CNN Breaking News — Supreme Court strikes down Chicago handgun ban; case may have far-reaching impact for states, local governments.
CNN Breaking News — Supreme Court strikes down Chicago handgun ban; case may have far-reaching impact for states, local governments.
I want to buy guns, but I’m pretty embarrassed about it. I mean don’t the sales people at the Gun store look at you like, “What does this guy need with a gun?”, “Is he planning to kill somebody?”, “Why would he want more than one gun!?!”. I know I shouldn’t feel weird about it, because I’ve seen the people at NRA conventions on TV and they all look like they should be in jail. I just feel too suspicious. Maybe I’ll just wear a disguise when I finally get the courage up to go in.
You should go in dressed as a bear. After all, the constitutional right to arm bears cannot be infringed.
They only look suspiciously at crackpots who think the Moon landing was faked, so you are right to feel embarrassed.
Brendan #2 – Hmmmm … “After all, the constitutional right to arm bears cannot be in fringed.”
But it can be “in beaded” or “in hemmed” ?
FWIW, as a sporting individual, I *do* support the Right to Arm Bears (except for Andrew Sullivan) …
LOL! But Sully doesn’t need a gun anyway; he’s so tough and self-sufficient. Heh.
I do not anticipate a moon landing conversation during the purchase of my weapons cache. If such a conversation does take place, things will have gone terribly wrong and probably will go wronger from there.
Anybody that believes people landed on the moon 41 years ago, and no other country can figure out how to land on the moon 41 years later is the real crackpot. They can put a computer in Brendan Loy’s pocket to use as a phone, but they can’t put a man on the moon? Come the freak on.
Sandy, the explanation in a nutshell is that Moore’s law applies to computers and personal electronic equipment, but not to rocket science — which tends to deal with difficult questions of aeronautics and astronautics within the context of the immutable laws of gravity and thermodynamics.
AML, you’re the voice of reason. After the Wright brothers flew their first plane you never heard about it again. And that silly Sputnik thing, it would take forever to put satellites around the earth. After we landed on the moon people were talking about space stations… never happened. Damn aeronautical Moore’s law!!!
Rather than blame aeronautical challenges, just follow the money. Cost/Benefit of going to the moon is astronomical.
The moon provides little/no return on the investment. We went for the bragging rights, and that’s done. The near-space missions with the shuttles, soyuz and others have spurred much tech development here on earth and even then there is a battle to keep the money flowing.
Sandy:
Just for shits and giggles…..
How do you explain the artifacts left on the moon by the lunar missions that can be seen through telescopes here on Earth?
I BLAME BUSH
Sandy, how do you explain how the Soviets, clearly not our friends in those days, who had the technology to observe the landing and verify it went alon silently with the supposed American ruse, despite the fact that blowing the cover of such an operation would have been a huge coup for them over the west? You really think the more rational explanation is an elaborate hoax which would have necessitated the complete cooperation of every major government at the time INCLUDING our biggest enemies?
OR it could be that sending people to the moon involves massive amounts of money and resources and is highly risky and the moon is a barren wasteland that doesn’t have much beyond scientific value at this point meaning it’s not very much incentive to go back? Not to mention that advances in areas like computing make little difference in the mechanical/aeronautical aspects of the problem where technology hasn’t advanced that dramatically like it has in computing?
Naw, the Soviets being in on it makes so much more sense than the non conspiratorial explanations.
Whackjob…
In addition, our robotics and radio technology HAS become much improved since the lunar landings. Back in the day, the only way for us to get anything from the moon and back was pretty much to send people. No robot in the late 60s/early 70s had anything NEAR the capability to go to the moon, grab some rocks, and bring them back for analysis. Now, a Furby could do that list of tasks, and still retain all its annoyingness. Why send people to the moon (a risky proposition still) when we can send Spirit and Opportunity, which can stay longer, probably cost less then having people up there for a fraction of the time, and basically have all of the capabilities a manned probe would.
Even in the 60s, toward the end there, they had almost no tasks for the astronauts, so they took up a dune buggy and some golf clubs for the dead time. And that was WITHOUT rovers with the ability to sit there and stare forever, with no risk to human life!
First of all, The Soviets don’t believe we went to the moon. 25% of Britons don’t believe we went to the moon. The USSR, at that time, and Russia today doesn’t really have a venue to voice their opinions on American culture.
As for the moon being a dead wasteland and too expensive to return to, why do China and Russia have such an interest in landing there? They can’t do it. China set a date for their moon launch in 2020. If it was so easy for the US to do it 41 years ago, equipped only with the technology found in an elementary school calculator, it’s sort of not believable that with 41 years of evolution and development in technology no other country that WANTS to go to the moon can even get a human being a mile outside of earth’s orbit.
Gahrie, good question, you should be able to clearly see what was left behind by the astronauts, but there is no picture or visuals of it from Earth or the hubble telescope which can see planets in other galaxies. You’d think a telescope that can see objects 20 light years away could get a good shot of the debris left behind on the moon 200,000 miles away.
“Basic physics provides a formula for calculating the smallest detail the Hubble Space Telescope can resolve on the surface of the Moon. It is larger than a flag.”
But I suppose fundamental laws of physics and optics are part of the conspiracy, too.
Sandy, your “arguments” for this position have been answered and rebutted numerous times. That you choose to ignore the rebuttals, and incredulously repeat the same asked & answered questions that you falsely believe are unanswerable, is not anyone’s problem but yours.
Also, even if the Hubble could take a picture of the flag on the Moon, you’d doubtless dismiss that as a hoax, too, so I’m not sure why we’re even bothering to talk about it.
China wants to do it as a symbol of pride. It’s a difficult task, both 40 years ago and today. That you are unaware of the difficulties and the technology involved isn’t a good argument for it being a hoax. It’s a good argument for you being ignorant!
http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/LRO/multimedia/lroimages/apollosites.html
Here is an issue that unites like few others! Both gahrie and David K are on the same team!
Also, not sure how we got to lunar landing from gun control. Quite the segue, I must say! I love the Internet.
DK, repeating a difficult task is much easier than being the first to accomplish it. If all the technology from the moon landing 41 years ago has improved as vastly as we both know it has, it would actually be exponentially easier to land on the moon today rather than with the technology of 41 years past. China’s government isn’t the type to dilly around with symbol’s of pride, they’re friggin commies who cut their people off from the rest of the world. If they wanted to say they landed on the moon, they could easily fake it. The US already has the blueprints on that.
Brendan, thanks for letting me know that the Hubble can’t take detailed photos of nearby objects, it doesn’t change the fact that numerous countries have sent unmanned satellites and probes around the moon and never found any evidence of debris from the Apollo missions. Furthermore, there is nothing to dispute what I’ve said. No other country has gone to the moon 41 years after we landed there. That’s something that hasn’t happened with any other achievement or advancement in our human history. From developing and commercializing the airline industry to putting 3,000 satellites in Earth’s orbit. No human being has gone close to 1 mile outside of Earth’s orbit except the Apollo programs astronauts. Now that’s just damn improbable, wouldn’t you say, at least!?
Gahrie, you got a bunch of pictures of the moon with arrows on it ID’ing everything. It may as well say it’s Lunar Disney because it’s not actually visible to the eye.
Gahrie, you got a bunch of pictures of the moon with arrows on it ID’ing everything. It may as well say it’s Lunar Disney because it’s not actually visible to the eye.
Sandy, you do realize that has only been the last 10 years or so that we have been able to take pictures of something the landers’ size on Earth from Earth orbit don’t you?
In the next decade or so we will be getting pictures of the landing sites that should convince you.
Sandy, again, you’re ignoring the perfectly plausible explanations that have been offered repeatedly, whenever you bring up this topic, for the facts you cite, which might otherwise seem improbable but become far more understandable once those explanations are considered. You’ve never rebutted them, you’ve never addressed them, you just keep repeating the same facts and saying OMG THERE IS NO POSSIBLE EXPLANATION!!! You are a completely unserious zealot.
Unserious, perhaps. Zealot, never! And nowhere on this board have I ever said OMG. And finally, I didn’t bring this topic up, Joe Mama did.
I’ve been doing some serious rebutting and rebuffing on this thread. I’m pretty astounded that someone can say that I’m ignoring plausible explanations when I address every hypothesis presented. I accept that the Hubble can’t take photos of objects that are as close as the moon, but there are many other lunar probes and satellites that have been all over and around the moon in the 41 years since the landing.
I can’t accept that there is nothing on the moon so nobody wants to go there, because China and Russia are actively trying to go there, and have been trying or in development to go there for decades. So somebody must think it’s worth re-visiting. So that excuse is out.
I can’t accept that it’s just so expensive and difficult to do that no one wants to do it. Aside from the fact that China and Russia both want to do it and plan missions 10 and 14 years from now, respectively, to the moon, it doesn’t get more expensive or more difficult AFTER someone does it the first time, it gets cheaper and less dangerous. Does someone honestly disagree with this? If so please give examples in history of the successors to the pioneer. No task has ever gotten more difficult the more it is done, just the opposite is true.
Once China lands on the moon, they’ll have the whole damn thing colonized with a military base a year later. That’s the difference between doing something and faking something.
Sandy, I am not going to put it lightly, you are an idiot and are so full of crap that I can smell it all the way here in Chicago. You’re one and only argument against the moon landings (note the plural) is that no one has done it since. In other words only things we keep doing now are things we could have done?
Well here is a list of things which we haven’t done since 1940 or earlier that according to your logic never happened:
Discovering penicillin
Discovering America
Building the Great Pyramids
and Stonehenge
and the Great Wall of China
electing a Catholic President
The attacks on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, or rather, there were no atom bombs
I can keep going, but what’s the point? You are willing to ignore evidence, arguments, and explanations based solely on the fact that YOU don’t understand them.
So despite the fact that the physics was understood en (and now)
Despite the fact that the technology existed then (and now)
Despite the testimony of all those involved.
Despite the photographs of the moon landing sites we have today
Despite the inability of technology at the time to fake the footage of the landing
Despite the lack of counter proof from the USSR who had EVERY incentive to rat out a lie that they would have been able to do at that time
Despite the complete lack of evidence of any sort to support your theory
you and only you have the depth of knowledge and clarity of mind to know with such certainty to know it was all a hoax because, and I repeat myself here, we haven’t done it since.
Reasons like shifting priorities and financial and safety concerns aren’t good reasons to you. Despite being imminently more rational, no instead it’s the largest conspiracy in the history of the WORLD. The same government who couldn’t cover up a hotel break in has managed to cover up the fact that the moon landing was faked?
Yeah, you aren’t bat shit insane at all…