The Daily Mail is mooning us all

Here is how the Daily Mail sidebar describes the story about Nasa’s recent discovery of water and metals in a lunar crater:

Why the Moon really IS silvery: Scientists discover 6% of lunar surface is precious metalHere is the actual headline:

Why the Moon really IS silvery: Lunar surface contains traces of precious metal and is 6% water

See if you can spot the difference.

Incidentally, the Moon’s surface isn’t 6% water anyway – the experiment was done specifically in a crater which is always in shadow, precisely because water there would freeze, and wouldn’t boil away during the scaldingly hot lunar day. Finding the Cabeus crater is 6% water is not the same as finding the entire moon is 6% water.

At least the comments that try use this as “proof” that the Apollo landings never took place because Neil Armstrong et al never found any silver (even though they did) have been red-arrowed to “Worst rated” oblivion, as has someone who worries that taking the moon’s silver might “render crystal healing utterly useless”.

Advertisements

  1. #1 by remotekontrol on Monday, 25th October 2010 - 15:47 UTC

    The Moon landings are without any shadow of a doubt completely & quite obviously fake.

    Please see my latest posting refering to name deleted‘s articles.

    Thanks =)

    Mod note: Took out links promoting blog – if you really care, the username is still linked.

    • #2 by atomicspin on Monday, 25th October 2010 - 16:31 UTC

      Eurgh, no. None of the claims those articles make hold any weight under actual scientific scrutiny.

      I’m not going to go through every claim that article makes, mostly because it is long and rambling as hell, and pointing out the holes in conspiracy theories is about as much fun as pushing Sisyphus’s rock for a day. Nevertheless, as a physicist, here are a few comments:

      Transmitting from the moon is a lot easier than transmitting from the other side of the Earth – the route moon to Earth is a straight line, and almost entirely vacuum, while the path from the Arabian peninsula to the US is a long curved line which has to be bounced off satellites.

      We have plenty of spacecraft capable of keeping humans alive for much, much longer than the Apollo spacecraft did. People can live on the International Space Station for months – we just don’t send them to the moon because there’s nothing there that it would be economical to exploit.

      We have plenty of questions about the moon still, it’s just cheaper to solve them with robots (which we send to the moon all the freaking time) than humans.

      And of course cameras were sent to the moon before the Apollo missions – the Soviet Luna 9 and the American Surveyor 1 probes, along with many others, carried cameras. I’m not convinced photography on the moon is that different to photography elsewhere – light is still light, wherever you are – but even if it was, we’d had years of practice. (Also, of course Nasa is only going to release the nicest looking photos – no-one wants to see the pointless blurry photos)

      The moon’s surface is shiny, so reflected sunlight will scatter in all directions and give you the “fill light” that he claims could only have been done in a studio.

      I know that nothing I say is going to have any effect on your belief, but seriously. Humans went to the Moon, found exactly what they expected, then got on with their lives. I’m sorry,* that’s a fact.

      *Disclaimer: I’m not actually sorry at all.

  2. #3 by remotekontrol on Monday, 25th October 2010 - 22:05 UTC

    Eurgh, no. None of the claims those articles make hold any weight under actual scientific scrutiny.

    –RK– You say they hold no weight but have you actually took the time to read the articles in full becuase it doesn’t appear you have by the below points you make? There is much contradicting information alot coming from NASA themselves in which they shoot themselves in the foot repeatedly, plus a great deal more. Again all i ask is you give the articles a chance and then judge. My comments below are brief but they’re are so many salient points to be made about the alledged moon landings the best way to transmit them to you would be if you were gracious enough to read the articles. Then you’re in a much better postion to berate me all you like.

    I’m not going to go through every claim that article makes, mostly because it is long and rambling as hell, and pointing out the holes in conspiracy theories is about as much fun as pushing Sisyphus’s rock for a day. Nevertheless, as a physicist, here are a few comments:

    Transmitting from the moon is a lot easier than transmitting from the other side of the Earth – the route moon to Earth is a straight line, and almost entirely vacuum, while the path from the Arabian peninsula to the US is a long curved line which has to be bounced off satellites.

    –RK– I agree entirely infact we were bouncing telecommunications off the moon many decades before 1969. Also a point made in the articles when looking at why did they need the Lunar Laser Ranging experiments.

    We have plenty of spacecraft capable of keeping humans alive for much, much longer than the Apollo spacecraft did. People can live on the International Space Station for months – we just don’t send them to the moon because there’s nothing there that it would be economical to exploit.

    –RK– Also correct. However these craft are no more that 400 miles from the Earths surface. No other craft has ever before or since carried man or beast any further than this. The Apollo craft alledgedy traveled 239,000 miles to the moon at the same distance back. Thats quite a leap by even todays standards let alone 1969. I must mention this is primarily because we cannot get any further due the Van Allen radiation belt as well as it being a logistical nightmare. But alledgedly they did it first time. Not only did they alledgedy reach the Moon six times but they also landed, drove dune buggys around, played some golf then shot back up & docked with the orbiting lunar module that was traveling at 4000 miles per hour and headed the mere 239,000 miles home and all perfectly coordinated during prime time tv hours. A startlingly good record in comparison to other moon ventures see below:

    http://wiki.answers.com/Q/How_many_moon_landings_have_there_been

    We have plenty of questions about the moon still, it’s just cheaper to solve them with robots (which we send to the moon all the freaking time) than humans.

    And of course cameras were sent to the moon before the Apollo missions – the Soviet Luna 9 and the American Surveyor 1 probes, along with many others, carried cameras. I’m not convinced photography on the moon is that different to photography elsewhere – light is still light, wherever you are – but even if it was, we’d had years of practice. (Also, of course Nasa is only going to release the nicest looking photos – no-one wants to see the pointless blurry photos)

    –RK– “of course they sent cameras to the moon” were is it mentioned that they didn’t send cameras to the Moon – myself nor David McGowan said any such thing?!

    The moon’s surface is shiny, so reflected sunlight will scatter in all directions and give you the “fill light” that he claims could only have been done in a studio.

    –RK– “The moon’s surface is shiny”, “light is still light, wherever you are” – To be fair thats not the best argument. Does light behave differently when shining through lets say ‘an atmosphere?’. Again there is around two thorough articles addressing the moon photography & the documentary video even has an interview with Jan Lunberg who himself finds it inexplainable how the camera shots are lit.

    I know that nothing I say is going to have any effect on your belief, but seriously. Humans went to the Moon, found exactly what they expected, then got on with their lives. I’m sorry,* that’s a fact.

    *Disclaimer: I’m not actually sorry at all.

    –RK– Again read the articles & documentary they’re genuinely very good… go on I dare you.

    Take care, RK ;-)

    • #4 by atomicspin on Monday, 25th October 2010 - 22:54 UTC

      Yes I read the articles. I didn’t watch the documentary because even I couldn’t be bothered wasting that much of my time.

      I’m not going to argue every point with you. Just a couple of things. The only thing that matters about keeping humans in space is time. Keeping a human alive in space 400 miles away is just as hard as keeping them alive 230,000 miles away. Besides, we send space probes through the Van Allen belts all the time, and their delicate electronics need protection from radiation just as humans do. Given that you agree went robots to the Moon, surely you agree that we were able to protect them from radiation just fine?

      Light does behave differently in a vacuum, but we still know how it behaves in a vacuum, and it’s not all that different to how it behaves in air. The refractive index (difference in light transmitting ability) between vacuum and air is miniscule; so small that scientists can ignore it all together most of the time.The only big difference between the two is atmospheric scattering, which sure enough, we didn’t see on the Moon. There were no stars in the sky because the stars weren’t bright enough to expose the film – you can see the exact same phenomenon occurring in photos taken on Earth.

      And the article does suggest that the idea of cameras going to the moon is ridiculous – I’m referring to when he says “Because the lighting conditions on the Moon are pretty unique, as you well know, and nobody had ever been there before, so I’m not really seeing how NASA’s photographers were able to work the exposures out “ahead of time.”” They worked them out ahead of time from previous photos and basic physics.

      The facts all clearly point to an actual moon landing. Please, stop beating this dead horse.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: