Yes, a coincidence. If I look up people with my last name on the internet, none of them are related. It used to be that I couldn't even find myself. Now, I can, but it takes a bit of doing. Every country has its "spectrum" of common or frequent names. In the phone book, how many "Smith" or "Jones" are there?
I don't follow the "unfortunately." Both are working from ignorance and popular belief. Birds of a feather.
I'm an engineer. Limits and levels don't have meaning without measurement. And if no one is discussing the measured data, it is a meaningless discussion.
Part of NASA is dishonest (climate change) and the rest is honest. I disagree with their program. I've held this view for decades, based on history and industrial experience.
There's plenty of "proof." I've found that the true dis-believers simply deny it, or have no clear idea what "proof" would entail.
When people get into a flap about "radiation" (I know, EM not nuclear) and never mention intensity levels, it has the same effect on me as when people get obsessed over something being "too fast," but never talk about speeds or speed limits. Much ado about potentially nothing.
My home county. Hello back!
In my father's father's time, a common reference was to "the 47 states and the soviet of Washington." He was preparing to go hiking and camping one time, and remarked that his knapsack was "packed tighter than FDR's court." Too bad he didn't live long enough for me to know him.
Lots of Scandinavians and Germans settled in western Washington (timber and lumberjacking). Those where the days when most important politicians had "-son" at the end of their names, and life was orderly and clean.
Two "parties" all right, but they are just across the street from each other. The clientele are only superficially different, while one serves margaritas and the other serves martinis. They occasionally have tiffs and grudges against each other, for trivial and transient reasons.
Ignorant people. Blue objects were burned (established by before and after photos). Other objects were not (e.g., surviving house with red roof). Complete failure of the logical test. And no credible laser weapon would operate in the visible spectrum---especially if it could be so easily defeated. (I have a machine gun, but if you wear blue clothes the bullets will bounce off.) This is just the 21st century equivalent of invoking magic.
What a ridiculous argument. The Apollo program was an immense political and economic commitment. "Going back" was not about science; it was about political will and popular support---which was lacking. And (to play devil's advocate) why go back? We have more surface sample material than has been examined. The current plan to return is cluttered with woke objectives (sending the first woman to the Moon, and maybe also the first black person) and visionary objectives (the search for water and helium-3). I have misgivings about the mission architecture, but that's NASA for you.
"Climate science" deserves always to be in quotation marks---but it is not travel to the Moon. It is refuted by facts, not by suspicion.
It would be better with an aluminum or sheer white (titanium dioxide) roof.
Wouldn't stop everything around you from being set on fire, though. How does that prevent you from burning down, anyway?
Completely bogus. As mentioned below, the satellite motion does not conform to the narrative. They pass over Midway Island, if they pass over anything. No discussion of the elevation angle of any laser beams. Below 30 degrees is generally regarded as being unreliable due to atmospheric absorption and refraction effects. And if you will notice, the passage is over with in a matter of seconds. Might as well track the motion of airliners as well. (It also proves out my standing contention that a satellite weapon cannot fire at a target from opposite sides, as would be required to melt ALL the wheels on an automobile.)
The laser claims are the worst, as there is no evidence for any of it. I can say with certainty that no 10 MW lasers are active in space, having been familiar with the system designs originally proposed in the 1980s and with the actual high-power laser constructed for YAL-1A in the 2000s. Anyone with a book on physics can dream up an imaginary weapon and pose as an expert. If he were an expert, he would realize that an infrared laser would have maximal interaction with anything painted a dark color---where "dark" effectively means anything other than white or aluminum. That, for me, was the tip-off that this guy is an empty hat. The idea that you can stuff a 10-MW laser into a 40,000-lb satellite is also sheer fancy. That alone was the weight of the beam generator on the YAL-1A, not counting everything else that would be required (optical train, beam pointing telescope, reactant storage / power supply, etc.).
"Well, it could have been...the way I imagined it," is not an argument. It is a fantasy.
No basis for doubt. All the "questions" I've seen have been simple scientific ignorance. Moreover, doubts don't prove anything except ignorance. The proper challenge is a proof of the contrary.
All the reasons have been thrashed out, but here's a tidbit. In Plato's account of Atlantis, the Atlanteans supposedly used "orichalcum" as a metallic currency. It was not as valuable as gold. They stopped using it after the mines ran out. The identify of orichalcum has been a mystery ever since.
But there is good reason to think it was an intermetallic compound of copper and gold, called auricupride (Cu3Au), which---interestingly---is sometimes found in nature, and fits the vague description of orichalcum.
(There is also an old monetary metal called "electrum," which is an alloy of silver and gold, and is also found sometimes in nature. There is little doubt about its identify and existence. I have often wondered whether electrum could be a useful metallic currency, as it would straddle the values of silver and gold, potentially being more stable in valuation.)
That's right. Geico is the gecko. That's how much attention I pay to the product being sold. They have their clever commercials, and I notice that one remembers the shtick, not the product. But what "position"? I'm still unclear as to your reference.
Not really. They never were. High power came from gasdynamic, chemical, and electric/gaseous lasers. Current high-powered lasers use doped glass filaments. And now we know how to make synthetic rubies.
It is also self-defeating to try to fake. The only metals that have close to the same density are either more rare or more difficult to work.
That's okay. I have a thick skin. But when you are in what amount to acoustic "canyons", you have no assurance that the first sound is even audible. I gave you a live example of that, which you seem to think means nothing. The issue is not I.Q. It has to do with perception of sound direction. There is also the problem that long-distance propagation of high-amplitude sound waves leads to "crackling" due to non-linear effects (which is why rocket launches sound the way they do at a distance). But, hey, if someone has the sound signals and the locations, it would be interesting to see what they deduce.
The only "proof" that is relevant is proof that the image has been doctored. Accusation stemming from a prejudiced viewpoint is not evidence at all. You might as well suspect that the Twin Towers were never hit, and that they are still standing. Anything to the contrary is a carefully contrived cover.
It is clear that you embrace fakery so long as it feeds your bias confirmation. The planes were there in all 4 cases, witnessed, caused damage, and killed hundreds of people. You want to imagine that it basically did not happen and that there were gratuitious explosions from conspirators and the vanishing of hundreds of people. The fact that you can doubt the Apollo program shows that you are willing to twist everything into fakery. When you do that, you are building your world on lies...and you don't seem to realize that doing so is counter to what we are supposed to be doing.
I'm not saying we should not question, but we have to accept the real answers, or the questions are superfluous. All that seems to happen is that some of us pose a question---and answer it with a conspiracy theory, and that's the end of the question.
I can't figure out what you are trying to say. I only remember the Geico commercials for the emu and the jerk with the mustache, so I don't get the reference. I suspect I might agree.
-
I was polite. Never made an aspersion against anyone's intelligence. I only pointed out that "they" had no respect for anyone's intelligence.
-
You remarked about how "amazing" it is that we haven't returned to the Moon. It is only "amazing" if you don't know the history. I suppose the implication is that you failed to learn that history, which is the outcome of doing no research. No conspiracy necessary. You pose a false picture of the situation as an excuse to feel resentment about it. ("...They truly do think we are stupid.") And what have you done to dispel that impression?
-
So, I taught you about something that you thought you had been lied to, and you don't like the message. Truth is always difficult to digest if you are not expecting it.
-
I have successfully taught in various circumstances. I once had to teach a class in system engineering for two weeks to officials from the South Korean department of defense procurement, where English was for them a second language. They were attentive and congratulated me afterwards. They had a desire to learn, and no preconceptions.
Coca-Cola ingredients (off the can): carbonated water, high fructose corn syrup, caramel color, phosphoric acid, natural flavors, caffeine. Maybe pests have no tolerance for caffeine? Or "natural flavors"? Or carbonated water?
Never forget that your digestive juices contain about 0.5% hydrochloric acid.
More to Mitchell than a one-liner. He arrived at his views by talking to people, not by direct experience or observation. He specifically said NASA had nothing to do with any of it. Here is a good summary of his claims and interests: https://heavy.com/news/2016/02/edgar-mitchell-ufo-aliens-exist/
It's unlikely that will happen. The cobalt mines are unfortunately one of those situations where the mines are economically infeasible if modern methods are used, because the deposits are so pocketed and the need for small, inexpensive laborers is great. Plus, it is the classic dilemma of a poor economy that either the children work in addition to the adults, or the family starves.