- Re: Shy, the more recent robotic missions that you list probably did/are happening in reality, because Archived Message
Posted by Shyaku
on July 30, 2019, 2:35 pm, in reply to "Shy, the more recent robotic missions that you list probably did/are happening in reality, because"
|
Yes, its a reasonable point about not really knowing whether humans can survive in deep space, though actually I fail to see why Elon Musk would be putting his money behind human space travel if this were a known issue. Or why other countries would now be talking about it. Moreover, if this were a concern, why not send a dog? First dog on the moon? :-) There is a history of sending animals into space after all. The difficulties in this topic are: (A) Currently nobody can prove anything because nobody can go and take a loot, though it seems reasonable to hedge your bets for a few years until people inevitably try this again, and/or until they take pictures of the official landing sites from space. Its not just one side that has to provide the proof after all. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence on both sides. (B) The official story is relatively hard to understand - Kennedy official story is a relatively easy human story ("lone gunman") 911 is a relatively straightforward though partially technical but nonetheless terrestrial narrative ("19 guys with boxcutters"), but the Apollo program is highly technical in all its aspects from biology through to mathematics. It becomes abundantly clear to someone who is technically trained, when someone who is not tries to debunk it, that there is no obvious smoking gun, just the usual set of things that look a bit weird at first glance. It can be a bit frustrating, but to go through it all e.g. examine all 10 long pages of it is a very tall order. In the past I have looked at photos etc that NASA debunked from the debunkers, and NASA did it in great detail and thoroughness and quite convincingly (too me). I think they just gave up, and this becomes like another anti-evolution story, where the anti-science folks just have much more free time, and perhaps more money too. |