Is NASA's Thin Dust Print Theory Incompetent?

  • Context: NASA 
  • Thread starter Thread starter sea_wizard
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Proof
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the validity of NASA's Thin Dust Print Theory, particularly in relation to the ability to leave footprints in lunar dust. Participants explore experimental attempts to replicate this phenomenon using various materials and express skepticism about the theory's credibility.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Experimental/applied
  • Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • One participant criticizes NASA's Thin Dust Print Theory, suggesting it is flawed and calling for accountability for the scientists involved.
  • Another participant mentions that the dust on the moon is approximately 1/4" thick, implying this may affect the ability to leave a print.
  • A different viewpoint suggests that experiments with calcined clay or calcined talc could demonstrate that footprints can be made in dry materials, challenging the original claims.
  • One participant reflects on the conditions under which footprints could be made in ash, noting that dry and hot conditions might facilitate this, while expressing uncertainty about the moisture content in flour.
  • Another participant points out that a website referenced in the discussion provides evidence against the initial claims, mentioning laser experiments conducted by scientists that support the existence of reflective surfaces on the moon.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express a range of opinions, with some supporting the idea that footprints can be made in lunar dust under certain conditions, while others remain skeptical of the Thin Dust Print Theory. There is no consensus on the validity of the theory or the experimental results discussed.

Contextual Notes

Participants reference various materials and conditions for making footprints, but there is uncertainty regarding the specific properties of these materials and their relevance to lunar dust. The discussion includes differing interpretations of experimental results and the implications for the Thin Dust Print Theory.

sea_wizard
Messages
25
Reaction score
0
http://liftoff.msfc.nasa.gov/sites/ExternSite.asp?url=http://www.redzero.demon.co.uk/moonhoax/

in this article you can see how a NASA site says that is possible to leave a foot print in thin dust

i tried it first with talcum succeding in leaving a print but then learned that talcum has some water

then try it with cigarete ashes and no clear print left

i really expect the scientific of the NASA who made up this stupid thin dust print theory to be fired because of taking us for retards,of course as well as to fire the person who hired the smart ass scientific and the person who hired the person who hired... and so on

couldnt they just say that in the moon there's some water what is a known fact or may be better couldn't they just tell the plain truth i don't think anybody would get more scare than when seing the sad normal news
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
Uh, yeah. *backs away slowly*

- Warren
 
The dust on the moon is something like 1/4" thick.
 
Why don't you send a copy of your findings to the "scientific of the nasa?" Those bastard scientifics have it coming, that's for sure. Why don't you show 'em what happens they take -- *ahem* mistake -- you for a retard?

- Warren
 
That was a great site, though somehow the fact that it disproves what sea_wizard is saying got past him. Did you read the whole site? I just did and the fact that scientists shoot lasers at the moon at the correct time and it actually bounces back should be proof enough. You don't think that there are mirrors up there naturally do you?
Did any of you read the news setion? It was hilarious! I like that parts with '30 year supply of donuts' and 'buy Canada and take over the world'. The part describing the head of NASA was good too. LOL!
 
Ya know, I've seen few better examples of a person with almost no education (in a particular field) try to prove a pet theory, using ignorance.

Try the same experiment with calcined clay or calcined talc (the mineral is talc, the commercial powder is usually called talcum powder). Calcining either of the above minerals will remove all water and will show you that you could, indeed, make a foot print in them. Anyone that's done enough camping would also be able to testify that footprints are easy to make in hardwood ash. Of course, this would not support your pet odd-balled theory, so I am sure you won't try it or accept it as true.
 
That didn't occur to me. But now that you mention that, it seems to me to be true. If the ash is still hot so as to have almost no water, and esp. if you are in a dry environment, and you then step (quickly ) down on the ash, I think it would easily make a footprint. Why didn't I think of that and post it first? I kept thinking of flour, but I would guess that flour has a little moisture in it, though I don't know why I think that, it just seems that way. You'd think that if there was any moisture in flour that it would go bad faster. I don't know.
 

Similar threads

News Is James Randi a skeptic or a Republican climate change denier?
  • · Replies 59 ·
2
Replies
59
Views
13K