TRUMP SCIENCE ADVISOR DENIES APOLLO MOON LANDINGS EVER HAPPENED

Yes, I think properly designed multi layered insulation could help to slow down the rate of enery transfer. The scientists and engineers who worked on the Apollo LM knew that solar radiation would be a big problem and tried to find solutions for it. This has been a problem for the last 50 years since Apollo and after much experimentation satellite designers have found ways to mitigate the problem. The Goddard Space Flight Center's currently lists 2,271 satellites in orbit.

At the time of Apollo, space technology was in its infancy, but they did try their best - and here we have it right from the horse's mouth:

https://www.flickr.com/photos/jurvetson/6861117148

EDN Magazine interviewed Grumman’s Ross Bracco, one of 25 engineers who began development of the LEM, as it was first called:

“Still another major challenge Bracco and his team faced was the fact that the LEM was expected to land on the sunny side of the lunar surface, which meant an environmental temperature of 250°F and a shade temperature of -250°F. A low-cost technique was needed to insulate and protect the LEM's structural materials, including the landing feet. The team decided to use 12 to 18 layers of Kapton or aluminized Mylar material sandwiched together in a 70°F earth clean room and trap the air with a special sealing tape. This trapped air remained permanently at 70°F and was used in many areas of the LEM, including the cupped landing feet. The ‘foil’ around much of the LEM was made with 2- and 5-mil aluminized Kapton film.”

What is revealing here is that the engineers understood that they needed to use a multi layer of mylar to try and insulate the LM - but this was not the high tech stuff of 50 years later - and would not have been as efficient. And the idea of trapping 70°F air in the foil is complete nonsense.
How could the engineer who helped design the thing get the science so wrong?

 

How slow? You are cornered and know it. You have no idea what You are talking about. Your refusal to respond to the bolded questions and requests is cowardice.

Tell us all how a supposedly 250F crumpled layer of Mylar or Kapton, emitting 0.05 of its heat, manages to bring up the layer next to it, to a similar temperature. Then add 8 more layers!

The layers were given exit channels for the air to escape in vacuum. He identified the problem in early design and it was corrected.

 

What do I think about it? You should stop posting fake news.

 

I'm cornered!!? I'm cornered?!!

 

Laborious troll is very laborious:-

1.Tell us all how a supposedly 250F crumpled layer of Mylar or Kapton, emitting 0.05 of its heat, manages to bring up the layer next to it, to a similar temperature. Then add the required number of more layers as per the specification.
2.The LM had cooling and it did not fail, why is your straw man even relevant?
3. Point me to Al Bean's thermal engineering training in a 1955 degree.
4. How long exactly are you claiming it will be before the oxygen interior reaches maximum temperature? Provide figures,
5. How do unmanned satellites and other vehicles keep cool in space for years?

Cornered, awaiting answers to simple points, that for some reason you can't supply.

How slow! Cornered.

 

You have made numerous statements in this thread regarding the Stefan-Boltzmann law and emissivity - and you have been proven wrong about them:

You finally even admitted that you were wrong here:

Nice try Beta, but no cigar...

 

Obfuscation. Cornered.

Objects in the Sun are not all flat. The LM has surfaces in shade that are able to conduct and radiate some of their heat away. The only mistake I have made is fully explaining my point. Something which dishonest conspiracy theorists latch onto to create yet another straw man. Now coward, answer the points made.

 

These pro-Apollo posters can obfuscate endlessly. Check out this forum.
http://www.apollohoax.net/forum/index.php?board=3.0

If they just speak to each other in front of viewers who haven't seen the hoax evidence, they can have a measure of success. They avoid the clearest anomalies and the viewers don't know about them. When someone posts a clear anomaly that's too clear to obfuscate, they still obfuscate away and have the attitude that they have the upper hand. There is a point though at which an anomaly is so clear that sophistry simply becomes ineffective such as this one,...
http://www.apollohoax.net/forum/index.php?topic=1145.0

...or this one.
http://www.apollohoax.net/forum/index.php?topic=993.15
(reply #21)

They can obfuscate all they want and do the victory dance all they want but their success rate at swaying the viewers is going to be quite low as something lame said in an authoritative patronizing way is still lame. What the viewers end up thinking is the only thing that matters. Their attitudes are irrelevant.

 

What you ignore is the evidence proves you wrong.

It is funny how you present links to other threads in which you were crushed and debunked.

The evidence flat out proves you wrong.

There is no evidence that the lunar landings were a hoax.

You know this is true

 

Yes, check out where the insane 10 year spammer gets his backside kicked.

Your insanity knows no bounds. You got your argument soundly put in its place. Your opinion is not evidence, your intuition is crap and your obsession is frightening. I totally debunked this ludicrous crap years ago. You pretty much jumped up and down like a baby and avoided my response:-

http://debunking-a-moron.blogspot.co.uk/2011/06/apollo-11-michael-collins-jacket.html

And the insanity continues with yet more spam. How many more times will you post this and ignore all responses? Where is your "trotting" video? It's either electrostatic discharge, ground vibration, kicked soil or an artefact from the video. All arguments have been presented to you and ignored.

What viewers? Where are these mysterious viewers you continually refer to? Your attitude is the irrelevant thing, as is your opinion on this matter.
What now? My so called credibility from agreeing with Jay Windley on another of your idiotic observations, or my debunking the stupid Chinese faked their spacewalk claim! Every time you get on the internet, you leave a mess of spammed madness. Get a life.

 

I beg to differ.
http://www.politicalforum.com/index...andings-ever-happened.512081/#post-1067871432

 

You did not differ you just proved my post and demonstrated you have no evidence and were crushed debunked and proven wrong on that thread

 

I actually find it amusing where he continually does this. It is delusion of the weirdest kind that he actually thinks he won the debate when he gets so badly taken apart.

After all these years, anyone who thinks the Apollo missions were faked is a moron.

 

Debunked spam.

http://debunking-a-moron.blogspot.co.uk

 

I say you lost this debate by saying lame things.
http://www.politicalforum.com/index...-move-so-it-was-obviously-in-a-studio.362999/

You destroyed your credibility by saying that the movement of the Apollo flag could not be duplicated on earth even though anyone can try it and see that it can.
http://www.politicalforum.com/index...-apollo-15-flag.438617/page-2#post-1065710796

I think most viewers will just look at the evidence and won't consider your authoritative patronizing attitude.

 

I don't care what you say. Your opinion is irrelevant, as are you.

Ten years later and this liar still hasn't posted his "trotting" video.

Most viewers who look at all the actual evidence and responses will come to the conclusion that you are insane. You linked to a spam and off topic post within this thread, that linked to a closed version of a thread. One of 3 identical threads on this forum!

My response:-

After the ass whooping you received in the first identical thread here:-

http://www.politicalforum.com/moon-landing/190138-apollo-moon-missions-were-faked-studio.html

You created a duplicate thread and got another dose.

http://www.politicalforum.com/moon-landing/279336-apollo-moon-missions-were-faked-studio.html

Then you feel the need to repeat this same thread for the 3rd time, so you can go back to your basketball thread and whinge about how you are being censored.

You are quite mad.

All the above spammed post taken apart here:-
http://debunking-a-moron.blogspot.co.uk/

 

That was when I thought the first and then the second thread had been deleted as they were out-of-sight (on the old system). I hadn`t seen the option of looking at old stuff that was at the bottom of the page.

 

So you admit you are either very stupid or a liar!

 

I never said I was observant. Is being unobservant and absent-minded the same as stupid? You seem to be groping for anything you can use against me.

You can't make those lame things you said disappear.


(2:35 time mark)


Anyone can hang a piece of cloth from a ceiling light and trot by it at a forty five degree angle and duplicate the movement of the Apollo flag and see that you are full-of-it. I don't need to make a video.

 

And any five year old can see that the astronaut simply touched the flag as he walked by it.

You have shown no evidence of anything

You are not being observant

 

I use your own obvious shortcomings. You are not observant about anything when it comes to responses. Your absent mindedness results in you accidentally posting the same thread hundreds of times! You have no integrity whatsoever. You very often avoid entire posts and use idiotic "credibility tests" as a means to avoid entire websites. The Clavius website is very well written and destroys pretty much every one of your claims. My blog deals directly with nearly all of your wall of spam. You fail every time to respond to the points made and concentrate exclusively on 4 things. Apollo 15, Collins' jacket, Chinese spacewalk and the transportation of soil. You constantly refer to your spam post, but never do you acknowledge responses to it away from the four points listed.

Spam. Nothing I have said is "lame". When somebody like you is my judge, everything you say is irrelevant and can be dismissed!

Anyone except you it seems!



Demonstrating how air moves with an approaching object. Notice that the first movement is towards the approaching item. The passing object creates a wake that actually pulls the fabric towards it. However, when the object approaches the fabric in a path that impacts it, the air wake will be in a direction towards that fabric and push it away.

Whichever way you chose, neither will match the viewpoint of the serial forum spammer known as Cosmored/Scott/Fatfreddy88

http://debunking-a-moron.blogspot.co.uk/

 

You didn't duplicate the exact scenario of the Apollo clip. The astronaut trots by the flag. He doesn't trot under it. You didn't duplicate the exact scenario because you knew the movement would be the same as that of the Apollo clip.

 

I suppose being unobservant helps you to stay with your insane claims. If you flip the ceiling light 90 degrees it is exactly the same! I refer you to above where I suggested you were stupid because you couldn't work out a simple forum display function.

I reiterate, anyone but you it seems. If this simple display is so obvious, how come, in 10 years you haven't put a simple video up? Jarrah White ran past his flag and it didn't move at all until he was level with it. I dropped a book onto a plastic bag and it moved when the book was inches away from it, not 6 feet.

 

Quite ironic, he does exactly what I said in his next post!

 

Viewers - start reading here.
http://www.politicalforum.com/index...-apollo-15-flag.438617/page-2#post-1065717660