Curiosity
« on: July 23, 2017, 07:51:41 PM »
I have seen quite a few people call the moon landing a hoax on this forum. What is the general FE census on the mars rovers. Also how do planets fit into FE are they considered projections on the dome or what.

Re: Curiosity
« Reply #1 on: July 24, 2017, 04:45:37 AM »
General FE consensus is that anything having to do with going beyond the atmosphere of Earth is a hoax, because space travel itself is a lie. Wiki goes over this some, but that's the broad strokes of it. As for the planets and stars we see, I believe that's no precise agreement, even here. The two most common views are that they are in fact all out there and real, or that they're holes in some form of sky dome. The former is the more prevalent upon these forms though I would say, and is the one espoused in the wiki.
FET - A few old books making claims and telling you how things must be based on the words contained therein. This sounds familiar....

The triangle doesn't work

Offline 3DGeek

  • *
  • Posts: 277
    • View Profile
Re: Curiosity
« Reply #2 on: July 25, 2017, 08:44:25 PM »
General FE consensus is that anything having to do with going beyond the atmosphere of Earth is a hoax, because space travel itself is a lie. Wiki goes over this some, but that's the broad strokes of it. As for the planets and stars we see, I believe that's no precise agreement, even here. The two most common views are that they are in fact all out there and real, or that they're holes in some form of sky dome. The former is the more prevalent upon these forms though I would say, and is the one espoused in the wiki.

Some FE'ers seem to be saying that EVERYTHING that NASA say is a lie - a knowing fabrication.  The size of that conspiracy is mind-blowing...it would have to have extended at least 400 years into the past (because sailors claimed to have used celestial navigation techniques that couldn't have worked in FET)...and would have to cover a dozen major governments, 450+ astronauts and cosmonauts, 400,000 people who worked on the moon shots at NASA and about a million other people who've worked on spacecraft since then.   Astronomers would also have to be in on the conspiracy - so add another million or so people there...then all of the people who write software for GPS receivers, etc.

Others say that NASA staff are EXPECTING their results to show a curved earth and so when the images come back not showing that, they presume they've made an error and "correct" the image back to show a round earth...that's kinda insulting to a bunch of VERY smart people who'd spot the true facts in a heartbeat.

The latter are going to have a hard time with the mars rovers.  Clearly, they are either on a large planet that isn't Earth - or NASA are faking it at enormous expense instead of just saying "Sorry - it's too hard to get rovers to Mars"...which would be a lot cheaper and easier for them.

I think it's sad.

I read this story today - about the insane lengths everyone went to in order to find a rock out in the Kyper belt to extend the New Horizons mission out by another couple of years using just the few ounces of fuel left in it's rocket tanks.   A town in Pategonia going to amazing lengths to allow the NASA team to observe a blink in the brightness of a star lasting under a second so that it's speed could be accurately determined and so the space probe (already FAR past Pluto) can use those last drops of fuel productively.   They shut down a freeway to get rid of light pollution - and when it looked like the wind would shake the telescopes and ruin this once-ever observation - they brought a bunch of semi-trailers and parked them around the telescopes to shield them from the wind.

This tiny rock will be (by FAR) the most distant object ever to have been explored by the works of mankind.

That's such a wonderful thing - it makes me proud of humanity that we crave knowledge to this degree - that we'll go to such lengths to see what's over the next hill.

https://www.nasa.gov/feature/nasa-s-new-horizons-team-strikes-gold-in-argentina

The bleak, miserably limited world of the Flat Earthers, full of nonsense and misunderstandings is a horrible place by comparison.   You almost feel that you're rescuing people from these horrors by opening up the true magnificence of the universe to them.

Re: Curiosity
« Reply #3 on: July 28, 2017, 03:11:43 PM »
General FE consensus is that anything having to do with going beyond the atmosphere of Earth is a hoax, because space travel itself is a lie. Wiki goes over this some, but that's the broad strokes of it. As for the planets and stars we see, I believe that's no precise agreement, even here. The two most common views are that they are in fact all out there and real, or that they're holes in some form of sky dome. The former is the more prevalent upon these forms though I would say, and is the one espoused in the wiki.

Some FE'ers seem to be saying that EVERYTHING that NASA say is a lie - a knowing fabrication.  The size of that conspiracy is mind-blowing...it would have to have extended at least 400 years into the past (because sailors claimed to have used celestial navigation techniques that couldn't have worked in FET)...and would have to cover a dozen major governments, 450+ astronauts and cosmonauts, 400,000 people who worked on the moon shots at NASA and about a million other people who've worked on spacecraft since then.   Astronomers would also have to be in on the conspiracy - so add another million or so people there...then all of the people who write software for GPS receivers, etc.

Others say that NASA staff are EXPECTING their results to show a curved earth and so when the images come back not showing that, they presume they've made an error and "correct" the image back to show a round earth...that's kinda insulting to a bunch of VERY smart people who'd spot the true facts in a heartbeat.

The latter are going to have a hard time with the mars rovers.  Clearly, they are either on a large planet that isn't Earth - or NASA are faking it at enormous expense instead of just saying "Sorry - it's too hard to get rovers to Mars"...which would be a lot cheaper and easier for them.

I think it's sad.

I read this story today - about the insane lengths everyone went to in order to find a rock out in the Kyper belt to extend the New Horizons mission out by another couple of years using just the few ounces of fuel left in it's rocket tanks.   A town in Pategonia going to amazing lengths to allow the NASA team to observe a blink in the brightness of a star lasting under a second so that it's speed could be accurately determined and so the space probe (already FAR past Pluto) can use those last drops of fuel productively.   They shut down a freeway to get rid of light pollution - and when it looked like the wind would shake the telescopes and ruin this once-ever observation - they brought a bunch of semi-trailers and parked them around the telescopes to shield them from the wind.

This tiny rock will be (by FAR) the most distant object ever to have been explored by the works of mankind.

That's such a wonderful thing - it makes me proud of humanity that we crave knowledge to this degree - that we'll go to such lengths to see what's over the next hill.

https://www.nasa.gov/feature/nasa-s-new-horizons-team-strikes-gold-in-argentina

The bleak, miserably limited world of the Flat Earthers, full of nonsense and misunderstandings is a horrible place by comparison.   You almost feel that you're rescuing people from these horrors by opening up the true magnificence of the universe to them.
If they believe its a hoax how do they explain other space agencies going along with it. At best this only increases the size of the necessary conspiracy. If you do assume they are all in on it then why did soviet russia portray many of its missions as failures if it had full control of the outcome.

Re: Curiosity
« Reply #4 on: July 28, 2017, 03:24:18 PM »
If they believe its a hoax how do they explain other space agencies going along with it. At best this only increases the size of the necessary conspiracy. If you do assume they are all in on it then why did soviet russia portray many of its missions as failures if it had full control of the outcome.
Other agencies: Because they don't want to look weak, so they keep up the charade. Never mind the incredibly vast amount of people that would then need to be in on this from all over the globe, and toeing the line.

Russia failures (NASA's too for that matter, remember Challenger?): No idea, don't think I've ever actually heard any sort of reasoning behind the things that have gone wrong. Be curious to know what.... ok, first thought on what they're going to say. It's to make the farce more believable, because who would believe a program that didn't have errors/problems. Seems a tad extreme for some of these, but that's gonna be my guess as to what they'll say, assuming anyone responds to that one.
FET - A few old books making claims and telling you how things must be based on the words contained therein. This sounds familiar....

The triangle doesn't work

Offline 3DGeek

  • *
  • Posts: 277
    • View Profile
Re: Curiosity
« Reply #5 on: July 29, 2017, 09:09:54 PM »
If they believe its a hoax how do they explain other space agencies going along with it. At best this only increases the size of the necessary conspiracy. If you do assume they are all in on it then why did soviet russia portray many of its missions as failures if it had full control of the outcome.
Other agencies: Because they don't want to look weak, so they keep up the charade. Never mind the incredibly vast amount of people that would then need to be in on this from all over the globe, and toeing the line.

Russia failures (NASA's too for that matter, remember Challenger?): No idea, don't think I've ever actually heard any sort of reasoning behind the things that have gone wrong. Be curious to know what.... ok, first thought on what they're going to say. It's to make the farce more believable, because who would believe a program that didn't have errors/problems. Seems a tad extreme for some of these, but that's gonna be my guess as to what they'll say, assuming anyone responds to that one.

About 4% of astronauts die going to or from space.  That's a horrifyingly large number.

The two shuttle disasters (one on ascent, one on reentry) were caused as follows:

* The solid rocket boosters that provide most of the initial velocity of the shuttle were assembled as a bunch of connected cylindrical sections.  They couldn't make them as one solid tube because they needed to absorb vibration from the motors.  So each section was cushioned against the next by a set of rubber seals (the infamous "O-rings").   It turns out that the choice of materials they'd been using lost it's flexibility in cold temperatures.  That meant that the O-ring could be crushed and not rebound again.  That left a gap between the sections of the booster - through which hot gasses escaped and burned through one of the support structures...which failed and sent the whole spacecraft into destruction.   My favorite historical figure (Richard Feynman) investigated this - and when the NASA officials denied it - he called a press conference - and with a $2 clamp and a cup of iced-water, he demonstrated the problem in front of the world's press.  They fixed the O-rings.

* The second occasion was on re-entry - where some of the thermal tiles over the leading edge of the shuttle's wing had been damaged on takeoff - this allowed the structure of the wing beneath the damaged area to heat up and melt, destroying the shuttle and scattering large chunks of it all over North Texas.  The cause of the damage was ice that was building up around the cryogenically cooled parts of the shuttle fuel tank.  In the extreme vibration of the first seconds of launch, that ice cracks apart and falls away.   One piece struck the leading edge of the wing and damaged the thermal protection there.

I was living the Dallas area at the time and have seen pieces of the shuttle scattered over streets and people's back yards with my own eyes.   That mission was definitely not faked!


*

Offline Rounder

  • *
  • Posts: 600
  • What in the Sam Hill are you people talking about?
    • View Profile
Re: Curiosity
« Reply #6 on: August 06, 2017, 06:27:24 PM »
why did soviet russia portray many of its missions as failures...?
The Soviets actually went to great lengths to hide their failures, including at least one instance of renumbering the missions which followed a failed (unmanned) one, in an effort to pretend the failed one had never happened.  Their launch complex is in the middle of nowhere for a reason.  All in service of the space program's goal: demonstrating the scientific and technological superiority of the Soviet system.  Failures don't fit that narrative.

Not that I'm claiming the US space program was any more noble of purpose, mind you.  All the flowery speeches notwithstanding, we chose to go to the moon in order to get there ahead of those evil Commies.  And NASA surely would have preferred to operate in secret as well, and for similar reasons, but our press and populace could not simply be ordered to keep quiet about exploding rockets.
Proud member of ─░ntikam's "Ignore List"
Ok. You proven you are unworthy to unignored. You proven it was a bad idea to unignore you. and it was for me a disgusting experience...Now you are going to place where you deserved and accustomed.
Quote from: SexWarrior
You accuse {FE} people of malice where incompetence suffice

Offline 3DGeek

  • *
  • Posts: 277
    • View Profile
Re: Curiosity
« Reply #7 on: August 09, 2017, 02:59:50 PM »
why did soviet russia portray many of its missions as failures...?
The Soviets actually went to great lengths to hide their failures, including at least one instance of renumbering the missions which followed a failed (unmanned) one, in an effort to pretend the failed one had never happened.  Their launch complex is in the middle of nowhere for a reason.  All in service of the space program's goal: demonstrating the scientific and technological superiority of the Soviet system.  Failures don't fit that narrative.

Not that I'm claiming the US space program was any more noble of purpose, mind you.  All the flowery speeches notwithstanding, we chose to go to the moon in order to get there ahead of those evil Commies.  And NASA surely would have preferred to operate in secret as well, and for similar reasons, but our press and populace could not simply be ordered to keep quiet about exploding rockets.

A *LOT* of civilians attend every single NASA launch - they are incredibly impressive things to see (and FEEL in your gut!).   There is clearly no way they could have covered up (or faked) launch problems.   Those spacecraft definitely go up to high altitudes and few (if any) FE'ers would dispute that.

The question is where they go once they are out of sight - and what they do while they are "up there".

Most deny the existence of the ISS...despite it being very easy to see it with your own eyes if you know when it's going to be overhead.  (My wife and I often stand out on our balcony and watch it go over...with binoculars, you can easily see that this is a space station and not an airplane or a meteor).

The Russian space program has been a lot different.  There is no doubt that they have covered up launch failures - astronaut deaths - all sorts of things were "buried".   HOWEVER - it's interesting to note that many of these "coverups" have subsequently been revealed...which says to me that even a totalitarian regime such as the Soviets had is leaky as all hell.   We found out dozens of cases where they'd faked or hidden stuff.

Yet we've never yet seen a "leak" about the earth really being flat.

That's pretty surprising when you think about it.