For the umptenth time I did not call you an idiot. Sheesh.
Perhaps conspiracy nut is the best thing to call you
LOL I'm not insulted anyway dude!
It's just an emotional response your brain makes when you don't want to hear someone elses beliefs.
For the umptenth time I did not call you an idiot. Sheesh.
Perhaps conspiracy nut is the best thing to call you
So the 3 astronauts in low earth orbit would have with them the equipment to remote control the part of the craft going to the moon from where they were at. They would then relay the information from the ground through those remote controls.
Assuming that this was technically possible for the sake of argument, you would then at the very least need to include the design and manufacturing people in the conspiracy as they would be building something different from what they were told.
It's a problem with all the grand conspiracy theories. These brilliant people, capable of pulling off these astonishing feats of deception through intense planning seemingly make the dumbest mistakes ever.
LOL I'm not insulted anyway dude!
It's just an emotional response your brain makes when you don't want to hear someone elses beliefs.
No idea, but playing devils advocate, they could have launched a secondary at the same time from another, remote, launch site.
Going to have a look at the clip you posted later.
Or, perhaps the honest people, who are made to go along with it, purposely let things slip into the public domain.
The Russians would have denounced the whole thing immediately, if it were not true
They said nothing, so they knew it was kosher
That's a composite image, they made them from data supplied by Suomi, but it's not a straight up picture.
They explain what they did, and the resulting perspective (7900 miles), here.
Low earth orbit - considered to be 200-2000km.
Here is a picture of earth from Suomi NPP at 500Miles
Whilst it does raise a good counter it does not prove (or disprove) anything, except they should seemingly not have said low earth orbit. Sorry!
Please, explain to me how you think they could have taken any image of the entire earth from low earth orbit without a massive wide angle lens. Then explain to me how they would use a massive wide angle lens through a small window while several meters away.
If not then I think it raises more than just "a good counter".
Again, what would the reaction be towards NASA if they made a mistake like that and then had to make a retraction? "Sorry, we didn't mean low earth orbit." Although I would have accepted a statement like that from these guys, it would be progress. It would indicate at least a smidgeon of intellectual honesty.
This to me goes a bit further than just "shouldn't have said low earth orbit".
One of the things they seem to go on about is the Van Allen radiation belts. Now, if Wikipedia is trustworthy then: The inner electron Van Allen Belt extends typically from an altitude of 1.2 to 3 Earth radii (L values of 1 to 3). Another source would be The Britannica, that says: The inner region is centred approximately 3,000 km (1,860 miles) above the terrestrial surface. We have already learned that the diameter of the earth is "about 12,756 kilometers" of course.
Seeing as the perspective from the image above is said to be from about 12,743 kilometers I would claim that to get the kind of footage they showed from the space craft it wouldn't be enough to be above low earth orbit, you would probably also have to be going into the Van Allen belt at the very least. I say "probably" because I once again can't be bothered to do any actual math myself.
Once again, these are the people you're getting your information from. And since the motivation of The US and NASA came up earlier, what is the motivation for these conspiracy theorists? Well, getting to make documentaries for Fox (wasn't it Fox you said?) would be one I suppose, a quick search on Amazon for Moon landing hoax books would reveal another, I'm guessing they do seminars, talks and so on as well. I have no problems with people making money off their ideas of course, but when they are making money off it, and their ideas have gaping holes in them like these ones I struggle to take them seriously. This was even the part of this film you thought were interesting while you accepted that there were other parts that were far from as convincing as this one (that I think is putting it mildly).
This is a fantastic quote for conspiracy theorists.Of course, none of this proves they didn't go, but the oddities just stack up and up.
Please, explain to me how you think they could have taken any image of the entire earth from low earth orbit without a massive wide angle lens. Then explain to me how they would use a massive wide angle lens through a small window while several meters away.
If not then I think it raises more than just "a good counter".
Again, what would the reaction be towards NASA if they made a mistake like that and then had to make a retraction? "Sorry, we didn't mean low earth orbit." Although I would have accepted a statement like that from these guys, it would be progress. It would indicate at least a smidgeon of intellectual honesty.
This to me goes a bit further than just "shouldn't have said low earth orbit".
One of the things they seem to go on about is the Van Allen radiation belts. Now, if Wikipedia is trustworthy then: The inner electron Van Allen Belt extends typically from an altitude of 1.2 to 3 Earth radii (L values of 1 to 3). Another source would be The Britannica, that says: The inner region is centred approximately 3,000 km (1,860 miles) above the terrestrial surface. We have already learned that the diameter of the earth is "about 12,756 kilometers" of course.
Seeing as the perspective from the image above is said to be from about 12,743 kilometers I would claim that to get the kind of footage they showed from the space craft it wouldn't be enough to be above low earth orbit, you would probably also have to be going into the Van Allen belt at the very least. I say "probably" because I once again can't be bothered to do any actual math myself.
Once again, these are the people you're getting your information from. And since the motivation of The US and NASA came up earlier, what is the motivation for these conspiracy theorists? Well, getting to make documentaries for Fox (wasn't it Fox you said?) would be one I suppose, a quick search on Amazon for Moon landing hoax books would reveal another, I'm guessing they do seminars, talks and so on as well. I have no problems with people making money off their ideas of course, but when they are making money off it, and their ideas have gaping holes in them like these ones I struggle to take them seriously. This was even the part of this film you thought were interesting while you accepted that there were other parts that were far from as convincing as this one (that I think is putting it mildly).
Gifter said:Of course, none of this proves they didn't go, but the oddities just stack up and up.
This is a fantastic quote for conspiracy theorists.
Exactly