Could the Apollo astronauts have headed off all this moon landing hoax bunk simply by taking a leak? Assuming they aimed parallel to the moon’s surface, wouldn’t the stream travel in a much shallower arc due to the lower gravity? How much further would it go?
Seems a shame that so much nonsense could have been avoided simply is Buzz had runk a few more coffees on the descent.
No need to when a feather and a hammer will do:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=6926891572259784994#
In When We Left Earth, Buzz said he paused on the ladder down to the lunar surface to relieve himself.
Better proof would be to see his penis freeze and fall off. In a shallow arc of course.
It would have proved it was a fake landing if they didn’t die from decompression.
Hey guys watch what happens when I… Argh!
I’m sure some sort of airlock in the space suit could have been devised.
One giant leak for mankind.
What? Somebody had to say it.
An airlock? His penis would have had to be exposed to the vacuum at some point, otherwise he’s just peeing in the suit.
At the time of the moon landing there wasn’t really any talk of a hoax to speak of, so counteracting it never crossed their minds.
Of course, I’m not suggesting otherwise. Think of a spacesuit with finger-less gloves, the rest of the suit could still be sealed.
I don’t think things would freeze-up instantly. There is no air to conduct heat away, so heat loss would be through radiation only. I’m not sure if the pressure difference between the inside of the suit and vacuum of the moon would cause “difficulties” if anything was sticking out of a suit.
Obviously, the OP wasn’t entirely serious, but I’m thinking of the simplest demo that might convince moon hoaxers believers. The hammer/feather drop is a good one, but some people would say it would just prove the test was done in a vacuum. An extended parabola of pee (username anyone?) might be more convincing. My original, slightly more sensible idea, was to look at the arcs of dust kicked up my the lunar rover wheels, and to see if the gravitational constant could be estimated from that.
John Young was bitching about all the farting he was doing on the lunar surface in the unedited transmissions.
That has been done. There’s a whole lot of footage of the rover in action, and a significant bit of that footage shows the dust arcs. I think the deniers have pretty much ignored that in their arguments.
That was F***IN’ COOL!
I don’t think so. These are conspiracy theorists. They very much want to believe, for whatever reasons, that we never went to the moon. Humans are good at finding ways to believe what they want to believe. They’d find some other “explanation” for the parabola of pee.
Leaving aside all the, um, technical problems of trying to take your unprotected penis out on the surface of the moon to take a wizz, what would be the point? People who believe in the CT would just come up with some excuse or other to not believe, or some far fetched notion of how it was faked. There is literally a mountain of evidence that shows we went to the moon…this would only be one more small piece that wouldn’t really add anything to the mix. Folks who don’t believe would still not believe, unless you took them there and showed them the foot prints, all the equipment left behind, scientific experiments, etc.
(and while I don’t think your penis would freeze off instantly, the change in pressure alone would probably do bad things to the unfortunate guy who tried to whip it out and take a pee on the moon…let alone all the other stuff that could also happen)
-XT
Yeah, something about that video just highlights the greatness that humans can achieve. I wish we could somehow resurrect Galileo for a few minutes and show him that video to BLOW HIS MIND.
Anyway, once you enter the conspiratorial mindset, you are essentially immune to evidence. Any evidence that anyone presents to you becomes part of the conspiracy. Look how much effort they went through to fake that high-quality evidence! The conspiracy must be even more powerful than I thought!
So there is essentially nothing they could’ve done to prove it to these people. And I’m sure it was the furthest thing from their minds - the idea that people would be so profoundly stupid as to take the greatest achievement in human history and turn it into an absurd conspiracy theory was completely unanticipated.
Then again, how could would it be if the suit had a multi-million dollar dick airlock, and something went wrong with it and some automated system in the suit proclaimed “ALERT! DICK AIRLOCK FAILURE!”
Actually, there is a range of people who doubt the moon landings took place. At one extreme are the batty brigade, obviously there is no convicing them. More common are the people who either haven’t thought about it much, or who don’t understand the technical details of things like why stars don’t show up on photographs taken on the moon. I’ve heard some otherwise sensible people express doubt that we landed on the moon. From a purely political point of view, it is somewhat plausable faking it might have been considered if it couldn’t be achieved. What is the most simple experiment that could be done that would demonstrate the moon landings were real? Think of something that could be done in a classroom, and reproduced easily on earth (that’s why I’m thinking gravitational constant).
Or too bad they didn’t just *film *the whole thing. *That *would have silenced all of the conspiracy theorists.
Couldn’t any trajectory of pee be created in any gravity just by adjusting the force? You could have an artificial penis stick out backed up by a pump. I mean, if Kris Angel can crawl through a closed window on camera, you can fake anything on camera. Lunar deniers can not be convinced by any evidence.
Never noticed. OK, I’ll bite. Why don’t stars show up on photographs from the moon?
The moon is very bright with all the light being reflected off the regolith, so you need to set your shutter speed to be very fast so that the details of the surface aren’t drowned out. The fast shutter speed doesn’t have time to register the comparatively faint light generated by the stars. If you were to use the same camera settings on a clear night on earth, the pictures would also have no stars.
Edit: But what gets me about the conspiracy theorist version of that is - they think that there are no stars because all the brilliant minds at NASA and everyone involved in this giant conspiracy FORGOT THAT THERE ARE STARS IN SPACE THAT WOULD BE VISIBLE FROM THE MOON! WOOPS! They just had that minor oversight. Sure they created all the video footage with all the 1/6th gravity related special effects, but those dumb bastards forgot there are stars in the sky. HAHA AND I CAUGHT THEM! I AM WAY SMARTER THAN NASA! HAHA THIS IS PROOF!!!