Comment on Neil Armstrong spaceboot 😤😤😤😤😤😤😡😡😡😡😡😡

Ghostalmedia@lemmy.world ⁨4⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

• xia@lemmy.sdf.org ⁨4⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  This is how conspiracy theories ought to work. Perfectly fine to raise a question, and dismissed when you get the answer. Absent is the rampant speculation and unfounded claims.

  source

  • MediumGray@lemmy.ca ⁨4⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    I mean, I think that’s just called science

    source
  • Smallwater@lemmy.world ⁨4⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    It’s because they find evidence to support their truth, instead of formulating a theory based in the evidence. I’ve heard it described with the circle analogy.

    Imagine the absolute truth is a circle, but we don’t know what the shape is. By doing research, we find out certain facts as points on that circle. We can then draw straight lines between those points, and draw a shape that’s as close to the absolute truth as we can get, with the data we have. Further research and discoveries place more dots, sometimes falling outside of the lines we’ve drawn. So we redraw the shape more and more, always increasing towards that circle. That’s how science works.

    Conspiracy theorist do the opposite. They draw a random shape (that’s nowhere near a circle, like a star), and then go out to find proof that fits on that shape. Some proof is correct - it just happens to fall on the same lines as the circle. Others are completely out there, aligning with their shape, but not with the circle (because it’s not relevant to the truth). And if they do find proof that fits on the circle, but not on their star, it’s ignored.

    source

    • SkyezOpen@lemmy.world ⁨4⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      I like debates but most conspiracy debates are absolutely insufferable because of this. No matter how many points get completely debunked, they move on to the next one, and even worse, continue spreading the debunked points afterwards. They don’t give a shit about science or the truth.

      source
• ShitOnABrick@lemmy.world ⁨4⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  That’s quite interesting thanks for that m8

  source
• sharkfucker420@lemmy.ml ⁨4⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  Neat, always wondered what the reason for this was

  source
• driving_crooner@lemmy.eco.br ⁨4⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  Why does they had their names on the clothes? Were they kindergarteners?

  source

  • todd_bonzalez@lemm.ee ⁨4⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    It’s a ~$700,000 space suit custom tailored for a single astronaut on a single mission. Why wouldn’t it have the astronaut’s name stitched into it?

    Also, have you never seen a NASA/Air Force/Military uniform in general? They all wear their names somewhere.

    source

    • simplejack@lemmy.world ⁨4⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      Also, so you can quickly put on the correct suit, quickly, in pretty disorienting conditions.

      source

      • GBU_28@lemm.ee ⁨4⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

        Who shit in my suit!

        source

        • -> View More Comments
    • Tar_alcaran@sh.itjust.works ⁨4⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      It’s a 700k suit to make in today’s money.

      That doesn’t include R&D, and very notably doesn’t include things the life support backpack or helmet either. If you add those, you come to something like nearly 2 million in 1967 money, or nearly 19 million in modern money.

      source

      • todd_bonzalez@lemm.ee ⁨4⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

        $700k was calculated assuming T&D and 2024 dollars, so you’re doubling down on math I already did.

        The total budget for the suits in 1967 dollars was $100K/suit.

        source

        • -> View More Comments
  • simplejack@lemmy.world ⁨4⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    Custom tailored suits that have to fit you perfectly so you don’t die. And might have to put them on very fast in an emergency, in low or zero g, with potential limited light. Big, high contrast, labels are probably helpful.

    Also, these things were tested and iterated on repeatedly. If something is on that suit, it’s often because it’s solving a problem that was identified in a past test.

    source
• GutixFeddit@feddit.cl ⁨4⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  what a good suit

  source