Comments by "Scott Wallace" (@therealzilch) on "Curious Droid" channel.

  1. In the sixties, my brother and I played around with war surplus magnetrons. He went on to designing and building electronic control devices. I went on to designing and building musical instruments. Whatever. Fascinating history, physics, and technology. Thanks again from cloudy Vienna, where lunch is always on me if you're in town, Scott
    21
  2. All faked, just like the Apollo missions. Oops, never mind, I forgot I had a brain. Nice work as usual.
    8
  3. It's just denier "physics". Not to be confused with real physics. Or do you know more than Dr. James Van Allen?
    6
  4.  @looneytoons2878  "Genetically imploded"? Lol. Why not "photosynthetically sublimed"? Scientific illiteracy at its finest.
    5
  5.  @soriac2357  "Accusing reality of being wrong" is a good description of conspiracy theories in general.
    5
  6. What Max said. And by the way, the old story (it goes back to Pliny the Elder) about ostriches putting their heads in the sand in case of danger, is of course nonsense. I've seen ostriches in the wild in Tanzania, and in case of danger (they regarded us as dangerous) they do exactly what one would expect: they run like hell.
    5
  7. Look at NASA's budget during the Apollo years and afterwards and you will have your answer.
    4
  8.  @Jan_Strzelecki  That's what they do.
    4
  9.  @ThomasKundera  Doing well, thanks. I'm taking a break from flat Earthers to see if Moon Landing deniers have gotten any smarter. Am disappointed.
    4
  10. Another simply wonderful show. In regards to "ringing like a bell"- as an instrument maker, I'd just add that if the Moon were hollow, it would almost certainly ring for much longer than ten minutes after larger impacts, and that the frequency of the ringing would be much slower. Lunch is on me if you're ever in town. Cheers from cloudy Vienna, Scott
    3
  11. How do you know it was Stanley Kubrick and not Quentin Tarantino? You don't.
    3
  12.  @maxfan1591  Ah, but that just proves how clever Kubrick was in covering his tracks- he deliberately made the Moon scenes in 2001 look fake, and saved his good special effects for Apollo. Devious, eh?
    3
  13. All you have to do is goggle "Paul is dead", "the Earth is flat", "planes fly using compressed air"; or any number of equally silly notions, and you will find lots of "proofs".
    3
  14. What a wonderful story. I suppose the Hasselblad will not be in working order after atmospheric burnout.
    3
  15.  @looneytoons2878  What do you mean, "what if?" What ifs are a dime a dozen. Where's your evidence?
    3
  16.  @antjuanmcghee3762  To put it briefly: you are confusing temperature with heat. Parts of the upper atmosphere can have very high temperatures but very little heat, because although the air molecules are moving very fast, there are so few of them that they impart very little energy. Think about it this way: would you rather hold your hand in an oven heated to 212 F for ten seconds, or in a pot of boiling water for the same amount of time? Why is there a difference?
    3
  17. Faking it would not be possible even with today's technology, much less with 1969 technology.
    3
  18.  @Jan_Strzelecki  That's because they glued the dust down beforehand. Don't you know anything?
    2
  19. You are right, the global elite keeps the proles divided with signs and wonders. But the signs and wonders are those of politics, not real world observation.
    2
  20.  @ThomasKundera  Hey, Thomas, long time no see. How's it going?
    2
  21.  @ThomasKundera  I feel your pain. They were my main thing about ten years ago. Spent a lot of time arguing with Calvinists. Learned a lot about the Bible. Fun for all.
    2
  22.  @Jan_Strzelecki  That just proves that NASA had demonic help.
    2
  23.  @Jan_Strzelecki  There is something uncanny about all those numbers.
    2
  24. Another fascinating glimpse at a bit of the collective genius of the Apollo program. As a musical instrument maker familiar with vibrations, this was particularly interesting to me. Thanks, nicely done. Cheers from cloudy Vienna, Scott
    2
  25.  @antjuanmcghee3762  What, pray tell, is a "super vacuum"? There's no upper limit on pressure, but there is a lower limit: you can't have less than zero pressure. The best vacuum that can be achieved on Earth has the same pressure of that on the Moon to an accuracy of better than a hundredth of a percent, so any explosion of a vessel in space because of internal pressure is virtually identical to what would happen in a vacuum chamber on Earth. Pressure differentials are additive and subtractive, not multiplicative.
    2
  26.  @antjuanmcghee3762  The vacuum on the Moon is the same, within a few thousandths of a percent, as the vacuum of space. For all practical purposes (say, building spacecraft) their pressures are both equal to zero.
    2
  27.  @antjuanmcghee3762  I didn't need to check with NASA about this, since I've been an amateur astronomer for many years and I've studied this stuff. Tell me this: if a spacecraft in outer space is filled with air at atmospheric pressure (14.5 psi), what's the pressure difference between inside and outside the spacecraft?
    2
  28.  @maxfan1591  Are you sure it's not faked?
    2
  29. Fascinating. I can't imagine how I could not have heard of the Ekranoplan before. Good reporting too.
    1
  30. Too bad it can't look at the Earth. Then we could finally see if it's flat or not. Just kidding. Nice work as usual. Cheers from cool Vienna, Scott
    1
  31.  @MaynardGKrebs-gv4vy  It's at least an "argument" I've never heard before.
    1
  32. You're forgetting that the astronauts were real people and not actors in a sitcom or action movie.
    1
  33.  @caav56  Sorta.
    1
  34. But the "no stars, no blast crater, optical irregularities" arguments really are demonstrably based on basic misunderstanding of science. They've been debunked over and over. For instance, why would you expect to set stars in photos or videos set to expose bright sunlit surfaces? Do you see or can you photograph stars in the night sky when you're in a brightly lit stadium? This is not just a counterclaim; it's a basic misunderstanding of how light and photography work.
    1
  35. Nixon and Congress got NASA's budget slashed. Social programs didn't get a fraction of what the military did, so they cannot be blamed.
    1
  36.  @jonsmith3945  Jon, if you're still here- tell me the angular size of stars.
    1
  37. In this fiftieth anniversary year of the Apollo 11 Moon landing, let's hear it for the Soviet scientists and astronauts who made it possible, and achieved many other amazing space feats.
    1
  38. They'll just say "FAKE!" again.
    1
  39.  @looneytoons2878  Anyone can lie, even Moon landing deniers. But why should NASA lie? They have the tech and the money to do this, and the Earth is not flat.
    1
  40.  @Mike-tg7dj  Agreed. Cheers from cool Vienna, Scott
    1
  41. Wonderful reporting on a great time in my life. Thank you from cool Vienna, Scott
    1
  42. Everyone who comments a lot gets shadowbanned sometimes. Not all of us bitch about it.
    1
  43.  @SixOhFive  No cataracts, but I do need reading glasses.
    1
  44. Caves on Earth are formed by geological processes that don't occur on the Moon.
    1
  45. I may have to borrow that.
    1