To The Moon

Useless thread being trolled to death by the usual suspect.
Ignored.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jpc
Russkiy Mir said:
Why would they waste money on that when they already went there?
Click to expand...
Exactly the point. They didn't. There will be no pics or footage of the moon lander on the actual moon. It's in a Hollywood warehouse somewhere. And apparently the Moon is full of rare earth minerals. You'd think there would be a commercial interest there.
 
buddy love said:
Sources for your point of view?(that's ok it's your personal view, fair enough) Actually it's your asserted POV for the Heliocentrician's that certainly require established sources of reference for us today.

Your claims here are beyond extraordinary surely, what proof this time?
There'll soon be much more up to date evidence available, things are going to get very busy 😅
Click to expand...
Gas pressure cannot exist next to a vacuum without a container. This has never been demonstrated. No container for the gas = nothing for the gas to press against = no pressure. We have air pressure on earth so that air MUST be contained.

Earth's atmosphere (i.e. gas pressure) cannot exist next to the vacuum of space if there is no containment as per the globe model. Therefore the space vacuum is IMPOSSIBLE, no matter what any Government or space agency says.

From Florida State University Department of Chemistry & Biochemistry: https://www.chem.fsu.edu/chemlab/chm1045/gases.html

pressure.png



View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NzKAJWTmlwg
 
Hermit said:
Gas pressure cannot exist next to a vacuum without a container. This has never been demonstrated. No container for the gas = nothing for the gas to press against = no pressure. We have air pressure on earth so that air MUST be contained.

Earth's atmosphere (i.e. gas pressure) cannot exist next to the vacuum of space if there is no containment as per the globe model. Therefore the space vacuum is IMPOSSIBLE, no matter what any Government or space agency says.

From Florida State University Department of Chemistry & Biochemistry: https://www.chem.fsu.edu/chemlab/chm1045/gases.html

pressure.png



View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NzKAJWTmlwg
Click to expand...

But but but...muh weak of force gravity, which can't even hold down a helium balloon, creates the perfect containment required for the official narrative to be real

images.jpeg
 
The Russian lunar module has been in orbit since yesterday. Where are the photos of the US debris, Flag and moon buggy?
 
The Indian one was in orbit a few days ago. I must check to see if either have an orbiter, which would have cameras.
 
@buddy love More sources on gas pressure for you:

To Invoke Gas Pressure WITHOUT a Container, you're merely VIOLATING ...
1. Boyle's Law – Relationship between pressure and volume in a gas at constant temperature.
2. Charles's Law – Relationship between volume and temperature of a gas at constant pressure.
3. Gay-Lusac's Law -- Relationship between pressure and temperature of a gas at constant volume.
4. Avagadro's Law - For a given mass of an ideal gas, the volume and amount (moles) of the gas are directly proportional if the temperature and pressure are constant.
5. Parts of Dalton’s Law: To summarize, the total pressure exerted by a mixture of gases is the sum of the partial pressures of component gases. This law was first discovered by John Dalton, the father of the atomic theory of matter. It is now known as Dalton’s law of partial pressures. Combined gas law (Ideal Gas Law) – Combination of Charles', Boyle's, and Gay-Lussac's gas laws. (PV=nRT)
6. Brownian Motion: "Real gas molecules move in all directions, not just to neighbors on a chessboard." http://web.mit.edu/8.334/www/grades/projects/projects17/OscarMickelin/brownian.html
7. 2nd Law of Thermodynamics: "The second law of thermodynamics can also be stated that "all spontaneous processes produce an increase in the entropy of the universe". https://chem.libretexts.org/Bookshe...f_Thermodynamics/Second_Law_of_Thermodynamics

"The "PRESSURE OF A GAS" is the force that the gas exerts on the 'WALLS OF ITS CONTAINER'". http://chemistry.elmhurst.edu/vchembook/180pressure.html

"The molecules are in constant, random motion and frequently collide with each other and with the WALLS OF A CONTAINER. Because the molecules are in motion, a GAS will expand to fill the CONTAINER. Since density is defined to be the mass divided by the volume, density DEPENDS DIRECTLY on the size of the CONTAINER in which a fixed mass of GAS is confined."
https://www.grc.nasa.gov/www/k-12/airplane/fluden.html

"Kinetic Molecular Theory Explanation of Boyle's [GAS] Law... "

Observations about pressure may be explained using the following ideas. The rapid motion and collisions of molecules with the WALLS OF THE CONTAINER "CAUSES" PRESSURE (force on a unit area). Pressure is proportional to the number of molecular collisions and the force of the collisions in a particular area. The more collisions of GAS MOLECULES with THE WALLS, the higher the PRESSURE."
http://chemistry.elmhurst.edu/vchembook/180pressure.html

"Pressure is 'CAUSED' by Gas Molecules hitting the WALLS OF THE CONTAINER. With a smaller VOLUME, the Gas Molecules will hit THE WALLS more frequently, and so the PRESSURE INCREASES. https://chem.libretexts.org/Bookshelves/Physical_and_Theoretical_Chemistry_Textbook_Maps/Supplemental_Modules_(Physical_and_Theoretical_Chemistry)/Physical_Properties_of_Matter/States_of_Matter/Properties_of_Gases/Gas_Laws/Boyle's_Law
 
Why are space cameras so shit? These, apparently, are Apollo landing site images from the Indian lunar orbiter. Seriously?? Someone give these lads an I-Phone :LOL:

F3wmNLEXAAAxZpr.png
 
nothing that I have seen could be described as a real photo showing anything worthwhile. It would not surprise me it both craft failed to soft land
 
I was looking at the fake lunar orbiter photos from the 1960s.
They are slightly BETTER than what we can manage today. Space is clearly fake.

They have created a visual style around faking these things, as a way to add a feeling of authenticity. This is generated using black and white images, blurred out, with a short angle lens and tight compositions.
 
PlunkettsGhost said:
I was looking at the fake lunar orbiter photos from the 1960s.
They are slightly BETTER than what we can manage today. Space is clearly fake.

They have created a visual style around faking these things, as a way to add a feeling of authenticity. This is generated using black and white images, blurred out, with a short angle lens and tight compositions.
Click to expand...
Do you remember a show that was shown on Channel 4 called ‘Space Cadets’. It was a reality to show where they convinced a bunch of morons that they win outer space, when in fact they were in a simulation machine in Ipswich 😂
 
Russkiy Mir said:
Russians in trouble!

news.sky.com

Russia reports 'abnormal situation' at Luna-25 spacecraft

Russia is racing against India to make an ambitious landing on the moon's south pole, with its rival having launched its own lunar lander Chandrayaan-3 last month. Space agencies like NASA have detected frozen water in the area's craters before, but no country has ever ventured there.
news.sky.com news.sky.com
Click to expand...
This was predicted by my good self of course. The Russian 'orbiter' has 'crashed on the moon' now, officially. More debris we will never see pics of.

Once again, 1960s tech beats 2023 tech.
 
Doesn't look like that Russian lunar probe landed in one piece.
 
Tiger said:
Do you remember a show that was shown on Channel 4 called ‘Space Cadets’. It was a reality to show where they convinced a bunch of morons that they win outer space, when in fact they were in a simulation machine in Ipswich 😂
Click to expand...
We all space cadets, those of us that believe in space, and moon landings and complex, multidirectional earth orbits at thousands of miles per hour.
 
My July 15 prophecy has come true:

To The Moon

View: https://youtu.be/jSYiXWEjgcc Blast off is just after noon in Ireland on Monday. This bears watching as in my opinion, this is an attempt to send a human to the moon. They are to have many tests. Including getting radiation readings to see if man can go into space at all.
www.sarsfieldsvirtualpub.com www.sarsfieldsvirtualpub.com
 
Declan said:
nothing that I have seen could be described as a real photo showing anything worthwhile. It would not surprise me it both craft failed to soft land
Click to expand...
Well one is certainly kaput and the latest is that the Indian attempt is Tuesday/Wednesday. It has an orbiter but it is to study earth and maybe does not have a camera at all maybe looking to the moon.
 
Declan said:
Well one is certainly kaput and the latest is that the Indian attempt is Tuesday/Wednesday. It has an orbiter but it is to study earth and maybe does not have a camera at all maybe looking to the moon.
Click to expand...
It's all a farcical fake. The Chinese 'space station' videos are a hoot.
 
I am not so sure about that. I think the craft crashed.
 
Surely it could have its electronics fried by a lazer beam.


But even without interference, a soft landing is nearly impossible imo, especially remotely.

Let's see it the dots have better luck in a few days.
 
It's difficult to find, but I once saw claimed Mars Rover video with a fly landing on the rover and walking on its surface. All filmed on Devon Island, Canada.
 
Mad as Fish said:
Same here, I heard the story but never saw anything to back it up.
Click to expand...
YouTube changed their algorithms a while ago so you can't find older video unless you know the exact name. Accounts have years worth of video, with most no longer scrollable by date. They are still on YouTube , just not visible in the account catalogue.
 
Last edited:
PlunkettsGhost said:
Who filmed the landing? Apparently this didn't appear an important question to the Chinese
Click to expand...
Agreed from what we can see so far, how was such camera control achieved, why no dust or shaking from such an obvious heavy landing??
Also I must agree with your criticism of the recorded footage presented from most of the missions, the images can hardly be taken seriously and are poorly explained from source.
Cheers!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest Threads

Popular Threads

Back
Top Bottom