Comments like the one i made are usually considered to be a joke. Thus not to be taken very seriously. (quite frankly hardly anyone cares about it) I can imagen you get fed up with people having a go at you, but be carefull not to lash out at everyone. In this case, me. It is undeserved.
I know it was a joke! you silly person! Thats why I said that Angelina jolie is ugly and weird...I joked too...sorry if you didn't realise that :(
5 posts is 3 responses, one strike of memory, and one new fact :)
Radical suggestion: You could of course say the whole thing in one post! Just [quote=] each person that you want to reply to, make the response, then add the new facts at the end or as you go along. From experience, it's more effective! :)
Perhaps - but its still gonna take up as much room and I can't be arsed with it - few other people will bother doing that just to 'save room' so I don't see why I should - eg peoples threads about middle names and rubbish like that and 'anyone about' :)
And you being such an open minded and forward thinking person- I'm disappointed! Forget what other people are doing, and be the best netiquette observer on the board!
5 posts is 3 responses, one strike of memory, and one new fact :)
Radical suggestion: You could of course say the whole thing in one post! Just [quote=] each person that you want to reply to, make the response, then add the new facts at the end or as you go along. From experience, it's more effective! :)
we're alright! thanks for sticking up for me though;)
as long as things remain disccusable there is no problem, i guess.
Perhaps - but its still gonna take up as much room and I can't be arsed with it - few other people will bother doing that just to 'save room' so I don't see why I should - eg peoples threads about middle names and rubbish like that and 'anyone about' :)
And you being such an open minded and forward thinking person- I'm disappointed! Forget what other people are doing, and be the best netiquette observer on the board!
What about you two? do you think that any of these things points to the moon landing being a hoax?
"Oh but look, the flag is moving in the picture - its rippling - theres no wind on the moon!"
"Look, you can see their footprints in the moon dust - theres not enough moisture (at all) on the moon to sustain a print!"
"Theres hardly any disturbance (burn marks, craters, spewen dust, underneath the rockets where it landed!"
Nope, i never ever thought the moonlanding to be a joke.
I see - well you know theres very little gravity on the moon, and thus no atmosphere (no wind or weather) - so don you find it odd that the flag is moving in the pictures?
also theres no marks from where it landed, and also theres footprints in the dust, even though there is no moisture on the moon to keep them like that - do they strike you as odd at all?
What about you two? do you think that any of these things points to the moon landing being a hoax?
"Oh but look, the flag is moving in the picture - its rippling - theres no wind on the moon!"
"Look, you can see their footprints in the moon dust - theres not enough moisture (at all) on the moon to sustain a print!"
"Theres hardly any disturbance (burn marks, craters, spewen dust, underneath the rockets where it landed!"
Nope, i never ever thought the moonlanding to be a joke.
I see - well you know theres very little gravity on the moon, and thus no atmosphere (no wind or weather) - so don you find it odd that the flag is moving in the pictures?
also theres no marks from where it landed, and also theres footprints in the dust, even though there is no moisture on the moon to keep them like that - do they strike you as odd at all?
You don't need moisture to sustain a print, but it depends on how long the print was present for, the weather conditions, land height etc. My old science teacher could argue this for extraordinary lengths of time.
- the flag was attached to a lightweight aluminium pole, very flexible. when they put the flag "down" the flag moved. And since there is no air capacitance, the flag moved longer then it would on earth.
- As for the disturbances on the moonsurface. Because the moonlander only used 25% of its power, traveled sideways and didn't stay at one place very long there are no disturbances.
- what also can be a clue, normally (on earth) the movement of the flag would be disturbed when one of the astronauts walked by, but since there is no air displacement the movement of the flag remains undisturbed.
My lack of knowing the right English expressions let me to "" a few discriptions.
What about you two? do you think that any of these things points to the moon landing being a hoax?
"Oh but look, the flag is moving in the picture - its rippling - theres no wind on the moon!"
"Look, you can see their footprints in the moon dust - theres not enough moisture (at all) on the moon to sustain a print!"
"Theres hardly any disturbance (burn marks, craters, spewen dust, underneath the rockets where it landed!"
Nope, i never ever thought the moonlanding to be a joke.
I see - well you know theres very little gravity on the moon, and thus no atmosphere (no wind or weather) - so don you find it odd that the flag is moving in the pictures?
also theres no marks from where it landed, and also theres footprints in the dust, even though there is no moisture on the moon to keep them like that - do they strike you as odd at all?
You don't need moisture to sustain a print, but it depends on how long the print was present for, the weather conditions, land height etc. My old science teacher could argue this for extraordinary lengths of time.
Precisely correct - it can be demonstrated using bicarbonate of soda which contains no moisture due to its high carbon presence, but still, a print will remain if you poured it on the floor and stepped in it :D
I watched a whole documentary on tv about the hoax of the moonlanding and I swear I am sooooooooo convinced it was all a pile of pooh! :-) The evidence is just too tarnished for my liking.
- the flag was attached to a lightweight aluminium pole, very flexible. when they put the flag "down" the flag moved. And since there is no "airresistance", the flag moved longer then it would on earth.
sort of :)more precisely, the flag was furled in storage, and the way it looks is due to the furl, and in two pictures taken several minutes apart, the flag is seen to move little, if at all - it moved a little at the start when he was hoisting it - thats all though
- As for the disturbances on the moonsurface. Because the moonlander only used 25% of its power, traveled sideways and didn't stay at one place very long there are no disturbances.
Sort of - but the dispute is where it lands - many people think there should be scorch marks etc, and note that there is lots of dust underneath the craft so (allegedly) it should have all been blown away. Not so - it landed in a vertical descent in its final position, and the pressure exerted by the exhausts and the engines on a planet with negligble gravity would acount for approximately 1/4 of a pound of weight on every square foot - not that big a deal!
Also, since there is no atmosphere, there is nothing to blow the dust very far away. Even if we were to pour flour on a table and step several steps away, and blow, the flour would move. Our breath can only travel about 6 inches, but its the breath that hits the air that moves the air in front of it. When theres no air, that can't happen - same with the exhausts :)
- what also can be a clue, normally (on earth) the movement of the flag would be disturbed when one of the astronauts walked by, but since there is no "movement of air" the movement of the flag remains undisturbed.
My lack of knowing the right English expressions let me to "" a few discriptions
That was cool though - well done:D (I know i'm too patrionising) :P
I watched a whole documentary on tv about the hoax of the moonlanding and I swear I am sooooooooo convinced it was all a pile of pooh! :-) The evidence is just too tarnished for my liking.
There is very little real scientific actual carefully thought out evidence that it was a hoax
To be hoenst I'm totally on the fence with this one cos i've seen and heard lots of bad and good examples of it being a hoax. however i do like pointing out how idiotic some people are - like with all of the above - all can be EASILY disproven - and many more!
