.jpg.8081a54a3b74a5d1823dfac966666137.jpg)
.jpg.594f0ef23288ec5ab04539b2f8a8dbd4.jpg)
Mr. Nice
-
Posts
568 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Mr. Nice
-
-
15 minutes ago, Given To Fly said:
And you prob believe that the eye, the pyramid and the slogans and hidden symbolism on the back of dollar notes is as non-conspiratorial as well
I love the way you take your claim and conflate it with other conspiracy claims. Good effort. The wing is a wing not a forked tongue. The name is NASA not with a silly made up T, or a silly made up anagram. I believe that every single symbol ever has some conspiracy nerd , somewhere, someplace making some "connection". Any symbol on a dollar bill would have the same crowd making the same claims.
-
37 minutes ago, sock muppet said:
You are correct, my apologies, it's just at my age i forget that a computer simulation qualifies as reality these days!
Or is it Virtual Insanity!
Off topic noise.
-
1 hour ago, sock muppet said:
I am a bleeding obvioust (new word i made up between obvious and theorist), and when something is too good to be true, well, it usually is.
Nope. You see part of the problem is that you have no clue about the subject so you aren't qualified to offer an opinion on what is obvious.
I just wrote a reasonably detailed reply to you and of course you have nothing in response.
1 hour ago, sock muppet said:Well shockingly NO is the answer to that in terms of PROOF and neither do you,
That is correct, I have no proof that there are dead astronauts on the Moon. Faceplant time.
1 hour ago, sock muppet said:the whole thing IS a media event and that is the TRUTH,
Nope. You have no evidence for any of your claims (well none that I can't tear to pieces) and once again you aren't qualified to pronounce, with your clear ignorance of any of this, that you know "the truth".
1 hour ago, sock muppet said:but i can see the force is strong in you,
And I can see that you have no evidence or knowledge of any of the subject matter.
1 hour ago, sock muppet said:i know a little off topic but just curious, what number booster shot are you on now,
Off topic shit, none of your business.
1 hour ago, sock muppet said:you know for the non existent virus
Sars2 is not non-existent.
1 hour ago, sock muppet said:well actually it is on topic because MSM never lies does it! Your Government would never lie to you either.
The appeal to incredulity, a pathetic attempt at poisoning the well and off topic bare assertion. NASA is not a government - it is predominantly a large bunch of scientists and engineers.
Here we are on page 2 and nobody has offered any tangible reason to mistrust NASA - just noise.
-
-
8 hours ago, sock muppet said:
This looks about right, but hey ho, both are DECEIVERS.
The only deception I am seeing is from you doctoring a logo and providing to justification for it.
-
7 hours ago, sock muppet said:
And don't forget that timeless statement before every launch where they flaunt it in the worlds face by saying, THAT'S T MINUS!!!
Time. T is for time. Duh. They flaunt it in the world's face do they? This fruitcake "satan" guff
-
7 hours ago, sock muppet said:
Again, your idea of a CRAFT is exactly what it says, the CRAFT of make believe, where as my description is more truthful of a space bucket, which is what it is that you would entrust your life in, therefore, sorry bud it's a no go for any space mission i would join you on in a space bucket.
Okay, well thank you for sharing your opinion. I too feel strangely comforted in the knowledge that I would not need to share any space mission with you.
7 hours ago, sock muppet said:Again, you dismiss your own argument for here is a visual representation of the enormous amount of radiation and high energy particles spiraling down the lines of magnetic force, exciting the low pressure gas as they go emitting light, and yet you dismiss it as harmless.
I dismiss nothing. You massively conflate it with no understanding. You are like every single conspiracy theorist. You think that YOU know things based on reports from the very people who you claim are lying! You clearly know zilch about this subject.
7 hours ago, sock muppet said:There are dead Astronauts on the moon!
Righto. Got any proof? So they got humans to the surface then
-
33 minutes ago, Given To Fly said:
NASA's logo literally has a forked tongue.
Nope.
The NASA logo is a wonderful example of a timeless, traditional logo. While the sphere evidently signifies a planet, the stars in the meatball represent the space. The red chevron, on the other hand, forms the alternate shape of the constellation Andromeda. It is supposed to be a wing that exemplifies aeronautics.
33 minutes ago, Given To Fly said:Add that T (for tongue) along with NASA and you've an anagram of SATAN.
It's not a tongue and it makes TNASA or Santa
That's also gobbleydegook.
33 minutes ago, Given To Fly said:And don't get me started on its Nazi connections.
Go on, start. We already covered that in the Moon Hoax nonsense thread, so you might like to read that before posting crap about operation paperclip.
So your distrust lies in nonsense about a snake tongue and employing experienced rocket engineers from Germany (most of whom were forced to work for the Nazis). Try again.
-
1 minute ago, sock muppet said:
Ok, in the other thread you said all you need to eliminate hostile radiation was a sealed bucket and a space hat
You are lying! That was in reference to an idiotic claim about UV radiation and nowhere did I coin the phrase about any buckets or hats. The astronauts wore a series of dosimeters and were exposed to small levels of radiation. This was indicative of the shielding rating of the vessel they were in.
1 minute ago, sock muppet said:but when i asked you about space idiots in low Earth orbit who's own experience of flashes of light in the eye, you said radiation
Another lie. I said they saw a charged particle.
1 minute ago, sock muppet said:and yet in low Earth orbit you have the Earth's magnetic field as a shield
And as we can see from the Aurora, the magnetosphere will not stop every single charged particle or stop them from being deflected.
1 minute ago, sock muppet said:as well as a space bucket and space hat and yet radiation still get's through
Again this ignorance about buckets and hats. If they are in the craft they don't wear a helmet and if they are wearing a helmet they aren't in the craft. Instances where charged particles entered through either are not unusual. No system will stop every particle. Exposure to lethal or dangerous levels of radiation involve particles with very high flux and trillions and trillions of them for a significant period. Particles already entered through the hull will have largely been attenuated.
1 minute ago, sock muppet said:that's just detected in the eye let alone the whole body
Haha, gotta laugh it this. They see 1 flash of light in their eyeball from a single charged particle and suddenly they are dosed in radiation levels akin to Chernobyl!
1 minute ago, sock muppet said:so my conclusion to this is i will never go on a space mission with you because i think it would be dangerous, jus sayin, jus sayin, no need to get huffy.
Dangerous in that one of us would have no understanding at all of a single thing occurring. That would be you btw.
Are we done with the silly claim about pictures and video?
-
On 3/19/2022 at 11:24 PM, sock muppet said:
An excellent point you make there, an historical event of biblical proportions and the original photographs and video tape just, well, vanished, and three...two...one...you're back in the room.
Waited all weekend to reply to this total crap. Here's the thing. Not one peace of that above is accurate, so it keeps making me wonder how much of this whole NASA are the antichrist is just down to ignorance and rubbish research.
NONE of the original photographs are missing, lost, deleted or in any jeopardy at all. They are all kept safely stored in chilled storage facilities. Every one of them was copied numerous times and every one of them is online and freely available.
None of the video tape used on the mission vanished. The telemetry and slow scan TV BACKUP tapes were overwritten from Apollo 11. All the telemetry was copied onto other media and all the TV was recorded as it was transmitted. These tapes were in short supply and nobody had the presence of mind to keep them, because it wasn't deemed important to keep backups when the data was already stored on other media.
-
1 minute ago, andy1033 said:
NASA = Never a straight answer
Andy, that is someone else's quote parroted. Give me some instances where they haven't given a straight answer, because as an agency they pretty much provide every aspect of every mission.
1 minute ago, andy1033 said:I personally believe they did goto moon, but i believe what they hid, was that they used better techs than they told people. ie they were hiding the real technology they used. Even though that was before i was alive, we can see how things work today, and its very likely nasa is a front, for just show, and what really goes on in secret is never told to us.
Ok. So within that paragraph I noticed your opinions which you are free to have of course. But I didn't notice any examples as to why you think this.
-
16 minutes ago, alexa said:
If you believe this rubbish, well, what can I say ?
I asked specifically for evidence and you dump your bare assertion appeal to incredulity on this thread? I find it almost impossible to contemplate anyone being dumb enough to watch that and think is is fake. The film Gravity took months and months to assemble just short sequences and to map them together. It used actual space footage as a model. This stuff comes out every other day when they are busy and there was a 24/7 feed running that only somebody who knows zero about the process could claim it was CGI.
-
1
-
-
21 minutes ago, ink said:
Why don't you trust NASA?
Well as they cannot keep any historical information without overwriting it .... and seem to lose 'old' technology .... I think that I would sack them all if they worked for me!
I wouldn't trust incompetence :)
What "historical information" has been overwritten and how do you know?
What old technology was lost that should have been kept and what does that have to do with trust?
What incompetence do you mean?
-
1 minute ago, sock muppet said:
that's the corona sphere, not the so called wind.
You keep making these statements and fail every time to back them up. It says the solar wind is visible. Not what it is!
-
1 minute ago, sock muppet said:
So i am not going to post any relevant material for you to read, because i suspect it to be a waste of time
Failure to back up your claims noted. Though it may be a waste of time in that I've read quite a lot of it!
1 minute ago, sock muppet said:why do people that go into low Earth orbit always say about flashes of light perceived in the eye?
Charged particles striking the retina. And?
-
1 minute ago, sock muppet said:
Is a nasa term.
Noise again, no citations just you huffing and puffing.
https://news.uchicago.edu/explainer/what-is-solar-wind
First proposed in the 1950s by University of Chicago physicist Eugene Parker, the solar wind is visible in the halo around the sun during an eclipse and sometimes when the particles hit the Earth's atmosphere—as the aurora borealis, or northern lights.
-
1 minute ago, sock muppet said:
It's radiation
It's ignorance of the highest order. Now once again, quote me a source for your made up crap. UV light does not penetrate aluminium or triple layer helmets.
-
Just now, sock muppet said:
First of all it is not a solar wind, that is a nasa term to make it seem all nice and fluffy and space loves you, it does not, it wants to kill you, it is deadly to be in the path of a radiant sun, which radiates deadly radiation all the time.
Noise. Prove your crap. NASA didn't name anything. Duh.
-
Just now, sock muppet said:
It is in space where the intensity is far higher than on Earth, don't forget it takes ozone and sixty miles of atmosphere to reduce its power to manageable levels and people still get skin cancer.
Sigh. Details please, explain why you think it would penetrate aluminium(sniffles guffaw).
-
9 minutes ago, sock muppet said:
And the Sun is that solar event happening all the time not just CME's.
Details please and then explain why the CSM or LM would not attenuate the solar wind. Try not to cite studies about long term exposure in space!
-
9 minutes ago, endfreemasonscum said:
Very risky play lying about something that anyone can find from the nasa site.
Go fetch. Unlike you I already read it all and understand it.
9 minutes ago, endfreemasonscum said:Here is a close-up of the tin foil used on the model that you still believe flew through space, faster than sound and landed men on the moon...
The drywall, cardboard and construction paper wasn't obvious enough?
That is not tin are you really THAT clueless? Your noise continues, even though I gave you a good answer that you ignored. Here's a more detailed one:
Like everything else, the ascent and descent stages were built to be as light as possible. But because they knew they would operate only in a vacuum, many things really didn't need to be sturdy, nor did the shape of it matter. It would never have to deal with aerodynamic drag. In fact, the descent stage was designed to buckle in the right places upon landing, that was how it absorbed the impact. It was only going to be used once, this was the most weight-efficient method of handling the shock of landing.
Also, the complex insulation blankets covering the module had many layers, and contact points between the layers needed to be minimized so that heat wouldn't be passed through them by conduction. The black material is where thin Inconel sheets formed the outer layer of the insulation blanket, and they were painted matte black with Pyromark paint to improve their heat emission properties, so they would cool off quickly. (Black material both absorbs and emits heat better than material of other colors.) Beneath the black layer were reflective layers to prevent the heat of the black layer penetrating into the module. This treatment was done where the exhaust of the reaction control thrusters heated the lunar modules. It had a tendency to crinkle, and on this particular module, that may have been accentuated by the fact it was in fact installed at the last minute, as were the chutes under the thrusters. From the Lunar Module Coatings Page:
A few months before flight, shock tunnel tests using a new thruster duty cycle revealed that the Pyromark painted Inconel lay-ups on the upper sides of the Descent Stage quads would not be sufficient protection against the hot plumes. A crash program to design a fix resulted in "coal chute" plume deflectors mounted below the down-firing jets. These were installed on LM 5 while it was on the pad, just before launch.
Another last minute thermal fix added 39 pounds of Kapton and Pyromark painted Inconel to the landing gear, pads and probe. One of the reasons for this added weight was a crew request(!) that they be allowed to keep the engine on past probe contact to pad touchdown. This would result in greater heating from the engine plume as it reflected off the lunar surface past the gear.
Considering the vast ambition of going to the Moon for the first time, it isn't surprising some fixes were last-minute.
The foil is Kapton MLI (multi-layer insulation) blankets, and it is actually pretty complex. In the places on the lunar modules that only needed to be a heat barrier to sunlight, high reflectivity was the most efffective approach, and those places are the shiny amber color of the Kapton. As there is no air in space to pass heat by convection, if you lower absorption of heat radiation by making surfaces that are highly reflective or emissive, and there are few contact points to pass heat by conduction, insulation can be highly effective. With the Kapton foil blankets, the contact points were reduced by hand-crinkling an inner layer of the blanket. From the Apollo News Reference:
To make an even more effective insulation, the polymide sheets are hand crinkled before blanket fabrication. This crinkling provides a path for venting, and minimizes contact conductance between the layers.
So, this is bound to make the outer layer rather uneven.
All the other covering material you see is also just there to protect whatever is underneath from the effects of sunlight. Perhaps they were also thinking a bit about keeping dust out. That is all it has to do, and it was made merely sufficient for that job. Weight savings were more important than looks. The fancy stuff is underneath all those bare-bones panels.
I found a different photo of the lander that gives a better sense of the complexity of it. The photo shows the Ascent Stage in the process of assembly, before the heat shielding had been put on it:
This photo of an LM test article shows the sturdy underlying aluminum and titanium structure pretty clearly:
And a quote from the book Chariots of Apollo available on the NASA website's History section:
By the end of 1965, Scrape and SWIP had pruned away 1,100 kilograms, providing a comfortable margin below the control weight limit. One of the more striking changes to come from this drive for a lighter spacecraft was the substitution of aluminum-mylar foil thermal blankets for rigid heatshields. The gold wrapping characteristic of the lander's exterior saved 50 kilograms. Many of these weight-reducing changes made the lander so difficult to fabricate, so fragile and vulnerable to damage, that it demanded great care and skill by assembly and checkout technicians. Structural components took on strange and complex shapes, requiring careful machining to remove any excess metal
'Scrape' and 'SWIP' were both programs Grumman, the company that fabricated the Lunar Module, instituted specifically to reduce the weight of the LM.
I found both things on a great thread on the topic at CosmoQuest
You can pore over the LM Apollo Operations Handbook for a great deal of technical information on the spacecraft, for more evidence.
-
Just now, sock muppet said:
on Earth it takes at least an inch worth lead in thickness to successfully stop Gamma radiation
So what does that tell you? We Earthlings are getting hit by it on a daily basis and for our entire lives. Those in the arctics, who have far less protection from the magnetosphere don't appear to be dropping dead. The atmosphere attenuates gamma to a certain extent but for the most part it hits us. This is where you explain why you think it would be so deadly over the course of two weeks in space compared to 70 years on Earth living in Alaska for example.
Just now, sock muppet said:UV is just one aspect,
Listen, just stop with the UV crap ok? It isn't dangerous with a helmet on. It isn't dangerous through the hull.
Just now, sock muppet said:once outside of the magnetic field of the Earth you have no protection at all,
That's bullshit. They were in an 8 gm^2 rated Command Module with a Service module running the entire length of their backs. This is where you quantify your appeal to incredulity and explain exactly what the levels they faced and how the machinery used didn't attenuate any of it. Otherwise you are just blowing air out of your bottom.
Just now, sock muppet said:and it's made worse by the Van Allen belts as they behave rather like the Tokamak fusion reactors that are still in testing, and intensifies the radiation experienced
Made up crap. I already explained that the craft took a wide elliptical orbit through weaker areas. Did you understand that?
Just now, sock muppet said:but lets be clear the radiation experienced is incomprehensible to imagine.
We don't need to imagine it. The doses were calculated based on dozens of unmanned probes. Conspiracy theorists like to think they know what they are talking about and conflate the danger through sheer ignorance.
-
17 minutes ago, Puzzle said:
Do we underlings even know what NASA is or just what we've been told? It doesn't appear to be anything to do with space, the moon or anything to do with rockets. Just seems a place that garners shit loads of money and tinkers with things it ought not to.
Your attention to detail and attempt at responding to the question posed in the OP is a little, how do I put it.....vague.
-
1
-
-
5 minutes ago, sock muppet said:
And you just lost the million pound question, oh we're so sorry that you leave empty handed but, thanks for being a wonderful contestant.
This is just trolling. Apollo shielding on the LM was Kapton / Mylar and micro-meteorite shielding. No tin. That is the kind of thing claimed by people ignorant of the design. As for intense space radiation, that only occurs when there are major solar events. None occurred during any Apollo mission.
Moon landings
in Space & Universe
Posted
You're raring are you