Earlier quoted context omitted.
Only weapons-grade milk.
Heavy milk (whole) is required for cookie enrichment. But depleted milk (skim) still has value.
Commonly used as a projectile
Artemis II and the invisible hazard on the way to the Moon
51–60 of 72 posts
Re: Artemis II and the invisible hazard on the way to the Moon
#52Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's a bit too much to ask of these folks, I'm afraid, but I did boil it down for him by saying that the real question is understanding why he is inclined to believe its a hoax, rather than trying to pile up evidence in front of him. I suppose that's what "street epistemology" is, though. Nice to have shorthand terms for these ideas. I also included a thought experiment for him: Imagine you take a conspiracy influe…
> Imagine you take a conspiracy influencer and actually put them in the spacecraft with the astronauts so they could see the whole thing with their own eyes and wouldn't be able to deny it. They return to earth to tell their followers that it's all real. Do you think everyone will be convinced, or would they say he's now in on the conspiracy and find a new person to lead the conspiracy theory? https://en.wikipedia.or…
The Final Experiment (https://www.the-final-experiment.com/) essentially did this by inviting "prominent" flat earthers to Antarctica to witness 24 hours of daylight. Very few did, but they are now shunned by the true flat earthers.
Re: Artemis II and the invisible hazard on the way to the Moon
#53Earlier quoted context omitted.
Strictly speaking, their existence was verified by Sputnik 2 (though the Soviets only released data on it after the fact, corroborating data from Explorer 1), so if you have a highly _specific_ conspiracy theory, around NASA rather than space stuff in general, that _could_ still work, I suppose?
No, because the Soviets have to in on faking the moon landing. They were also landing a spacecraft at the same time as the landings. To fake the moon landing you'd also have to fake the entire cold war .
Wouldn't it be great for the US and the USSR if most of the cold war was fake?
Both sides get a great boogie man to denounce. Save a bunch of money on arms if they're mostly fake. Once you learn about the Van Allen Belt, you call over on the red phone and say hey guys, we know we can't send people, but think about the ratings? Maybe we send you a case of Pepsi and we're good?
Re: Artemis II and the invisible hazard on the way to the Moon
#54Earlier quoted context omitted.
Strictly speaking, their existence was verified by Sputnik 2 (though the Soviets only released data on it after the fact, corroborating data from Explorer 1), so if you have a highly _specific_ conspiracy theory, around NASA rather than space stuff in general, that _could_ still work, I suppose?
No, because the Soviets have to in on faking the moon landing. They were also landing a spacecraft at the same time as the landings. To fake the moon landing you'd also have to fake the entire cold war .
It's disappointingly difficult to get a positive case for what happened from deniers, that attempts to explain these things. Very eager to tell you what didn't happen, though.
Re: Artemis II and the invisible hazard on the way to the Moon
#55Earlier quoted context omitted.
Any entertaining “Artemis II is a hoax” takes?
I haven't been actively looking for them, but a friend sent me something about the launch tower escape zipline/gondolas and how that somehow indicated something fraudulent. He is not a denier, but works with one and is always asking me to refute that person's claims.
Oh because the astronauts were “really” on the escape zip lines instead of in the rocket?
How would they do the zero gravity during the live streams? They have to actually be in space, not even the zero-G parabolic airplane sim can maintain zero gravity for as long as their live streams have been.
I’ve heard people claim you can’t leave Low Earth Orbit due to the Van Allen radiation belts, but most Apollo deniers still believe low earth orbit is possible and reasonable. If they did fake Artemis II, it would have to be that the astronauts actually launched into LEO, and just didn’t really leave.
There’s just no way to fake zero-G for that long.
Re: Artemis II and the invisible hazard on the way to the Moon
#56Earlier quoted context omitted.
The threat of radiation is not overblown at all. The errors caused by radiation are extremely frequent and you definitely must guard against them, otherwise anything will fail immediately in space. However that does not necessarily require hardware measures. It may be more efficient if instead of a slow antique CPU with hardware redundancy you use a fast modern CPU, even if it is more sensitive to radiation and even…
>>The errors caused by radiation are extremely frequent and you definitely must guard against them, otherwise anything will fail immediately in space. I asked this in another thread but I will repeat it here - how come that their bog standard iPhones that they use for taking pictures with are still operating fine then? If like you said, "anything will fail immediately" - doesn't sound like that's the case? They have…
Aren't the stakes a little different with an iPhone that you have for picture taking and entertainment vs the systems that manage your trajectory and life support?
The fact that a handful of devices hasn't failed is hardly proof that they can't. Hell, I've driven thousands of times and never actually NEEDED my seatbelt.
Re: Artemis II and the invisible hazard on the way to the Moon
#57Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Imagine you take a conspiracy influencer and actually put them in the spacecraft with the astronauts so they could see the whole thing with their own eyes and wouldn't be able to deny it. They return to earth to tell their followers that it's all real. Do you think everyone will be convinced, or would they say he's now in on the conspiracy and find a new person to lead the conspiracy theory? https://en.wikipedia.or…
The Final Experiment ( https://www.the-final-experiment.com/ ) essentially did this by inviting "prominent" flat earthers to Antarctica to witness 24 hours of daylight. Very few did, but they are now shunned by the true flat earthers.
So what is it really? A social club? A church? A religion?
Re: Artemis II and the invisible hazard on the way to the Moon
#58Earlier quoted context omitted.
No, because the Soviets have to in on faking the moon landing. They were also landing a spacecraft at the same time as the landings. To fake the moon landing you'd also have to fake the entire cold war .
Wouldn't it be great for the US and the USSR if most of the cold war was fake? Both sides get a great boogie man to denounce. Save a bunch of money on arms if they're mostly fake. Once you learn about the Van Allen Belt, you call over on the red phone and say hey guys, we know we can't send people, but think about the ratings? Maybe we send you a case of Pepsi and we're good?
What if large wars are coordinated by the rulers of opposing sides with the purpose of killing off as many of their own young men as possible - thus reducing the threat of an uprising?
Re: Artemis II and the invisible hazard on the way to the Moon
#59Earlier quoted context omitted.
No, because the Soviets have to in on faking the moon landing. They were also landing a spacecraft at the same time as the landings. To fake the moon landing you'd also have to fake the entire cold war .
Wouldn't it be great for the US and the USSR if most of the cold war was fake? Both sides get a great boogie man to denounce. Save a bunch of money on arms if they're mostly fake. Once you learn about the Van Allen Belt, you call over on the red phone and say hey guys, we know we can't send people, but think about the ratings? Maybe we send you a case of Pepsi and we're good?
Now the whole idea of a fake cold war is burrowing into my brain.
Re: Artemis II and the invisible hazard on the way to the Moon
#60I enjoy how moon-landing deniers will use the van Allen belts as a reason for why the astronauts could not have made it to the moon because of radiation exposure. Like, you don't believe NASA that they went to the moon, but you believe NASA that the van Allen belts exist?
People live in regions far more radioactive than the van Allen belts for far longer than the amount of time the Apollo and Artemis astronauts spent travelling through.
Like, for example, people who live in Aberdeen.