Comments by "Yazzam X" (@yazzamx6380) on "Motherboard"
channel.
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@wildboar7473 - Please tell me that was a joke :-)
Today, we have a HUGE number of geostationary satellites broadcasting live TV channels FROM SPACE to millions upon millions of people. Those satellites are over 22,000 MILES away, broadcasting TV channels via a weak 40W radio signal, and yet all we need to pick up those channels are very SMALL satellite dishes like this;
www.protv.co.uk/uploads/Sky%20dish%20installation%20in%20Bletchley.JPG
The moon is about 11 times further away, therefore to receive the signal to the same strength would require a bigger dish, just like the massive radio dishes/telescopes used during the Apollo missions, like this;
upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/46/Parkes_Radio_Telescope_09.jpg/800px-Parkes_Radio_Telescope_09.jpg
So it's exactly the same principle. Your satellite dish (if you have one) works because it is pointed directly at the satellite, where despite being over 22,000 miles away you can receive the TV channels perfectly if your dish is aligned correctly.
Now move that SAME satellite to the distance of the moon and the signal would be too weak for your small satellite dish, but if you have the massive Parkes Radio Telescope in the link above, then you'll receive the TV channels without any problems, and you'll also be able to receive and send radio signals significant further than the moon.
Although I'm sure you would agree that such a large radio dish is not practical to attach to your home ;-)
And because the Earth rotates, then for distant spacecraft you will need to use at least THREE massive radio dishes spread around the world to ensure that one of them is in direct line of sight of the spacecraft at any given time.
So it's not a mystery my friend, it's just science and engineering.
Why couldn't you work that out for yourself? Oh yes, I nearly forgot, you're a flat Earth believer.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
That's a classic conspiracy theorist myth with all due respect.
Simply go to the search here in YouTube and search for: Neil Armstrong Interview, and Neil Armstrong Speech, for example and see how many interviews and speeches you can find from your claimed recluse who refused to give interviews :-)
Neil was an introvert and he NEVER saw himself as a hero, and hence he was always uncomfortable with being referred to or seen as a hero.
In contrast, Buzz Aldrin is more of an extrovert, you can't shut him up about the moon landings and hence he's practically everywhere talking about it. Same mission remember! :-)
As far as Neil was concerned, he had a job to do and he did it to the best of his ability. But he knew others could have done his job too and been the first man to walk on the moon.
In other words, Neil was a very humble man and it shows.
And my videos showed that the astronauts were NOT miserable before, during or after that press conference. They were there to answer serious questions from an informed audience of professionals, including scientists and astronomers, and therefore took their role seriously and professionally as they gave the best answers they could.
They were not there to entertain a crowd, it was work and they behaved like men at work, where you and many other conspiracy believers confuse that serious professionalism with misery or fear or shame etc.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2