So, you are using ChatGPT as your source. And then laughing at ChatGPT's responses.
Sounds like a great source you've got there!
No, I'm laughing at you. ChatGPT is just a thing. But it has access to nearly every public source. Which answer it chooses is up to its algorithms and its coaching, thus the response you got. It has been proven to tow the government lines when it comes to any remotely controversial subject. Asking it direct questions on controversial topics just gets you a CNN response, exactly they way it has been coached to do.
So you're saying that the govt is careful and competent enough to coach chatGPT to keep quiet about the dangers of the van allen belt BUT not careful and competent enough to coach chatGPT to keep quiet about what makes it dangerous? Seems like a strange argument to me
No, I'm laughing at you. ChatGPT is just a thing. But it has access to nearly every public source. Which answer it chooses is up to its algorithms and its coaching, thus the response you got. It has been proven to tow the government lines when it comes to any remotely controversial subject. Asking it direct questions on controversial topics just gets you a CNN response, exactly they way it has been coached to do.
So you're saying that the govt is careful and competent enough to coach chatGPT to keep quiet about the dangers of the van allen belt BUT not careful and competent enough to coach chatGPT to keep quiet about what makes it dangerous? Seems like a strange argument to me
I'm not saying "government" did anything. OpenAI did it. It's easy to repeat a big lie for the one million and 1st time. But coaching it to lie about physics will simply result in loss of confidence in the product. So dissect the issue and ask it questions about the parts. This is what I did until it told me a ship would need walls of lead several meters to tens of meters thick to spend 4 hours traversing the Van Allen belts.
In the earlier versions this type of coaching was much more obvious. There were big holes. Now, rather than directly lie, it typically avoids giving a straight answer.
I do agree that no human has passed through the van allen belt since 1972 (at least, not to my knowledge). There have been no manned missions that have gone that far out. That certainly does not mean that it is impossible or that it has not been done before.
I don't see a need to list my education credentials. Everything I have said is basic textbook science. Evaluate the strengh of my argument, not the strength of my diploma. You can follow the links I have posted if you'd like to understand the things I've said
Even forgetting radiation belts etc, do you agree that 238,646 miles seems like a really long way to go in terms of how far we have sent humans from the earth since 1972 and where NASA plans to send them (back) now? (That's the difference between the ISS from the earths surface - 254 miles, and the distance to the moon - 238,900 miles).
Asking for a friend.
There is approximately nothing interesting between 254 miles and 240k miles. There’s no reason to go 100k miles from the Earth if you’re not going to the moon. This is a very lame argument.
If the entire argument is whether NASA lied, why would you think that relying on imagery produced by or in cooperation with the accused would settle the matter?
You: “Put another way, why don't NASA and others” show evidence.
Me: evidence from NASA and others
You: No wait! Never mind!!
Apparently the amateur astronomer in Arizona is now employed by NASA
You: “Put another way, why don't NASA and others” show evidence.
Me: evidence from NASA and others
You: No wait! Never mind!!
This is why I included 'and others, such as high school astronomy clubs', because, obviously, once a liar, always a liar so who would believe anything NASA produces. A completely independent 3rd party is what is required. At this point, I'd likely only believe if both the Chinese and Russian produced such imagery. In this case, I would still believe that all pictures and video evidence was faked, because you'd have to be a moron to believe that garbage. And, I would still think that NASA are beyond incompetent for losing every second of telemetry data from all five missions.
A random dude in Arizona took some photos! Think about how easy it would be for Russia or China to take photos of the landing sites and show NO landers - they could even photoshop it! Why haven’t they? Because it’s a piece of propaganda that even they know is so stupid it wouldn’t work.
Elon musk is sending astronauts to orbit. The Artemis missions and SpaceX will send people around the moon. Will those be faked too? Even in this era?
“I won’t believe any evidence presented” is not really a statement you want to make when you are trying to convince people to listen to you.
So you're saying that the govt is careful and competent enough to coach chatGPT to keep quiet about the dangers of the van allen belt BUT not careful and competent enough to coach chatGPT to keep quiet about what makes it dangerous? Seems like a strange argument to me
I'm not saying "government" did anything. OpenAI did it. It's easy to repeat a big lie for the one million and 1st time. But coaching it to lie about physics will simply result in loss of confidence in the product. So dissect the issue and ask it questions about the parts. This is what I did until it told me a ship would need walls of lead several meters to tens of meters thick to spend 4 hours traversing the Van Allen belts.
In the earlier versions this type of coaching was much more obvious. There were big holes. Now, rather than directly lie, it typically avoids giving a straight answer.
okay, so you're saying that the openAI is careful and competent enough to coach chatGPT to keep quiet about the dangers of the van allen belt BUT not careful and competent enough to coach chatGPT to keep quiet about what makes it dangerous? Seems like a strange argument to me
If you'd like a real physics explanation of the van allen belts, I am happy to give you one
This is why I included 'and others, such as high school astronomy clubs', because, obviously, once a liar, always a liar so who would believe anything NASA produces. A completely independent 3rd party is what is required. At this point, I'd likely only believe if both the Chinese and Russian produced such imagery. In this case, I would still believe that all pictures and video evidence was faked, because you'd have to be a moron to believe that garbage. And, I would still think that NASA are beyond incompetent for losing every second of telemetry data from all five missions.
A random dude in Arizona took some photos! Think about how easy it would be for Russia or China to take photos of the landing sites and show NO landers - they could even photoshop it! Why haven’t they? Because it’s a piece of propaganda that even they know is so stupid it wouldn’t work.
Elon musk is sending astronauts to orbit. The Artemis missions and SpaceX will send people around the moon. Will those be faked too? Even in this era?
“I won’t believe any evidence presented” is not really a statement you want to make when you are trying to convince people to listen to you.
Is there any lie that would be more embarrassing to the United States than for it to be revealed that the moon landings were faked? If there is, I can't think of one. NASA and the US government will do everything possible to maintain the lie. A huge portion of SpaceX's funding comes from the US government. Elon knows where his bread is buttered. I wonder how successful SpaceX would be with the US government as its enemy?
This shouldn't be so complicated for you to understand.
So, you are using ChatGPT as your source. And then laughing at ChatGPT's responses.
Sounds like a great source you've got there!
No, I'm laughing at you. ChatGPT is just a thing. But it has access to nearly every public source. Which answer it chooses is up to its algorithms and its coaching, thus the response you got. It has been proven to tow the government lines when it comes to any remotely controversial subject. Asking it direct questions on controversial topics just gets you a CNN response, exactly they way it has been coached to do.
I just have to point out that you "toe the line" not "tow the line."
I'm not saying "government" did anything. OpenAI did it. It's easy to repeat a big lie for the one million and 1st time. But coaching it to lie about physics will simply result in loss of confidence in the product. So dissect the issue and ask it questions about the parts. This is what I did until it told me a ship would need walls of lead several meters to tens of meters thick to spend 4 hours traversing the Van Allen belts.
In the earlier versions this type of coaching was much more obvious. There were big holes. Now, rather than directly lie, it typically avoids giving a straight answer.
okay, so you're saying that the openAI is careful and competent enough to coach chatGPT to keep quiet about the dangers of the van allen belt BUT not careful and competent enough to coach chatGPT to keep quiet about what makes it dangerous? Seems like a strange argument to me
If you'd like a real physics explanation of the van allen belts, I am happy to give you one
No. I'm not saying Open AI has been coached about the Van Allen belts. It has been coached about the moon landings... to give the CNN response.
Hey, if you think the van allen belts are of no threat to humans, which they would have to have been for six missions, traveling in something approximating an aluminum garden shed, to have traversed them without any harm coming to the astronauts, then explain away. Change my mind.
No, I'm laughing at you. ChatGPT is just a thing. But it has access to nearly every public source. Which answer it chooses is up to its algorithms and its coaching, thus the response you got. It has been proven to tow the government lines when it comes to any remotely controversial subject. Asking it direct questions on controversial topics just gets you a CNN response, exactly they way it has been coached to do.
I just have to point out that you "toe the line" not "tow the line."
Thank you. Apparently I should have asked ChatGPT about that too.
I do agree that no human has passed through the van allen belt since 1972 (at least, not to my knowledge). There have been no manned missions that have gone that far out. That certainly does not mean that it is impossible or that it has not been done before.
I don't see a need to list my education credentials. Everything I have said is basic textbook science. Evaluate the strengh of my argument, not the strength of my diploma. You can follow the links I have posted if you'd like to understand the things I've said
Even forgetting radiation belts etc, do you agree that 238,646 miles seems like a really long way to go in terms of how far we have sent humans from the earth since 1972 and where NASA plans to send them (back) now? (That's the difference between the ISS from the earths surface - 254 miles, and the distance to the moon - 238,900 miles).
Asking for a friend.
Wow. The distance to the moon is probably one of the least problematic parts of the Apollo missions. Do you know what a logical fallacy is? But hey, I get it. I'm sure that's a very big scary number for you. It's so impossibly far it's beyond what you can believe. I'm sorry you got so frightened.
We live in an age where people can't except that there are things that experts in a field will understand better than them, if they are even able to fully understand it at all. But, they would prefer to believe a conspiracy theory rather than to feel inferior and admit others may know more, or be more intelligent etc. It's just so pathetic and weak.
This is why I included 'and others, such as high school astronomy clubs', because, obviously, once a liar, always a liar so who would believe anything NASA produces. A completely independent 3rd party is what is required. At this point, I'd likely only believe if both the Chinese and Russian produced such imagery. In this case, I would still believe that all pictures and video evidence was faked, because you'd have to be a moron to believe that garbage. And, I would still think that NASA are beyond incompetent for losing every second of telemetry data from all five missions.
A random dude in Arizona took some photos! Think about how easy it would be for Russia or China to take photos of the landing sites and show NO landers - they could even photoshop it! Why haven’t they? Because it’s a piece of propaganda that even they know is so stupid it wouldn’t work.
Elon musk is sending astronauts to orbit. The Artemis missions and SpaceX will send people around the moon. Will those be faked too? Even in this era?
“I won’t believe any evidence presented” is not really a statement you want to make when you are trying to convince people to listen to you.
I checked out the 'random dude in Arizona's' GigaMoon project. 280,000 pictures. Not exactly a random dude. Quite impressive actually. I'm on the fence now. I wonder if his dad works for NASA?
A random dude in Arizona took some photos! Think about how easy it would be for Russia or China to take photos of the landing sites and show NO landers - they could even photoshop it! Why haven’t they? Because it’s a piece of propaganda that even they know is so stupid it wouldn’t work.
Elon musk is sending astronauts to orbit. The Artemis missions and SpaceX will send people around the moon. Will those be faked too? Even in this era?
“I won’t believe any evidence presented” is not really a statement you want to make when you are trying to convince people to listen to you.
Is there any lie that would be more embarrassing to the United States than for it to be revealed that the moon landings were faked? If there is, I can't think of one.
I agree! Which is why if a guy in Arizona can photograph the earth with a few $10ks of equipment it’s shocking that our major geopolitical adversaries or even anti-American individuals with $$$ to spare haven’t photographed any of the landing sites WITHOUT landers.
A moon landing is far easier to disprove than it is to fake…
This shouldn't be so complicated for you to understand.
NASA picked a trajectory that avoided the inner belt, and only flew through part of the outer belt.
Even before 1972, Nixon/NASA was not "crazy enough to send a countryman or two through Van Allen Radiation Belt."
Van Allen Radiation Belt isn't a blob or a storm cloud to fly around. You proved your ignorance by stating Van Allen Radiation Belt may be navigated around.
Seriously? It is shaped like two concentric donuts, and you only have to fly out the hole.
1) No world leader since December, 1972 has risked the health of a countryman through Van Allen Radiation Belt.
2) No world leader prior to President Richard Nixon risked the health of a countryman through Van Allen Radiation Belt.
3) I am supposed to believe President Nixon risked the health of U.S. citizens for no logical reason, flying U.S. citizens through Van Allen Radiation Belt supposed six times, 1969 to December, 1972?
I have you, an anonymous poster acting as if you know. You may be a dentist or m.d., but you are in over your head.
3) You are supposed to believe the Apollo Astronauts flew around the most dangerous part, minimizing the risk of radiation exposure. This low risk/exposure was confirmed with radiation dosimeters after the first flight.
The US, demonstrating their intellectual superiority compared to the rest of the world, sent men to the moon, not New Aussieland or wherever you're from.
You guys probably still think it's made out of sheep's cheese.
I know "we", meaning man, landed there. That is apparently beyond most Americans to understand now.
Sucks to have to try and ride on the coattails of the US when your country's claim to fame is sheep herding.
A random dude in Arizona took some photos! Think about how easy it would be for Russia or China to take photos of the landing sites and show NO landers - they could even photoshop it! Why haven’t they? Because it’s a piece of propaganda that even they know is so stupid it wouldn’t work.
Elon musk is sending astronauts to orbit. The Artemis missions and SpaceX will send people around the moon. Will those be faked too? Even in this era?
“I won’t believe any evidence presented” is not really a statement you want to make when you are trying to convince people to listen to you.
I checked out the 'random dude in Arizona's' GigaMoon project. 280,000 pictures. Not exactly a random dude. Quite impressive actually. I'm on the fence now. I wonder if his dad works for NASA?
Again. Generating super high resolutions images of the moon from Earth is no feasible with civilian technology (still a lot of $ and work). Such efforts would be trivial for large nations with access to superior technology and financial capability.
Yet somehow, none of the America-haters, private or public, will simply take the photo of Tranquility Base with the missing LM! How kind of them!
Even forgetting radiation belts etc, do you agree that 238,646 miles seems like a really long way to go in terms of how far we have sent humans from the earth since 1972 and where NASA plans to send them (back) now? (That's the difference between the ISS from the earths surface - 254 miles, and the distance to the moon - 238,900 miles).
Asking for a friend.
You're correct. However, that fact is totally arbitrary and has no bearing on the feasibility of the trip. There is precious little in between 245mi out and 238646mi out that would interest a manned mission
Well no, fact's aren't arbitrary - they are the opposite of something "arbitrary".
So you don't think distance has a bearing on the feasibility of the trip? Is there a difference in the feasibility of driving 10 miles vs 10000 miles? (btw that's the exact same factor of difference between the ISS and the Moon). That's the same as a round trip from Miami to Anchorage vs a round trip to your local Home Depot - there maybe "precious little in between" that would "interest a manned" drive - but it doesn't mean the feasibility is the same?
Even forgetting radiation belts etc, do you agree that 238,646 miles seems like a really long way to go in terms of how far we have sent humans from the earth since 1972 and where NASA plans to send them (back) now? (That's the difference between the ISS from the earths surface - 254 miles, and the distance to the moon - 238,900 miles).
Asking for a friend.
Wow. The distance to the moon is probably one of the least problematic parts of the Apollo missions. Do you know what a logical fallacy is? But hey, I get it. I'm sure that's a very big scary number for you. It's so impossibly far it's beyond what you can believe. I'm sorry you got so frightened.
We live in an age where people can't except that there are things that experts in a field will understand better than them, if they are even able to fully understand it at all. But, they would prefer to believe a conspiracy theory rather than to feel inferior and admit others may know more, or be more intelligent etc. It's just so pathetic and weak.
Really? You know this how exactly? You talk about "experts in a field" - as you are one of them why don't you explain why it's probably one of the least problematic parts.
Btw I do find it hilarious that you think it's not a big deal considering the furthest you personally could travel right now in your existence is 9500 miles on a flight from Singapore to New York. So the simple answer is (and let me not fill up my post with deflective bullsh$t about "scary numbers" and what's "pathetic and weak") - you simply would have no f-ing idea.
