- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
manwich
| Favorite team: | Junior College |
| Location: | You've wanted my |
| Biography: | Killin' it since 12/20/2006 |
| Interests: | |
| Occupation: | full time poster with a weakness for debbie gibson |
| Number of Posts: | 52769 |
| Registered on: | 10/2/2008 |
| Online Status: | Not Online |
Recent Posts
Message
re: You Moon landing deniers are all complete idiots...
Posted by manwich on 12/23/25 at 1:24 am to Errerrerrwere
quote:Let me tell you what Starship is packin' right here, all right. We got 4:11 Positrac outback, 750 double pumper, Edelbrock intake, bored over 30, 11 to 1 pop-up pistons, turbo-jet 390 horsepower. We're talkin' some frickin' muscle.
And I'm still fascinated that we need 20 times the energy today to make it to the moon
1
re: You Moon landing deniers are all complete idiots...
Posted by manwich on 12/23/25 at 1:17 am to Errerrerrwere
quote:3100 tons to starship's 5000 tons
How massively heavy was it man?
I guess the added weight at liftoff and escape plus low g landing plus low g liftoff plus return plus landing on earth needs that much more. The initial liftoff and escape would account for a significant increase but 20 refuelings does seem excessive, but I'm no rocket scientist
re: You Moon landing deniers are all complete idiots...
Posted by manwich on 12/23/25 at 12:43 am to Errerrerrwere
quote:2.8 million kg
Do you realize that you guys are saying the rocket needed 45k kg of fuel to get to the moon?
remember?
re: You Moon landing deniers are all complete idiots...
Posted by manwich on 12/23/25 at 12:36 am to Errerrerrwere
quote:do you realize you questioned the Apollo mission veracity because of musk and nasa's fuel estimations for a different mission with different scenarios multiple times?
Errerrerrwere
the constant insults and 'you're boring me' lines don't make you look superior btw
re: You Moon landing deniers are all complete idiots...
Posted by manwich on 12/23/25 at 12:27 am to Errerrerrwere
quote:not if it's legit and relevant
now you want me to jump through more hoops? This time you'll just attack the source, right?
I'm not seeing the connection between Apollo and Musk's missions that you leaned on.
quote:guilty as charged
Look you smug frick
re: You Moon landing deniers are all complete idiots...
Posted by manwich on 12/23/25 at 12:21 am to Errerrerrwere
the difference is that your links only referred to NASA's evaluations of the much different Musk mission, not the Apollo fuel needs.
They are completely different payload and landing scenarios and are irrelevant to proving whether a moon landing happened or not.
If that's your confusion, then congrats. We helped someone today
They are completely different payload and landing scenarios and are irrelevant to proving whether a moon landing happened or not.
If that's your confusion, then congrats. We helped someone today
re: You Moon landing deniers are all complete idiots...
Posted by manwich on 12/23/25 at 12:02 am to Errerrerrwere
quote:I'd like to see a source on that but I get it if you want to just sit on that
according to who?
The Saturn program
quote:sigh. according to who?
But those quantities aren't valid.
quote:you have your answer. once again, vastly different usage and goals.
I know it's a different program
you have the answer but feel free to revel in your willful ignorance. it can be tough to let go of fun beliefs
personally, I think it would be cool if it was faked. I just don't see how you can believe in it after even a tiny bit of fact checking
re: You Moon landing deniers are all complete idiots...
Posted by manwich on 12/22/25 at 11:45 pm to Errerrerrwere
quote:
4M kg just to overcome escape velocity.
according to who?
they used 2.8 MM kg of 2 fuels, kerosene and LOX
what's your point? I'm genuinely interested to see some engineering level explanations here since I may be missing your implication
he overplayed his troll hand
apparently i'm dead, so they're half right
re: You Moon landing deniers are all complete idiots...
Posted by manwich on 12/22/25 at 5:46 pm to Errerrerrwere
quote:do your own research, kid
Link? Let's see what ya got, science boy.
re: You Moon landing deniers are all complete idiots...
Posted by manwich on 12/22/25 at 5:23 pm to Errerrerrwere
quote:not trying to break up your little spat but it's apples to oranges
Care to argue anything that Elon said that I posted?
Different rocket sizes with different fuels with different payloads with different landing plans
quote:260°F (127°C) in sunlight
Tell us the temp on the moon on the sunny side
quote:depends on the shielding
tell us what the radiation exposure there and back would be
quote:Wheelbase 7.5 ft (2.3 m)
How big was the Rover?
Length 10 ft (3.0 m)
Height 3.6 feet (1.1 m)
462 lbs
quote:Each LRV was carried to the Moon folded up in the Lunar Module's Quadrant 1 Bay. After being unpacked, each was driven an average of 20 miles (30 km), without major incident.
And how was it transported?
quote:literally thousands of people independently verified it across the globe.
You only know what “They” wanted you and everyone else to know.
Some fall for it and others ask questions because they don’t take the word of the biggest propaganda machine in the word.
this conspiracy is easily the dumbest I've heard because it isn't wild speculation, it's verifiably false
re: Physical Therapist Recs in Livingston Parish
Posted by manwich on 12/22/25 at 11:25 am to tigerbater
Switching over after the Ace PT owner video hit?
re: An S thread but for posters that don’t post anymore
Posted by manwich on 12/21/25 at 8:35 pm to terd ferguson
quote:that's not gonna go well for me if Chicken hasn't purged my post history like I asked
Maybe we're all dead and this is purgatory
re: An S thread but for posters that don’t post anymore
Posted by manwich on 12/19/25 at 3:51 pm to terd ferguson
quote:
terd
Ella's better half
Schwartz
Ghazi's boxing skills
re: Why does everyone think we need a new QB?
Posted by manwich on 12/9/25 at 4:24 pm to RUKIDDINGME
quote:OP's optimism and naivety must be studied
It truly is amazing you are asking this question.
quote:then he's pointless. His strength is in off-campus recruiting. If he isn't an on-field coach, he can't be an off-campus recruiter.
Frank has an offer from LSU in hand, but it is not as running back coach
And Lane isn't having his experienced buddy Kevin Smith be an analyst
I could be wrong if the rule has indeed changed. We'll see
quote:
He was named captain at Arizona State, then they trashed his locker.
Here's the TMZ video of anyone hasn't seen it
Popular
24
