[geocentrism] Re: Earth and science
- From: Paul Deema <paul_deema@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: Geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Sat, 1 Sep 2007 21:18:01 +0000 (GMT)
Jack L
From Jack Lewis Sat Sep 1 17:29:27 2007
Dear Paul,
There are numerous websites which decimate all photographic imagery plus a lot
of seudo science. So if the photos are contrived, what were all those men
sitting in front of monitors really doing? Why don't you look at this evidence?
I did at a time when I didn't want to believe that it could have been a hoax
but as much as tried to ignore the critics, my common sense told me the critics
were right. And since then the evidence against the moon landings increases.
Would you like me to give you a link to just one of these sites?
Let me ask you a question. Why was it necessary for NASA to rehearse
Armstrong's decent of the ladder in a studio set that looked exactly like the
'real thing'? During this rehearsal a light gantry collapsed behind Armstrong
and he remarked, " I suppose we need to do that again" or words to that effect.
I can provide you with a link to the video - if you are interested.
Jack
I've visited many of these hoax sites and found none to be convincing. I've
been to hoax debunking sites and found them to be convincing. I'll try one of
you hoax sites just to show that I'm prepared to look and I'll report to you on
my findings. I'll also answer specific questions from you concerning your
nominated site. I'm not interested in video -- it's way too slow and soaks up
too much of my monthly ration of MBs.
The men in the rows of stations are organised by function. There was one for
engineering -- do you want to guess at how many components there were in an
Apollo vehicle -- where they were interested in monitoring the operation of the
various processes; another was, I believe, concerned with operations; but
definately I do remember that one whole row was concerned with navigation. The
accuracy required of heading and thrust in order to achieve success is
staggering and the maths involved would curl my teeth. Remember that in the
late 1960s, computers were not the capable devices we have today. Why don't you
look into that?
Rehearsals -- now there's a story! Have you ever been in the military Jack? If
you have you should have some rudimentary idea of the need for and the value of
rehearsals. Getting some tiny task exactly and immediately right, in the rain
and in the dark, can be the difference between winning the action and losing,
but more important -- on a personal level -- is that it might be the difference
between living to eat breakfast and having your guts and your brains splattered
all over the countryside and the bloke next to you. In the case of Apollo in
particular but space navigation in general, every tiny task is rehearsed and
the results analysed to the nth degree. Each mission costs buckets of money and
to have a failure because a spanner wouldn't fit a nut or a vital adjusting
knob was just out of reach is innexcusable! Why would you think that coming
down a ladder didn't need rehearsal? It's very often the trivial, the
unimportant which is the cause of
disaster. Are you aware of the enormous water tank in which astronauts and
their helpers exercise with full size mockups? These sorts of things are very
expensive and they aren't built to impress the visitors.
The truth about your skepticism is simply this -- you don't believe because you
don't want to believe. Put in the positive -- you want to not believe. Why this
is so almost defies belief but confronted by the reality of it I must believe.
Paul D
____________________________________________________________________________________
Sick of deleting your inbox? Yahoo!7 Mail has free unlimited storage.
http://au.docs.yahoo.com/mail/unlimitedstorage.html
Other related posts:
