Re: for BMJ and all other parochial lot re moon landing



On Fri, 3 Aug 2006, Kamal R. Prasad wrote:


BMJ wrote:
Joseph the Skeptic wrote:
Kamal R. Prasad wrote:


.The flag couldn't have
fluttered in an air-less atmosphere. At the most, it would have been
drooping.


An excellent example of why I should have ignored your post. Kamal,

I am not interested in forcing my opinion down anybody's throat.

On the contrary: you have submitted several times in the last year the idea that the moonshot never took place. You stated recently that you agreed with this conclusion. I had a serious look at those images you sent me. I spent maybe 1-2 hours using Google to examine a few websites on this subject and in reading your posts and composing my posts. With my scientific background and familiarity with photography, physics, etc., I did not find anything seriously inconsistent with the majority understanding that this event really did take place (the only exception might be, at most, the one sequence of the LM ascending which could have been a "visual aid" produced on a stage for the benefit of totally innocent PR purposes) and you did not say from where or who these images came from and thus all the images you sent me could be fake, too!

this point has already been addressed, and you deal with that
inconvenient reality by doing what so many other netloons have done

how can you categorize a person with a difference of opinion as stupid?
Isn't one entitled to think different? I just posed questions about the
landing -but haven't dismissed the landing as a fake.

You said, several times, farther in the past, that "it was a fake because of technical reasons." Now it is OK with me if you want to revise your opinion or if you want to express some level of doubt or express some difficulty in understanding or even ask for responses to questions (and I gave my responses, my qualifications, and speculations). But don't try to say, now, that you "haven't dismissed the landing as a fake" because you actually did declare in the past that it was a fake and you talked about technical reasons. In addition, there is this crazy idea showing up in Google searches that because there has not been any more moon landings in the last 35-40 years, that therefore, the first one was a fake. From all that I ever saw, that project was a very very expensive and risky and complicated project. I am not at all surprised, and considering that the emphasis (at least to me) on shuttle flights would be more practical (since it could place into orbit more robot scientific instruments per budget buck, and even do commercial satellite launches and repairs) and much cheaper robot missions, that plans for more moonshots were abandoned.

before you - by developing a convenient case of amnesia.


I am not at all uncomfortable with the landing having taken place.

Are you sure? What changed your mind? Sure seems like a switch in thinking to me. You sure had a lot of doubt in the past.

There is no sense in trying to reason with somebody like you.

you don't need to reason with me or convince me of it coz I am not all
that religious about concluding whether it did or did not take place.

I'll be quiet about this one.

Regrettably, Google does not offer killfiles; if it did, I'd put you in
mine. But I can have the sense to ignore you in the future, as you post
on this and all other topics.


You could do without a killfile, meaning Im not interested in harassing
anyone with my posts. There was no bait from my side -just questions
for which i wanted answers. All of the questions that I received were
from the US -and I am outside the US.

Well, I hope you might someday be more satisfied with space project reports from all countries that spend signficant budgets on them. Farther in the past, the old USSR could be criticised for one thing: keeping its space project failures a big secret from everyone. We (the USA) had some big failures, too (many deaths [old oxygen fire that burned 3 guys to death] on the ground, and two shuttle destructions [on takeoff and re-entry], to name the more serious ones).


* PLONK *


This issue's been discussed time and again on the various space
newsgroups I subscribe to. The moon landing hoax disciples are best
ignored as there's no reasoning with them.

It turns out that Im trying to reason if it did take place and how the
shots have so many questions around them.

Fine. I think it is OK to ask for some opinions about anything and those opinions. I gave my opinions, and, if you paid attention, I'm sure I never said that it was absolutely true that US guys really landed on the
moon; I just have such little doubt because there is such a large body of
evidence that they really did. Its too big of a project and too public of a project. If it was a secret CIA mission, or like the U-2 spy plane flight over the Soviet Union that got shot down and our president Eisenhour said it was a simple, poor weather research plane that accidentally flew off course and the next day the Soviet government shows pictures of the crashed plane, the pictures of the spy camera, the pilot still alive, and they had the court case on Soviet television for months, then its better to just face the truth and not lie. So, I am not afraid to talk about failures and lies even from my own government. I don't want to be part of any life or job where I have to limit my thinking to political or religious dogma. That is why I went into science.

But the wise ones wouldn't
want to waste their time doing so coz they just voted to categorize me
as a moose.

To me, you are not a moose. You are not stupid. You do know some things. But, at least if you have one view and some other people have another view, then maybe you need some time to think about the difference. However, there is nothing wrong--and it is polite, too--to just say "Let me think about this some more" or "I need some time to think about this."

Today, I think differently about a few things than I thought about the same things 10-20-30 years ago. Am I right, now, and wrong back then? Or, vice versa? OK, I'll say there is very little truth in the world, and just a little more fact, and a whole lot of opinions, viewpoints, misunderstandings, dogma, and quite a bit of stupidity, too (my idea is our US war in Iraq is stupid, and I had that idea since before it started).

Its actually not much different from rednecks categorizing
their competition in India as incompetent so that they can retain high
paying jobs. The bad news for such people is that their vote doesn't
count as much as evidence does.

I've read a lot of the "hate" posts over on a.c.c over the last few years, myself. First, you need to understand that when you have anything taken away from a person (their job, career, a theft, we even have crime in the USA where a wife or husband gets killed somehow), then that person is going to be mad. I, myself, am mad about a few things in life. Second, I've read a lot of posts authored by Indians who have no hesitation to taunt and tease all these US guys who lost their jobs and are mad; those Indians are not helping the situation, either. They are making it worse.

I blame both the US CEOs and I also blame the India lobby, just like there are lobbys all over the world, trying to get business, money, military aid, or some other favor or deed from the USA just because we are big, have money, and sometimes fight some wars for good reasons (eg. WWII and Kuwait). So, don't look at all of life as if India is nothing but heaven and the USA is nothing but hell. I have read a few books on economics and one on globalization by a guy who is _for_ globalization but he is an old guy who studied it all his life and he's not sure it will work. Now, I am reading about a backlash in China: many people there are now protesting the selling of Chinese companies to foreigners (just like in the US, some people did not want to sell an oil company to China, or a port administration to Dubai). And, there are going to be more people who lose their jobs and businesses in the USA. And, a lot of Chinese farmers are not happy with everything in China, either.

Even if, say, it was
possible to take pictures of the landing sites with a telescope, they're
bound to claim that it was faked.


*they* doesn't necessary include me. I have dealt with cameras
sufficiently to know that a remote timed shot is v difficult to explain
-but if it can be taken by a person, that would be easier to explain.

I have dealt with cameras, too. To me, its not a big deal.

Does the technology to take a shot by a telescope from earth of 2 men
on the moon exist or existed then? I doubt it.

In my opinion, based on telescope resolution and atmospheric disturband, there could not be enough resolution to take pictures from the earth of 2 guys on the moon.

Some of them know no shame. A few years ago, one, a chap named Bart
Sibrel, cornered Buzz Aldrin and badgered him to admit that he was part
of the grand conspiracy. Take a look at websites such as:

http://www.csicop.org/articles/20021018-aldrin/
http://www.insideksc.cjb.net:8081/moonshot/punch.htm

not a v scientific explanation - really.

Fine, you guys can keep arguing about the moonshot. I'm about tired of reading and talking about this problem.

[snip]
regards
-kamal


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: VMPC isnt free
    ... starts as a beginner who can't yet do things that a profi ... This is where us amateurs lose out. ... > Of course unless one of the few regular pros posts about it you'll never ... one's opinions in very objective/precise/pertinent/logical ...
    (sci.crypt)
  • Re: Rameaus legacy
    ... And this is exactly what I am saying. ... I give you a very honest ... evaluation of what I see in your posts and replies and exactly why I ... I have challenged opinions that were just wrong and I have ...
    (rec.music.theory)
  • Re: Y&R: Jack Abbott
    ... ignore the parts of my posts that don't suit your beef with me? ... That we should all just not have any reaction to ... So I should curtail my opinions because of how they affect *you*? ... that's just complaining for the sake of complaining. ...
    (rec.arts.tv.soaps.cbs)
  • Re: Found a pic of Keefy Adams
    ... of validity to your posts. ... a passion for what he does that will lend further credence to any ... Especially when that person's opinions are related to ... that discourages new posters from contributing. ...
    (alt.guitar)
  • Re: Hello to the group
    ... I've been a student since August, and have enjoyed many of the posts ... My instructor says I need to hang in there, ... I understood the dynamics of landing, ...
    (rec.aviation.student)