An extraordinary statement?

[Steven Phillips]

Also- Would someone please provide the definition of computer chip as referenced in Duane's quote.

I think you know what Duane meant when he said computor chips hadnt been invented in the 60`s ; I know he meant processors as do you, what you are classifying as a chip was little more than a glorified transistor.

[Evan Burton]

Also- Would someone please provide the definition of computer chip as referenced in Duane's quote.

I think you know what Duane meant when he said computor chips hadnt been invented in the 60`s ; I know he meant processors as do you, what you are classifying as a chip was little more than a glorified transistor.

Doesn't make much of a difference, though:

"In any event, by 1969 computers were more than adequate to provide sufficiently accurate guidance for the moon mission.".

[Steve Ulman]

Also- Would someone please provide the definition of computer chip as referenced in Duane's quote.

I think you know what Duane meant when he said computor chips hadnt been invented in the 60`s ; I know he meant processors as do you, what you are classifying as a chip was little more than a glorified transistor.

It's important because there is no such thing as a "computer chip". What is important is what the author was trying to say and why the author thought it was relevant. If he's speaking of a IC's then he's wrong. The IC was invented in the late 50's and were instramental in the construction of the AGC. If, the author was speaking of microprocessors, the statement is true. In any event, if the author believes that fact has any relevance, he's wrong.

And I wasn't getting on to Duane, he was simply quoting someone else. Also, to his credit, he has already given his source, and acknowledged his lack of knowledge in this area.

[Guest Mark Valenti]

"It is a waste of time to argue with bigots."

Just like it's a waste of time to argue with those who's only means of arguing their point is to use unnecessary ad homs .... Or maybe he think that makes him look more intelligent .

Bigot is not even the correct term in this application ... Bigot refers to racial prejudice ... So much for intelligent conversations .... You contact a nasa defender to get an honset answer ? ... Too funny !

Um...actually bigot is defined as "a person who is utterly intolerant of any differing creed, belief or opinion." Quoting the Random House Dictionary of the English Language, Second Edition Unabridged.

[Steven Phillips]

Yes bigot was originally used to describe people who held stubborn religeous beliefs but has more recently been used to describe people with right wing views on race and multiculturalism and people who hold intolerable fixed beliefs like the nasa defenders who to and fro referencing their shuttle spotters almanacs.

[Duane Daman]

"It is a waste of time to argue with bigots."

Just like it's a waste of time to argue with those who's only means of arguing their point is to use unnecessary ad homs .... Or maybe he think that makes him look more intelligent .

Bigot is not even the correct term in this application ... Bigot refers to racial prejudice ... So much for intelligent conversations .... You contact a nasa defender to get an honset answer ? ... Too funny !

Um...actually bigot is defined as "a person who is utterly intolerant of any differing creed, belief or opinion." Quoting the Random House Dictionary of the English Language, Second Edition Unabridged.

Um... do you mean like those who are intolerent of any differing belief or opinion which goes against the accepted opinion of the main stream majority ? ... Such as nasa's story of landing men on the moon 37 years ago ?

What an unfortunate use of a word, which much more applies to the one who said it , than of those he said it about .

[Duane Daman]

But getting back on topic ...

"An extraodinary statement ? Mr Daman claims "Mission control left out of loop"

Yes they were .... Even the flight director Gene Krantz said that NO CONTROLLER could discern the difference between a real landing from one done in training .

[Guest Mark Valenti]

Um... do you mean like those who are intolerent of any differing belief or opinion which goes against the accepted opinion of the main stream majority ? ... Such as nasa's story of landing men on the moon 37 years ago ?

Nope - it's just that words mean things and your definition of the word was blatantly wrong. I don't know that I would have used that particular word to describe your position on the moon landings. But I do think precision on your part is the barest minimum requirement when you're talking about casting aside the lifetime achievements of thousands of NASA employees. I suspect many of them would have more pungent words to describe your position.

[Duane Daman]

"I suspect many of them would have more pungent words to describe your position."

I have no doubt .

I cast aside the achievements of no one .... Not many of the hard working individuals working for nasa or their out sourced companies had any idea that the Apollo missions were faked .... Not even the hard workers at mission control were in on the scam .... Ever hear of compartmentalization or "as need to know" basis ? .... The only ones in the loop , so to speak , was nasa management , the astronauts and of course the stage hands , set builders , artists and photograhers , who cast aside quite a lot to help scam the world .

[Jack White]

"I suspect many of them would have more pungent words to describe your position."

I have no doubt .

I cast aside the achievements of no one .... Not many of the hard working individuals working for nasa or their out sourced companies had any idea that the Apollo missions were faked .... Not even the hard workers at mission control were in on the scam .... Ever hear of compartmentalization or "as need to know" basis ? .... The only ones in the loop , so to speak , was nasa management , the astronauts and of course the stage hands , set builders , artists and photograhers , who cast aside quite a lot to help scam the world .

Exactly, Duane. I have nothing but admiration for the brilliant scientists

at NASA which brought us such achievements as the Hubble telescope,

unmanned space missions, and the space station.

Forgotten is the fact that the Apollo missions were strictly POLITICAL,

being run by Lyndon and Tricky Dick. The vast majority of NASA employees

were duped along with the compliant press and gullible public.

Jack

[Duane Daman]

"Forgotten is the fact that the Apollo missions were strictly POLITICAL, being run by Lyndon and Tricky Dick. The vast majority of NASA employees were duped along with the compliant press and gullible public."

And in that one statement Jack , you just hit the big nail very squarely on it's big head ! ... Or in other words ... BINGO !!

[Evan Burton]

You still continue to miss the point:

I have provided opinions from two Apollo Flight Controllers (as distinct from Mr Kranz, who was the Mission Controller - do we need to cover this again?) who say:

1) The technology did not allow for a continuous simulation, which would be needed to fake an entire mission; and

2) The Flight Controllers could tell the difference between a sim and real flight.

Perhaps Sy Liebergot would know how to contact Gene Kranz, and could ask his opinion on your interpretation of his quote? I'm sure he would say you were wrong... but if he did, I'm equally sure you'd claim it was some type of 'backpeddling' instead of perhaps a slightly inaccurate choice of words.

Edited December 8, 2006 by Evan Burton

[Evan Burton]

I'm glad you acknowledge the efforts of the many thousands of scientists, engineers, designers and workers. Let's think some more about that for the moment.

How many spacecraft did Lyndon Johnson or Richard Nixon, or other politicians, design or build? None.

How many launch vehicles did Lyndon Johnson or Richard Nixon, or other politicians, design or build? None.

How many 'spacesuits' did Lyndon Johnson or Richard Nixon, or other politicians, design or build? None.

The contractors designed and built them. NASA said 'we need a device to fulfil the following criteria..'. The scientists and engineers designed, built, and tested the various sub-sections and components to meet those specifications (a lunar landing).

So all the scientists and engineers designed, built, and tested these devices... and then NASA didn't use them?

Reality check for my friend here, please.