REVscene - Vancouver Automotive Forum


Welcome to the REVscene Automotive Forum forums.

Registration is Free!You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today! The banners on the left side and below do not show for registered users!

If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.


Go Back   REVscene Automotive Forum > Automotive Chat > Vancouver Off-Topic / Current Events

Vancouver Off-Topic / Current Events The off-topic forum for Vancouver, funnies, non-auto centered discussions, WORK SAFE. While the rules are more relaxed here, there are still rules. Please refer to sticky thread in this forum.

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 07-23-2009, 03:32 PM   #26
Revscene.net has a homepage?!
 
Cyclonus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Burnaby
Posts: 1,204
Thanked 45 Times in 10 Posts
Failed 0 Times in 0 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lomac View Post
Objects still move on their own in vacuum (flag). Over exposure on photos to show surface detail faded out most of the stars in the photos. Van Allen himself have denied the possibilities that the radiation in the belt will kill astronauts for the relative brief amount of time that they'll be inside it.
+1
Although I'm pretty skeptical myself regarding the truth about the landing, Mythbusters did do a good job at explaining the flag moving, foot prints of astronauts as well as the over exposure issue of picture taking.
Advertisement
__________________
Just because my username is Cyclonus doesn't mean I can't have pic of Optimus as my avatar =P

1 3 5
├┼┼╕
2 4 6 R
Cyclonus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-23-2009, 03:39 PM   #27
Da Vinci's real masterpiece: The Mona Diesel
 
Jsunu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Richmond
Posts: 1,797
Thanked 563 Times in 247 Posts
Failed 15 Times in 15 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cyclonus View Post
+1
Although I'm pretty skeptical myself regarding the truth about the landing, Mythbusters did do a good job at explaining the flag moving, foot prints of astronauts as well as the over exposure issue of picture taking.
What are you skeptical about the moon land specifically.

Note: im not trying to start a shitstorm here, im just curious about what other people think how it was faked.
Jsunu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-23-2009, 03:55 PM   #28
ESKETIT
 
Vansterdam's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Shambhala
Posts: 23,360
Thanked 9,694 Times in 2,326 Posts
Failed 997 Times in 240 Posts
LOL
Vansterdam is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-23-2009, 03:56 PM   #29
WOAH! i think Vtec just kicked in!
 
cococly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Van
Posts: 1,664
Thanked 413 Times in 101 Posts
Failed 95 Times in 37 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by asian_XL View Post
FOOTPATH?

I saw a whale on the moon 2 days ago.
cococly is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-23-2009, 05:38 PM   #30
WOAH! i think Vtec just kicked in!
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: vancouver
Posts: 1,620
Thanked 218 Times in 59 Posts
Failed 43 Times in 16 Posts
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qu3WBrKq7tY

Ron Howards Film In the Shadow of the Moon contains all previously unrealsed footage of them on the moon. Here's just one of the parts. I think their all on youtube. Watch the film, and then shut the fuck up about how it was fake.
rslater is offline   Reply With Quote
This post thanked by:
Old 07-23-2009, 05:51 PM   #31
In RS I Trust
 
murd0c's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Mission
Posts: 20,779
Thanked 17,661 Times in 4,345 Posts
Failed 1,037 Times in 352 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jsunu View Post
What are you skeptical about the moon land specifically.

Note: im not trying to start a shitstorm here, im just curious about what other people think how it was faked.
watch the movie about how they faked the moon landing and you will be shocked. It does make sence since after that they havn't tried going anywhere (mars rovers dont count)
murd0c is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-23-2009, 06:13 PM   #32
WOAH! i think Vtec just kicked in!
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: vancouver
Posts: 1,620
Thanked 218 Times in 59 Posts
Failed 43 Times in 16 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by murd0c View Post
watch the movie about how they faked the moon landing and you will be shocked. It does make sence since after that they havn't tried going anywhere (mars rovers dont count)
Well clearly this topic does not make an sense to you because your unsure of how to even spell "sence". Now no offence to how stupid you are or anything but your anecdotal evidence that we never went to the moon is summed up by suggesting that after Apollo 11 went, no one else has gone to the moon correct?

Except their have been 5 manned landings on the moon since the one you point out. A total of twelve men have been on the Moon.

Apollo 11: Launched July 16 1969. First manned landing on the Moon.
Neil Armstrong, Edwin "Buzz" Aldrin, Michael Collins

Apollo 12: Launched November 14, 1969. Landed.
Pete Conrad, Alan Bean, Richard Gordon

Apollo 14: Launched January 31, 1971. Landed.
Alan Shepard, Ed Mitchell, Stuart Roosa

Apollo 15: Launched July 26, 1971. Landed.
David Scott, Jim Irwin, Al Worden

Apollo 16: Launched April 16, 1972. Landed.
John Young, Charles Duke, Ken Mattingly

Apollo 17: Launched December 7, 1972. Landed.
Gene Cernan, Harrison Schmitt, Ron Evans.

Aside from that Apollo missions 8, 13 and 10 have reached lunar orbit and several Russian Space missions have soft landed on the Moon; Luna 20 in '72, and Luna 24 in '76 even returned samples.

Now to further this evidence, I like this persons summary taken off another website.

1) Apollo 11 left a retroreflector on the lunar surface that astronomers have detected thousands of times.
2) Independent radio telescopes, when pointed at the Moon, detected the Apollo transmissions. If there hadn't been a ship there, they wouldn't have heard anything.
3) The Moon rocks have been thoroughly analyzed by geologists, who conclude that the rocks formed billions of years ago on the Moon. They explain that there's no way for NASA to fake the rocks.
4) No scientist rejects the landings. If there was something fishy about the landings, would it not be scientists who would notice? Instead, scientists are the first to vigorously defend the landings.
rslater is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-23-2009, 06:22 PM   #33
MiX iT Up!
 
tiger_handheld's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: vancouver
Posts: 8,150
Thanked 2,075 Times in 871 Posts
Failed 642 Times in 183 Posts
did you guys hear the moon landing didnt happen, and the entire 'process' was filmed from a warehouse in LA?

The US gov, didnt wan't to be #2 to the Russians, so they had to fake it.
__________________

Sometimes we tend to be in despair when the person we love leaves us, but the truth is, it's not our loss, but theirs, for they left the only person who couldn't give up on them.


Make the effort and take the risk..

"Do what you feel in your heart to be right- for you'll be criticized anyway. You'll be damned if you do, and damned if you don't." - Eleanor Roosevelt
tiger_handheld is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-23-2009, 06:31 PM   #34
RS has made me the bitter person i am today!
 
Bouncing Bettys's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Bootyville
Posts: 4,638
Thanked 2,617 Times in 900 Posts
Failed 496 Times in 162 Posts
question for the idiots - why did the soviets not discredit nasa's claims and accomplishments? afterall, they were in a space race with the US as another facet of the cold war. being able to prove the americans as frauds would have been major piece of ammunition. yet there was no attempt to discredit. the soviets sent various unmanned missions to the moon which could have easily aquired evidence that a manned moon landing never happened.

why haven't they been back since?
all sorts of reasons:
- a tighter budget due to a recession
- NASA was focusing on reusable space vehicles (the shuttle)
- NASA began focusing on space station developement and long-term space inhabitance which would also help with the creation of a lunar base should they ever return
- NASA had done pretty much all it could with manned landings on the moon while unmanned technology was improving to the point that it was cheaper
- basically, once man landed on the moon, the space race was essentially over. nasa could worry less about press headlines and patriotism and focus more on the scientific aspects of space
__________________
LEAFS!
Bouncing Bettys is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-23-2009, 06:34 PM   #35
In RS I Trust
 
murd0c's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Mission
Posts: 20,779
Thanked 17,661 Times in 4,345 Posts
Failed 1,037 Times in 352 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by rslater View Post
Well clearly this topic does not make an sense to you because your unsure of how to even spell "sence". Now no offence to how stupid you are or anything but your anecdotal evidence that we never went to the moon is summed up by suggesting that after Apollo 11 went, no one else has gone to the moon correct?

Except their have been 5 manned landings on the moon since the one you point out. A total of twelve men have been on the Moon.

Apollo 11: Launched July 16 1969. First manned landing on the Moon.
Neil Armstrong, Edwin "Buzz" Aldrin, Michael Collins

Apollo 12: Launched November 14, 1969. Landed.
Pete Conrad, Alan Bean, Richard Gordon

Apollo 14: Launched January 31, 1971. Landed.
Alan Shepard, Ed Mitchell, Stuart Roosa

Apollo 15: Launched July 26, 1971. Landed.
David Scott, Jim Irwin, Al Worden

Apollo 16: Launched April 16, 1972. Landed.
John Young, Charles Duke, Ken Mattingly

Apollo 17: Launched December 7, 1972. Landed.
Gene Cernan, Harrison Schmitt, Ron Evans.

Aside from that Apollo missions 8, 13 and 10 have reached lunar orbit and several Russian Space missions have soft landed on the Moon; Luna 20 in '72, and Luna 24 in '76 even returned samples.

Now to further this evidence, I like this persons summary taken off another website.

1) Apollo 11 left a retroreflector on the lunar surface that astronomers have detected thousands of times.
2) Independent radio telescopes, when pointed at the Moon, detected the Apollo transmissions. If there hadn't been a ship there, they wouldn't have heard anything.
3) The Moon rocks have been thoroughly analyzed by geologists, who conclude that the rocks formed billions of years ago on the Moon. They explain that there's no way for NASA to fake the rocks.
4) No scientist rejects the landings. If there was something fishy about the landings, would it not be scientists who would notice? Instead, scientists are the first to vigorously defend the landings.
ever heard of scarcasm before?


and yes I know I have shitty spelling
murd0c is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-23-2009, 06:41 PM   #36
"They call me Bowser...RawR!"
 
!LittleDragon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 8,285
Thanked 1,007 Times in 395 Posts
Failed 60 Times in 31 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by BNR32_Coupe View Post
Why can't the airplanes fly upside down (its possible ive seen jet fighters do it) and take pictures of the moon then? explain that
Wouldn't it be easier to move the camera to the top of the plane? lol
__________________
"Damn fine car Dodge... Ran over me wife with a Dodge!", Zeke
!LittleDragon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-23-2009, 07:18 PM   #37
I WANT MY 10 YEARS BACK FROM RS.net!
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 20,415
Thanked 7,481 Times in 1,449 Posts
Failed 2,380 Times in 472 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by SkinnyPupp View Post
Google Maps uses airplanes that fly a few thousand feet (or even hundreds?) from the surface.
I don't care what they are using...
here's what NASA has in the space

asian_XL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-23-2009, 07:26 PM   #38
Banned By Establishment
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Shaugnessy
Posts: 2,610
Thanked 481 Times in 168 Posts
Failed 730 Times in 91 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lomac View Post
Objects still move on their own in vacuum (flag). Over exposure on photos to show surface detail faded out most of the stars in the photos. Van Allen himself have denied the possibilities that the radiation in the belt will kill astronauts for the relative brief amount of time that they'll be inside it.
Exactly. These points kill all the major evidence of the landing being fake. Easiest conspiracy to debunk, however, something like 20% of americans believe the landing isn't real.

Quote:
Originally Posted by murd0c View Post
watch the movie about how they faked the moon landing and you will be shocked. It does make sence since after that they havn't tried going anywhere (mars rovers dont count)
Quote:
Originally Posted by tiger_handheld View Post
did you guys hear the moon landing didnt happen, and the entire 'process' was filmed from a warehouse in LA?

The US gov, didnt wan't to be #2 to the Russians, so they had to fake it.
we haven't gone anywhere else because there's no cold war space race happening anymore. there's no need to invest trillions of $ to explore a different part of space thats close. in addition, we have technology so advance, it can detect the type of elements in atmospheres of planets in other solar systems. why go somewhere when you can look at it first?

also, in short, the space race was escalated out of fear. when the russians first send a man into space, it was the craziest thing to ever happen in history; the world was shocked and amazed. it would be like if today, we sent a man to another earth-like planet in another solar system. no one ever went into space in history, so when the US found out, they feared the worst. what if the russians are able to attack from space? the americans had to find out what space was like for themselves, and they took it to the next level - by landing on the moon.
BNR32_Coupe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-23-2009, 07:31 PM   #39
I contribute to threads in the offtopic forum
 
tonyvu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Van.
Posts: 2,929
Thanked 1,967 Times in 290 Posts
Failed 536 Times in 92 Posts
i've always wondered why there wasn't any stars in the background when they took the pictures....
__________________
RIP JN

UNCE UNCE UNCE!

Quote:
Originally Posted by strykn View Post
Comparing A&B with deadmau5? Really? I should fucking slap you

2007 Acura TL
2005 Acura TL....RIP
2003 Honda Accord Coupe V6....RIP
tonyvu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-23-2009, 07:34 PM   #40
In RS I Trust
 
murd0c's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Mission
Posts: 20,779
Thanked 17,661 Times in 4,345 Posts
Failed 1,037 Times in 352 Posts
I personally think the reason why we havn't done anything else because at the current moment there's more money in war rather then spending money going into space. Now if they found something that would make billions on the moon the US would be there so quick it wouldn't be a laughing matter.

Space is the future but war is the payday.
murd0c is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-23-2009, 07:36 PM   #41
Glorious Gaming PC Master Race
 
Psykopathik's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Coquitlam y0!
Posts: 21,240
Thanked 968 Times in 446 Posts
Failed 83 Times in 30 Posts
they need this in space

__________________
My 100+ Buy and Sell feedback
Psykopathik is offline   Reply With Quote
This post thanked by:
Old 07-23-2009, 09:36 PM   #42
you
Banned (BBM)
 
you's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: van
Posts: 1,067
Thanked 6 Times in 6 Posts
Failed 0 Times in 0 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quickshifter View Post
What's the point of showing the pictures when they're not even clear...

i bet the picture was meant as another puzzle for ch0 to tackle
you is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-23-2009, 10:09 PM   #43
Hacked RS to become a mod
 
SkinnyPupp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Sunny Hong Kong
Posts: 54,439
Thanked 25,328 Times in 8,862 Posts
Failed 1,559 Times in 707 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by asian_XL View Post
I don't care what they are using...
here's what NASA has in the space

I'm glad they're using that for something more important than the fucking moon, which they have landed on several times. Using it to take high res pictures of the moon to shut up a bunch of blithering idiots would be a complete waste of time and effort. Besides, it's kind of entertaining to hear these idiots go on about how the landing was fake. Funny in an annoying kind of way, but funny nonetheless. Not quite as annoying as the 9/11 conspiracies, thank god.
SkinnyPupp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-23-2009, 10:48 PM   #44
I WANT MY 10 YEARS BACK FROM RS.net!
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 20,415
Thanked 7,481 Times in 1,449 Posts
Failed 2,380 Times in 472 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonyvu View Post
i've always wondered why there wasn't any stars in the background when they took the pictures....
you won't see any stars on moon when the big ass Earth is right above your head. It's like you don't see stars when it is full moon.
asian_XL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-24-2009, 08:53 AM   #45
Glorious Gaming PC Master Race
 
Psykopathik's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Coquitlam y0!
Posts: 21,240
Thanked 968 Times in 446 Posts
Failed 83 Times in 30 Posts


__________________
My 100+ Buy and Sell feedback
Psykopathik is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 10:09 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
SEO by vBSEO ©2011, Crawlability, Inc.
Revscene.net cannot be held accountable for the actions of its members nor does the opinions of the members represent that of Revscene.net