Faking the moon landing impossible

  • 457 Replies
  • 22275 Views
*

onebigmonkey

  • 1623
  • You. Yes you. Stand still laddie.
Re: Faking the moon landing impossible
« Reply #180 on: April 11, 2017, 09:38:29 AM »
The astronauts don't even turn their helmets when moving about, so how do they manage to see all around them properly.
You'd think they would be able to turn their heads and helmets so far each way.

They could move their heads freely inside the helmets, and if that didn't go far enough they moved themselves. The helmets were locked in place.  What's difficult?

Here's the helmet without the protective cover and visor attachments



and which direction is Buzz looking here?

« Last Edit: April 11, 2017, 09:45:40 AM by onebigmonkey »
Facts won't do what I want them to.

We went from a round Earth to a round Moon: http://onebigmonkey.com/apollo/apollo.html

*

onebigmonkey

  • 1623
  • You. Yes you. Stand still laddie.
Re: Faking the moon landing impossible
« Reply #181 on: April 11, 2017, 09:44:28 AM »
PS: "A guy on youtube says so with no proof?"
He is the proof as he investigated first hand. He's not hiding behind a screen with the username of his ancestors. He's done the work but at this point of brainwashing even if Neil Armstrong stood in front of the world and admitted he never went to the moon you'd find a reason to dismiss that claim.

He does fuck all. All he's done is argue from incredulity. He points out a lot of things he does't understand and makes no attempt to understand them. I may have adopted a username on the internet (because I can), but my real name isn't difficult to find - it's on my website. Not one astronaut has ever come forward and denied their own achievements. Not one. Ever. If the dragged you to the moon and made you step outside you'd still claim you were hypnotised. See how that argument works? Show me proof they didn't go, pick one thing. All I hear so far is bluster and the avoidance of doing any research.

Quote
Just like the evolutionists, moon landing blind followers eat up what's given as science and when the lies masquerading as science comes into question then it's thrown out and ignored. Just like the video, completely dismissed without justification.

Prove me wrong with science. Still waiting.
Facts won't do what I want them to.

We went from a round Earth to a round Moon: http://onebigmonkey.com/apollo/apollo.html

?

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 23256
Re: Faking the moon landing impossible
« Reply #182 on: April 11, 2017, 11:39:45 AM »
The astronauts don't even turn their helmets when moving about, so how do they manage to see all around them properly.
You'd think they would be able to turn their heads and helmets so far each way.

They could move their heads freely inside the helmets, and if that didn't go far enough they moved themselves. The helmets were locked in place.  What's difficult?

Here's the helmet without the protective cover and visor attachments



and which direction is Buzz looking here?


I don't see any reason why the helmets don't turn with their heads.
It seems stupid just to have a fixed helmet.

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 39099
Re: Faking the moon landing impossible
« Reply #183 on: April 11, 2017, 11:50:47 AM »
I don't see any reason why the helmets don't turn with their heads.
It seems stupid just to have a fixed helmet.
Fixed helmets are easier to make and keep an air tight seal than movable helmets.
Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.
Quote from: Robosteve
Besides, perhaps FET is a conspiracy too.
Quote from: bullhorn
It is just the way it is, you understanding it doesn't concern me.

Re: Faking the moon landing impossible
« Reply #184 on: April 11, 2017, 11:51:31 AM »
He does fuck all. All he's done is argue from incredulity. He points out a lot of things he does't understand and makes no attempt to understand them.
Says you. I'd rather take my information from someone who say in front of a camera and did independent investigation with facts rather than a shill on a Flat Earth forum lol.

Prove me wrong with science. Still waiting.

4th time:


*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 39099
Re: Faking the moon landing impossible
« Reply #185 on: April 11, 2017, 11:58:22 AM »
He does fuck all. All he's done is argue from incredulity. He points out a lot of things he does't understand and makes no attempt to understand them.
Says you. I'd rather take my information from someone who say in front of a camera and did independent investigation with facts rather than a shill on a Flat Earth forum lol.
And I'd rather take my information from people who are competent in the things that they're investigating.
Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.
Quote from: Robosteve
Besides, perhaps FET is a conspiracy too.
Quote from: bullhorn
It is just the way it is, you understanding it doesn't concern me.

Re: Faking the moon landing impossible
« Reply #186 on: April 11, 2017, 12:09:50 PM »
He does fuck all. All he's done is argue from incredulity. He points out a lot of things he does't understand and makes no attempt to understand them.
Says you. I'd rather take my information from someone who say in front of a camera and did independent investigation with facts rather than a shill on a Flat Earth forum lol.
And I'd rather take my information from people who are competent in the things that they're investigating.
Moon landing believers:
"I'd rather take my information from people who are competent in telling us what to believe in the things that they're investigating."

Moon landing skeptics:
"I'd rather take my information from people who are competent in the things that they're investigating" hence

If anyone moon landing believer is competent enough, how about starting a new thread to actually answer this amazing video?

Dismissal and calling it "shite" is pointless and no one is falling for that pathetic attempt.

*

Denspressure

  • 1776
  • What do you, value?
Re: Faking the moon landing impossible
« Reply #187 on: April 11, 2017, 12:54:29 PM »
He does fuck all. All he's done is argue from incredulity. He points out a lot of things he does't understand and makes no attempt to understand them.
Says you. I'd rather take my information from someone who say in front of a camera and did independent investigation with facts rather than a shill on a Flat Earth forum lol.
And I'd rather take my information from people who are competent in the things that they're investigating.
Moon landing believers:
"I'd rather take my information from people who are competent in telling us what to believe in the things that they're investigating."

Moon landing skeptics:
"I'd rather take my information from people who are competent in the things that they're investigating" hence

If anyone moon landing believer is competent enough, how about starting a new thread to actually answer this amazing video?

Dismissal and calling it "shite" is pointless and no one is falling for that pathetic attempt.
OBM has done tonnes of independent research, have you see his website? weather patterns, stars and panoramic features are just some examples that he completely investigated himself.

As you wish.

let us talk about one of his claims and arguments:

Here are some of the things he said:

"It never flew on Earth"

"So when it crashed on Earth and never flew once"

"It should have looked like a rocket"

"This simulator flew once and blew up"

He can't seem to make his mind up whether it flew or not. The fact is that the thing that crashed was the LLTV. His claim that it flew once is a lie, it flew many times.

He claims that the LM was never tested and crashed on Earth. Well, if it was never tested on Earth how did it crash? That aside, what crashed was actually a couple of the LLTV trainers (many flights were successful, Armstrong's high profile crash makes the headlines). All the components were tested on Earth, including in a vacuum chamber with people in it, unmanned on Apollo 5 in Earth orbit and manned in Earth orbit. Apollo 9 and 10 also tested the LM in Lunar Orbit.
« Last Edit: April 11, 2017, 01:02:57 PM by Denspressure »
Watch me at: YouTube
Experience the past: Flickr
Support me on Patreon

*

Denspressure

  • 1776
  • What do you, value?
Re: Faking the moon landing impossible
« Reply #188 on: April 11, 2017, 01:00:19 PM »
I don't see any reason why the helmets don't turn with their heads.
It seems stupid just to have a fixed helmet.
Fixed helmets are easier to make and keep an air tight seal than movable helmets.
And the large helmets would have been very hard to move. They are made out of multiple parts, how are you going to connect all those parts to the head?

There are no fur suits with movable heads for a reason... it does not work.
Watch me at: YouTube
Experience the past: Flickr
Support me on Patreon

?

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 23256
Re: Faking the moon landing impossible
« Reply #189 on: April 11, 2017, 10:34:01 PM »
I don't see any reason why the helmets don't turn with their heads.
It seems stupid just to have a fixed helmet.
Fixed helmets are easier to make and keep an air tight seal than movable helmets.
It doesn't appear to be a problem for them in 1965.
Can you explain what's happening with this swivel helmet at 1:55?

For all those that are interested in the space and moon shenanigans...watch it all.

I'm just interested in this bit at 1:55 and wonder if there's an explanation for it that doesn't crack me up.


*

onebigmonkey

  • 1623
  • You. Yes you. Stand still laddie.
Re: Faking the moon landing impossible
« Reply #190 on: April 11, 2017, 11:14:40 PM »
I don't see any reason why the helmets don't turn with their heads.
It seems stupid just to have a fixed helmet.
Fixed helmets are easier to make and keep an air tight seal than movable helmets.
It doesn't appear to be a problem for them in 1965.
Can you explain what's happening with this swivel helmet at 1:55?

For all those that are interested in the space and moon shenanigans...watch it all.

I'm just interested in this bit at 1:55 and wonder if there's an explanation for it that doesn't crack me up.



Does Google not work where you are? Gemini helmet and Apollo helmets were designed differently.

http://space.stackexchange.com/questions/9296/how-do-the-movable-neck-space-suit-helmet-works

Quote
The ring had rotating bearings, allowing the astronaut to turn his head from side to side
Facts won't do what I want them to.

We went from a round Earth to a round Moon: http://onebigmonkey.com/apollo/apollo.html

?

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 23256
Re: Faking the moon landing impossible
« Reply #191 on: April 11, 2017, 11:39:34 PM »
Does Google not work where you are? Gemini helmet and Apollo helmets were designed differently.

http://space.stackexchange.com/questions/9296/how-do-the-movable-neck-space-suit-helmet-works

Quote
The ring had rotating bearings, allowing the astronaut to turn his head from side to side
;D
Wake up for crying out loud. If you're not being paid for this then snap out of your sci-fi bubble and engage your brain for crying out loud.

Look at the nonsense that these people pushed onto the gullible.



Swivel helmets in 1965 then fixed in 1969. What a joke.
And this design above in 1966. Why?
Hahahahaha. What's wrong with people?  ;D


Re: Faking the moon landing impossible
« Reply #192 on: April 11, 2017, 11:56:25 PM »
Does Google not work where you are? Gemini helmet and Apollo helmets were designed differently.

http://space.stackexchange.com/questions/9296/how-do-the-movable-neck-space-suit-helmet-works

Quote
The ring had rotating bearings, allowing the astronaut to turn his head from side to side
;D
Wake up for crying out loud. If you're not being paid for this then snap out of your sci-fi bubble and engage your brain for crying out loud.

Look at the nonsense that these people pushed onto the gullible.



Swivel helmets in 1965 then fixed in 1969. What a joke.
And this design above in 1966. Why?
Hahahahaha. What's wrong with people?  ;D

Once more rather than providing evidence to back your claims, you resort to a combination of implied conspiracy, inferring that those who disagree are being paid, coupled with a constant stream of mockery.
The moon landings were carried out, the evidence is irrefutable. It's more likely that you are being paid to try and discredit both science and historical facts....why are you doing this?
Perhaps you can enlighten us?

?

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 23256
Re: Faking the moon landing impossible
« Reply #193 on: April 12, 2017, 12:02:04 AM »
Once more rather than providing evidence to back your claims, you resort to a combination of implied conspiracy, inferring that those who disagree are being paid, coupled with a constant stream of mockery.
The moon landings were carried out, the evidence is irrefutable. It's more likely that you are being paid to try and discredit both science and historical facts....why are you doing this?
Perhaps you can enlighten us?

I'm making sure that the gullible people who believed it all from the early days to present, see that it was not only faked but their gullibility is being taken full advantage of as well as their actual intelligence being totally insulted.

Re: Faking the moon landing impossible
« Reply #194 on: April 12, 2017, 12:46:41 AM »
Once more rather than providing evidence to back your claims, you resort to a combination of implied conspiracy, inferring that those who disagree are being paid, coupled with a constant stream of mockery.
The moon landings were carried out, the evidence is irrefutable. It's more likely that you are being paid to try and discredit both science and historical facts....why are you doing this?
Perhaps you can enlighten us?

I'm making sure that the gullible people who believed it all from the early days to present, see that it was not only faked but their gullibility is being taken full advantage of as well as their actual intelligence being totally insulted.

Your argument still revolves around inferring that people, apart from you that is, are gullable.
Where is your proof of their gullibility?
Where is your proof of your non-gullibility?

I could assert that you are possibly slightly deranged given your prepensity for believing in unproven conspiracies and rejection of main stream science in favour of theories which you alone believe in.....denpressure for example. I think this evidence could be seen as a clear indication of your mental instability and prepensity for delusional thoughts.......
Imagining  that everyone apart from you are gullable and are being hoodwinked and only you know the real truth is a classic sign of the deluded personality.
You may wish to consider seeking some help, as these conditions can often become worse if not treated.

*

disputeone

  • Ranters
  • 16810
  • Or should I?
Re: Faking the moon landing impossible
« Reply #195 on: April 12, 2017, 01:02:43 AM »
Don't be an hero granger.
For all the law is fulfilled in one word, even in this.

The reason I am consistently personally attacked here.
https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=69306.msg1960160#msg1960160

Re: Faking the moon landing impossible
« Reply #196 on: April 12, 2017, 01:08:19 AM »
Don't be an hero granger.

Me no understand?

?

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 23256
Re: Faking the moon landing impossible
« Reply #197 on: April 12, 2017, 01:46:53 AM »
Your argument still revolves around inferring that people, apart from you that is, are gullable.
We are all gullible, so don't take offence at it.
he issue is in the amount of it people are willing to accept in the face of clear logic.

Where is your proof of their gullibility?
Are you kidding me?
Refusal to accept you are or could be or have been, does you no favours.

Where is your proof of your non-gullibility?
I don't have any because I was extremely gullible and I still am for a lot of stuff...and likely always will be gullible till I expire.
The key to it all is to try and sort the wheat from the chaff throughout your life, not just hold in the chaff because it's the in thing or the mass opinion.
I could assert that you are possibly slightly deranged given your prepensity for believing in unproven conspiracies and rejection of main stream science in favour of theories which you alone believe in.....denpressure for example.
You can assert anything you want. You can wish anything upon me or accuse me of whatever you want. You can spend the rest of your life telling all and sundry about what a shit bag and loony I am...etc...etc.
I'll keep smiling and the strong will also keep smiling under the same circumstances.
The weak will suffer and deny the suffering because they are afraid of showing their true selves.

I think this evidence could be seen as a clear indication of your mental instability and prepensity for delusional thoughts.......
Well swivelling helmets against fixed helmets under pressurisation, apparently, tells me that someone is taking the complete and utter piss out of the gullible public.
To extrapolate it all, they add in that stupid looking 1966 space suit into the mix.

So what we have is swivel helmet space suits that can be puffed out or deflated depending on the so called space shot, or we can have moon man space suits with fish bowl like stiff helmets that do not move at all and also work like a treat in a space vacuum, apparently.

Perfectly working suits, we are led to believe and yet here we are watching the bozo's trying out ridiculous suits that look like man in the can effigy's  in between these so called masterful space suits.
And people accept it all without a second thought.
It's not just gullibility for all. It's duping for many that have not even bothered to look into any of it and just take everything in their stride.
These people have their own gullibilities in life but not scrutinising so called space stories and all of it's nonsense, does not make them gullible. It makes them willingly ignorant of something that does not take precedence in their day to day lives.
Those who do scrutinise it all have no excuse if they fall for the crap. It makes them wilfully gullible when logic and common sense does not hit home or is bypassed in favour of following mass opinion on that basic piss take.



Imagining  that everyone apart from you are gullable and are being hoodwinked and only you know the real truth is a classic sign of the deluded personality.
If that was true, I'd agree.
The fact is, I don't know the truth to a lot of things and neither do you.
The thing is, I know when I've been kicked in the balls. I remember the pain of it and try to make sure I don't suffer it. You either do not have any or they are numb in many instances if you cannot feel it when you are clearly being kicked in between your legs.


You may wish to consider seeking some help, as these conditions can often become worse if not treated.
The trouble is, my condition keeps getting better because for every piece of bullshit I see, it stops the rot of gullibility setting it, because it makes me more wary and less easily duped by the snake oil sales people.
You are basically describing yourself in the treatment scenario because  it is actually becoming worse for you with every story told about space exploration and all the extra tools invented at cost (add amount in billion here) to the ever giving tax payer.


*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 39099
Re: Faking the moon landing impossible
« Reply #198 on: April 12, 2017, 05:37:56 AM »
I don't see any reason why the helmets don't turn with their heads.
It seems stupid just to have a fixed helmet.
Fixed helmets are easier to make and keep an air tight seal than movable helmets.
It doesn't appear to be a problem for them in 1965.
Can you explain what's happening with this swivel helmet at 1:55?

For all those that are interested in the space and moon shenanigans...watch it all.

I'm just interested in this bit at 1:55 and wonder if there's an explanation for it that doesn't crack me up.


Space suits have evolved over the years.  Why would that surprise you?

Space suits for Mercury and Gemini were based on existing military pressure suits.  Apollo space suits were designed, pretty much from scratch, by a different contractor.
Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.
Quote from: Robosteve
Besides, perhaps FET is a conspiracy too.
Quote from: bullhorn
It is just the way it is, you understanding it doesn't concern me.

Re: Faking the moon landing impossible
« Reply #199 on: April 12, 2017, 11:20:34 AM »
I don't see any reason why the helmets don't turn with their heads.
It seems stupid just to have a fixed helmet.
Fixed helmets are easier to make and keep an air tight seal than movable helmets.
It doesn't appear to be a problem for them in 1965.
Can you explain what's happening with this swivel helmet at 1:55?

For all those that are interested in the space and moon shenanigans...watch it all.

I'm just interested in this bit at 1:55 and wonder if there's an explanation for it that doesn't crack me up.


Space suits have evolved over the years.  Why would that surprise you?

Space suits for Mercury and Gemini were based on existing military pressure suits.  Apollo space suits were designed, pretty much from scratch, by a different contractor.

The only thing missing from your flawed logic and failure to understand what the mission was about is that the suits were PRESSURIZED. Meaning that such a quick movement even if the helmet were able to swivel is impossible

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 39099
Re: Faking the moon landing impossible
« Reply #200 on: April 12, 2017, 12:32:27 PM »
The only thing missing from your flawed logic and failure to understand what the mission was about is that the suits were PRESSURIZED. Meaning that such a quick movement even if the helmet were able to swivel is impossible
I disagree with the video's assertion that the rotation if the earth is smooth.  To me, the clouds passing by look pretty choppy, consistent with a fairly slow frame rate of 6 frames per second.
http://archives.chicagotribune.com/1965/06/24/page/135/article/cameras-film-function-fine-on-gemini-4-flight
Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.
Quote from: Robosteve
Besides, perhaps FET is a conspiracy too.
Quote from: bullhorn
It is just the way it is, you understanding it doesn't concern me.

*

onebigmonkey

  • 1623
  • You. Yes you. Stand still laddie.
Re: Faking the moon landing impossible
« Reply #201 on: April 12, 2017, 01:12:06 PM »
The only thing missing from your flawed logic and failure to understand what the mission was about is that the suits were PRESSURIZED. Meaning that such a quick movement even if the helmet were able to swivel is impossible

Why?

The helmets clearly were able to swivel - you can see it happening. The part of the suit you can see is not pressurised, that is just an outer layer. The pressurised element is a pressure bladder. The helmet is obviously pressurised, but why would this stop it form being to move?

Some more info below, and if you look at the second link you can see clearly the head is very securely cushioned, which means that when it moves, the helmet moves.

http://www.astronautix.com/g/g4c.html

http://space.stackexchange.com/questions/9296/how-do-the-movable-neck-space-suit-helmet-works
Facts won't do what I want them to.

We went from a round Earth to a round Moon: http://onebigmonkey.com/apollo/apollo.html

*

onebigmonkey

  • 1623
  • You. Yes you. Stand still laddie.
Re: Faking the moon landing impossible
« Reply #202 on: April 12, 2017, 01:32:49 PM »
Another thing the video makes an issue of is the supposedly missing patch on the arm of a crew photographed in their Gemini craft.

Unfortunately for the video maker, the crew pictured is Grissom and Young from Gemini 3, not Ed White and James McDivett from Gemini 4. Gemini 3 used a different suit.

The G-4C suit was used on EVA missions, and there are many showing the US flag on the arm, for example this one from Gemini 12

Facts won't do what I want them to.

We went from a round Earth to a round Moon: http://onebigmonkey.com/apollo/apollo.html

Re: Faking the moon landing impossible
« Reply #203 on: April 12, 2017, 07:35:55 PM »
Another thing the video makes an issue of is the supposedly missing patch on the arm of a crew photographed in their Gemini craft.

Unfortunately for the video maker, the crew pictured is Grissom and Young from Gemini 3, not Ed White and James McDivett from Gemini 4. Gemini 3 used a different suit.

The G-4C suit was used on EVA missions, and there are many showing the US flag on the arm, for example this one from Gemini 12


Pressurization is a completely different matter making it impossible for the astronaut to attempt his maneuvers. Are you blind,deaf, and dumb?

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 39099
Re: Faking the moon landing impossible
« Reply #204 on: April 12, 2017, 08:07:34 PM »
Pressurization is a completely different matter making it impossible for the astronaut to attempt his maneuvers. Are you blind,deaf, and dumb?
You do know that the Gemini EVA suit was pressurized to all of 3.7 psi, don't you?  You also understand that the whole point of a pressure suit is so that you can move around in a very low air pressure environment, don't you?
Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.
Quote from: Robosteve
Besides, perhaps FET is a conspiracy too.
Quote from: bullhorn
It is just the way it is, you understanding it doesn't concern me.

Re: Faking the moon landing impossible
« Reply #205 on: April 12, 2017, 08:52:53 PM »
Another thing the video makes an issue of is the supposedly missing patch on the arm of a crew photographed in their Gemini craft.

Unfortunately for the video maker, the crew pictured is Grissom and Young from Gemini 3, not Ed White and James McDivett from Gemini 4. Gemini 3 used a different suit.

The G-4C suit was used on EVA missions, and there are many showing the US flag on the arm, for example this one from Gemini 12


Pressurization is a completely different matter making it impossible for the astronaut to attempt his maneuvers. Are you blind,deaf, and dumb?
So, are you joking here, or are we serious this time?
Is your main issue that things under pressure cannot swivel? If so, boy do I have news for you... I used to work for Halliburton, hydraulic fracturing aka fracking. From our (very) high pressure pumps, we hammered together discharge lines to the well head. This was 3" ID steel joints, rated at 15K psi. Before starting the job, the iron was pressured up to 14,500 psi, to check for leaks. We used what's called a Chiksan swivel joint at every point a turn was required in the iron. These were also rated at 15K psi. The pressure did not affect the swivel's ability to rotate.
Do you honestly believe  a measly 3.7 psi would hinder anything to turn?

*

onebigmonkey

  • 1623
  • You. Yes you. Stand still laddie.
Re: Faking the moon landing impossible
« Reply #206 on: April 12, 2017, 09:23:05 PM »
Pressurization is a completely different matter making it impossible for the astronaut to attempt his maneuvers. Are you blind,deaf, and dumb?

I asked you for an explanation as to why it is impossible to swivel the helmet,

I don't see an answer to that in your response. Who's got the sensory perception issue here?
Facts won't do what I want them to.

We went from a round Earth to a round Moon: http://onebigmonkey.com/apollo/apollo.html

?

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 23256
Re: Faking the moon landing impossible
« Reply #207 on: April 13, 2017, 12:25:25 AM »
Pressurization is a completely different matter making it impossible for the astronaut to attempt his maneuvers. Are you blind,deaf, and dumb?
You do know that the Gemini EVA suit was pressurized to all of 3.7 psi, don't you?  You also understand that the whole point of a pressure suit is so that you can move around in a very low air pressure environment, don't you?
You do realise that your body at sea level is under around 15 psi, right?
You understand that the less pressure upon your body the more your body swells. Why does it swell?
It swells because you are under compression from this 15 psi atmosphere and taking away some of the pressure would allow your cells to expand. Take too much pressure away and you will expand so fast that you will look like your body is boiling due to massive expansion.

So first of all, don't even think for one second that a so called space suit can have under 4 psi in it in so called space vacuum, because there's something you're forgetting.

In a so called capsule that is apparently pressurised to sea level atmosphere, in so called space, a so called astronaut would be under that pressure inside his suit without pressurisation required.
If Ed White (for instance) left that capsule for his supposed space walk, he would have had to decompress the entire capsule to get out but at the same time, equalise his inner suit to match the pressure decrease by increasing it inside the suit.
3.7 psi is just not going to cover it, in no way shape or form for starters.

Now let me explain something to you and I want all genuine free thinking people to pay attention to this.
The so called 3.7 psi in the so called space suits are done at sea level. But remember that for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.

Basically the extra pressure exerted onto you is being exerted onto the elasticity of the bladder which is now mildly crushing you by an extra 3.7 psi.

If you were to take that to so called space, then the whole shebang changes.
This is why space is impossible and this is why these so called astronauts are no more than paid actors playing a game of pretence.
It's almost like a long running series that moves along with the times.
It's a world of fantasy that is cast out as science.
It's nonsense.

People should really see this. I'm serious. People should not be arguing it in favour of real space because its so in your face clear.
« Last Edit: April 13, 2017, 12:30:03 AM by sceptimatic »

*

disputeone

  • Ranters
  • 16810
  • Or should I?
Re: Faking the moon landing impossible
« Reply #208 on: April 13, 2017, 12:43:49 AM »
Good post scepti.

Apparently there's just under 5psi of pressure on the top of Mt Everest, we're told that people have survived up there, I haven't climbed Everest so I am just going along with what I have been told.

We do need oxygen to keep us breathing up there.
For all the law is fulfilled in one word, even in this.

The reason I am consistently personally attacked here.
https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=69306.msg1960160#msg1960160

*

onebigmonkey

  • 1623
  • You. Yes you. Stand still laddie.
Re: Faking the moon landing impossible
« Reply #209 on: April 13, 2017, 12:47:42 AM »
Good post scepti.

Apparently there's just under 5psi of pressure on the top of Mt Everest, we're told that people have survived up there, I haven't climbed Everest so I am just going along with what I have been told.

We do need oxygen to keep us breathing up there.

Which is why the suit pressure is 3.7.
Facts won't do what I want them to.

We went from a round Earth to a round Moon: http://onebigmonkey.com/apollo/apollo.html