The Flat Earth Society

Flat Earth Discussion Boards => Flat Earth General => Topic started by: Cartesian on July 14, 2015, 03:08:52 AM

Title: A lie 9+ years in the making
Post by: Cartesian on July 14, 2015, 03:08:52 AM
New Horizons is on its closest approach to Pluto and its moons. Why would anyone spend 9+ years to create a such elaborate lie? Why would anyone lie about Pluto's distance of 3 billion miles from Earth? Why would lie about a spacecraft that can only travel that distance in 9.5 years?

20th Jan 2006: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/4629486.stm (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/4629486.stm)
14th Jul 2015: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-33517532 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-33517532)
Its position: http://www.livecometdata.com/new-horizons-spacecraft/ (http://www.livecometdata.com/new-horizons-spacecraft/)

Title: Re: A lie 9+ years in the making
Post by: sceptimatic on July 14, 2015, 03:20:25 AM
9 years is extremely young for a lie. The moon landing lie has been going on for nearly 50 years. That's just one of many things in life that's been ongoing in lies.
Nukes. Mars rover in the 70's. The list is endless and the lies get older and older.
Title: Re: A lie 9+ years in the making
Post by: Cartesian on July 14, 2015, 03:36:14 AM
I don't think you are getting my point scepti. If NASA had lied about sending a probe to Pluto, why would they have waited 9.5 years after the actual launch to tell everyone that the probe finally reaches Pluto.
Title: Re: A lie 9+ years in the making
Post by: sceptimatic on July 14, 2015, 04:07:16 AM
I don't think you are getting my point scepti. If NASA had lied about sending a probe to Pluto, why would they have waited 9.5 years after the actual launch to tell everyone that the probe finally reaches Pluto.
If I wanted to lie to you about telling you that my friend set off from my home to walk around the world and end up back at my door but did this feat by walking on his hands which consisted of not only ascending hills and what not, but also walking onto barges and into tunnels and all things needed to achieve this, then I can't tell people I've set him off then the next day tell them he's done it. Right?

I'd have to calculate a load of bullshit up that made enough calculable sense to those wishing to do the math, so that whatever time it took by fictionally calculating the distance and his average speed, I can then shout out (in maybe 9 years) that the man has achieved the goal set out.

Now someone like me would pipe up with, " oh yeah, sure he's done this. what a crock of crap."  You would tell everyone that he has done it because it's took him so long and it makes sense for it to take him that long. So there you are. It's all true.

Come of for crying out loud. Are you really that effing naive?  ::)
Title: Re: A lie 9+ years in the making
Post by: Cartesian on July 14, 2015, 04:25:02 AM
I'd have to calculate a load of bullshit up that made enough calculable sense to those wishing to do the math, so that whatever time it took by fictionally calculating the distance and his average speed, I can then shout out (in maybe 9 years) that the man has achieved the goal set out.

The difference between walking around the world and flying to Pluto is that you can easily lie about the distance to Pluto and how fast a spacecraft can be. So why 3 billion miles in 9.5 years? It could have been 3 billion miles in one year, anyway they could have as well made up a very fast spacecraft or 300 million miles in one year if they had lied about the distance. 9.5 years is a very long waiting game for everyone, some like Venetia Burney, who witnessed the launch did not even make it to see the arrival of the probe.
Title: Re: A lie 9+ years in the making
Post by: Doglover on July 14, 2015, 04:28:23 AM
I don't think you are getting my point scepti. If NASA had lied about sending a probe to Pluto, why would they have waited 9.5 years after the actual launch to tell everyone that the probe finally reaches Pluto.
If I wanted to lie to you about telling you that my friend set off from my home to walk around the world and end up back at my door but did this feat by walking on his hands which consisted of not only ascending hills and what not, but also walking onto barges and into tunnels and all things needed to achieve this, then I can't tell people I've set him off then the next day tell them he's done it. Right?

I'd have to calculate a load of bullshit up that made enough calculable sense to those wishing to do the math, so that whatever time it took by fictionally calculating the distance and his average speed, I can then shout out (in maybe 9 years) that the man has achieved the goal set out.

Now someone like me would pipe up with, " oh yeah, sure he's done this. what a crock of crap."  You would tell everyone that he has done it because it's took him so long and it makes sense for it to take him that long. So there you are. It's all true.

Come of for crying out loud. Are you really that effing naive?  ::)

But why would you start the story in the first place?
Title: Re: A lie 9+ years in the making
Post by: sceptimatic on July 14, 2015, 04:53:02 AM
I'd have to calculate a load of bullshit up that made enough calculable sense to those wishing to do the math, so that whatever time it took by fictionally calculating the distance and his average speed, I can then shout out (in maybe 9 years) that the man has achieved the goal set out.

The difference between walking around the world and flying to Pluto is that you can easily lie about the distance to Pluto and how fast a spacecraft can be. So why 3 billion miles in 9.5 years? It could have been 3 billion miles in one year, anyway they could have as well made up a very fast spacecraft or 300 million miles in one year if they had lied about the distance. 9.5 years is a very long waiting game for everyone, some like Venetia Burney, who witnessed the launch did not even make it to see the arrival of the probe.
If I want to spin you lies for a long time and amaze you at the same time, I have to play the game carefully.
In time the distances traveled will get faster and shorter, just like the man walking around the world on his hands.
The next time he does something, we add rubber palm pads and then springs and so on so we can knock off so much time.

In your space, they will invent hyper drives and all kids of bollocks that will have mars trips as good as going to the shops, just as soon as they get the Hollywood effects believable for the viewing audience.

Make the distances further away so people cannot challenge it with any authority.
Piss easy to pull off for these people.
Let's face it. In this day and age when people can see the moon landing shit for what it was, the likes of you are gripped to it like a frigging limpet as being 100% true.
If you're going to believe that in this day and age then you'll believe they went to pluto in an inflatable dingy and snorkelling gear.
Title: Re: A lie 9+ years in the making
Post by: sceptimatic on July 14, 2015, 04:54:23 AM
I don't think you are getting my point scepti. If NASA had lied about sending a probe to Pluto, why would they have waited 9.5 years after the actual launch to tell everyone that the probe finally reaches Pluto.
If I wanted to lie to you about telling you that my friend set off from my home to walk around the world and end up back at my door but did this feat by walking on his hands which consisted of not only ascending hills and what not, but also walking onto barges and into tunnels and all things needed to achieve this, then I can't tell people I've set him off then the next day tell them he's done it. Right?

I'd have to calculate a load of bullshit up that made enough calculable sense to those wishing to do the math, so that whatever time it took by fictionally calculating the distance and his average speed, I can then shout out (in maybe 9 years) that the man has achieved the goal set out.

Now someone like me would pipe up with, " oh yeah, sure he's done this. what a crock of crap."  You would tell everyone that he has done it because it's took him so long and it makes sense for it to take him that long. So there you are. It's all true.

Come of for crying out loud. Are you really that effing naive?  ::)

But why would you start the story in the first place?
Why does anyone lie?
Title: Re: A lie 9+ years in the making
Post by: Misero on July 14, 2015, 05:14:40 AM
YOU NEED TO PROVIDE EVIDENCE OF A CONSPIRACY OR IT CAN BE DISPROVEN WITHOUT EVIDENCE

Is that enough for you to notice?
Title: Re: A lie 9+ years in the making
Post by: JimmyTheCrab on July 14, 2015, 05:23:47 AM
I don't think you are getting my point scepti. If NASA had lied about sending a probe to Pluto, why would they have waited 9.5 years after the actual launch to tell everyone that the probe finally reaches Pluto.
If I wanted to lie to you about telling you that my friend set off from my home to walk around the world and end up back at my door but did this feat by walking on his hands which consisted of not only ascending hills and what not, but also walking onto barges and into tunnels and all things needed to achieve this, then I can't tell people I've set him off then the next day tell them he's done it. Right?

I'd have to calculate a load of bullshit up that made enough calculable sense to those wishing to do the math, so that whatever time it took by fictionally calculating the distance and his average speed, I can then shout out (in maybe 9 years) that the man has achieved the goal set out.

Now someone like me would pipe up with, " oh yeah, sure he's done this. what a crock of crap."  You would tell everyone that he has done it because it's took him so long and it makes sense for it to take him that long. So there you are. It's all true.

Come of for crying out loud. Are you really that effing naive?  ::)

But why would you start the story in the first place?
Why does anyone lie?
That doesn't answer the question, it just avoids it.  Why did they tell this particular lie?
Title: Re: A lie 9+ years in the making
Post by: Cartesian on July 14, 2015, 07:24:44 AM
If I want to spin you lies for a long time and amaze you at the same time, I have to play the game carefully.
In time the distances traveled will get faster and shorter, just like the man walking around the world on his hands.
The next time he does something, we add rubber palm pads and then springs and so on so we can knock off so much time.

In your space, they will invent hyper drives and all kids of bollocks that will have mars trips as good as going to the shops, just as soon as they get the Hollywood effects believable for the viewing audience.

Make the distances further away so people cannot challenge it with any authority.
Piss easy to pull off for these people.
Let's face it. In this day and age when people can see the moon landing shit for what it was, the likes of you are gripped to it like a frigging limpet as being 100% true.
If you're going to believe that in this day and age then you'll believe they went to pluto in an inflatable dingy and snorkelling gear.

Writing longer doesn't mean it will make more sense. You still don't make any sense. If they can lie about everything that everyone would grip to it like a frigging limpet as being 100% true then why would they take 9.5 years to finish your lie? It just doesn't make any sense at all.
Title: Re: A lie 9+ years in the making
Post by: hoppy on July 14, 2015, 07:37:44 AM
I don't think you are getting my point scepti. If NASA had lied about sending a probe to Pluto, why would they have waited 9.5 years after the actual launch to tell everyone that the probe finally reaches Pluto.
If I wanted to lie to you about telling you that my friend set off from my home to walk around the world and end up back at my door but did this feat by walking on his hands which consisted of not only ascending hills and what not, but also walking onto barges and into tunnels and all things needed to achieve this, then I can't tell people I've set him off then the next day tell them he's done it. Right?

I'd have to calculate a load of bullshit up that made enough calculable sense to those wishing to do the math, so that whatever time it took by fictionally calculating the distance and his average speed, I can then shout out (in maybe 9 years) that the man has achieved the goal set out.

Now someone like me would pipe up with, " oh yeah, sure he's done this. what a crock of crap."  You would tell everyone that he has done it because it's took him so long and it makes sense for it to take him that long. So there you are. It's all true.

Come of for crying out loud. Are you really that effing naive?  ::)

But why would you start the story in the first place?
Why does anyone lie?
That doesn't answer the question, it just avoids it.  Why did they tell this particular lie?
This lie is a continuation of all the space travel lies. One lie piled on top of another. The reason is to keep you amazed and baffled, to keep you unaware of the very ground you walk on. You think you are flying through space at unimaginable speeds, actually you are planted on an unmovable earth.
Title: Re: A lie 9+ years in the making
Post by: legion on July 14, 2015, 12:17:53 PM
YOU NEED TO PROVIDE EVIDENCE OF A CONSPIRACY OR IT CAN BE DISPROVEN WITHOUT EVIDENCE

Is that enough for you to notice?

MISERO: THAT IS THE BURDEN OF PROOF FALLACY. DO YOU UNDERSTAND?
Title: Re: A lie 9+ years in the making
Post by: legion on July 14, 2015, 12:22:08 PM
New Horizons is on its closest approach to Pluto and its moons. Why would anyone spend 9+ years to create a such elaborate lie? Why would anyone lie about Pluto's distance of 3 billion miles from Earth? Why would lie about a spacecraft that can only travel that distance in 9.5 years?

20th Jan 2006: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/4629486.stm (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/4629486.stm)
14th Jul 2015: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-33517532 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-33517532)
Its position: http://www.livecometdata.com/new-horizons-spacecraft/ (http://www.livecometdata.com/new-horizons-spacecraft/)

Argument from incredulity fallacy. You cannot imagine why they would lie about this, so therefore it must be true? That doesn't wash around here, flatorange.
Title: Re: A lie 9+ years in the making
Post by: JohnTitor on July 14, 2015, 12:27:28 PM
I doubt logic changes substantially over time. The burden of proof is not a fallacy. Saying that the other person has the burden of proof is, if true, an entirely valid statement.
If you are claiming that something is, then you do have the burden of proof, no fallacy involved.
Title: Re: A lie 9+ years in the making
Post by: legion on July 14, 2015, 01:02:30 PM
I doubt logic changes substantially over time. The burden of proof is not a fallacy. Saying that the other person has the burden of proof is, if true, an entirely valid statement.
If you are claiming that something is, then you do have the burden of proof, no fallacy involved.

johntitor, read the following and then ask yourself can anyone disprove the claims that nasa makes? Substitue 'probe' for 'teapot', if that helps.

Quote
Russell's teapot, sometimes called the celestial teapot or cosmic teapot, is an analogy first coined by the philosopher Bertrand Russell (1872–1970) to illustrate that the philosophic burden of proof lies upon a person making scientifically unfalsifiable claims rather than shifting the burden of proof to others, specifically in the case of religion. Russell wrote that if he claims that a teapot orbits the Sun somewhere in space between the Earth and Mars, it is nonsensical for him to expect others to believe him on the grounds that they cannot prove him wrong. Russell's teapot is still referred to in discussions concerning the existence of God.

miseros claim was fallacious: "YOU NEED TO PROVIDE EVIDENCE OF A CONSPIRACY OR IT CAN BE DISPROVEN WITHOUT EVIDENCE."
Title: Re: A lie 9+ years in the making
Post by: Misero on July 14, 2015, 01:47:47 PM
YOU NEED TO PROVIDE EVIDENCE OF A CONSPIRACY OR IT CAN BE DISPROVEN WITHOUT EVIDENCE

Is that enough for you to notice?

MISERO: THAT IS THE BURDEN OF PROOF FALLACY. DO YOU UNDERSTAND?

So you are claiming something without evidence, and I must prove it wrong with evidence?
Logic at it's finest.
Title: Re: A lie 9+ years in the making
Post by: mikeman7918 on July 14, 2015, 02:02:37 PM
I doubt logic changes substantially over time. The burden of proof is not a fallacy. Saying that the other person has the burden of proof is, if true, an entirely valid statement.
If you are claiming that something is, then you do have the burden of proof, no fallacy involved.

John, this is a great chance to prove that you are a time traveler.  Tell us what the New Horizons probe will find.
Title: Re: A lie 9+ years in the making
Post by: Rayzor on July 14, 2015, 06:10:03 PM
I doubt logic changes substantially over time. The burden of proof is not a fallacy. Saying that the other person has the burden of proof is, if true, an entirely valid statement.
If you are claiming that something is, then you do have the burden of proof, no fallacy involved.

johntitor, read the following and then ask yourself can anyone disprove the claims that nasa makes? Substitue 'probe' for 'teapot', if that helps.

Quote
Russell's teapot, sometimes called the celestial teapot or cosmic teapot, is an analogy first coined by the philosopher Bertrand Russell (1872–1970) to illustrate that the philosophic burden of proof lies upon a person making scientifically unfalsifiable claims rather than shifting the burden of proof to others, specifically in the case of religion. Russell wrote that if he claims that a teapot orbits the Sun somewhere in space between the Earth and Mars, it is nonsensical for him to expect others to believe him on the grounds that they cannot prove him wrong. Russell's teapot is still referred to in discussions concerning the existence of God.

miseros claim was fallacious: "YOU NEED TO PROVIDE EVIDENCE OF A CONSPIRACY OR IT CAN BE DISPROVEN WITHOUT EVIDENCE."

Here's the evidence disproving the conspiracy.   First ever closeup look at Pluto,  before the flyby.  an amazing achievment.   

(http://ichef-1.bbci.co.uk/news/976/cpsprodpb/B547/production/_84270464_p_lorri_fullframe_color.png)

The conspiracy is a figment in the imagination of a vanishingly small number of paranoid delusional nutters.

PS.   Maybe there is a flat pluto society somewhere,  that just went into denial mode.  ;D
Title: Re: A lie 9+ years in the making
Post by: Doglover on July 14, 2015, 06:20:55 PM
I don't think you are getting my point scepti. If NASA had lied about sending a probe to Pluto, why would they have waited 9.5 years after the actual launch to tell everyone that the probe finally reaches Pluto.
If I wanted to lie to you about telling you that my friend set off from my home to walk around the world and end up back at my door but did this feat by walking on his hands which consisted of not only ascending hills and what not, but also walking onto barges and into tunnels and all things needed to achieve this, then I can't tell people I've set him off then the next day tell them he's done it. Right?

I'd have to calculate a load of bullshit up that made enough calculable sense to those wishing to do the math, so that whatever time it took by fictionally calculating the distance and his average speed, I can then shout out (in maybe 9 years) that the man has achieved the goal set out.

Now someone like me would pipe up with, " oh yeah, sure he's done this. what a crock of crap."  You would tell everyone that he has done it because it's took him so long and it makes sense for it to take him that long. So there you are. It's all true.

Come of for crying out loud. Are you really that effing naive?  ::)

But why would you start the story in the first place?
Why does anyone lie?
That doesn't answer the question, it just avoids it.  Why did they tell this particular lie?
This lie is a continuation of all the space travel lies. One lie piled on top of another. The reason is to keep you amazed and baffled, to keep you unaware of the very ground you walk on. You think you are flying through space at unimaginable speeds, actually you are planted on an unmovable earth.

I bet if you ask any 100 people what the New Horizons Probe is, less than 10 of them would have the faintest idea. An awful lot of effort for very little payback.
Title: Re: A lie 9+ years in the making
Post by: Heiwa on July 14, 2015, 07:48:36 PM
This lie is a continuation of all the space travel lies. One lie piled on top of another. The reason is to keep you amazed and baffled, to keep you unaware of the very ground you walk on. You think you are flying through space at unimaginable speeds, actually you are planted on an unmovable earth.

Sounds reasonable to me. Only brainwashed twirps believe in space travel anyway.
Title: Re: A lie 9+ years in the making
Post by: kman on July 14, 2015, 09:53:03 PM
This lie is a continuation of all the space travel lies. One lie piled on top of another. The reason is to keep you amazed and baffled, to keep you unaware of the very ground you walk on. You think you are flying through space at unimaginable speeds, actually you are planted on an unmovable earth.

Sounds reasonable to me. Only brainwashed twirps believe in space travel anyway.

You believe that the majority of people brainwashed "twirps"? How stuck up.
Title: Re: A lie 9+ years in the making
Post by: Cartesian on July 15, 2015, 02:17:33 AM
Below is what New Horizons captured in June 2015 (last month). The pictures look very blurry. Is this what "Hollywood" could do best?

(http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2015/06/30/13/2A1B816E00000578-0-New_Horizons_is_providing_astronomers_with_the_closest_views_of_-a-27_1435666779169.jpg)

They could have done something as sharp as below (which is a CGI version):

(http://media-2.web.britannica.com/eb-media/78/91878-120-D9683A32.jpg)

Get real.
Title: Re: A lie 9+ years in the making
Post by: hoppy on July 15, 2015, 10:39:08 AM
Come on man. That is not the best they can do. They could have shown you better pictures if they wanted to. The pictures should be better if they were taken from space. For whatever reason, this is the best lie they chose to tell you. You and he world should be amazed at their exploits. Me, I'm not impressed whatsoever, it's total bs.
Title: Re: A lie 9+ years in the making
Post by: mikeman7918 on July 15, 2015, 10:58:28 AM
The pictures should be better if they were taken from space.

The probe was tens of millions of miles away from Pluto at the time, so it makes sense that they have the quality that they do.
Title: Re: A lie 9+ years in the making
Post by: Cartesian on July 15, 2015, 01:11:11 PM
I don't think you are getting my point scepti. If NASA had lied about sending a probe to Pluto, why would they have waited 9.5 years after the actual launch to tell everyone that the probe finally reaches Pluto.
If I wanted to lie to you about telling you that my friend set off from my home to walk around the world and end up back at my door but did this feat by walking on his hands which consisted of not only ascending hills and what not, but also walking onto barges and into tunnels and all things needed to achieve this, then I can't tell people I've set him off then the next day tell them he's done it. Right?

I'd have to calculate a load of bullshit up that made enough calculable sense to those wishing to do the math, so that whatever time it took by fictionally calculating the distance and his average speed, I can then shout out (in maybe 9 years) that the man has achieved the goal set out.

Now someone like me would pipe up with, " oh yeah, sure he's done this. what a crock of crap."  You would tell everyone that he has done it because it's took him so long and it makes sense for it to take him that long. So there you are. It's all true.

Come of for crying out loud. Are you really that effing naive?  ::)

But why would you start the story in the first place?
Why does anyone lie?
That doesn't answer the question, it just avoids it.  Why did they tell this particular lie?
This lie is a continuation of all the space travel lies. One lie piled on top of another. The reason is to keep you amazed and baffled, to keep you unaware of the very ground you walk on. You think you are flying through space at unimaginable speeds, actually you are planted on an unmovable earth.

I bet if you ask any 100 people what the New Horizons Probe is, less than 10 of them would have the faintest idea. An awful lot of effort for very little payback.

This is so true. Less than 10% would have any idea of what it is and even lesser would care for what it does.
Title: Re: A lie 9+ years in the making
Post by: Cartesian on July 15, 2015, 01:14:17 PM
The pictures should be better if they were taken from space.

Are you saying you believe in space travel?
Title: Re: A lie 9+ years in the making
Post by: Cartesian on July 15, 2015, 01:18:29 PM
After 9+ years of waiting, here's the first close up picture of Pluto!

(https://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/thumbnails/image/nh-plutosurface.png)

9 years for just a boring mountainous landscape? Come on dudes. Wake up!

Title: Re: A lie 9+ years in the making
Post by: tappet on July 15, 2015, 01:39:35 PM
After 9+ years of waiting, here's the first close up picture of Pluto!



9 years for just a boring mountainous landscape? Come on dudes. Wake up!
What now, we can not even go to the moon.
So when is Gunnar going Pluto with the non for profit Pluto One.
Title: Re: A lie 9+ years in the making
Post by: Doglover on July 15, 2015, 02:46:41 PM
I don't think you are getting my point scepti. If NASA had lied about sending a probe to Pluto, why would they have waited 9.5 years after the actual launch to tell everyone that the probe finally reaches Pluto.
If I wanted to lie to you about telling you that my friend set off from my home to walk around the world and end up back at my door but did this feat by walking on his hands which consisted of not only ascending hills and what not, but also walking onto barges and into tunnels and all things needed to achieve this, then I can't tell people I've set him off then the next day tell them he's done it. Right?

I'd have to calculate a load of bullshit up that made enough calculable sense to those wishing to do the math, so that whatever time it took by fictionally calculating the distance and his average speed, I can then shout out (in maybe 9 years) that the man has achieved the goal set out.

Now someone like me would pipe up with, " oh yeah, sure he's done this. what a crock of crap."  You would tell everyone that he has done it because it's took him so long and it makes sense for it to take him that long. So there you are. It's all true.

Come of for crying out loud. Are you really that effing naive?  ::)

But why would you start the story in the first place?
Why does anyone lie?
That doesn't answer the question, it just avoids it.  Why did they tell this particular lie?
This lie is a continuation of all the space travel lies. One lie piled on top of another. The reason is to keep you amazed and baffled, to keep you unaware of the very ground you walk on. You think you are flying through space at unimaginable speeds, actually you are planted on an unmovable earth.

I bet if you ask any 100 people what the New Horizons Probe is, less than 10 of them would have the faintest idea. An awful lot of effort for very little payback.

This is so true. Less than 10% would have any idea of what it is and even lesser would care for what it does.

Exactly. So why make this up??? Nine years of painstaking details. All that work for something pretty darn obscure. Who would care?
Title: Re: A lie 9+ years in the making
Post by: BJ1234 on July 15, 2015, 06:21:26 PM
I doubt logic changes substantially over time. The burden of proof is not a fallacy. Saying that the other person has the burden of proof is, if true, an entirely valid statement.
If you are claiming that something is, then you do have the burden of proof, no fallacy involved.

johntitor, read the following and then ask yourself can anyone disprove the claims that nasa makes? Substitue 'probe' for 'teapot', if that helps.

Quote
Russell's teapot, sometimes called the celestial teapot or cosmic teapot, is an analogy first coined by the philosopher Bertrand Russell (1872–1970) to illustrate that the philosophic burden of proof lies upon a person making scientifically unfalsifiable claims rather than shifting the burden of proof to others, specifically in the case of religion. Russell wrote that if he claims that a teapot orbits the Sun somewhere in space between the Earth and Mars, it is nonsensical for him to expect others to believe him on the grounds that they cannot prove him wrong. Russell's teapot is still referred to in discussions concerning the existence of God.

miseros claim was fallacious: "YOU NEED TO PROVIDE EVIDENCE OF A CONSPIRACY OR IT CAN BE DISPROVEN WITHOUT EVIDENCE."
Actually, Russell's teapot supports misero.
Russell (scepti) claims there is a teapot orbiting the sun (a great big space conspiracy) and without any evidence, it is nonsensical to expect others to believe the claim of a teapot (space conspiracy) that cannot be proven wrong.  Therefore, it is the burden of the claimant to supply evidence.  In this case, scepti needs to supply evidence of a conspiracy.
Title: Re: A lie 9+ years in the making
Post by: Cartesian on July 15, 2015, 10:48:42 PM
After 9+ years of waiting, here's the first close up picture of Pluto!

9 years for just a boring mountainous landscape? Come on dudes. Wake up!
What now, we can not even go to the moon.
So when is Gunnar going Pluto with the non for profit Pluto One.

Why would they wait for a decade to finish their story? Why would they spend that time for a story that almost no one would care for less. Your conspiracy theory doesn't hold up to scrutiny. It just doesn't make sense. You and the like are even unable to defend it.
Title: Re: A lie 9+ years in the making
Post by: tappet on July 16, 2015, 02:10:19 AM
After 9+ years of waiting, here's the first close up picture of Pluto!

9 years for just a boring mountainous landscape? Come on dudes. Wake up!
What now, we can not even go to the moon.
So when is Gunnar going Pluto with the non for profit Pluto One.


Why would they wait for a decade to finish their story? Why would they spend that time for a story that almost no one would care for less. Your conspiracy theory doesn't hold up to scrutiny. It just doesn't make sense. You and the like are even unable to defend it.
You think 9 years is a long time for a story? if they made it up it should have only taken 2 weeks, right?
Your cute!
Title: Re: A lie 9+ years in the making
Post by: JohnTitor on July 16, 2015, 03:13:58 AM
I doubt logic changes substantially over time. The burden of proof is not a fallacy. Saying that the other person has the burden of proof is, if true, an entirely valid statement.
If you are claiming that something is, then you do have the burden of proof, no fallacy involved.

John, this is a great chance to prove that you are a time traveler.  Tell us what the New Horizons probe will find.

I have no idea. I have knowledge from the future, but that's only what I had access to. There's very little free information in my time.
I can give you access to scientific knowledge in my fields, and what I had access to.
Title: Re: A lie 9+ years in the making
Post by: JohnTitor on July 16, 2015, 03:43:03 AM
I doubt logic changes substantially over time. The burden of proof is not a fallacy. Saying that the other person has the burden of proof is, if true, an entirely valid statement.
If you are claiming that something is, then you do have the burden of proof, no fallacy involved.

johntitor, read the following and then ask yourself can anyone disprove the claims that nasa makes? Substitue 'probe' for 'teapot', if that helps.

Quote
Russell's teapot, sometimes called the celestial teapot or cosmic teapot, is an analogy first coined by the philosopher Bertrand Russell (1872–1970) to illustrate that the philosophic burden of proof lies upon a person making scientifically unfalsifiable claims rather than shifting the burden of proof to others, specifically in the case of religion. Russell wrote that if he claims that a teapot orbits the Sun somewhere in space between the Earth and Mars, it is nonsensical for him to expect others to believe him on the grounds that they cannot prove him wrong. Russell's teapot is still referred to in discussions concerning the existence of God.

miseros claim was fallacious: "YOU NEED TO PROVIDE EVIDENCE OF A CONSPIRACY OR IT CAN BE DISPROVEN WITHOUT EVIDENCE."

I am actually familiar with that delightful notion of a teapot (though it's a teddybear in the last account of it I'd heard). However, it's not relevant in this case, because the 'teapot' in the hypothetical was never in a position to be observed: the probe is, and is still being observed (albeit indirectly). Receiving signals observing a launch: there are many ways to have verified that it does exist.
Because you neglected to be part of any of those observations, you do rely on others' word, but that is your doing, and is nothing to do with the situation, so the hypothetical does not apply. There is evidence for the existece of the probe.

To argue against it, you have made a positive claim of a conspiracy, and the burden of proof there is on you.

In addition, what you call the burden of proof fallacy was never relevant. You made a positive claim, so you did need to provide evidence for it. That evidence could just be that you reject the claims of NASA.
However, if your only response to a teapot is to suppose another teapot, you can no longer call your view any more intellectually tenable.
Title: Re: A lie 9+ years in the making
Post by: Cartesian on July 16, 2015, 03:56:15 AM
After 9+ years of waiting, here's the first close up picture of Pluto!

9 years for just a boring mountainous landscape? Come on dudes. Wake up!
What now, we can not even go to the moon.
So when is Gunnar going Pluto with the non for profit Pluto One.


Why would they wait for a decade to finish their story? Why would they spend that time for a story that almost no one would care for less. Your conspiracy theory doesn't hold up to scrutiny. It just doesn't make sense. You and the like are even unable to defend it.
You think 9 years is a long time for a story? if they made it up it should have only taken 2 weeks, right?
Your cute!

Would you wait 9 years to get laid? You're cute too!
Title: Re: A lie 9+ years in the making
Post by: sceptimatic on July 16, 2015, 04:43:52 AM
After 9+ years of waiting, here's the first close up picture of Pluto!

9 years for just a boring mountainous landscape? Come on dudes. Wake up!
What now, we can not even go to the moon.
So when is Gunnar going Pluto with the non for profit Pluto One.

Why would they wait for a decade to finish their story? Why would they spend that time for a story that almost no one would care for less. Your conspiracy theory doesn't hold up to scrutiny. It just doesn't make sense. You and the like are even unable to defend it.
What do you mean "finish this story"?
I've come to sort of know N.A.S.A and the little merry employees wearing blue shirts or whatever shirts suit them and I have a feeling that this story isn't over just yet.

I watched a documentary on this the other night. I laughed like hell at it. The supposed experts waiting with baited breath for the probe to about turn and get pictures.

With N.A.S.A and the team, miracles are always only a stones throw away. Or in some cases, 3 billion miles.  ;D
Title: Re: A lie 9+ years in the making
Post by: Cartesian on July 16, 2015, 06:22:46 AM
I've come to sort of know N.A.S.A and the little merry employees wearing blue shirts or whatever shirts suit them and I have a feeling that this story isn't over just yet.

I watched a documentary on this the other night. I laughed like hell at it. The supposed experts waiting with baited breath for the probe to about turn and get pictures.

With N.A.S.A and the team, miracles are always only a stones throw away. Or in some cases, 3 billion miles.  ;D

So what? Is ad-hominem the best you can do to prove this is a conspiracy? You still haven't answered why, if there was a conspiracy, they had waited a decade after the probe's launch to present us with the pictures.
Title: Re: A lie 9+ years in the making
Post by: tappet on July 17, 2015, 12:40:22 AM
After 9+ years of waiting, here's the first close up picture of Pluto!

9 years for just a boring mountainous landscape? Come on dudes. Wake up!
What now, we can not even go to the moon.
So when is Gunnar going Pluto with the non for profit Pluto One.


Why would they wait for a decade to finish their story? Why would they spend that time for a story that almost no one would care for less. Your conspiracy theory doesn't hold up to scrutiny. It just doesn't make sense. You and the like are even unable to defend it.
You think 9 years is a long time for a story? if they made it up it should have only taken 2 weeks, right?
Your cute!

Would you wait 9 years to get laid? You're cute too!
So the longer it takes to go back to the moon just makes it more believable we went in the first place. Got it!
Title: Re: A lie 9+ years in the making
Post by: sceptimatic on July 17, 2015, 01:14:13 AM
I've come to sort of know N.A.S.A and the little merry employees wearing blue shirts or whatever shirts suit them and I have a feeling that this story isn't over just yet.

I watched a documentary on this the other night. I laughed like hell at it. The supposed experts waiting with baited breath for the probe to about turn and get pictures.

With N.A.S.A and the team, miracles are always only a stones throw away. Or in some cases, 3 billion miles.  ;D

So what? Is ad-hominem the best you can do to prove this is a conspiracy? You still haven't answered why, if there was a conspiracy, they had waited a decade after the probe's launch to present us with the pictures.
Are you a blue shirt?
Title: Re: A lie 9+ years in the making
Post by: Papa Legba on July 17, 2015, 05:08:41 AM
The 'New Horizons' (lol - 'horizons' in space? Fail!) Probe allegedly had 2 'star cameras', taking 10 photos per second of the surrounding star-field, in order to compare it to their onboard map of over 10,000 stars & thus help orientate/navigate the craft.

My question is: where are the images from these 'star cameras'?

Indeed, where are the stars in the probe's images of Pluto itself?

Pluto isn't very bright, you know, every astronomer knows this; so don't spam me with nonsense about 'exposures'...

As for why a lie should be impossible just cos it took 9+ years to create; how old are most of the cultists here?

Mikeman, for example, claims to be 17 years old & he lies all the time, as easy as breathing...

As do you all.

So Age clearly has no connection to Truth, does it?

LOL!!!
Title: Re: A lie 9+ years in the making
Post by: Rayzor on July 17, 2015, 05:45:31 AM
The 'New Horizons' (lol - 'horizons' in space? Fail!) Probe allegedly had 2 'star cameras', taking 10 photos per second of the surrounding star-field, in order to compare it to their onboard map of over 10,000 stars & thus help orientate/navigate the craft.
My question is: where are the images from these 'star cameras'?

Why don't you ask them,    Navigation by the star patterns is pretty well established.   

Indeed, where are the stars in the probe's images of Pluto itself?
Pluto isn't very bright, you know, every astronomer knows this; so don't spam me with nonsense about 'exposures'...

You arent very bright either,   so you wouldn't understand exposure.   

As for why a lie should be impossible just cos it took 9+ years to create; how old are most of the cultists here?
Mikeman, for example, claims to be 17 years old & he lies all the time, as easy as breathing...
As do you all.
So Age clearly has no connection to Truth, does it?
LOL!!!

Huh?    try engaging the brain,   put together some coherent thoughts before writing.     I'm half tempted to tell you what LOL means...    Nah... 




Title: Re: A lie 9+ years in the making
Post by: sceptimatic on July 17, 2015, 05:46:09 AM
I think mikeman was about 8 years old when N.A.S.A finally got his nod of approval to launch this probe.
Mikeman was the brains behind it. Mikeman actually built the probe out of lego and toilet paper rolls with the tin foil from his school sandwiches from his school lunch box that he'd saved up.

Mikeman is an expert on everything to do with science. The actually Higgs boson particle itself salutes when mikeman walks past.  ;D
Title: Re: A lie 9+ years in the making
Post by: Rayzor on July 17, 2015, 05:52:28 AM
I think mikeman was about 8 years old when N.A.S.A finally got his nod of approval to launch this probe.
Mikeman was the brains behind it. Mikeman actually built the probe out of lego and toilet paper rolls with the tin foil from his school sandwiches from his school lunch box that he'd saved up.

Mikeman is an expert on everything to do with science. The actually Higgs boson particle itself salutes when mikeman walks past.  ;D

So Mikeman makes you feel inferior,  I get it,   we all get it,  you really have to get over your feelings of inadequacy.   Maybe a high school refresher physics and chemistry course would help your self esteem.

If it makes you feel better Mikeman makes almost as many mistakes as you do,  you just never notice.  Too dumb too bad.
 
Title: Re: A lie 9+ years in the making
Post by: Papa Legba on July 17, 2015, 05:53:46 AM
Rayzor/Evil Edna: so you can't answer a perfectly legitimate question but keep responding anyway?

Obvious Troll is Obvious.

Again, for non-trolls; where are the photos of the star-fields that NASA openly admit they were taking ten of every second?

Astronomers, for example, may be interested in looking at them...

Or does NASA not care about astronomy?
Title: Re: A lie 9+ years in the making
Post by: Rayzor on July 17, 2015, 06:03:22 AM
Rayzor/Evil Edna: so you can't answer a perfectly legitimate question but keep responding anyway?
Again, for non-trolls; where are the photos of the star-fields that NASA openly admit they were taking ten of every second?

Go outside at night and look up.   See those points of light,  that there is them thar stars,  the have been there, in those patterns for thousands of years.   I'm sure genuine astronomers would be interested to know about them.

What was the legit question?    Did you actually say something intelligent?"
Title: Re: A lie 9+ years in the making
Post by: Papa Legba on July 17, 2015, 06:49:18 AM
I'm sure astronomers would be even more interested in seeing views of those star-fields taken from 2 cameras onboard a space probe, too, Rayzor/Evil Edna/Psyopticon/Etc...

Gives em a different perspective, you know?

Which you are perfectly aware of; but being a well-renowned total Troll-entity, you just want to shit-post instead.

Well done!

&, as ever, LOL!!!
Title: Re: A lie 9+ years in the making
Post by: mikeman7918 on July 17, 2015, 07:14:28 AM
Mikeman, for example, claims to be 17 years old & he lies all the time, as easy as breathing...

Really?  Give one example of where you think I am lying.

I think mikeman was about 8 years old when N.A.S.A finally got his nod of approval to launch this probe.
Mikeman was the brains behind it. Mikeman actually built the probe out of lego and toilet paper rolls with the tin foil from his school sandwiches from his school lunch box that he'd saved up.

Mikeman is an expert on everything to do with science. The actually Higgs boson particle itself salutes when mikeman walks past.  ;D

There are still a ton of things I don't know, for example I know very little about telecommunications so I plan on researching it soon.  I am often wrong just like any human, but I try to make sure that I don't stay wrong.  I enjoy learning and I get out in the world to do things and learn things.  You should try it some time instead of hiding inside staring at a blank wall because you are terrified of an imaginary conspiracy.  If there were a massive conspiracy I bet that's what they would want you doing anyway.
Title: Re: A lie 9+ years in the making
Post by: charles bloomington on July 17, 2015, 07:16:15 AM
Who is the beneficiary of this Pluto probe crap ? If you Inquire in to who is the creditor & who is the debtor.  Then you will realize the scam.
Title: Re: A lie 9+ years in the making
Post by: mikeman7918 on July 17, 2015, 07:19:46 AM
Who is the beneficiary of this Pluto probe crap ? If you Inquire in to who is the creditor & who is the debtor.  Then you will realize the scam.

If the entire government were in on it then they wouldn't need to fake anything to get tax payer money.
Title: Re: A lie 9+ years in the making
Post by: Papa Legba on July 17, 2015, 08:00:39 AM
More diversion & shitposting.

Still, the question remains; where are any of the 10-photos-per-second that the 2 on-board star-cameras were taking from the New Horizons (lol!) probe?

These photos would give astronomers a valuable new perspective on our universe, you'd think?

I mean, they must be of SOME scientific value, surely?

So; where are they?

& why, if the probe was so far from the sun, were stars not visible in the photos of Pluto itself, for that matter?

Unlike many stars, Pluto is barely visible to the naked eye; it really is not a bright object, so the excuses about camera exposures used on ISS or Lunar photos cannot apply.

Does anyone honestly not find any of the above just a wee bit odd?

Probably not; SCHILLS, SCHMUCKS & HERBERTS are notoriously slow-witted...

LOL!!!
Title: Re: A lie 9+ years in the making
Post by: Rayzor on July 17, 2015, 08:15:04 AM
Still, the question remains; where are any of the 10-photos-per-second that the 2 on-board star-cameras were taking from the New Horizons (lol!) probe?
These photos would give astronomers a valuable new perspective on our universe, you'd think?
I mean, they must be of SOME scientific value, surely?
So; where are they?

Here you go.   took all of 10 seconds to find.

(http://cdn.theatlantic.com/assets/media/img/photo/2015/07/the-voyage-of-new-horizons-jupiter/p11_112806/main_1500.jpg)
Title: Re: A lie 9+ years in the making
Post by: Papa Legba on July 17, 2015, 08:44:12 AM
Got a link to your source for that, super-troll?

& what about the lack of stars in the background of the Pluto images too?
Title: Re: A lie 9+ years in the making
Post by: mikeman7918 on July 17, 2015, 09:09:33 AM
& what about the lack of stars in the background of the Pluto images too?

The same reason why there are no stars in this image:
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/9a/Howling_at_the_Moon_in_Mississauga.jpg)

And this image:
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/5/58/Hodges_Stadium_at_night.JPG)

And this image (taken with a telescope on Earth):
(http://risahorowitz.com/projects/imagingsaturn/Horowitz_Saturn_2012.jpg)

Show me one real image where there are bright objects on the foreground and yet you can see stars in the background.  Pluto may be dim, but it's bright enough to overpower the distant stars.

Google "planet artist conception" and you will find that nearly all fake images of planets have stars in the background just because that's what people expect.  It can be proven that you shouldn't expect stars in images in planets and it turns out that NASA's photos meet those expectations.  If the images did have stars then I would be suspicious.
Title: Re: A lie 9+ years in the making
Post by: Papa Legba on July 17, 2015, 09:36:18 AM
*Pluto is 3.5 billion miles away from the Sun...

*...which is 40x farther away than the Earth is.

*Pluto is far smaller than Earth.

*Unlike many, many stars, Pluto is barely visible with the naked eye from Earth.

*Pluto is small, dim & far from the Sun.

So; you claim that none of the many stars which are all brighter as seen from Earth than Pluto could possibly be visible in these 'photos'?

Bullshit.

And I'm still waiting for Rayzor/deepconfusion/Evil Edna's link to a source for his 'star-field' photo too...

Also bear in mind that if New Horizons was taking 10 of these every single second for 9+ years, some kind of animation of them in motion wouldn't be too hard either, as well as being very scientifically valuable...

Does that exist?

Or are you still waiting for NASA's CGI 'imagineers' to knock them up?

LMFAO!!!

The Fraud is as clear as the nose on your face, Pinnochio...

Title: Re: A lie 9+ years in the making
Post by: kman on July 17, 2015, 10:33:41 AM
Oh I see, NASA is smart enough to brainwash the entire world but they forget to stick some stars in the background of the photos?
Title: Re: A lie 9+ years in the making
Post by: Papa Legba on July 17, 2015, 12:43:40 PM
Kman: it is what it is, troll.

& it don't have stars even though there is absolutely NO physical reason for that...

TROLL.

Rayzor: WHERE IS YOUR LINK TO THE SOURCE OF YOUR IMAGE, TROLL?

Everyone else: beaten again; how does it feel?

TROLLS!

LMFAO!!!

At YOU!!!
Title: Re: A lie 9+ years in the making
Post by: Misero on July 17, 2015, 02:10:11 PM
http://www.theatlantic.com/photo/2015/07/the-voyage-of-new-horizons-jupiter-pluto-and-beyond/398408/ (http://www.theatlantic.com/photo/2015/07/the-voyage-of-new-horizons-jupiter-pluto-and-beyond/398408/)

And no, this is not 'proof' I'm an alt-bot-man-thing, or whatever you want to say about me.
I right clicked on the image and got the URL.
Title: Re: A lie 9+ years in the making
Post by: mikeman7918 on July 17, 2015, 05:09:15 PM
You can't see stars in that Saturn image and Saturn is very far away from the Sun too.  Pluto may look very dim from here, but that's mostly because of it's distance from us.  In fact: the only reason we can see it all fromEarth is because it's so overexposed that it looks like a star.
Title: Re: A lie 9+ years in the making
Post by: Rayzor on July 17, 2015, 05:16:57 PM
http://www.theatlantic.com/photo/2015/07/the-voyage-of-new-horizons-jupiter-pluto-and-beyond/398408/ (http://www.theatlantic.com/photo/2015/07/the-voyage-of-new-horizons-jupiter-pluto-and-beyond/398408/)

And no, this is not 'proof' I'm an alt-bot-man-thing, or whatever you want to say about me.
I right clicked on the image and got the URL.

Oh no,  Papa Lega will have now learned to right click,  hang on, maybe he runs MacOS Sneezing Giraffe or whatever,    or is it Leaping Legba this week?   LOL!!!
Title: Re: A lie 9+ years in the making
Post by: markjo on July 17, 2015, 06:10:35 PM
*Unlike many, many stars, Pluto is barely visible with the naked eye from Earth.
Incorrect.  Pluto is not visible at all with the naked eye from earth.  Pluto is only visible with powerful telescopes from earth.  Same goes for Uranus and Neptune.
Title: Re: A lie 9+ years in the making
Post by: Quail on July 18, 2015, 04:05:45 AM
I'm sure astronomers would be even more interested in seeing views of those star-fields taken from 2 cameras onboard a space probe, too, Rayzor/Evil Edna/Psyopticon/Etc...

Gives em a different perspective, you know?

Which you are perfectly aware of; but being a well-renowned total Troll-entity, you just want to shit-post instead.

Well done!

&, as ever, LOL!!!
There is no reason to save these images as they are scientifically useless and probably high resulution.
Title: Re: A lie 9+ years in the making
Post by: Cartesian on July 18, 2015, 04:21:19 AM
The 'New Horizons' (lol - 'horizons' in space? Fail!) Probe allegedly had 2 'star cameras', taking 10 photos per second of the surrounding star-field, in order to compare it to their onboard map of over 10,000 stars & thus help orientate/navigate the craft.

Where did you get the part which I highlighted from?
Title: Re: A lie 9+ years in the making
Post by: Cartesian on July 18, 2015, 04:22:49 AM
After 9+ years of waiting, here's the first close up picture of Pluto!

9 years for just a boring mountainous landscape? Come on dudes. Wake up!
What now, we can not even go to the moon.
So when is Gunnar going Pluto with the non for profit Pluto One.


Why would they wait for a decade to finish their story? Why would they spend that time for a story that almost no one would care for less. Your conspiracy theory doesn't hold up to scrutiny. It just doesn't make sense. You and the like are even unable to defend it.
You think 9 years is a long time for a story? if they made it up it should have only taken 2 weeks, right?
Your cute!

Would you wait 9 years to get laid? You're cute too!
So the longer it takes to go back to the moon just makes it more believable we went in the first place. Got it!

Why are you talking about Moon now?
Title: Re: A lie 9+ years in the making
Post by: Cartesian on July 18, 2015, 04:24:02 AM
I've come to sort of know N.A.S.A and the little merry employees wearing blue shirts or whatever shirts suit them and I have a feeling that this story isn't over just yet.

I watched a documentary on this the other night. I laughed like hell at it. The supposed experts waiting with baited breath for the probe to about turn and get pictures.

With N.A.S.A and the team, miracles are always only a stones throw away. Or in some cases, 3 billion miles.  ;D

So what? Is ad-hominem the best you can do to prove this is a conspiracy? You still haven't answered why, if there was a conspiracy, they had waited a decade after the probe's launch to present us with the pictures.
Are you a blue shirt?

Still dodging my question aren't you? Classic scepti :P
Title: Re: A lie 9+ years in the making
Post by: Cartesian on July 18, 2015, 04:54:47 AM
Who is the beneficiary of this Pluto probe crap ? If you Inquire in to who is the creditor & who is the debtor.  Then you will realize the scam.

I still can't see how this can be a scam. Can you enlighten me please?
Title: Re: A lie 9+ years in the making
Post by: Cartesian on July 19, 2015, 03:36:57 AM
Also bear in mind that if New Horizons was taking 10 of these every single second for 9+ years, some kind of animation of them in motion wouldn't be too hard either, as well as being very scientifically valuable...

Does that exist?

Or are you still waiting for NASA's CGI 'imagineers' to knock them up?

LMFAO!!!

The Fraud is as clear as the nose on your face, Pinnochio...
The closest thing I have found to your highlighted claim is this http://www.gizmag.com/new-horizons-time-lapse-pluto-charon/36104/ (http://www.gizmag.com/new-horizons-time-lapse-pluto-charon/36104/) where 7 different pictures were taken at 7 different days in January, each time with an exposure time of one-tenth of a second, too short to capture Pluto’s other, more distant moons.

(http://images.gizmag.com/hero/new-horizons-pluto-charon-time-lapse@2x.jpg)

For sure, New Horizons didn't take 10 pictures every single second for 9+ years. The sensor of its cameras are so sensitive that they had to cover the camera because  if you got a glimpse of the sun, or the sun reflected in the moon or Earth, you could saturate the detector and potentially destroy it. They didn’t open the aperture until they were closer to Mars.

http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2015/07/the-camera-behind-the-new-horizons-pluto-photos-ralph/398549/ (http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2015/07/the-camera-behind-the-new-horizons-pluto-photos-ralph/398549/)
Title: Re: A lie 9+ years in the making
Post by: mikeman7918 on July 19, 2015, 11:36:45 AM
Even if New Horizons did take 10 pictures every second for navigation, it wouldn't have sent them all back to Earth.  There is only so much bandwidth available for communicating to New Horizons and NASA would rather use it to receive useful data like photos of Pluto.
Title: Re: A lie 9+ years in the making
Post by: Doglover on July 21, 2015, 04:56:27 PM
Update;

http://www.aol.com/article/2015/07/21/new-horizons-flyby-reveals-pluto-has-a-tail/21211810/?icid=maing-grid7%7Cmain5%7Cdl23%7Csec1_lnk3%26pLid%3D-1444106825 (http://www.aol.com/article/2015/07/21/new-horizons-flyby-reveals-pluto-has-a-tail/21211810/?icid=maing-grid7%7Cmain5%7Cdl23%7Csec1_lnk3%26pLid%3D-1444106825)
Title: Re: A lie 9+ years in the making
Post by: Son of Orospu on July 21, 2015, 08:08:32 PM
Even if New Horizons did take 10 pictures every second for navigation, it wouldn't have sent them all back to Earth.  There is only so much bandwidth available for communicating to New Horizons and NASA would rather use it to receive useful data like photos of Pluto.

Are you sure you understand what the term "bandwidth" means in a telcom sense?  Because your statement really was dumb. 
Title: Re: A lie 9+ years in the making
Post by: markjo on July 21, 2015, 08:50:15 PM
Even if New Horizons did take 10 pictures every second for navigation, it wouldn't have sent them all back to Earth.  There is only so much bandwidth available for communicating to New Horizons and NASA would rather use it to receive useful data like photos of Pluto.

Are you sure you understand what the term "bandwidth" means in a telcom sense?  Because your statement really was dumb.
Are you sure that you understand the implications of transmitting data from several billion miles away?  Currently, New Horizons has a data rate of about 1-2 kbps.
Title: Re: A lie 9+ years in the making
Post by: striv on July 21, 2015, 08:54:09 PM
Even if New Horizons did take 10 pictures every second for navigation, it wouldn't have sent them all back to Earth.  There is only so much bandwidth available for communicating to New Horizons and NASA would rather use it to receive useful data like photos of Pluto.

Are you sure you understand what the term "bandwidth" means in a telcom sense?  Because your statement really was dumb.

That statement was actually spot-on.  In this context "bandwidth" is  "the transmission capacity of a computer network or other telecommunication system."  Expressed in "bits per second".

NewHorizions probe current bandwidth is about 1 kbit/s.  It is estimated that it will need > 16 months to transmit all the data captured during the Pluto flyby. 

In 2007 when it flew by Jupiter it captured > 36Gb of data that took over a year to transmit it all back. At a time it's bandwidth was higher than it is now.
Title: Re: A lie 9+ years in the making
Post by: Son of Orospu on July 21, 2015, 08:57:09 PM
Even if New Horizons did take 10 pictures every second for navigation, it wouldn't have sent them all back to Earth.  There is only so much bandwidth available for communicating to New Horizons and NASA would rather use it to receive useful data like photos of Pluto.

Are you sure you understand what the term "bandwidth" means in a telcom sense?  Because your statement really was dumb.
Are you sure that you understand the implications of transmitting data from several billion miles away?  Currently, New Horizons has a data rate of about 1-2 kbps.

Does that mean it had to bank it's bandwidth for 9 years in order for it to send a picture, like Mikeman stated?  It needs a new Verizon plan.  The current one has shotty rollover data.   :-\
Title: Re: A lie 9+ years in the making
Post by: Son of Orospu on July 21, 2015, 09:06:00 PM
Even if New Horizons did take 10 pictures every second for navigation, it wouldn't have sent them all back to Earth.  There is only so much bandwidth available for communicating to New Horizons and NASA would rather use it to receive useful data like photos of Pluto.

Are you sure you understand what the term "bandwidth" means in a telcom sense?  Because your statement really was dumb.

That statement was actually spot-on.  In this context "bandwidth" is  "the transmission capacity of a computer network or other telecommunication system."  Expressed in "bits per second".

NewHorizions probe current bandwidth is about 1 kbit/s.  It is estimated that it will need > 16 months to transmit all the data captured during the Pluto flyby. 

In 2007 when it flew by Jupiter it captured > 36Gb of data that took over a year to transmit it all back. At a time it's bandwidth was higher than it is now.


Bandwidth is not like getting $10 a week allowance and you have to save for 10 weeks to buy a $100 telescope.  Bandwidth is instantaneous and occurring all the time.  It did not have to save it up.  Would you people please do a little research on telcom bandwidth?  You probably think you have to save all of you miles per gallon in order to take a road trip.   ::)
Title: Re: A lie 9+ years in the making
Post by: striv on July 21, 2015, 09:45:42 PM
Even if New Horizons did take 10 pictures every second for navigation, it wouldn't have sent them all back to Earth.  There is only so much bandwidth available for communicating to New Horizons and NASA would rather use it to receive useful data like photos of Pluto.

Are you sure you understand what the term "bandwidth" means in a telcom sense?  Because your statement really was dumb.

That statement was actually spot-on.  In this context "bandwidth" is  "the transmission capacity of a computer network or other telecommunication system."  Expressed in "bits per second".

NewHorizions probe current bandwidth is about 1 kbit/s.  It is estimated that it will need > 16 months to transmit all the data captured during the Pluto flyby. 

In 2007 when it flew by Jupiter it captured > 36Gb of data that took over a year to transmit it all back. At a time it's bandwidth was higher than it is now.


Bandwidth is not like getting $10 a week allowance and you have to save for 10 weeks to buy a $100 telescope.  Bandwidth is instantaneous and occurring all the time.  It did not have to save it up.  Would you people please do a little research on telcom bandwidth?  You probably think you have to save all of you miles per gallon in order to take a road trip.   ::)

The only person who needs to do some research (on most topics actually) is you.  First of all it _just_ captured Gigabytes of data as it flew by Pluto this week. Not just pictures btw, it has 6 other instruments that captured data as well. It will take 16 months to send it all back starting NOW. It couldn't use the bandwidth over the last 10 years to send back pictures it didn't take yet. Are you disagreeing with this fact?

Secondly most of the time (about 2/3) in the last 10 years it spent in hibernation mode. Up-to 200 days at a time, where it was completely asleep and not capturing any photos or sending any data back.

Thirdly, even if it didn't sleep 2/3 of the time, which it did , and even if it was capturing 10 pictures/s, which it didn't (at least not until Pluto fly-by), it could only send about 1/36000 of that at the available bandwidth.  (1kbit/s == 450KB/hour == 1-2 hig-res pictures/hour.) 

And don't forgot the time > 1 year it took to send the data it did capture during Jupiter fly-by.

So no, it wouldn't have time to send all the 10 pictures a second (which it didn't take).

But this point is moot, right? since space travel isn't possible at all, right?  This is all made up, right? They probably just claiming small "bandwidth" to give themselves more time to CGI these images, right? Amazing how elaborate long planned and detailed the deception is.... Or maybe, just maybe, it's possible that they actually did do it? maybe? Nah, you couldn't possibly be wrong about this. Nope. It's inconceivable...

Title: Re: A lie 9+ years in the making
Post by: Son of Orospu on July 21, 2015, 10:10:19 PM
I suppose you are disageeing with Mikeman, then, who stated that it had to save up 9 years worth of bandwidth?  I am still loling about that.  You have not disagreed with anything I said.  You just go on and on about how long the pictures would take to transmit.  Do you even have the raw pics?
Title: Re: A lie 9+ years in the making
Post by: Mainframes on July 21, 2015, 10:19:05 PM
I suppose you are disageeing with Mikeman, then, who stated that it had to save up 9 years worth of bandwidth?  I am still loling about that.  You have not disagreed with anything I said.  You just go on and on about how long the pictures would take to transmit.  Do you even have the raw pics?

Could you provide a quote for Mikemans statement please.
Title: Re: A lie 9+ years in the making
Post by: Son of Orospu on July 21, 2015, 10:26:02 PM
Even if New Horizons did take 10 pictures every second for navigation, it wouldn't have sent them all back to Earth.  There is only so much bandwidth available for communicating to New Horizons and NASA would rather use it to receive useful data like photos of Pluto.
Title: Re: A lie 9+ years in the making
Post by: Rayzor on July 21, 2015, 11:06:38 PM
Even if New Horizons did take 10 pictures every second for navigation, it wouldn't have sent them all back to Earth.  There is only so much bandwidth available for communicating to New Horizons and NASA would rather use it to receive useful data like photos of Pluto.

What part of that are you unable to understand? 
Title: Re: A lie 9+ years in the making
Post by: Mainframes on July 21, 2015, 11:14:30 PM
Even if New Horizons did take 10 pictures every second for navigation, it wouldn't have sent them all back to Earth.  There is only so much bandwidth available for communicating to New Horizons and NASA would rather use it to receive useful data like photos of Pluto.

Nothing in quote at all about saving up bandwidth for 9 years.

All he is stating is that NASA wouldn't waste bandwidth sending navigational data whilst gathering and sending data on Pluto itself.
Title: Re: A lie 9+ years in the making
Post by: Rayzor on July 22, 2015, 12:50:29 AM
Even if New Horizons did take 10 pictures every second for navigation, it wouldn't have sent them all back to Earth.  There is only so much bandwidth available for communicating to New Horizons and NASA would rather use it to receive useful data like photos of Pluto.

Nothing in quote at all about saving up bandwidth for 9 years.

All he is stating is that NASA wouldn't waste bandwidth sending navigational data whilst gathering and sending data on Pluto itself.

I suspect jroa is showing his ignorance,  and not having the faintest clue about what bandwidth actually means,   I'm guessing he thinks it's like an internet plan where you get so many gigabytes per month and you can save it up to use later...    ;D     

For jroa,  bandwidth is exactly that,  the speed of the radio link between the tracking station and the spacecraft.   limited bandwidth doesn't mean they skimped on the internet plan...    ROTFLMAO!!
Title: Re: A lie 9+ years in the making
Post by: Papa Legba on July 22, 2015, 01:37:46 AM
So; only ONE photo from all the many thousands it must have taken?

Are you okay with that?

Plus, I got the ten photos per-second figure from a National Geographic article by Nadia Drake; are you claiming she is lying?

& no real answer from any of you for the lack of stars either; just nit-picking & evasion.

Anyhow, forget all that; just add the appropriate eyes to the left hemisphere of the white, heart-shaped feature on Pluto & nose to the right hemisphere, & you'll get a pretty good image of Disney's 'pluto the dog'.

Co-incidence?

LMAO!!!

They are laughing right in your faces; but believe what you want, brain-washed space-cultists.
Title: Re: A lie 9+ years in the making
Post by: Mainframes on July 22, 2015, 04:28:40 AM
So; only ONE photo from all the many thousands it must have taken?
Are you okay with that?

I take it you've missed the part where it states it will take 16 months to return all of the data gathered.....
Title: Re: A lie 9+ years in the making
Post by: Papa Legba on July 22, 2015, 04:42:34 AM
Actually, I've missed the part where any of this entire stupid farrago makes any sense whatsoever.

But I haven't missed the part where NASA's cartoonists put a silhouette of Disney's Pluto The Dog on their ridiculous, fraudulent images.

& as that's by far the lulziest bit,  I am content.

Toodle-pip, cultists!
Title: Re: A lie 9+ years in the making
Post by: striv on July 22, 2015, 05:06:00 AM
Even if New Horizons did take 10 pictures every second for navigation, it wouldn't have sent them all back to Earth.  There is only so much bandwidth available for communicating to New Horizons and NASA would rather use it to receive useful data like photos of Pluto.

What part of that are you unable to understand?

All of it I'm guessing. Maybe the "If .. then it wouldn't ..." form of the logical statement is confusing, I don't know.

Not sure why I bother but let me summarize:  mikeman said that there's not enough bandwidth to send 10/s photos back to earth. jroa questioned his understanding of the word "bandwidth". I concurred with mikeman and explained what bandwidth is. And then showed a computation that effective current bandwidth is about 1-2 photos per HOUR. Directly and factually supporting mikeman's statement.  And yes, the past bandwidth cannot be saved, but that doesn't change anything.

Title: Re: A lie 9+ years in the making
Post by: striv on July 22, 2015, 05:47:11 AM
So; only ONE photo from all the many thousands it must have taken?

Are you okay with that?
okay with what exactly? That they can only send ONE photo for many thousands it taken -- well what choice do you have. you're limited by physical constraints.


Plus, I got the ten photos per-second figure from a National Geographic article by Nadia Drake; are you claiming she is lying?

I did some research on this. I found that article and 10/s figure she mentioned. So no, I'm not claiming that she is lying. I then did some more reading about the probe:

http://pluto.jhuapl.edu/Mission/Spacecraft/Systems-and-Components.php (http://pluto.jhuapl.edu/Mission/Spacecraft/Systems-and-Components.php)

>>> " New Horizons carries two copies of each of these units for redundancy. The star-tracking cameras store a map of about 3,000 stars; 10 times per second one of the cameras snaps a wide-angle picture of space, compares the locations of the stars to its onboard map, and calculates the spacecraft’s orientation. "

So, yes, you're correct about this point. It does take 10 photos/second, compares it with internal map to validate it's direction. (I can admit being wrong about something, can you?) Now as I've computed elsewhere it couldn't possibly have send all of them, or even anything more than a fraction back. Now this is partly speculation on my part, but an educated guess - I think it's likely doesn't store any of these photos at all. It uses it in real-time to orient itself and throws them out. This is a separate system from the cameras and other instruments used to do scientific research. It really wouldn't have any space to store them either, as 2 8GB harddrives it has are dedicated to storing important data from all other instruments to be send back later. As I mentioned earlier it will take it 16 months to send back the data about Pluto encounter it captured during the 1 week fly-by.


& no real answer from any of you for the lack of stars either; just nit-picking & evasion.

I'm not avoiding anything. I just got annoyed by jroa not understanding what "bandwidth" is. But you want to talk about lack of stars. Fine.
https://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/newhorizons/images/index.html?id=345555 (https://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/newhorizons/images/index.html?id=345555)
https://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/newhorizons/images/index.html?id=354084 (https://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/newhorizons/images/index.html?id=354084)

there's many more, oh wait, here's a really good one:

https://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/newhorizons/images/index.html?id=358082 (https://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/newhorizons/images/index.html?id=358082)


Now, I admitted being wrong about something, will you?

Anyhow, forget all that; just add the appropriate eyes to the left hemisphere of the white, heart-shaped feature on Pluto & nose to the right hemisphere, & you'll get a pretty good image of Disney's 'pluto the dog'.

Co-incidence?

Ever tried seeing familiar shapes in clouds? It's a fun past-time...

Title: Re: A lie 9+ years in the making
Post by: markjo on July 22, 2015, 06:24:21 AM
Even if New Horizons did take 10 pictures every second for navigation, it wouldn't have sent them all back to Earth.  There is only so much bandwidth available for communicating to New Horizons and NASA would rather use it to receive useful data like photos of Pluto.

Are you sure you understand what the term "bandwidth" means in a telcom sense?  Because your statement really was dumb.

That statement was actually spot-on.  In this context "bandwidth" is  "the transmission capacity of a computer network or other telecommunication system."  Expressed in "bits per second".

NewHorizions probe current bandwidth is about 1 kbit/s.  It is estimated that it will need > 16 months to transmit all the data captured during the Pluto flyby. 

In 2007 when it flew by Jupiter it captured > 36Gb of data that took over a year to transmit it all back. At a time it's bandwidth was higher than it is now.


Bandwidth is not like getting $10 a week allowance and you have to save for 10 weeks to buy a $100 telescope.  Bandwidth is instantaneous and occurring all the time.  It did not have to save it up.  Would you people please do a little research on telcom bandwidth?  You probably think you have to save all of you miles per gallon in order to take a road trip.   ::)
Apparently you don't realize that bandwidth goes down when transmitting from extreme distances.  Do you really expect reliable gigabit data rates from a 12 watt transmitter over 3 billion miles away?
Title: Re: A lie 9+ years in the making
Post by: hoppy on July 22, 2015, 02:29:02 PM
Thx for pointing out the ridiculous Legba. Pluto's face on Pluto, give me a break. In your face sci-fi fans.
Title: Re: A lie 9+ years in the making
Post by: Papa Legba on July 22, 2015, 02:52:43 PM
Yeah; they just do not give a flying f**k do they?

What more can I say?

Title: Re: A lie 9+ years in the making
Post by: sokarul on July 22, 2015, 02:57:58 PM
How about a proper rebuttal instead of the cowardly responses?
Title: Re: A lie 9+ years in the making
Post by: Papa Legba on July 22, 2015, 03:11:42 PM
A proper rebuttal to WHAT, exactly, you psycho?

That there is NOT a silhouette of Disney's Pluto the Dog on NASA's images of Pluto?

Are you BLIND?!?

Just go away, SOCK-arul, you useless Troll; nobody cares what you think about anything, anywhere, ever.

'You got to FIGHT the science! You got to FIGHT the SCIENCE that BE!!!'

LMFAO!!!
Title: Re: A lie 9+ years in the making
Post by: Doglover on July 22, 2015, 05:53:20 PM
A proper rebuttal to WHAT, exactly, you psycho?

That there is NOT a silhouette of Disney's Pluto the Dog on NASA's images of Pluto?

Are you BLIND?!?

Just go away, SOCK-arul, you useless Troll; nobody cares what you think about anything, anywhere, ever.

'You got to FIGHT the science! You got to FIGHT the SCIENCE that BE!!!'

LMFAO!!!

The tendency to see faces and familiar objects in random patterns is called Pareidolia. It's like seeing the man in the moon, the face on mars, faces in clouds, The Virgin Mary on a taco. It's very hard to "unsee" the object once you see it.

You can LMFAO my now.
Title: Re: A lie 9+ years in the making
Post by: striv on July 22, 2015, 07:14:08 PM
A proper rebuttal to WHAT, exactly, you [ad hominem deleted]?

I'm still waiting for you to at least admit that you were wrong about there being no photos of Pluto with stars. You were complaining earlier about no source links, and I gave you those as well. The last link I posted was most telling as it was in fact animation over multiple photos that demonstrate how Pluto and it's moons rotate. All with many stars in the background...


Title: Re: A lie 9+ years in the making
Post by: Cartesian on July 30, 2015, 06:18:17 AM
So maybe, just maybe, it really took 9+ years for New Horizons to reach Pluto. And also, maybe, the sustained space travel is possible after all. There seems to be no other explanation :P
Title: Re: A lie 9+ years in the making
Post by: Son of Orospu on July 30, 2015, 06:46:04 AM
Maybe there really are fairies in the woods in my backyard?
Title: Re: A lie 9+ years in the making
Post by: Quail on July 30, 2015, 09:28:22 AM
Thx for pointing out the ridiculous Legba. Pluto's face on Pluto, give me a break. In your face sci-fi fans.

Why do you hate science-fiction so much? Just because you saw one shitty sci-if movie like "Gravity" doesn't mean that all of science fiction is that stupid. It's like reading one bad romance book and then hating the entire genre and all of its fans.
Title: Re: A lie 9+ years in the making
Post by: striv on July 30, 2015, 11:15:50 AM
Maybe there really are fairies in the woods in my backyard?

Could you please quickly go to your backyard and take a picture of fairies and post it. If true then logically Earth must be flat.
Title: Re: A lie 9+ years in the making
Post by: Son of Orospu on July 30, 2015, 03:41:37 PM
Maybe there really are fairies in the woods in my backyard?

Could you please quickly go to your backyard and take a picture of fairies and post it. If true then logically Earth must be flat.

So, maybe, just maybe the fairies are just as camera shy as the sasquashes?
Title: Re: A lie 9+ years in the making
Post by: Ski on July 30, 2015, 04:08:09 PM
I bet if you ask any 100 people what the New Horizons Probe is, less than 10 of them would have the faintest idea. An awful lot of effort for very little payback.

Seems like very little effort to fraudulently make $700M to me.
Title: Re: A lie 9+ years in the making
Post by: Misero on July 30, 2015, 06:12:26 PM
Your problem is evidence. You can't accept anything not shown to you up close, yet make baseless claims about invisible Aether and don't bother to go farther into it.
Title: Re: A lie 9+ years in the making
Post by: Son of Orospu on July 30, 2015, 06:17:35 PM
Your a tucking retart, missedy. 
Title: Re: A lie 9+ years in the making
Post by: Rayzor on July 30, 2015, 07:33:39 PM
I bet if you ask any 100 people what the New Horizons Probe is, less than 10 of them would have the faintest idea. An awful lot of effort for very little payback.

Seems like very little effort to fraudulently make $700M to me.

That doesn't make any sense,   why would a conspiracy that is powerful enough to hide the shape of the world be bothered,  they would already be in control every government on the planet,  as well as all the military resources of the US, China, Russia, Europe.    Why fart about with faking piddling little probes to far off planets.

There must be more to the conspiracy than just making pocket money.    If the conspiracy is real, then it's all powerful and the motives are unclear.  Maybe it's an alien mind control experiment?   

Or the conspiracy doesn't exist.   

Title: Re: A lie 9+ years in the making
Post by: Misero on July 31, 2015, 07:23:11 AM
Your a tucking retart, missedy.
I thought you were supposed to enforce the rules?
Title: Re: A lie 9+ years in the making
Post by: Pavarotti on July 31, 2015, 12:10:56 PM
Who agrees this is awesome? And FEe'rs are missing out on so much

(http://scitechdaily.com/images/An-Interior-Ocean-May-Be-Driving-Geologic-Activity-on-Pluto.jpg)
Title: Re: A lie 9+ years in the making
Post by: Master_Evar on July 31, 2015, 12:24:14 PM
I agree. So cool.
Title: Re: A lie 9+ years in the making
Post by: Son of Orospu on July 31, 2015, 12:26:32 PM
Looks a lot like this.

(http://img2.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20131019121937/starwars/images/b/b0/Tatooine_TPM.png)
Title: Re: A lie 9+ years in the making
Post by: Pavarotti on July 31, 2015, 12:36:04 PM
Looks a lot like this.

(http://img2.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20131019121937/starwars/images/b/b0/Tatooine_TPM.png)

Not really, pity it's such a small image, the atmosphere looks fake
Title: Re: A lie 9+ years in the making
Post by: Alpha2Omega on July 31, 2015, 12:39:01 PM
Looks a lot like this.

http://img2.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20131019121937/starwars/images/b/b0/Tatooine_TPM.png (http://img2.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20131019121937/starwars/images/b/b0/Tatooine_TPM.png)
It does? I suppose it depends on what you mean by "a lot". They both look spherical and some of the colors are sort of similar. Only one of them seems to have an atmosphere.
Title: Re: A lie 9+ years in the making
Post by: Son of Orospu on July 31, 2015, 12:40:12 PM
I wonder if the same artist painted both.
Title: Re: A lie 9+ years in the making
Post by: Pavarotti on July 31, 2015, 12:51:04 PM
I wonder if the same artist painted both.

Don't think it's possible, one is a photo.

Photo's and paintings are different you know