Horley CTFC Saint

Whats so surprising about blue light through the window when the Sun and Moon are not visible – sounds like maybe the reflection of light off the Earth to me – I would have thought that the Earth would be much bigger in than the Moon is in our sky. They would also seek to keep direct sunlight out of the command module as much as possible – given the lack of any atmosphere the glare alone would be intolerable. Down here on our blue planet there is plenty of diffusion of the Sun’s light but still I wouldn’t recommend you look directly at – even a quick glimpse will impact your vision short term. You also need to take a look at the inside of a command module – its not the Tardis you know and who’s is saying the Russians might reverse engineer stuff? ....and what do you make of this? http://www.jb.man.ac.uk/news/2009/luna15-apollo11/ this? http://history.nasa.gov/ap10fj/pdf/a10-postlaunch-rep.pdf ..or these courtesy of the Urban Dictionary? (I’m just saying like so don’t shoot the messenger will you!) Pap 1. Verb The act of gently smacking someone’s forehead/upper facial area with a penis 2. Noun The sound a penis makes as it gently smacks the forehead/upper facial area Jarrah 1. Being high on drugs, particularly cannabis 2. Something that is contemptuously laughable, can be used either in jest of perjoratively Which reminds me how are you getting on finding a meaningful CV for Jarrah White and does he really believe that Christa McAuliffe was murdered? :-o Hammy – does he really have Buzz in his passport? How does he get away with not using his given names or am I just being credulous? Is there a conspiracy to investigate here?

Not really sure what points he trying to make here but for what its worth. Where on the film at the start does it say that they are faking the pictures? The interviewer says this is the case but I cant see it is borne out by actual the film. Why is the picture edited when mission control is saying that they have quite a way to go before filling up their screen? I don’t see that at all – same goes for the second example When they were taking pictures of the Earth the lights were out in the command module (as JW himself confirms) so as soon as the camera is moved away from the window there would be little visible to film until the lights were turned on again Also which camera is being used? If memory serves at least one of the cameras was trigger operated. If they were using that camera it wouldn't surprise me if it wasnt in use when the astronaut was trying to manouvre in what was ultimately a very cramped command module. Also does the camera have auto focus given we are looking at 60’s technology here?

.25 + .25 + .25 + .25 = 1 1/4 + 1/4 + 1/4 + 1/4 = 1

....

What really amazes me about threads like this is that at the time it all happened nobody ever questioned the veracity of the moon landings as they quite clearly were happening before our very eyes and there were any number of independent sources to demonstrate the truth of these events - the whole worlds eyes were on what happened yet now with all the advances in technology and such things as satellite pictures of the landings sites, years of studying moon rock samples, first hand testimony and any number of additional proofs as outlined by various contributors above that we get a people who were probably not even a twinkle in their father's eyes at the time it all happened suggesting that it was all just so much hogwash and who are unable to believe the facts before their very eyes. Should we question the WWII or the fact that Southampton lost the - 1901 FA Cup Final - because we weren't there and never experienced it ourselves? The credulity of these people is what the conspiracy theorists rely on to make their money - there's been a whole lot of these guys seeking to make a fast buck from Erich Von Daniken to Henry Lincoln on a never ending range of subjects with theories that simply do not stand up to scrutiny and for some reason we lap it up without even the slightest degree scepticism. People nowadays will believe anything if someone writes a book about it or sets up a website saying its all true simply because its there in black and white before them - even better if its in colour!

Anyone found a decent CV of Jarrah White - all I can find out is that he's an Aussie blogger with what seems to be an axe to grind with NASA (did they turn him down for employment?) and a wannabee James Bond!?! Still at least he doesn't seem to be some hack after making a quick buck

Not necessarily - booking time on a major scope be-it earthbound or the Hubble is like trying to find a needle in a haystack. Every cosmologist/astronomer has their project that they want to progress but the whole issue of booking time has been a problem for as long as I can remember

Seeing this reminds me Jodrell Bank tracked Apollo 11 - I'm pretty sure there's an interview with Bernard Lovell somewhere where its mentioned

.....eg we had this photo of Buzz Aldrin at the top of our stairs for many years and if memory serves it was always understood to have had a bit of work done on it: http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%A4%D0%B0%D0%B9%D0%BB:Aldrin_Apollo_11_(jha).jpg

I thought it had been generally accepted at the time that there had been a degree of touching up - a great deal of money was made out of selling the rights to these pictures its pretty well always been an established fact that photo editors will touch up and crop pictures for the purposes of publication this is not to manipulate the truth merely to make a photo suitable for publication? Am I wrong about this?

Some responses to your various posts from late last night....man this has been a busy thread since I was last here Firstly I don't believe you should pay to use the internet and nor does Tim Berners Lee - can you dig it, man?! Water on the moon is very important - without it there's really not a lot you can do of much use there longer term. The moon has only a negligible atmosphere and a fraction of the gravity of earth - this makes it a much better base to launch rockets from - with water you can do many things including grow a sustainable food supply and crucially manufacture rocket propellant. Compare this video of the LEM taking off with any rocket launched from earth and you'll see the difference so little fuel so much thrust I mentioned yesterday about the blatent lie that the conspiracists perpetrated to try and demonstrate that the moon photos were faked - google Jumping on the Moon and you'll find the photo concerned with the disconnected shadow - here's a video showing the event from another angle: So why do the conspiracists need to lie to try and get their theory recognised? Still whats it matter eh, another 1,000 people ahve just brought the book so who cares k'ching k'ching Re the Van Allen Belts there is documentary proof that the discoverer Dr Van Allen himself doesn't consider it overly problematic to navigate through them safely - last time I looked the general scientific consensus was that the astronauts were subjected to roughly the same doseage of radiation as a nucleur industry worker would receive over the period of about a year - certainly not lethal amount unless it was a Fukushima employee. I would suggest by far the bigger risk would be once your through earth's gravity and subject to the whims of the Sun and its solar flares and mass coronal ejections (and then less so for a trip to the moon as there would normally be sufficient time to do something about it than on a trip to Mars) I see little wrong with the Moon images if you let me know which ones in particular you have a problem with I will endeavour to debunk them for you. Turning to the events themselves I would contest that if the landings had been faked then the TV pictures would have been significantly better than they actually were - now I remember the "one giant leap moment" well as I watched it live albeit somewhat early in the morning and yes I was a little bleary eyed but man those pictures were poor quality. A question - as far as I know the Soviets never disputed the Moon landings despite being in the midst of a space race and the Cold War - if anyone was going to dispute the landings then surely it would have been the USSR whereas infact there is stong evidence to show that they were planning their own manned moonshot as late as Apollo 8? I would also urge you to take a look at the CVs of the various leading conspiray theorists it makes fun reading. After reading a little bit about these authors I know who's side I would be on in a life or death argument

You missed my earlier post mate. Really as someone who lived through the Apollo era the only surprising thing about it to me is that only three astronauts White, Chaffee and Grissom died in the whole project - this conspiracy thing is an unwarranted stain on the memory of those guys. ...oh and why just because I can only post 3 times a day does it make the conspiracy theories any more valid? Thats all for today folks.........

Not to mention the 3 or was it 4 planned 'faked landings' they cancelledafter Apollo 17

I luv the picture of the astronaut who's shadow doesn't connect with his body that the conspiracists regularly point to - I actually remember the guy jumping when the picture was being taken - there's video of it all happening somewhere Current thinking is that there is a 30% chance of getting terminal cancer as a result of a trip to Mars. Given how far Mars is from Earth compared to the Moon it suggests that the radiation issue is blown out of all proportion. As far as I am aware no serious scientist has disputed the Moon landings and for me the conspiracists are just out for a fast buck Technology has indeed moved on 40 years but it has only been relatively recently that it has been thought possible that there are significant amounts of water to be found trapped in the lunar poles that could be used to produce rocket propellant - hydrogen and oxygen you see. That makes the Moon a bit more interesting than in the 1970s and could result in renewed exploration at some time in the foreseeable future. Also with the growth in robotics there is less need for human exploration which is both more costly and more hazardous in terms of human life - I think it is not surprising that there is less astronaut based space exporation nowadays for that fact alone. There are quite a few pictures taken by satellites of various of the Moon landing sites - not sure they're particularly well publicised but are easily found if you search the Internet

Its a valid comment he painted several Screams so we need to know which one.........

Correct its the twisting thats the problem - if he's done a cruciate he probably knows it though

Might be the stadium accoustics - normally go for the Kingsland/Northam corner where I rarely hear much from the away fans but for a change I went for the Itchen/Chapel corner today and thought the Reading fans were making more noise than the Northam

You could try Highland Water down at Stoney Cross thats quite a nice stream

We've only gone and won it

Well if we arent in a relegation battle it'll be one of our best seasons in the Prem

Liverpool away with and ticket please

Dust your boots off Nigel

Chris Nichol

Magpies are crows except Jenny Hanley

Not a sponsor but Pony always made me laugh