Originally posted by shavixmirTake a look at this site:
What about rhyolite?
That's a vulcanic rock with very little water content...
http://www.eos.ubc.ca/public/resources/concepts/igneous/magma/magcont.html
It doesn't list the water content directly but shows Rhyolite to
be less viscous due to higher water content, the lowest density
of the lot in the graph.
Originally posted by Coconuthow can there be independent confirmation? You really don't know
I haven't come to a 100% conclusion myself, I just know that a lot of effort has been put into collecting evidence against it.
And from that website I give you this:
Q: What about the moon rocks?
A: NASA chief scientist James Garvin recently appeared on C-SPAN (4-17-2005.) A viewer called in for the live, audience response, program. He stated tha ...[text shortened]... vilian to be in possession of a moon rock, so how can there truly be independent verification?)
much about the space program do you? You perhaps may not have
heard that institutions all around the globe are given pieces of
this rock for independent analysis. These people are world experts
on geology and would have found without a doubt, evidence these
rocks were faked. How can you denigrate the hero's who died on
the Apollo? You think all those geological geniuses could be fooled
into thinking moonrocks were just meteorites?
You then denigrate the intelligence of some extremely smart dudes.
You also wildly overestimate the abilities of the NASA technology
of that time, it was the 1960's for gods sake, we couldn't even
make a decent computer then much less fake a moon rock.
I know for a fact computers were dumb at the time, we had
computers at Goddard, I had two hours a day computer time assigned
to me because if they didn't show usage the money dudes would pull
the comps out. They were so primitive, I had to enter words with
a 16 lever switch, one switch for each bit! Set 16 switches, hit the
enter key and there you have it, ONE byte entered. Think about
that, if its possible for you to do that, how could you fake anything
with nothing in the way of computers? God you are naive.
i don't know why we have these nay sayers, stating that we never landed on the moon, so what the saturn V rocket was just an expensive firework. NO stop jumping on the bandwagon of the few doubters that like to stir up the s**t. the space program is a vital part of our human exsistance and long may it continue
Originally posted by sonhousehow were we so successful in going 240,000 miles away when we only hover around 400 miles these days with the stupidness of NASA technology?
how can there be independent confirmation? You really don't know
much about the space program do you? You perhaps may not have
heard that institutions all around the globe are given pieces of
this rock for independent analysis. These people are world experts
on geology and would have found without a doubt, evidence these
rocks were faked. How can you ...[text shortened]... o do that, how could you fake anything
with nothing in the way of computers? God you are naive.
That is a freaking long way. I'm sorry, but it's just easier for me to believe it was faked here than we sent people that far into space. Especially with the radiation field supposedly surrounding earth. I really hope I'm wrong. I hope it is possible to go to the moon and beyond.
Why don't we have video of people jumping 10 feet in the air? All we have is footage of people hopping around in a seemingly low-gravity area, but put the video on double speed, and it looks like someone in a suit jumping with earth gravity.
Right now on the NASA channel they are talking about the coming
mars orbiter, a 1200 MEGAPIXEL half meter wide telescope camera!
It will be able to focus down to one foot per pixel on the surface of
mars, 5 times the resolution of any other camera to go to mars.
It will launch this month and get to mars next march and go into
a highly elliptical orbit and use the mars atmosphere to slow down
the craft over 500 orbits(!) to make a 200 mile high circular orbit. Go
to the site listed in the first post here and you will see the interview
in real time.
Originally posted by sonhouseAh yes, but take a peek here:
Take a look at this site:
http://www.eos.ubc.ca/public/resources/concepts/igneous/magma/magcont.html
It doesn't list the water content directly but shows Rhyolite to
be less viscous due to higher water content, the lowest density
of the lot in the graph.
http://www.terrapub.co.jp/journals/EPS/abstract/5605/56050517.html
It clearly states there are 2 different sorts of Rhyolite. One containing more water than the other!
Originally posted by shavixmirI couldn't access that site, authentation required, maybe later I can
Ah yes, but take a peek here:
http://www.terrapub.co.jp/journals/EPS/abstract/5605/56050517.html
It clearly states there are 2 different sorts of Rhyolite. One containing more water than the other!
get in. The main point about this rock is there are no rocks on earth
with anything like the water content of lunar regolith.
There may be actual ice deposits near the poles of the moon that
are always in the dark that could have water ice but the moon
seems to have been made by a mars sized planet crashing into the
earth billions of years ago when earth was new and the resulting
crash sent a huge a cloud of debris in orbit and most of the water
totally evaporated so there was not much water left to allow water
to even be locked up in mineralization.
Originally posted by CoconutIf you analyze the video of the lunar astronauts you see dust
how were we so successful in going 240,000 miles away when we only hover around 400 miles these days with the stupidness of NASA technology?
That is a freaking long way. I'm sorry, but it's just easier for me to believe it was faked here than we sent people that far into space. Especially with the radiation field supposedly surrounding earth. I really h ...[text shortened]... t put the video on double speed, and it looks like someone in a suit jumping with earth gravity.
puffing up from their feet when they walk. the path the dust takes
is what happens in a vacuum at 1/6th gravity. That alone was the
clincher for me when I first saw the images. That could not have
been faked by the technology of the time. You seem to be forgetting
this all happened nearly 40 years ago. There was no video simulators
at that time. They could no more have faked that video than
have gone on to mars at that time. They went to the moon and
that is a solid fact, and there will be a lot of idiots running around
with egg on their face when the landing sites are imaged and you
can see the footprints. Thats the only clincher left for the a ss holes
who hate science in the first place and go about trying to make
a living off self generated conspiracy theories. These are nut cases
dressed as human.
Originally posted by sonhouseAnd all planets formed from dust after the big bang, and our lucky rock was a perfect fit around the sun, with a perfect atmosphere. And water appeared. Then against 1 to 10^450 odds (as if the odds of getting this far aren't already impossible), proteins linked together to make a cell.
the moon seems to have been made by a mars sized planet crashing into the earth billions of years ago when earth was new and the resulting crash sent a huge a cloud of debris in orbit.
And the rest is history, or prehistoric, or fiction...
Originally posted by CoconutMy job is visual fx. It would be a chore to fake the landing now, impossible at the time.. You have seen space movies from this era?
Infinity times more than any other living creature. Mankind is so far advanced that evolution can not be true. We are just so far ahead of anything else proven to have existed.
speech aside, we never made it to the moon, so how could we make it to mars? That's a long ways away. www.moonmovie.com
speech aside, humans make a freaking lot of stuff.
Cheers
Scott
Originally posted by CoconutGo read the huge number of threads on evolution in the spirituality forum. Read posts by frogstomp, LemonJello, telerion, myself and many others. Then you will realise just how little you actually understand about evolution.
And all planets formed from dust after the big bang, and our lucky rock was a perfect fit around the sun, with a perfect atmosphere. And water appeared. Then against 1 to 10^450 odds (as if the odds of getting this far aren't already impossible), proteins linked together to make a cell.
And the rest is history, or prehistoric, or fiction...