Do Aliens Exist: The Great Debate

[Vagrant0]

One thing you can't argue whats been aired on tv, depending what channel its been aired on the host tv station would lose credibility if they aired something like a hoax. Especially if it was aired on discovery or something similar.

Yes... and where have you been? Oh, right... somehow Amish Mafia is actually a thing... Right.

 

The discovery channel hasn't been credible for many of their programs since they started dabbling into reality TV shows. Once in awhile they do manage to put on reasonably well made documentaries, but the reality is that it is all about trying to get ratings and less about intellectual value.

 

That said, at one time Larry King did do a show or two featuring footage of a supposed alien in reasonable quality, shown plainly for an extended length of time (and not just some head in a window). Except it was undoubtedly a hoax since those related to this footage have done little with it other than try to milk it for every buck they can get... Meanwhile the airing was made unavailable in its original quality and has become buried by the usual rubbish and trolling.

 

 

 

Reasons

 

!. resources, gathering resources and just visiting because a long trip needs stops just to explore our galaxy

2. Just visiting because they are like us explorers and might have a code like Star trek does when it comes to meeting other Aliens in the universe. You never know they might have a huge system of government spanning several galaxies. If you want to think star trek then they are just waiting for us to gain the knowledge or faster then light speed before they make contact.

3. Aliens are to afraid of us to make direct contact because of our possible war like stance on things.

4. We have made contact just that the government has tried desperately hard to cover their tracks, sometimes fail with leaked footage.

 

If they were gathering resources, we'd be missing them or seeing evidence of it.

If they had some prime directive, all these sightings would only prove that directive to be a complete and utter failure.

Any alien species capable of traversing the stars or coming from an alternate Earth would certainly have the technology to bring any military force to its knees.

Except that occasionally there would be that footage and evidence which holds up under scrutiny. Instead, all we get is the same recycled rubbish and hoaxes.

[JimboUK]

Reasons

 

!. resources, gathering resources and just visiting because a long trip needs stops just to explore our galaxy

2. Just visiting because they are like us explorers and might have a code like Star trek does when it comes to meeting other Aliens in the universe. You never know they might have a huge system of government spanning several galaxies. If you want to think star trek then they are just waiting for us to gain the knowledge or faster then light speed before they make contact.

3. Aliens are to afraid of us to make direct contact because of our possible war like stance on things.

4. We have made contact just that the government has tried desperately hard to cover their tracks, sometimes fail with leaked footage.

 

1. "Just" explore our galaxy, our galaxy is 100,000 LY across and our nearest proper neighbour is 2 million LY away, that's one hell of a long trip. As for resources Vagrant is right, we would notice.

 

2. That doesn't answer the question, why are they here? we would be of no interest to them, we'd be a bunch of primitive savages hardly worth looking at. If the UFO crowd are to be believed then the directive includes buzzing people, chopping up cattle and molesting the locals with probes, maybe they have been stealing things, beer by the sounds of it.

 

3. A civilisation with the technology to travel faster than light would have little to fear from us.

 

4. So the government are using low quality wobblycams as well?

[Ironman5000]

our nearest proper neighbour is 2 million LY away

Which neighbour is this? If you mean planets that have the potential for life there are quite a few closer than this, not to mention Keplar 22b which is 600 ly away.

 

Anyway there seem to be a lot of refusal to believe the idea that aliens visit because of preconceptions based on popular theory or sci-fi films. Why do aliens have to have superior technology instead of alternative technology? They could come from a world with completely different resources and depend on alternative fuels, and their way of life could actually appear primitive to us, and their methods of interstellar travel is something only they can achieve maybe relative to their biology?

 

Remember the hoaxes started after the Roswell incident, which could mean that a real incident involving a crashed alien ship has spawned the idea of floating discs which opportunists adopted and could very well mean EVERY footage of aliens is fake. It's a popular belief that cloaking is one the features used with alien craft and would use this to pop in and out again making us none the wiser.

 

As far as the concept of them coming to us for resources I see people thinking of aliens loading their ships with tonnes of resources we rely on which leaves us short, which would mean another preconception on them being too much like us. For all we know they aren't subject to human flaws like greed or malice and have come only to share their technology with us, (which is what is being kept secret otherwise it would be a case too many cooks...)

 

The idea of a galactic military and laser guns is very much a sci-fi inspired idea because it all mirrors human endeavour and stories that use it are based around our own historic events, so if anyone believes this could be real should maybe stop reading comics and think about it scientifically.

Edited August 14, 2013 by Ironman5000

[Hardwaremaster]

I checked back after a few days of absence, and I was surprised I missed a thread like this, as for aliens I'm not going to debate that matter. When we simply do not have enough data, to make a solid conclusion, with out it becoming a Circular Logic: yes, no, or somewhere in between. However, I would like to present an article, which I found highly intriguing, and unlike most I've read, this one seems to have more basis in science then most I find into this subject, and seems to be relevant to the topic here. I would like to mention beforehand that I'm not a scientist of any denomination, so I'm not sure how exactly how much of this can be debunked. Also the Basic Science, I know of, is High School to General Collage Knowledge, so nothing specific about anything in particular.

 

Because any talk of extraterrestrials is not complete without the Moon Landing Hoax.

While in this case, this is definitely, not the version I'm used to reading.

 

Warning: Wall-of-Text. Hyperlink to the actual Article is below.

 

Therefore without further delay, I present you with the following, Hypothetical Situation.

 

Indisputable scientific proof man never stepped foot on the Moon nor left Earth’s Atmosphere.

 

 

 

It is scientifically and physically impossible for man to set foot on the Moon. The fact that we need a constant intake of water means that man could not go to, let alone step foot on the Moon or even Mars. Despite what NASA will have you believe, one giant leap of faith, we cannot live on Mars even if water exists. We need massive amounts of atmospheric water vapor to inhale and a precise amount of atmospheric water pressure to surround us to survive. Man was in 1969 and is today in 2012 technologically confined to Earth. It is a universally accepted fact that most of the human body is made up of water, H2O, with cells consisting of 65-90% water by weight. Scientifically we are aquatic beings. We require a constant intact of water in order to survive. We intake water by consuming it and inhaling it. Yes I said inhaling it. What you don’t realize is that the air we breathe is actually water – in its gaseous state. Every Earth image gives proof of this. Look at any photo of Earth from Space. Earth is blue from space because its atmosphere is entirely made up of water vapor. You’ve heard the weatherman talk about the jet stream? The jet stream is literally a fast flowing (at jet speed) stream – of water vapor. The jet stream transports atmospheric rivers of water vapor around the World. These jet streams of vapor carry an amount of water vapor roughly equivalent to the average flow of water at the mouth of the Mississippi River. When these atmospheric rivers make landfall, they often release this water vapor in the form of rain or snow. Another giant leap claim by NASA and other so claimed space experts is that earth’s rotation (they claim Earth is spinning at 1000 mph) is what causes gravity. Earth’s gravity has everything to do with the layers of atmospheric water and the pressure they exert downward, not rotation. Remove Earth’s water vapor atmosphere and everyone and everything not firmly attached to the Earth’s surface will be literally flung (remember they claim Earth is rotating at 1000 mph) off it. The Moon doesn’t spin (rotate) which is proven with the universally accepted fact that we always see and only see one face of the Moon. Because the Moon doesn’t rotate rotational gravity doesn’t exist. Actually, rotation of any spherical object causes the opposite effect – anti-gravity. Place any object on a rotating sphere or to a spinning wheel to see for yourself what happens with rotation. All objects are flung off. Centrifugal Force, in physics, is the tendency of an object following a curved path to fly away from the center of curvature. The fact that the Moon surface is barren of any life is because it doesn’t have an atmosphere. Despite what NASA and the US government claim, man never went to the Moon. No rotation and no atmosphere means man could not set foot on it.

 

http://cdn.medgadget.com/img/centrif_nasa.jpg

 

NASA and the US Air Force knows rotation causes centrifugal forces and have built centrifuge simulators to test astronauts and pilots. An astronaut or pilot is strapped to the outer end of a centrifuge simulator and the centrifuge is spun at high speeds. The spinning tries to fling off the person attached but because the person is strapped in centrifugal force, not Gravity force, are exerted on the person. And they would have us believe that Earth is apparently rotating at 1000 miles per hour, creating gravity and keeping everything planted firmly on Earth. I don’t know about you, but if that was the case wouldn’t Earth be a giant centrifuge, trying to toss us off the outer edge of its curvature surface? After all, Centrifugal Force, in physics, is the tendency of an object following a curved path to fly away from the center of curvature. Rotational gravity would only be scientifically plausible if we lived inside Earth’s crust. As demonstrated with any centrifuge simulator. The universally accepted and known fact that we are living on Earth’s outer surface disproves any claim that Earth’s rotation causes gravity.

 

http://www.ascienceportal.com/science_opposites/images/fairground_swing_main.jpg

 

Another perfect example of how earth rotation doesn’t cause gravity is found at any fairgrounds. Can you image what this ride would do to its passengers if it was turning at a speed of 1000 mph? NASA http://lro.gsfc.nasa.gov/moonfacts.html “The earth rotates about 1000 mph. By comparison, the moon rotates about 10 mph.” Man could never set foot on the Moon because it has no atmosphere and therefore no atmospheric pressure (gravity). In zero atmospheric pressure man literally comes apart. The bond that keeps our water based bodies together is broken. A thin space suit isn’t going to keep you together for very long. A thin space suit could never be made to provide an astronaut with a constant atmospheric pressure. The space suit provides very minimal air pressure to keep the fluids in your body in a liquid state. Once that air is used up the fluids in your body can no longer remain in a liquid state and you literally come apart. Man hasn’t even been to space, for the simple fact that Man cannot survive in a vacuum (zero atmospheric pressure). Man would have to take with us a huge supply of an air mixture that precisely mimics our atmosphere. Any deficiency of any air element that mimics our atmosphere would surely kill us.

 

Scientific proof man hasn’t even been to outer space

http://howthingsfly.si.edu/sites/default/files/image-large/EarthAtmosphere-2_lg.jpg

 

What you haven’t been told is that the International Space Station isn’t in outer space, as NASA claims. It is still within Earth’s water vapor atmosphere. It is sailing on the waters above – in the layer of Earth’s atmosphere called the ionosphere. According to NASA http://www.nasa.gov/audience/foreducators/teachingfromspace/dayinthelife/index.html, the International Space Station is orbiting 240 miles (386 km) above the Earth. But, depending on who you talk to, the Earth’s atmosphere is from 400 miles to 800 miles thick. There is no exact place where Earth’s atmosphere ends; it just gets thinner and thinner, until it merges with outer space. The exosphere is considered the outermost layer of the Earth’s atmosphere. The exosphere goes from about 400 miles (640 km) high to about 800 miles (1,280 km). The lower boundary of the exosphere is called the critical level of escape, where atmospheric pressure is very low (water’s gaseous atoms are very widely spaced) and the temperature is very low. So if the exosphere extends some 800 miles above Earth and it is accepted by the scientific community to be part of Earth’s atmosphere then that means the International Space Station is still within Earth’s atmosphere – positioned within Earth’s upper atmosphere called the ionosphere (the ionosphere starts at about 43-50 miles (70-80 km) high and continues for about 400 miles or 640 km) atmosphere. Above the International Space Station (ISS) still exists Earth’s 400 mile thick exosphere atmosphere.

 

Proof that Earth’s atmosphere is a river of water is presented in the Christian Bible. If you are a Christian you must believe the word of God. That being said, the word of God, the Holy Bible, states in Genesis 1:

 

1. In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.

And God said, “Let there be a vault between the waters to separate water from water.”

7. So God made the vault and separated the water under the vault from the water above it.

And it was so. 8 God called the vault “sky.” And there was evening, and there was morning —the second day.

9. And God said, “Let the water under the sky be gathered to one place, and let dry ground appear.” And it was so. 10 God called the dry ground “land,” and the gathered waters he called “seas.” And God saw that it was good.

 

Ever wonder what happens to us when we die? Religion tells us that when we die our soul leaves our body and ascends to heavens. To give us peace of mind religion tells us that when we die we go to heaven and we are rejoined with those who have gone before us. But in order for you to get to heaven you must serve, obey and finance them for your entire life. The truth is, everyone ascends to the heavens (sky) above after we die. When we die, our water body loses its electrical charge that bonds the hydrogen and oxygen molecules together. Immediately our body begins to evaporate and this is what causes our body to bloat – water vapor (gas) buildup within our body. Our thick skin is the only thing keeping up from spontaneously evaporating and ascending to the heavens above. Eventually, everyone rejoins the water molecules of the ones who have gone before them.

 

What will happen when man leaves Earth’s atmosphere?

How would lose of atmosphere, for any period of time, affect man? When you lower the pressure exerted on water, you increase the evaporation of the water. The moment we venture off World and into the vacuum of space we immediately begin losing body mass. Exposure to the micro atmospheric water pressure environment of Earth’s outermost atmosphere causes men and women of all ages to lose up to 1% of their bone mass per month. Because Earth’s atmospheric water pressure is critically diminished or no longer exists we start to literally evaporate and our body’s water molecules ascend to the heavens above. Heavens is defined as the the sky or universe as seen from the earth; the firmament. According to Genesis, God created the firmament to separate the “waters above” – atmospheric rivers of water vapor, from those below- the oceans, seas, lakes, rivers and streams. Evaporation is defined as the process by which water is converted from its liquid form to its vapor form and ascends from land and water masses to the atmosphere. Religion takes advantage of this fact to enslave the people of Earth. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vacuum – “Humans and animals exposed to vacuum will lose consciousness after a few seconds and die of hypoxia within minutes … Although the blood will not boil, the formation of gas bubbles in bodily fluids at reduced pressures, known as ebullism, is still a concern. The gas may bloat the body to twice its normal size and slow circulation, but tissues are elastic and porous enough to prevent rupture. Swelling and ebullism can be restrained by containment in a flight suit. Shuttle astronauts wore a fitted elastic garment called the Crew Altitude Protection Suit (CAPS) which prevents ebullism at pressures as low as 2 kPa (15 Torr)”

 

“Animal experiments show that rapid and complete recovery is normal for exposures shorter than 90 seconds, while longer full-body exposures are fatal and resuscitation has never been successful.” Above 3 km, “oxygen enrichment is necessary to prevent altitude sickness in humans that did not undergo prior acclimatization, and spacesuits are necessary to prevent ebullism above 19 km. Most spacesuits use only 20 kPa (150 Torr) of pure oxygen, just enough to sustain full consciousness. This pressure is high enough to prevent ebullism, but simple evaporation of blood can still cause decompression sickness and gas embolisms if not managed.” In other words, loss of Earth’s atmospheric pressure over 90 seconds will kill a human being. The vacuum of space will cause the fluids (man is made almost entirely of liquid water) in the human body to convert to gas. The gas may bloat the body to twice its normal size is only present when a liquid is vaporized. The change of state from a liquid to a gas is called ‘Vaporization’. There are two types of Vaporization: boiling and evaporation. So the statement that the blood won’t boil is feasible – the water in the your skin and organs can, however, vaporize into a gas. Not a very nice way to die. For this reason NASA and the US never took a chance and sent any astronaut farther than Earth’s aquatic atmosphere or to the Moon.

 

Earth’s atmospheric (water vapor) pressure creates gravity

We humans actually live at the bottom of an ocean called the ATMOSPHERE. It, not Earth rotation, presses on us from all directions. Atmospheric pressure is the pressure at any location on the Earth, caused by the weight of the column of atmosphere above it. At sea level, atmospheric pressure has an average value of one atmosphere or 14.7 psi. and gradually decreases as altitude increases. In terms of molecules, if the number of molecules above a surface increases, there are more molecules to exert a force on that surface and consequently, the pressure increases. The opposite is also true, where a reduction in the number of molecules above a surface will result in a decrease in pressure. Atmospheric pressure is measured with an instrument called a “barometer”, which is why atmospheric pressure is also referred to as barometric pressure. Meteorologists use a metric unit for pressure called a millibar and the average pressure at sea level is 1013.25 millibars or 2116.2 pounds/square foot. Obviously, enough pressure to keep everything grounded on earth. The atmospheric pressure pressing on us from all directions creates gravity. High speed rotation causes anti-gravity. Since pressure is a measure of the weight of the air above an area, reduction of atmosphere at the upper levels subsequently reduces atmospheric pressure created gravity.

 

 

 

Edit: I read this sort of stuff when I'm bored, so yes, I'm weird like that. :blush:

Make of it what you will, I just finished it, and now I know what I think of it. :teehee:

 

So, let me know what you guys think, I'm bugging out till later. :nuke:

 

The Article Link is Below:

 

 

 

http://presscore.ca/2012/indisputable-scientific-proof-nasa-never-stepped-foot-on-the-moon.html

 

 

 

Information.

 

A few interesting comments, from the article in question.

Which makes this even more complex, and, interesting.

 

 

 

Herbert Friedman, in his book Sun and Earth, describes the Van Allen Belt that surround Earth: “The results from Explorer I, launched on January 31, 1958, were so puzzling that instrument malfunction was suspected. High levels of radiation intensity appeared interspersed with dead gaps … Explorer III succeeded fully, and most important, it carried a tape recorder. Simulation tests with intense X rays in the laboratory showed that the dead gaps represented periods when the Geiger counter in space had been choked by radiation of intensities a thousand times greater than the instrument was designed to detect.” As Van Allen’s colleague Ernie Ray exclaimed in disbelief: ‘All space must be radioactive!’.” Herbert Friedman later explains that “Of all the energy brought to the magnetosphere by the solar wind, only about 0.1 percent manages to cross the magnetic barrier.” The magnetic barrier is the Van Allen Belt. The Van Allen radiation belts, between 200 and 500 miles high, “act as a thin, protective skin for Earth, trapping charged particles before they bombard our planet and harm us.” “Intense solar flares release very-high-energy particles that can be as injurious to humans as the low-energy radiation from nuclear blasts. Earth’s atmosphere and magnetosphere allow adequate protection for us on the ground, but astronauts in space are subject to potentially lethal dosages of radiation. The penetration of high-energy particles into living cells, measured as radiation dose, leads to chromosome damage and, potentially, cancer. Large doses can be fatal immediately. Solar protons with energies greater than 30 MeV are particularly hazardous. In October 1989, the Sun produced enough energetic particles that if an astronaut was on the Moon, wearing only a space suit and caught out in the brunt of the storm, would probably have died.”

 

Once you are past the Van Allen shields, between the earth and the moon, or on the moon, you would be subject to the full brunt of solar flares and radiation. The Van Allen shields protect us here on Earth from this deadly radiation. There is no protection past the Van Allen shield. We would die immediately from exposure to radioactive space. No space capsule or space suit can be built to protect man from this deadly space radiation. The hulls of the Apollo spacecraft were ultra-thin. They would have been unable to stop any significant amount of radiation. The same can be said for the spacesuits. All of the Apollo missions, from 1969 to 1972, were occurring during a solar maximum, when there would have been peak numbers of solar flares per day! SOLAR FLARE – Very hazardous and intermittent but may persist for 1 to 2 days. High energy protons travel at the speed of light so there is no time to get under cover. Protected dose 10-100 REM/hr Unprotected dose Fatal”

 

The Spacecast 2020 Technical Report puts the space weather radiation hazard to human life in perspective: “…at geostationary orbit, with only 0.1 gm/cm2 of aluminum shielding thickness, the predicted radiation dose (REM) for one year continuous exposure, with minimum-moderate solar activity, is estimated to be about 3,000,000…” At geosynchronous orbit, doses are still low compared to interplanetary space due to geomagnetic shielding. A radiation dose value from a low energy flare is provided from NASA Mooned America, p. 134: “On page 256 of ‘Astronautical Engineering’ there is a chart that shows the dosage of four different flares. On August 22, 1958 there was a low energy flare that could have been reduced to 25-rem with 2-cm of water shielding.” So, being conservative and using 25 rems per flare, we have 25 rems x 15 flares/day = 375 rems / day for the Apollo astronauts.

 

For occupational exposure dose limits, the International Atomic Energy Agency states that the “occupational exposure of any worker shall be so controlled” that the limit of an “effective dose of 50 mSv” “in any single year” “be not exceeded”. 50 mSv converts to 5 rems. During the Apollo missions astronauts would have been subjected to solar radiation levels of 375 rems per day well above the IAEA occupational exposure dose limit of only 5 rems for an entire year?

http://www.mrcc.uqam.ca/effet_serre/serre.data/images/atmosphere/composition/atmosphere.jpg

 

The levels of radiation in outer space and on the Moon makes it impossible for man to go to outer space or step on the Moon. Man never went to the Moon. Man has never even gone to space. Man has only gone to Earth’s low orbit. Google Earth’s atmosphere and chances are you will find many images that show the position in Earth’s atmosphere where the space shuttle and the International Space Station orbit. Example – http://www.daviddarling.info/encyclopedia/E/Earthatmos.html – The Encyclopaedia of Science. The International Space Station is orbiting within Earth’s protective atmosphere, not in outer space. Satellite are also shown orbiting still within Earth’s atmosphere. Going further than the outer limits of Earth’s atmosphere would mean instant death.

 

 

 

 

 

A comet shows us exactly what happens to a human body beyond our Earth’s protective atmosphere. Comets are mixtures of ice (frozen water), carbon and dust. As a comet approaches our Sun, the radiation emitting from the Sun evaporates the comet’s ice core. Solar radiation heats the nucleus and creates an atmosphere of gas and dust called the coma. A comet’s distinctive tail is caused by solar radiation and a stream of charged particles that constantly jets away from the Sun called the solar wind.

 

This vaporizing effect that the Sun has on a comet can be seen even if the comet is millions of miles away from the Sun, from Earth and from the farthest extent of our solar system. Man is also made up of mostly water. As is every living thing on Earth. How long would it take for our Sun to vaporize a human being beyond Earth’s protective atmosphere? If the Sun can cause a comet that is typically 1 to 10 kilometers (0.6 to 6 miles) across to vaporize from 1,243 million miles away (on 12 February 1991 two Belgian astronomers, Olivier Hainant and Alain Smette of the Southern European Observatory in Chile, witnesses an outburst of Halley’s Comet from this distance) what effect do you think it would have a needle in a haystack (man) from 93,000,000 miles (150 million kilometers) away from the Sun?

 

To help you visualize this effect our Sun emits in any one second the equivalent of about a billion 1-megaton nuclear bombs.

Here is an easy test that anyone can do to visual what will happen to a human being in space. Take a balloon and fill it with water. The water balloon represents man. The balloon’s flexible material represents our skin. It is what keeps us together and our water based insides from seeping out. Now put this balloon in your microwave and turn the microwave on. What happens? Take another water filled balloon and put near a hot fire. What happens? The results are the same every time, even if you suited up the balloon.

 

To visualize the effect the Sun has on a thin metal, lowest bid made spacecraft take an unopened can of soup and put it in your microwave. I know you are smart enough not to even attempt to do this. You know, a 4 year old knows what will happen. Instead, take that unopened can of soup and place it in a fire. What happens? The soup liquid is quickly vaporized and the expanding gases expands the can until it ruptures. We are the soup in the can. The radiation from our Sun is so intense that it will literally cook us. The Sun’s radiation can easily penetrate any spaceship or spacesuit that we have made. Remember what they told us in school about surviving nuclear radiation. The only effective protection against a nuclear blast is a lead lined suit. In any one second the Sun detonates and emits the equivalent of about a billion 1-megaton nuclear bombs.

 

 

 

 

 

For years now many have asked why NASA wouldn’t prove that they stepped foot on the Moon using the Hubble Space Telescope. After all it can capture images of very distant planets and solar systems. This is what NASA has to say about not using the Hubble to film the Moon landing sites – “The Hubble Space Telescope cannot photograph the Moon because it is too bright and would saturate the detectors. In addition, the Apollo landers themselves are too small to be resolved by the Hubble. But what would be the point anyway? No informed person can doubt that we went to the Moon, based on a vast amount of information ranging from the returned samples to the Apollo astronauts themselves. Anyone who does not understand or believe the ample evidence at hand would be unlikely to believe HST data either and would no doubt claim that the photos were faked.” Source of the quote is found here – http://astrobiology.nasa.gov/ask-an-astrobiologist/question/?id=1323

“the Apollo landers themselves are too small to be resolved by the Hubble” yet distant planets and galaxies that have never been seen before because they were too far away (too small to see) are filmed in vivid clarity.

 

In May of this year NASA scientists announced that they will use NASA’s Hubble Space Telescope to observe June’s historic transit of Venus across the sun’s face. Hubble watched the June 5-6 Venus transit by using the moon as a mirror. What happened to the NASA claim “the Hubble Space Telescope cannot photograph the Moon because it is too bright and would saturate the detectors.” In order to photograph something you have to point it at something – the Moon. “Hubble will be locked onto one location on the moon’s surface for the entire seven-hour transit, during which Venus will appear as a tiny black dot crossing the sun’s face.”

 

“Astronomers need the long observation time because they’re looking for extremely faint spectral signatures. Only 0.001 percent of the sun’s light will filter through Venus’s thick atmosphere and be reflected off the moon, researchers said.”

“looking for extremely faint spectral signatures” isn’t “extremely faint” the same as “too small”? Undeniably debunks NASA’s official statement “The Hubble Space Telescope cannot photograph the Moon because it is too bright and would saturate the detectors. In addition, the Apollo landers themselves are too small to be resolved by the Hubble.”

 

 

Edited August 14, 2013 by Hardwaremaster

[Vagrant0]

 

 

:facepalm: Oh the typos, bad information, and just ridiculous ideas. :psyduck:

 

The mere fact that you can take a strong enough telescope, look at the moon, and see evidence that humanity has been there overrides all this. The fact that anyone with a few thousand dollars to spend could rig up a model rocket with measuring devices and immediately disprove the theory also doesn't help.

 

If it were true, it would not only be a huge moral disservice to pretty much everyone on the planet, mean spending a very large amount of time and money researching technologies which are ultimately worthless, and wasting money trying to keep people on a space station. Nevermind the fact that the very idea is both insulting to the intelligence of everyone in the community and towards the achievements and life costs humanity has made towards space exploration.

[Hardwaremaster]

:facepalm: Oh the typos, bad information, and just ridiculous ideas. :psyduck:

 

I happened to catch your comment and I had just finished the article, excellent timing, I was laughing the hole time while I was thinking this. :laugh:

 

The mere fact that you can take a strong enough telescope, look at the moon, and see evidence that humanity has been there overrides all this. The fact that anyone with a few thousand dollars to spend could rig up a model rocket with measuring devices and immediately disprove the theory also doesn't help.

 

If it were true, it would not only be a huge moral disservice to pretty much everyone on the planet, mean spending a very large amount of time and money researching technologies which are ultimately worthless, and wasting money trying to keep people on a space station. Nevermind the fact that the very idea is both insulting to the intelligence of everyone in the community and towards the achievements and life costs humanity has made towards space exploration.

 

Yeah, anyone who completed High School will tell you that. And trust me, I spend a lot of my free time around the back alleys of the Internet, and as a general rule of sanity. I carry this with me where ever I go, in case I run across anything, that might damage my Human Social Standing. :cool:

Edited August 14, 2013 by Hardwaremaster

[Ironman5000]

Yeah when I watch videos on youtube trying to disprove the moon landings it takes every ounce of my willpower to not get involved and silence the paranoid freaks, but it would only get them excited. I could logically explain every 'theory' that was ever made (after looking at footage and photography) to disprove the landings, because unlike the majority of the internet I research and learn things before blurting stuff out.

Edited August 14, 2013 by Ironman5000

[Thor.]

I believe the moon landing happened, there is a lot of satellite footage to disprove those conspiracy's.

[JimboUK]

Not the fake moon landing thing again, that nonsense has been well and truly debunked.

 

 

our nearest proper neighbour is 2 million LY away

Which neighbour is this? If you mean planets that have the potential for life there are quite a few closer than this, not to mention Keplar 22b which is 600 ly away.

 

 

 

I was referring the next galaxy, I misread Thors point, I was also wrong because it's 2.5 million LY away.

[Thor.]

There is more planets that could support life then you think with the Kepler mission on its way to finding the next earth like planet.

 

http://www.space.com/21800-alien-planets-60-billion-habitable-exoplanets.html

 

http://www.space.com/21712-habitable-alien-planets-gliese-667c-infographic.html