revisiting Apollo

Alan LeHun wrote:

In article o5EKc.1059157$Ar.127259
@twister01.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com,
says...

Another stupid ass American

Doesn't matter, still stupid ass, and American seems to fit in quite
well with stupid, considering the avalanche of 'information' coming out
of George Orwell's 1984 'homeland security' bunch anyways. I'll stick to
dumb ass American because it fits so well into our modern scientific
world view.




Nope. There is more than enough evidence in my post to let people know
where I live, and I can tell you that that is my nationality.

You are still a dumb ass American or not, I merely quoted the
documentary...so I guess you and others have nothing to say other than
to insult them. Go figure.


And Americans, in general, are not stupid. Un-educated and misinformed,
almost definitely, but not stupid.

Tell that to Jerry Springer.



claiming to know it all about a documentary
he hasn't even seen, no doubt.


Nope, but I am not critising the documentary.

You're a joke.

I am critising your posts.
Even an American could work that one out.

A dumb ass American figure that out? Probably not..but hey you did.




Your type of analysis


has been left unanswered. Instead, you top posted an unjustified ad-
hominems.

Here is some more ad hominems for ya....dumb ass.




is better left for
people like the Jehovah Witnesses or better yet how about the
Mennonites, you know those guys in horse drawn carriages who don't
believe in the tooth fairy, or santa claus or radio's and TV's for that
matter. Go talk to them, maybe they will understand your nonsense.


They would probably at least try to answer my critiques and concerns.

Like you answered anything? I merely quoted the documentary..did you
bother to watch it? No. Instead you insulted...er ad hominem attacks
on me..showing who the real dumb ass is. Go watch it then make your
opinion known eh....dumb ass.

I
wonder why you didn't bother. Was it the scientific words like
"inertia" that put you off,

Negative mass? hardly.

or are you just spouting second hand
nonsense

Nonsense to dumb arses such as yourself? Hard to tell..you tell me.

without any understanding of the content whatsoever,

Have you watched the documentary? No. So who is the dumb arse? Wait
before you answer that....it is already clear that you *are*

(a trait
usually attributed to the American's you so obviously despise,

Dumb ass fortress america...sheesh...yes I can't stand it. Sue me.


but one
that will soon be attached to Canadians if you continue to make such an
arse of yourself).

Oh, no...you're making ad hominem attacks...because you are simply put a
dumb arse not to mention a hypocrite.

Apologies to all in the various groups for rising to the bait. It ends
here.

Good, now get lost and leave the real research to the real men. Or
better yet...go and WATCH THE VIDEO before making your stupid sweeping
statements, dumb arse.

"Yoda" wrote in message
t.cable.rogers.com...
Dumb ass..Its night right now, I can see stars. My camera can see them
too. ****in' moron. The Badastronomy web site was made for people like
you, dimwits and morons.

No, your camera cannot see them with fast exposure settings. If you would
care to experiment for yourself, please report back to us on the fastest
shutter speed you can use and still "see" stars with your camera. Then we
will compare that with the slowest shutter speed you can use without
overexposing a brightly lit foreground object. Get the picture?

"Yoda" wrote in message
t.cable.rogers.com...
Dumb ass..Its night right now, I can see stars. My camera can see them
too. ****in' moron. The Badastronomy web site was made for people like
you, dimwits and morons.

No, your camera cannot see them with fast exposure settings. If you would
care to experiment for yourself, please report back to us on the fastest
shutter speed you can use and still "see" stars with your camera. Then we
will compare that with the slowest shutter speed you can use without
overexposing a brightly lit foreground object. Get the picture?

Holy ****..why dont you people watch the documentary then make your
silly comments. Then at least questions like what you pose below won't
have to be answered because they are answered in the documentary.

Jaxtraw wrote:

"Yoda" wrote in message
t.cable.rogers.com...


Jaxtraw wrote:


"Yoda" wrote in message
.net.cable.rogers.com...


Jaxtraw wrote:



"Yoda" wrote in message
. is.net.cable.rogers.com...



The `scientific proof of the first moon walk' is one that all can
share in the very detailed records and televised pictures that

remain.

It was a fact, just as Pearl Harbor was a fact regardless of the spin
put on the facts.




The US government openly admitted recently

snip bilge

So to summarise, your belief is that NASA spent billions of dollars

hoaxing


a moon landing,

Can you read English? I said the videos shown on TV were hoaxed. Get
your story strait.


Well, I'm trying to get yours strait (sic) to be honest. Are you saying

that

they actually went to the moon, but showed fake videos?

Yes. That is all the documentary said. That the immediate televised
landing was hoaxed. It ddidn't say the landing itself was hoaxed and
indeed you would have to be pretty out to lunch to believe that.


Why bother hoaxing something that really happened? I'm perplexed.


but were so inept that they got all the basic science wrong,


and that you can prove this because things look different in hollywood
special effects?

Sigh....NASA releases videos promoting new satellite technology and even
their technicians and artists place stars in the background.


Yes, because these are *simulations* and they want them to look nice,

and

people expect stars in space.

Duh....but you forget that NASA also likes to maintain accuracy or as
realistic as possible. That is the markings of a good artist that works
for the space industry no doubt.


The markings of a good artist is their use of aesthetics and license.
Creating a simulation of a scene does not obligate the artist to simulate
particular characteristics of real imaging devices. Even if you work for
NASA.


Besides you missed my point, many images from JPL and NASA show stars in
the background. My point was they missed blackening them out like they
normally do.


But why? You're saying that they deliberately didn't include stars in the
"hoaxed" footage; which shows it to be a hoax because there are no stars to
be seen. Please explain why they would deliberately make it look incorrect,
so that people such as yourself could see the deliberate flaw later on. This
makes no sense at all.


I can take
any camera and place it on a tripod and take pictures of stars. Your
telling me NASA sent a camera to the moon, and put it on a tripod and it
couldnt take a picture of stars? Give me a break, we aren't all as
dumbass about photography as you seem to be.



Yes, but can you do that in broad daylight? Can you take pictures of the
stars if the landscape around you is floodlit to daylight levels?

Would you give me a break? You're telling me that the ISS or moon
missions were never out of the daylight? You are even kookier than I
thought possible.


Exactly. I don't believe any of the moon missions took place during the
lunar night. The place was bathed in sunlight. They would have been
stumbling around in the dark otherwise. As much light hits the moon as the
earth, you know.


Do you know what "dynamic range" is?


Depends on your optics no doubt.


No, it depends on your emulsion, or your CCD.

Ian

Holy ****..why dont you people watch the documentary then make your
silly comments. Then at least questions like what you pose below won't
have to be answered because they are answered in the documentary.

Jaxtraw wrote:

"Yoda" wrote in message
t.cable.rogers.com...


Jaxtraw wrote:


"Yoda" wrote in message
.net.cable.rogers.com...


Jaxtraw wrote:



"Yoda" wrote in message
. is.net.cable.rogers.com...



The `scientific proof of the first moon walk' is one that all can
share in the very detailed records and televised pictures that

remain.

It was a fact, just as Pearl Harbor was a fact regardless of the spin
put on the facts.




The US government openly admitted recently

snip bilge

So to summarise, your belief is that NASA spent billions of dollars

hoaxing


a moon landing,

Can you read English? I said the videos shown on TV were hoaxed. Get
your story strait.


Well, I'm trying to get yours strait (sic) to be honest. Are you saying

that

they actually went to the moon, but showed fake videos?

Yes. That is all the documentary said. That the immediate televised
landing was hoaxed. It ddidn't say the landing itself was hoaxed and
indeed you would have to be pretty out to lunch to believe that.


Why bother hoaxing something that really happened? I'm perplexed.


but were so inept that they got all the basic science wrong,


and that you can prove this because things look different in hollywood
special effects?

Sigh....NASA releases videos promoting new satellite technology and even
their technicians and artists place stars in the background.


Yes, because these are *simulations* and they want them to look nice,

and

people expect stars in space.

Duh....but you forget that NASA also likes to maintain accuracy or as
realistic as possible. That is the markings of a good artist that works
for the space industry no doubt.


The markings of a good artist is their use of aesthetics and license.
Creating a simulation of a scene does not obligate the artist to simulate
particular characteristics of real imaging devices. Even if you work for
NASA.


Besides you missed my point, many images from JPL and NASA show stars in
the background. My point was they missed blackening them out like they
normally do.


But why? You're saying that they deliberately didn't include stars in the
"hoaxed" footage; which shows it to be a hoax because there are no stars to
be seen. Please explain why they would deliberately make it look incorrect,
so that people such as yourself could see the deliberate flaw later on. This
makes no sense at all.


I can take
any camera and place it on a tripod and take pictures of stars. Your
telling me NASA sent a camera to the moon, and put it on a tripod and it
couldnt take a picture of stars? Give me a break, we aren't all as
dumbass about photography as you seem to be.



Yes, but can you do that in broad daylight? Can you take pictures of the
stars if the landscape around you is floodlit to daylight levels?

Would you give me a break? You're telling me that the ISS or moon
missions were never out of the daylight? You are even kookier than I
thought possible.


Exactly. I don't believe any of the moon missions took place during the
lunar night. The place was bathed in sunlight. They would have been
stumbling around in the dark otherwise. As much light hits the moon as the
earth, you know.


Do you know what "dynamic range" is?


Depends on your optics no doubt.


No, it depends on your emulsion, or your CCD.

Ian

"Yoda" wrote in message
t.cable.rogers.com...
Funny, after I sent this in I went to tell my wife....dont be suprised
to see some dumbass point out the spelling error. You win the award!

Paul Lawler wrote:

"Jaxtraw" wrote in message
...

"Yoda" wrote in message
.net.cable.rogers.com...

Again for those who need it spelled out for them.....take an H, take an
A, take an O, take an X, put them together,....what does that spell?

Um, HAOX?

Just checking to see if you can spell, and I guess you can.....now do
some real research on your own.

Hoax right? Now take a V, take an I, take a D, take an E, and take an
O, and put them together ok? What does that spell? Video...right.
Now
take a P, take an I, take a C, take a T, take an I, take an R, take an
E, take an S, and put that together...what does that spell?

PICTIRES? Gee. this is fun.

Gee, you can spell..can you spell dumbass?

Ah yes... again faced with his inability to provide a shred of evidence
other than the repeated mantra "Go look it up if you care, I can't be
bothered" Yoda suffers a meltdown and is reduced to babbling ad hominem
attacks.

"Yoda" wrote in message
t.cable.rogers.com...
Funny, after I sent this in I went to tell my wife....dont be suprised
to see some dumbass point out the spelling error. You win the award!

Paul Lawler wrote:

"Jaxtraw" wrote in message
...

"Yoda" wrote in message
.net.cable.rogers.com...

Again for those who need it spelled out for them.....take an H, take an
A, take an O, take an X, put them together,....what does that spell?

Um, HAOX?

Just checking to see if you can spell, and I guess you can.....now do
some real research on your own.

Hoax right? Now take a V, take an I, take a D, take an E, and take an
O, and put them together ok? What does that spell? Video...right.
Now
take a P, take an I, take a C, take a T, take an I, take an R, take an
E, take an S, and put that together...what does that spell?

PICTIRES? Gee. this is fun.

Gee, you can spell..can you spell dumbass?

Ah yes... again faced with his inability to provide a shred of evidence
other than the repeated mantra "Go look it up if you care, I can't be
bothered" Yoda suffers a meltdown and is reduced to babbling ad hominem
attacks.

Well said for a dumb arse.

CeeBee wrote:

Yoda wrote in sci.astro:


You guys sometimes only prove that
the science of the last one hundred years is really just a new
religion.



You, of all people? A moon hoax twit accusing _others_ of following a
religion?


Where do you get the idea that there is a "moon hoax"? This was never
said, nor implied. Its the footage dumb arse...DUMB ARSE!


You're a stunner. Really, you are.

You're a dumb ass, so who cares what you think? I don't think the
people at CBC will be loosing sleep over it because dumb asses like you
think there is wind on the moon, and mud to boot!

Well said for a dumb arse.

CeeBee wrote:

Yoda wrote in sci.astro:


You guys sometimes only prove that
the science of the last one hundred years is really just a new
religion.



You, of all people? A moon hoax twit accusing _others_ of following a
religion?


Where do you get the idea that there is a "moon hoax"? This was never
said, nor implied. Its the footage dumb arse...DUMB ARSE!


You're a stunner. Really, you are.

You're a dumb ass, so who cares what you think? I don't think the
people at CBC will be loosing sleep over it because dumb asses like you
think there is wind on the moon, and mud to boot!

Sticks and stones...dumb arse.

CeeBee wrote:

Yoda wrote in sci.astro:


I wouldn't be shocked if you did believe that
there is not only mud there but an atmosphere to boot.


I wouldn't be shocked if the Yoda doll in the Star Wars movies has
actually more brains than his namesake in this newsgroup.