The Flat Earth Society

Flat Earth Discussion Boards => Flat Earth Community => Topic started by: Bermit The Dog on October 28, 2019, 10:21:01 PM

Title: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: Bermit The Dog on October 28, 2019, 10:21:01 PM
I’ve come to understand that most people who believe the FE theory also believe the moon landing was faked. So, if NASA was willing to fake that big achievement, why is it that they haven’t done anything consequential, real or faked, in such a long time? Did they decide to stop faking it?

Sorry if this is in the wrong section, I’m new to the forum.
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: Bad Puppy on October 28, 2019, 10:55:10 PM
I’ve come to understand that most people who believe the FE theory also believe the moon landing was faked. So, if NASA was willing to fake that big achievement, why is it that they haven’t done anything consequential, real or faked, in such a long time? Did they decide to stop faking it?

Sorry if this is in the wrong section, I’m new to the forum.

I don't think they faked the moon landing, but if they did who says they stopped faking other accomplishments since then?  Just looking at the recent stuff, the Mars rover and Juno's Jupiter flyby could also have been faked.
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: Pete Svarrior on November 01, 2019, 10:28:47 AM
why is it that they haven’t done anything consequential, real or faked, in such a long time? Did they decide to stop faking it?
Surely you should be asking them, not us. We can only offer speculation on their reasoning.

Presumably it ties in with the continued budget cuts to NASA. They're not trying to grow, they're slowly fading into obscurity. That could be deliberate. As many RE'ers astutely point out, keeping a lie of this scale going would have to be immensely challenging.
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: Tom Bishop on November 01, 2019, 02:19:46 PM
They don't need to constantly make amazing claims anymore because the US already got what it wanted from the Space Race and Cold War. With ICBMs following WWII the US became the world's greatest superpower.

The US dollar is the default international currency. The US maintains a military presence in nearly 150 countries. Most countries have their reserves in US dollars. English is the language of business. The US military is the greatest in the world. All thanks to nuclear weapons and then the race to space that followed immediately after, which established the US as the most technically competent, and therefore most frightening, country to ever exist.
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: TomInAustin on November 01, 2019, 03:22:33 PM
why is it that they haven’t done anything consequential, real or faked, in such a long time? Did they decide to stop faking it?
Surely you should be asking them, not us. We can only offer speculation on their reasoning.

Presumably it ties in with the continued budget cuts to NASA. They're not trying to grow, they're slowly fading into obscurity. That could be deliberate. As many RE'ers astutely point out, keeping a lie of this scale going would have to be immensely challenging.

Much more likely is that private industry has proven that they can be much more cost-effective than the huge contracts given to the military complex in the 50's to 90's
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: Pete Svarrior on November 01, 2019, 03:59:56 PM
Much more likely is that private industry has proven that they can be much more cost-effective than the huge contracts given to the military complex in the 50's to 90's
Apologies for the shorthand confusion - when I say "NASA" (or "NASA's budget"), I'm talking about NASA and its subcontractors combined. The model of ownership doesn't really affect this.

Are they more efficient? Oh, I bet they've found ways to make efficiency cuts ;)
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: TomInAustin on November 01, 2019, 08:33:29 PM
Much more likely is that private industry has proven that they can be much more cost-effective than the huge contracts given to the military complex in the 50's to 90's
Apologies for the shorthand confusion - when I say "NASA" (or "NASA's budget"), I'm talking about NASA and its subcontractors combined. The model of ownership doesn't really affect this.

Are they more efficient? Oh, I bet they've found ways to make efficiency cuts ;)

I knew what you meant.   I meant that the new private sector developments outside of NASA are way more cost-effective than the old way of giving blanket contracts to huge defense contractors.
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: Pete Svarrior on November 01, 2019, 09:23:06 PM
Right. In that case: we're simultaneously seeing a drop in funding and a drop in "big achievements". Your proposal seems to contradict that correlation, which leads me to think it's not very plausible (or, at the very least, not particularly relevant)
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: TomInAustin on November 02, 2019, 12:08:11 AM
Right. In that case: we're simultaneously seeing a drop in funding and a drop in "big achievements". Your proposal seems to contradict that correlation, which leads me to think it's not very plausible (or, at the very least, not particularly relevant)

NASA has made some "big achievements" it's just that without manned flight no one seems to care.  Yes NASA funding is going away but private is just getting started, Space X and Virgin might just surprise you.  This is not like the 60's where they had to invent everything and create new branches of science.   

Plus India, Japan, and China are making big strides.  Hell Isreal is in it too.  We will see a manned lunar mission in the next 5 or so years.
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: Pete Svarrior on November 02, 2019, 09:33:15 AM
Perhaps. We shall see.
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: TomInAustin on November 04, 2019, 08:17:10 PM
Perhaps. We shall see.

It makes me a little sad to think of all the amazing technology like self-landing reusable heavy-lift boosters and a few obviously smart guys around here ignoring it as nothing but a fake.
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: Pete Svarrior on November 05, 2019, 03:20:22 PM
Don't spend too much time worrying about it - even if you're correct, there's plenty of people online who are wrong about things that affect you much more directly :)
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: TomInAustin on November 05, 2019, 03:53:26 PM
Don't spend too much time worrying about it - even if you're correct, there's plenty of people online who are wrong about things that affect you much more directly :)

I sleep well at night.  Not worrying and yes, there are many much more pressing issues.
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: J-Man on November 06, 2019, 10:24:14 PM
What is faking it? It's a lie ! Were the twin towers a lie? Was building #7 collapse a fake? Is the worth of the US dollar a fake? Was the most secure building in the world with no cameras of a plane hitting the pentagon a fake? Is the stock market value fake? Is the US solvent a fake out? Kennedy's? Epstein? People have become so gullible to believe all lies or fakery.

Seriously, why ask about the moon landing, it was a lie.....
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: ChrisTP on November 06, 2019, 11:41:11 PM
Seriously, why ask about the moon landing, it was a lie.....
in your opinion. In my opinion the moon landings were real. Technology has just recently (relative to the landings) caught up and we're able to simulate the exact lighting. As this is my field of expertise I'm inclined to believe that they weren't capable of faking via CGI and I don't believe they could fake it in a studio, the lighting, the movement of the flag and the people in lesser gravity. NVIDIA even did a presentation to show off their realistic lighting by recreating the lighting that could have only worked in the conditions under ther assumption that they were on the moon with the extremely bright sun, the light bouncing off each other and the landing craft, the albedo of the moons surface.

https://youtu.be/syVP6zDZN7I

You could argue that being in a cold war with the soviets pushed the americans to fake it to be superior but this would be speculation. You could say the landing craft looks like it was made out of kitchan material like tinfoil, but it was simply wrapped in reflective metal and doesn't diminish the sturdiness of the craft. You could also speculate that we haven't as a species gone back to the moon so it must have been fake, but again this is just an opinion people have based on speculation.

What factual and solid evidence do you have to prove it was fake that isn't simply speculation and opinion? are there any whistleblowers? Any first hand accounts of fakery? why haven't other competing countries called out the US as fakery?

On the note of the moon landings, theres a new show on Apple TV+ where the soviets beat the americans to the landing (it's a fictional series of an alternate history). slightly off topic but I quite enjoyed it.
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: Pete Svarrior on November 07, 2019, 11:44:26 AM
are there any whistleblowers? Any first hand accounts of fakery?
Yes. Whether or not you want to believe them is your prerogative, but you'd do well to do your homework before posting
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: ChrisTP on November 07, 2019, 12:40:48 PM
If any whistleblowers had hard evidence and worthy credentials it wouldn't be a case of choosing to believe so much as seeing the facts. Besides, statistically the amount of people involved directly in such a conspracy would have been absolutely leaked within no time at all.

Who in particular are you refering to as whistleblowers Pete? Names of people so I can as you put it, do my homework (not being snarky, I am always open to potentially new information). :)
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: Pete Svarrior on November 07, 2019, 01:22:01 PM
Who in particular are you refering to as whistleblowers Pete? Names of people so I can as you put it, do my homework (not being snarky, I am always open to potentially new information). :)
The two that immediately come to mind are Math Powerland and Thomas Baron, and both of them seem to have met a ghastly fate (though in two very different ways). How many were silenced before I was able to learn of them? I don't know.
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: Tumeni on November 07, 2019, 04:14:06 PM
How many were silenced before I was able to learn of them? I don't know.


How do you know that ANY were "silenced", then?
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: Pete Svarrior on November 07, 2019, 04:18:45 PM
How do you know that ANY were "silenced", then?
I just provided you with two examples.
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: Tumeni on November 07, 2019, 04:38:30 PM
I was talking about the ones you claim/suggest were silenced before you learned of them. I thought that was clear from the quote. Without learning of them, you don't actually know if there were any.

So you only have two that you can name. Y/N

Any others are pure speculation. Y/N
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: ChrisTP on November 07, 2019, 04:50:47 PM
The ones you did name are still speculation regarding the moon landings as a hoax. Thomas is more credible but in the end it seems he was mostly showing concern for safety of the lander and it's crew because presumably NASA was trying to rush things and ignore a lot of potential risks (of course they were, they were racing against the soviets to land on the moon first, they probably ignored lots of risks and cut lots of corners to get it done).

I could say to my friend "you will never be able to jump  down that waterfall without hitting the rocks" but my friend may ignore my warning jump anyway and land in the water either by luck or skill. Were my concerns valid? Yes. Then I trip and fall to my death by some bad luck.

Suddenly years later there will be a forum and people will say "this guy told another guy they'd never land that jump, but then the other guy claimed to have landed it when there's no way he could have and then killed the guy for showing concern about the jump".
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: Pete Svarrior on November 07, 2019, 04:51:26 PM
I was talking about the ones you claim/suggest were silenced before you learned of them. I thought that was clear from the quote. Without learning of them, you don't actually know if there were any.
Right, let's recap. You took me saying the following:

How many were silenced before I was able to learn of them? :nyan: I don't know. :nayn:
[subtle emphasis mine]

And your groundbreaking contribution to the thread is that I don't know the number of other potential whistleblowers. Amazing.

If you don't have anything to add to the discussion, do not post in the upper fora.

[the whistleblowers might not be whistleblowers and could be explained away as coincidence]
Sure they could. If we're in the territory of just explaining things away, we can stay here ad infinitum, throwing around baseless what-ifs. Frankly, I have better uses for my time.
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: AllAroundTheWorld on November 07, 2019, 04:56:05 PM
You provided two names with zero evidence to back up that they'd been "silenced". And for what?
The first dude I had to Google, think he's some comedian or something who said something about FE as a joke? Not quite clear about him.
The second is someone who was writing reports about safety concerns, not whistle-blowing about fakery and his death was ruled an accident.
He was killed with his wife and step-daughter, you think "they" really wiped out his immediate family too? Do you have any evidence of foul play?
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: Pete Svarrior on November 07, 2019, 04:59:17 PM
You provided two names with zero evidence to back up that they'd been "silenced".
I asked that Chris do his homework. He asked for names so that he can do so. I delivered. It appears that he was able to get started with his reading that way.

Surely you can do that, too?

The second is someone who was writing reports about safety concerns, not whistle-blowing about fakery and his death was ruled an accident.
How do you know the contents of a report that disappeared off the face of the Earth and was never fully released? You speak of it with such conviction and authority! Is there something you'd like to tell us?
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: ChrisTP on November 07, 2019, 05:03:58 PM
Sure they could. If we're in the territory of just explaining things away, we can stay here ad infinitum, throwing around baseless what-ifs. Frankly, I have better uses for my time.
Very true. But again this comes down to the fact that there's no solid evidence that cannot be explained otherwise, every other claim so far that I've seen is again speculation and hearsay. And a lot of uneducated speculation at that (refering to youtube videos, not so much here)
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: Pete Svarrior on November 07, 2019, 05:06:29 PM
But again this comes down to the fact that there's no solid evidence that cannot be explained otherwise
You can always come up with an alternative explanation. Unsurprisingly, this becomes easier if you happen to control the world's largest economy.
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: ChrisTP on November 07, 2019, 05:22:00 PM
Well, the NVIDIA video above explains away how it wouldn't have been possible to recreate that environment on a set at the time and you can rule out CGI too. It also addresses a number of things conspiracy theorists say as to why they think it's fake.  This is nothing to do with the government being all powerful and explaining everything away. They independantly recreated the moon landings visual conditions that would otherwise not have been possible at the time. And NVIDIA did it to prove their own tech. Unless you think the government told the company to do it?

It's also easy to say that the government are all powrful and in control but in reality it's not one person, it's not one hivemind pulling the strings. The US and it's government is made up of regular people. It's a shody system at best.
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: Pete Svarrior on November 12, 2019, 10:30:11 AM
Well, the NVIDIA video above explains away how it wouldn't have been possible to recreate that environment on a set at the time and you can rule out CGI too.
I don't think Nvidia is an authority on what technology a hypothetical secret organisation may have had access to at an unspecified point in time, and you've made no case to suggest that they are. Why do you consider them relevant?

It's also easy to say that the government are all powrful and in control but in reality
What are your credentials to declare what the reality of governments' power is? Is it specific to a particular government, or do you have authoritative knowledge on all of them?
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: ChrisTP on November 12, 2019, 11:54:00 AM
What would you say is more likely? That the US fumbled around and managed to somehow land on the moon by a mix of luck and skill or that they had 50+ years advanced cutting edge technology in order to fake it? NVIDIA are the current leaders of graphical hardware which is what makes them relevant. I’m assuming you’ve heard of Moores law which is effectively the predictive trend in technology advancement in computers and you can see what 50 years of advancement can bring. NVIDIA’s video showcasing how just with recently technology they were capable of recreating the lighting conditioned expected on the moon which would have previously been impossible in computer technology 50 years ago. This is why I said CGI can be ruled out. Now you have the other issues. Can you recreate the same conditions in a studio? Given you’d have to have lighting from the sun uninterrupted by an atmosphere to get that level of bounce lighting alone I already doubt it.

As for my credentials on the reality of the government. I guess I don’t have any but living in the UK I see first hand how unorganised and messy the government is. Can’t leave the EU but capable of collaborating with all other countries to keep the moon landings a secret, but god forbid two celebrities secretly hook up it’ll be all over the news. Do you think the US government is that much more capable? If so, do you think all other competing countries wouldn’t have outed them by now?

When it comes down to it, I think it’s more likely they landed on the moon at great risk, it would probably be harder to fake it and keep it a secret.
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: Pete Svarrior on November 12, 2019, 03:02:41 PM
What would you say is more likely? That the US fumbled around and managed to somehow land on the moon by a mix of luck and skill or that they had 50+ years advanced cutting edge technology in order to fake it?
That's an extremely loaded question, which can be easily flipped around. What would you say is more likely? That the US fumbled around and managed to somehow pull off an unprecedented publicity stunt by a mix of luck and skill, or that they had cutting edge technology way ahead of its time that they were then unable to reproduce in the 60 years that followed?

This sort of whataboutery is pointless, and deferring to my personal feelings won't advance this issue. What you or I find "likely" may well have no bearing on reality.

NVIDIA are the current leaders of graphical hardware which is what makes them relevant.
Says who? They're up there in commercial computer graphics - that says nothing about what the military may or may not have access to.

I’m assuming you’ve heard of Moores law
I'm a computer scientist.

This is why I said CGI can be ruled out.
You haven't demonstrated that at all. The official moon landing footage is of extremely poor quality - you're not going to get anywhere near analysing the lighting on it, because you don't have sufficient data points to do so.

Can you recreate the same conditions in a studio?
Once again - I'd suggest that you first prove that you could infer any of that from the footage, rather than what you expect the conditions on the Moon to be.

As for my credentials on the reality of the government. I guess I don’t have any but living in the UK I see first hand how unorganised and messy the government is.
So, again, you're deferring to nothing but personal intuition. You believe what you want to believe, because you want to. I can't stop you from doing that, nor do I have any interest in stopping you, but I hope you can see why I don't find this approach persuasive.
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: ChrisTP on November 14, 2019, 08:58:08 PM
Quote
That's an extremely loaded question, which can be easily flipped around. What would you say is more likely? That the US fumbled around and managed to somehow pull off an unprecedented publicity stunt by a mix of luck and skill, or that they had cutting edge technology way ahead of its time that they were then unable to reproduce in the 60 years that followed?
The technology wasn't that advanced for it's time (to land on the moon). It was just super risky. I'll put it this way, when I was a kid I would pull stupid and dangerous stunts all the time (like jumping down a full set of stairs) without a care in the world. I walked into the ocean barefoot, I'd jump rivers. Now I'm older and well aware of the risks of breaking my neck or standing on a dangerous sea creature and getting stung, I'd not do those things unless I were absolutely sure of the measures I'd need to take to keep myself safe. This is how I see NASA in the early stages. Can they land on the moon? sure, is it super risky? yes but they didn't care much for the risks so long as they won. Would they do it now, knowing how massively risky it is with little reward? I don't think so. They aren't in a space race or a cold war, they haven't got much to prove and their budget has declined because people care less about it now than when it was super important to 'beat those darn soviets'.

Quote
The official moon landing footage is of extremely poor quality - you're not going to get anywhere near analysing the lighting on it, because you don't have sufficient data points to do so.
I would disagree, but you're free to have that opinion if that's how you feel. What would you say about all of the other missions to the moon? video footage and photos alike. The other countries that have sent unmanned rovers to the moon that all seem to come back looking awfully similar. China and Russia would be the least likely countries to defend Amercia if they were faking such things.

It's basically impossible to keep such a massive lie from being fully exposed and I'm not talking about some illustrator/comedian whistleblower or some guy that thought it was too risky to go to the moon. of the 500+ people who've been into space and the 12 who've supposedly stepped on the moons surface it's crazy to think that all of those people or their friends and family would stay quiet about the moon landings and the earth being flat. That's already at least 1000 people with first/second hand experience of this stuff and by then, the conspiracy will already have collapsed to the public. This is why I can only assume the space race and the globe is real. You're free again to disagree and obviously, you will do for whatever reasons. Even smaller government secrets have had whistleblowers which have caused huge public outcry. I will admit though if an astronaut does come forward and claims it's all fake I'd find the chaos pretty fun to watch. :P

Quote
Once again - I'd suggest that you first prove that you could infer any of that from the footage, rather than what you expect the conditions on the Moon to be.
What would the point be in demonstrating my ability to do this to you when you'll simply disagree anyway? I believe it's you who needs to do this to prove it to yourself. If you aren't capable I can't help you with that. As is the way with the majority of flat earthers, unless you do these things yourself I don't think you'll believe anyone with opposing views. I won't waste my time demostrating to you my own ability. I will say though that since my area of expertise is CGI I'm reasonably confident. Can you prove the videos were in fact made in a studio?

Quote
I hope you can see why I don't find this approach persuasive.
Yes I can see why you wouldn't. All I can say is that my first hand experience with the government is that I get the opposite impression of anything close to a hivemind or anything capable of pulling off such a massive conspiracy. That's not to write it off entirely as impossible. I mean hell, maybe the 'real' government hide behind their moronic fake government persona as a mask. Maybe by some absoutely miniscule fraction of a chance they've managed to keep this whole hoax quiet. I'd be impressed and to be honest, if it turned out the moon landings were a hoax, I'd be impressed and interested to see how they managed that. I've really got nothing to gain or lose from it being real or fake.

As to the point of the thread, I think NASA have achieved plenty of amazing things since the moon landings (real or fake). We have NASA to thank for various inventions however great or small, inventions which we use daily in some cases. I found this a while back just as a quick example;

https://www.jpl.nasa.gov/infographics/uploads/infographics/full/11358.jpg

And if NASA is to be believed, the Mars rovers are pretty impressve too. They don't get the same kind of publicity but they still do some great work IMO. In this day and age as well, I think it'd be pretty hard to fake things.
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: Pete Svarrior on November 15, 2019, 11:22:52 AM
What would the point be in demonstrating my ability to do this to you when you'll simply disagree anyway?
Personal betterment. After all, you said a dumb thing, and learning why it was dumb would help you grow.

Your assertions are ridiculous, and if you simply looked into them, you'd see why. You assert that the footage of the moon lighting cannot be faked, because it would be impossible to replicate the light patterns. I'm pointing out a simple fact - you have never looked at the light patterns, and you would really struggle to see any if you tried. The footage is of appalling quality, which is either a product of its age or convenience; but regardless of that, your refutation is impossible to replicate.

What Nvidia have accomplished is produced a realistic image of what you think the Moon landing would look like in modern high-res. It serves as no point of comparison to the historical footage.

Can you prove the videos were in fact made in a studio?
Why would I prove a claim I didn't make?
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: ChrisTP on November 15, 2019, 05:48:16 PM
It's great that you can know for a fact what I have and haven't done or seen in my own time without having been here with me. Maybe use that super power to see what the astonauts saw. Or maybe it's as if you're assuming something is a fact when it's actually just your opinion of me. Since you're quick to point out other people for making biased assumptions maybe you should reflect on that, either way your opinions about what I do and don't know or have and haven't done are irrelevant here because it doesn't matter what I've done or what I've seen, you won't believe it until you've come to the same conclusions all on your own. That's fine and all, but there's no point in me showcasing my perceptions to you in this case... Surely you can see why I won't waste my time trying to show you what I see.

Anyway, I don't know if you believe the moon landings were a hoax or not, or maybe you are trying to suggest you just have no opinion on the matter (but you most certainly do). I asked what your thoughts are on the rest of the moon landing missions (manned and unmanned) videos and photos but it seems you're adamant about talking of the lowest quality video footage, rather than all of the evidence together. Or maybe you think all of the footage and images from all of the moon landings are too low a quality to assess, which I disagree with.

I'd still stand by saying that NASA have achieved all kinds of amazing things since the moon landings. It's whether you think they've been lying the whole time I suppose. The Mars rovers IMO are maybe more impressive than getting a man on the moon. To get a rover to travel so far and to land on a planet no one has been to, one with an atmosphere too. The moon would have been easier because it would be a descent through near enough empty space onto a body much closer to us. The precision of the mars rovers missions were far greater achievements and I'd say the only thing people are impressed about with the moon landings were sentimental, being people instead of machines. What are your thoughts on the Mars rovers Pete? Hoax or real?
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: Pete Svarrior on November 16, 2019, 01:07:11 AM
It's great that you can know for a fact what I have and haven't done or seen in my own time without having been here with me.
I asked you, and you answered. If you lied to me, that's unfortunate, but ultimately I have to assume that you describe your experiences truthfully. Otherwise, this discussion becomes meaningless.

Surely you can see why I won't waste my time trying to show you what I see.
Of course - given how much time you're wasting on other near-identical things while loudly avoiding this one, your motivation here is crystal clear. I must say I did not expect you to admit it quite so bluntly.

Anyway, I don't know if you believe the moon landings were a hoax or not, or maybe you are trying to suggest you just have no opinion on the matter
As mentioned before, that's irrelevant to the matter at hand. Investigating this issue from the perspective of feelings is useless. Facts and measurable evidence are what matters. If you follow me on this adventure and "waste your time" looking at the footage, establishing whether your prior position made any sense, you might just learn something. It's a sincere offer - try to look past your obvious dislike of me and approach it dispassionately.

Your assertion is that the moon landing footage cannot be faked because the nice people at Nvidia said the light patterns wouldn't match. For your own benefit (you don't have to tell us about it if you'd rather pretend you "don't want to waste your time". I don't want you to "show me" anything, so long as you've actually seen it), have a look at the footage of the moon landing and ask yourself how plausible it is for one to observe the lighting in any meaningful way. Or don't. You can just carry on shouting about how biased I am for exposing flaws in your assertions. I have no intention of forcing your hand :)
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: Tumeni on November 17, 2019, 04:50:06 PM
The official moon landing footage is of extremely poor quality - you're not going to get anywhere near analysing the lighting on it, because you don't have sufficient data points to do so.

The still photographs are not of extremely poor quality. So use them for analysis instead of the video footage.

Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: Pete Svarrior on November 17, 2019, 06:21:35 PM
The still photographs are not of extremely poor quality. So use them for analysis instead of the video footage.
By all means - feel free to. You might even be able to contribute something!
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: ChrisTP on November 18, 2019, 01:28:44 PM
Quote
Of course - given how much time you're wasting on other near-identical things while loudly avoiding this one, your motivation here is crystal clear. I must say I did not expect you to admit it quite so bluntly.
Yes my motivation is clear, I cba to put in the extra effort for you when there is little for me to gain. Practice what you preach and do it yourself if you feel it's important. If you've come to a different conclusion than I have then cool. I don't doubt that you've looked at the footage but it's no secret you think anything that comes from NASA are lies, you've said so yourself.

Quote
try to look past your obvious dislike of me and approach it dispassionately.
I don't like or dislike you, I've never met you... And I am approaching this dispassionately which is why I said I cba to hold your hand or prove myself to you for little to no gain. regarding wasting time; responding to this thread with text is a lot easier and faster than going back through videos, screenshotting and photoshopping lines as examples in an attempt to prove myself to you. I have no reason to do that. I have in fact looked at the footage from all the missions (public at least) and I've clearly come to a conclusion you don't agree with. You can sit there and call me dumb all you like if it makes you feel better but you disagreeing with me does not mean I'm wrong.

And of course both mine and your opinions in this discussion matter. There would be no discussion otherwise. Would you be disagreeing with me if I were saying the moon landings were a hoax? If not then would you say that other NASA's achievements (ie the mars rovers landing on mars) are lies? If so, what evidence do you have that they are lies other than your personal lack of trust in NASA? Are you offended at the idea that you think and have individual opinions and biases? Would you rather I consider you a robot than cannot process information in a human way?

At any rate if you can't move past the fact that I think the moon landings were legit then I suggest we move on to other topics like the mars rovers, since this thread is about whether or not NASA have faked their achievements since the moon landings.
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: Pete Svarrior on November 18, 2019, 01:33:20 PM
it's no secret you think anything that comes from NASA are lies, you've said so yourself.
Have I? Blimey, I must have been unwell that day. Could you please point me to where I said that? I'll have to adjust it accordingly, since it completely contradicts what I've been saying for years (and what I continue to say).

EDIT: I have now re-read every post of mine that includes the words "NASA" or "nasa" and came back empty-handed. I can't help but think that you're once again showing yourself to not be particularly dispassionate - projecting your imagination of what that gosh-darn Svarrior must be thinkin' onto my actual person. If that does turn out to be correct, I'd really appreciate it if you could stop doing that.

I cba to hold your hand or prove myself to you for little to no gain
You cannot credibly claim to hold no ill will towards me while bending what I said so aggressively. I made it extremely clear that you're not proving anything to me. If you are unwilling to discuss this without devolving to petty attacks, then please take it somewhere more appropriate.

Would you be disagreeing with me if I were saying the moon landings were a hoax?
That depends on what arguments you'd bring to the table. I'm not interested in unqualified opinions - they're worthless.

At any rate if you can't move past the fact that I think the moon landings were legit then I suggest we move on
Absolutely not. If your debating strategy is to declare yourself correct with no qualfiication, denounce me as "unable to move past the fact", and demand that I simply accept this and move on, then this discussion ends here. If you make an assertion, you back it up. If your logic is full of holes, you patch them up. "Whatever, I'm right, moving swiftly on!" is not going to fly around here.
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: ChrisTP on November 18, 2019, 05:11:39 PM
Quote
Have I? Blimey, I must have been unwell that day. Could you please point me to where I said that? I'll have to adjust it accordingly, since it completely contradicts what I've been saying for years (and what I continue to say).
Apologies I believe what you actually said was not to trust NASA at all, or something along those lines. I won't fish for the comment but it was a long youtube interview with you and globebusters I think. I could have misinterpreted what you said as calling them liars, but I suppose you could also have meant you don't trust that they even know what they're doing, either way in your own words you essentially have said you don't trust what nasa say about anything.

Ok, if you sincerely feel strongly toward this and aren't just making a lame attempt at calling me out as having lied then at some point I'll go through some of the apollo footage and mark up some screengrabs. I'm not against you being curious to more evidence but the way you're coming across is calling me dumb and suggesting I've been bullsh***ing which I do not appreciate, and I'll usually respond in kind. What you've just called petty attacks is simply me talking to you how you talk to me. Either way I don't want to derail this thread and turn it into petty attacks which is why I'm suggesting to move on.

Feel free to actually respond to my questions regarding the mars rovers though.

Quote
Absolutely not. If your debating strategy is to declare yourself correct with no qualfiication, denounce me as "unable to move past the fact", and demand that I simply accept this and move on, then this discussion ends here.
Well you have the means to know what my qualifications are here, my expertise is CGI and particularly environmnet CGI (recreating scenery in 3D) which includes lighting and materials. While I've only a mere decade of industry experience and I'm well aware I'm nowhere near the best in my field of work I'm still quite confident with my own analysis. Again though that's not to say I'm 100% right which is the point I'm trying to make, that if you disagree that's fine, but I was still confident.

My claim was that IMO based on my own analysis of the footage I do not believe it could have been faked at the time, what I didn't do was say "I'm right you're wrong next topic!" I can be proven wrong for sure as can everyone. ^^

So if you are actually interested in seeing a breakdown then I might just do that, if you're just interested in attempting to ridicule and debase my points as bull then I won't bother because like I said before, I've nothing to prove (and the burden of proof is actually on the people claiming hoax which I still haven't seen you do yet in this thread).
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: Pete Svarrior on November 22, 2019, 11:53:13 AM
I believe what you actually said was not to trust NASA at all
Not trusting someone is not the same as assuming everything they say is false by default. Information from an untrusted or mistrusted source (or even a distrusted source, since I suppose you could interpret my statement either way) is still valuable once scrutinised. Of course, if you had any doubt as to what I meant, the prudent thing to do would have been to ask, not to choose the least generous assumption and assert it as fact.

I eagerly await your results, should you choose to post them. As mentioned before, you're under no compulsion to disclose them - your personal growth is all I hope to achieve here.
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: ChrisTP on November 22, 2019, 12:57:20 PM
Quote
Not trusting someone is not the same as assuming everything they say is false by default. Information from an untrusted or mistrusted source (or even a distrusted source, since I suppose you could interpret my statement either way) is still valuable once scrutinised. Of course, if you had any doubt as to what I meant, the prudent thing to do would have been to ask, not to choose the least generous assumption and assert it as fact.
That's fair, apologies for misunderstanding your meaning there. Language can be easily mistaken with context and individual interpretation. :)

As for showing my results, I'll need to go through the content again and mark things up which may take a little time, I'm rarely at home, but I may as well do it just to further this discussion otherwise we're at a standstill disagreement. I do understand what you're trying to point out, that I may well have missed a lot or not fully understood things as I scrutinised the footage for myself, or maybe never even looked and just parrot what I heard. You should also strive for your own personal growth here too, you may hate the idea but I could well be correct.

I did actually once think the moon landings were a hoax when I was a kid (because I grew up around people who said it was and I just assumed it true). Those people (my mum, my brother, other family members and friends) only parrot what they've been told and lack any critical thinking skills. Once I realised this I began to rely mostly on information I've looked up for myself which I try to fact check with multiple sources (especially better when the sources are heavily opposing each other but still have the same information). Over time I've come to what I think is a reasonable understanding of integrity in sources of information. When I checked through the moon landing thinking it was a hoax I still came to the conclusion that it was actually not likely a hoax.

My mum on the other hand will still parrot how it's a big hoax (only when asked, she's not obsessed or anything), all the while never having actually looked at the information. In this sense I think this is what you seem to think of me here, but I can only assure you I've done the research for myself and I'm not just here saying "look, NVIDIA said so, so it must be true!". :) I used the nvidia video because it shows my reasoning and I'd like to think it's a trusted source of information in this instance. I agree with their assessment though they didn't go into much detail regarding shadows, which is one of the things I first looked into.

Anyway. Would you agree that (if true) the mars rover are a much bigger achievement in technology than the moon landings? and on less of a budget.
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: J-Man on November 22, 2019, 07:15:15 PM
It's pretty clear we'll be faking the next moon mission and Mars landing. Nobody is going anywhere and never has. Step right up to the greatest launch in history !!!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4dTTxdw7Z2c

Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: TomInAustin on November 22, 2019, 07:33:41 PM
It's pretty clear we'll be faking the next moon mission and Mars landing. Nobody is going anywhere and never has. Step right up to the greatest launch in history !!!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4dTTxdw7Z2c

Ok, I'll play along.   Why is Space X spending so much money on heavy-lift boosters that come back and land?  Think about that technology.  What about the satellites they are launching that you can see with your own eyes?
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: J-Man on November 22, 2019, 09:04:56 PM
Why is NASA using a guy that fails and smokes pot on Joe Rogan?  Has anything he's made work right? 1 minute mark lmao

https://www.npr.org/2019/11/22/782052992/elon-musk-unveils-teslas-cybertruck-with-a-polarizing-wedge-shape
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: Tumeni on November 22, 2019, 11:38:55 PM
Why is NASA using a guy that fails and smokes pot on Joe Rogan?  Has anything he's made work right?

Because, despite a few failures, they have made the business of landing and RE-USING their first-stage rockets a routine business. It's no longer the exception, it's the rule.

You can see the satellites that were recently launched for Starlink for yourself, if you're in the right part of the world at the right time. They have a host of satellite makers queuing up to take advantage of the savings that they can make by using SpaceX in preference to other launch providers.



 
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: J-Man on November 23, 2019, 04:16:20 AM
Please tell me what a satellite does that an aerial photography/data link plane or drone doesn't do? Throw in the millions of fixed data towers laid out on the flat earth.

It looked so fake, it must be real. nod, giggle giggle pass me the blunt dog !
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: Tumeni on November 23, 2019, 09:13:20 AM
Please tell me what a satellite does that an aerial photography/data link plane or drone doesn't do? Throw in the millions of fixed data towers laid out on the flat earth.

1. Domestic satellite TV.

Data towers are irrelevant to this. Nobody anywhere has proved that my satellite signal, or anyone else's, is coming from a fixed data tower. They could do so easily; find tower, buy or borrow portable satellite dish and receiver. Go to tower, and within a few metres of it, point dish at tower from North, South, East and West. If the tower is genuinely broadcasting the local satellite provider's signal, it will come through loud and clear.

In the absence of this, one has to note that (in the UK, for instance) all satellite dishes point South. Even the ones on the South Coast, which are then pointing out to sea. UK above the equator, satellite in equatorial orbit, so dish points South. Dishes in Australia point North, for the same reason in reverse.

In my case, I know where the local towers are. They're North, West and East of me, and my dish points South. No tower in its direction.

2. Fleet Tracking

One of SpaceX's early customers was Orbcomm, who provide fleet vehicle tracking services. If you want to expose them as a "fake", you could always buy their service and devise an experiment to show that they're only using towers, similar to the one above.... but nobody will.


3. Remote news-gathering and outside broadcast

etc

etc


Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: J-Man on November 23, 2019, 05:31:41 PM
Stop being foolish. You couldn't point one of these miniature disc's within 5 thousand miles of a sat, if in fact it could float in the same location 25,000 miles up. Which it can't, no such thing dog, pass the blunt again. Live TV broadcast, no fricken latency, no delay to cut the nude streaker or murder in progress. Once the signal is out, it's available. The things peeps are asked to believe....amazing !!!
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: Tumeni on November 23, 2019, 05:42:03 PM
You couldn't point one of these miniature disc's within 5 thousand miles of a sat

I invite you to prove the signal is coming from anything else. If you think it's coming from a tower, any tower, I've shown you the method above by which you could prove this. Look forward to the YouTube video when you do. It should be easy, shouldn't it?

Like I said, I know where the towers are in my locale, and I know my own dish is not pointing at any of them.



Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: J-Man on November 23, 2019, 06:01:02 PM
It couldn't bounce off the firmament or nanometal particles dropped via chemtrails since the 1970's.....Daaaaaaa
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: Tumeni on November 23, 2019, 06:20:47 PM
You mentioned the towers. By all means, show proof that anyone is getting a domestic satellite TV signal from a tower. Method outlined above. Shouldn't cost a lot, shouldn't take much time, but NOBODY that I have suggested it to has actually gone and done it.

Why not, do you think?


News teams use portable satellite uplink equipment in the field. I invite you to show that any of these are actually connecting with a convenient communications tower whilst in some far-flung. war-torn corner of the Middle East. Where's the infrastructure going to come from to do this?
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: Tumeni on November 23, 2019, 07:04:57 PM
SpaceX's upcoming launches from https://spaceflightnow.com/launch-schedule/

Dec. 4 Falcon 9 • SpaceX CRS 19

A SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket will launch the 21st Dragon spacecraft mission on its 19th operational cargo delivery flight to the International Space Station.


Dec. 15/16 Falcon 9 • JCSAT 18/Kacific 1

A SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket will launch the JCSAT 18/Kacific 1 communications satellite jointly owned by SKY Perfect JSAT Corp. of Japan and Kacific Broadband Satellites of Singapore.


TBD Falcon 9 • Starlink 2

A SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket is expected to launch the third batch of approximately 60 satellites for SpaceX’s Starlink broadband network, a mission designated Starlink 2. Delayed from Nov. 4. [Oct. 9]


TBD Falcon 9 • Starlink 3

A SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket is expected to launch the fourth batch of approximately 60 satellites for SpaceX’s Starlink broadband network, a mission designated Starlink 3. [Sept. 11]


January 2020 Falcon 9 • GPS 3 SV03

A SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket will launch the U.S. Air Force’s third third-generation navigation satellite for the Global Positioning System.


TBD Falcon 9 • Starlink 4

A SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket is expected to launch the fifth batch of approximately 60 satellites for SpaceX’s Starlink broadband network


TBD Falcon 9 • Crew Dragon Demo 2

A SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket will launch a Crew Dragon spacecraft on its first test flight with astronauts on-board to the International Space Station


February 2020 Falcon 9 • SAOCOM 1B

A SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket will launch the SAOCOM 1B satellite for CONAE, Argentina’s space agency.


March 1 Falcon 9 • SpaceX CRS 20

A SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket will launch the 22nd Dragon spacecraft mission on its 20th operational cargo delivery flight to the International Space Station


May 2020 Falcon 9 • GPS 3 SV04

A SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket will launch the U.S. Air Force’s fourth third-generation navigation satellite for the Global Positioning System



These folks video pretty much all the launches, and lots of movements of the boosters around Port Canaveral.

EDIT - YouTube channel "USLaunchReport"

In particular, they video the boosters returning on the landing barge from the Atlantic;

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X2PM8AAyyYg

..and here's the above being moved around the port

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TXSGXaN6Wkw

A lot of effort to go to in order to generate a "fake", wouldn't you say....?

If they're not doing what they say they're doing, why bother? 
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: Tom Bishop on November 23, 2019, 07:09:42 PM
What makes you think that the rockets have no payload that its operators are deploying for financial benefit?
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: Tumeni on November 23, 2019, 10:47:24 PM
What makes you think that the rockets have no payload that its operators are deploying for financial benefit?

Who are you asking?
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: TomInAustin on November 25, 2019, 03:30:53 PM
What makes you think that the rockets have no payload that its operators are deploying for financial benefit?

Of course, the rockets have commercial payloads.  Even if the customer is the same company.
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: AllAroundTheWorld on November 29, 2019, 03:57:54 PM
It's pretty clear we'll be faking the next moon mission and Mars landing. Nobody is going anywhere and never has. Step right up to the greatest launch in history !!!

I'm genuinely confused about the FE beliefs in this area.

You see this failure of evidence of something but all the footage of the successful launches...what, they faked those? It's like hearing about a plane crash and concluding that planes can't fly.
I mean, firstly, there are loads of witnesses to successful launches - I saw a Shuttle launch back in the day and these launches are being witnessed too.
And secondly if you're claiming they fake the successful launches did they fake this? Why did they bother faking a failure?
Or is it that this was real but the fake ones aren't? I honestly don't know what your point is.

Similarly I don't understand Tom's questions about the payload. Of course SpaceX are delivering payloads, they have launched satellites for the US military. What does anyone think is going on here? The military pay SpaceX to deploy a satellite into orbit and just assume they've done it without checking? Or SpaceX are just somehow simulating the deployment but really using some other technology to fool the military into believing they have done it?

I am genuinely baffled by FE beliefs in this area.
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: Tumeni on November 30, 2019, 11:19:24 AM
https://www.spacex.com/missions (https://www.spacex.com/missions)

There's at least two missions in there that SpaceX completed for Orbcomm. Please take a minute to look Orbcomm up. Their speciality is commercial fleet vehicle tracking, and they use their satellites for this.

https://www.orbcomm.com/eu/hardware/devices (https://www.orbcomm.com/eu/hardware/devices)

So, in order for the fakery to be complete, there are options;

1. Orbcomm is "in on it", and only pretends to its customers that it is using satellites. Unlikely, since at least one of their products is specifically intended for marine, off-shore use

2. SpaceX is somehow managing, without deploying a satellite, to convince Orbcomm that it has, and is generating a signal that resembles a satellite signal, and is somehow generated for areas that cell networks do not cover.

Possibly others, and variations on the above.

One group of FE-ers has already funded a ring laser gyroscope in order to try and prove flat earth.

Is there another group that will purchase Orbcomm's products and use them in a similar effort?   
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: Tom Bishop on November 30, 2019, 05:51:33 PM
I see that SpaceX is putting up satellites for Argentina, Indonesia, Tiawan, Bulgaria, Japan, and Malasia. Interesting that the zealots claim that that space is an international endeavor, yet a few organizations are relied on for access.
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: ChrisTP on November 30, 2019, 06:11:42 PM
I see that SpaceX is putting up satellites for Argentina, Indonesia, Tiawan, Bulgaria, Japan, and Malasia. Interesting that the zealots claim that that space is an international endeavor, yet a few organizations are relied on for access.
Strange way of thinking... There are very few space agencies that work internationally, so that's somehow suspicious? It's a very specialized endevour. and spaceX are doing it comercially for cometitive prices. That's just how a monopoly works.

Do you also think it's 'interesting' that there isn't a seperate FES per country?
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: Tumeni on November 30, 2019, 11:53:20 PM
I see that SpaceX is putting up satellites for Argentina, Indonesia, Tiawan, Bulgaria, Japan, and Malasia. Interesting that the zealots claim that that space is an international endeavor, yet a few organizations are relied on for access.

No different from any other endeavour where a particular supplier/provider has a unique selling point, or is more keenly priced than the competition, surely ... ?
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: inquisitive on December 03, 2019, 09:51:32 PM
Stop being foolish. You couldn't point one of these miniature disc's within 5 thousand miles of a sat, if in fact it could float in the same location 25,000 miles up. Which it can't, no such thing dog, pass the blunt again. Live TV broadcast, no fricken latency, no delay to cut the nude streaker or murder in progress. Once the signal is out, it's available. The things peeps are asked to believe....amazing !!!
Time for you to explain how the satellite dishes, that millions have, work.  Check the angles.  Identify the transmitter(s).
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: Tumeni on December 03, 2019, 10:53:00 PM
Stop being foolish. You couldn't point one of these miniature disc's within 5 thousand miles of a sat, if in fact it could float in the same location 25,000 miles up. Which it can't, no such thing dog, pass the blunt again. Live TV broadcast, no fricken latency, no delay to cut the nude streaker or murder in progress. Once the signal is out, it's available. The things peeps are asked to believe....amazing !!!
Time for you to explain how the satellite dishes, that millions have, work.  Check the angles.  Identify the transmitter(s).

The oft-quoted suggestion is that it's driven by "cell towers" or other ground-based transmitters.

Having lived through the era of analogue and digital terrestrial TV, and seen the evidence of those living south of the transmitter pointing aerials north, toward it, and others to the west of it pointing aerials east toward it, I now see absolutely every domestic satellite dish in the land pointing broadly south.

Having seen for myself how main transmitters fail to reach valley areas and such, and how repeater transmitters were used to fill in areas, this requirement has gone, and all dishes point to the same spot, with no or much-reduced issues from high ground in the way, except in the north, the furthest point from the transmitter in the sky.

And, as I suggested above, anyone can take a portable satellite rig, operate it in the vicinity of a local ground tower, and show the world whether or not they can get a usable signal from it. Just pick up one of the channels broadcast by the local satellite provider, but which is absent from the terrestrial TV listings.
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: J-Man on December 03, 2019, 11:58:48 PM
What is satellite transmission? Nothing more than transmitters shooting data (flaring out) into the sky and supposedly hitting this fake sat that never moves (like the earth) and beams down all sorts of data.

Now 1958- 1962 US and Russia started sending nukes up to the firmament (ie molten glass) to one, try to find it's weakness (windows to heaven where the floods came from). They found that these electromagnetic charges floated around for a long long time creating an electromagnetic field that "data" could bounce off of back to flat earth!!! In come Chemtrails in early 1970's where these nano-particles could be used for same purpose along with others like blocking the sun to a degree, weather modification, weaponry ect., so we have Chemtrails usually daily covering our skies with these metal particles (smaller than the human eye can detect) staying aloft over a month.

Transmit away, now go smoke the Blunt !

The thousand of weather balloons sent aloft daily monitor the electromagnetic field all day.

Satan is soooo weak, Kingdom seekers rule !!!

https://www.globalresearch.ca/chemtrails-aerosol-and-electromagnetic-weapons-in-the-age-of-nuclear-war-4/5617879

https://www.who.int/peh-emf/about/WhatisEMF/en/

Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: J-Man on December 04, 2019, 12:53:55 AM
Now just try a little common sense. Why do rockets tip over after they go airborne a few miles? The excuse is this is to get it to its intended angle to fall around the globe at this magical degree when infact it's to prevent it from crashing into the firmament where everyone could see it explode on collision. Now think hard here: wouldn't it be wise to get on up super high quickly out of thicker atmosphere where drag is less THEN tilt over sideways to proper angle around globe saving tons of fuel...Ah less weight for rocket, less cost....no no tip over and get out of sight THEN plop in the ocean !!!

Fooled again....puff puff !!!
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: AllAroundTheWorld on December 04, 2019, 11:21:36 AM
Now just try a little common sense. Why do rockets tip over after they go airborne a few miles?
Lot's of information here if you want to actually know the answer rather than arguing from a position of ignorance/incredulity

https://space.stackexchange.com/questions/4085/does-the-space-shuttle-fly-straight-up-when-leaving-earth

The headline is the craft needs to achieve a horizontal velocity of 18,000mph - the horizontal velocity is the key thing to achieve orbit, so the path needs to be curved to achieve that.
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: J-Man on December 04, 2019, 01:39:06 PM
ha ha exactly what one would expect. Satan coming up with scientific BS excuses why we hide the dome. plop plop always ends in the drink !!!
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: somerled on December 04, 2019, 01:50:44 PM
Jet and rocket engines are limited by atmospheric pressure - little or no atmospheric pressure means no thrust and no flight , hence we see the curved paths of rockets .
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: Tumeni on December 04, 2019, 02:04:46 PM
Jet and rocket engines are limited by atmospheric pressure - little or no atmospheric pressure means no thrust and no flight , hence we see the curved paths of rockets .

If that's the case, why would any space agency or private space operator bother to do anything? If the craft which everyone can clearly see being launched do not do what they say they will, why would they bother building them?

Answer - they're doing it because their customers are actually getting what they asked for - satellites placed into orbit, supplies delivered to the ISS, etc. 


Observe the SpaceX first stage being brought back into port, as I posted above. It's clearly not an illusion, for someone went out and videoed it for real, in the flesh, along with the personnel working on it. Do you really think they're doing this just for show? 
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: J-Man on December 04, 2019, 02:14:56 PM
They went to Mars in the movies, I know it's just a movie but they filmed it from real adventures in space landing humans on Mars recently.  shhh don't tell anyone.
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: J-Man on December 04, 2019, 02:24:09 PM
Why would one believe you could land a rocket back on land or sea safely when you can't even make bullet proof glass or a car that exits a garage by itself? I witnessed a new car unable to get out of a garage, we all laughed at the fool who paid for garbage hype.  puff puff
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: TomInAustin on December 04, 2019, 03:57:05 PM
Now just try a little common sense. Why do rockets tip over after they go airborne a few miles? The excuse is this is to get it to its intended angle to fall around the globe at this magical degree when infact it's to prevent it from crashing into the firmament where everyone could see it explode on collision. Now think hard here: wouldn't it be wise to get on up super high quickly out of thicker atmosphere where drag is less THEN tilt over sideways to proper angle around globe saving tons of fuel...Ah less weight for rocket, less cost....no no tip over and get out of sight THEN plop in the ocean !!!

Fooled again....puff puff !!!

Science is your friend if you could just open your eyes and close the book of myths.
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: TomInAustin on December 04, 2019, 03:58:32 PM
Jet and rocket engines are limited by atmospheric pressure - little or no atmospheric pressure means no thrust and no flight , hence we see the curved paths of rockets .

You might want to go back to 4th-grade science and look into Newton's laws.
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: J-Man on December 04, 2019, 04:43:03 PM
Dear Tom

I'm probably a lot older than you. Here's some science ! Back when the dinosaurs roamed we watched TV with these funky rabbit ears, now we point this stupid round disc thingy in a direction and get the same thing only a box monitors our outflow of evil MONEY.

Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: somerled on December 04, 2019, 04:57:38 PM
Jet and rocket engines are limited by atmospheric pressure - little or no atmospheric pressure means no thrust and no flight , hence we see the curved paths of rockets .

You might want to go back to 4th-grade science and look into Newton's laws.

I do remember those laws of motion . Thrust is a reactive force . No atmospheric pressure or launch pad then no reaction and no acceleration .
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: J-Man on December 04, 2019, 05:02:51 PM
Wait so how do these fake sats slow down after being jettisoned from the rocket? Then how do they correct slight orbital movement? You scientist can't even agree now can you?

One day we all wake up and figure out its all about money and us being controlled. Set yourself free and live happily ever after for eternity :)
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: TomInAustin on December 04, 2019, 06:00:05 PM
Jet and rocket engines are limited by atmospheric pressure - little or no atmospheric pressure means no thrust and no flight , hence we see the curved paths of rockets .

You might want to go back to 4th-grade science and look into Newton's laws.

I do remember those laws of motion . Thrust is a reactive force . No atmospheric pressure or launch pad then no reaction and no acceleration .

Fail:

Thurst is reactive yes, as in for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.  The only difference in a rocket engine efficiency in an atmosphere and one in a vacuum is the size and shape of the bell.  It does not have to push against anything. 
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: inquisitive on December 04, 2019, 06:05:46 PM
Dear Tom

I'm probably a lot older than you. Here's some science ! Back when the dinosaurs roamed we watched TV with these funky rabbit ears, now we point this stupid round disc thingy in a direction and get the same thing only a box monitors our outflow of evil MONEY.
Why do you have a problem understanding satellite communication?
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: somerled on December 04, 2019, 06:27:16 PM

[/quote]

Fail:

Thurst is reactive yes, as in for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.  The only difference in a rocket engine efficiency in an atmosphere and one in a vacuum is the size and shape of the bell.  It does not have to push against anything.
[/quote]

Yeah that's right . Back in the day we were shown that as air pressure dropped then the big stage one  Saturn V rocket was jettisoned and the narrower longer stage two nozzles were more efficient - and so on to the stage three , smaller still .

We were also shown that to work in a vacuum the nozzle would have to be very small and infinitely long .

Your last sentence defies logic since you already admit that thrust is a reactive force - the exhaust flow needs pressure to produce thrust .
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: TomInAustin on December 04, 2019, 06:32:48 PM


Fail:

Thurst is reactive yes, as in for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.  The only difference in a rocket engine efficiency in an atmosphere and one in a vacuum is the size and shape of the bell.  It does not have to push against anything.
[/quote]

Yeah that's right . Back in the day we were shown that as air pressure dropped then the big stage one  Saturn V rocket was jettisoned and the narrower longer stage two nozzles were more efficient - and so on to the stage three , smaller still .

We were also shown that to work in a vacuum the nozzle would have to be very small and infinitely long .

Your last sentence defies logic since you already admit that thrust is a reactive force - the exhaust flow needs pressure to produce thrust .
[/quote]

Have you ever shot a gun?   Did you feel recoil?  What were you feeling?   The same goes for a high-pressure water hose.   What are you feeling when the nozzle is pushed back in your hand?  Not air resistance, you are feeling the opposite reaction of the water leaving the nozzle. 

This is really simple science.   
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: Tumeni on December 04, 2019, 11:36:45 PM
Why would one believe you could land a rocket back on land or sea safely ...

No need to "believe" when people in Florida watch them do this, for real, right in front of them. And hear and feel the double sonic booms when they do. Oodles of videos, professional and amateur, on YouTube and elsewhere.
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: Tumeni on December 04, 2019, 11:38:59 PM
Wait so how do these fake sats slow down after being jettisoned from the rocket? Then how do they correct slight orbital movement?

Thrusters and other engines.
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: J-Man on December 05, 2019, 01:05:01 AM
Why would one believe you could land a rocket back on land or sea safely ...

No need to "believe" when people in Florida watch them do this, for real, right in front of them. And hear and feel the double sonic booms when they do. Oodles of videos, professional and amateur, on YouTube and elsewhere.

Please post up some amateur vids, not real.
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: J-Man on December 05, 2019, 01:11:20 AM
Wait so how do these fake sats slow down after being jettisoned from the rocket? Then how do they correct slight orbital movement?

Thrusters and other engines.

Your own scientist on previous page said it can't happen without atmospheric pressure. I wish you all could get on the same page. No such thing as space and sats floating around. Besides the sats aren't floating they are constantly falling back to earth right? If in fact they weren't make believe.
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: somerled on December 05, 2019, 10:42:34 AM


Fail:

Thurst is reactive yes, as in for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.  The only difference in a rocket engine efficiency in an atmosphere and one in a vacuum is the size and shape of the bell.  It does not have to push against anything.

Yeah that's right . Back in the day we were shown that as air pressure dropped then the big stage one  Saturn V rocket was jettisoned and the narrower longer stage two nozzles were more efficient - and so on to the stage three , smaller still .

We were also shown that to work in a vacuum the nozzle would have to be very small and infinitely long .

Your last sentence defies logic since you already admit that thrust is a reactive force - the exhaust flow needs pressure to produce thrust .
[/quote]

Have you ever shot a gun?   Did you feel recoil?  What were you feeling?   The same goes for a high-pressure water hose.   What are you feeling when the nozzle is pushed back in your hand?  Not air resistance, you are feeling the opposite reaction of the water leaving the nozzle. 

This is really simple science.
[/quote]

From this response it's clear that your knowledge of the physical sciences is limited . Ballistics and rocketry are different fields , bullets aren't rockets .

When a jet of water encounters the resistance of the atmosphere or some surface ,  thrust - that reactive force - is produced causing the reaction that you feel .

This is basic science although I do believe everything taught nowadays is "dumbed down "  which probably accounts for the basic lack of knowledge about scientific principles shown in posts like yours .
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: AllAroundTheWorld on December 05, 2019, 03:28:26 PM
Rocket in a vacuum:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uf6158lBjGo
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: TomInAustin on December 05, 2019, 04:47:23 PM
What is satellite transmission? Nothing more than transmitters shooting data (flaring out) into the sky and supposedly hitting this fake sat that never moves (like the earth) and beams down all sorts of data.

Now 1958- 1962 US and Russia started sending nukes up to the firmament (ie molten glass) to one, try to find it's weakness (windows to heaven where the floods came from). They found that these electromagnetic charges floated around for a long long time creating an electromagnetic field that "data" could bounce off of back to flat earth!!! In come Chemtrails in early 1970's where these nano-particles could be used for same purpose along with others like blocking the sun to a degree, weather modification, weaponry ect., so we have Chemtrails usually daily covering our skies with these metal particles (smaller than the human eye can detect) staying aloft over a month.


OMG, you are over the edge of reality,  that or a very poor troll. LOL
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: TomInAustin on December 05, 2019, 04:51:09 PM


Fail:

Thurst is reactive yes, as in for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.  The only difference in a rocket engine efficiency in an atmosphere and one in a vacuum is the size and shape of the bell.  It does not have to push against anything.

Yeah that's right . Back in the day we were shown that as air pressure dropped then the big stage one  Saturn V rocket was jettisoned and the narrower longer stage two nozzles were more efficient - and so on to the stage three , smaller still .

We were also shown that to work in a vacuum the nozzle would have to be very small and infinitely long .

Your last sentence defies logic since you already admit that thrust is a reactive force - the exhaust flow needs pressure to produce thrust .

Have you ever shot a gun?   Did you feel recoil?  What were you feeling?   The same goes for a high-pressure water hose.   What are you feeling when the nozzle is pushed back in your hand?  Not air resistance, you are feeling the opposite reaction of the water leaving the nozzle. 

This is really simple science.
[/quote]

From this response it's clear that your knowledge of the physical sciences is limited . Ballistics and rocketry are different fields , bullets aren't rockets .

When a jet of water encounters the resistance of the atmosphere or some surface ,  thrust - that reactive force - is produced causing the reaction that you feel .

This is basic science although I do believe everything taught nowadays is "dumbed down "  which probably accounts for the basic lack of knowledge about scientific principles shown in posts like yours .
[/quote]


OMG, you are too funny, or totally illiterate in science.   A rocket moves for the exact same reason that a gun recoils.   

For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction.

How hard is that to understand?
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: Tumeni on December 05, 2019, 11:42:53 PM
Please post up some amateur vids, not real.

Here's today's CRS-19

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OvdJGAKGmTg

The Falcon Heavy night launch

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CJV-zJ_AozE

The Falcon Heavy

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uLCXn445-eQ

Miscellaneous

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fi1ApYivlE8

Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: Tumeni on December 05, 2019, 11:50:13 PM
Please post up some amateur vids, not real.

From a different YouTuber

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cEZZkEXAD6Q

Pro footage

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JRzZl_nq6fk

Dash cam with distracted drivers ahead

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ff7wbSwTuEk

Falcon Heavy night launch

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UpqhqIVMf9Y


Is that enough? I could go on like this all night...
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: Tumeni on December 05, 2019, 11:57:29 PM
Your own scientist on previous page said it can't happen without atmospheric pressure.

I see no scientist there.

Come on, think about it; rocket starts up, drives a LOT of smoke, exhaust and steam at high speed, AWAY from the craft. Rocket makes a LOT of noise, over considerable distance. Noise is the movement of large amounts of air. Sound waves are driven AWAY from the craft. Where's all the resistance of atmospheric pressure? Why isn't the air holding either the steam/smoke, or the air, around the rocket to resist the exhaust and drive the rocket forward? Why is it all being driven away? Surely if it's being driven away, it's not providing resistance to drive the rocket?
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: J-Man on December 06, 2019, 12:01:49 AM
One fake video? Thats it?
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: Tumeni on December 06, 2019, 12:04:13 AM
Ballistics and rocketry are different fields , bullets aren't rockets

How do you drive the bullet forward? By detonating a quantity of explosive propellant within the shell casing. That acts to expand, pressing on all the internal walls of the casing, and driving the bullet forwards from it, as well as imparting the 'push' to the rear of the casing that generates the recoil. Agree?

When a jet of water encounters the resistance of the atmosphere or some surface ,  thrust - that reactive force - is produced causing the reaction that you feel.

Yet you can get the reaction from the garden hose without directing it at a surface. Once the water leaves the hose and hits the air, or the surface, how does it transfer reaction force back to the hosepipe?
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: Tumeni on December 06, 2019, 12:05:23 AM
One fake video? Thats it?

I posted eight. Are you talking to me?
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: Tumeni on December 06, 2019, 12:11:16 AM
Rockets in a vacuum

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-BsrzO7aXNs

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GxBRQXxBRic
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: Tumeni on December 06, 2019, 08:57:49 AM
Another CRS-19

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_AeNxzkRgUA

... and a compilation of the sonic booms from descending first stages;

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D6rydiOwcnA
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: somerled on December 06, 2019, 12:02:24 PM

[/quote]


OMG, you are too funny, or totally illiterate in science.   A rocket moves for the exact same reason that a gun recoils.   

For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction.

How hard is that to understand?
[/quote]

Why insist that a bullet and rocket are equivalent ? A bullet is a projectile . A rocket is an engine - it works by converting thermal energy to kinetic . The flow of hot gas requires a resistance (eg water or atmospheric pressure or a launch pad ) to produce the reactive force that is thrust . Why do you think rocket launches are cancelled when there are windy conditions in the atmosphere ( spacehoax 9 yesterday I believe) ? Winds lower air pressure across the face of the nozzles .
   The large load rockets path has to curve or it would stall because of the rapid change of air pressure as altitude increases .

Newtons laws require that an action occurs causing a reaction . A mass flow ( rocket exhaust ) does not produce a force until a resistive mass is encountered . That's why they do not produce thrust in a vacuum.


Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: AllAroundTheWorld on December 06, 2019, 12:19:01 PM
Newtons laws require that an action occurs causing a reaction . A mass flow ( rocket exhaust ) does not produce a force until a resistive mass is encountered . That's why they do not produce thrust in a vacuum.
I posted a video above proving you wrong.
Someone else posted a video proving you wrong.
This isn't a matter of debate, people have done experiments which show you are not correct.
Feel free to respond to those, the one I posted is actually a second attempt at the experiment where he addresses the things raised after his first attempt.
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: ChrisTP on December 06, 2019, 12:48:08 PM
Quote
Why insist that a bullet and rocket are equivalent ? A bullet is a projectile . A rocket is an engine - it works by converting thermal energy to kinetic.
I know you aren't refering to me here but a bullet works much the same way... by igniting an explosive amount of energy that propels the bullet forward. the difference being that a rocket is constantly doing this while a bullet only does this once at the start. I'm sure you know this so I'm not sure why you're going against this simile.
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: Tumeni on December 06, 2019, 02:21:31 PM
The flow of hot gas requires a resistance (eg water or atmospheric pressure or a launch pad ) to produce the reactive force that is thrust.

Yet the atmosphere is shown not to resist. Large amounts of air are seen and heard to be driven AWAY from the rocket exhaust, providing no resistance. Rockets are loud for the same reason thunderclaps are loud - they move large volumes of air.

Here's an engine test. Is the air remaining under the engine, to provide resistance, or is it being driven away from it? Observe the shots within the building, and note the airflow from ABOVE the engine and from the side. The air is flowing from above and side to fill the partial vacuum left by the rocket exhaust pushing all the air below it away.  That air is exiting the building along with all the smoke, steam and exhaust product

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_8xoyNfxJeI

Why do you think rocket launches are cancelled when there are windy conditions in the atmosphere ( spacehoax 9 yesterday I believe) ?


For the same reason long and high road bridges ban high-sided vehicles from the bridge in high winds, but still let small passenger cars go by.

Large objects present a bigger surface to the wind, and are more likely to be blown off course. 


A mass flow ( rocket exhaust ) does not produce a force until a resistive mass is encountered . That's why they do not produce thrust in a vacuum.

Yet we can see the mass flow driving the so-called resistive mass away from the engine. And, as you can see above, rockets do produce thrust in a vacuum
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: Tumeni on December 07, 2019, 08:42:20 PM
Further to earlier posts, here's the most recent SpaceX first stage coming back in to port;

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PNvmrNTi29s

As I said earlier, if they're not actually doing what they claim to be doing, why bother building all this stuff?
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: J-Man on December 07, 2019, 10:29:26 PM
Theatrics bro...These things don't cost squat in the scope of the budget to fool you.

The filming of the ISS has been proven fraudulent sooo many times.

Thanks for playing !!!
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: Tumeni on December 07, 2019, 10:32:42 PM
Theatrics bro...

Wild theory, bro. Unproven.
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: J-Man on December 07, 2019, 11:04:24 PM
nothing passes the sniff test when it comes to NASA

https://www.forbes.com/sites/startswithabang/2017/07/24/sorry-internet-some-of-your-favorite-space-pictures-are-fakes/#7472db02437e

"Sorry, Internet, Some Of Your Favorite Space Pictures Are Fakes"

My opinion is it's all fakery !!!  ALL OF IT....You've lost your way to GOD

Next you'll believe I gained 3.5 inches in space and lost 55 lbs.   space is good !!
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: Tumeni on December 07, 2019, 11:58:39 PM
nothing passes the sniff test when it comes to NASA

... yet we've just been talking about SpaceX. Not NASA.

You take issue with NASA's photos, yet SpaceX don't do photos (very much). They just launch stuff for folk who pay them to do so. They bring honkin' big first stages back to Earth and re-use them, which nobody had done before them. They have a queue of more customers waiting to pay them. This is all plain to see, quite obvious, and most of it is done in full view of the public. You can go to Florida and watch it for yourself, the next time they bring a first stage back to Canaveral. 

Yet your opinion is that it's all fake. OK.
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: Pete Svarrior on December 08, 2019, 12:58:34 AM
... yet we've just been talking about SpaceX. Not NASA.
NASA subcontractors may as well be NASA. It really doesn't matter that their money is now operating under a slightly nicer name.
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: somerled on December 08, 2019, 07:48:42 AM
Rockets in a vacuum

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-BsrzO7aXNs

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GxBRQXxBRic

Nice videos showing that you cannot ignite a rocket engine in a low pressure environment . 5mins in guy says " it is more difficult to ignite the rocket in a vacuum " -  it is actually impossible . After another failure at 9 mins he has to alter his rocket engine , he seals the nozzle . He turns it into a bomb/bullet .

He is no longer testing whether a rocket engine will work in a vacuum - he is testing whether a bomb will explode in a vacuum which is pointless since there is no argument about that.

His 4K slow motion video of the same bomb shows ,at about 2.5 mins , the explosion blowing his pressure cap of his fuel releasing gas and pressurizing the container allowing the fuel to burn .

Both videos prove that a rocket engine will not burn in a low pressure environ .
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: AllAroundTheWorld on December 08, 2019, 07:55:07 AM
My opinion is it's all fakery !!!  ALL OF IT....
Right. But what is that opinion based on?
I mean, I’ve seen a shuttle launch. I just happened to be in Florida when one was going up, the launch time was on the news so we went to see it. It was incredible.
Now, obviously I can’t know for sure it went into orbit but it certainly went straight up and then followed the curved path I’d expect.
I have no reason to think it secretly landed anywhere. If it did then where? Where are the astronauts really in the days they are allegedly in orbit? And how does the shuttle come in to land on cue and from where?
All you’re doing is shouting “FAKE!” at anything which doesn’t conform to your worldview but you’re providing no credible evidence for fakery. Opinions should be evidence based, where is your evidence? The only “evidence” I’ve seen are confirmation biased based “bubbles in space” type videos by people who have already decided it’s all fake and desperately analyse video without having any actual skills in the area of video or photographic analysis.

Your link. Yes, sometimes pictures are made to give ideas of what things might look like - particularly things like views of exoplanets. But when that is done it’s always made clear that is the case. Other pictures are enhanced or composited but that doesn’t mean they are fake. When I was at the Grand Canyon a few years back I took panoramic pictures. All your camera or phone does in that mode is it takes a series of pictures and digitally composites them. That doesn’t make the end result a fake or mean I was never there. After the fact I might look at one of the pictures and adjust the contrast or colour balance to make it more aesthetically appealing. Again, that doesn’t make the end result fake or mean I was never there.

What actual evidence do you have?
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: AllAroundTheWorld on December 08, 2019, 08:00:51 AM
Both videos prove that a rocket engine will not burn in a low pressure environ .
Ok. So you started this by claiming that rockets don’t work in a vacuum because there’s nothing for them to push against (which isn’t how rockets work).
Now having been shown conclusively that they do work you’re shifting your argument to they wouldn’t burn in space.
Admittedly ignition is more difficult in a vacuum, ignition requires oxygen. But don’t worry, the clever chaps who design rockets thought of that and they carry their own oxygen supply so ignition can happen in the vacuum of space.
This stuff is really easy to look up, you know.
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: somerled on December 08, 2019, 12:17:23 PM
Both videos prove that a rocket engine will not burn in a low pressure environ .
Ok. So you started this by claiming that rockets don’t work in a vacuum because there’s nothing for them to push against (which isn’t how rockets work).
Now having been shown conclusively that they do work you’re shifting your argument to they wouldn’t burn in space.
Admittedly ignition is more difficult in a vacuum, ignition requires oxygen. But don’t worry, the clever chaps who design rockets thought of that and they carry their own oxygen supply so ignition can happen in the vacuum of space.
This stuff is really easy to look up, you know.
The "clever chaps" in the videos are using rocket fuel complate with own fkn oxidizer. I'll assume you haven't noticed that or maybe just haven't watched them.

The videos show conclusively that the rocket fuel with it's own oxidizer can not burn or ignite in a vacuum . The people carrying out these experiments , with rocket fuel complete with it's own fkn oxidizer,  have to seal the rocket nozzle thus changing the rocket engine into a bomb , changing the experiment into one of "will a bomb explode in a vacuum " which we already know will happen . Psuedoscientific trickery by clever idiots in order to brainwash the gullible .

I know it's hard to admit but ignition of a rocket engine is not difficult in a vacuum , it is impossible . Proven in principle by James Joules expansion of gas into a vacuum experiment around the 1850s - and shown in these experiments with rocket fuel ,complete with its own fkn oxidizer here . I don't have to claim rockets don't work in a vacuum because real experimental science proves so. As do the videos .

The very clever chaps you refer to are very dishonest and devious . Rocket engines are not bombs .

Rocket engines use the reactive force of thrust, Newtons 3d , provided by the launch pad or outside of nozzle atmospheric pressure , in reaction to the active force -mass flow meeting resistance ,Newtons 2nd, of the fuel burn forcing the hot gas out the fuel . You can't have Newtons 3d without the 2nd .


Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: Tumeni on December 09, 2019, 01:20:26 AM
The videos both appear to be using amateur rocket engines, the type that can be bought over the counter in a modelling shop, or one that specialises in aircraft models and amateur rocketry.

The fact that these, which are built with a solid propellant, are difficult to start up in a vacuum, is not of itself a proof that all rockets, of all types, behave in a similar way. The ones used here appear to rely on an electrical starter (certainly those I've used in the past have done this). Once started, even they can clearly be seen running in the vacuum.

The fuel used in, for instance, the Lunar Module, was hypergolic (DiNitrogen Tetroxide and AeroZine 50). It needs no external starter, and relies simply on the combination of two fuel elements. Place them in contact with each other, and combustion results, with no ignition process or system. This is a different kind of engine to the amateur ones above.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypergolic_propellant (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypergolic_propellant)

As a for-instance of another type, the SpaceX Falcon 9 second stage uses a Merlin engine fuelled by a combinaton of RP-1 and liquid oxygen, both of which are a bit out of the reach of the amateur.

The ignition system uses a TEA-TEB as an igniter fluid. The mixture is pyrophoric, and ignites spontaneously when it comes to contact with oxygen (including the liquid supercooled oxygen used in the primary fuel mix). Essentially, throw some of this into the path of the primary fuel mix, and this lights it up.
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: somerled on December 09, 2019, 11:13:39 AM

The fact that these, which are built with a solid propellant, are difficult to start up in a vacuum, is not of itself a proof that all rockets, of all types, behave in a similar way. The ones used here appear to rely on an electrical starter (certainly those I've used in the past have done this). Once started, even they can clearly be seen running in the vacuum.


Once the electrical detonation ignites the bomb the vacuum is instantly destroyed - these vacuums are small containers. That initial pressure allows the fuel to burn further increasing this internal pressure and producing thrust . The important thing is that there is no longer a vacuum once these rocket engine bombs explode.

The reactive force of thrust requires that external pressure . The conversion of the engine to a bomb totally invalidates these videos as proof of anything . Would like to see these experiments carried out in a huge vacuum chamber , although can't see it happening .
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: Tumeni on December 09, 2019, 11:26:40 AM
The reactive force of thrust requires that external pressure.

I refer back to reply #99. There is little or no resistive pressure. The rocket exhaust is driving the air away from the engine. You can see this creating a pressure differential, causing air from above and from the side of the engine to be drawn in, and then also forced downward by the exhaust. The result being the huge mass of air, steam and smoke being driven out of the building.

What external pressure?
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: totallackey on December 09, 2019, 12:14:46 PM
Why would one believe you could land a rocket back on land or sea safely ...

No need to "believe" when people in Florida watch them do this, for real, right in front of them. And hear and feel the double sonic booms when they do. Oodles of videos, professional and amateur, on YouTube and elsewhere.
No there isn't.

Nobody has filmed any of this, private citizen wise...
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: Tumeni on December 09, 2019, 01:51:07 PM
Nobody has filmed any of this, private citizen wise...

Disagree.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VUFwR364Hq8

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D6rydiOwcnA

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VBlIvghQTlI

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XWEhPQO3y5Y

That's just the first four I found, within a few minutes. Shall I go on?

Got half a dozen more lined up in my YT watch history - all amateur, all showing the public watching this, right in front of them
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: TomInAustin on December 09, 2019, 03:42:47 PM
Why would one believe you could land a rocket back on land or sea safely ...

No need to "believe" when people in Florida watch them do this, for real, right in front of them. And hear and feel the double sonic booms when they do. Oodles of videos, professional and amateur, on YouTube and elsewhere.
No there isn't.

Nobody has filmed any of this, private citizen wise...

Now you are just lying.  Most every launch is annonced and people watch them.  Duh
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: somerled on December 09, 2019, 03:48:57 PM
The reactive force of thrust requires that external pressure.

I refer back to reply #99. There is little or no resistive pressure. The rocket exhaust is driving the air away from the engine. You can see this creating a pressure differential, causing air from above and from the side of the engine to be drawn in, and then also forced downward by the exhaust. The result being the huge mass of air, steam and smoke being driven out of the building.

What external pressure?

14lbs p.s.i. atmospheric pressure at sea level .
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: AllAroundTheWorld on December 09, 2019, 03:49:58 PM
Now you are just lying.  Most every launch is annonced and people watch them.  Duh
As I've said, I saw a shuttle launch myself. I happened to be in Florida, the launch date and time was on the news, I headed out to watch it thinking (correctly) it would be my only opportunity to do so.

It was at least 15 years ago, before smartphones and before digital cameras had the capacity to record video so I'll hold my hands up here, I've not got any video. Not sure I've even got any photos, I can have a look. But I did see it and I'll never forget how long it took for the sound to get to us when it did go up - we were a fair distance away. When it did it was like an Underground train rumbling under my feet.

Amateur video of these things is very easy to find and if totallackey wanted to stop burying his head in the sand he could make plans to go see one for himself.
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: AllAroundTheWorld on December 09, 2019, 04:00:38 PM
14lbs p.s.i. atmospheric pressure at sea level .
But you have been shown several videos of this working in a vacuum
Have another look at the video I posted:

https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=15502.msg201754#msg201754

I believe your latest "theory" is that the gases the rocket expels which create enough pressure for the rocket to then push off of?
Have a look at the end of the video where there's a slowed down video of the rocket working in a vacuum.
You'll note the pressure gauge barely flickers after the rocket has moved so no, after the rocket has moved it's still pretty much in a vacuum.
And the tube is over 3m long in response to the idea that it could have been pushing off the bottom of the container.
You then changed tack and started about combustion - that has been dealt with above by someone who knows what they're talking about.
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: Tumeni on December 09, 2019, 04:13:16 PM
14lbs p.s.i. atmospheric pressure at sea level .

... which is not providing any resistance at all to the rocket exhaust. That air is getting blown far, far away, and the result is that air to the above and side of the engine is being drawn in - rapidly - to fill the void.

The air below the engine at start up has been ejected out of the side of the building, with the air from above and side of the engine also being driven out when it gets in the way of the exhaust.





Thought experiment; a single particle of rocket exhaust leaves the engine and hits a single particle of air. How does that transfer forward motion back to the body of the craft? 
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: somerled on December 09, 2019, 05:15:12 PM
14lbs p.s.i. atmospheric pressure at sea level .
But you have been shown several videos of this working in a vacuum
Have another look at the video I posted:

https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=15502.msg201754#msg201754

I believe your latest "theory" is that the gases the rocket expels which create enough pressure for the rocket to then push off of?
Have a look at the end of the video where there's a slowed down video of the rocket working in a vacuum.
You'll note the pressure gauge barely flickers after the rocket has moved so no, after the rocket has moved it's still pretty much in a vacuum.
And the tube is over 3m long in response to the idea that it could have been pushing off the bottom of the container.
You then changed tack and started about combustion - that has been dealt with above by someone who knows what they're talking about.

A 3m+ cylinder which we cannot see into ? The prof will have to do better  .

14lbs p.s.i. atmospheric pressure at sea level .

... which is not providing any resistance at all to the rocket exhaust. That air is getting blown far, far away, and the result is that air to the above and side of the engine is being drawn in - rapidly - to fill the void.

The air below the engine at start up has been ejected out of the side of the building, with the air from above and side of the engine also being driven out when it gets in the way of the exhaust.





Thought experiment; a single particle of rocket exhaust leaves the engine and hits a single particle of air. How does that transfer forward motion back to the body of the craft? 

Air pressure provides a constant 14lbs psi at sea level = 14lbs psi resistance .

Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: TomInAustin on December 09, 2019, 05:31:51 PM
nothing passes the sniff test when it comes to NASA

https://www.forbes.com/sites/startswithabang/2017/07/24/sorry-internet-some-of-your-favorite-space-pictures-are-fakes/#7472db02437e

"Sorry, Internet, Some Of Your Favorite Space Pictures Are Fakes"

My opinion is it's all fakery !!!  ALL OF IT....You've lost your way to GOD

Next you'll believe I gained 3.5 inches in space and lost 55 lbs.   space is good !!

The fake you are referring to is GOD.  No such thing except in weak minds.
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: AllAroundTheWorld on December 09, 2019, 06:00:49 PM
A 3m+ cylinder which we cannot see into ?
Yes. If you watch the video he explains why that is. But air is transparent so how would being able to see in it help you? You can’t tell from looking whether it’s a vacuum or not. The pressure gauge tells you that and it barely moves after the rocket fires. Conclusive proof that the rocket works in a vacuum. And your comments about combustion have been comprehensively dealt with too.

At this point I suggest you’re trolling so I’ll leave it there.
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: Tumeni on December 09, 2019, 06:24:08 PM
Air pressure provides a constant 14lbs psi at sea level = 14lbs psi resistance .

.. but it's not resisting.

Surely this is self-evident from the plumes of smoke, steam and AIR being driven at high speed away from the engine?
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: Tumeni on December 10, 2019, 11:16:44 AM
Amateur footage - last one, unless anyone asks for more

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eZGSCztfs9I
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: J-Man on December 11, 2019, 01:01:17 AM
It looks soo fake it must be real. No more, please no more.
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: Tumeni on December 11, 2019, 01:42:17 PM
It looks soo fake it must be real. No more, please no more.

You (EDIT not you, but totallackey) asked for amateur footage. Do you accept that what has been provided is amateurs videoing, and members of the public watching, these launches and landings? If not, why not?

If not, can you actually prove any fakery, beyond your disbelief?
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: TomInAustin on December 11, 2019, 04:22:07 PM
It looks soo fake it must be real. No more, please no more.

Ok you caught us, every single person on earth except you is in on the gag
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: somerled on December 13, 2019, 11:04:07 AM
A 3m+ cylinder which we cannot see into ?
Yes. If you watch the video he explains why that is. But air is transparent so how would being able to see in it help you? You can’t tell from looking whether it’s a vacuum or not. The pressure gauge tells you that and it barely moves after the rocket fires. Conclusive proof that the rocket works in a vacuum. And your comments about combustion have been comprehensively dealt with too.

At this point I suggest you’re trolling so I’ll leave it there.

Where is this explanation ?  He says at the end of the video ( which was supposed to remove all experimental gaffes from his first rubbish attempt ) that he should have use a clear perspex tube . It's another huge blunder . Nowhere in that video can we see a 3.7m evacuated tube . And he refuses to show the rocket design . Why ? What is the little dangly bit hanging directly beneath the nozzle , if that's what it is ?This bufoon has plenty to hide and plenty of blind followers.
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: somerled on December 13, 2019, 11:10:20 AM
Air pressure provides a constant 14lbs psi at sea level = 14lbs psi resistance .

.. but it's not resisting.

Surely this is self-evident from the plumes of smoke, steam and AIR being driven at high speed away from the engine?

Of course it's resisting . Where do you think the reactive force of thrust comes from ?

If there was no resistance  then the plumes of smoke would travel for miles at high speed  .
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: AllAroundTheWorld on December 13, 2019, 02:02:51 PM
Where is this explanation ? He says at the end of the video ( which was supposed to remove all experimental gaffes from his first rubbish attempt ) that he should have use a clear perspex tube.

11:15. He says he could have, not should. And he explains he was trying to keep the cost down. It’s not a blunder, the rest doesn’t need to be transparent, that wouldn’t affect the result. And the rocket design is irrelevant. You can see from both tests that it’s expelling propellant from one end, that moves the rocket up. And as he’s proved, it does so whether the tube is evacuated or not.

If you dispute his findings then I urge you to do your own tests and post them for review. I look forward to seeing your results.
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: somerled on December 13, 2019, 07:37:52 PM
Where is this explanation ? He says at the end of the video ( which was supposed to remove all experimental gaffes from his first rubbish attempt ) that he should have use a clear perspex tube.

11:15. He says he could have, not should. And he explains he was trying to keep the cost down. It’s not a blunder, the rest doesn’t need to be transparent, that wouldn’t affect the result. And the rocket design is irrelevant. You can see from both tests that it’s expelling propellant from one end, that moves the rocket up. And as he’s proved, it does so whether the tube is evacuated or not.

If you dispute his findings then I urge you to do your own tests and post them for review. I look forward to seeing your results.

To save a few bob he totally compromises his most important experiment !!!  hahahaha
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: AllAroundTheWorld on December 13, 2019, 10:53:17 PM
To save a few bob he totally compromises his most important experiment !!!  hahahaha

Again, it made zero difference to the experiment or result.
Dude, just accept it, you’re wrong about this.
But I look forward to the results of your experiment.
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: totallackey on December 16, 2019, 12:53:16 PM
Rocket in a vacuum:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uf6158lBjGo
Disingenuous video.

What is the precise scientific method for tapping a gauge in terms of both number and force to ensure reliable operation?
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: totallackey on December 16, 2019, 01:04:56 PM
Got half a dozen more lined up in my YT watch history - all amateur, all showing the public watching this, right in front of them
Now you are just lying.  Most every launch is annonced and people watch them.  Duh
Posting vids...claiming they are amateur.

Yeah...

Strikes me as weird the whole ignition and fire thing anyway...

No one ever asked why all the necessity for pyrotechnics?

The claim by rocket proponents is all you need is pressurized expulsion of gas, even if you are in a vacuum...you will still go the opposite direction.

Of course, this is pure BS.
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: ChrisTP on December 16, 2019, 01:29:56 PM
Got half a dozen more lined up in my YT watch history - all amateur, all showing the public watching this, right in front of them
Now you are just lying.  Most every launch is annonced and people watch them.  Duh
Strikes me as weird the whole ignition and fire thing anyway...

No one ever asked why all the necessity for pyrotechnics?

The claim by rocket proponents is all you need is pressurized expulsion of gas, even if you are in a vacuum...you will still go the opposite direction.

Of course, this is pure BS.
Why do you find it weird?

Are you talking about the sparks at the base of the rocket before launch? If so yes people asked.

https://www.quora.com/Why-do-launch-pads-light-up-sparks-under-rocket-boosters-before-launch

If you don't believe the amature footage just go watch a launch for youself...
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: totallackey on December 16, 2019, 01:37:46 PM
Got half a dozen more lined up in my YT watch history - all amateur, all showing the public watching this, right in front of them
Now you are just lying.  Most every launch is annonced and people watch them.  Duh
Strikes me as weird the whole ignition and fire thing anyway...

No one ever asked why all the necessity for pyrotechnics?

The claim by rocket proponents is all you need is pressurized expulsion of gas, even if you are in a vacuum...you will still go the opposite direction.

Of course, this is pure BS.
Why do you find it weird?

Are you talking about the sparks at the base of the rocket before launch? If so yes people asked.
Thanks for talking about sparklers and thinking that addresses flames.

And thanks for ignoring the rest of the post.

https://www.quora.com/Why-do-launch-pads-light-up-sparks-under-rocket-boosters-before-launch
If you don't believe the amature footage just go watch a launch for youself...
Why would I want to go watch holographic images?
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: AllAroundTheWorld on December 16, 2019, 03:27:06 PM
Why would I want to go watch holographic images?
And that, right there, sums up a lot of mentality I see from conspiracy theorists.
You believe something without providing any evidence but when you are shown evidence for being incorrect you just without basis dismiss it as fake.
It's a pretty dishonest way of debating.
But OK, as you said it - what is your evidence that rocket launches are holographic images which are good enough to fool people from multiple viewpoints and angles. Does that technology even exist?
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: TomInAustin on December 16, 2019, 04:46:07 PM

Why would I want to go watch holographic images?


LOL, this is the post of the decade and just in time.  Holographic images LOL

Delude yourself much?
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: TomInAustin on December 16, 2019, 04:49:18 PM
Why would I want to go watch holographic images?
And that, right there, sums up a lot of mentality I see from conspiracy theorists.
You believe something without providing any evidence but when you are shown evidence for being incorrect you just without basis dismiss it as fake.
It's a pretty dishonest way of debating.
But OK, as you said it - what is your evidence that rocket launches are holographic images which are good enough to fool people from multiple viewpoints and angles. Does that technology even exist?

Exactly.  Pick a stance and defend it to the death no matter how retarded it makes you look.  Holograms and ignoring 5th grade level science.   LOL
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: somerled on December 16, 2019, 06:28:41 PM
https://archive.org/details/youtube-ek-Q0T9wK2g

Holograms in use .

Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: J-Man on December 16, 2019, 06:30:42 PM
Unless it's NASA or someone promoting the NASA satanic agenda, I've been walking this earth for long enough to know there has never been any proof of a ball earth. Never, as humans we just don't see or feel the spin of this imaginary ball. In contrast things like water finding its level and soft tissue in dinosaur bones are just a few facts that prove without a doubt we are created on a plane with a dome.
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: TomInAustin on December 16, 2019, 09:08:51 PM
Unless it's NASA or someone promoting the NASA satanic agenda, I've been walking this earth for long enough to know there has never been any proof of a ball earth. Never, as humans we just don't see or feel the spin of this imaginary ball. In contrast things like water finding its level and soft tissue in dinosaur bones are just a few facts that prove without a doubt we are created on a plane with a dome.

Right on time, J Man the bibletard shows up
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: TomInAustin on December 16, 2019, 09:09:44 PM
https://archive.org/details/youtube-ek-Q0T9wK2g

Holograms in use .

9-11er  Huge surprise
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: AllAroundTheWorld on December 16, 2019, 10:46:15 PM
https://archive.org/details/youtube-ek-Q0T9wK2g

Holograms in use .

9-11er  Huge surprise

Gotta say, this is an angle I'd not heard before. The idea that it wasn't real planes which went into the Towers despite the number of witnesses who saw and heard them fly over, the fact that another plane went into the Pentagon and another crash landed and all 4 planes have flight numbers and passenger lists.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Airlines_Flight_175

Leaving aside the ridiculous notion that the technology exists to produce a hologram which works from all angles and also makes a sound like a plane going over, the scale of conspiracy required to fake all the plane data makes my head spin.

And, again, this is the problem with the conspiracy theory mindset. You can prove anything to yourself if you ignore all the evidence showing you to be wrong or just dismiss it as fake. You can literally go and see a rocket launch. I have. But if you're crazy enough to call the launches and the videos of them as fake and then say that if you did go there then you'd only be watching a hologram then there's not much point in further discussion.
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: J-Man on December 17, 2019, 01:05:34 AM
What in the world is the big fascination with rocket launches? They go up, tilt over, get out of site and kerplunk in a vast ocean. NASA just made up the garbage about it needs a certain speed sideways to get fake sats up there so they don't have to explain why they can't explode against the dome. If you hear garbage enough you'll (not me) will think it's true.
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: AllAroundTheWorld on December 17, 2019, 06:59:32 AM
What in the world is the big fascination with rocket launches? They go up, tilt over, get out of site and kerplunk in a vast ocean.
Please provide some evidence for this.
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: somerled on December 17, 2019, 10:45:37 AM
Time lapse images of rocket launches , including spacehoax and nasa . All lovely trajectories dictated by the loss of thrust as altitude increases . Link here .

https://www.google.com/search?biw=1175&bih=638&tbm=isch&sa=1&ei=k6v4XYy9G-2mrgTilqZg&q=time+lapse+images++of++rocket+launches&oq=time+lapse+images++of++rocket+launches&gs_l=img.12...33453.65691..78612...0.0..0.268.4857.14j20j6......0....1..gws-wiz-img.......0i7i30j0i24.fjRNyi-yAJY&ved=0ahUKEwjM0qrAurzmAhVtk4sKHWKLCQwQ4dUDCAY

All for show .
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: somerled on December 17, 2019, 10:57:41 AM
https://archive.org/details/youtube-ek-Q0T9wK2g

Holograms in use .

9-11er  Huge surprise

Brainwashed believe any old government shoit sheep shows up . As expected .
The technology will be far in advance of where you think it is .
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: ChrisTP on December 17, 2019, 11:04:39 AM
Time lapse images of rocket launches , including spacehoax and nasa . All lovely trajectories dictated by the loss of thrust as altitude increases . Link here .

https://www.google.com/search?biw=1175&bih=638&tbm=isch&sa=1&ei=k6v4XYy9G-2mrgTilqZg&q=time+lapse+images++of++rocket+launches&oq=time+lapse+images++of++rocket+launches&gs_l=img.12...33453.65691..78612...0.0..0.268.4857.14j20j6......0....1..gws-wiz-img.......0i7i30j0i24.fjRNyi-yAJY&ved=0ahUKEwjM0qrAurzmAhVtk4sKHWKLCQwQ4dUDCAY

All for show .
first off, I didn't even consider long exposure rocket launches were a thing so thank you for these beautiful images.

Second, it's kinda funny how some flat earthers try to explain away how the sun visually sinks below the horizon because of 'perspective' or 'bendy light' but when a rocket vanishes into the distance in the sky (like the sun should on a flat earth) it's 'definitely falling back to earth'.
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: totallackey on December 17, 2019, 12:03:05 PM
Why would I want to go watch holographic images?
And that, right there, sums up a lot of mentality I see from conspiracy theorists.
You believe something without providing any evidence but when you are shown evidence for being incorrect you just without basis dismiss it as fake.
It's a pretty dishonest way of debating.
But OK, as you said it - what is your evidence that rocket launches are holographic images which are good enough to fool people from multiple viewpoints and angles. Does that technology even exist?
Of course it exists.

https://www.fastcompany.com/90365452/hologram-concert-revolution-like-it-or-not-meet-company-touring-whitney-houston-buddy-holly
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: totallackey on December 17, 2019, 12:10:55 PM
Further, not one of you want to address the pyrotechnics of it all.

Not one of you want to address the silly gauge video offered up...what is the scientifically established protocol in tapping a gauge, in terms of both number of taps administered, frequency of taps, force of taps, etc...

According to you rocket surgeons, the reason why a rocket works in a vacuum is that mass is being expelled and the rocket travels in the opposite direction of the expulsion.

Why does the mass need to be on fire for it to work?

As seen with the holographic concerts, the answer is SHOW!!!

It just looks prettier...

Rockets don't work in a vacuum.

You guys need to come up with something akin to reality.
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: totallackey on December 17, 2019, 12:23:18 PM
Time lapse images of rocket launches , including spacehoax and nasa . All lovely trajectories dictated by the loss of thrust as altitude increases . Link here .

https://www.google.com/search?biw=1175&bih=638&tbm=isch&sa=1&ei=k6v4XYy9G-2mrgTilqZg&q=time+lapse+images++of++rocket+launches&oq=time+lapse+images++of++rocket+launches&gs_l=img.12...33453.65691..78612...0.0..0.268.4857.14j20j6......0....1..gws-wiz-img.......0i7i30j0i24.fjRNyi-yAJY&ved=0ahUKEwjM0qrAurzmAhVtk4sKHWKLCQwQ4dUDCAY

All for show .
first off, I didn't even consider long exposure rocket launches were a thing so thank you for these beautiful images.

Second, it's kinda funny how some flat earthers try to explain away how the sun visually sinks below the horizon because of 'perspective' or 'bendy light' but when a rocket vanishes into the distance in the sky (like the sun should on a flat earth) it's 'definitely falling back to earth'.
The point you want to leave out is the fact we know the Sun had no origination point from the surface of the flat plane Earth to begin with.

And perspective and bendy light exist in reality.
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: AllAroundTheWorld on December 17, 2019, 12:32:18 PM
Why would I want to go watch holographic images?
And that, right there, sums up a lot of mentality I see from conspiracy theorists.
You believe something without providing any evidence but when you are shown evidence for being incorrect you just without basis dismiss it as fake.
It's a pretty dishonest way of debating.
But OK, as you said it - what is your evidence that rocket launches are holographic images which are good enough to fool people from multiple viewpoints and angles. Does that technology even exist?
Of course it exists.

https://www.fastcompany.com/90365452/hologram-concert-revolution-like-it-or-not-meet-company-touring-whitney-houston-buddy-holly

Did you even read that article?

Quote
Pepper’s Ghost was popularized by British scientist John Henry Pepper, who debuted his version in an 1862 stage production of Charles Dickens’s The Haunted Man and the Ghost’s Bargain. The basic mechanics involve a reflected image giving the illusion of someone or something in its physical form. For Tupac at Coachella, a live actor was made to look like Tupac using CGI. That performance was then projected downward on a reflective surface, which bounced the moving image onto a tightly pulled transparent foil screen.
It’s an effective illusion but not efficient for a touring schedule.
“There’s a lot of tension on the screen, like 1,200-pounds-per-inch kind of tension,” Tudor says. “So you have to set up an enormous structure around that to be able to deal with the tension on the screen. To do a full stage-size screen is doable. It’s just a big undertaking.”
The seminal development that has allowed Tudor to go beyond the legacy tech is when he found a company in the U.K. that develops a proprietary mesh screen that makes setting up and breaking down a set much faster. What’s also elevating Base’s productions is an Epson projector capable of producing 25,000 lumens of light (a standard 60-watt bulb produces about 800 lumens). Instead of the Pepper’s Ghost technique, Base projects directly onto the screen.
Base’s technology does have its limitations: There’s currently no way to project a volumetric image (which would represent a character in three dimensions), certain venue seats can’t be sold because of angle issues, projections can walk across the stage but can’t go up and down stairs, and so forth.

My emphasis.

The headline is that sure, some impressive technology exists which in a theatre setting where they can set up special screens and very powerful projectors can produce some convincing effects within certain limitations. But a holographic plane flying across a city with full sound effects which is convincing from any angle? No, that technology does not exist.

This is like me saying people can't fly and you saying "Have you seen David Copperfield?!". Sure, in the theatre he can do it. Next time you see him in the street ask if he can fly around a bit for you, see how that goes.
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: AllAroundTheWorld on December 17, 2019, 12:44:55 PM
Not one of you want to address the silly gauge video offered up...what is the scientifically established protocol in tapping a gauge, in terms of both number of taps administered, frequency of taps, force of taps, etc...

I genuinely don't know what you think there is to address here. On a manual gauge the needle can get stuck, tapping it can help check it's reading correctly. This was pretty much the first thing I found when I Googled it. What is your issue here?

https://www.reddit.com/r/todayilearned/comments/9v9nwx/til_when_you_tap_on_a_gauge_or_meter_to_see_if_it/

Quote
According to you rocket surgeons, the reason why a rocket works in a vacuum is that mass is being expelled and the rocket travels in the opposite direction of the expulsion.
Why does the mass need to be on fire for it to work?

It's about generating a force in one direction which causes an equal and opposite force in the other. Newton's third law.
Controlled explosions are a pretty efficient way of generating that force. It's basically how cars work too - the mixture of fuel and air is ignited, that explosion creates the force that ultimately makes the car move. If you can invent a way of generating significant amounts of force in a different way then you'll be a bazillionaire.

Quote
Rockets don't work in a vacuum.

Multiple videos have been posted showing quite clearly that they do. If you still refute this and want to do your own tests to demonstrate your position then I look forward to seeing the results.
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: totallackey on December 17, 2019, 01:05:16 PM
Why would I want to go watch holographic images?
And that, right there, sums up a lot of mentality I see from conspiracy theorists.
You believe something without providing any evidence but when you are shown evidence for being incorrect you just without basis dismiss it as fake.
It's a pretty dishonest way of debating.
But OK, as you said it - what is your evidence that rocket launches are holographic images which are good enough to fool people from multiple viewpoints and angles. Does that technology even exist?
Of course it exists.

https://www.fastcompany.com/90365452/hologram-concert-revolution-like-it-or-not-meet-company-touring-whitney-houston-buddy-holly

Did you even read that article?

Quote
Pepper’s Ghost was popularized by British scientist John Henry Pepper, who debuted his version in an 1862 stage production of Charles Dickens’s The Haunted Man and the Ghost’s Bargain. The basic mechanics involve a reflected image giving the illusion of someone or something in its physical form. For Tupac at Coachella, a live actor was made to look like Tupac using CGI. That performance was then projected downward on a reflective surface, which bounced the moving image onto a tightly pulled transparent foil screen.
It’s an effective illusion but not efficient for a touring schedule.
“There’s a lot of tension on the screen, like 1,200-pounds-per-inch kind of tension,” Tudor says. “So you have to set up an enormous structure around that to be able to deal with the tension on the screen. To do a full stage-size screen is doable. It’s just a big undertaking.”
The seminal development that has allowed Tudor to go beyond the legacy tech is when he found a company in the U.K. that develops a proprietary mesh screen that makes setting up and breaking down a set much faster. What’s also elevating Base’s productions is an Epson projector capable of producing 25,000 lumens of light (a standard 60-watt bulb produces about 800 lumens). Instead of the Pepper’s Ghost technique, Base projects directly onto the screen.
Base’s technology does have its limitations: There’s currently no way to project a volumetric image (which would represent a character in three dimensions), certain venue seats can’t be sold because of angle issues, projections can walk across the stage but can’t go up and down stairs, and so forth.

My emphasis.

The headline is that sure, some impressive technology exists which in a theatre setting where they can set up special screens and very powerful projectors can produce some convincing effects within certain limitations. But a holographic plane flying across a city with full sound effects which is convincing from any angle? No, that technology does not exist.

This is like me saying people can't fly and you saying "Have you seen David Copperfield?!". Sure, in the theatre he can do it. Next time you see him in the street ask if he can fly around a bit for you, see how that goes.
Where was this for Mariah Carey?

Answer: OUTDOORS

https://www.google.com/search?rlz=1C1GCEO_enUS795US795&sxsrf=ACYBGNRfYc7_Vt6kzmjM5XO2ww9gpMaphQ:1576587840938&q=mariah+carey+hologram&tbm=isch&source=univ&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwj0hd2x37zmAhWXJ80KHcrwA08QsAR6BAgHEAE

Everybody knows the military has the access to stuff, long before the public...

Look at Teflon...
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: totallackey on December 17, 2019, 01:19:54 PM
Not one of you want to address the silly gauge video offered up...what is the scientifically established protocol in tapping a gauge, in terms of both number of taps administered, frequency of taps, force of taps, etc...

I genuinely don't know what you think there is to address here. On a manual gauge the needle can get stuck, tapping it can help check it's reading correctly. This was pretty much the first thing I found when I Googled it. What is your issue here?

https://www.reddit.com/r/todayilearned/comments/9v9nwx/til_when_you_tap_on_a_gauge_or_meter_to_see_if_it/
errr...I clearly wrote out what I want you to address.

You, being the self-avowed CHAMPION OF SCIENCE (you know, that stuff you complain FE ignores?) should be able to provide a scientifically established protocol (peer-reviewed, documented crapola...you know, the type you CLAMOR FOR!) for the process of gauge tapping, when a gauge, such as the one in the pretty video here:
https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?action=post;quote=201754;topic=15502.80;last_msg=202345
doesn't work.
Quote
According to you rocket surgeons, the reason why a rocket works in a vacuum is that mass is being expelled and the rocket travels in the opposite direction of the expulsion.
Why does the mass need to be on fire for it to work?

It's about generating a force in one direction which causes an equal and opposite force in the other. Newton's third law.
Controlled explosions are a pretty efficient way of generating that force. It's basically how cars work too - the mixture of fuel and air is ignited, that explosion creates the force that ultimately makes the car move. If you can invent a way of generating significant amounts of force in a different way then you'll be a bazillionaire.
Holy crap...

Now, it's controlled explosions...

LMMFAO!

So, a balloon expelling air is a controlled explosion...

A man, sitting on a rolling office chair, pushing against the medicine ball while at the same time tossing it (it is actually the force of pushing against the medicine ball, giving rise to the reactionary force of rolling away from that point) is now an explosion.

You really are TOO MUCH!!!
Quote
Rockets don't work in a vacuum.

Multiple videos have been posted showing quite clearly that they do. If you still refute this and want to do your own tests to demonstrate your position then I look forward to seeing the results.
Actually, no...multiple videos have been posted showing rockets work in the atmosphere...not so much in work in space.

Even the X-15 shut off once it reach a certain height...which truly, no man, woman, child, or animal, has exceeded since.

You haven't even addressed your bogus video with the sticky gauge...and your attempt to provide an explanation containing the phrase CONTROLLED EXPLOSION in terms of rocketry was quite laughable...

Please continue.
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: AllAroundTheWorld on December 17, 2019, 02:39:44 PM
Where was this for Mariah Carey?
You can literally see the screen behind "her". And it's at night, on a stage.
In broad daylight projecting a hologram above a city in such a way that it can be seen properly from all angles and the sound matches up with the location of the image? Not a chance.


And that's before you get into the issues of the fact that these flights had flight numbers, were reported as having stopped contacting air traffic control and had passengers on board who are listed as victims of the attack. The logistics of faking all that make my head spin.
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: AllAroundTheWorld on December 17, 2019, 02:54:16 PM
Now, it's controlled explosions...
LMMFAO!

Yes...
What do you think happens in your car?
https://www.explainthatstuff.com/carengines.html

Quote
The spark ignites the fuel-air mixture causing a mini explosion. The fuel burns immediately, giving off hot gas that pushes the piston back down. The energy released by the fuel is now powering the crankshaft.

The other things you mention no, those are not controlled explosions. Stop straw manning.

Quote
Actually, no...multiple videos have been posted showing rockets work in the atmosphere...

Well no, they've been shown working in vacuum chambers. That demonstrates the principle that they can work in a vacuum, rockets aren't pushing against an atmosphere, they don't need to push against anything, that's not how they work.

Quote
You haven't even addressed your bogus video with the sticky gauge...

Again, I don't know what there is to address. I've explained why he was tapping it but you can clearly see in the video the gauge is working and records the lowering pressure when he turns the pump on

(https://i.ibb.co/HT9y0rg/pump.jpg)


Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: totallackey on December 17, 2019, 03:38:29 PM
Where was this for Mariah Carey?
You can literally see the screen behind "her". And it's at night, on a stage.
In broad daylight projecting a hologram above a city in such a way that it can be seen properly from all angles and the sound matches up with the location of the image? Not a chance.


And that's before you get into the issues of the fact that these flights had flight numbers, were reported as having stopped contacting air traffic control and had passengers on board who are listed as victims of the attack. The logistics of faking all that make my head spin.
Well, I did not offer 9/11 as evidence, did I?

And, you have no clue as to angle of view for these rockets on video.

No POV offered for videographer or spectators present, so you do not have a reference.

Finally, tech is available to military and government FAR IN ADVANCE of general populace (i.e. DARPA).
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: somerled on December 17, 2019, 03:49:47 PM
Time lapse images of rocket launches , including spacehoax and nasa . All lovely trajectories dictated by the loss of thrust as altitude increases . Link here .

https://www.google.com/search?biw=1175&bih=638&tbm=isch&sa=1&ei=k6v4XYy9G-2mrgTilqZg&q=time+lapse+images++of++rocket+launches&oq=time+lapse+images++of++rocket+launches&gs_l=img.12...33453.65691..78612...0.0..0.268.4857.14j20j6......0....1..gws-wiz-img.......0i7i30j0i24.fjRNyi-yAJY&ved=0ahUKEwjM0qrAurzmAhVtk4sKHWKLCQwQ4dUDCAY

All for show .
first off, I didn't even consider long exposure rocket launches were a thing so thank you for these beautiful images.

Second, it's kinda funny how some flat earthers try to explain away how the sun visually sinks below the horizon because of 'perspective' or 'bendy light' but when a rocket vanishes into the distance in the sky (like the sun should on a flat earth) it's 'definitely falling back to earth'.

https://www.mnealon.eosc.edu/RocketSciencePage5.htm

Scroll down to the bottom of this page - it's about the saturn v5 flight path . At the end you will see the graph of altitude against range .

It's rocket science .
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: totallackey on December 17, 2019, 03:55:03 PM
Now, it's controlled explosions...
LMMFAO!

Yes...
What do you think happens in your car?
https://www.explainthatstuff.com/carengines.html
That is called an INTERNAL COMBUSTION ENGINE...(i.e, takes place in an INTERNAL ENVIRONMENT!)

No such process can take place in a ROCKET!

You do know the difference, correct?

The result of the operation of an INTERNAL COMBUSTION engine is transferred to the front, rear, or all four wheels of my car, causing the front, rear, or all four wheels of my car to spin. When they spin, the rubber encompassing those wheels and making contact with the pavement, results in friction, causing forward motion, or rearward motion, depending on transmission gear.

Please, stop pretending you have any sensible explanation.

You don't.

You are clearly tying yourself into a mental pretzel over this and have no logical explanation. No one is going to join you in your specious argumentation.
Quote
The spark ignites the fuel-air mixture causing a mini explosion. The fuel burns immediately, giving off hot gas that pushes the piston back down. The energy released by the fuel is now powering the crankshaft.

The other things you mention no, those are not controlled explosions. Stop straw manning.
You are correct.

They are not controlled explosions, and that is the point.

However, according to the renowned rocket surgeons and space experts, they are the real true nature of how rockets work.

In fact, ask any rocket surgeon....it is simply the MASS of the propellant being ejected out of the rear of the rocket that is causing the rocket to move in the opposite direction. Please note, it is not necessary for the MASS of the propellant to be on FIRE...

Got it?
Quote
Actually, no...multiple videos have been posted showing rockets work in the atmosphere...

Well no, they've been shown working in vacuum chambers. That demonstrates the principle that they can work in a vacuum, rockets aren't pushing against an atmosphere, they don't need to push against anything, that's not how they work.
Well, no...First, anything introduced to a vacuum? Like gas from these these rockets?

Right...results in no vacuum.
Quote
You haven't even addressed your bogus video with the sticky gauge...

Again, I don't know what there is to address. I've explained why he was tapping it but you can clearly see in the video the gauge is working and records the lowering pressure when he turns the pump on

(https://i.ibb.co/HT9y0rg/pump.jpg)
No, you didn't explain why he was tapping it.

I explained why he was tapping it.

The explanation? The gauge wasn't working properly.

So the whole video is bogus.
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: AllAroundTheWorld on December 17, 2019, 04:03:39 PM
Finally, tech is available to military and government FAR IN ADVANCE of general populace (i.e. DARPA).
This bit is probably true, but the whole logistics of faking 9/11 with holographic airplanes is stupid.

Look, the point here is this. Let's say the technology does exist. So how we determine the nature of reality then? How do we know anything is true?
If you're determined to believe that everything NASA and SpaceX does is a lie and you're going to call all the evidence which shows that they really are launching rockets into space as lies/hoax/fake/holograms or whatever then it's not a very productive discussion.

We are both entrenched in our views, the difference is I am entrenched because of the evidence, you are entrenched despite it.
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: AllAroundTheWorld on December 17, 2019, 04:18:54 PM
it is simply the MASS of the propellant being ejected out of the rear of the rocket that is causing the rocket to move in the opposite direction. Please note, it is not necessary for the MASS of the propellant to be on FIRE...
But it is necessary for the mass of the propellant to be ejected at very high speed if you're going to move a sodding great rocket, as opposed to a small balloon. What's one way of eject stuff at very high speed? How about if you ignite some fuel in a chamber and leave a hole in one end? What happens? Effectively you get an explosion in the chamber which creates a lot of heat and pressure, you get a very high speed jet coming out of the hole so the chamber moves quickly in the other direction.
I'm simplifying but that's basically how rockets work.

Quote
Well, no...First, anything introduced to a vacuum? Like gas from these these rockets?
Right...results in no vacuum.

A little bit of gas will go into the chamber, yes. But look at the pressure gauge after the rocket has gone off. The needle barely moves.
The chamber is big compared to the amount of gas the rocket will produce, it's still effectively a vacuum.

Quote
No, you didn't explain why he was tapping it.

I posted a link explaining why people do that. I also posted stills from the video after her turned the pump on which clearly show the gauge is working and shows the pressure lowering when he turns the pump on.
You can watch the video yourself. And I look forward to the results of your experiment.
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: ChrisTP on December 17, 2019, 04:26:02 PM
Time lapse images of rocket launches , including spacehoax and nasa . All lovely trajectories dictated by the loss of thrust as altitude increases . Link here .

https://www.google.com/search?biw=1175&bih=638&tbm=isch&sa=1&ei=k6v4XYy9G-2mrgTilqZg&q=time+lapse+images++of++rocket+launches&oq=time+lapse+images++of++rocket+launches&gs_l=img.12...33453.65691..78612...0.0..0.268.4857.14j20j6......0....1..gws-wiz-img.......0i7i30j0i24.fjRNyi-yAJY&ved=0ahUKEwjM0qrAurzmAhVtk4sKHWKLCQwQ4dUDCAY

All for show .
first off, I didn't even consider long exposure rocket launches were a thing so thank you for these beautiful images.

Second, it's kinda funny how some flat earthers try to explain away how the sun visually sinks below the horizon because of 'perspective' or 'bendy light' but when a rocket vanishes into the distance in the sky (like the sun should on a flat earth) it's 'definitely falling back to earth'.

https://www.mnealon.eosc.edu/RocketSciencePage5.htm

Scroll down to the bottom of this page - it's about the saturn v5 flight path . At the end you will see the graph of altitude against range .

It's rocket science .
Thanks, I skimmed over it briefly for now and plan to go back to it later when I have time. Since I'm of the side of the fence that says rockets/moon landings are possible is there a point you were making with this link? I don't want to assume one.
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: TomInAustin on December 17, 2019, 04:49:24 PM
A man, sitting on a rolling office chair, pushing against the medicine ball while at the same time tossing it (it is actually the force of pushing against the medicine ball, giving rise to the reactionary force of rolling away from that point) is now an explosion.


How can someone be so dense?  Did you ever attend a science class?   On one hand, you say that rockets are fake but think the evil shadow government has holograms that can fake a launch.

LOL
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: junker on December 17, 2019, 11:23:30 PM
A man, sitting on a rolling office chair, pushing against the medicine ball while at the same time tossing it (it is actually the force of pushing against the medicine ball, giving rise to the reactionary force of rolling away from that point) is now an explosion.


How can someone be so dense?  Did you ever attend a science class?   On one hand, you say that rockets are fake but think the evil shadow government has holograms that can fake a launch.

LOL

Refrain from personal attacks in the upper fora. Warned.
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: somerled on December 18, 2019, 11:39:24 AM
Time lapse images of rocket launches , including spacehoax and nasa . All lovely trajectories dictated by the loss of thrust as altitude increases . Link here .

https://www.google.com/search?biw=1175&bih=638&tbm=isch&sa=1&ei=k6v4XYy9G-2mrgTilqZg&q=time+lapse+images++of++rocket+launches&oq=time+lapse+images++of++rocket+launches&gs_l=img.12...33453.65691..78612...0.0..0.268.4857.14j20j6......0....1..gws-wiz-img.......0i7i30j0i24.fjRNyi-yAJY&ved=0ahUKEwjM0qrAurzmAhVtk4sKHWKLCQwQ4dUDCAY

All for show .
first off, I didn't even consider long exposure rocket launches were a thing so thank you for these beautiful images.

Second, it's kinda funny how some flat earthers try to explain away how the sun visually sinks below the horizon because of 'perspective' or 'bendy light' but when a rocket vanishes into the distance in the sky (like the sun should on a flat earth) it's 'definitely falling back to earth'.

https://www.mnealon.eosc.edu/RocketSciencePage5.htm

Scroll down to the bottom of this page - it's about the saturn v5 flight path . At the end you will see the graph of altitude against range .

It's rocket science .
Thanks, I skimmed over it briefly for now and plan to go back to it later when I have time. Since I'm of the side of the fence that says rockets/moon landings are possible is there a point you were making with this link? I don't want to assume one.
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: totallackey on December 18, 2019, 12:40:49 PM
Finally, tech is available to military and government FAR IN ADVANCE of general populace (i.e. DARPA).
This bit is probably true, but the whole logistics of faking 9/11 with holographic airplanes is stupid.

Look, the point here is this. Let's say the technology does exist. So how we determine the nature of reality then? How do we know anything is true?
If you're determined to believe that everything NASA and SpaceX does is a lie and you're going to call all the evidence which shows that they really are launching rockets into space as lies/hoax/fake/holograms or whatever then it's not a very productive discussion.

We are both entrenched in our views, the difference is I am entrenched because of the evidence, you are entrenched despite it.
Good thing I have never claimed 9/11 was faked using holographic imagery.

Why are you attributing that to me?

I have also never claimed that everything about NASA/SpaceX is based on a lie.

They are launching rockets.

We disagree on the apex of the flight.

And you are entrenched due to what you determine to be factual evidence, while I question the validity of such evidence.

I find my criticisms of the evidence to be valid while you do not.

Fine.
it is simply the MASS of the propellant being ejected out of the rear of the rocket that is causing the rocket to move in the opposite direction. Please note, it is not necessary for the MASS of the propellant to be on FIRE...
But it is necessary for the mass of the propellant to be ejected at very high speed if you're going to move a sodding great rocket, as opposed to a small balloon. What's one way of eject stuff at very high speed? How about if you ignite some fuel in a chamber and leave a hole in one end? What happens? Effectively you get an explosion in the chamber which creates a lot of heat and pressure, you get a very high speed jet coming out of the hole so the chamber moves quickly in the other direction.
I'm simplifying but that's basically how rockets work.
Extreme simplification, and regrettably for you, fails to account for the hole.

If you have a hole in a chamber, whatever is in the chamber is simply going to exhaust out the chamber, especially in an environment with no resisting pressure outside of said hole.
Quote
Well, no...First, anything introduced to a vacuum? Like gas from these these rockets?
Right...results in no vacuum.

A little bit of gas will go into the chamber, yes. But look at the pressure gauge after the rocket has gone off. The needle barely moves.
The chamber is big compared to the amount of gas the rocket will produce, it's still effectively a vacuum.
Err, no...

Essentially your science is revealed to be a charade, and your definition of a vacuum is actually no longer a vacuum.

Good to know.
Quote
No, you didn't explain why he was tapping it.

I posted a link explaining why people do that. I also posted stills from the video after her turned the pump on which clearly show the gauge is working and shows the pressure lowering when he turns the pump on.
You can watch the video yourself. And I look forward to the results of your experiment.
Unfortunately, your link doesn't offer a scientifically tested protocol for the process of gauge tapping.

Why tap on a working gauge?

I look forward to your concession on these points.
A man, sitting on a rolling office chair, pushing against the medicine ball while at the same time tossing it (it is actually the force of pushing against the medicine ball, giving rise to the reactionary force of rolling away from that point) is now an explosion.


How can someone be so dense?  Did you ever attend a science class?   On one hand, you say that rockets are fake but think the evil shadow government has holograms that can fake a launch.

LOL
Yeah, I am not dense.

Yeah, I have actually attended many science classes. Chemistry, Astronomy, Geology, Physics...

Nope, I never wrote rockets are fake.

Nope, I never claimed claimed the government is faking launches with holograms.

Further, I offered holograms as a possible explanation for the landing videos, but there are certainly more.

There is no verifiable information regarding ultimate apex of these flights and they could have simply been dropped from a point above the clouds, below which they then become visible.
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: totallackey on December 18, 2019, 01:20:54 PM
Thanks, I skimmed over it briefly for now and plan to go back to it later when I have time. Since I'm of the side of the fence that says rockets/moon landings are possible is there a point you were making with this link? I don't want to assume one.
Have you got back to more than skimming?

This link puts an end to that whole moon landing thing...

More likely, you have not read it all or simply do not understand what you are reading.

Look forward to your in depth analysis of the material, regardless.
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: ChrisTP on December 18, 2019, 04:01:31 PM
Thanks, I skimmed over it briefly for now and plan to go back to it later when I have time. Since I'm of the side of the fence that says rockets/moon landings are possible is there a point you were making with this link? I don't want to assume one.
Have you got back to more than skimming?

This link puts an end to that whole moon landing thing...

More likely, you have not read it all or simply do not understand what you are reading.

Look forward to your in depth analysis of the material, regardless.
No I haven't, I'm in semi crunch time at work because it's nearing the holidays. Sorry about that but my spare time is sometimes quite precious.

Ok sure, I'll bite. How does this link shut down the moon landings? Do you fully understand it? I'm not a rocket scientist so I've not made any bold claims on any of the information on that website though maths is one of my strong suits so I do hope to make at least a little sense from it when it get to it, which I have yet to do.

You shouldn't make assumptions you know nothing about, you cannot tell me what I have and haven't done in my own time. Claiming I haven't read something as if you're sitting behind me at my desk is kinda delusional. For example, you don't see me claiming you haven't gone through higher education when you could well have for all I know (though it isn't very apparent if you have).

I don't plan on publishing anything, you have nothing to look forward to here. Sorry to disappoint. Though feel free to throw up your detailed analysis here for us to see, since you've made it clear you've not only read it but understand it, agree with it and concluded that the moon landings were faked.
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: proponent on December 18, 2019, 05:12:55 PM
I’ve come to understand that most people who believe the FE theory also believe the moon landing was faked. So, if NASA was willing to fake that big achievement, why is it that they haven’t done anything consequential, real or faked, in such a long time? Did they decide to stop faking it?

Sorry if this is in the wrong section, I’m new to the forum.
<<<<If they fake the moon landing, then they fake it for profit, absolutely.
The main tool of the various so-called space programs is the rocket. It takes money to research and manufacture them.
If the space industry is in disguise, to avoid condemnation. And the main body of money - rockets, its other most important role is to carry a variety of explosives, in the service of war.
That's possible today, less than 100 years after world war ii, and even more likely in the 1950s and '60s, just after world war ii.
So if it's a disguise, it's probably a war chest for countries to have a good reason to get funding.
If that were the case, it could invent any location that no one could actually explore, forbid anyone to find out, in the name of military secrets.
So to get back to your question, the reason for doing this is because it's the simplest, most complicated lie that can be easily found out.
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: totallackey on December 19, 2019, 11:19:24 AM
Thanks, I skimmed over it briefly for now and plan to go back to it later when I have time. Since I'm of the side of the fence that says rockets/moon landings are possible is there a point you were making with this link? I don't want to assume one.
Have you got back to more than skimming?

This link puts an end to that whole moon landing thing...

More likely, you have not read it all or simply do not understand what you are reading.

Look forward to your in depth analysis of the material, regardless.
No I haven't, I'm in semi crunch time at work because it's nearing the holidays. Sorry about that but my spare time is sometimes quite precious.

Ok sure, I'll bite. How does this link shut down the moon landings? Do you fully understand it? I'm not a rocket scientist so I've not made any bold claims on any of the information on that website though maths is one of my strong suits so I do hope to make at least a little sense from it when it get to it, which I have yet to do.

You shouldn't make assumptions you know nothing about, you cannot tell me what I have and haven't done in my own time. Claiming I haven't read something as if you're sitting behind me at my desk is kinda delusional. For example, you don't see me claiming you haven't gone through higher education when you could well have for all I know (though it isn't very apparent if you have).

I don't plan on publishing anything, you have nothing to look forward to here. Sorry to disappoint. Though feel free to throw up your detailed analysis here for us to see, since you've made it clear you've not only read it but understand it, agree with it and concluded that the moon landings were faked.
I understand the part where it shows the difference in calculations between those utilizing gravity in the process and those not.

Go ahead, take your time.
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: flatearther633 on March 11, 2020, 11:31:24 PM
Because they didn't fake the moon landing. It is impossible with the technology they had at the time.
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: Tumeni on March 12, 2020, 12:32:07 AM
https://www.mnealon.eosc.edu/RocketSciencePage5.htm

Scroll down to the bottom of this page - it's about the saturn v5 flight path . At the end you will see the graph of altitude against range .

It's rocket science .

...and the point is ... what?
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: somerled on March 12, 2020, 10:00:12 AM
Flight path dictated by pressure change caused by altitude.
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: AllAroundTheWorld on March 12, 2020, 10:12:43 AM
Because they didn't fake the moon landing. It is impossible with the technology they had at the time.
In terms of the actual footage - which is generally where people who believe it was all a hoax start - it was arguably possible.
The trouble is their "evidence" is usually based on ignorance or confirmation bias.
The things I've never seen them address is all the 3rd party evidence.
The Australians were relaying signals for the mission - were they "in on it" too?
In the UK Jodrell Bank were tracking the craft and a Russian one (Luna 15) which was trying to beat the Americans to a soft landing on the moon (albeit an unmanned one)
Some amateurs were tracking the craft too.

The idea that all these people were either "in on it" or were also tricked somehow is ludicrous.
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: gurnb on March 12, 2020, 09:56:52 PM
I live in a town where there are going on 3 generations of people who have worked in the space program, including me.  How is it possible that all of these people are keeping this huge conspiracy a secret?
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: stack on March 13, 2020, 01:22:34 AM
Flight path dictated by pressure change caused by altitude.

You forgot about stages 2 & 3. The graph is for Stage 1 only.
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: The_Ponderer on March 13, 2020, 02:39:59 AM
If Nasa Faked another moon landing in this generation, even 5 year old will be calling out 'photoshop'. If we can go to the moon... why not go again?
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: somerled on March 13, 2020, 01:07:56 PM
Flight path dictated by pressure change caused by altitude.

You forgot about stages 2 & 3. The graph is for Stage 1 only.

No I didn't .  Stage 1 rockets can only get so high as their efficiency at producing thrust decreases markedly with altitude . Stage two rockets have smaller nozzles with a decrease in area that allows more thrust to be produced as air pressure declines - same for stage 3 .All explained to us in physic class and believed by all.

Of course perceptions changed once I encountered Joules Law.

If you look at stages 2 & 3 in that link you will see that they are based on the premise of "no gravity" which renders them entirely fictional under what passes for mainstream science . Which is why I ignored them.


Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: stack on March 13, 2020, 09:42:26 PM
Flight path dictated by pressure change caused by altitude.

You forgot about stages 2 & 3. The graph is for Stage 1 only.

No I didn't .  Stage 1 rockets can only get so high as their efficiency at producing thrust decreases markedly with altitude .

I'm not sure where you learned that. The thrust is constant, not diminishing, as the rocket gains speed as it becomes lighter due to burned off fuel. Burn time, about 2.5 mins before cut-off and jettison.

Stage two rockets have smaller nozzles with a decrease in area that allows more thrust to be produced as air pressure declines - same for stage 3 .All explained to us in physic class and believed by all.

Of course factoring in the rocket is now much lighter all in an effort to get to escape velocity, I think around 25k mph.

Of course perceptions changed once I encountered Joules Law.

The operative word being 'I'. Once you encountered Joules Law you dispensed with the rest of physics as we know and use it. I don't think you're in a position to do so based upon your encounter.

If you look at stages 2 & 3 in that link you will see that they are based on the premise of "no gravity" which renders them entirely fictional under what passes for mainstream science . Which is why I ignored them.

Yes and if you read further the author, as a thought experiment, by removing gravity, gets the lunar module to the moon in hours instead of the reality of days. You can find the actual data all over the web, thrust, velocity, weight, time, anything you want. Dig a little deeper and you'll find that your encounter is irrelevant here.

Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: somerled on March 14, 2020, 09:57:57 PM
Active force is constant - thrust decreases with altitude as pressure decreases .

https://www.pprune.org/engineers-technicians/407743-relationship-between-thrust-tempreture.html

You could look that in two mins.
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: stack on March 15, 2020, 07:36:03 PM
Active force is constant - thrust decreases with altitude as pressure decreases .

https://www.pprune.org/engineers-technicians/407743-relationship-between-thrust-tempreture.html

You could look that in two mins.

Again, you're barking up the wrong tree just like with your 'encounter' with Joules Law and your interpretation. You cited a "Pilots" forum and they are talking about the performance of jet engines at higher altitudes. Jet engines rely on the intake of O2 from the atmosphere. Higher altitude, thinner air, more O2 is required. Rockets, conversely, do not rely on O2 intake from the atmosphere. A rockets Oxidizer is built into the internals of the combustion system. Apples & oranges in this regard.

You might want to take more than 2 minutes for your research going forward - These 'encounters' you have with various physical laws and how you interpret them are becoming increasingly irrelevant.

Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: totallackey on March 16, 2020, 10:34:30 AM
Active force is constant - thrust decreases with altitude as pressure decreases .

https://www.pprune.org/engineers-technicians/407743-relationship-between-thrust-tempreture.html

You could look that in two mins.

Again, you're barking up the wrong tree just like with your 'encounter' with Joules Law and your interpretation. You cited a "Pilots" forum and they are talking about the performance of jet engines at higher altitudes. Jet engines rely on the intake of O2 from the atmosphere. Higher altitude, thinner air, more O2 is required. Rockets, conversely, do not rely on O2 intake from the atmosphere. A rockets Oxidizer is built into the internals of the combustion system. Apples & oranges in this regard.

You might want to take more than 2 minutes for your research going forward - These 'encounters' you have with various physical laws and how you interpret them are becoming increasingly irrelevant.
Aside from jets taking in oxygen from an intake, how do they move?
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: stack on March 16, 2020, 05:13:50 PM
Active force is constant - thrust decreases with altitude as pressure decreases .

https://www.pprune.org/engineers-technicians/407743-relationship-between-thrust-tempreture.html

You could look that in two mins.

Again, you're barking up the wrong tree just like with your 'encounter' with Joules Law and your interpretation. You cited a "Pilots" forum and they are talking about the performance of jet engines at higher altitudes. Jet engines rely on the intake of O2 from the atmosphere. Higher altitude, thinner air, more O2 is required. Rockets, conversely, do not rely on O2 intake from the atmosphere. A rockets Oxidizer is built into the internals of the combustion system. Apples & oranges in this regard.

You might want to take more than 2 minutes for your research going forward - These 'encounters' you have with various physical laws and how you interpret them are becoming increasingly irrelevant.
Aside from jets taking in oxygen from an intake, how do they move?

Irrelevant. We are talking about rockets, not jet engines, not turbo-props, etc. Rockets, rockets used to take man to the moon and back.
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: J-Man on May 08, 2020, 10:37:03 PM
Isn't the Hubble fake and all those really groovy pics?
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: ChrisTP on May 09, 2020, 01:04:33 AM
Isn't the Hubble fake and all those really groovy pics?
No.
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: JSS on May 09, 2020, 11:40:53 AM
It's been said before, but worth saying again.

NASA has an entire history of great achievements.

Viking probes? The Grand Tour? Close up pictures of the outer planets?

The Space Shuttle? That was pretty great, I remember watching those as a kid.

Mars landers? We put robots with fecking lasers on Mars.

We stuck a camera on a giant rocket and sent it to Pluto.

We slammed a probe into Jupiter on purpose. (Lets not talk about the Mars one, oops.)

We have a probe orbiting the sun at close range.

The Hubble?

The James Webb? (Hopefully soon, if it doesn't blow up or get stuck unfolding.)

NASA has done an amazing amount of work.
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: J-Man on May 11, 2020, 12:41:28 AM
It's been said before, but worth saying again.

NASA has an entire history of great achievements.

Viking probes? The Grand Tour? Close up pictures of the outer planets?

The Space Shuttle? That was pretty great, I remember watching those as a kid.

Mars landers? We put robots with fecking lasers on Mars.

We stuck a camera on a giant rocket and sent it to Pluto.

We slammed a probe into Jupiter on purpose. (Lets not talk about the Mars one, oops.)

We have a probe orbiting the sun at close range.

The Hubble?

The James Webb? (Hopefully soon, if it doesn't blow up or get stuck unfolding.)

NASA has done an amazing amount of work.

NASA has a bunch of cartoonist and magicians on their staff. And of course writers like you all to come and flood sites with rubbish.
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: JSS on May 11, 2020, 01:00:46 AM
NASA has a bunch of cartoonist and magicians on their staff. And of course writers like you all to come and flood sites with rubbish.

Is this an example of high quality upper flora comments?

I don't work for NASA but I wish I did. If I worked for them I'd certainly say so and brag about it.
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: ChrisTP on May 11, 2020, 01:04:13 AM
It's been said before, but worth saying again.

NASA has an entire history of great achievements.

Viking probes? The Grand Tour? Close up pictures of the outer planets?

The Space Shuttle? That was pretty great, I remember watching those as a kid.

Mars landers? We put robots with fecking lasers on Mars.

We stuck a camera on a giant rocket and sent it to Pluto.

We slammed a probe into Jupiter on purpose. (Lets not talk about the Mars one, oops.)

We have a probe orbiting the sun at close range.

The Hubble?

The James Webb? (Hopefully soon, if it doesn't blow up or get stuck unfolding.)

NASA has done an amazing amount of work.

NASA has a bunch of cartoonist and magicians on their staff. And of course writers like you all to come and flood sites with rubbish.
You probably wouldn't be able to use your computer to spout this kind of nonsensical ramblings if it weren't for tech made by NASA.
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: AllAroundTheWorld on May 11, 2020, 08:42:32 AM
NASA has a bunch of cartoonist and magicians on their staff. And of course writers like you all to come and flood sites with rubbish.

Is this an example of high quality upper flora comments?

I don't work for NASA but I wish I did. If I worked for them I'd certainly say so and brag about it.
I have a friend* who works for them, I don't know whether directly, she might just work with them.
She's doing some really cool stuff, taking seismology data from a craft on Mars to study "Marsquakes".
Which poses an interesting question for anyone who thinks NASA are faking it all.
Is the person I'm talking about "in on it"? Is she lying about this job?
Or is she being fed fake data? Why? For what purpose? Why would they employ her to do something entirely pointless?

[*full disclosure, no-one I've heard from in years, she's an ex-colleague and I heard this through a mutual ex-colleague]
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: JSS on May 11, 2020, 11:13:20 AM
NASA has a bunch of cartoonist and magicians on their staff. And of course writers like you all to come and flood sites with rubbish.

Is this an example of high quality upper flora comments?

I don't work for NASA but I wish I did. If I worked for them I'd certainly say so and brag about it.
I have a friend* who works for them, I don't know whether directly, she might just work with them.
She's doing some really cool stuff, taking seismology data from a craft on Mars to study "Marsquakes".
Which poses an interesting question for anyone who thinks NASA are faking it all.
Is the person I'm talking about "in on it"? Is she lying about this job?
Or is she being fed fake data? Why? For what purpose? Why would they employ her to do something entirely pointless?

[*full disclosure, no-one I've heard from in years, she's an ex-colleague and I heard this through a mutual ex-colleague]

I have a friend who helped build the Space Shuttle's robot arm. She got flown to the Kennedy Space center for all the shuttle launches as an expert consultant to help with any problems the arm might encounter. Again, very smart and I can't imagine she lied to me all those years about what she did.
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: yetitsflat on May 11, 2020, 12:14:47 PM
NASA has a bunch of cartoonist and magicians on their staff. And of course writers like you all to come and flood sites with rubbish.

Is this an example of high quality upper flora comments?

I don't work for NASA but I wish I did. If I worked for them I'd certainly say so and brag about it.
I have a friend* who works for them, I don't know whether directly, she might just work with them.
She's doing some really cool stuff, taking seismology data from a craft on Mars to study "Marsquakes".
Which poses an interesting question for anyone who thinks NASA are faking it all.
Is the person I'm talking about "in on it"? Is she lying about this job?
Or is she being fed fake data? Why? For what purpose? Why would they employ her to do something entirely pointless?

[*full disclosure, no-one I've heard from in years, she's an ex-colleague and I heard this through a mutual ex-colleague]

I have a friend who helped build the Space Shuttle's robot arm. She got flown to the Kennedy Space center for all the shuttle launches as an expert consultant to help with any problems the arm might encounter. Again, very smart and I can't imagine she lied to me all those years about what she did.


Most of them believe the mainstream story, they aren't lying, they are deceived. As I said I worked on satellites myself, more specifically on the flight software (responsible for controlling the trajectory/orientation of the satellites, supposedly). I was given specifications that I had to turn into computer code. The problem is quite often there were logical contradictions in the specifications. That wasn't an isolated incident, it happened on many occasions. If I didn't uncover them and programmed the software according to the specifications there is no way the satellites could have flown properly. The guys I was working with were just turning the internally inconsistent specs into code like drones. With people like that working on critical parts of the satellites there is no way thousands of satellites are flying up there without any problem. Even the tests we conducted on the code to make sure it was working properly weren't foolproof. Back then despite all that I still believed the code I was writing was embedded on satellites orbiting up there. It took me many years to wake up.

Your friend who helped build the Space Shuttle's robot arm wasn't lying, she really built a robot arm. The friend taking seismology data from a craft on Mars isn't lying, she really believes that's what she's doing. Who is paying them for that work? Yourselves, through your taxes.

That work isn't pointless, it helps propagate the grand illusion that we're insignificant blobs of matter on a tiny speck of dust lost in an infinite universe, that there's nothing special about Earth or about us, that in the future life will become impossible on Earth and that in the distant future all life will become impossible in the universe, that everything will cease to exist, so as to make you believe that your life is meaningless and hide your true origins and your true purpose here. And while you're living in your bubble looking at pretty CGI and pursuing pointless materialistic goals, evil is spreading here on Earth and progressively enslaving humanity and destroying life and love and happiness.
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: Tom Bishop on May 11, 2020, 10:47:33 PM
People will believe that just because the government is paying for scientists to design things that it's actually going to be used, and that those technologies would have otherwise been created for nothing. Those NASA technologies are also being patented and spun off to industry.

Look at page ii on this 2013 NASA Socio-Economic Impacts Report (https://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/files/SEINSI.pdf) --

Quote
Spurs Innovation and Business Growth

- 1,600 new technologies reported in 2012
- 2,200 tech transfer transactions in 2012
- $1M annually per spinoff (median, based on small study)

If those tech transfers to industry make 2.2 billion a year, and they are producing new technologies and transfers every year, that would add up quickly over 20 years, and would surpass their federal budget.
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: stack on May 11, 2020, 11:10:44 PM
People will believe that just because the government is paying for scientists to design things that it's actually going to be used, and that those technologies would have otherwise been created for nothing. Those NASA technologies are also being spun off into patents.

Look at page ii on this 2013 NASA Socio-Economic Impacts Report (https://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/files/SEINSI.pdf) --

Quote
Spurs Innovation and Business Growth

- 1,600 new technologies reported in 2012
- 2,200 tech transfer transactions in 2012
- $1M annually per spinoff (median, based on small study)

If those tech transfers to industry make 2.2 billion a year, that would quickly adds up over 20 years, and would surpass their federal budget.

I think you're mis-interpreting the report. It says:

"NASA’s technology transfer office surveyed companies featured in Spinoff to determine the impacts generated by NASA spinoffs."

Meaning, they contacted the companies that they spun off technology to and asked said companies what was THEIR revenue was attributable to NASA tech they are using/selling.

It goes on to say, "Of those, 39 respondents’ data could be used to derive annual estimates. Analysis of these data indicate the median annual revenue per spinoff per year is $1 million."

Again, referring to the revenue generated at the surveyed companies that got spunoff tech from NASA. It's not the amount of money NASA gets from their spinoffs. That would be easy to track. Patent out, dollars in. What this is about is how much revenue NASA spunoff tech makes other companies. Another metric to show how NASA helps to boost the economy in the private sector.

Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: GoldCashew on May 12, 2020, 01:55:48 PM
NASA has a bunch of cartoonist and magicians on their staff. And of course writers like you all to come and flood sites with rubbish.

Is this an example of high quality upper flora comments?

I don't work for NASA but I wish I did. If I worked for them I'd certainly say so and brag about it.
I have a friend* who works for them, I don't know whether directly, she might just work with them.
She's doing some really cool stuff, taking seismology data from a craft on Mars to study "Marsquakes".
Which poses an interesting question for anyone who thinks NASA are faking it all.
Is the person I'm talking about "in on it"? Is she lying about this job?
Or is she being fed fake data? Why? For what purpose? Why would they employ her to do something entirely pointless?

[*full disclosure, no-one I've heard from in years, she's an ex-colleague and I heard this through a mutual ex-colleague]

I have a friend who helped build the Space Shuttle's robot arm. She got flown to the Kennedy Space center for all the shuttle launches as an expert consultant to help with any problems the arm might encounter. Again, very smart and I can't imagine she lied to me all those years about what she did.


Most of them believe the mainstream story, they aren't lying, they are deceived. As I said I worked on satellites myself, more specifically on the flight software (responsible for controlling the trajectory/orientation of the satellites, supposedly). I was given specifications that I had to turn into computer code. The problem is quite often there were logical contradictions in the specifications. That wasn't an isolated incident, it happened on many occasions. If I didn't uncover them and programmed the software according to the specifications there is no way the satellites could have flown properly. The guys I was working with were just turning the internally inconsistent specs into code like drones. With people like that working on critical parts of the satellites there is no way thousands of satellites are flying up there without any problem. Even the tests we conducted on the code to make sure it was working properly weren't foolproof. Back then despite all that I still believed the code I was writing was embedded on satellites orbiting up there. It took me many years to wake up.

Your friend who helped build the Space Shuttle's robot arm wasn't lying, she really built a robot arm. The friend taking seismology data from a craft on Mars isn't lying, she really believes that's what she's doing. Who is paying them for that work? Yourselves, through your taxes.

That work isn't pointless, it helps propagate the grand illusion that we're insignificant blobs of matter on a tiny speck of dust lost in an infinite universe, that there's nothing special about Earth or about us, that in the future life will become impossible on Earth and that in the distant future all life will become impossible in the universe, that everything will cease to exist, so as to make you believe that your life is meaningless and hide your true origins and your true purpose here. And while you're living in your bubble looking at pretty CGI and pursuing pointless materialistic goals, evil is spreading here on Earth and progressively enslaving humanity and destroying life and love and happiness.


Folks generally believe in Conspiracies (such as space travel being a hoax) so that they can make sense of a chaotic world and be assured that the Earth is the center of the universe and that we are not insignificant. In some cases, it's also to support religious belief or doctrine; a few folks that I've observed on this site fall into the "God-fearing" category with one citing religious doctrine with the Earth being flat and the Sun being only 6 feet in diameter.

It's a coping mechanism which consists of stitching together a narrative to help rationalize and make sense of our complex world. It's like eating comfort food.

When factual events, such as space travel and the moon landing, are difficult to comprehend as things humans actually achieved, than conspirators create a story or adopt notions that border on being delusional to ridiculous. You can't make this stuff up; it's fascinating. Its equivalent to the ridiculousness of aliens having visited Earth or the existence of BigFoot.
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: yetitsflat on May 13, 2020, 11:09:41 AM

Most of them believe the mainstream story, they aren't lying, they are deceived. As I said I worked on satellites myself, more specifically on the flight software (responsible for controlling the trajectory/orientation of the satellites, supposedly). I was given specifications that I had to turn into computer code. The problem is quite often there were logical contradictions in the specifications. That wasn't an isolated incident, it happened on many occasions. If I didn't uncover them and programmed the software according to the specifications there is no way the satellites could have flown properly. The guys I was working with were just turning the internally inconsistent specs into code like drones. With people like that working on critical parts of the satellites there is no way thousands of satellites are flying up there without any problem. Even the tests we conducted on the code to make sure it was working properly weren't foolproof. Back then despite all that I still believed the code I was writing was embedded on satellites orbiting up there. It took me many years to wake up.

Your friend who helped build the Space Shuttle's robot arm wasn't lying, she really built a robot arm. The friend taking seismology data from a craft on Mars isn't lying, she really believes that's what she's doing. Who is paying them for that work? Yourselves, through your taxes.

That work isn't pointless, it helps propagate the grand illusion that we're insignificant blobs of matter on a tiny speck of dust lost in an infinite universe, that there's nothing special about Earth or about us, that in the future life will become impossible on Earth and that in the distant future all life will become impossible in the universe, that everything will cease to exist, so as to make you believe that your life is meaningless and hide your true origins and your true purpose here. And while you're living in your bubble looking at pretty CGI and pursuing pointless materialistic goals, evil is spreading here on Earth and progressively enslaving humanity and destroying life and love and happiness.


Folks generally believe in Conspiracies (such as space travel being a hoax) so that they can make sense of a chaotic world and be assured that the Earth is the center of the universe and that we are not insignificant. In some cases, it's also to support religious belief or doctrine; a few folks that I've observed on this site fall into the "God-fearing" category with one citing religious doctrine with the Earth being flat and the Sun being only 6 feet in diameter.

It's a coping mechanism which consists of stitching together a narrative to help rationalize and make sense of our complex world. It's like eating comfort food.

When factual events, such as space travel and the moon landing, are difficult to comprehend as things humans actually achieved, than conspirators create a story or adopt notions that border on being delusional to ridiculous. You can't make this stuff up; it's fascinating. Its equivalent to the ridiculousness of aliens having visited Earth or the existence of BigFoot.

That's what you want to believe. I was an atheist and then an agnostic for most of my life, that didn't prevent me from seeing that science cannot prove that the Earth isn't flat or isn't at the center of the universe. All science can reasonably say is that a particular theory in which the Earth is round and orbiting the Sun is simpler than another particular theory in which the Earth is flat and at the center. This does not prove that there is no flat Earth theory that is simpler than the mainstream round Earth theory. And more and more it appears that observations/phenomena can be explained in a simple way within a flat Earth model.

As for the coping mechanism, it is a coping mechanism to refuse to seriously consider evidence when that evidence goes against one's own cherished beliefs. Such as the belief that powerful organizations wouldn't do that to you, wouldn't lie to you like that, wouldn't wish you ill. You want to believe that you are the master of your own life, that the bad things that happen in the world or in your mind are mostly an unfortunate consequence of the laws of physics, that there is no will behind them. You don't want to face the idea that powerful groups who have power over your life do not have your best interests at heart, but want you to be their slave, believing and accepting what you're told, so you can be controlled while they further their agenda. And that agenda doesn't lead to a world that is free and full of love and happiness. It leads to a world full of fear and suffering in which humanity is enslaved. And that isn't comforting. But the truth isn't easy to face.
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: BRrollin on May 13, 2020, 11:57:05 AM

Most of them believe the mainstream story, they aren't lying, they are deceived. As I said I worked on satellites myself, more specifically on the flight software (responsible for controlling the trajectory/orientation of the satellites, supposedly). I was given specifications that I had to turn into computer code. The problem is quite often there were logical contradictions in the specifications. That wasn't an isolated incident, it happened on many occasions. If I didn't uncover them and programmed the software according to the specifications there is no way the satellites could have flown properly. The guys I was working with were just turning the internally inconsistent specs into code like drones. With people like that working on critical parts of the satellites there is no way thousands of satellites are flying up there without any problem. Even the tests we conducted on the code to make sure it was working properly weren't foolproof. Back then despite all that I still believed the code I was writing was embedded on satellites orbiting up there. It took me many years to wake up.

Your friend who helped build the Space Shuttle's robot arm wasn't lying, she really built a robot arm. The friend taking seismology data from a craft on Mars isn't lying, she really believes that's what she's doing. Who is paying them for that work? Yourselves, through your taxes.

That work isn't pointless, it helps propagate the grand illusion that we're insignificant blobs of matter on a tiny speck of dust lost in an infinite universe, that there's nothing special about Earth or about us, that in the future life will become impossible on Earth and that in the distant future all life will become impossible in the universe, that everything will cease to exist, so as to make you believe that your life is meaningless and hide your true origins and your true purpose here. And while you're living in your bubble looking at pretty CGI and pursuing pointless materialistic goals, evil is spreading here on Earth and progressively enslaving humanity and destroying life and love and happiness.


Folks generally believe in Conspiracies (such as space travel being a hoax) so that they can make sense of a chaotic world and be assured that the Earth is the center of the universe and that we are not insignificant. In some cases, it's also to support religious belief or doctrine; a few folks that I've observed on this site fall into the "God-fearing" category with one citing religious doctrine with the Earth being flat and the Sun being only 6 feet in diameter.

It's a coping mechanism which consists of stitching together a narrative to help rationalize and make sense of our complex world. It's like eating comfort food.

When factual events, such as space travel and the moon landing, are difficult to comprehend as things humans actually achieved, than conspirators create a story or adopt notions that border on being delusional to ridiculous. You can't make this stuff up; it's fascinating. Its equivalent to the ridiculousness of aliens having visited Earth or the existence of BigFoot.

That's what you want to believe. I was an atheist and then an agnostic for most of my life, that didn't prevent me from seeing that science cannot prove that the Earth isn't flat or isn't at the center of the universe. All science can reasonably say is that a particular theory in which the Earth is round and orbiting the Sun is simpler than another particular theory in which the Earth is flat and at the center. This does not prove that there is no flat Earth theory that is simpler than the mainstream round Earth theory. And more and more it appears that observations/phenomena can be explained in a simple way within a flat Earth model.

As for the coping mechanism, it is a coping mechanism to refuse to seriously consider evidence when that evidence goes against one's own cherished beliefs. Such as the belief that powerful organizations wouldn't do that to you, wouldn't lie to you like that, wouldn't wish you ill. You want to believe that you are the master of your own life, that the bad things that happen in the world or in your mind are mostly an unfortunate consequence of the laws of physics, that there is no will behind them. You don't want to face the idea that powerful groups who have power over your life do not have your best interests at heart, but want you to be their slave, believing and accepting what you're told, so you can be controlled while they further their agenda. And that agenda doesn't lead to a world that is free and full of love and happiness. It leads to a world full of fear and suffering in which humanity is enslaved. And that isn't comforting. But the truth isn't easy to face.

I agree with you! But this is shifting the burden of proof. It is not science’s job to prove the Earth isn’t flat - scientist’s aren’t claiming that it is! It is FEers job to prove that the Earth is flat, and provide evidence for that claim.

The one making the positive claim inherits a burden of proof, and in my view that burden is not met by claiming evidence of an alternate claim is invalid.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Null_hypothesis

The bull hypothesis of ANY claim is that it isn’t true.
Title: Re: If NASA faked the moon landing, why doesn’t it fake any more great achievements?
Post by: GoldCashew on May 13, 2020, 04:51:27 PM

Most of them believe the mainstream story, they aren't lying, they are deceived. As I said I worked on satellites myself, more specifically on the flight software (responsible for controlling the trajectory/orientation of the satellites, supposedly). I was given specifications that I had to turn into computer code. The problem is quite often there were logical contradictions in the specifications. That wasn't an isolated incident, it happened on many occasions. If I didn't uncover them and programmed the software according to the specifications there is no way the satellites could have flown properly. The guys I was working with were just turning the internally inconsistent specs into code like drones. With people like that working on critical parts of the satellites there is no way thousands of satellites are flying up there without any problem. Even the tests we conducted on the code to make sure it was working properly weren't foolproof. Back then despite all that I still believed the code I was writing was embedded on satellites orbiting up there. It took me many years to wake up.

Your friend who helped build the Space Shuttle's robot arm wasn't lying, she really built a robot arm. The friend taking seismology data from a craft on Mars isn't lying, she really believes that's what she's doing. Who is paying them for that work? Yourselves, through your taxes.

That work isn't pointless, it helps propagate the grand illusion that we're insignificant blobs of matter on a tiny speck of dust lost in an infinite universe, that there's nothing special about Earth or about us, that in the future life will become impossible on Earth and that in the distant future all life will become impossible in the universe, that everything will cease to exist, so as to make you believe that your life is meaningless and hide your true origins and your true purpose here. And while you're living in your bubble looking at pretty CGI and pursuing pointless materialistic goals, evil is spreading here on Earth and progressively enslaving humanity and destroying life and love and happiness.


Folks generally believe in Conspiracies (such as space travel being a hoax) so that they can make sense of a chaotic world and be assured that the Earth is the center of the universe and that we are not insignificant. In some cases, it's also to support religious belief or doctrine; a few folks that I've observed on this site fall into the "God-fearing" category with one citing religious doctrine with the Earth being flat and the Sun being only 6 feet in diameter.

It's a coping mechanism which consists of stitching together a narrative to help rationalize and make sense of our complex world. It's like eating comfort food.

When factual events, such as space travel and the moon landing, are difficult to comprehend as things humans actually achieved, than conspirators create a story or adopt notions that border on being delusional to ridiculous. You can't make this stuff up; it's fascinating. Its equivalent to the ridiculousness of aliens having visited Earth or the existence of BigFoot.

That's what you want to believe. I was an atheist and then an agnostic for most of my life, that didn't prevent me from seeing that science cannot prove that the Earth isn't flat or isn't at the center of the universe. All science can reasonably say is that a particular theory in which the Earth is round and orbiting the Sun is simpler than another particular theory in which the Earth is flat and at the center. This does not prove that there is no flat Earth theory that is simpler than the mainstream round Earth theory. And more and more it appears that observations/phenomena can be explained in a simple way within a flat Earth model.

As for the coping mechanism, it is a coping mechanism to refuse to seriously consider evidence when that evidence goes against one's own cherished beliefs. Such as the belief that powerful organizations wouldn't do that to you, wouldn't lie to you like that, wouldn't wish you ill. You want to believe that you are the master of your own life, that the bad things that happen in the world or in your mind are mostly an unfortunate consequence of the laws of physics, that there is no will behind them. You don't want to face the idea that powerful groups who have power over your life do not have your best interests at heart, but want you to be their slave, believing and accepting what you're told, so you can be controlled while they further their agenda. And that agenda doesn't lead to a world that is free and full of love and happiness. It leads to a world full of fear and suffering in which humanity is enslaved. And that isn't comforting. But the truth isn't easy to face.


The last three sentences of your above statement summarize perfectly your fear of what you may not understand in the world, and thus the need for a coping mechanism. You just made my point about the need for coping mechanisms.

Yes, there is a lot of evil in the world but it doesn't mean that an organization like NASA is some type of nefarious company with an underlying agenda to lie, deceive, and inflict evil. NASA's purpose is to advance our understanding of the world, the universe, etc.. through scientific study, observation, and research. It's nothing more and nothing less than that. But, people that get caught up in notions of conspiracies may develop delusions that border on the ridiculous, without having insight into just how delusional it's become.

As I have said in a previous post... the wiki on this site talks about the importance of knowing as apposed to believing. Knowing through experimentation and observing in order to seek the truth. Yet, the flat earth community's notion of the space travel conspiracy is based on a belief without any evidence to get to a position of knowing. It's an oxi-moron of an approach. When pushed for evidence, flat Earthers generally just state something along the lines of "it's CGI" or "pictures or photos showing curvature or round ball Earth are fake." Or, those astronauts are just actors and are all lying to us.