Two things:
1) There is known variability. Polaris (aka, the north star), does have variable position, it's just not very much relative to the earth, because it's spinning along with us in the same galaxy, and...
2) You also have to remember you are seeing the different stars where they were...
I wouldn't describe it like that, and in the 1950s and 1960s, during the development of the space program...not at all.
The technology used for the moon program was being designed in house, by engineers working for the government, tested by government employed military pilots. Outside firms...
I don't think anyone here is arguing people don't act foolishly, herd-like, self-interested, etc.
The difference between the COVID vaccine debate and fundamental physical laws is pretty obvious: One is a brand new technology, emerging from an industry via a highly captured regulatory...
There's no narrative.
The basic science we are discussing spans centuries, continents, languages, cultures, regimes. There's no agenda behind it. It's been observed and tested for hundreds of years.
I've been critical of many modern scientific agendas (my climate skepticism is now nearly 2...
Some of the most successful people in the world never went to college. Nowadays, you go to college, you may very well come out dumber than you went in. This discussion is not about that.
Hopefully, we can agree on basic terms:
Hypothesis - a question or line of scientific inquiry yet to be...
Gravity does not come from spinning. It comes from mass.
And I'm not sure how you arrived at "backwards"...that would imply there is a "forwards". What's the rule for which way is backwards and forwards when a sphere is spinning on an axis? Left? Right? Clockwise? Counterclockwise?
I'd...
Are you even vaguely familiar with Newton's laws of motion?
Specifically and practically: You aim a nozzle with gas coming out of it in one direction. You go in the opposite direction.
Put enough of those nozzles on a craft, with controls inside the craft to manage those thrusts, along with...
Do you believe moonlight (regardless of the nature/source of that light) reaches the earth ? In other words, when the moon is out and bright, your eyes have better light for seeing things, in comparison to a moonless light?
I think you're serious, so I'll answer seriously.
What you describe is well known and entirely predictable with the known orbit characteristics of the earth and moon. So well known that gravitational tides can been predicted with boring regularity.
Celestial orbits are elliptical, and objects...
Not sure how you got there. Have any data/calcs to back that up?
3600 miles per hour for low lunar orbit.
The lunar module's takeoff and acceleration to match that velocity is greatly eased by the low gravity, low mass of the vehicle, and no atmospheric drag. Yes, it's rocket science, but...
There is a starting point in that equation. If the intensity of light was bright enough to blind at it's source (reflection of sunlight at the surface of the moon) then, yes, it would be an issue. But just because you have a perception of the intensity anywhere along the curve, doesn't...
Some other counter arguments come to mind:
1) The 'tuber claims the computing power was so lame in comparison to what we have today. Certainly true. But the calculations for moon travel and landing are algebra and geometry, and the variables are very limited. In the mid-1940s, we were using...