Space ship! Kapal Angkasa!

[blichius1963]

aku pn dh jmp sos tu cuma malas nk percaya sbb semua misi apollo dr thn 1969 – 1972 tu tak berjaya meyakinkn aku..zaman cold war masih belum habis..

[chat Helena and Evelyn www.vvologde.com]

well sebenarnya dakwaan yang kononnya misi ni palsu datang dari 9 keping gambo tu je.. itu je.. langsung takde explaination saintifik.

ada beratus 2 jounal sains yang bincang secara detail, pendaratan.. calculation.. telemetri ..itu ini… belum lagi kisah… dan kalau nak kata ni Hoax… Jepun sendiri dah verify pendaratan Apollo 11 sebagai benar.. diorang dah jumpa tapak pendaratan dan amik gambo.

[chat Helena and Evelyn www.vvologde.com]

so far 2-2 xplanation ko belum meyakinkn aku..cmne plak kes bendera USA yg brkibar di tempat yg tiada angin??..err..atas sana ade angin ker??..atau kes space ship diorng mendarat xde kesan jejak pn tp amtrong punya 'big leap 4 mankind' tu bapak besar punya kesan..berat si armstrong tu makin brtambah ke kat atas sana??

..dan antra jwp saintis soviet union knp diorng tak pernah landingkn org kt ats sana(walaupn diorng 1st anta org outer space dan bina ISS) ialah manusia trdedah kpd tahap radiasi yg sangt tinggi dan tak logik utk suit armstrong masa tu diorng kebal dan kenyataan ini disokong oleh ramai saintis seluruh dunia..even sampai sekarang pn radiasi antra masalah utama utk astronot keluar dr space ship diorng..

itu tak masuk lg kes gambar bulan kt lain tp sumber cahaya kt lain..

haha aku belum abis lagi cerita.. infact semua yang tulis tu dah kena debunk dah

[chat Helena and Evelyn www.vvologde.com]

okay ulang semula… susah aku tulis orang tak caya,,.. meh tanya saintis.

You can tell Apollo was faked because … the American flag appears to be flapping as if “in a breeze” in videos and photographs supposedly taken from the airless lunar surface.

The fact of the matter is … “the video you see where the flag's moving is because the astronaut just placed it there, and the inertia from when they let go kept it moving,” said spaceflight historian Roger Launius, of the Smithsonian's National Air and Space Museum in Washington D.C.

The astronauts also accidentally bent the horizontal rods holding the flag in place several times, creating the appearance of a rippling flag in photographs (Apollo 11 moon-landing pictures).

[chat Helena and Evelyn www.vvologde.com]

hoax 2

You can tell Apollo was faked because … only two astronauts walked on the moon at a time, yet in photographs such as this one where both are visible, there is no sign of a camera. So who took the picture?

The fact of the matter is … the cameras were mounted to the astronauts' chests, said astronomer Phil Plait, author of the award-winning blog Bad Astronomy and president of the James Randi Educational Foundation.

In the picture above, Plait notes, “you can see [Neil's] arms are sort of at his chest. That's where the camera is. He wasn't holding it up to his visor.”

[chat Helena and Evelyn www.vvologde.com]

hoax 3

You can tell Apollo was faked because … the astronauts made no such exclamation while on the moon, and the black backgrounds of their photographs are curiously devoid of stars.

The fact of the matter is … the moon's surface reflects sunlight, and that glare would have made stars difficult to see. Also, the astronauts photographed their lunar adventures using fast exposure settings, which would have limited incoming background light.

“They were taking pictures at 1/150th or 1/250th of a second,” Bad Astronomy's Plait said. “In that amount of time, stars just don't show up.”

tak caya tanya ekamil… hehe

[blichius1963]

tengkius tp in general incek baket dh bagi link yg brkaitan cuma cm aku ckp kt dia lah..aku bukan mudah percaya semua maklumat n info bulat2 kecuali ilmu teknikal dr cikgu2 aku dan aku sangt naif..

[chat Helena and Evelyn www.vvologde.com]

Hoax 4

You can tell Apollo was faked because … the module is shown sitting on relatively flat, undisturbed soil. According to skeptics, the lander's descent should have been accompanied by a large dust cloud and would have formed a noticeable crater.

The fact of the matter is … the lander's engines were throttled back just before landing, and it did not hover long enough to form a crater or kick up much dust, the Smithsonian's Launius said.

“Science fiction movies depict this big jet of fire coming out as [spacecraft] land, but that's not how they did it on the moon,” he added. “That's not the way they would do it now or anytime in the future.”

[chat Helena and Evelyn www.vvologde.com]

tak pe lah aku post je sini.. kalau ngko skeptik sila lah debunk.

sebeb skeptik mesti sangsi berdasarkan sesuatu jugak kan.. mana ada sekeptik yang tetiba je tak percaya.. mesti ketidak percayaan itu berdasarkan sesuatu. Oleh itu share lah kenapa ngko skeptik dan kenapa saintis ni salah.

[chat Helena and Evelyn www.vvologde.com]

hoax 5

You can tell Apollo was faked because … Aldrin is seen in the shadow of the lander, yet he is clearly visible. Hoax subscribers say that many shadows look strange in Apollo pictures. Some shadows don't appear to be parallel with each other, and some objects in shadow appear well lit, hinting that light was coming from multiple sources—suspiciously like studio cameras.

The fact of the matter is … there were multiple light sources, Launius said. “You've got the sun, the Earth's reflected light, light reflecting off the lunar module, the spacesuits, and also the lunar surface.”

It's also important to note that the lunar surface is not flat, he added. “If an object is in a dip, you're going to get a different shadow compared to an object next to it that is on a level surface.”

[chat Helena and Evelyn www.vvologde.com]

hoax 6

You can tell Apollo was faked because … the astronauts' prints are a bit too clear for being made on a bone-dry world. Prints that well defined could only have been made in wet sand.

The fact of the matter is … that's nonsense, said Bad Astronomy's Plait. Moon dust, or regolith, is “like a finely ground powder. When you look at it under a microscope, it almost looks like volcanic ash. So when you step on it, it can compress very easily into the shape of a boot.” And those shapes could stay pristine for a long while thanks to the airless vacuum on the moon.

[chat Helena and Evelyn www.vvologde.com]

hoax 7

You can tell Apollo was faked because … with instruments such as the Hubble Space Telescope capable of peering into the distant recesses of the universe, surely scientists should be able to see the various objects still on the moon. But no such pictures of these objects exist.

The fact of the matter is … no telescope on Earth or in space has that kind of resolving power. “You can calculate this,” Plait said. “Even with the biggest telescope on Earth, the smallest thing you can see on the surface of moon is something bigger than a house.”

[chat Helena and Evelyn www.vvologde.com]

sorry aku post satu persatu ni ytujuan nya supaya sesapa yang nak debunk bleh easily quote setiap satu hoax dan debunk,.

hoax last

You can tell Apollo was faked because … those mysterious reflections come from studio lights on a production set.

The fact of the matter is … it's highly unlikely NASA would make such an obvious blunder if they had spent millions of dollars to fake the moon landing, Plait said.

“Okay, let's take a step back. NASA's going to release a picture showing studio lights? Hello!” The odd lights in the picture are simply lens flares,” he said. “There's a big fat pentagonal one right in the middle that is from the aperture of the camera itself.”

[blichius1963]

tak pe lah aku post je sini.. kalau ngko skeptik sila lah debunk.

sebeb skeptik mesti sangsi berdasarkan sesuatu jugak kan.. mana ada sekeptik yang tetiba je tak percaya.. mesti ketidak percayaan itu berdasarkan sesuatu. Oleh itu share lah kenapa ngko skeptik dan kenapa saintis ni salah.

sbb aku trtengok satu mini siri documentary psl penipuan USA dalam filem bajet pling besar dalam sejarah manusia..itulah dakwaan dirong..aku xleh nk recall semua info yg diorng utarakn tp setakat ni aku stick pd pendapat diorng..dr side USA pn mmg dah byk scientific xplanation tp bg aku,utk diorng fake kan misi tu..bukan semudah buat cerita star wars..konfem lah diorng pn wt kajian gila2..tp hakikatnya sejauh mana kebenaran kes ni aku amik 30% jer..

analogi mudah aku..katakn ko nk tipu aku ko pernah naik gunung tebu..takkan ko nk cerita atas sana ade dewa duk lepak sambil main PS3..mmg konfem2 pn ko tipu so sblm ko tipu ak ko dah buat research dulu dan bgtaw aku semua fakta yg releven ape yg ade kt atas sana..tp hakikatnya xde sape pn taw betul ke ko pernah naik gunung tebu

[chat Helena and Evelyn www.vvologde.com]

hahah bapak guna analogi gunung tebu seh… haha

ok itu opinion ko.. bleh bagi sauce mini siri tu? rasa pernah dengar.. masa zaman 80 an rasanya.. orang yang create tu dah tua gamaknya. Masalahnya saintis pun dah bertukar je.. rasa ko saintis yang research nasa tahun 70 an tu masih kerja kat Nasa? saintis bertukar, zaman makin canggih ..saintis baru pun agree yang menda ni tak hoax.. melainkan ada teori baru.,,,,, aku rasa dah temaktub yang THIS MYTH is…….. BUSTED. hehe

[blichius1963]

gunung tebu lebih dekat dihati..

itu pendapat ko..bg aku myth itew tak busted lg..bab radiation n etc tu pn x konfem lg kebenarannya..n walau pape sos even dokumentari tu pn x meletakkn aku kepercayaan penuh pd USA..

documentary tu aku tgk bbrape thn lepas kt canel astro..lupe canel mana..sekali jer diorng tayang seingt aku..disebalik bukti saintifik, diorng pn ade citer konspirasi sebelum si armstrong p naik bulan..

dan td duk search google jap aku hnya jmp misi apollo semasa zaman cold war je..so conclusion mudah aku misi apollo hanya utk perang psikologi..kebenrannya tak munkin dibuktikan..zaman sekarng klu ade pn manusia p bulan,myb dah tak pelik sangt kut..teknologi pn dah makin maju..tp dulu punya citer remain misteri..

[craxx]

kalau dulu us boleh hantar angkasawan ke bulan, kenapa tak hantar sekarang? mcm bearing ckp, kenapa mission apollo hanya pada cold war? apollo 17 adalah pada 1972, dah dekat nak 40 tahun, us tanak hantar lagi ker?

[chat Helena and Evelyn www.vvologde.com]

question nya ialah buat ape? … voters yang decide funding untuk Nasa ni…

[craxx]

errr…dulu nasa buat mission apollo nak buat apa? lagi pon kalau betul nasa dah landing kat bulan, sure dia dah claim tanah2 kat bulan tu, nnt senang nak buat colony

[chat Helena and Evelyn www.vvologde.com]

space race antara soviet dengan US….

[mishanarchy1971]

dulu-dulu aku pernah tengok cerita nih. tapi pasal landing kat Mars. “Capricorn One” keluaran 1977. tentang penipuan pendaratan di planet Marikh

[jeeown]

Aku tak paham bab Radiasi (sinaran dari matahari) Kat Bulan atau Angkasaraya (ruang vakum) ?

setakat ini gambar yang betul lah…

[jeeown]

US dah buat 6 kali..
russia unknown dan masih classified tapi rumour nya ialah berberapa kali dan gagal. semua cosmonout mati…tetapi USSR lah yang first unmanned landing…dan survey USSR gak. Soviet Luna mission (rover mission) bawak balik batu bulan lima kali……. tetapi US 6 kali manned mission berjaya bawak balik batu bulan yang kemudian di sahkan mempunyai kandungan dan komposisi yang sama dengan sample yang soviet kutip.

total pendaratan ada 18 kali
ini termasuk pendaratan unmanned oleh Japan, Europe, India dan China

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_Moonshot

[jeeown]

LK Lander

[blichius1963]

Aku tak paham bab Radiasi (sinaran dari matahari) Kat Bulan atau Angkasaraya (ruang vakum) ?

aku pn xpaham sangt juga cuma setakat pengetahuan aku space radiation ni antra main factor yg perlu diambil kira di outer space sana. Radiation ni bukan dr matahri jer tp berselerakan di seluruh ruang galaksi akibat proses letupan dan lain2 proses yg berlaku di angkasa.

edit: quote dr tenet

The difference in each case may consist of differences in voltage levels between clouds and ground. NASA scientists have found the radio waves created by lightning clear a safe zone in the radiation belt surrounding the earth. This zone, known as the Van Allen Belt slot, can potentially be a safe haven for satellites, offering them protection from the Sun's radiation.

link:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lightning

Kita selamat dr radiation ni klu tak silap aku sbb 2 faktor..perlindungn dr medan ape ntah dr matahari dan fenomena ajaib yg brlaku semasa kilat dan guruh..fenomena tu saintis duk kaji lg sepengatahuan aku..aku tgk benda ni dlm nat geo klu tak salah..

tempat yg ade kilat klu dilihat dr luar angkasa berlaku satu fenomena cantik macam aurora skit2..kawasan tu akn turun tahap radiasinya..aku pn ingt2 lupe gk fakta ni..klu silap fakta tolong betulkn..

edit:

xtra info dr web nasa: http://srag-nt.jsc.nasa.gov/

lain2 link berkaitan:

What is space radiation?

Dangerous levels of radiation in space could bar astronauts from a mission to Mars and limit prolonged activity on the moon, experts now caution.

However, more research could reveal ways to handle the risks that radiation poses to space missions.

link : Space Radiation Too Deadly For Mars Mission

Surviving Space: Risks to Humans on the Moon and Mars

[date Amy and Molly www.arinazenkova.ru]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GuwyY2DzO2I

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sgfC4-_LFzo

Ini link2 youtube yg membongkar rahsia penipuan kamera trick pendaratan di bulan.

[chat Helena and Evelyn www.vvologde.com]

actually vid tu sendiri adalah fake.. yang di buat untuk replicate moon landing tu… ni dah lama dah kene debunk

[chat Helena and Evelyn www.vvologde.com]

When astronomers from around the world want a precise measurement, they bounce lasers off of 1 of 3 retroreflectors left on the moon by Apollos 11, 14 and 15. They're exactly where NASA says they should be. Mythbusters demonstrates this before your very eyes. How did they get there? If weren't placed there by Apollo astronauts, then hoax theorists have some explaining to do.

[blichius1963]

aih..x abis lg ngn hoax tu..yelah source nye mana bang??..dan bukan aku taknak caya pd misi apollo ni tp sbb aku amik 50-50 jer mana2 fakta dr dr barat..sebagaimna teori darwin pn diorng brsungguh nk buat kita percaya kt teori diorng inikn pulak setakat nk tipu pegi bulan..

[chat Helena and Evelyn www.vvologde.com]

yang kata hoax tu pun datanbg dari barat gak…

anyway Darwin tu bukan hoax tetapi kesilapan sains… sains sentiasa berubah….. sebab bukti2 dia sentaiasa ada.

[Author]

Posts