when was the last manned moon landing - GoFuckYourself.com

Global Dialers · 06-23-2004, 02:19 AM

anyone know

MrJackMeHoff · 06-23-2004, 02:19 AM

1972

*edit*

Global Dialers · 06-23-2004, 02:21 AM

so why hasnt there been another one in the last 32 years

conspiracy theorists may now start replying to this thread

nofx · 06-23-2004, 02:22 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Global Dialers
so why hasnt there been another one in the last 35 years

conspiracy theorists may now start replying to this thread

the moon doesnt exist..

Fabuleux · 06-23-2004, 02:25 AM

There will happen a lot in the next 10 years. Japan, India, Russia and Europe are preparing to go to the moon. Japan has planned test flight for august this year. They want to grab some Helium-3 for kern fusion reactors.

the Shemp · 06-23-2004, 02:26 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Global Dialers
so why hasnt there been another one in the last 32 years

conspiracy theorists may now start replying to this thread

the studio burned down?

MrJackMeHoff · 06-23-2004, 02:26 AM

Why is ones shadow almost twice the length as the other!? Conspiracy!?

Fabuleux · 06-23-2004, 02:31 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by MrJackMeHoff
Why is ones shadow almost twice the length as the other!? Conspiracy!?

There's a little hill behind the left guy.

MrJackMeHoff · 06-23-2004, 02:34 AM

In the spot where R is marked why is the marked with the letter C? And how does bone dry lunar dust allow perfect tire/foot prints!?

MrJackMeHoff · 06-23-2004, 02:35 AM

Why is the cross hair on the left behind the pic its taking!?

MrJackMeHoff · 06-23-2004, 02:37 AM

Where the fuck are the stars!?

TheMob · 06-23-2004, 02:38 AM

http://pirlwww.lpl.arizona.edu/~jscotti/NOT_faked/

Quote:

If you look at the rock labeled R you will notice a the letter C carved in the rock. Perhaps a gag left by the props department?

This is an artifact of the particular scan of this print. It does not appear in the original image. The following close-up (not color corrected) of a print of the same image from our collection at the Lunar and Planetary Laboratory shows no such feature:

Fabuleux · 06-23-2004, 02:45 AM

What are you trying to prove MrJackMeHoff? Deny ignorance. For every thing you see in that pictures is a logical emplanation. For example stars are so small they are very hard to catch on a photograph. What are you going to tell us next? Airplanes doesn't exist?

MrJackMeHoff · 06-23-2004, 02:54 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Fabuleux
There's a little hill behind the left guy.

Ok brainiac explain this angle of the same pic:

Fabuleux · 06-23-2004, 02:59 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by MrJackMeHoff
Ok brainiac explain this angle of the same pic:

Make it a litte harder will ya. It's the shadow of the flag.

MrJackMeHoff · 06-23-2004, 03:02 AM

Why are there 3 different directions to the shadows in this pic? And where are the stars. You cant expect me to believe without an atmosphere bright dots wouldn't appear?

MrJackMeHoff · 06-23-2004, 03:03 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Fabuleux
Make it a litte harder will ya. It's the shadow of the flag.

Even without the flag his shadow is still way taller.

Peacemaker · 06-23-2004, 03:04 AM

*lol*..

why was the flag waving? there is no air neither a athmosphere., it cant wave

it was all fake

Fabuleux · 06-23-2004, 03:11 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Peacemaker
*lol*..

why was the flag waving? there is no air neither a athmosphere., it cant wave

it was all fake

The flag isn't waving, it's crumpled because of the way it was carried in the spacecraft. A piece of metal-wire holds the flag up.

Peacemaker · 06-23-2004, 03:15 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Fabuleux
The flag isn't waving, it's crumpled because of the way it was carried in the spacecraft. A piece of metal-wire holds the flag up.

nope.. in the movies you see the flag waving.. just like wind does.

Fabuleux · 06-23-2004, 03:15 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by MrJackMeHoff
Why are there 3 different directions to the shadows in this pic? And where are the stars. You cant expect me to believe without an atmosphere bright dots wouldn't appear?

This is a panorama picture created by stitching 3 photo's together. You can see the color diffrence in the middle pic. When the three pictures are taken from the same spot, you have to "bend" the pictures to make them fit.

Fabuleux · 06-23-2004, 03:16 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Peacemaker
nope.. in the movies you see the flag waving.. just like wind does.

Got link?

Peacemaker · 06-23-2004, 03:19 AM

oehm.. let me search.. had it on my hd a while back..

MrJackMeHoff · 06-23-2004, 03:21 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Fabuleux
This is a panorama picture created by stitching 3 photo's together. You can see the color diffrence in the middle pic. When the three pictures are taken from the same spot, you have to "bend" the pictures to make them fit.

The shadow area is with a few feet of each other why would you stich such small sections that makes no sense. And if thats the case why is there only one shadow of the pic taker!?

Fabuleux · 06-23-2004, 03:22 AM

And about the stars, I was in the middle of the desert of Egypt a few years back and in the middle of the night, it's so dark (because there is no "light pollution" from street lights and cities) that you could even see the Milky Way. You see a gazillion stars with a blue glow around it. I've taken 30 sec. exposure shots without good results. Catching stars on can isn't easy.

MrJackMeHoff · 06-23-2004, 03:26 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Fabuleux
And about the stars, I was in the middle of the desert of Egypt a few years back and in the middle of the night, it's so dark (because there is no "light pollution" from street lights and cities) that you could even see the Milky Way. You see a gazillion stars with a blue glow around it. I've taken 30 sec. exposure shots without good results. Catching stars on can isn't easy.

YOu keep skipping the good questions and answering the ones that dont matter much. 'Sides egypt still has an atmosphere!

Here is the wind blowing flag:

http://www.ufos-aliens.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/Apollo1.rm

Fabuleux · 06-23-2004, 03:31 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by MrJackMeHoff
The shadow area is with a few feet of each other why would you stich such small sections that makes no sense. And if thats the case why is there only one shadow of the pic taker!?

No small area's are stitched, it are three pictures of equal size. There is only one shadow in the picture because you siply only can see it in the right picture. It's hard to explain what I mean by bending and stiching, but the bending is needed because the photographer turned around one single position.

MrJackMeHoff · 06-23-2004, 03:34 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Fabuleux
No small area's are stitched, it are three pictures of equal size. There is only one shadow in the picture because you siply only can see it in the right picture. It's hard to explain what I mean by bending and stiching, but the bending is needed because the photographer turned around one single position.

Whatever your in fantasy land you really think we landed on the moon in 1969 thats a laugh.

Taking pics at different angles doesnt change where the shadows fall anyway. If they were that far off I think the objects in the pic would be distorted as well.

All the shadows are right next to each other! Its caused by using flood lights in a studio. C'mon get a clue.

Fabuleux · 06-23-2004, 03:42 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by MrJackMeHoff
Whatever your in fantasy land you really think we landed on the moon in 1969 thats a laugh.

All the shadows are right next to each other! Its caused by using flood lights in a studio. C'mon get a clue.

The fastest airplaine ever build is the Lockheed Martin SR-71A Blackbird and it's first flight was in 1965. Don't think we didn't have the knowlegde back then.

By the way, I study Flight and airospace technology

MrJackMeHoff · 06-23-2004, 03:44 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Fabuleux
The fastest airplaine ever build is the Lockheed Martin SR-71A Blackbird and it's first flight was in 1965. Don't think we didn't have the knowlegde back then.

By the way, I study Flight and airospace technology

Huge difference between fast flight and landing on the moon there.

ADL Colin · 06-23-2004, 03:52 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by MrJackMeHoff
And where are the stars. You cant expect me to believe without an atmosphere bright dots wouldn't appear?

The Sun was too bright.

ADL Colin · 06-23-2004, 03:53 AM

Haven't you seen the clips where the guys are bouncing around in obvious low gravity?

Fabuleux · 06-23-2004, 03:57 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Colin
The Sun was too bright.

He used his flashlight in the right picture.

MrJackMeHoff · 06-23-2004, 03:59 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Colin
Haven't you seen the clips where the guys are bouncing around in obvious low gravity?

They just slow down the frame rate for that.

Fabuleux · 06-23-2004, 03:59 AM

And about the flag: Neil is turning the flagpole to "drill" it in the moon surface. The flag acts strange because there is no air resistance. Try it for yourself. Take a stick and mount a paper on top of it with tape so it looks like a flag. Then strengthen the top of the paper with iron-wire and fold it a few times around the stick. If you turn the stick the paper will act very similar as what you see on the video.

The technology we as civillians see today is not the technology our governments have. The Joint Strike Fighter for example is equipped with a 100kW laser capable of shooting rockets out of the sky. Sounds Star Wars, but it's today's reality.

MrJackMeHoff · 06-23-2004, 04:00 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Fabuleux
He used his flashlight in the right picture.

They didnt have flashlights on the moon. As a matter of fact they didnt have any lights at all. They couldn't even have had cameras because the film would have melted its over 200 degrees on the moon!

jade_dragon · 06-23-2004, 04:01 AM

I challange anyone to produce the mathematical equation to show the trajectory needed to push a mass through our atmosphere, through space, get it close enough to the moon to launch a lander, have that lander land, then take off again, hook back up with the shuttle and then rocket back to earth TODAY in 2004 LET ALONE back when the original "happened".

Our own president even said that he will try to land on the moon next year. TRY? why do you have to try, if you did it back then and there have been so many advances why can't it be done now?

To add insult to injury a privately owned craft just flew into space for pennies on the dollar of NASA budget, who as we are told is mostly privately funded now! HAHA come on people!

the earth revolves and rotates, as does the moon, not on an eliptical course. when the rockets boost there is not a hell of a lot of correction being done, not when you look at it as a ratio. Gravity is going to fight the ship and pull on it till the force of the upward movement brings it out of the range of earth's gravitational pull. IE IT IS NOT GOING STRAIGHT UP, IT IS REVOLVING AND ROTATING AS IT DOES UP. At the same time you have a dot out in space that is moving around it in the same weeble wobble type motion. You have a window from which to launch from houston or florida to get everything to link up. Ask anyone on the salt flats of bonnaville how far off from the proposed end point you will get if you turn the wheel of your car even 1* at 150mph and if you need a second opinion ask the guy who just got back from space what happened when their guidance apparatus messed up, I believe he said 20 miles off course.

My point is the ship is massive and it is going fast, the mathematics to figure out how to get the shit i said in the beginning to happen is PAST rocket science, it was science fantasy plain and simple. Even today the math involved in getting a massive space craft being thrusted that fast to correct itself due to wind shifts and gravitational divergence is still the same. As long as you are using solid or liguid fuel with limited thrusting capablities, on a ship that is not highly manuverable with a human pilot who needs air and has limited ability to stay in space IT JUST DON'T ADD UP. You are talking about math that needs to be percise down to the .0000001 the world is full of things that would cause a differance that small.

But go ahead prove me wrong, show us the math.

MrJackMeHoff · 06-23-2004, 04:03 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Fabuleux
And about the flag: Neil is turning the flagpole to "drill" it in the moon surface. The flag acts strange because there is no air resistance. Try it for yourself. Take a stick and mount a paper on top of it with tape so it looks like a flag. Then strengthen the top of the paper with iron-wire and fold it a few times around the stick. If you turn the stick the paper will act very similar as what you see on the video.

The technology we as civillians see today is not the technology our governments have. The Joint Strike Fighter for example is equipped with a 100kW laser capable of shooting rockets out of the sky. Sounds Star Wars, but it's today's reality.

What the fuck are you talking about, you smokin some crack now. 'Sides this wasnt my argument I just showed you what you ask for from the other guy. I personaly think they would have staged this indoors so the wind theory wasn't mine.

MrJackMeHoff · 06-23-2004, 04:06 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by jade_dragon
I challange anyone to produce the mathematical equation to show the trajectory needed to push a mass through our atmosphere, through

But go ahead prove me wrong, show us the math.

Yeah and they saying they dont know how to send people to the moon today because of the radiation belts. How did they do it 32 years ago!?

MrJackMeHoff · 06-23-2004, 04:08 AM

Notice the "posed" tire tracks!? Like the lunar lander can turn like that eh?

Fabuleux · 06-23-2004, 04:16 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by jade_dragon
I challange anyone to produce the mathematical equation to show the trajectory needed to push a mass through our atmosphere, through space, get it close enough to the moon to launch a lander, have that lander land, then take off again, hook back up with the shuttle and then rocket back to earth TODAY in 2004 LET ALONE back when the original "happened".

Our own president even said that he will try to land on the moon next year. TRY? why do you have to try, if you did it back then and there have been so many advances why can't it be done now?

To add insult to injury a privately owned craft just flew into space for pennies on the dollar of NASA budget, who as we are told is mostly privately funded now! HAHA come on people!

the earth revolves and rotates, as does the moon, not on an eliptical course. when the rockets boost there is not a hell of a lot of correction being done, not when you look at it as a ratio. Gravity is going to fight the ship and pull on it till the force of the upward movement brings it out of the range of earth's gravitational pull. IE IT IS NOT GOING STRAIGHT UP, IT IS REVOLVING AND ROTATING AS IT DOES UP. At the same time you have a dot out in space that is moving around it in the same weeble wobble type motion. You have a window from which to launch from houston or florida to get everything to link up. Ask anyone on the salt flats of bonnaville how far off from the proposed end point you will get if you turn the wheel of your car even 1* at 150mph and if you need a second opinion ask the guy who just got back from space what happened when their guidance apparatus messed up, I believe he said 20 miles off course.

My point is the ship is massive and it is going fast, the mathematics to figure out how to get the shit i said in the beginning to happen is PAST rocket science, it was science fantasy plain and simple. Even today the math involved in getting a massive space craft being thrusted that fast to correct itself due to wind shifts and gravitational divergence is still the same. As long as you are using solid or liguid fuel with limited thrusting capablities, on a ship that is not highly manuverable with a human pilot who needs air and has limited ability to stay in space IT JUST DON'T ADD UP. You are talking about math that needs to be percise down to the .0000001 the world is full of things that would cause a differance that small.

But go ahead prove me wrong, show us the math.

Simpel question. There are no satellites? Without you couldn't have seen the war in Iraq live. There circle in a 0.000001mm precise orbit. First satillite was broadcasting data 4th october of 1957.
A launch from the moon costs far less energy then a launch from earth, there is no atmosphere and gravity is 7 times lower.

Peacemaker · 06-23-2004, 04:17 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by MrJackMeHoff
They just slow down the frame rate for that.

right..
just double the speed and it looks like they are driving on a dune / desert

Peacemaker · 06-23-2004, 04:19 AM

and this is not a panorama pictures.. but whats wrong here with the shadows and the different light sources?

Fabuleux · 06-23-2004, 04:19 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by MrJackMeHoff
Notice the "posed" tire tracks!? Like the lunar lander can turn like that eh?

Turn, drive backwards, drive forward. Next question please.

Fabuleux · 06-23-2004, 04:21 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Peacemaker
right..
just double the speed and it looks like they are driving on a dune / desert

Try to jump that high with a suite that heavy.

Peacemaker · 06-23-2004, 04:22 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Fabuleux
Try to jump that high with a suite that heavy.

did you ever wear that suite they used? i didnt, did you? no, how do you know its not only plastic

xxxbruce · 06-23-2004, 04:22 AM

you guess is as good as mine

dodint · 06-23-2004, 04:28 AM

http://www.moontruth.com/clips/moontruth.mpg

Peacemaker · 06-23-2004, 04:34 AM

and something is so wrong in this pic.. look at the light source and the shadows..

Fabuleux · 06-23-2004, 04:41 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Peacemaker
and something is so wrong in this pic.. look at the light source and the shadows..

Shadows look ok, but I agree with the light source. Give me a sec on that one haha.

06-23-2004, 02:19 AM	#1
Global Dialers Confirmed User Join Date: May 2004 Location: Spain Posts: 1,349	when was the last manned moon landing anyone know __________________ the hun gets revenue from pre-paid gallery placements on the top 15 spaces and banners. the rest of thegalleries are free placements.

06-23-2004, 02:19 AM	#2
MrJackMeHoff Confirmed User Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: LOLLIPOP ISLAND =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Posts: 4,569	1972 edit __________________ Last edited by MrJackMeHoff; 06-23-2004 at 02:21 AM..

06-23-2004, 02:21 AM	#3
Global Dialers Confirmed User Join Date: May 2004 Location: Spain Posts: 1,349	so why hasnt there been another one in the last 32 years conspiracy theorists may now start replying to this thread __________________ the hun gets revenue from pre-paid gallery placements on the top 15 spaces and banners. the rest of thegalleries are free placements. Last edited by Global Dialers; 06-23-2004 at 02:22 AM..

06-23-2004, 02:25 AM	#5
Fabuleux Confirmed User Join Date: May 2003 Location: The Netherlands Posts: 2,543	There will happen a lot in the next 10 years. Japan, India, Russia and Europe are preparing to go to the moon. Japan has planned test flight for august this year. They want to grab some Helium-3 for kern fusion reactors. __________________

06-23-2004, 02:26 AM	#7
MrJackMeHoff Confirmed User Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: LOLLIPOP ISLAND =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Posts: 4,569	Why is ones shadow almost twice the length as the other!? Conspiracy!? __________________

06-23-2004, 02:34 AM	#9
MrJackMeHoff Confirmed User Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: LOLLIPOP ISLAND =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Posts: 4,569	In the spot where R is marked why is the marked with the letter C? And how does bone dry lunar dust allow perfect tire/foot prints!? __________________ Last edited by MrJackMeHoff; 06-23-2004 at 02:36 AM..

06-23-2004, 02:35 AM	#10
MrJackMeHoff Confirmed User Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: LOLLIPOP ISLAND =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Posts: 4,569	Why is the cross hair on the left behind the pic its taking!? __________________

06-23-2004, 02:37 AM	#11
MrJackMeHoff Confirmed User Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: LOLLIPOP ISLAND =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Posts: 4,569	Where the fuck are the stars!? __________________

06-23-2004, 02:45 AM	#13
Fabuleux Confirmed User Join Date: May 2003 Location: The Netherlands Posts: 2,543	What are you trying to prove MrJackMeHoff? Deny ignorance. For every thing you see in that pictures is a logical emplanation. For example stars are so small they are very hard to catch on a photograph. What are you going to tell us next? Airplanes doesn't exist? __________________

06-23-2004, 03:02 AM	#16
MrJackMeHoff Confirmed User Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: LOLLIPOP ISLAND =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Posts: 4,569	Why are there 3 different directions to the shadows in this pic? And where are the stars. You cant expect me to believe without an atmosphere bright dots wouldn't appear? __________________ Last edited by MrJackMeHoff; 06-23-2004 at 03:05 AM..

06-23-2004, 03:04 AM	#18
Peacemaker Confirmed User Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Mars Posts: 897	lol.. why was the flag waving? there is no air neither a athmosphere., it cant wave it was all fake __________________ SEO since 2002 - Google Index Record: 32 minutes. - Selling SEO services and tools

06-23-2004, 03:19 AM	#23
Peacemaker Confirmed User Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Mars Posts: 897	oehm.. let me search.. had it on my hd a while back.. __________________ SEO since 2002 - Google Index Record: 32 minutes. - Selling SEO services and tools

06-23-2004, 03:22 AM	#25
Fabuleux Confirmed User Join Date: May 2003 Location: The Netherlands Posts: 2,543	And about the stars, I was in the middle of the desert of Egypt a few years back and in the middle of the night, it's so dark (because there is no "light pollution" from street lights and cities) that you could even see the Milky Way. You see a gazillion stars with a blue glow around it. I've taken 30 sec. exposure shots without good results. Catching stars on can isn't easy. __________________

06-23-2004, 03:53 AM	#32
ADL Colin Too lazy to set a custom title Join Date: Feb 2001 Location: Tube Titans, USA Posts: 11,929	Haven't you seen the clips where the guys are bouncing around in obvious low gravity? __________________ Adult Date Link - $50 PPS starting NOW! -- good and JUICY! skype = "adultdatelink"

06-23-2004, 03:59 AM	#35
Fabuleux Confirmed User Join Date: May 2003 Location: The Netherlands Posts: 2,543	And about the flag: Neil is turning the flagpole to "drill" it in the moon surface. The flag acts strange because there is no air resistance. Try it for yourself. Take a stick and mount a paper on top of it with tape so it looks like a flag. Then strengthen the top of the paper with iron-wire and fold it a few times around the stick. If you turn the stick the paper will act very similar as what you see on the video. The technology we as civillians see today is not the technology our governments have. The Joint Strike Fighter for example is equipped with a 100kW laser capable of shooting rockets out of the sky. Sounds Star Wars, but it's today's reality. __________________

06-23-2004, 04:01 AM	#37
jade_dragon Confirmed User Join Date: May 2004 Location: NEW ORLEANS/Baton Rouge BABY! Posts: 1,737	I challange anyone to produce the mathematical equation to show the trajectory needed to push a mass through our atmosphere, through space, get it close enough to the moon to launch a lander, have that lander land, then take off again, hook back up with the shuttle and then rocket back to earth TODAY in 2004 LET ALONE back when the original "happened". Our own president even said that he will try to land on the moon next year. TRY? why do you have to try, if you did it back then and there have been so many advances why can't it be done now? To add insult to injury a privately owned craft just flew into space for pennies on the dollar of NASA budget, who as we are told is mostly privately funded now! HAHA come on people! the earth revolves and rotates, as does the moon, not on an eliptical course. when the rockets boost there is not a hell of a lot of correction being done, not when you look at it as a ratio. Gravity is going to fight the ship and pull on it till the force of the upward movement brings it out of the range of earth's gravitational pull. IE IT IS NOT GOING STRAIGHT UP, IT IS REVOLVING AND ROTATING AS IT DOES UP. At the same time you have a dot out in space that is moving around it in the same weeble wobble type motion. You have a window from which to launch from houston or florida to get everything to link up. Ask anyone on the salt flats of bonnaville how far off from the proposed end point you will get if you turn the wheel of your car even 1* at 150mph and if you need a second opinion ask the guy who just got back from space what happened when their guidance apparatus messed up, I believe he said 20 miles off course. My point is the ship is massive and it is going fast, the mathematics to figure out how to get the shit i said in the beginning to happen is PAST rocket science, it was science fantasy plain and simple. Even today the math involved in getting a massive space craft being thrusted that fast to correct itself due to wind shifts and gravitational divergence is still the same. As long as you are using solid or liguid fuel with limited thrusting capablities, on a ship that is not highly manuverable with a human pilot who needs air and has limited ability to stay in space IT JUST DON'T ADD UP. You are talking about math that needs to be percise down to the .0000001 the world is full of things that would cause a differance that small. But go ahead prove me wrong, show us the math. __________________ even ADULTS need TOYS icq: 3 6 3 2 6 6 6 7 \| aim: conglomorateman open for business, affiliates and friendships

06-23-2004, 04:08 AM	#40
MrJackMeHoff Confirmed User Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: LOLLIPOP ISLAND =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Posts: 4,569	Notice the "posed" tire tracks!? Like the lunar lander can turn like that eh? __________________ Last edited by MrJackMeHoff; 06-23-2004 at 04:10 AM..

06-23-2004, 04:19 AM	#43
Peacemaker Confirmed User Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Mars Posts: 897	and this is not a panorama pictures.. but whats wrong here with the shadows and the different light sources? __________________ SEO since 2002 - Google Index Record: 32 minutes. - Selling SEO services and tools

06-23-2004, 04:22 AM	#47
xxxbruce Confirmed User Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: born again Posts: 653	you guess is as good as mine __________________ SIG TOO BIG! Maximum 120x60 button and no more than 3 text lines of DEFAULT SIZE and COLOR. Unless your sig is for a GFY top banner sponsor, you may use a 624x80 instead of a 120x60. Let me repeat... A 120 x 60 button and no more that 3 lines of DEFAULT SIZE AND COLOR text.

06-23-2004, 04:28 AM	#48
dodint Confirmed User Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: SoCal Posts: 131	http://www.moontruth.com/clips/moontruth.mpg

06-23-2004, 04:34 AM	#49
Peacemaker Confirmed User Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Mars Posts: 897	and something is so wrong in this pic.. look at the light source and the shadows.. __________________ SEO since 2002 - Google Index Record: 32 minutes. - Selling SEO services and tools