- In the spirit of celtic magic: Where are the embedded links and citations? Archived Message
Posted by Shyaku
on July 28, 2019, 5:36 pm, in reply to "Been having a laff at one of those dorks who KNOWS BEYOND DOUBT that a certain thing actually happen"
|
To a poet, playright or thespian, polemics carry equal weight to a piece of writing that cites sources. Wikpedia cites sources for the reader to follow. In its entirety it seems it is dismissed (trashed) with mocking polemics. If this piece of writing had embedded links, I could attempt to study it. I scanned as far as page "X" but I could not see any. As far as what was written, I did not read past the first page for the above reason. The first part, about the TV coverage being transmitted off a monitor was because the first mission had slow scan TV, which takes up less bandwidth. I actually had some experience with slow scan TV in the 1970s. It really does exist, the same way the US had 525 lines and Europe had 625 lines at the same time. It is (or was) hard to convert electronically. In general, I wonder what you think is not faked. I assume all of NASA's apparent shining successes must be faked by virtue of their seeming improbability. Maybe all commercial airline flights are faked too, whose safety record is almost unbelievable (I actually cannot believe anything could possibly be so safe given the amount of airline traffic. Maybe there are commercial airliner crashes all the time that are omitted from the news?) It seems Voyager 2, the robotic craft that flew past Mars, Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus and Neptune and is now in interstellar space - was faked because all these planets are like pinpricks in space. All those Mars rovers? The recent mission to Pluto was fake perhaps? Maybe the A-bomb was a fake? How could there possibly be so much energy in a tiny lump of metal to wipe out an entire city? And how could there be so much energy in a hydrogen bomb? Hydrogen is flammable, but not THAT explosive, right? How is it possible to pack all that computing power into an iphone? To make wires so tiny they are just a few atoms wide? I mean cmon! Do carbon nanotubes really exist? I think people really should put up or shut up. If you think everything you can't grasp with your five senses (or at least the stuff you can't use personally, as much as you could have used the welfare handouts) must be fake or magic, just be honest about it. If you want to tear down people's achievements, at least present an argument that someone can study. Not just polemics. Polemics are worth glancing through to. Find amusing turns of phrase, but when criticizing such a massive effort, don't you think it needs argument or debate? My working experience with things which seem miraculous are that they are actually easier than they appear. A card trick. Cutting the woman in half. All that stuff is pretty easy to grasp once you know how they do it. Flying a plane seems like a job for a hero, but it is almost foolproof. My feeling - and its only a feeling - is that many parts of the moon mission were easier than anticipated. Once you are in a vacuum where the perfection of Newtonian physics applies, things are pretty predictable. The hard part is getting in and out of the earth's atmosphere, which really is difficult to model. Flying through the van allen belts at 25000 mph takes an hour. Flying through the most dangerous part takes 10 min. And the part about leaving the earths atmosphere and re-entry was always risky, and was addressed much earlier than the Apollo program. Regards, Shyaku |