The Flat Earth Society

Flat Earth Discussion Boards => Flat Earth General => Topic started by: Gigamonsta on December 19, 2009, 11:27:24 AM

Title: NASA update: more ridiculousness
Post by: Gigamonsta on December 19, 2009, 11:27:24 AM
http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/WISE/news/wise20091214.html


NASA at it again, boys. Apparently they launched a rocket into space as they claimed. I understand space flight is possibly but that satellites and stuff are probably crap. But this right here is another pathetic attempt to put the conspiracy forward. Disagree and your called insane. Maybe Round Earthers can answer this question: how do you feel about NASA using your tax dollars to do this?! Well not all of it goes to do this. I am sure some of it is sticky money if you get my drift. Looks like Nasa employees will be getting a nice Christmas bonus!
Title: Re: NASA update: more ridiculousness
Post by: The Swede on December 19, 2009, 11:56:23 AM
http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/WISE/news/wise20091214.html


NASA at it again, boys. Apparently they launched a rocket into space as they claimed. I understand space flight is possibly but that satellites and stuff are probably crap. But this right here is another pathetic attempt to put the conspiracy forward. Disagree and your called insane. Maybe Round Earthers can answer this question: how do you feel about NASA using your tax dollars to do this?! Well not all of it goes to do this. I am sure some of it is sticky money if you get my drift. Looks like Nasa employees will be getting a nice Christmas bonus!

I have no problem with NASA using my tax money to further our understanding of space.
Title: Re: NASA update: more ridiculousness
Post by: Thermal Detonator on December 19, 2009, 12:21:01 PM
http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/WISE/news/wise20091214.html


NASA at it again, boys. Apparently they launched a rocket into space as they claimed. I understand space flight is possibly but that satellites and stuff are probably crap. But this right here is another pathetic attempt to put the conspiracy forward. Disagree and your called insane. Maybe Round Earthers can answer this question: how do you feel about NASA using your tax dollars to do this?! Well not all of it goes to do this. I am sure some of it is sticky money if you get my drift. Looks like Nasa employees will be getting a nice Christmas bonus!

Yeah you go ahead and believe it's a conspiracy, when you're too stupid to have noticed that the motions of the night sky do not fit your flat earth model. Lucky it's NASA researching space and not you, right? You don't appear to be able to even look up at night.
Title: Re: NASA update: more ridiculousness
Post by: Pseudointellect on December 19, 2009, 07:22:10 PM
How is it a "pathetic attempt to put the conspiracy forward"??? As was just stated by an earlier poster, they are furthering our understanding of space. And if you would like to be a part of this great process, you can be. But right now, you have no idea what you're talking about. "satellites and stuff are probably crap." Why? You see, when an object has a high enough horizontal velocity, it will fall toward the earth at the same speed that the earth curves down below it. And so its height relative to the earth will be stable at all times. This is called orbit.
Title: Re: NASA update: more ridiculousness
Post by: Gigamonsta on December 19, 2009, 07:49:25 PM
http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/WISE/news/wise20091214.html


NASA at it again, boys. Apparently they launched a rocket into space as they claimed. I understand space flight is possibly but that satellites and stuff are probably crap. But this right here is another pathetic attempt to put the conspiracy forward. Disagree and your called insane. Maybe Round Earthers can answer this question: how do you feel about NASA using your tax dollars to do this?! Well not all of it goes to do this. I am sure some of it is sticky money if you get my drift. Looks like Nasa employees will be getting a nice Christmas bonus!

Yeah you go ahead and believe it's a conspiracy, when you're too stupid to have noticed that the motions of the night sky do not fit your flat earth model. Lucky it's NASA researching space and not you, right? You don't appear to be able to even look up at night.


Ah more insults. And how do you know NASA is serious. Here is a question for you: look at all the technological advancements in the past 150 years. Impressive, right? Yet if we are advancing that far then why not space? 1969 we supposedly landed on the moon! Why no moonbases or space ship that are a significant advancement! The space station they claim they have can't even hold that many people!
Title: Re: NASA update: more ridiculousness
Post by: The Swede on December 19, 2009, 07:54:39 PM
http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/WISE/news/wise20091214.html


NASA at it again, boys. Apparently they launched a rocket into space as they claimed. I understand space flight is possibly but that satellites and stuff are probably crap. But this right here is another pathetic attempt to put the conspiracy forward. Disagree and your called insane. Maybe Round Earthers can answer this question: how do you feel about NASA using your tax dollars to do this?! Well not all of it goes to do this. I am sure some of it is sticky money if you get my drift. Looks like Nasa employees will be getting a nice Christmas bonus!

Yeah you go ahead and believe it's a conspiracy, when you're too stupid to have noticed that the motions of the night sky do not fit your flat earth model. Lucky it's NASA researching space and not you, right? You don't appear to be able to even look up at night.


Ah more insults. And how do you know NASA is serious. Here is a question for you: look at all the technological advancements in the past 150 years. Impressive, right? Yet if we are advancing that far then why not space? 1969 we supposedly landed on the moon! Why no moonbases or space ship that are a significant advancement! The space station they claim they have can't even hold that many people!

NASA is rather underfunded. And I think we've made leaps and bounds in technological advancement. Why no moon-bases? No real point. "Wow...sure is rocky up here..."

The amount of people a space-station can hold in no way reflects its capability or how technologically advanced it is. It holds just enough people to run it. 
Title: Re: NASA update: more ridiculousness
Post by: Pseudointellect on December 19, 2009, 09:20:40 PM
Moon bases and mass evacuation plans are not necessary. Our earth is just fine right now. NASA doesn't do its work just to be cool. "Oh look at these cool moon bases we just spend 100 billion dollars on....now what?"

NASA's mission is as much to make scientific discoveries through aeronautics research as it is to explore space. Plus, our governments are much more concerned with international affairs, geopolitics, and the economy. Those issues are much, much, much, much more important in the average person's mind than "oh no what if we need to evacuate the planet right now?" And so therefore the amount of funding provided to NASA for its research is insignificant compared to the amount of money being invested in the economy, military, and such.
Title: Re: NASA update: more ridiculousness
Post by: Gigamonsta on December 20, 2009, 07:43:25 PM
Moon bases and mass evacuation plans are not necessary. Our earth is just fine right now. NASA doesn't do its work just to be cool. "Oh look at these cool moon bases we just spend 100 billion dollars on....now what?"

NASA's mission is as much to make scientific discoveries through aeronautics research as it is to explore space. Plus, our governments are much more concerned with international affairs, geopolitics, and the economy. Those issues are much, much, much, much more important in the average person's mind than "oh no what if we need to evacuate the planet right now?" And so therefore the amount of funding provided to NASA for its research is insignificant compared to the amount of money being invested in the economy, military, and such.

Ah but thjere would be many scientific discoveries made if nasa really could land a man on the moon. Think if they establised a moon base! They could discover many things about outter space living could they not?
Title: Re: NASA update: more ridiculousness
Post by: The Swede on December 20, 2009, 08:31:44 PM
Moon bases and mass evacuation plans are not necessary. Our earth is just fine right now. NASA doesn't do its work just to be cool. "Oh look at these cool moon bases we just spend 100 billion dollars on....now what?"

NASA's mission is as much to make scientific discoveries through aeronautics research as it is to explore space. Plus, our governments are much more concerned with international affairs, geopolitics, and the economy. Those issues are much, much, much, much more important in the average person's mind than "oh no what if we need to evacuate the planet right now?" And so therefore the amount of funding provided to NASA for its research is insignificant compared to the amount of money being invested in the economy, military, and such.

Ah but thjere would be many scientific discoveries made if nasa really could land a man on the moon. Think if they establised a moon base! They could discover many things about outter space living could they not?

Not really, no. We can do most of our observations from the comfort of our own planet. Why pour money into a moon-base? The only reason to conceivably build a Moon base would be to experiment on long-term space bases that we could build elsewhere (Mars for instance), but that kind of endeavor isn't even on the horizon yet. And yes, there are actually more important things the government spends their money on, because most of the public don't really understand the need for a moon-base (I'm one of these people).

Basically...we went to the Moon a whole bunch already. There's rocks there.

Neat!
Title: Re: NASA update: more ridiculousness
Post by: Tristan on December 21, 2009, 05:54:32 AM
Maybe Round Earthers can answer this question: how do you feel about NASA using your tax dollars to do this?!

Given that I don't live, work or pay taxes in the United States, it doesn't bother me at all.
Title: Re: NASA update: more ridiculousness
Post by: Sutekh on December 23, 2009, 02:09:44 AM
http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/WISE/news/wise20091214.html


NASA at it again, boys. Apparently they launched a rocket into space as they claimed. I understand space flight is possibly but that satellites and stuff are probably crap. But this right here is another pathetic attempt to put the conspiracy forward. Disagree and your called insane. Maybe Round Earthers can answer this question: how do you feel about NASA using your tax dollars to do this?! Well not all of it goes to do this. I am sure some of it is sticky money if you get my drift. Looks like Nasa employees will be getting a nice Christmas bonus!

It's all good, we learn more about space and slowly technology develops. Then we kill ourselves with the technology in about 50 years in world war 4. all good.
Title: Re: NASA update: more ridiculousness
Post by: parsec on December 23, 2009, 02:11:20 AM
when did ww3 happen? did i miss it?
Title: Re: NASA update: more ridiculousness
Post by: dim on December 23, 2009, 05:24:44 AM
http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/WISE/news/wise20091214.html


NASA at it again, boys. Apparently they launched a rocket into space as they claimed. I understand space flight is possibly but that satellites and stuff are probably crap. But this right here is another pathetic attempt to put the conspiracy forward. Disagree and your called insane. Maybe Round Earthers can answer this question: how do you feel about NASA using your tax dollars to do this?! Well not all of it goes to do this. I am sure some of it is sticky money if you get my drift. Looks like Nasa employees will be getting a nice Christmas bonus!

Yeah you go ahead and believe it's a conspiracy, when you're too stupid to have noticed that the motions of the night sky do not fit your flat earth model. Lucky it's NASA researching space and not you, right? You don't appear to be able to even look up at night.


Ah more insults. And how do you know NASA is serious. Here is a question for you: look at all the technological advancements in the past 150 years. Impressive, right? Yet if we are advancing that far then why not space? 1969 we supposedly landed on the moon! Why no moonbases or space ship that are a significant advancement! The space station they claim they have can't even hold that many people!

NASA is rather underfunded. And I think we've made leaps and bounds in technological advancement. Why no moon-bases? No real point. "Wow...sure is rocky up here..."

The amount of people a space-station can hold in no way reflects its capability or how technologically advanced it is. It holds just enough people to run it.  


Oh, man.
Underfunded?
They have billions. The labour force costs much more lower. If somebody artificially rising prices for all that pseudo-stuff, it doesnt mean than in reality(if earth was really round) it would cost that much.
I mean, if we are race of wise human, why would factories and so on just rise the prices that high, that even NASA with their billions feels herself as udnerfunded.

Space travels and space technologies for sure must be sponsored by factories and scientists centers, but no, no low prices for the pride of humnity. In fact vise versa, somebody even thinks that NASA is underfunded.

But what is problem to build 100 or 1000 rockets of same technology that are fly? Why it would cost that much that NASA is underfuned. If they have drawing, plans, exact amount of materials used - why would it cost that much? And don't tell me about liberalismus and markets, because if it really worked, they would have popularized this many many years ago.
Title: Re: NASA update: more ridiculousness
Post by: The Swede on December 23, 2009, 05:35:32 AM
http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/WISE/news/wise20091214.html


NASA at it again, boys. Apparently they launched a rocket into space as they claimed. I understand space flight is possibly but that satellites and stuff are probably crap. But this right here is another pathetic attempt to put the conspiracy forward. Disagree and your called insane. Maybe Round Earthers can answer this question: how do you feel about NASA using your tax dollars to do this?! Well not all of it goes to do this. I am sure some of it is sticky money if you get my drift. Looks like Nasa employees will be getting a nice Christmas bonus!

Yeah you go ahead and believe it's a conspiracy, when you're too stupid to have noticed that the motions of the night sky do not fit your flat earth model. Lucky it's NASA researching space and not you, right? You don't appear to be able to even look up at night.


Ah more insults. And how do you know NASA is serious. Here is a question for you: look at all the technological advancements in the past 150 years. Impressive, right? Yet if we are advancing that far then why not space? 1969 we supposedly landed on the moon! Why no moonbases or space ship that are a significant advancement! The space station they claim they have can't even hold that many people!

NASA is rather underfunded. And I think we've made leaps and bounds in technological advancement. Why no moon-bases? No real point. "Wow...sure is rocky up here..."

The amount of people a space-station can hold in no way reflects its capability or how technologically advanced it is. It holds just enough people to run it.  


Oh, man.
Underfunded?
They have billions. The labour force costs much more lower. If somebody artificially rising prices for all that pseudo-stuff, it doesnt mean than in reality(if earth was really round) it would cost that much.
I mean, if we are race of wise human, why would factories and so on just rise the prices that high, that even NASA with their billions feels herself as udnerfunded.

Space travels and space technologies for sure must be sponsored by factories and scientists centers, but no, no low prices for the pride of humnity. In fact vise versa, somebody even thinks that NASA is underfunded.

But what is problem to build 100 or 1000 rockets of same technology that are fly? Why it would cost that much that NASA is underfuned. If they have drawing, plans, exact amount of materials used - why would it cost that much? And don't tell me about liberalismus and markets, because if it really worked, they would have popularized this many many years ago.


Are you under the impression that all NASA does is build a flimsy rocket every six months?
Title: Re: NASA update: more ridiculousness
Post by: dim on December 23, 2009, 05:52:00 AM
Man I really dont know what NASA does except for:

writing texts;
faking pictures;
makes launches of metal junk to the nearest waters;
and tells to few people that they soon become heroes by becoming superstars in the form astronauts;

I dont know about anything else. Like their experiments on the orbit(what they do there except repairing ISS?), like all those fuel, like all those super-challenging stuff. I never heard about it in details nor i dont see any benefits for human race since first Sputnik was launched. Do you see any? (miss the point about GPS pls)

Title: Re: NASA update: more ridiculousness
Post by: The Swede on December 23, 2009, 09:06:11 PM
Man I really dont know what NASA does except for:

writing texts;
faking pictures;
makes launches of metal junk to the nearest waters;
and tells to few people that they soon become heroes by becoming superstars in the form astronauts;

I dont know about anything else. Like their experiments on the orbit(what they do there except repairing ISS?), like all those fuel, like all those super-challenging stuff. I never heard about it in details nor i dont see any benefits for human race since first Sputnik was launched. Do you see any? (miss the point about GPS pls)



Oh, okay...conspiracy NASA is wasting our money, sure.

Not conspiracy NASA works on new technologies from aeronautics (for practical and vital use in our everyday life (even in conspiracy reality where planes have to be in the air 24 hours a day to feed "satellite signals" across the world)) to robotics, the continual effort to document as much of space and our celestial neighbors as possible, maintain very sophisticated equipment both on Earth and in orbit, as well as developing better technology to further our understanding of Earth and space. In a Round Earth universe this is an endeavor to better understand the world around us.

In a Flat Earth viewpoint...

Why bother? Who cares? The world is the world, so there. Let's not worry with it.

So, regarding FE viewpoint, yes, they're wasting a whole bunch of money.   
Title: Re: NASA update: more ridiculousness
Post by: Nimbus on December 23, 2009, 09:15:51 PM
Ooh, the "conspiracy". Clearly they're all wasting our
money trying to get us to believe that the world is round.

And it takes a MASSIVE amount of money for all of NASA's projects. So excuse them if they don't come out with private space shuttles and vacation homes on Mars. =P
Title: Re: NASA update: more ridiculousness
Post by: Sutekh on December 23, 2009, 09:43:12 PM
Man I really dont know what NASA does except for:

writing texts;
faking pictures;
makes launches of metal junk to the nearest waters;
and tells to few people that they soon become heroes by becoming superstars in the form astronauts;

I dont know about anything else. Like their experiments on the orbit(what they do there except repairing ISS?), like all those fuel, like all those super-challenging stuff. I never heard about it in details nor i dont see any benefits for human race since first Sputnik was launched. Do you see any? (miss the point about GPS pls)



Don't forget NASA blows up shuttles and kills astronauts to make us think the shuttles are real, when in fact they are just airplanes. Must be the worst job in the conspiracy, " Sir can I work in the library instead? I know you guys murder us every few years to make it seems the shuttle is a dangerous spaceship" lol!!
Title: Re: NASA update: more ridiculousness
Post by: dim on December 23, 2009, 11:36:30 PM
Man I really dont know what NASA does except for:

writing texts;
faking pictures;
makes launches of metal junk to the nearest waters;
and tells to few people that they soon become heroes by becoming superstars in the form astronauts;

I dont know about anything else. Like their experiments on the orbit(what they do there except repairing ISS?), like all those fuel, like all those super-challenging stuff. I never heard about it in details nor i dont see any benefits for human race since first Sputnik was launched. Do you see any? (miss the point about GPS pls)



Oh, okay...conspiracy NASA is wasting our money, sure.

Not conspiracy NASA works on new technologies from aeronautics (for practical and vital use in our everyday life (even in conspiracy reality where planes have to be in the air 24 hours a day to feed "satellite signals" across the world)) to robotics, the continual effort to document as much of space and our celestial neighbors as possible, maintain very sophisticated equipment both on Earth and in orbit, as well as developing better technology to further our understanding of Earth and space. In a Round Earth universe this is an endeavor to better understand the world around us.

In a Flat Earth viewpoint...

Why bother? Who cares? The world is the world, so there. Let's not worry with it.

So, regarding FE viewpoint, yes, they're wasting a whole bunch of money.   

Really, I am enlighted after your post!

Aircraft 24h in the air. That what they do, to make GPS more efficient and longreaching.
The inly thing is, that this technology was discovered and in use, i think, from mid 90ies for all, and from mid 70 for militaries.  But that's just my opinion. And it is done not by NASA of course, so they don't waste money on it.

What else humankind can benefit from space flights?
Title: Re: NASA update: more ridiculousness
Post by: Sutekh on December 24, 2009, 04:20:45 AM
Man I really dont know what NASA does except for:

writing texts;
faking pictures;
makes launches of metal junk to the nearest waters;
and tells to few people that they soon become heroes by becoming superstars in the form astronauts;

I dont know about anything else. Like their experiments on the orbit(what they do there except repairing ISS?), like all those fuel, like all those super-challenging stuff. I never heard about it in details nor i dont see any benefits for human race since first Sputnik was launched. Do you see any? (miss the point about GPS pls)



Oh, okay...conspiracy NASA is wasting our money, sure.

Not conspiracy NASA works on new technologies from aeronautics (for practical and vital use in our everyday life (even in conspiracy reality where planes have to be in the air 24 hours a day to feed "satellite signals" across the world)) to robotics, the continual effort to document as much of space and our celestial neighbors as possible, maintain very sophisticated equipment both on Earth and in orbit, as well as developing better technology to further our understanding of Earth and space. In a Round Earth universe this is an endeavor to better understand the world around us.

In a Flat Earth viewpoint...

Why bother? Who cares? The world is the world, so there. Let's not worry with it.

So, regarding FE viewpoint, yes, they're wasting a whole bunch of money.    

Really, I am enlighted after your post!

Aircraft 24h in the air. That what they do, to make GPS more efficient and longreaching.
The inly thing is, that this technology was discovered and in use, i think, from mid 90ies for all, and from mid 70 for militaries.  But that's just my opinion. And it is done not by NASA of course, so they don't waste money on it.

What else humankind can benefit from space flights?

One day we are going to colonise half the galaxy, probably a real real bad thing for any other species out there in space, but our space program is a first step. It's all part of the inevitable evolution and expansion of our species, and its very facinating the stuff being discovered, from the rough age and origin of the universe, to the origin of planets and life. Isin't that stuff makign nasa's work worth it even without any technological changers that will occur as any science is done?
Title: Re: NASA update: more ridiculousness
Post by: dim on December 24, 2009, 04:43:09 AM
Nah, I like games like Master of Orion too. But it was just a fiction game, based on novels of fiction authors. It was really nice. But we should understand, that we gonna find another species out there but not in space, but outside icewall, or even in the great deep. So, intersting stuff is going to happen anyway, my version is that we can meet even dragons outside icewall, basically animals. What about space...well, they should have already done building base on the moon and so on, but it never happened. Well, we just switched to the philosophy stream.

I dont see any progress of NASA. They never told us what they for in space.
Title: Re: NASA update: more ridiculousness
Post by: Nimbus on December 24, 2009, 06:18:47 PM
If it wasn't for NASA you wouldn't have GPS systems. And Google Earth, which is really cool. And other satellite-based stuff, including satellite TV. I'd say that that's at least some progress.
Title: Re: NASA update: more ridiculousness
Post by: ugaboga313 on December 27, 2009, 12:29:53 PM
NASA has done some great stuff. Especially GPS, I dont know how FE gets around that.


That would mean that thousands of towers were put up all over the world and were not noticed or anything. Thats impossible. Give me an alternate to why GPS works that actually makes sense/is possible.
Title: Re: NASA update: more ridiculousness
Post by: Mrs. Peach on December 27, 2009, 12:39:06 PM
The US Air Force runs and controls the GPS, not NASA.  They and to some extent the US Navy have been responsible for the GPS from the get go.
Title: Re: NASA update: more ridiculousness
Post by: parsec on December 27, 2009, 12:39:34 PM
The US Air Force runs and controls the GPS, not NASA.  They and to some extent the US Navy have been responsible for the GPS from the get go.
proof?
Title: Re: NASA update: more ridiculousness
Post by: Mrs. Peach on December 27, 2009, 12:45:12 PM
Proof?  Why don't you trust me?  ;D

The impetus for the thing in the first place was for pinpoint submarine navigation, hence the Navy's role.  Then the Air Force got involved as some of the first triangulation was done from high altitude aircraft belonging to the USAF.   This was in the very early days.  I'm not privy as to why the Navy is no longer running the thing...maybe our Marine FES members can enlighten us.
Title: Re: NASA update: more ridiculousness
Post by: parsec on December 27, 2009, 12:46:13 PM
reference?
Title: Re: NASA update: more ridiculousness
Post by: Mrs. Peach on December 27, 2009, 12:51:23 PM
References I have none; I am relying on personal knowledge.  You may however google the 50th Space Wing and the Air Force Space Command (AFSPC).
Title: Re: NASA update: more ridiculousness
Post by: ugaboga313 on December 27, 2009, 12:56:23 PM
So now you are increasing the conspiracy either way. Explain how gps could work without sats.
Title: Re: NASA update: more ridiculousness
Post by: Mrs. Peach on December 27, 2009, 12:58:56 PM
Strats.
Title: Re: NASA update: more ridiculousness
Post by: parsec on December 27, 2009, 01:00:21 PM
GPS works on frequencies between 1,100 and 1,600 MHz. At these frequencies, the penetration depth of the electromagnetic waves in seawater is between 1.4 and 1.7 inches. This is a very inefficient way of communicating with submarines. I call your point moot.
Title: Re: NASA update: more ridiculousness
Post by: ugaboga313 on December 27, 2009, 01:00:57 PM
Strats?


GPS needs satellites to function or an unbelievable amount of towers. Also why does my boats gps work in the middle of the ocean? There are no towers around. Also don't say a fleet of high flying planes as that requires a very large amount of people, fuel, and money.  
Title: Re: NASA update: more ridiculousness
Post by: Mrs. Peach on December 27, 2009, 01:07:37 PM
GPS works on frequencies between 1,100 and 1,600 MHz. At these frequencies, the penetration depth of the electromagnetic waves in seawater is between 1.4 and 1.7 inches. This is a very inefficient way of communicating with submarines. I call your point moot.

It's entirely reliable for near-surface navigation.
Title: Re: NASA update: more ridiculousness
Post by: ugaboga313 on December 27, 2009, 01:09:27 PM
Still haven't given example of how GPS would work without satellites.
Title: Re: NASA update: more ridiculousness
Post by: Mrs. Peach on December 27, 2009, 01:16:22 PM
Still haven't given example of how GPS would work without satellites.

It's been done to death in numerous threads here.  I'm not keen on covering gone-over ground.  Maybe someone else feels fresher.  Apologies for my ennui. 
Title: Re: NASA update: more ridiculousness
Post by: ugaboga313 on December 27, 2009, 01:16:49 PM
Can't even give me a link or a one word overview?
Title: Re: NASA update: more ridiculousness
Post by: Mrs. Peach on December 27, 2009, 01:20:05 PM
Look up some threads covering 'stratellites.'  I really do apologize, I'm sort of busy today storing away the Christmas stuff and sweeping out cedar needles.
Title: Re: NASA update: more ridiculousness
Post by: ugaboga313 on December 27, 2009, 01:30:33 PM
stratellites are basically the planes I was talking about. They would show up on radar and such for regular planes, would require maintenance and fuel, and would have to be everywhere to give adequate gps coverage. They are not feasible at all.
Title: Re: NASA update: more ridiculousness
Post by: parsec on December 27, 2009, 01:53:38 PM
GPS works on frequencies between 1,100 and 1,600 MHz. At these frequencies, the penetration depth of the electromagnetic waves in seawater is between 1.4 and 1.7 inches. This is a very inefficient way of communicating with submarines. I call your point moot.

It's entirely reliable for near-surface navigation.


No, it isn't. Subs don't travel 1 inch below the surface of water. That is effectively a ship. You know nothing about submarine navigation, so please stop making up stuff as you go along.
Title: Re: NASA update: more ridiculousness
Post by: Mrs. Peach on December 27, 2009, 02:29:21 PM
Or as submariners would call it 'a boat' but hey, call it what you like. GPS would still be reliable at periscope depth, would it not? Essentially antenna depth.  I did not say or imply that submarines used GPS at depth; or that it took the place of Loran or whatever.   

And what you are effectively saying is that subnarines aren't equipped with GPS equipment?  You're absolutely right, I would never have guessed that.



Title: Re: NASA update: more ridiculousness
Post by: ugaboga313 on December 27, 2009, 02:37:06 PM
Still haven't answered my question.
Title: Re: NASA update: more ridiculousness
Post by: Mrs. Peach on December 27, 2009, 03:20:44 PM
A reference, as requested, for Parsec (and please remember I said the very early days of GPS):

 
"The TRANSIT system, also known as NAVSAT (for Navy Navigation Satellite System), was the first satellite navigation system to be used operationally. The system was primarily used by the US Navy to provide accurate location information to ballistic missile submarines, and was also used as a general navigation system by the Navy, as well as hydrographic and geodetic surveying."

From: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transit_(satellite) (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transit_(satellite))




Title: Re: NASA update: more ridiculousness
Post by: ugaboga313 on December 27, 2009, 03:28:18 PM
Still doesn't work in FE. Give me a better reason that psuedo or stratolittes. I already debunked those 2.
Title: Re: NASA update: more ridiculousness
Post by: Tom Bishop on December 27, 2009, 03:29:25 PM
Still doesn't work in FE. Give me a better reason that psuedo or stratolittes. I already debunked those 2.

Where?
Title: Re: NASA update: more ridiculousness
Post by: Mrs. Peach on December 27, 2009, 03:32:23 PM
In the succinct words of Mr. Bishop:


Where?
Title: Re: NASA update: more ridiculousness
Post by: ugaboga313 on December 27, 2009, 03:32:59 PM
"stratellites are basically the planes I was talking about. They would show up on radar and such for regular planes, would require maintenance and fuel, and would have to be everywhere to give adequate gps coverage. They are not feasible at all."

If you read the thread, it would be helpful. Would require many, many, blimps/airplanes. This requires fuel, people, maintenance, and would not be as effective as gps really is.
Title: Re: NASA update: more ridiculousness
Post by: Mrs. Peach on December 27, 2009, 03:36:19 PM
You are supposing/assuming a spherical earth.  Rethink it on a flat surface. 
Title: Re: NASA update: more ridiculousness
Post by: ugaboga313 on December 27, 2009, 03:37:44 PM
Doesn't change anything. Radar still works, Planes need fuel and maintenance, and they still need to be around in large numbers (easily noticeable numbers). Just less than a RE.

Think next time before you post.
Title: Re: NASA update: more ridiculousness
Post by: Tom Bishop on December 27, 2009, 03:41:52 PM
Quote
Radar still works

Weather balloons don't show up on radar. Why would a stratellite at the edge of the atmosphere?

Quote
Planes need fuel and maintenance

Actually, a stratellite is not a plane. It's a helium balloon. And last I read, a stratellite only needs maintenance once every 24 months.

Quote
they still need to be around in large numbers (easily noticeable numbers)

Why? Because their range is limited by the curvature of the earth?

You're forgetting that the earth is flat.
Title: Re: NASA update: more ridiculousness
Post by: ugaboga313 on December 27, 2009, 03:43:20 PM
Why do they stay still (necessary for gps or we need to know where they are going)? Who made these balloons? This adds a lot of people to the conspiracy.
Title: Re: NASA update: more ridiculousness
Post by: The Swede on December 27, 2009, 03:45:52 PM
Also, one of these balloons has never failed and fallen to Earth?
Title: Re: NASA update: more ridiculousness
Post by: Tom Bishop on December 27, 2009, 03:46:31 PM
Why do they stay still (necessary for gps or we need to know where they are going)? Who made these balloons? This adds a lot of people to the conspiracy.

NASA has admitted that they have $500-a-pop pseudolites. They might as well be disposable.

http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn11911-nasa-develops-smart-weather-balloons-for-launch-sites.html
Title: Re: NASA update: more ridiculousness
Post by: Mrs. Peach on December 27, 2009, 03:48:13 PM
Why do they stay still (necessary for gps or we need to know where they are going)?

Stratellites are able to remain in stable position with solar-powered electric motors.
Title: Re: NASA update: more ridiculousness
Post by: ugaboga313 on December 27, 2009, 03:51:08 PM
Solar panels are expensive.

Also people have to launch these with all this stuff. One person can't do it. Also every country when then need to be in on the conspiracy. You can't chalk everything up to conspiracy you know.


Also how far do you believe the atmosphere to go?


Off Topic: What do FE'ers think of affordable space travel? When it becomes affordable/safe, will you believe it or go on it? Would it prove to you the curvature or lack thereof of the earth?
Title: Re: NASA update: more ridiculousness
Post by: Mrs. Peach on December 27, 2009, 03:53:57 PM
I think I'm safe in saying solar panels are cheaper than satellite launches.
Title: Re: NASA update: more ridiculousness
Post by: ugaboga313 on December 27, 2009, 03:57:00 PM
So what?

Basically FE thought is, earth is flat thus nasa is wrong thus earth is flat.

Also wouldn't people wonder why Nasa designed a psuedolite? And is buying tons of solar panels and motors? Conspiracy would have to be about 20 people before someone leaks for money.
Title: Re: NASA update: more ridiculousness
Post by: Mrs. Peach on December 27, 2009, 03:58:24 PM
Nasa doesn't run the GPS.
Title: Re: NASA update: more ridiculousness
Post by: ugaboga313 on December 27, 2009, 04:02:13 PM
NASA launches the gps sats so they have to be in on the conspiracy anyway.
Title: Re: NASA update: more ridiculousness
Post by: Mrs. Peach on December 27, 2009, 04:10:25 PM
The Air Force makes the claim that the latest IIR-21 was launched by the Air Force at Cape Canaveral Air Force Station, Florida.  But that's okay if you choose not to believe it.
Title: Re: NASA update: more ridiculousness
Post by: ugaboga313 on December 27, 2009, 04:11:02 PM
NASA has still launched GPS sats so it doesn't matter. They must be in on it. Good try though.
Title: Re: NASA update: more ridiculousness
Post by: Mrs. Peach on December 27, 2009, 04:14:20 PM
THe GPS is a primarily military operation and always has beem.  Nasa is a civilian agency.  Everything going off the pad at Canaveral is not NASA's baby.
Title: Re: NASA update: more ridiculousness
Post by: ugaboga313 on December 27, 2009, 04:16:52 PM
It. Doesn't. Matter. You are helping me because NASA is the conspiracy and now the military is in on it. As well as gps programmers.
Title: Re: NASA update: more ridiculousness
Post by: markjo on December 27, 2009, 09:32:52 PM
The US Air Force runs and controls the GPS, not NASA.  They and to some extent the US Navy have been responsible for the GPS from the get go.
proof?

Quote from: http://www.schriever.af.mil/gps/
Operated by the dedicated men and women of the 2nd Space Operations Squadron at Schriever Air Force Base, Colo., GPS is also the world's largest military satellite constellation. The 2nd SOPS has three missions: global navigation, time transfer and nuclear detection. Uses of GPS include precise timing for financial transactions, search and rescue, communications, farming, recreation and both military and commercial aviation.
Title: Re: NASA update: more ridiculousness
Post by: Tom Bishop on December 27, 2009, 09:35:04 PM
It. Doesn't. Matter. You are helping me because NASA is the conspiracy and now the military is in on it.

Did you forget that is was the military who started NASA and that all astronauts are military men?
Title: Re: NASA update: more ridiculousness
Post by: markjo on December 27, 2009, 09:39:10 PM
It. Doesn't. Matter. You are helping me because NASA is the conspiracy and now the military is in on it.

Did you forget that is was the military who started NASA and that all astronauts are military men?

Nope.  Not all astronauts are military, or men.  Mission specialists are usually civilians.  And before you say it, working for the military is not the same as being in the military.
Title: Re: NASA update: more ridiculousness
Post by: Tom Bishop on December 27, 2009, 09:46:04 PM
And before you say it, working for the military is not the same as being in the military.

Actually, it is.

Anyone the military gives a paycheck to is working for the military.
Title: Re: NASA update: more ridiculousness
Post by: markjo on December 27, 2009, 09:58:09 PM
And before you say it, working for the military is not the same as being in the military.

Actually, it is.

Anyone the military gives a paycheck to is working for the military.

Tom, as a US Marine, I was in the military.  During my time as a Marine, I worked with several civilian contractors who were paid by the military but were not members of the military (hence the term "civilian contractor").  Same goes with the astronaut corps.
Title: Re: NASA update: more ridiculousness
Post by: Tom Bishop on December 27, 2009, 10:00:01 PM
Tom, as a US Marine, I was in the military.  During my time as a Marine, I worked with several civilian contractors who were paid by the military but were not members of the military (hence the term "civilian contractor").

Military Contractors are working for and under the direction of the military.

When the military says jump, they jump.
Title: Re: NASA update: more ridiculousness
Post by: markjo on December 27, 2009, 10:07:59 PM
Tom, as a US Marine, I was in the military.  During my time as a Marine, I worked with several civilian contractors who were paid by the military but were not members of the military (hence the term "civilian contractor").

Military Contractors are working for and under the direction of the military.

When the military says jump, they jump.

Not when the military says to jump in front of a bullet.
Title: Re: NASA update: more ridiculousness
Post by: Tom Bishop on December 27, 2009, 10:22:29 PM
Not when the military says to jump in front of a bullet.

http://en.wikinews.org/wiki/Number_of_private_contractors_killed_in_Iraq_and_Afghanistan_passes_1,000
Title: Re: NASA update: more ridiculousness
Post by: markjo on December 27, 2009, 10:55:08 PM
Not when the military says to jump in front of a bullet.

http://en.wikinews.org/wiki/Number_of_private_contractors_killed_in_Iraq_and_Afghanistan_passes_1,000

Quote
Despite beliefs that the contractors all belong to large military-oriented groups such as the British intelligence firm Aegis or Blackwater USA which has been labelled "mercenaries", the jobs of contractors killed have been as varied as electrical engineer Ronald Schulz, translator Kim Sun-il and truck driver Murat Yuce.
Sorry but I'm failing to see your point.
Title: Re: NASA update: more ridiculousness
Post by: Tom Bishop on December 27, 2009, 11:54:49 PM
Sorry but I'm failing to see your point.

The military told their contractors to go over there into the red zone, and like dogs to their master's whistle, they complied.
Title: Re: NASA update: more ridiculousness
Post by: parsec on December 28, 2009, 12:01:53 AM
GPS would still be reliable at periscope depth, would it not?
No, periscopes are not 1 inch long.

Essentially antenna depth.  I did not say or imply that submarines used GPS at depth; or that it took the place of Loran or whatever.
Ok, then. This is a different point.

And what you are effectively saying is that subnarines aren't equipped with GPS equipment?  You're absolutely right, I would never have guessed that.
See Inertial Navigation Systems.
Title: Re: NASA update: more ridiculousness
Post by: Thermal Detonator on December 28, 2009, 04:06:09 AM
Sorry but I'm failing to see your point.

The military told their contractors to go over there into the red zone, and like dogs to their master's whistle, they complied.

Stop quacking, Bob.
Title: Re: NASA update: more ridiculousness
Post by: markjo on December 28, 2009, 06:21:24 AM
Sorry but I'm failing to see your point.

The military told their contractors to go over there into the red zone, and like dogs to their master's whistle, they complied.

No Tom.  The military listed a number of duties that need to be done in certain potentially hazardous ares.  The contractors signed up specifically to do those jobs in those areas. 
Title: Re: NASA update: more ridiculousness
Post by: ugaboga313 on December 28, 2009, 07:11:45 AM
Tom you are helping me. Now NASA and the Military are in on it. Even though they are affiliated, that is more people who are in on it. The conspiracy can't really work when thousands of people are in on it. Also FE still hasn't found a way to deal with flight times so why waste time on the conspiracy which is all conjecture and work on the science of it.
Title: Re: NASA update: more ridiculousness
Post by: dim on December 28, 2009, 10:22:57 AM
Tom you are helping me. Now NASA and the Military are in on it. Even though they are affiliated, that is more people who are in on it. The conspiracy can't really work when thousands of people are in on it. Also FE still hasn't found a way to deal with flight times so why waste time on the conspiracy which is all conjecture and work on the science of it.

Man and men.
You are very enlighted in your thoughts and words. But a little bit naive(may be it's me but keep reading this).

Main qustion of the thread is how many people are in the conspiracy, right? NASA + Military + weather shoutcasts + astronauts and so on. Yes, sounds weird for FE's. But it is only if to be naive and think that if person doing something, he is completely aware of what he is doing. Well, I am not telling even about main rule of mafia bosess "never make your people know everything about deeds".To make it simplier, remember Microsoft. Huge corporation. They doing what is everybody has on the hard disk. But how it's made?
Some group of programmers gets a task to bulid some module. Another one gets another task of what module to build. Next one is on the same roll. They all work for Microsoft, but they dont really know what they doing. That program code is done, and people are on the way of getting next task. It's their job. And on the top of the tree there is no need to have much people to conduct an operation where all those modules would be doing one thing, for example steal information every second from our computers while we just browsing. So, Microsoft can be a conspiracy of specified type too.

I think the parallels are clear.
No need for even "astronauts" to know the truth.
Title: Re: NASA update: more ridiculousness
Post by: markjo on December 28, 2009, 10:34:25 AM
I think the parallels are clear.
No need for even "astronauts" to know the truth.

The guys that claim to have been to outer space don't need to know the truth that they didn't really go to outer space?  ???
Title: Re: NASA update: more ridiculousness
Post by: onetwothreefour on December 28, 2009, 10:37:00 AM
I think the parallels are clear.
No need for even "astronauts" to know the truth.

The guys that claim to have been to outer space don't need to know the truth that they didn't really go to outer space?  ???

Ah I was just about to post this Mark! It really is sad that FEer's literally get to say whatever they want to, yet we have to work within the confines of reality...
Title: Re: NASA update: more ridiculousness
Post by: dim on December 28, 2009, 10:45:37 AM
I think the parallels are clear.
No need for even "astronauts" to know the truth.

The guys that claim to have been to outer space don't need to know the truth that they didn't really go to outer space?  ???

I'll clarify this.

Variant 1:Some conspirasy member gets in touch with the future and young "astronaut" and says: "Dear, Man. This is very confidential talk is going to occur. We gonna pay you much, we gonna make you a star, a well known and well paid person." Then there goes a far-fethced explanation of why he can't go to space, but how they need to tell to media that he is really an astronaunt. But of course it's taken into considiration by conspiracy memeber that that "astronaut" must be ensured that space flights are really is. That he is just being unlucky not to fly there, but it will be paid off with big money. That he must just act like the real "astronauts".

Variant 2:They put "astronaut" into some machine and simulate the flight. But instead windows there are high quality displays. No need to talk anything.

Variant 3: All "astronauts" are zombied by some stuff or drugs.


BTW, about Variant 2. There is a book of Russian writer Pelevin that is named "Omon-Ra". You can read it, and you will be surprised how the well-known author in Russia says about Variant 2. But in his book "astronaut" has all they way been in the Moscow's subway.


So... not really a tough task.
Title: Re: NASA update: more ridiculousness
Post by: ugaboga313 on December 28, 2009, 11:08:45 AM
But then what about the people who construct fake space shuttle? What about the people who give the drugs? What about the people who do the bribing? Conspiracy is not scientific so I really can't argue it. Everything could be part of the conspiracy. But how does the conspiracy deal with no FE will explain flight times?
Title: Re: NASA update: more ridiculousness
Post by: markjo on December 28, 2009, 11:09:43 AM
Variant 1:Some conspirasy member gets in touch with the future and young "astronaut" and says: "Dear, Man. This is very confidential talk is going to occur. We gonna pay you much, we gonna make you a star, a well known and well paid person." Then there goes a far-fethced explanation of why he can't go to space, but how they need to tell to media that he is really an astronaunt. But of course it's taken into considiration by conspiracy memeber that that "astronaut" must be ensured that space flights are really is. That he is just being unlucky not to fly there, but it will be paid off with big money. That he must just act like the real "astronauts".

Most of the 500+ astronauts that claim to have been to space are hardly "stars".

Variant 2:They put "astronaut" into some machine and simulate the flight. But instead windows there are high quality displays. No need to talk anything.

Several dozen astronauts claim to have exited their vehicles while in space performing so called "space walks". 

Variant 3: All "astronauts" are zombied by some stuff or drugs.

Or they went to Recall and had false memory implants.  ::)

So... not really a tough task.

I think that it's a little (whole lot) tougher than you make it out to be.
Title: Re: NASA update: more ridiculousness
Post by: dim on December 28, 2009, 11:38:06 AM
But then what about the people who construct fake space shuttle? What about the people who give the drugs? What about the people who do the bribing? Conspiracy is not scientific so I really can't argue it. Everything could be part of the conspiracy. But how does the conspiracy deal with no FE will explain flight times?

They construct space shuttle exactly under the same model. Some group makes engines that ensures shuttle to fly. Other creates steering and controls. Another one makes computer stuff and so on. And just some persons are ready to drive the shuttle into the nearest waters after it flies high enough to not to be seen from Earth :D

Conspiracy can consist of some thousans of people all over the planet. I think it's enough. If one person can rule the whole country(technically is not, but if to simplify - it can be), then some thousand of people can really make the world to be turned over.

Title: Re: NASA update: more ridiculousness
Post by: ugaboga313 on December 28, 2009, 11:42:31 AM
Thousands of people in the conspiracy? And you believe that they rule the world? How? NASA only gets so much money and according to u they have to spend a lot of it on fake stuff. Then you have to pay all these people. What about the Ice Wall? Basically its far easier for someone in on the conspiracy to rat it out and get paid.
Title: Re: NASA update: more ridiculousness
Post by: onetwothreefour on December 28, 2009, 12:00:45 PM
But then what about the people who construct fake space shuttle? What about the people who give the drugs? What about the people who do the bribing? Conspiracy is not scientific so I really can't argue it. Everything could be part of the conspiracy. But how does the conspiracy deal with no FE will explain flight times?

They construct space shuttle exactly under the same model. Some group makes engines that ensures shuttle to fly. Other creates steering and controls. Another one makes computer stuff and so on. And just some persons are ready to drive the shuttle into the nearest waters after it flies high enough to not to be seen from Earth :D

Conspiracy can consist of some thousans of people all over the planet. I think it's enough. If one person can rule the whole country(technically is not, but if to simplify - it can be), then some thousand of people can really make the world to be turned over.



Who installs the displays in the windows?
Title: Re: NASA update: more ridiculousness
Post by: ugaboga313 on December 28, 2009, 12:07:00 PM
Also shuttles are super expensive. You would make very little money if you made real shuttles. Since making fake shuttles is the only way to handsomely pay those involved, that means more people are in on it.
Title: Re: NASA update: more ridiculousness
Post by: Thermal Detonator on December 28, 2009, 12:17:39 PM
Also shuttles are super expensive. You would make very little money if you made real shuttles. Since making fake shuttles is the only way to handsomely pay those involved, that means more people are in on it.

If they are fake shuttles, then they have almost the same capabilities as the real thing - they launch at high speed on rocket boosters and achieve extremely high altitude, for which they need to be airtight and able to cope with a fast glide landing. Since the take off and landing are the most difficult part of shuttle flight, a fake vehicle would be virtually no different to the real thing. In other words, very, very expensive.
Title: Re: NASA update: more ridiculousness
Post by: dim on December 28, 2009, 01:41:16 PM
Well, guys. I think, if even money play a significant role for the conspiracy, nevertheless they have all the money in world, so they don't care about how much things cost.

I clarify, first or second or third builded shuttle would be very expensive because of innovtion and venture costs, but mass production of it for sure lowers the price to the net cost of the materials, even if prices are higher in the papers and so on. But again, basically to product even the real shuttle which can take off and land is not really high if it is a mass production conveyor.

But agian, what is money if there is a real game and joy for the conspiracy. What would you do if you have unlimited money from the very childhood!?
You can use drugs, you can be fan of health, you can be fan of women, or doing sports or you can be tired of life unless you create something just great as the Round Earth plan for the conpiracy members.  By the way, they have interest in discovering.

And also, I think, by the year 2050 the world would be in general informed of the fact that old science was wrong and there were really bad rulers who fooled humankind. World is not going to be cruel with the time. At least I believe in that)
Title: Re: NASA update: more ridiculousness
Post by: ugaboga313 on December 28, 2009, 01:43:16 PM
Space shuttles are hella expensive. Mass production doesn't work like that and besides People would notice that 20 space shuttles have been made when there are just 4 or 5.

Also how do they have unlimited money?
Title: Re: NASA update: more ridiculousness
Post by: Rational U.S. Viking on December 28, 2009, 03:04:12 PM
Well, guys. I think, if even money play a significant role for the conspiracy, nevertheless they have all the money in world, so they don't care about how much things cost.

I clarify, first or second or third builded shuttle would be very expensive because of innovtion and venture costs, but mass production of it for sure lowers the price to the net cost of the materials, even if prices are higher in the papers and so on. But again, basically to product even the real shuttle which can take off and land is not really high if it is a mass production conveyor.

But agian, what is money if there is a real game and joy for the conspiracy. What would you do if you have unlimited money from the very childhood!?
You can use drugs, you can be fan of health, you can be fan of women, or doing sports or you can be tired of life unless you create something just great as the Round Earth plan for the conpiracy members.  By the way, they have interest in discovering.

And also, I think, by the year 2050 the world would be in general informed of the fact that old science was wrong and there were really bad rulers who fooled humankind. World is not going to be cruel with the time. At least I believe in that)

Face it, dim, the silliness, irrationality and sheer desperation of your own arguments does as much or more damage to the credibility of your point of view than the best reasoned arguments against it!  Merely reading your lame arguments would be enough to convince me of the falsity and irrationality of your viewpoint, even if I had not read any of your opponents' counter-arguments!
Title: Re: NASA update: more ridiculousness
Post by: Tom Bishop on December 28, 2009, 03:36:17 PM
No Tom.  The military listed a number of duties that need to be done in certain potentially hazardous ares.

Sounds like telling (bribing) them to jump in front of a bullet to me.
Title: Re: NASA update: more ridiculousness
Post by: markjo on December 28, 2009, 04:12:00 PM
No Tom.  The military listed a number of duties that need to be done in certain potentially hazardous ares.

Sounds like telling (bribing) them to jump in front of a bullet to me.

The military did not tell the contractor to go to an unsafe environment.  The contractor chose to take an assignment in an unsafe environment.  Members of the military are not given that choice.  If you can't see the difference, then you need to join the military and experience it for yourself.
Title: Re: NASA update: more ridiculousness
Post by: Tom Bishop on December 28, 2009, 05:00:21 PM
Quote
The military did not tell the contractor to go to an unsafe environment.  The contractor chose to take an assignment in an unsafe environment.

So did the soldiers.

Members of the military are not given that choice.

Yes they are. If they didn't want to be put into harm's way they didn't have to sign up.
Title: Re: NASA update: more ridiculousness
Post by: ugaboga313 on December 28, 2009, 05:02:15 PM
Getting off topic, still it stands that conspiracy costs just as much as running a real space program and you would have thousands of people in on it not to mention every single country.
Title: Re: NASA update: more ridiculousness
Post by: Thermal Detonator on December 28, 2009, 05:03:24 PM
Members of the military are not given that choice.

Yes they are. If they didn't want to be put in harm's way they didn't have to sign up.

Stop nitpicking. You know perfectly well what he means. Your resorting to a semantic argument is a sign of your deep failure.
Title: Re: NASA update: more ridiculousness
Post by: Tom Bishop on December 28, 2009, 05:16:35 PM
Stop nitpicking. You know perfectly well what he means. Your resorting to a semantic argument is a sign of your deep failure.

Soldiers are given the choice to put their lives in harm's way just as contractors are given the choice of putting their lives in harm's way. Neither of them had to sign up.

The government puts them in harm's way by bribing them with money.
Title: Re: NASA update: more ridiculousness
Post by: ugaboga313 on December 28, 2009, 05:35:41 PM
Tom you don't have to accept a bribe you know.
Title: Re: NASA update: more ridiculousness
Post by: Tom Bishop on December 28, 2009, 06:15:09 PM
Tom you don't have to accept a bribe you know.

The poor and unskilled do.
Title: Re: NASA update: more ridiculousness
Post by: ugaboga313 on December 28, 2009, 06:16:18 PM
Why don't we get back to how running a fake NASA would cost as much as a real one and require thousands of people.
Title: Re: NASA update: more ridiculousness
Post by: Tom Bishop on December 28, 2009, 07:01:08 PM
Why don't we get back to how running a fake NASA would cost as much as a real one and require thousands of people.

So you're saying that it would cost more not to go into space than to go into space?  ???
Title: Re: NASA update: more ridiculousness
Post by: markjo on December 28, 2009, 07:14:01 PM
Stop nitpicking. You know perfectly well what he means. Your resorting to a semantic argument is a sign of your deep failure.

Soldiers are given the choice to put their lives in harm's way just as contractors are given the choice of putting their lives in harm's way. Neither of them had to sign up.

Yes, we do have an all volunteer military.  No, joining the military does not automatically mean that you will be put into harm's way (even though it is always a possibility).

The government puts them in harm's way by bribing them with money.

Tom, obviously you have no idea how bribery works. 
Title: Re: NASA update: more ridiculousness
Post by: ugaboga313 on December 28, 2009, 07:19:40 PM
If you read the thread that would help.


I will still spell it out for you. There are public launches of space shuttles. The space shuttle must be strong enough to take off and land. So you are basically using a real space shuttle (don't need as much stuff inside but if you want this not to land in say middle of texas you still need a lot of equipment). Then you need to rebuild these space shuttles each time or involve most of the Navy. Also Astronauts have to be bribed or a lot of people need to be bribed. Fake NASA's money just evaporates real quick.
Title: Re: NASA update: more ridiculousness
Post by: Tom Bishop on December 28, 2009, 07:25:23 PM
Quote
Yes, we do have an all volunteer military.  No, joining the military does not automatically mean that you will be put into harm's way (even though it is always a possibility).

Who joins the military expecting that they will never be put in harm's way?  ???

Quote
Tom, obviously you have no idea how bribery works.

I know exactly how it works.

"Don't worry kids, you don't have to leave your parent's house and go into the real world after High School. Just join the military. We'll pay for your education, your health care, your housing, your children's and spouse's health care, and give you a guaranteed salary on top of that to boot."

It's an offer the poor and struggling have a hard time refusing.
Title: Re: NASA update: more ridiculousness
Post by: ugaboga313 on December 28, 2009, 07:30:26 PM
Well then you have to be pretty stupid to think there is no chance of danger when we are still fighting in two locations.

You still don't have to accept a bribe Tom.
Title: Re: NASA update: more ridiculousness
Post by: markjo on December 28, 2009, 07:35:19 PM
Quote
Yes, we do have an all volunteer military.  No, joining the military does not automatically mean that you will be put into harm's way (even though it is always a possibility).

Who joins the military expecting that they will never be put in harm's way?  ???

My brother and I each spent 4 years in the US Marine Corps and neither of us were put in harm's way.

Quote
Tom, obviously you have no idea how bribery works.

I know exactly how it works.

"Don't worry kids, you don't have to leave your parent's house and go into the real world after High School. Just join the military. We'll pay for your education, your health care, your housing, your children's and spouse's health care, and give you a salary on top of that to boot."

It's an offer the poor and struggling have a hard time refusing.

And yet, so many do.  About 20 years or so ago NY state wanted to require all people on welfare who were of the eligible age to talk with a military recruiter in order to keep their benefits.  They didn't have to join, they just had to talk.  Needless to say, it never happened because of all of the protests.
Title: Re: NASA update: more ridiculousness
Post by: Mrs. Peach on December 28, 2009, 08:22:52 PM
GPS would still be reliable at periscope depth, would it not?
No, periscopes are not 1 inch long.

Essentially antenna depth.  I did not say or imply that submarines used GPS at depth; or that it took the place of Loran or whatever.
Ok, then. This is a different point.

And what you are effectively saying is that subnarines aren't equipped with GPS equipment?  You're absolutely right, I would never have guessed that.
See Inertial Navigation Systems.


Cutting up a paragraph isn't my idea of fair play but what the heck.  I assume you saw the reference I finally found for you; pretty well makes my point.

A reference, as requested, for Parsec (and please remember I said the very early days of GPS):

 
"The TRANSIT system, also known as NAVSAT (for Navy Navigation Satellite System), was the first satellite navigation system to be used operationally. The system was primarily used by the US Navy to provide accurate location information to ballistic missile submarines, and was also used as a general navigation system by the Navy, as well as hydrographic and geodetic surveying."

From: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transit_(satellite) (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transit_(satellite))
Title: Re: NASA update: more ridiculousness
Post by: ugaboga313 on December 29, 2009, 01:16:46 PM
Tom you even say they have a hard time refusing. That means they can. Thanks for fighting my battle for me.
Title: Re: NASA update: more ridiculousness
Post by: The Swede on December 29, 2009, 04:32:22 PM
So, why spend the money? Why didn't they (NASA, Government), at the beginning, just say that it's impossible to go into space? Why did we make a wild vow to land someone on the Moon?
Title: Re: NASA update: more ridiculousness
Post by: dim on December 30, 2009, 06:19:51 AM
Swede, I think(but it was idea of someone else).

When we are(mean Soviets) told the world that they are first in the space, by the cold war unprinted laws USA had to do the same thing. And USA told the world, they been on the Moon.

So it's how its started. But later it just turned to be a business.

Truth will be known soon. (or not really soon, I think maybe by the year 2050)
Title: Re: NASA update: more ridiculousness
Post by: Canadark on December 30, 2009, 09:29:06 AM
Moon bases and mass evacuation plans are not necessary. Our earth is just fine right now. NASA doesn't do its work just to be cool. "Oh look at these cool moon bases we just spend 100 billion dollars on....now what?"

NASA's mission is as much to make scientific discoveries through aeronautics research as it is to explore space. Plus, our governments are much more concerned with international affairs, geopolitics, and the economy. Those issues are much, much, much, much more important in the average person's mind than "oh no what if we need to evacuate the planet right now?" And so therefore the amount of funding provided to NASA for its research is insignificant compared to the amount of money being invested in the economy, military, and such.

Ah but thjere would be many scientific discoveries made if nasa really could land a man on the moon. Think if they establised a moon base! They could discover many things about outter space living could they not?

Context does not imply causation.
Title: Re: NASA update: more ridiculousness
Post by: Yousmokecrackz on December 30, 2009, 12:43:04 PM
Man I really dont know what NASA does except for:

writing texts;
faking pictures;
makes launches of metal junk to the nearest waters;
and tells to few people that they soon become heroes by becoming superstars in the form astronauts;

I dont know about anything else. Like their experiments on the orbit(what they do there except repairing ISS?), like all those fuel, like all those super-challenging stuff. I never heard about it in details nor i dont see any benefits for human race since first Sputnik was launched. Do you see any? (miss the point about GPS pls)
Wow youve sussed it! Bravo!
Why hide from the gps argument? Cant figure out how else it would work without satellites?

I dont know what The Flat Earth Society does, except for;
Faking Maps,
Agitating believers of modern life physics and concepts by denying what concepts are most obvious,
Making up Quotes;
Oh yeah, and talking bullshit.
Title: Re: NASA update: more ridiculousness
Post by: dim on December 31, 2009, 02:09:53 AM
You have 47 posts, and probably dont even read threads about GPS. GPS works without sattelites.
Title: Re: NASA update: more ridiculousness
Post by: flyingmonkey on January 01, 2010, 04:27:43 AM
You have 47 posts, and probably dont even read threads about GPS. GPS works without sattelites.


What

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_Positioning_System
Title: Re: NASA update: more ridiculousness
Post by: ugaboga313 on January 01, 2010, 07:28:44 AM
GPS might work with a fleet of balloons and maintenance but that would require a lot of money, fuel, parts, and personal who would have to be in on it. Also all GPS companies would need to change the specifications of the physical part and change the software. It requires a lot of work and would be very noticeable.
Title: Re: NASA update: more ridiculousness
Post by: Thermal Detonator on January 01, 2010, 07:37:11 AM
GPS might work with a fleet of balloons and maintenance but that would require a lot of money, fuel, parts, and personal who would have to be in on it. Also all GPS companies would need to change the specifications of the physical part and change the software. It requires a lot of work and would be very noticeable.

That's the problem with the flat guys glibly signing off explanations to "the conspiracy did it"; every time they blame the conspiracy for something it gets larger, really to handle the amount of work the FE'ers give the conspiracy it would have to involve several thousand people, every single one of whom would have to be paid more money than they could get by selling their story to the papers.
Faking GPS with aircraft - involves thousands of aircraft worldwide.
Title: Re: NASA update: more ridiculousness
Post by: ugaboga313 on January 01, 2010, 07:41:45 AM
Plus people would notice why there are tons of planes/blimps just floating around. Also they wouldn't really work because you need exact location to get a good answer.
Title: Re: NASA update: more ridiculousness
Post by: markjo on January 01, 2010, 08:31:28 AM
You have 47 posts, and probably dont even read threads about GPS. GPS works without sattelites.

And you probably haven't read how it's possible to track GPS satellites by their moving signals.
Title: Re: NASA update: more ridiculousness
Post by: Tom Bishop on January 01, 2010, 09:15:26 PM
You have 47 posts, and probably dont even read threads about GPS. GPS works without sattelites.

And you probably haven't read how it's possible to track GPS satellites by their moving signals.

Stratellites can also move.
Title: Re: NASA update: more ridiculousness
Post by: markjo on January 01, 2010, 09:34:09 PM
You have 47 posts, and probably dont even read threads about GPS. GPS works without sattelites.

And you probably haven't read how it's possible to track GPS satellites by their moving signals.

Stratellites can also move.

Not at the same angular velocity as GPS satellites.
Title: Re: NASA update: more ridiculousness
Post by: Tom Bishop on January 01, 2010, 09:36:50 PM
Not at the same angular velocity as GPS satellites.

GPS 'satellites' are geostationary, or nearly so. They don't streak across the GPS screen.
Title: Re: NASA update: more ridiculousness
Post by: markjo on January 02, 2010, 07:41:21 AM
Not at the same angular velocity as GPS satellites.

GPS 'satellites' are geostationary, or nearly so. They don't streak across the GPS screen.

*sigh*  No, Tom.
Quote from: http://www.kowoma.de/en/gps/orbits.htm
The satellites orbit the earth with a speed of 3.9 km per second and have a circulation time of 12 h sidereal time, corresponding to 11 h 58 min earth time. This means that the same satellite reaches a certain position about 4 minutes earlier each day. The mean distance from the middle of the earth is 26560 km. With a mean earth radius of 6360 km, the height of the orbits is then about 20200 km. Orbits in this height are referred to as MEO – medium earth orbit. In comparison, geostationary satellites like ASTRA or Meteosat – satellites orbit the earth at 42300 km, which is about twice the distance of GPS satellites.

The satellites are arranged on 6 planes, each of them containing at least 4 slots where satellites can be arranged equidistantly. Today, typically more than 24 satellites orbit the earth, improving the availability of the system. The inclination angle of the planes towards the equator is 55°, the planes are rotated in the equatorial plane by 60° against each other. This means that the orbits range from 55° north to 55° degrees south. Block I satellites had an inclination of 63° against the equator.
Title: Re: NASA update: more ridiculousness
Post by: Tom Bishop on January 02, 2010, 06:02:17 PM

I don't know. Sounds nearly geostationary to me.
Title: Re: NASA update: more ridiculousness
Post by: markjo on January 02, 2010, 07:25:42 PM
    "The satellites orbit the earth with a speed of 3.9 km per second and have a circulation time of 12 h sidereal time, corresponding to 11 h 58 min earth time. This means that the same satellite reaches a certain position about 4 minutes earlier each day."

I don't know. Sounds nearly geostationary to me.

You're kidding, right Tom?  Geostationary is a 24 hour orbital period over the same spot above the equator.  A 12 hour orbital period inclined 56 degrees to the equator is not even close to geostationary.  ::)
Title: Re: NASA update: more ridiculousness
Post by: Tom Bishop on January 02, 2010, 07:35:22 PM
You're kidding, right Tom?  Geostationary is a 24 hour orbital period over the same spot above the equator.  A 12 hour orbital period inclined 56 degrees to the equator is not even close to geostationary.  ::)

Actually the article says that the satellite moves with a "circulation time of 12 h sidereal time, corresponding to 11 h 58 min earth time"

Ergo, when the earth moves 11:58 hours, the satellite has moved 12 hours.

Ergo, when the earth moves 23:56 hours, the satellite has moved 24 hours.

The satellite is following closely with the Round Earth's rotation, nearly matching it with a difference of four minutes, as the article also mentions.

GPS satellites don't streak across the sky as you are imaging. Their movement is nearly imperceptible. They are nearly stationary. When you watch the GPS locations on a GPS device they are entirely still, with slight movement occurring only over a long period of time.
Title: Re: NASA update: more ridiculousness
Post by: markjo on January 02, 2010, 07:47:27 PM
You're kidding, right Tom?  Geostationary is a 24 hour orbital period over the same spot above the equator.  A 12 hour orbital period inclined 56 degrees to the equator is not even close to geostationary.  ::)

Actually the article says that the satellite moves with a "circulation time of 12 h sidereal time, corresponding to 11 h 58 min earth time"

Ergo, when the earth moves 11:58 hours, the satellite has moved 12 hours.

Ergo, when the earth moves 23:56 hours, the satellite has moved 24 hours.

The satellite is following closely with the Round Earth's rotation, nearly matching it with a difference of four minutes, as the article also mentions.

GPS satellites don't streak across the sky as you are imaging. Their movement is nearly imperceptible. They are nearly stationary. When you watch the GPS locations on a GPS device they are entirely still, with slight movement occurring only over a long period of time.

Tom, 12 hour orbital period means 2 orbits per 24 hour day.  That's twice around the earth every day.  How is that nearly imperceptible?  ???
Title: Re: NASA update: more ridiculousness
Post by: parsec on January 03, 2010, 07:53:11 AM
Ergo, when the earth moves 11:58 hours, the satellite has moved 12 hours.

Ergo, when the earth moves 23:56 hours, the satellite has moved 24 hours.

Quoted for sheer ridiculousness.
Title: Re: NASA update: more ridiculousness
Post by: Eratosthenes2 on January 05, 2010, 12:40:32 PM
http://www.wimp.com/roundearth/
http://wimp.com/paranalobservatory/
http://wimp.com/liftoff/
http://wimp.com/nicetour/
http://wimp.com/deathhole/
http://wimp.com/isend/
http://wimp.com/skydivespace/
Dude. Earth is a massive spherical object floating in a giant sea of absolutely nothing known as space. I can go on and get more evidence of the curvature of the earth if you like...
Title: Re: NASA update: more ridiculousness
Post by: ugaboga313 on January 05, 2010, 02:16:25 PM
Tom got beat hard. Whats your next theory on satellites?
Title: Re: NASA update: more ridiculousness
Post by: dim on January 06, 2010, 04:42:32 AM
Hey, comon.

GPS can be conducted with the use of: aircraft up in the air, fixed anntennas, stratellites.

GPS "sattelites" are geostationary, that's what russian wikipedia says - we are always simplify things :) Moreover, Tom stated the same geostationary thing.

And that links with the tour on the ISS - what they for?
Give us a video where he is taking it from the inside, then steps to the window, show us earth, then show us sun and moon, how it might be seen from the orbit. And please, make it rather long, so we don't think this is computer movie, in the Avatar style.
Why the fcuk he didn't show us moon and sun from the illuminator? What he is doing I've seen in the computer game Duke Nukem 3d ten years ago.

Sorry, may be it looks like trolling, but you are just mean guys!

Title: Re: NASA update: more ridiculousness
Post by: markjo on January 06, 2010, 07:25:50 AM
GPS "sattelites" are geostationary, that's what russian wikipedia says - we are always simplify things :) Moreover, Tom stated the same geostationary thing.

Umm...  No.  Neither the American GPS, the Russian GLONASS nor the European Galileo satellites use geostationary orbits.
Title: Re: NASA update: more ridiculousness
Post by: ugaboga313 on January 06, 2010, 02:41:50 PM
If so that means all programmers for GPS would be in on the conspiracy and a lot of people in all armies.
Title: Re: NASA update: more ridiculousness
Post by: Laughing at you on January 09, 2010, 07:37:35 PM
Love the way he says Satellites are probably crap. Yeah, probably, well done with your whole Flat Earth Theory and your certainty over the matter.
Title: Re: NASA update: more ridiculousness
Post by: flyingmonkey on January 11, 2010, 01:51:25 AM
Tom proves once again why we should believe anything he says.

Not really, no.


Good job at destroying any credibility this theory had because you struggle to understand simple things.