Neeum Zawan wrote:
> On 09/03/09 03:31, Warp wrote:
>>    If you think about it, you'll find some problems with that idea. As 
>> you
>> know, the Earth rotates. This means that one point on the surface of the
>> earth is in direct line-of-sight to the Moon for an average of 12 hours
>> per day. It's physically impossible for the NASA mission control center
>> to have a 24-hour direct link to the signals sent from the Moon.
> 
>     Satellites?
> 
Of which there where what.. Maybe 5 at the time, all stationary *over* 
the US, not in the least because people in other countries would have 
been less than happy to know they where being potentially spied on. On, 
and.. Unless you missed the point of how they are built, they have two 
systems on them, both aimed *at* what they are dealing with, one to 
receive, the other to transmit, and both at pointed *down*, at the 
earth. As a rule, most satellites, especially from that period, could 
only relay information from the ground, to other satellites, or back to 
the ground, and then only in line of site, and then only on the same 
plane, if the moon was *behind* the damn thing, it would be worthless, 
as it would be on almost any angle to the moon from it. We still have 
the same issue talking to orbital systems and space craft today. 
*Something* has to be pointed at what you plan to receive.

Now, I suppose, if you where taking a long approach, you could have shot 
up a dozen satellites, all specifically *designed* to receive data from 
the "opposite" direction of the earth, but that would have taken more 
launches, before we put people into space. Fact is, even today, we 
*still* have our space craft talk to ground stations, then *those* 
stations relay the data up to a satellite, which shoots it across to 
another one, and finally back down to the ground. The shuttle/ship never 
"talks" directly to the satellites.

>>    (Also, do you *seriously* think that eg. the USSR was not watching
>> closely every single transmission? The USSR would have loved nothing
>> more than to expose a hoax and ridicule the USA.)
> 
>     That's the kind of logic conspiracy theorists use.
> 
Uh, no. Conspiracy theorists make up implausible secret agencies, then 
claim that *those* are watching everyone. We know the USSR existed, we 
know they spied on us, we know they watched our TV, we even have 
documentation indicating they listened in on a lot of stuff we did in 
the space program. Its hardly implausible, or only supported by some 
random wacko with a book, who insists he once worked for some secret 
project to paint rocks for a fake landing, or the similar BS you get in 
conspiracy theorist thinking.

-- 
void main () {

     if version = "Vista" {
       call slow_by_half();
       call DRM_everything();
     }
     call functional_code();
   }
   else
     call crash_windows();
}

<A HREF='http://www.daz3d.com/index.php?refid=16130551'>Get 3D Models, 
3D Content, and 3D Software at DAZ3D!</A>

Post a reply to this message