Steph Curry Nonsense
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/12/10/sports/stephen-curry-moon-landing.html?rref=collection%2Fsectioncollection%2Fsports&action=click&contentCollection=sports®ion=rank&module=package&version=highlights&contentPlacement=1&pgtype=sectionfront
Quote: onenickelmiraclewe have never been back to the moon.
Nasa landed humans on the moon 6 times between 1969 and 1972 putting a total of 12 astronauts on the lunar surface.
1. 1/6 gravity is very beneficial for growing crystals, new molecules, and miniaturization of chips. Lack of magnetic fields there also allow new science in fission/fusion to develop, while placing the danger far away.
2. Other science in geriatrics, cellular development, hydroponics, other areas. The moon could farm, with endless sunlight, enough foodstuffs to feed billions more people (which I personally don't think is a plus - earth is sustaining about 2 billion more than it should be now, at the cost of every other living thing on it). But it would be cheap to ship grown product back because of the gravity well.
3. The big one. The country or entity that occupies the moon has dominance militarily over the earth.
4. A moon base offers a more permanent, probably safer, certainly larger off-earth habitat than the ISS. It can serve as a more economical launch point to the stars and other planets. Its major industry would probably be building and launching satellites, at least in the near term.
5. I mentioned geriatrics, but there could be a huge industry in retirement communities and easier living for amputees/paraplegic/other delicate people. It would lengthen many lives to only fight the effects of 1/6g instead of 1g.
6. Moon tourism could be huge. Lots of fun activities could only be done there, like flying. Imagine jumping on a trampoline up there, or diving from a 50 foot tower and slowly floating into water, or a lot of other things. Not to mention the view of earth, or the sky without an atmosphere blurring the stars.
7. Solar power, with big enough batteries to store and ship it, could not just run the whole thing, but become a commodity. We could become completely fossil-fuel free in a generation.
And, yes, the moon landings absolutely happened, and could be resumed. The smart phone you're holding has many times the brains needed to get people to the moon in the 60s. We have the technology, the observable benefits, and the capability. What we don't have is the political will.
Maybe it will be a private entity rather than the government, ours or others. I think it will be starvation that pushes us there, or an unstoppable plague that makes the earth uninhabitable. I would prefer we went there voluntarily, though.
Quote: beachbumbabsThere are several good reasons to colonize the moon.
Let's not forget all the green cheese that's up there.
Don't forget the crackers.
Quote: MrVLet's not forget all the green cheese that's up there.
Don't forget the crackers.
We won't be worrying about saving you a seat, then. Lol.
Quote: beachbumbabsThere are several good reasons to colonize the moon. earth uninhabitable.
how would you get enough water on the moon to support a whole city?
there's no rain there
seems impossible
Quote: lilredroosterhow would you get enough water on the moon to support a whole city?
there's no rain there
seems impossible
Not impossible, just very difficult. Same issue with making sure there is enough oxygen.
Damage from exposure to radiation is also challenge with living on the Moon. For all the benefits of low-G, life expectancy will be shorter since our bodies were not designed for "floating". Weak bones, muscles, and circulation problems are also byproducts of our bodies adapting to living in low gravity.
Quote: lilredroosterhow would you get enough water on the moon to support a whole city?
Perfect recycling technology will be necessary for any sustained space mission like that. My information is a few years old, but I don't think this is the toughest technological hurdle for us.
There is no definitively profitable reason to have a permanent presence on the moon yet. Yes, mining in a lower gravity well and a staging point for the rest of the solar system are reasons, among others, but we aren't there yet. It's still prohibitively expensive to get things into orbit and even more expensive to make the vacuum of space somewhat livable. We still don't have an answer for long term radiation exposure.
We haven't been back because there's no tangible reason to put another set of feet on a desolate body 300k miles away when we can do a bunch of unmanned missions for the same price. Anyone that denies the moon landing is almost as stupid as a flat earther and disrespecting every single person involved with the Apollo missions.
I think, re: radiation, people would have to live IN the moon rather than on it. Blow out a lot of caverns and tunnels, and limit their exposure to the surface.
Re: water, we breathe out, sweat, and pee water. That would have to be reclaimed, and the wastes mulched into the farm tunnels, along with solid waste, dead bodies, and whatever else will provide minerals, nutrients, water, and fertilizer.
Water could be gotten there by steering ice-covered comets/asteroids to near-orbit or even into the farside. It only has to be lifted once, even if it comes from Earth, because it can be endlessly cleansed and reused. They'd just have to protect it from boiling off into a vacuum.
It's also possible there is ancient ice below the surface. There is a theory that the moon did, at one time, have an atmosphere and oceans. If you look at the craters and stressor lines, it appears the moon might have been hit by a massive asteroid, that could have blown the atmosphere from the surface (if there was an atmosphere - nobody knows, but it is in the temperate zone that could have had one.)
So, if there was an atmosphere, it might have had oceans. Which may mean there is water frozen deep beneath the surface. Again, nobody yet knows. That's part of why it's so interesting that the Chinese will land a probe on the farside soon. They may find a way to sample the inner mantle and learn a lot.
And I'm not sure why they're going to send men to Mars without learning how to sustain a colony on the moon. Maybe I just don't know enough about Mars, but at least if something goes wrong on the moon, it's 3 days away, not 8 months or whatever in our respective orbits.
Obviously I didn't go to the moon, but I did see several of the launches. They happened, and there's no question in my mind that they went there, not around the corner to some soundstage. I don't even know.where that conspiracy theory started.
Quote: beachbumbabs...That's part of why it's so interesting that the Chinese will land a probe on the farside soon. They may find a way to sample the inner mantle and learn a lot...
I heard a comment that the only way to get US politicians to invest again in moon landings is for us to be talking about China's moon projects, and hint at China's military uses for the moon.
Quote: ahiromu
We haven't been back because there's no tangible reason to put another set of feet on a desolate body 300k miles away when we can do a bunch of unmanned missions for the same price. Anyone that denies the moon landing is almost as stupid as a flat earther and disrespecting every single person involved with the Apollo missions.
Yes, let's talk about radiation. *sits down at the wrong table in the HS cafeteria*
This NASA spokesman must be almost as stupid as a flat earther. Maybe the exceedingly brilliant men and women of this thread (i mean that sincerely) can educate NASA engineers on how to sail humans harmlessly through the Van Ellen radiation belts. Again, this is like modern-day Spanish and Portuguese still trying to figure out how Columbus traveled to the New World given that there's a giant ocean in the way.
#defundNASA
#ripGusGrissom
Quote: ChesterDogI heard a comment that the only way to get US politicians to invest again in moon landings is for us to be talking about China's moon projects, and hint at China's military uses for the moon.
.gov using scare tactics to fund its programs? Preposterous! Then again, those pesky Chinese could be hiding weapons of mass destruction on the moon.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/arstechnica.com/science/2018/12/china-just-launched-a-far-side-moon-lander-and-thats-pretty-important/%3famp=1
Also, NASA answered back to Steph:
http://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/25508943/nasa-offers-show-proof-moon-landing-golden-state-warriors-star-stephen-curry?platform=amp
about 13.5 days of daytime and then 13.5 days of nighttime
can't be real easy to deal with
need to plan what time you take your walk real carefully
Quote: lilredroosterthe temperature on the moon swings from about 260 degrees Farenheit to about minus 280 degrees Farenheit
about 13.5 days of daytime and then 13.5 days of nighttime
can't be real easy to deal with
need to plan what time you take your walk real carefully
True. But it's extremely predictable, and we've solved similar problems to some extent in the ISS and Shuttle programs. Those predictable conditions could even be an asset, with supercool and superhot processes making purer crystals, chips, or other materials without having to create the energy needed on earth to reach those temperatures.
I don't think life on the surface is possible, though, and that's part of why. It would have to be inside, with shielded and airtight access to the surface. All compartments and airlocks, some inner domes, a warren of tunnels. But nearly unlimited power available to shape the environment. Lots of silicate to make thick glass. Not much iron (or there would be magnetic fields) for steel, but other metals in the crust (aluminum? Seems like I read that somewhere, that there was bauxite.) Could be used. Just gotta find the water somewhere, and the rest can be done with today's technology.
Does anybody know the physical properties of compressed hydrogen or LOX? I know water doesn't compress, but those do - if you ship the elements compressed, do you somehow end up with a larger volume of water than the gases represent as components, once they're recombined?
When government-sponsored religion is presented to the masses as "science", people will believe all sorts of ridiculousness.
Quote: RogerKintWill Curry be able to take those so-called moon rocks to have them analyzed?
When government-sponsored religion is presented to the masses as "science", people will believe all sorts of ridiculousness.
I think it's a federal crime for anyone to mess with the moon rocks. I could be wrong.
I don't know who he would trust to analyze them, anyway. If he already thinks it's a fake, isn't it easier to claim any scientist or testing lab is in on the conspiracy, than to admit he was wrong?
Other rocks, claimed to be from the moon, have been proven to be petrified wood. Why would he trust NASA? Isn't that like trusting a coca cola study that says coca cola is super healthy?
Quote: RogerKintOther rocks, claimed to be from the moon, have been proven to be petrified wood. Why would he trust NASA?
That report you linked was the first I'd heard of any fakes, so I'm not sure about "other rocks" (plural). And the article noted that nothing on the presentation or the plaque on which the rock was mounted claimed it was an actual moon rock...but I'm sure it was strongly implied. It also doesn't seem to have come from NASA, but from this Nixon WH guy traveling with the astronauts.
And you know you can trust the Nixon WH. Lol...
Quote: beachbumbabsThat report you linked was the first I'd heard of any fakes, so I'm not sure about "other rocks" (plural). And the article noted that nothing on the presentation or the plaque on which the rock was mounted claimed it was an actial moon rock...but I'm sure it was strongly implied. It also doesn't seem to have come from NASA, but from this Nixon WH guy traveling with the astronauts.
And you know you can trust the Nixon WH. Lol...
Especially since Nixon had a telephone conversation with the astronauts while they were on the moon LOL. Wanna guess what the delay time was?
Quote: RogerKintEspecially since Nixon had a telephone conversation with the astronauts while they were on the moon LOL. Wanna guess what the delay time was?
I don't have to guess. I watched it. There was lag. Not sure what the interval should have been, though, versus what they showed.
Quote: beachbumbabsIt's also possible there is ancient ice below the surface.
They have discovered water on the moon, most recent confirmation of that was from an Indian probe that orbited the poles [may just be at the poles]. Google lunar water.
Scientists are surprised that water is being discovered everywhere in space, even on Mercury. It turns out that as long as it is not in direct sunlight, water just stays put. Even when in sunlight, the process that takes the water away requires breakdown of the water. Boiling/sublimation processes are what can move water into an atmosphere, but if there is no atmosphere, the water can't be taken up. It tends to stay. Generally an atmosphere, including water vapor, can be swept away by the solar wind, but again, in crevices and so on, it tends to stay, we know now. Shows how actual observation is critical as opposed to theory.
Various people theorized about lunar water for some time.
btw I agree that the current thought is that low gravity is bad, not good, for the human body. Certainly weightlessness has been shown to be very bad. Perhaps Mars will prove "enough" . But actual observation will be critical again for "not weightless but less than 1 G"
Quote: beachbumbabsI don't have to guess. I watched it. There was lag. Not sure what the interval should have been, though, versus what they showed.
Yeah me neither but you can understand how and why younger people than your generation are quite skeptical. Curry's views represent a larger portion of us than you may realize. I mean 60 years later and millenials lose their wireless signal places here on earth. Do I really need to bring up the radiation in "space" again? Radiation really screws with software and communications. Tricky dick Nixon had a phone conversation with astronauts on the moon LOL. It's gonna take a lot more than flooding the mall with NASA t shirts to fix that one for future generations. Then again, maybe it won't.
I just can't believe that's NASAs response to people who doubt them... "Bruh, we have rocks..." How bout telemetry data from the greatest achievement in mankind's history? Oh wait, they lost it.
But dealing with the short-duration low-dose radiation of the Van Allen Belts (basically by not stopping to needlessly camp out in the middle of them for a long time or getting buck 'naked' outside of a rather modest amount of shielding while quickly passing through on a shallow trajectory) is hardly one of the more difficult problems for that bizarre supposedly self-sustaining moneymaking moon colony nonsense that was just asserted as fact, which is nothing but a backyard pot party fantasy wildly unhinged from the actual science & engineering and realistic economics of any of it.Quote: RogerKintYes, let's talk about radiation. *sits down at the wrong table in the HS cafeteria*
This NASA spokesman must be almost as stupid as a flat earther. Maybe the exceedingly brilliant men and women of this thread (i mean that sincerely) can educate NASA engineers on how to sail humans harmlessly through the Van Ellen radiation belts. Again, this is like modern-day Spanish and Portuguese still trying to figure out how Columbus traveled to the New World given that there's a giant ocean in the way.
#defundNASA
#ripGusGrissom
Quote: DrawingDeadThey are the Van Allen Belts. Allen, with an "A" as in Allen's Adam's Apple. Still named for James Van Allen, as they were when we first read a little about them back in junior high school. If we weren't too busy out back in the trees behind the school smoking dope and imagining elaborate conspiracies lurking in the shrubbery at the time. But either way, there are still no irradiated belts for Ellen.
You mean they're not the van Ellen DeGeneres radiation belts?
Quote: DRAwingdeadBut dealing with the short-duration low-dose radiation of the Van Allen Belts (basically by not stopping to needlessly camp out in the middle of them for a long time or getting buck 'naked' outside of a rather modest amount of shielding while quickly passing through on a shallow trajectory) is hardly one of the more difficult problems for that bizarre supposedly self-sustaining moneymaking moon colony nonsense that was just asserted as fact, which is nothing but a backyard pot party fantasy wildly unhinged from the actual science & engineering and realistic economics of any of it.
NASAs engineers disagree with you. At 3:35 of the official NASA video I linked to, he specifically states the challenges of the Ellen DeGeneres radiation belts must be solved before they can attempt to reach beyond low earth orbit. But yeah, I'm sure that's the least of their challenges.
Quote: DrawingDeadThey are the Van Allen Belts. Allen, with an "A" as in Allen's Adam's Apple. Still named for James Van Allen, as they were when we first read a little about them back in junior high school. If we weren't too busy out back in the trees behind the school smoking dope and imagining elaborate conspiracies lurking in the shrubbery at the time. But either way, there are still no irradiated belts for Ellen.
But dealing with the short-duration low-dose radiation of the Van Allen Belts (basically by not stopping to needlessly camp out in the middle of them for a long time or getting buck 'naked' outside of a rather modest amount of shielding while quickly passing through on a shallow trajectory) is hardly one of the more difficult problems for that bizarre supposedly self-sustaining moneymaking moon colony nonsense that was just asserted as fact, which is nothing but a backyard pot party fantasy wildly unhinged from the actual science & engineering and realistic economics of any of it.Quote: RogerKintYes, let's talk about radiation. *sits down at the wrong table in the HS cafeteria*
This NASA spokesman must be almost as stupid as a flat earther. Maybe the exceedingly brilliant men and women of this thread (i mean that sincerely) can educate NASA engineers on how to sail humans harmlessly through the Van Ellen radiation belts. Again, this is like modern-day Spanish and Portuguese still trying to figure out how Columbus traveled to the New World given that there's a giant ocean in the way.
#defundNASA
#ripGusGrissom
Assuming the scorn is aimed at me...
Who said anything about self-sustaining? I think it might take 100 years and some serious scientific advancement before a moon colony is self-sustaining. Maybe it never is. But it's a question of valuation. What is the human race worth?
Might not be one bit in the larger scheme of things. Do we starve or pollute ourselves out of this planet before we learn to survive anywhere else? The food chain is severely disrupted already. The seas are rising. The particulate pollutants are above 400 ppm over Mauna Kea, supposedly a significant and, according to some folks, irrevocably fatal amount. (I don't claim any expertise in this stuff.)
60% of all wildlife has disappeared from this planet in the last 40 years. The pollenators are decimated. And the last chances we have to perhaps turn it around are disappearing under the weight of politics and greed.
Maybe we have as little as 20 more years to figure this out, before the population pressure on food and arable land air, and/or water plays out the supply. Maybe 50. Probably not more than 100, depending on what expert you ask. Are we just going to grasshopper our way into annihilation?
Feels a bit like the movie Titanic, where they hit the iceberg, and nobody except the architect thinks it's anything serious, so party on, dude!
Meanwhile, those of us who can't stop the boat from sinking would like to, just maybe, have somewhere to go.
But it doesn't have to be that severe. We could build a moon colony for the right reasons. And learn enough through R and D that commercial application of the resulting science will end up paying for itself. It worked for the moon shots. It worked for the shuttle. Why can't it work again?
But it has to start with a significant investment and a long view on returns. IDK whether we can get there.
No, they don't and he didn't. They (which would include my father) most definitely do not, and "he" did not. Except perhaps to the unique perceptions of some WoV Forum types who will manage to "hear" and "see" a conspiracy in a falling leaf. Are you trolling?Quote: RogerKintQuote: DrawingDeadThey are the Van Allen Belts. Allen, with an "A" as in Allen's Adam's Apple. Still named for James Van Allen, as they were when we first read a little about them back in junior high school. If we weren't too busy out back in the trees behind the school smoking dope and imagining elaborate conspiracies lurking in the shrubbery at the time. But either way, there are still no irradiated belts for Ellen.
You mean they're not the Ellen DeGeneres radiation belts? I stand corrected
NASAs engineers disagree with you. At 3:35 of the official NASA video I linked to, he specifically states the challenges of the Ellen DeGeneres radiation belts must be solved before they can attempt to reach beyond low earth orbit.
Quote:That's not what they said. It's an experimental vehicle and they would need to test it before they send humans into space [in that vehicle].
Quote:WARNING: Video title is a lie
Quote:Wow. You are an idiot. It is a new craft and he said they need to make sure its safe and reliable for humans.
Quote:The VARB is made of HE protons and electrons respectively. For an example, the Apollo command module was made of sheets of aluminium and polyethylene (along with a multitude of other elements), which coincidentally are very good at absorbing high energy protons and electrons. And Apollo mission planners made sure the capsule went through the thinnest part of both belts as possible. The radiation absorbed by the Apollo astronauts were far below the level required to get sick, around the maximum dosage allowed by nuclear energy plant workers. That, friends is how you through the Van Allen RB.
This Apollo astronaut, Alan Bean, didn't even know he sailed through them LOL. They can't hurt you if you don't know theyre there. Notice the poker tells.
Quote: DrawingDeadOkay, so you are trolling.
Was that directed at the official NASA spokesman?
If you take issue with a perceived exaggeration in a NASA video take it up with them.
NASA (and my dad) are not responsible for what any kooks decide they want to "hear" from the peculiar translations occurring in their fevered imaginations. And point by point refutation of such eccentric *ahem* "intereprtations" usually amounts to accepting an invitation to climb down an insane rabbit hole.Quote: RogerKintWas that directed at the official NASA spokesman?
If you take issue with a perceived exaggeration in a NASA video take it up with them.
Quote: DrawingDeadNASA (and my dad) are not responsible for what kooks decide to "hear" from the peculiar translations occurring in their fevered imaginations.
Chiiiillllllllll. You win, k?
Quote: EyetinatimWell, He is not the only one who doubts about this... We all know that story...
British asked about Apollo
Oh my. That is certainly some kind of news. And I think it is best not to mess with the kind of messianic faith & special vision involved there.Quote: beachbumbabs...60% of all wildlife has disappeared from this planet in the last 40 years. ...<SNIP> ... Maybe we have as little as 20 more years to figure this out,..<ASSORTED YIKES & EGADS HITHERTO UNKNOWN TO MERE MORTALS>...
Quote: DrawingDeadThey are the Van Allen Belts. Allen, with an "A" as in Allen's Adam's Apple. Still named for James Van Allen, as they were when we first read a little about them back in junior high school.
James Van Allen was a professor of mine at the University of Iowa.
you have to be a member of Amazon Prime if you want to get a seat on his spaceship😂
https://www.fastcompany.com/40578214/jeff-bezos-talks-about-his-plans-to-colonize-the-moon
For some reason the man who in large part gave birth to the modern industrial world was especially sure that (among other lives) he'd previously lived as a soldier who had been heroically killed at Gettysburg.Quote: Ford, originally in San Francisco Examiner (26 August 1928)I adopted the theory of Reincarnation when I was twenty six. Religion offered nothing to the point. Even work could not give me complete satisfaction. Work is futile if we cannot utilise [sic] the experience we collect in one life in the next. When I discovered Reincarnation it was as if I had found a universal plan I realised [sic] that there was a chance to work out my ideas. Time was no longer limited. I was no longer a slave to the hands of the clock. Genius is experience. Some seem to think that it is a gift or talent, but it is the fruit of long experience in many lives. Some are older souls than others, and so they know more. The discovery of Reincarnation put my mind at ease. If you preserve a record of this conversation, write it so that it puts men’s minds at ease. I would like to communicate to others the calmness that the long view of life gives to us.
Perhaps Bezos has been Henry Ford. If so, I think that's great. It would make him a lot better qualified on the matter, give him some relevant skills and pertinent knowledge, and so maybe it'd be sooner that I could enjoy ringing in the holidays with a seasonal volume shipping discount while sending festive gift coupons for one way complementary rides to the lovely Mare Fecunditatis to a number of *interesting* individuals who come to mind. Maybe even as stocking stuffers for a few deserving souls right here!
^Free parking with no resort fee at Fabulous Fecunditatis Resort!
Quote: RSIf we do ANYTHING with the moon, my vote is to plant a billion pounds of dynamite on that puppy and blow it to smithereens.
Quote: RSIf we do ANYTHING with the moon, my vote is to plant a billion pounds of dynamite on that puppy and blow it to smithereens.
Umm, I think the tides are kind of important to life on Earth... at least that’s what I learned from the Jim Carey documentary, “Bruce Almighty”
Quote: RSIf we do ANYTHING with the moon, my vote is to plant a billion pounds of dynamite on that puppy and blow it to smithereens.
Rule # 6 of space warfare: Don’t blownup something large that sits on top of your gravity well.
It would make the meteor that killed off the dinasours look like a dry run.
