There are no alternative facts in science. A fact remains a fact whether people choose to believe it or not.

Clive is completely right. There are certain questions we might never know the answer too like "Why do we exist?" (which suggests there IS a reason when there might not be). If we don't know an answer, we invent one we like. Just because we don't know how a trick is done (yet: for example how life began) doesn't make it magic.

Yet you're wrong because they did so you don't. There is no room for debate about this unless you want to claim the Bumble Bee can't fly also. Did you ever consider that you're stupidity holds the human race back? I'm sorry if I come across as offensive but it's like trying to hold a rational argument with an irrational person. It can't be done. Which parts do you struggle with and I'll attempt to answer them for you?

A brief "definition" that works for me:

"God" is a convenient tag to which people attribute anything which is beyond their comprehension.

I find this conveniently disposes of the concept of "belief in" God, and probably explains why some find comfort in worshiping.

MichaelG.

A fact is the subject of a majority opinion, confirmed through practice and time, the expression "alternative fact" really annoys me, because it's just a fad word for falsehood.

Michael W

Edited By Michael-w on 28/05/2017 12:59:24

Close it Neil.... I'm none the wiser !

Hi, well I believe there is more evidence that the moon landings occurred then there is of it being faked. As far as being a waste of money, you could say that about any exploration, however many benefits have come about to the majority of peoples lives through all types of exploring and the research and development of them. As far as the existence of God is concerned, if God does not exist then no one will ever know, but if God does exist, what happens next?

Regards Nick.

Rod - once again, I agree 100% with what you say.

Recently, at one of the clubs I belong to, we had an issue, and many spouted "facts", whilst ignoring published guidelines (even ones published by the landlord). Nobody was anywhere near an expert in the field-of-issue, but that did not stop some people from pontificating!

I found it quite depressing, to tell you the truth. For my own sake it has re-affirmed that for my own health and happiness I have to back away from being anywhere near club decision-making processes. Sigh.

Keep up the good work, with your writing and designing and making - it is appreciated.

Regards, John A. Stewart.

Rod and Chris have about summed it up. I don't understand how computers work, but this one seems to be managing without any divine assistance, and it certainly isn't being faked by the CIA. Landing a spacecraft on a comet seems a much more difficult job that a trip of a few day's to the moon and back.

**LINK**

After all, a B52 bomber made the trip to the moon one way

**LINK**

even tho' they do call it a fighter part way down the page

Edited By duncan webster on 28/05/2017 14:47:55

.

For anyone that is interested (it's been on many times before) on 'Eden' channel this afternoon is the NASA story.

Nick

The only thing that's actually going to the moon is Bitcoin

.

An interesting take on it Carl

... I had assumed that "we" referred to mankind.

MichaelG.

That was a poke at NASA who famously mixed up imperial and metric when crashing a mars probe.

More pertinently, the majority of 'full-sun' moon is at 100C, but only the 'feet' of the lander and astronauts woudl be directly in contact with this and in the absence of an atmosphere they would be more heated by the sunlight than by re-radiation of IR from the moon, so the challenge of cooling (or accepting heat) is really the same as for a spacecraft in orbit. In fact this is even tougher to deal with, sunlit parts of the ISS would reach 250C:

science.nasa.gov/science-news/science-at-nasa/2001/ast21mar_1

The LEM used a 'porous plate sublimator' a very efficient device for refrigeration that works by allowing tiny amounts of water to evaporate into the vacuum of space, also used for space suits (the little ones on spacesuits can dump nearly 600 watts of energy).

www.quora.com/How-did-the-air-conditioning-work-on-Apollo-11-lunar-landing-module

In fact the cooling system on Apollo 11 was a bit too good:

"During the sleep period on the lunar surface, the crewmen reported that they
were too cold to sleep. Analysis of the conditions experienced indicated that, once the
crewmen were in a cold condition, there was not enough heat available in the ECS to
return them to a comfortable condition. In addition to the required procedural changes
which were designed to maintain heat in the suit circuit, hammocks were provided for
subsequent missions to improve crew comfort and to reduce heat conduction from the
crewmen."

Much of interest in this fascinating NASA document

Neil

Ransomed out of the NHS?

That 'temperature on the moon' problem is a good example of earth bound common sense leading us astray. We live on a world with an atmosphere and it's obvious that we would cook if the temperature of the air was 150°C. I own an ordinary kitchen oven and you couldn't live in it.

Cooking in that way can't happen on the moon. There is no atmosphere so the only way astronauts can get hot is by direct contact with the surface, or by absorption of the sun's radiation. The first is mostly dealt with by a bit of insulation and the second by a layer of silver foil.

Dave

Edited By SillyOldDuffer on 28/05/2017 17:19:34

I believe the ransom was 300 USD - but payable in bitcoin, so the earlier you bought yer bitcoin, the cheaper the ransom.

I'm not certain that any release code is even sent after payment. Maybe just forking out for a new hard drive & reinstalling from a backup () would be the best way forward, like you'd have to do with other virus infections.

Ali G Interviews Buzz Aldrin

A bit rude in parts so don't watch if easily offended - still funny in my opinion.

Edited By blowlamp on 28/05/2017 18:41:43