Airlocks in the supposed LM's.

  • 405 Replies
  • 25165 Views
*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 28515
Re: Airlocks in the supposed LM's.
« Reply #150 on: June 28, 2021, 12:30:29 AM »
“Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.”
-Arthur C. Clarke

Fits you quite well.

You still haven't been able to show any concrete problems. Everything is just based on what you do not know, or can't understand.
It fits the space shenanigans quite well by having a sci-fi writer basically start telling the truth in a roundabout way after the very same sci-fi writer invented satellites out of his aris which became the very thing he stated.

It's indistinguishable from magic because it's advanced sci-fi magical thoughts, nothing more than that.

*

rvlvr

  • 2148
Re: Airlocks in the supposed LM's.
« Reply #151 on: June 28, 2021, 12:40:44 AM »
Present the problems with something more than your spurious musings.

Re: Airlocks in the supposed LM's.
« Reply #152 on: June 28, 2021, 12:41:25 AM »


All they did was increase the oxygen pressure levels in the canisters they took on the Apollo 17 mission, enabling the astronauts to have more oxygen in their personal life support systems, as well as inside the LM. They had extra batteries because they were staying an extra day. The plss packs enabled 7 hours of extravehicular activity, depending on the user's metabolic rate, and the tank was replenished from the LM oxygen supply.


Of course they did.
They just doubled the pressure, no problem.
They just flung in a few extra batteries. No problem.

 Minus 250 in the shade and plus 250 in sunlight.

No issue for water or oxygen or batteries.

All magically fantastic and works every time no matter what.

You're welcome to your fantasy.

No magic or fantasy from me. The plss units only had to work for three days and each personal life support system had an emergency back-up system. Would it help your understanding if I uploaded a colour photo of the insides of one of the packs, and a few diagrams?

Now for your concerns about minus 250 in the shade and plus 250 in the sunlight - those are moon temperature extremes.  For starters, the spacesuits they wore, as well as the LM, were all insulated.

But more importantly, all missions to the moon landed at their chosen moon areas at lunar dawn. This means those areas weren't at their absolute coldest, and hadn't heated up to the maximum temperatures. You have to remember that a full lunar day is 29.5 Earth days long, or 708 hours long.

So, you wouldn't really want to spend longer than 3 days or 72 hours, on the moon surface in lunar dawn, for that reason. It would start getting uncomfortably hot.

The mission for Apollo 17 was for a three day visit, so, everything still checks out. Any other issues you need ironing out?
« Last Edit: June 28, 2021, 12:50:11 AM by Smoke Machine »

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 28515
Re: Airlocks in the supposed LM's.
« Reply #153 on: June 28, 2021, 12:41:49 AM »
Present the problems with something more than your spurious musings.
Already have.

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 28515
Re: Airlocks in the supposed LM's.
« Reply #154 on: June 28, 2021, 12:52:38 AM »
No magic or fantasy from me. The plss units only had to work for three days and each personal life support system had an emergency back-up system. Would it help your understanding if I uploaded a colour photo of the insides of one of the packs, and a few diagrams?

Yeah, let's see them in their naked glory.
 
Quote from: Smoke Machine
Now for your concerns about minus 250 in the shade and plus 250 in the sunlight - those are the extremes.  For starters, the spacesuits they wore, as well as the LM, were all insulated.
Insulated?
What good is insulation in a vacuum, as we're told space is?



Quote from: Smoke Machine
But more importantly, all missions to the moon landed at their chosen moon areas at lunar dawn. This means those areas weren't at their absolute coldest, and hadn't heated up to the maximum temperatures. You have to remember that a full lunar day is 29.5 Earth days long, or 708 hours long.
Any idea what the average temperature supposedly was for those so called astronauts?



Quote from: Smoke Machine
So, you wouldn't really want to spend longer than 3 days or 72 hours, on the moon surface in lunar dawn, for that reason. It would start getting uncomfortably hot.
I'm talking about the shade as well as the sun.
I'm not interested in a supposed moon day against Earth's.


 
Quote from: Smoke Machine
The mission for Apollo 17 was for a three day visit, so, everything still checks out. Any other issues you need ironing out?
Nothing checks out. It is ridiculous.

*

rvlvr

  • 2148
Re: Airlocks in the supposed LM's.
« Reply #155 on: June 28, 2021, 12:55:42 AM »
Present the problems with something more than your spurious musings.
Already have.

And those tanks inside those backpacks do not look like they would support anyone for more than 30 minutes and I think I'm being over generous..
Yes. You think. Mighty fine way to present a problem.

Re: Airlocks in the supposed LM's.
« Reply #156 on: June 28, 2021, 12:58:32 AM »
Do you have any answers for Apollo 17 and it's numerous refills of oxygen and how it was achieved?

With a length of hose from big tank to little tank probably.

What exactly is so hard to believe about it?
Just like that, eh?
A length of hose from a large tank to a small tank.
Tell me how that works then.

It’s flexible tubing that allow fluids to go from one place to another.  Have you heard of garden hose?

I understand that to someone who has no idea how anything in the world works, such advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.

Re: Airlocks in the supposed LM's.
« Reply #157 on: June 28, 2021, 01:19:51 AM »
Quote
You are not looking at any space station, in my honest opinion.
Of course you would say that because the very existence of the ISS is incompatible with what you would like to believe. 

But you can see what I recognise as the ISS pass over where ever you live just as easily as I can.  If you have a pair of binoculars just aim them at that bright star in the sky as it moves across the sky and you will see exactly what I do.  Obviously you can accept that it is the ISS or not as you wish.

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 28515
Re: Airlocks in the supposed LM's.
« Reply #158 on: June 28, 2021, 02:09:10 AM »

Yes. You think. Mighty fine way to present a problem.
Yep, I do think. And yep, I do question. And yep, I don't believe any of it until I see some facts.

You do not possess them and neither does those who are arguing them.


What you do possess is the ability to go and find stuff related to the argument, which is fine and can be used to argue a point but it does not hand you a fact unless you absolutely know it to be a afct, which you do not.

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 28515
Re: Airlocks in the supposed LM's.
« Reply #159 on: June 28, 2021, 02:11:23 AM »
Do you have any answers for Apollo 17 and it's numerous refills of oxygen and how it was achieved?

With a length of hose from big tank to little tank probably.

What exactly is so hard to believe about it?
Just like that, eh?
A length of hose from a large tank to a small tank.
Tell me how that works then.

It’s flexible tubing that allow fluids to go from one place to another.  Have you heard of garden hose?

I understand that to someone who has no idea how anything in the world works, such advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.
Ok a flexible hose in a vacuum going from one tank to another. Is this what you're saying? Like a garden hose...right?

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 28515
Re: Airlocks in the supposed LM's.
« Reply #160 on: June 28, 2021, 02:13:21 AM »
Quote
You are not looking at any space station, in my honest opinion.
Of course you would say that because the very existence of the ISS is incompatible with what you would like to believe. 

But you can see what I recognise as the ISS pass over where ever you live just as easily as I can.  If you have a pair of binoculars just aim them at that bright star in the sky as it moves across the sky and you will see exactly what I do.  Obviously you can accept that it is the ISS or not as you wish.
There's something moving up there but it's not in space and it is not a shape other than a blob of light.

Rather than argue it I'll just say to you, whatever it is, it's not in space and it is not manned.

You cannot prove anything to the contrary.

Re: Airlocks in the supposed LM's.
« Reply #161 on: June 28, 2021, 02:46:33 AM »
You guys are asking all the wrong questions.
Consider the nasa duping is real.
Now sceppy must justify its conspircacy.

Re: Airlocks in the supposed LM's.
« Reply #162 on: June 28, 2021, 02:53:33 AM »
Do you have any answers for Apollo 17 and it's numerous refills of oxygen and how it was achieved?

With a length of hose from big tank to little tank probably.

What exactly is so hard to believe about it?
Just like that, eh?
A length of hose from a large tank to a small tank.
Tell me how that works then.

It’s flexible tubing that allow fluids to go from one place to another.  Have you heard of garden hose?

I understand that to someone who has no idea how anything in the world works, such advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.
Ok a flexible hose in a vacuum going from one tank to another. Is this what you're saying? Like a garden hose...right?

Sci-fi magic space technology.  You wouldn’t understand.

*

JackBlack

  • 18611
Re: Airlocks in the supposed LM's.
« Reply #163 on: June 28, 2021, 03:26:28 AM »
A length of hose from a large tank to a small tank.
Tell me how that works then.
It is quite simple physics, which anyone with a basic understanding of how gasses work would understand.
Again, stop asking dumb questions and start trying to show an issue.

If you were told those back packs held a decade worth of oxygen and water, etc, you'd find nothing amiss, is my guess.
You mean is your blatant misrepresentation because you can't actually show any fault.

And those tanks inside those backpacks do not look like they would support anyone for more than 30 minutes and I think I'm being over generous..
For you they would "look like" they wouldn't support anyone for any extent of time. Because you want it to all be fake.
For rational people, they would want more than just your pathetic ridicule.
Can you provide any math to show they couldn't support people for more than 30 minutes?
Or do you only have pathetic ridicule?

The size of those tanks would hardly give anyone more than 30 mins in reality.
Is that a claimed statement of fact, or just your baseless opinion?

If you want to claim it as a fact, you need to prove it.
Do you have anything at all to justify your claim? Or again, is it just pathetic ridicule?

I'm still waiting to see how they refill those tanks.
Showing yet again that you don't give a damn about the answers that are provided.
Or did you miss this:
https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=88640.msg2324437#msg2324437

Meanwhile, we are still waiting for you to even attempt to show a problem with the lunar landings.

No issue
That's right, no issue.
If you think there is one, clearly prove it. So far all you have done is appealed to your own fantasy of reality being fantasy.
But you not liking reality and wanting to replace it with a fantasy doesn't magically make it fantasy.

Present the problems with something more than your spurious musings.
Already have.
Only dumb questions which don't help you at all.
You are yet to present anything even resembling an argument to show a problem.
Instead you just continually assert it is fantasy with no justification at all.

Yes. You think. Mighty fine way to present a problem.
Yep, I do think. And yep, I do question. And yep, I don't believe any of it until I see some facts.
But you do, you believe/think that they wont support anyone for more than 30 minutes, even though you have no facts at all to support that baseless garbage of yours.
You quite happily believe all sorts of pure BS, without any facts at all to back it up.
Meanwhile you outright reject facts which show you are wrong.

Again, the problem with your statement is that you THINK, you don't know and you don't have anything to support that baseless thought of yours.

Rather than argue it I'll just say to you, whatever it is, it's not in space and it is not manned.
You cannot prove anything to the contrary.
The distinction is evidence. There is plenty of evidence supporting the fact that the ISS exists and is a manned spacecraft in LEO.
Conversely you have NOTHING to support your baseless garbage.

If you want to assert it is fake, when people take pictures of it and so much other evidence, you need more than just your baseless assertion.


*

rvlvr

  • 2148
Re: Airlocks in the supposed LM's.
« Reply #164 on: June 28, 2021, 03:36:06 AM »
Sceptimatic, why do you think the tank can't hold more than 30 minutes worth of oxygen?

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 28515
Re: Airlocks in the supposed LM's.
« Reply #165 on: June 28, 2021, 04:21:05 AM »


Sci-fi magic space technology.  You wouldn’t understand.
It's like a nightmare, isn't it? It just keeps getting worse and worse.

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 28515
Re: Airlocks in the supposed LM's.
« Reply #166 on: June 28, 2021, 04:22:57 AM »
Sceptimatic, why do you think the tank can't hold more than 30 minutes worth of oxygen?
The size of it.

Re: Airlocks in the supposed LM's.
« Reply #167 on: June 28, 2021, 04:26:17 AM »
Quote
There's something moving up there but it's not in space and it is not a shape other than a blob of light.

Rather than argue it I'll just say to you, whatever it is, it's not in space and it is not manned.

You cannot prove anything to the contrary.
So you obviously haven't looked at the ISS through binoculars then?  Because then you could see for yourself that it is more than just the blob of light you think it is. 

I don't need to argue anything because I've seen it for myself.  You could as well if you could be bothered.

Re: Airlocks in the supposed LM's.
« Reply #168 on: June 28, 2021, 04:30:51 AM »
Quote
You are not looking at any space station, in my honest opinion.
Of course you would say that because the very existence of the ISS is incompatible with what you would like to believe. 

But you can see what I recognise as the ISS pass over where ever you live just as easily as I can.  If you have a pair of binoculars just aim them at that bright star in the sky as it moves across the sky and you will see exactly what I do.  Obviously you can accept that it is the ISS or not as you wish.
There's something moving up there but it's not in space and it is not a shape other than a blob of light.

Rather than argue it I'll just say to you, whatever it is, it's not in space and it is not manned.

You cannot prove anything to the contrary.

A friend of mine who is an amateur astronomer, recently showed me some great photos he'd taken using his telescope, from his backyard. He showed me a photo he'd taken of Saturn clearly showing the rings of Saturn. He then showed me a photo he'd taken of moon craters on the moon, which were incredibly detailed. Another guy I know, who is a professional astronomer, showed me photos he'd taken of the planet Jupiter through his telescope.

Have you ever owned a telescope, sceptimatic, that you pointed at the night sky and not just your neighbour's bedroom window?

Re: Airlocks in the supposed LM's.
« Reply #169 on: June 28, 2021, 04:32:21 AM »


Sci-fi magic space technology.  You wouldn’t understand.
It's like a nightmare, isn't it? It just keeps getting worse and worse.

Don’t even get me started on people who believe in other sci-fi nonsense like valves and regulators.  Clearly all fake.

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 28515
Re: Airlocks in the supposed LM's.
« Reply #170 on: June 28, 2021, 04:33:19 AM »
Quote
There's something moving up there but it's not in space and it is not a shape other than a blob of light.

Rather than argue it I'll just say to you, whatever it is, it's not in space and it is not manned.

You cannot prove anything to the contrary.
So you obviously haven't looked at the ISS through binoculars then?  Because then you could see for yourself that it is more than just the blob of light you think it is. 

I don't need to argue anything because I've seen it for myself.  You could as well if you could be bothered.
Good, leave it at that because I absolutely do not believe you.

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 28515
Re: Airlocks in the supposed LM's.
« Reply #171 on: June 28, 2021, 04:34:50 AM »


Have you ever owned a telescope, sceptimatic
Yes.

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 28515
Re: Airlocks in the supposed LM's.
« Reply #172 on: June 28, 2021, 04:35:42 AM »


Sci-fi magic space technology.  You wouldn’t understand.
It's like a nightmare, isn't it? It just keeps getting worse and worse.

Don’t even get me started on people who believe in other sci-fi nonsense like valves and regulators.  Clearly all fake.
In so called space, yes they are.

Re: Airlocks in the supposed LM's.
« Reply #173 on: June 28, 2021, 04:50:03 AM »
Ok so you absolutely don't believe you can see the outline of the ISS through a simple pair of binoculars.

Try it for yourself and you will find that you can. It's not a case of believing. It's a fact. I've seen it dozens of times myself through my own binoculars (15x70s) and so could you if you own a pair.

And of course if you could be bothered to try but you won't will you because your own binoculars would show you you are wrong. So you'd rather just plead ignorant instead and carry on with your beliefs regardless instead of facing reality.
« Last Edit: June 28, 2021, 05:06:16 AM by Solarwind »

*

Mikey T.

  • 3416
Re: Airlocks in the supposed LM's.
« Reply #174 on: June 28, 2021, 04:55:37 AM »


All they did was increase the oxygen pressure levels in the canisters they took on the Apollo 17 mission, enabling the astronauts to have more oxygen in their personal life support systems, as well as inside the LM. They had extra batteries because they were staying an extra day. The plss packs enabled 7 hours of extravehicular activity, depending on the user's metabolic rate, and the tank was replenished from the LM oxygen supply.


Of course they did.
They just doubled the pressure, no problem.
They just flung in a few extra batteries. No problem.

 Minus 250 in the shade and plus 250 in sunlight.

No issue for water or oxygen or batteries.

All magically fantastic and works every time no matter what.

You're welcome to your fantasy.
Yes, they increased the pressure, meaning they had more gaseous oxygen in the same volume.  Volume is something you intentionally lie about. 
Yes they took more batteries.  Planning ahead to increase useful EVA time is not a difficult concept to grasp. 
I explained before how a vacuum is excellent insulation.  Your incredulity over the big temperature numbers means nothing.
Why is there an issue for water if they planned ahead? 

Why do you think there is only 30 minutes of oxygen in the tanks?  Just your gut feeling about it I guess.  Incredulity is not evidence. 

I'll live in the real world, you can call it fantasy all you like.  The more you blatantly put your indoctrination on display, have nothing to base your outlandish claims on, and keep claiming everything you don't understand is fantasy, the more naive people get turned away from FE before they get brainwashed.  Please continue being this transparently indoctrinated. 

*

Mikey T.

  • 3416
Re: Airlocks in the supposed LM's.
« Reply #175 on: June 28, 2021, 04:59:42 AM »
Quote
There's something moving up there but it's not in space and it is not a shape other than a blob of light.

Rather than argue it I'll just say to you, whatever it is, it's not in space and it is not manned.

You cannot prove anything to the contrary.
So you obviously haven't looked at the ISS through binoculars then?  Because then you could see for yourself that it is more than just the blob of light you think it is. 

I don't need to argue anything because I've seen it for myself.  You could as well if you could be bothered.
Good, leave it at that because I absolutely do not believe you.
Again, no one cares if you believe, we want to highlight the mental damage caused by conspiratorial indoctrination to warn others off.  You are a great exhibition.  Please continue.

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 28515
Re: Airlocks in the supposed LM's.
« Reply #176 on: June 28, 2021, 05:20:25 AM »


All they did was increase the oxygen pressure levels in the canisters they took on the Apollo 17 mission, enabling the astronauts to have more oxygen in their personal life support systems, as well as inside the LM. They had extra batteries because they were staying an extra day. The plss packs enabled 7 hours of extravehicular activity, depending on the user's metabolic rate, and the tank was replenished from the LM oxygen supply.


Of course they did.
They just doubled the pressure, no problem.
They just flung in a few extra batteries. No problem.

 Minus 250 in the shade and plus 250 in sunlight.

No issue for water or oxygen or batteries.

All magically fantastic and works every time no matter what.

You're welcome to your fantasy.
Yes, they increased the pressure, meaning they had more gaseous oxygen in the same volume.  Volume is something you intentionally lie about. 
Yes they took more batteries.  Planning ahead to increase useful EVA time is not a difficult concept to grasp. 
I explained before how a vacuum is excellent insulation.  Your incredulity over the big temperature numbers means nothing.
Why is there an issue for water if they planned ahead? 

Why do you think there is only 30 minutes of oxygen in the tanks?  Just your gut feeling about it I guess.  Incredulity is not evidence. 

I'll live in the real world, you can call it fantasy all you like.  The more you blatantly put your indoctrination on display, have nothing to base your outlandish claims on, and keep claiming everything you don't understand is fantasy, the more naive people get turned away from FE before they get brainwashed.  Please continue being this transparently indoctrinated.
A vacuum is excellent insulation against, what?

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 28515
Re: Airlocks in the supposed LM's.
« Reply #177 on: June 28, 2021, 05:21:15 AM »

Again, no one cares if you believe, we want to highlight the mental damage caused by conspiratorial indoctrination to warn others off.  You are a great exhibition.  Please continue.
I fully intend to.

Re: Airlocks in the supposed LM's.
« Reply #178 on: June 28, 2021, 05:48:54 AM »


Sci-fi magic space technology.  You wouldn’t understand.
It's like a nightmare, isn't it? It just keeps getting worse and worse.

Whos i  charge of putti g the narative together?

*

rvlvr

  • 2148
Re: Airlocks in the supposed LM's.
« Reply #179 on: June 28, 2021, 05:52:24 AM »
Sceptimatic, why do you think the tank can't hold more than 30 minutes worth of oxygen?
The size of it.
Okay! So, how much oxygen do you think it holds, and how much bigger would it need to be? And again: why do you think it is too small, what do you compare it to?
« Last Edit: June 28, 2021, 06:44:46 AM by rvlvr »