TRUMP SCIENCE ADVISOR DENIES APOLLO MOON LANDINGS EVER HAPPENED

Here's something else about the stars issue.

http://www.aulis.com/edgar_mitchell.htm
(excerpt)
----------------------------------------------
I had previously attended the 2010 and 2011 Autographica shows as part of my long term study in connection with the prevailing historical record, as asserted by NASA, with particular attention to the Apollo missions. Ed Mitchell started his speech on Sunday 14 October in a very confident and exuberant manner, with no trace of the nervous, staccato cough that frequently characterises the ending of his sentences.

Dr Mitchell expounded to the large audience about how his life had been transformed by the voyage to the Moon on Apollo 14. Edgar explained that as the vehicle revolved to allow solar cooling: he was astounded by the alternating view of the Sun, the Earth and above all the incredible 'heavenly' view of the stars.

Dr Mitchell explained that the stars were 'magnificent', and described them as being 'ten times brighter' than when observed from Earth. In fact he credited this vista with changing his life, as the euphoric effect led him to engage in the pursuit of, among other things, Eastern philosophic studies.
----------------------------------------------

I know an article saying someone said something is not proof that he really said it but I'm posting this anyway. Maybe someone can link to something to verify or disprove it.

 

I think the posters here who defend the official story are paid sophists* who know the missions were faked as well as the hoax-believers do.

*
http://www.whale.to/m/disin.html
https://openheartedrebel.com/2012/0...-confessions-of-a-paid-disinformation-poster/

 

There is something weird going on, there's no doubt about it; part of it is an irrational admiration for anyone who, offering not a whit of evidence of it whatsoever, claims to be an 'expert' on something or other, and especially anything to do with 'space, the final frontier' and all that crap, and the apparent determination to believe it, again without the evidence. I have a theory that mankind is inexplicably becoming childlike. I mean look at how grown men behave at sporting events for example, with the face-painting, the jumping up and down if a score is made, the pointing to 'heaven', and the high-5ing and group hugging and squirting each other with champagne? I mean the list just goes on and on. Children are gullible, so maybe I'm on the right track.

 

What you think is irrelevant. You are a serial forum spammer who shows behaviour that is quite insane. Only very ignorant people can contemplate the lunar landings as being faked. Nobody who defends Apollo believes it to be faked. It is an even more ridiculous claim based on your irrational and illogical misconceptions.

 

There is no stars issue.

He has made similar overtures elsewhere. Most of his viewing were made on the shaded side of the Moon. But after leaving the Moon, he spent a lot of his time contemplating his existence and looking out the window. Sounds perfectly reasonable, though the stars luminosity is somewhat exaggerated.

2. Seeing stars with a rotating cabin, in cis-lunar space, with Sunlight, Earthlight, Moonlight and internal cabin light is very difficult.

If the position of the Sun and Earth is mainly in the same hemisphere, the cabin lights dimmed, there is no reason why stars could not be viewed. Always, the viewing circumstances and inclination are the relevant variables.

 

I don't know - the only way the LM could get rid of solar energy on the moon or in space would be by the very inefficient process of radiation. On an asphalt parking lot the LM would have both radiation and convection to convect away heat - convection being the most efficient way to get rid of the heat.

So I think a case could be made that the LM parked in the parking lot would have a more efficient heat transfer than if it was in a vacuum AND WOULD ACTUALLY STAY COOLER ON THE PARKING LOT! than if it were in space.

 

Nonsense! The side facing the Sun can conduct heat to areas connected to it and the internal temperature has air conditioning. Note also that the gaps between layers are also vacuum and subject to only radiated heat.

I'm trying very hard to placate your inept claims but it is becoming very laborious. The Earth based LM has heat from all four sides. Direct sunlight from one half. In addition to convected heat from the air, there would be reflected and further convected heat from buildings and the surface. The external heat would reach an equilibrium with the air around, followed by conducting heat internally.

I don't actually care either way which situation would get hotter, but it's completely academic, since the internal cooling system only works in a vacuum anyway. As stated, on the Moon, there is also only radiated heat between the insulation layers, the hull and the equipment racks. If you actually had a point rather than a poor opinion, now would be the time to break a nauseating habit and present the damn thing!

 

C'mon Beta, we are talking about getting rid of the solar heat buildup on the LEM. The only conduction would be a tiny amount through the foot pads; and that would only happen on the lunar surface - in space, no conduction to anywhere...

 

You are either completely ignorant of the LM design or are just acting the fool. Any heat that managed to even penetrate the micro-meteorite shielding, the outer thermal layers and strike the aluminum hull would conduct around the craft. Aluminum is a very strong conductor of heat.

You haven't even proven that radiated heat would get through the shielding! You have basically made lots of noise and said nothing significant. I asked you to make your point and back it up. Always you fail to do this. The LM cooling was there to deal with electrical and body heat. The shielding and hull was perfectly designed to stop heat build up from the Sun.

 

We are talking about external conduction NOT internal conduction. I thought you would have realized that...

 

"We"? Don't include me in your tirade of ignorance. You are a troll and this is you trolling.

Make a point and back it up with something other than your very mindless opinion.

 

Do you think Alan Bean is telling the truth here:

Bart Sibrel: If the LEM didn't have climate control and had air in it, would it be hot or cold without the climate control?

Alan Bean: If the lunar module is sitting in the sun, which it always is, then slowly but surely that temperature inside is going to go up to 250 degrees fahrenheit, and you aint going to make it, because you're going to cook long before that.

 

Why would Al Bean have an accurate temperature assessment? He is accurate in that as the Sun rises high in the sky, slowly the shielding will be less effective. But he was asked to say what would happen if the climate control failed! It didn't. The body heat and equipment would send the internal temperature up.

I love the way you ask if he is lying when he is offering his opinion. No he isn't lying, he's just not quite right.

I think they cover this quite well on this page:-

http://apollohoax.proboards.com/thread/2042/lm-air-conditioning-operated-batteries?page=2

Sibrel is a lying ass SOB. His film is heavily edited and there is no guarantee he didn't just misrepresent the context of the question.

Now I ask again, what is your point? The air con didn't fail, the science works. You make noise and nothing else.

 

Are you saying Alan Bean would not have known the capabilities of his spacecraft? He would not have known the consequences of a power failure?

Alan LaVern Bean (born March 15, 1932), (CAPT, USN, Ret.), is an American former naval officer and Naval Aviator, aeronautical engineer, test pilot, and NASA astronaut

Awards and honors:
Navy Astronaut Wings
Navy Distinguished Service Medal (2x)
NASA Distinguished Service Medal (2x)
Rear Admiral William S. Parsons Award for Scientific and Technical Progress
University of Texas Distinguished Alumnus Award and Distinguished Engineering Graduate Award
Godfrey L. Cabot Award
National Academy of Television Arts and Sciences Trustees Award
Texas Press Associations Man of the Year Award for 1969
City of Chicago Gold Medal
Robert J. Collier Trophy for 1973
Federation Aeronautique Internationale Yuri Gagarin Gold Medal for 1973
V. M. Komarov Diploma for 1973 (1974)
Dr. Robert H. Goddard Memorial Trophy for 1975 (1975)
AIAA Octave Chanute Award for 1975 (1975)
AAS Flight Achievement Award for 1974 (1975)
Inducted into the International Space Hall of Fame in 1983
Inducted into the U.S. Astronaut Hall of Fame in 1997
Enshrined into the National Aviation Hall of Fame for 2010

 

No, he knew the capabilities and the consequences, just not the temperature it would attain and how quickly. Kindly point me to his thermal engineering training. The inside of a vehicle on Earth will reach 150 degrees maybe after a few hours with atmosphere. People spend time in saunas at 230 degrees. Of course he's wrong! Nobody would "cook" and the exterior shielding would make the temperature increase very slow.

The cooling system didn't fail, so your increasingly frantic fumblings mean nothing. Now get to the damn point!

 

To calculate the temperature of an object heated by the sun at a distance of the earth/moon from the sun we can use the Stefan-Boltzmann law:

P/A = sigma T^4 W/m2

This law enables us to estimate the temperature T of such an object, assuming that we know the power per unit area of the sun falling on the object. From direct measurement, we know that P/A for the sun at this distance = 1,360 W/m^2.

We also know that
sigma = 5.67 x 10^-8 W/(m2 K4).

So, 1360 W/m^2 = 5.67 x 10^-8 x T^4 W/(m2 K4)

Solving for T, we get T = 394 K

Thus, the nominal temperature of an object, in space and in sunlight, is 394 K; and this equals 250 degrees F - so it looks like ole' Alan Bean knows his thermodynamics!

 

Al Bean knew the maximum temperature of the lunar surface and assumed it applied to the internal of the vehicle - he was mistaken. Well done for working out how to cut and paste some figures. Not so well done that you understand none of them! The Stefan-Boltzmann law applies to black bodies that perfectly absorb all wavelengths.

http://whatis.techtarget.com/definition/Stefan-Boltzmann-constant

"The Stefan-Boltzmann constant, symbolized by the lowercase Greek letter sigma ( ), is a physical constant involving black body radiation. A black body, also called an ideal radiator, is an object that radiates or absorbs energy with perfect efficiency at all electromagnetic wavelengths. The constant defines the power per unit area emitted by a black body as a function of its thermodynamic temperature ."

Now you've blundered into the world of physics, factor in the emissivity of the external reflective surfaces, the micro-meteor shielding, the aluminum hull and the internal equipment. We're only really concerned with the IR wavelength. Try this second equation(with the emissivity less than a perfect 1):-

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/thermo/stefan.html

Here is some extra information. It is assumed that a black body has an emissivity of 1. Aluminum has somewhere around 0.09 depending how polished it is, Mylar a little less at 0.04 (kapton tape is similar to mylar). As advised before, you can factor in the heating power of the exterior shielding from radiated heat onto the inner hull, then onto the inner equipment and finally to the oxygen in the crew compartment. Then you can factor in that the Sun is only striking about 25% of the LM directly and a further 25% with incident radiation. Since all the metals used in the design are very good conductors, before you calculate the radiating effect of each of them inwards, calculate the conductivity to cooler parts of the continuous and linked layers in the shade.

On second thoughts, you forget about all that and go and bug someone else!

 

The heavenly bodies move on an 8 spoke wheel.

 

I don' stink so ...

 

You stink the place out with your inept grasp of reading, geology and basic thermal dynamics. Every time you post you show how ignorant you are, then avoid responding in favour of full trolling.

Quite clearly you made a stupid error in your last post. Cowardly though, and as usual, you will not be man enough to admit it.

 

lol, the President is a Dotard

 

Doesn't look too reflective to me...

 

We've already established that your personal views, understanding and logic are pitiful. You seem able to find things on Google, albeit material that you dont understand or ridiculous conspiracy crap; how come you can't find assembly images of the LM?
Because it never occurs to you to attempt to disprove your own ridiculous claims:-



On the ascent stage the reflective foil was underneath the meteorite shielding.

Question for you to avoid. How do unmanned satellites and other vehicles keep cool in space for years?

 

Not too reflective here either...

 

A different picture of a lunar module on the Moon, and the same answer.

It seems the troll has nothing better to do than be a troll. I'm building a post of all the different times you've screwed up and lied. You think you can just ignore it and it goes away. Why not tell everyone about Stefan-Boltzmann's constant regarding black bodies and how it relates to mylar?

How do unmanned satellites and other vehicles keep cool in space for years?