dichotomy

Gee, post a simple fact and iNow spits the dummy . The truth hurts. Ok, so what you seem to assume is that people whom inquire here have to take iNow’s word for it just like Forest Gump type morons or **** off. Speaks volumes about your level of true emotional maturity. And even more about your dubious powers of reason. Agree with iNow on everything or he won’t help with anything, sad! So do you regularly explode into reptilian fight/flight states when someone disagrees with your god like knowledge of moon walks?. What a ****ing dictator! Strike a light! And ****ing grow up! Keep taking your pills iNow, you’ll eventually benefit, I hope. I done with you too, on account of your pathetic childish temperament and your overreactive disposition. iNow, POWER and CONTROL FREAK, extraordinaire ... Not necessarily more reliable, they are easier to judge on their previous track record. I have "SOLID" personal experience of this, I'm sure you do to. Thanks chief. I honestly wasn’t sure. Is it a crime on SFN to not know something now? That's it keep up the insults grownup. What, with these Hill Children??? If they agree to stop throwing there sad childish stones, then I will too. It's a Triune brain model thing...it's worked for millennia. Sheesh, talk about precious. Note to self, don't ask questions about things that are sacred cows.

That sounds like any "legitimate" war. The Yanks where considered terrorists by the British back in the war of independance days. It all comes down to perspective. Maybe terrorists generally don't control a state perhaps? Terrorist don't have massive wealth? Ahh, terrorist is just not a scientific term is it.

Well then, does a scientific mind just accept things like a religious zealot, or does it inquire on many levels? iNow, I know you are being facetious, but ridicule is a science killer or a nervous reaction from someone whom isn't so sure, IMO. It's funny, because paleontology is "stuff of the earth" I more familiar with, I think I could accept the gaps more readily, I totally accept the concept of evolution for example. I just don't personally know anyone who has walked on the hostile surface of the moon. I mean, we haven't even got a man down to the deepest depths of the oceans yet, or have we? You had me all exited then , I thought they might be updated high res images, but it’s the same pre school finger painting that I’ve already posted in this thread. Merged post follows: Consecutive posts merged I intend to look at the Moon Rocks information more closely so I can potentially be 100% convinced! The holy grail!!! What the **** is a holy grail anyway?

Thanks, I'll take a look, and so will Egbert, my scared little inner scientist. Yes, but unmanned. That's right, but the burden back on those with meager resourses to do it. I am trying to disprove the hoax!!! So, where are the independant references, citations, etc. I'll even take a signed scribbled note (from a russian national) on some dunny paper at present. All it needs to say is -"Yep, can be done and was done". Taddah!!! Merged post follows: Consecutive posts merged FFS, All I wanted was a "Russian Scientific Reference", to state that it was indeed done. And you know that. I know I'm not taking to hill children here...Or...???? Merged post follows: Consecutive posts merged FFS, All I wanted was a "Russian Scientific Reference", to state that it was indeed done. And you know that. I know I'm not talking to hill children here...Or...????

Okay, the problem with media being the messenger of science is that it can be manipulated at too many points to mention. Think of the German population in WW2. Do you think the Nazi's would allow the truth to establish itself from outside their ideological boarders? No, and if it did succeed getting through it would be discredited and laughed upon by the Nazi hierachy and the general population would generally believe they are in the right. Extreme example I know. The point is that mainstream Russian media have recently given a lot of credibility to some hoax/propaganda theories. I'm not saying it was a hoax. I'm saying that the Russians appear to not be completely convinced. You would be surprised how little real news we get from Russia, even today. And you would also be very surprise at just how filtered western media is, both to and from China and Russia, and from us to them. Besides, I'm 95% certain. Just like the scientific Method recommends! If it's good enough for the method, it's good enough for this suburban slob

Ok, I see I have bottomed out here in my quest. The only references I have to rely on to join the dots are the Murdoch style tabloid newspapers and media reports. Gee, no wonder civilized history is so obscured. A total reliance on taking someone’s word for it. Just like the word of GOD. BTW I’m not blaming anyone here; it’s just our inherent human limitations shining through. Thanks anyway. I have learnt much here in a short space of time. I just hope in the future something like Science Daily publishes more about manned interplanetary space travel. What I will do is look more closely at the returned moon rocks as evidence of a manned lunar walk. They seem like the most solid bits of evidence to me anyway. Very convincing from an Aussie forum - "Moon rocks are similar to Earth rocks, indicating a common origin. But they are different enough from Earth rocks that if you were to give a Moon rock to a geologist without telling her where it came from, she could tell you with certainty that it didn’t come from the Earth. Moon rocks show signs of having formed in a low gravity vacuum, which was obviously expected. But they are also essentially free of water, and contain little in the way of other volatile chemicals, which wasn’t universally expected. Finally, it’s worth noting that at least some of the rocks scientists have studied from the Moon were selected during the missions by looking at the television pictures beamed back live from the Moon. Yes, there are lunar meteorites which have been collected on the Earth. But their surfaces have been weathered by passing through the Earth’s atmosphere. By contrast, the Apollo rocks are covered with tiny craters caused by the impact of microscopic dust particles at speeds of tens of kilometres a second. We don’t have the technology to recreate those craters. So in other words, the Apollo rocks weren’t collected from the Moon by robots, and they weren’t collected on the Earth. The only solution left is that they were collected by humans from the Moon."

I have been confirmed an incurrable mathematical dyslexic by a specialist. Can someone please post the solution the problem: What size would a sphere of pure iridium need to be, to give it the same gravity as our Earth? You can send me a private message if you don't want to spoil it for others. cheers.

So, the moon landings are not truely science then? Does this confine them to the world of politics??? If moon landings are not in scientific journals, then my little interior scientist says, they are A. Highly possible but unproven B. Pure propaganda and politiking C. A mass delusion, on par with belief in a deity - in that exact order of probability.

Well, simple to prove outright. Provide a Russian satillite image of a single moon landing site that shows tracks.

I’ve never moved the goal posts. Ok Mokele, one last time for your benefit. Even though I made it perfectly clear in my earliest post. I require one, yes that’s right 1, Russian, and or Chinese scientific reference to confirm a "MOON (lunar) WALK, BY AT LEAST ONE HOMO SAPIEN". The reference can not be produced by a non Russian/Chinese national, unless, it was produced while they where still a confirmed national. I’ve attempted to search the Russian science links kindly provided, but to no avail at this point in time. BTW. I’m 95% sure it happened now. And according to the scientific method this makes me certain it happened. Merged post follows: Consecutive posts merged Was'nt Reagan one of those Disney animatronix? Merged post follows: Consecutive posts merged Lord iNow, model citizen.

It’s not that complex if you catalogue humour under - "power and control". I speculate that basically everything we do is ultimately for personal and tribal power and/or control; over ourselves and our environment. Homo sapiens are spectacular control freaks. That’s one good reason why we excel with science and creativity compared with our fellow life forms. I know there is at least some scientific psychological/neurological research out there that explores this fascinating area. Any links would be appreciated. Some links - Humor Shown To Be Fundamental To Our Success As A Species http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/06/080612150144.htm Love Me; Love My Jokes http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2005/02/050212200527.htm Having Less Power Impairs The Mind And Ability To Get Ahead, Study Shows http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/05/080515113259.htm

Damn, you're ****ing right! Merged post follows: Consecutive posts merged iNow, you're lucky. I lost hope years ago...I'm hoping for a homosapien speciation, not unlike chimps and bonobos. I'll be a well dressed baboon of couse!

Honestly, I'm not even certain that I have a clean pair of black socks in my draws at present, so I better go look. Gotta go! Cheers.

The only thing I found obviously unreliable (in the Docu) was the talk about Captain Pizarro leading 170 conquistadors to victory against 80000 Incas! Look, I can believe the microbes hypothesis being primarily responsible for this victory, but not the talk of horses, muskets and swords. I think Captain Pizarro ensured a over inflated legend for himself.

I’m a socialist right winger, in favour of benevolent dictatorships. Nah! Democratic Socialist Greenie (idealist:embarass:).

"Roald Sagdeev who is a Professor of Physics at the University of Maryland. He once was the Director of the Soviet Space Institute. He is right now at NASA’s Ames Research Center in California looking at photos for evidence that there is frozen ice in craters on the moon." - again with the conflict of interest. Sorry, this still makes me 5% short of being convinced, according to the scientific method. "What will it take for you to accept that it did happen?" you already know what it will take. Reference please... Merged post follows: Consecutive posts merged Yes, but I thought it more astute to ask the experts. Besides, this is part of the evidence I'm accumulating. I thought this would be the critical path. Merged post follows: Consecutive posts merged I'd be the first to be happy that this space monkey was off my back! Thanks for the link. I know it's a pain in the arse searching/translating 'cause I've been trying it my self....masochist!!! :-(

Sorry, this is not independant enough, but thanks for trying, why? - "Sergei Nikitich Khrushchev, son of former Soviet Premier Nikita Khrushchev, now resides in the United States where he is a Senior Fellow at the Watson Institute for International Studies at Brown University in Providence, Rhode Island. ref: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sergei_Khrushchev A massive conflict of interest. If he was still a Russian national, I'd completely accept his words. You had my hopes up then! Merged post follows: Consecutive posts merged When they talk of something like '30' meters per pixel images, what size pixel are they referring too? Fair enough, I would just love to see a moon buggy up there. And take a ride!

Come on guys! You are science people, not god botherers. This supposed photographic proof in the year 2009 is totally laughable. If the Russians have sent multiple unmanned craft to take moon samples from 1969, if mars rovers are currently sending back data, then surely we could get some detailed high resolution image evidence today. From someone? I know the Japanese recently tried and failed with there probe. It’s interesting; they point out astronaut’s footpath etc, but where are the lunar rovers and their tracks? They are my personal favourites. Besides, they would have been quite an added weight to the spaceflight. Very risky I would have thought, considering you have mens lives in your hands. In theory, faking a correct echo would be easy if you sent an unmanned craft to the moon to video broadcast the whole moon landing/walk thing. Even easier, if the echo effect was pre-recorded in a studio and broadcast from a space probe/satillite. Granted the echo would be impressive detail if faked, but not beyond intelligent chess playing men. Anyway, this is taking up far too much of everyone’s time. I’ll now be content to patiently wait for the scientific reference (not non- peer reviewed tabloid newspapers) I’ve asked for. Even though the Russian scientists where not up there to see it first hand, I’d take their word for it (that it’s been done), when combined with Nasa’s and the Nixon administrations existing claims. Just remember, when a group of scientists are broken up into enough different specialized areas they all won’t know what the head/s (the administration) are doing. If I was a betting man I’d still say it (a manned moon expedition) was indeed done. But my small inner scientific man tells me, “with every speculation there is a risk”. Merged post follows: Consecutive posts merged What!? the other superpowers independent scientific reference/s? Come on, it's not rocket science! You got that bit right brother! Oh, and change...

So, it's a work in progress? Or, should be used in conjunction with the most reliable up to date data available? I really didn't think I tripped it up. What I was hoping for was less of a divergence between wolf and tassie wolf, than from kangaroo and tassie wolf.

Like I stated, I stand at 90% convinced of a moon walk, which I think is pretty damn reasonable considering I'm Joe Average from the suburbs that doesn't have close contacts in any of the superpowers political and military hierachies. Although I'm 100% sure that Micheal Jackson has done it. Russian state TV news recently gave a lot of attention to a hoax manned Apollo 11 Moon landing. I can provide a link to the limited story if you wish. All I'm asking for are Russian, and or Chinese scientific references stating that an astronaut can walk on the moon, which would crystalize it as a 100% scientific fact in my mind anyway. Is this too much to ask? Honestly, I thought it would be slightly easier than NASA demonstrating it as a fact by actually doing it again today? All I'm attempting is to build evidence in support of a moon walk, just as the 'scientific method' recommends. Why is this such a touchy subject? If I lived in a remote community that never saw an aircraft, I'd be asking for credible scientific references outside of my community to establish aircraft as a 100% scientific fact, even though I've never seen one. None,that's where independant superpowers step in, because they have the resources and I simply don't. Look I'll make it real simple, all superpowers agree that pluto, manned space stations and space probes exist, therefore I do. Do you see the logic? All superpowers agree that these are facts. If I was a russky, I'd be seeking a U.S. reference for Russian scientific claims that are difficult to prove/replicate. Come on, I'm 90% convinced that a hoax busting reference exists, don't make it 20%. You must have ESP. You are obviously not into probability. Hello! this is the S-P-E-C-U-L-A-T-I-O-N-S thread. I suggest someone attempt to find a russian reference to shoot this bullshit down in flames. Honestly, it's beginning to seem like asking a religious nut for a credible reference to prove a deitie's existance. It just shouldn't be that big a deal. Merged post follows: Consecutive posts merged I'm not asking for proof against a moon walk, I'm asking for what I see as damned solid proof for a moon walk, by the supply of a simple scientific reference from the independant superpowers. Knock, knock, knock. Hello! anyone home. Keep looking under your bed for a red, stay in fear, stay in fear, buy, buy consume, consume. (see I can stoop to my more primitive brain regions too ).

Well, at least DH gave me something (scientific references) as opposed to the nothing I got thus far from aussie science forums. The best that was provided was western newspaper reports of the time. Hardly scientific method stuff I'm affraid. Merged post follows: Consecutive posts merged This is all funny as hell!!! I have a buddy who believes every single detail of what governments and the commercial sector say. Same buddy says that Vietnam is a good war and that thalidomide is a wonder drug. ...oops!!! LoL!! see how juvenile it is?

If it wasn't so close to the truth I'd laugh! This is SFN and not North Korea is it not?

Hmm, okay, no need to devolve and get all reptilian here DH. I thought science was about inquiry, proof and logic, the scientific method, etc, and not the hostile immature emotions of a god fearing 15 year old. And after all, this is the speculations thread . I could just as immaturely state that, "we have no f*cking proof of walking on the moon. If you think otherwise, you're a f*cking tard. Good day". But I find it ineffectual in getting solid evidence. And I could go to other science forums that engage in exactly that kind of consistently pissy response to questions if I was so pointlessly inclined. So I take it, from your response and references, that a radio signal coming from the moon is enough to prove to the Russians that men can indeed 'walk' on the moon? Although in the reference you generously supply I see nothing that actually states this as fact. What it proves to me is that the Russians where tracking radio communications coming from the direction of the moon, that astronauts where in space at the time, and that a space craft accomplished flight around and landing on the moon. This puts me at about a 90 percent level of accepting astronauts actually walking on the moon and driving about in a moon rover. To quote - "to develop the special control radio-technical complex, with the aid of which it would be possible to assume signals from the American spacecraft of the program "of Apollo", which accomplished flight around the moon and landing on its surface." No statement of men walking on the moons surface. None the less, I do appreciate the Russian scientific references you supplied and hope that you, or someone else, can come across one that shows the Russians accepting the fact of an actual homosapien walking on the moons surface. Cheers.

I suppose what's not trivial is the explanation of exactly what environmental factors had the largest impacts on the various populations that hold power...and those that don't?

The problem with using, "a signal coming from the moon", as solid proof is that it can be achieved using unmanned space craft (and satellites). The same goes for the mirrors that are on the moon. Or am I wrong here? But if the Russian scientists are happy with signals as solid evidence, then I would be as well. I just need to see the reference. From what I can gather, the best available evidence of a moon walk is the 300 odd kgs of moon rocks that have been collected. But what I have read is that these rocks could have just as easily been collected from earth as fragments of meteorites, and of course the USSR managed to collect moon rocks with unmanned craft. Also, a reasonably well supported scientific theory states that the moon is a fragment of earth which broke away after a collision and merging with another planet. This would lead me to assume that the minerals collected from the moon can also be collected from the parts of the earth that it broke off from (minus organic matters influences of course). This is not solid evidence either. We may all have to wait for a manned Mars landing that will probably be even harder for independent superpowers to indisputably prove.