Neil Armstrong

First topic message reminder :

The man behind the legend.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-48953973

Apollo 11: 'The greatest single broadcast in television history'

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-48857752

Did you know , the moon was over Wigan when they landed.

Yes, and it was Wigan proper in 1969. None of your Metropolitan Greater Manchester crap. One small step for a County Borough...………….

Join us as we count down the final 13-minute descent from 18:45 GMT on Saturday 20 July

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/world-48991051

NASA scientists say ...... "the temperature on the Moon varies from 120 degrees c. to MINUS 180 degrees c." (water boils at 100 degrees and freezes at 0 degrees)

They also say ...... "solar winds on the Moon's surface can travel at up to 900 metres per second" (3 times the speed of sound?)


Work it out for yourself!

solar wind is not bloody wind

mache wrote:solar wind is not bloody wind

No.  The difference being, 'wind' can blow you over.  'Solar Wind' can microwave you in seconds!?  


Not to mention the "thousands of volts of static electricity, which makes moon-dust levitate above the surface"!

That's NASA scientists. If they'd been, they'd know!

Your sat on your backside in a solar wind as you type

My sat? (You're.)

Purposeful post, your reply sums up your lack of knowledge

A debate, in 2012, on "Dust on the Moon, the affect on any robotic rovers exploring craters"


Lunar Science Institute / NASA says - "highly charged atmosphere" and "minus 400 degrees" and "as for robots, the craters high concentration of static electricity is likely to short out their electronics".


Now. Ask yourself. ..... If the atmosphere of the Moon is so dangerous to the electronics used in the technology of today, how did they cope with it in 1969?
You also have to think about the information they have. It's not 'black and white'. It's all done on calculations and those calculations are done from scientific speculation using computer models
They also 'speculate' that "any astronaut would have to wait for a period of time, after every step, in order to allow the static charge created by the dust to discharge. ('would' have to? Them men didn't stand any static discharge time, when they were running round in that 'dust' in 1969!) (or, maybe, it was just .... sand?)

Enjoy

https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m0006vqt

SPACE CENTER, HOUSTON (AP) — It has taken almost $24 billion to give Neil A. Armstrong a chance to walk on the moon for two hours, 40 minutes.

While he’s doing it, the nation’s first civilian astronaut will be earning only about $33 for his time.

erontquay wrote:  ....   the nation’s first civilian astronaut will be earning only about $33 for his time.

That's above minimum wage!  What more does he want,  travel expenses?  

RIP

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neil_Armstrong

There is no event in the history of the world about which people can't make perfectly logical (to them at least) arguments that they didn't happen. Or that they happened significantly differently than we are taught. Like the Moon landing, Holocaust, JFK assassination, 911..... How do they pick the events they will deny? Why not the climbing of Mount Everest, the Trump election, World War One, or yesterday's rising of the Sun? The possibilities are limited only by the supply of tinfoil. And why tinfoil?