The man on the moon was a great revolution in the space age. Until then it had succeeded in putting satellites into orbit and even people, but traveling to the moon was one of the greatest scientific and technical challenges of the twentieth century. Even now still poses many problems returning to the moon, despite the great development since that time.
Despite the evidence, many people doubt that the man actually reached the moon and think that everything was staged by the U.S.. Say you have to be critical and do not believe it. For this filter, and manipulate data. In the U.S., 11% of the population believe that man landed on the moon. In 1961 JF Kennedy Congress promised to send a man to the moon and in 1969 was achieved.
In my opinion, being critical is a good thing, as long as they know about the topic that is being discussed. Most people think it was a scam do not know many details and has little knowledge of aeronautics. I think the man came to the moon and while I can be wrong, the chances are small. If the U.S. had made a fraud to beat the Soviets, they had discovered and denounced him as they were the most affected to be overcome in the space race (at that time had spy satellites to detect rocket launches). Many people saw the launch of the rocket with 3 crew, and the re-entry capsule of Apollo (rescued by the U.S. Navy.) In any case, the arguments made by skeptics are easy folding.
The first point where irregularities are seen in the photos. In the photos are not the stars and shadows are irregular and divergent. The first point is due to the lack of atmosphere for the diffusion of light. So the stars would be brighter but smaller and the camera is capable of capturing. The moon is reflective as in cities (light pollution) is still difficult to see the stars in the sky, so it appears black. Shadows are due to uneven ground, which is not smooth.
The flag waving is because these and fixing the spin like a parasol on the beach and stretch the corners. This was displayed by rail, but not the entire deployed to give a sense of greater realism (as on Earth). This produces an effect similar to waving a flag in a still photo.
They said the ship should have left a crater on landing and take off (by motor) 5000 kg. thrust. But this is not true, as was 1500 kg. because the moon's gravity is lower. The motor only he did was move sand from the surface of the moon, so he appreciates how well Armstrong's footprint.
There are some who think that NASA conceals us photos of parts of the moon, where there are ruins of aliens. In the latest high resolution photos taken is shown that this is false, since in the old lower-resolution appeared certain geometrical parameters.
Some television shows have given false dialogues between the astronauts (and recognized) and a video where you see a microphone. It has been a communication mix of the astronauts to look like something that does not actually say. All this is a satire for the naive.
appears in a photograph on a rock called C (as if it were part of the props, to indicate where it should be placed) but NASA gave a plausible explanation, is a hair filter to scan the photograph, More photos in the same rock appears no C.
A curious case is the English Luis Ruiz de Gopegui, former director of manned monitoring in Spain. From Houston asked him to destroy a videotape. He looked at it and saw a light that looked like a UFO. Shortly afterwards he received a call from NASA saying that listen to the audio. Could seen as an American astronaut insulting to the Russians because the Soyuz is moving too in the docking maneuver. They thought they could trigger an international conflict if it came to media.
Given these arguments are almost completely test the "apoloescépticos" do not base their skepticism on any solid argument but rather in confusion and misinterpretation. In my opinion, the first man on the moon has any credibility. "This debate will arise when we get to Mars? Sure.
0 comments:
Post a Comment