular scientific concept—that's apparently the sole purview of the flat earthers?  Every so-called round earther on the planet agrees that there's only one, single model of the planet; there's no differences of opinion (as within the flat earth community) and no disagreements about the most basic of issues, that is the simple geometric shape of the planet (again, as there is within the flat earth community).

Flat earthers fight amongst themselves all the time; round earthers never do at a base level of agreement.  And that should also tell you something.

Quote
It's just good to know that I can question this stuff but also bad to know that I had to get to this stage by events that reek of lies.
Can I ask what specific "events" you consider to "reek of lies"?  Are you referring maybe to Nicolaus Copernicus's theory of heliocentrism from the 16th century?  Or the imaging from the space vehicles of NASA and numerous other countries this century?  I'd be pleased to know of just a couple of the tenets of the spherical planet model you consider to be lies, and why, and I'll attempt to address those concerns.
 
 


?

SirSpankalot

  • 601
  • +0/-0
Re: At sceptimatic's request...
« Reply #196 on: February 24, 2014, 11:54:15 PM »
What a fantastic reply!

How do you get individual quotes in like that?  I assume your not just cutting and pasting.. and deleting what you don't need?  On a different forum I'm on, all you need to do is highlight the text and click 'quote' - that doesn't seem to work on this forum - the quote button includes the whole quote, not just the highlighted part:(


*

glokta

  • 598
  • +0/-0
Re: At sceptimatic's request...
« Reply #197 on: February 25, 2014, 12:31:19 AM »
And something that always seems to get passed over, but is apparent in all of the footage, is just how would they get dust on earth to react like this to being kicked up? #ws" class="bbc_link" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Apollo 11 Buzz Aldrin Kicking Moon Dust
That's how it looks if you kick sand.
Total BS. Next time you are down the beach with your straight edge please make a video to back that up.
Quote from: sceptimatic
Use your brain. There is no sun in space. You are simply duped.

*

ausGeoff

  • 6091
  • +0/-0
Re: At sceptimatic's request...
« Reply #198 on: February 25, 2014, 12:47:40 AM »
What a fantastic reply!

How do you get individual quotes in like that?  I assume your not just cutting and pasting.. and deleting what you don't need?  On a different forum I'm on, all you need to do is highlight the text and click 'quote' - that doesn't seem to work on this forum - the quote button includes the whole quote, not just the highlighted part:(

Thanks...   :)

I just block text and use the "quote" button.  You have to be careful to delete any other original but now superfluous quote codes though, otherwise you'll stuff up the formatting.  And make sure you leave the topmost line intact EG: [quöte author=SirSpankalot link=topic=61007.msg1583283#msg1583283 date=1393314855] as this preserves to whom you're responding in the initial quote block.

As long as you've got the [quöte] and [/quöte] codes around your text, you'll be good to go.

Hope this makes sense.

*

glokta

  • 598
  • +0/-0
Re: At sceptimatic's request...
« Reply #199 on: February 25, 2014, 12:49:14 AM »
Look at this ridiculous video. I have no interest in what he is blowing on. I want you to look how he can hardly stay on the surface. Especially 17 seconds to 35 second mark, no traction whatsoever he is just about to do handstands. Has he got cable connected to his back or something? Then you expect me to believe they can drive a buggy on the moon let alone steer the thing.
If the buggy is on the same moon as this astronaut the steering would not work especially when it hits a bump. The buggy would do constant wheelies. I am watching this and crying with laughter.
 #" class="bbc_link" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Moon Landing Hoax Apollo 16 : Astronaut Blows on a Rock Through a Hole in His Helmet For Breathing
You are comparing the stability of a man in a 200lb bulky space suit with a lunar rover that weighed up to 1543lb when fully laden. Add in the fact they are travelling at about 10mph. You can see the suspension diving in all the right places. It's almost as if the thing was designed to be stable and not jump all over the place and flip over. Quite important given the potential consequences.
« Last Edit: February 25, 2014, 12:55:24 AM by glokta »
Quote from: sceptimatic
Use your brain. There is no sun in space. You are simply duped.

?

tappet

  • 2162
  • +0/-0
Re: At sceptimatic's request...
« Reply #200 on: February 25, 2014, 12:53:33 AM »
And something that always seems to get passed over, but is apparent in all of the footage, is just how would they get dust on earth to react like this to being kicked up? #ws" class="bbc_link" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Apollo 11 Buzz Aldrin Kicking Moon Dust
That's how it looks if you kick sand.
Total BS. Next time you are down the beach with your straight edge please make a video to back that up.
BS yourself, you kick your foot in fine white sand towards water and you can easily make it go 10/15 ft.

?

SirSpankalot

  • 601
  • +0/-0
Re: At sceptimatic's request...
« Reply #201 on: February 25, 2014, 12:54:18 AM »
What a fantastic reply!

How do you get individual quotes in like that?  I assume your not just cutting and pasting.. and deleting what you don't need?  On a different forum I'm on, all you need to do is highlight the text and click 'quote' - that doesn't seem to work on this forum - the quote button includes the whole quote, not just the highlighted part:(

Thanks...   :)

I just block text and use the "quote" button.  You have to be careful to delete any other original but now superfluous quote codes though, otherwise you'll stuff up the formatting.  And make sure you leave the topmost line intact EG: [quöte author=SirSpankalot link=topic=61007.msg1583283#msg1583283 date=1393314855] as this preserves to whom you're responding in the initial quote block.

As long as you've got the [quöte] and [/quöte] codes around your text, you'll be good to go.

Hope this makes sense.

Yeah that does make sense..thats what I thought - you have to get rid of the text you don't want....

cool thanks :)

?

SirSpankalot

  • 601
  • +0/-0
Re: At sceptimatic's request...
« Reply #202 on: February 25, 2014, 12:55:45 AM »
And something that always seems to get passed over, but is apparent in all of the footage, is just how would they get dust on earth to react like this to being kicked up? #ws" class="bbc_link" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Apollo 11 Buzz Aldrin Kicking Moon Dust
That's how it looks if you kick sand.
Total BS. Next time you are down the beach with your straight edge please make a video to back that up.
BS yourself, you kick your foot in fine white sand towards water and you can easily make it go 10/15 ft.

That's sand.. not moondust..

Compared to moondust, sand is more like large boulders. 

?

tappet

  • 2162
  • +0/-0
Re: At sceptimatic's request...
« Reply #203 on: February 25, 2014, 12:58:48 AM »

Really, and you know this how?

?

SirSpankalot

  • 601
  • +0/-0
Re: At sceptimatic's request...
« Reply #204 on: February 25, 2014, 01:03:18 AM »
LOL.. because I have read up on it.. I haven't seen it.

Nor have you.

*

glokta

  • 598
  • +0/-0
Re: At sceptimatic's request...
« Reply #205 on: February 25, 2014, 01:04:00 AM »
Let's start with something simple.
Now as we all know, vehicles leave tyre tracks and humans, even in big boots, leave boot prints. Having said that. Can anyone tell me how this vehicle got into this situation without leaving tyre tracks.

Here's my 3 guesses.

1. It was lowered into position via a crane, maybe some kind of arms attached to the tin foil clad lander.

2. It's a hover rover and it's wheels don;t actually touch the ground upon movement.

3. Every time it's moved, an astronaut sweeps the track marks away and that's why we just see boot prints.

If it's not any of these, can anyone give me another reason or two as to what could be happening here?




Looking at  that buggy, she's certainly done a few laps of the track.
Yes it had already been on the first eva where the fender broke and covered the rover and astronauts in dust. This photo is before the second eva.
Quote from: sceptimatic
Use your brain. There is no sun in space. You are simply duped.

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 30076
  • +3/-4
Re: At sceptimatic's request...
« Reply #206 on: February 25, 2014, 01:14:54 AM »
Look at this ridiculous video. I have no interest in what he is blowing on. I want you to look how he can hardly stay on the surface. Especially 17 seconds to 35 second mark, no traction whatsoever he is just about to do handstands. Has he got cable connected to his back or something? Then you expect me to believe they can drive a buggy on the moon let alone steer the thing.
If the buggy is on the same moon as this astronaut the steering would not work especially when it hits a bump. The buggy would do constant wheelies. I am watching this and crying with laughter.
 #" class="bbc_link" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Moon Landing Hoax Apollo 16 : Astronaut Blows on a Rock Through a Hole in His Helmet For Breathing
I needed a hanky for this video. I was crying with laughter.  ;D
I don't think there's any hope for people if they cannot see this bull crap for what it is.

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 30076
  • +3/-4
Re: At sceptimatic's request...
« Reply #207 on: February 25, 2014, 01:21:15 AM »
Let's deal with this picture. Can any rational person see anything wrong with this picture? I have a strange feeling that the round earth crew will see nothing wrong at all and it's all to be expected, as per usual.  ;D



?

tappet

  • 2162
  • +0/-0
Re: At sceptimatic's request...
« Reply #208 on: February 25, 2014, 01:23:28 AM »
This is going to be good.

?

SirSpankalot

  • 601
  • +0/-0
Re: At sceptimatic's request...
« Reply #209 on: February 25, 2014, 01:24:07 AM »
Let's deal with this picture. Can any rational person see anything wrong with this picture? I have a strange feeling that the round earth crew will see nothing wrong at all and it's all to be expected, as per usual.  ;D



Are you referring to the buggy's rear left hand wheel being perched up?