So, the Great Awakening thinks a toaster is smarter than the people who put us on the Moon? A toaster that is programmed by a left-leaning intelligentsia? Or, who do you think is doing the work on all this "Artificial Intelligence"?
No "technology was lost." You have a magical conception of technology. We lost the ability to make F-1 engines for the same reason we lost the ability to purchase Studebaker automobiles: it was a limited production run, and after the run was over (or the demand market dried up), the supply base turned to other products or went out of business. A lot of the manufacturing information was embedded in hand-me-down "tribal knowledge," and when the tribe retired and died, that went with them. (A good argument for systematic and complete documentation.)
The F-1 "production line" was over with. People talked about bringing it back, but it would have meant starting all over again from scratch, and no one wanted to foot the bill. It didn't mean we lost the technology of making rocket engines. We went on to make the Space Shuttle Main Engine---which is now in its waning years. SpaceX comes along, newcomer on the block, and starts making rocket engines for its own use. Now they have the Raptor engine, which compares to the F-1 and they are flying it with gusto.
Go find a Studebaker and drive it around. Or an American Motors car. Pontiac, Mercury, Plymoth, and Oldsmobile will be equally unknown in another decade or so. Does their demise mean we have "lost the technology"? Of course not. We have lost them as products, and all we can say is "boo-hoo."
Get some humility and learn some history. You are in a very poor position to look down with scorn on NASA when they were doing the right things.
I am one who think the toaster who bludgeon Clinton's friend to death is smarter than the friend, but moon landing, always seem a little fake to me. I did ask several questions about that and didn't get any good answers.
You have to be thoughtful about what a "good answer" is. Any truthful answer is a good answer. If you are not in a position to know the answer beforehand, you may have a problem if it conflicts with "common sense." In this case, common sense is mostly ignorant expectations and prejudice. (People actually scoffed at Robert Goddard's contention that one could use rockets in a vacuum. "How could it work if there is no air to push against?" Seems reasonable---but is totally ignorant of how a rocket works.) It will be necessary to accept answers that have nothing to do with your "common sense," because your common sense is the result of having no answers. The way to get over that is to continue to ask questions, and read up on the founding subject matter.
Slow down dude. We all know you know what we know. Nothing. All info pushed on us and not one bit of it is verifiable by any of us. Therefore i.will not accept it.
So, the Great Awakening thinks a toaster is smarter than the people who put us on the Moon? A toaster that is programmed by a left-leaning intelligentsia? Or, who do you think is doing the work on all this "Artificial Intelligence"?
The people who "put us on the moon" miraculously "lost" the technology that allegedly got us there. Some "geniuses".
No "technology was lost." You have a magical conception of technology. We lost the ability to make F-1 engines for the same reason we lost the ability to purchase Studebaker automobiles: it was a limited production run, and after the run was over (or the demand market dried up), the supply base turned to other products or went out of business. A lot of the manufacturing information was embedded in hand-me-down "tribal knowledge," and when the tribe retired and died, that went with them. (A good argument for systematic and complete documentation.)
The F-1 "production line" was over with. People talked about bringing it back, but it would have meant starting all over again from scratch, and no one wanted to foot the bill. It didn't mean we lost the technology of making rocket engines. We went on to make the Space Shuttle Main Engine---which is now in its waning years. SpaceX comes along, newcomer on the block, and starts making rocket engines for its own use. Now they have the Raptor engine, which compares to the F-1 and they are flying it with gusto.
Go find a Studebaker and drive it around. Or an American Motors car. Pontiac, Mercury, Plymoth, and Oldsmobile will be equally unknown in another decade or so. Does their demise mean we have "lost the technology"? Of course not. We have lost them as products, and all we can say is "boo-hoo."
Get some humility and learn some history. You are in a very poor position to look down with scorn on NASA when they were doing the right things.
I am one who think the toaster who bludgeon Clinton's friend to death is smarter than the friend, but moon landing, always seem a little fake to me. I did ask several questions about that and didn't get any good answers.
My other offer stands, so I won't repeat it here.
You have to be thoughtful about what a "good answer" is. Any truthful answer is a good answer. If you are not in a position to know the answer beforehand, you may have a problem if it conflicts with "common sense." In this case, common sense is mostly ignorant expectations and prejudice. (People actually scoffed at Robert Goddard's contention that one could use rockets in a vacuum. "How could it work if there is no air to push against?" Seems reasonable---but is totally ignorant of how a rocket works.) It will be necessary to accept answers that have nothing to do with your "common sense," because your common sense is the result of having no answers. The way to get over that is to continue to ask questions, and read up on the founding subject matter.
Slow down dude. We all know you know what we know. Nothing. All info pushed on us and not one bit of it is verifiable by any of us. Therefore i.will not accept it.