Proof of NASA Lies

Matrix would like to make a list citing evidence where NASA has deliberately misled, decieved and lied to the general public.

Take it away fella...

This thread is a good start.

You can then follow that up by their disgraceful performance at the Challenger disaster board of inquiry, where they tried to tilt the balance in their favour by selecting NASA-friendly people for the 'independent' board (including Neil Armstrong).  The final report highlighted flaws in NASA to the top level, but at the same time tried so hard to cover up criticism of individuals that Feynman (who was also on the panel and proved the cold temperature failure of o-rings on national TV using nothing more than a sample of o-ring, and glass of cold water and a g-clamp) almost refused to sign it.

There is a veritable litany of NASA deception - it's not hard to find evidence, and these two are just cases in point where there is a lot of official documentation to support them.

This thread is a good start.

You can then follow that up by their disgraceful performance at the Challenger disaster board of inquiry, where they tried to tilt the balance in their favour by selecting NASA-friendly people for the 'independent' board (including Neil Armstrong). ...

Yes. NASA tried to tip an enquiry in its favour. This was largely a management/PR/saving face issue.

Did they deny challenger blew up? No
Did they deny it was an O-Ring that caused the fault? No
Did they deny it was NASAs fault? No
Did they try to save face as best they could? Yes.

There is a veritable litany of NASA deception

Good. Post it all here.

...and these two are just cases in point...

Whoa! Two? So far I've only seen one. Do we need to get the Count off Sasame Street in here?

Erm, did you even read the thread I linked to?  That top post is a link, in case you missed it.

Now that we know what intellectual level you like debating on, would you like me to draw you a colourful crayon picture to show you what to do with a link?

Erm, did you even read the thread I linked to?

Yes. Tom Bishop wibbles on about paychecks.
Tom Bishop says he doesnt need to prove anything.
Some waffle about the ice wall (irrelevent to this case)
C-Ray posts list of NASAs contributions

(etc)

Seems like 11 pages of babble to me. Is there a particular post you'd like to pick out for our attention?

(etc)

Seems like 11 pages of babble to me. Is there a particular post you'd like to pick out for our attention?

So the correct answer was "No, I didn't read the entire thread".  OK, to save you from some derailment attempts, try all of Ravenwood's posts, page 7 onwards.

Quote from: Obamabam on March 14, 2009, 09:35:46 AM

(etc)

Seems like 11 pages of babble to me. Is there a particular post you'd like to pick out for our attention?

So the correct answer was "No, I didn't read the entire thread".  OK, to save you from some derailment attempts, try all of Ravenwood's posts, page 7 onwards.

What all of them... OK here goes...

but if this is a waste of time I will find you and kill you.

...

Ravenwood posts evidence of bad accountancy. Found in pretty much all large goverment funded departments. She makes some pretty asinine points too. Such as...

Google NASA, money, embezzlement.  You should get something like this:

 "Results 1 - 10 of about 37,100 for NASA, money, embezzlement. (0.18 seconds) "

So... no lies, just bad accounting. Hmm.

I think I'm contractually allowed to kill you now.

You have to admit the numbers are pretty obscene - the fact that other organisations are badly run doesn't absolve them of responsibility.

If you REALLY want to find and kill me, I guess it comes with the territory 

You have to admit the numbers are pretty obscene - the fact that other organisations are badly run doesn't absolve them of responsibility.

If you REALLY want to find and kill me, I guess it comes with the territory 

I assure you that you can sleep safe tonight.

I assure you that you can sleep safe tonight.

Spoken like a true assassin... I'm on to you!

Quote from: MayTheBetterModelWin on March 15, 2009, 01:31:01 PM

I assure you that you can sleep safe tonight.

Spoken like a true assassin... I'm on to you!

If he was an assassin worth worrying about then you'd already be dead.

If he was an assassin worth worrying about then you'd already be dead.

Unless he was also the sort of sick psychopath who enjoys toying with his victims...

Quote from: markjo on March 15, 2009, 03:22:08 PM

If he was an assassin worth worrying about then you'd already be dead.

Unless he was also the sort of sick psychopath who enjoys toying with his victims...

Unless I'm also the sort of sick psychopath who likes to make you think that I'm the sort of sick psychopath who enjoys toying with this victims...

Quote from: Matrix on March 15, 2009, 03:25:57 PM

Quote from: markjo on March 15, 2009, 03:22:08 PM

If he was an assassin worth worrying about then you'd already be dead.

Unless he was also the sort of sick psychopath who enjoys toying with his victims...

Unless I'm also the sort of sick psychopath who likes to make you think that I'm the sort of sick psychopath who enjoys toying with this victims...

That's just mean though.

a list citing evidence where NASA has deliberately misled, decieved and lied to the general public.

The Apollo Sun is Not Real
http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=26006.0

Rooster Tails from the Lunar Rover


A Close Look at the Lunar Lander
http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=26010.0

What Happened on the Moon?
http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=18509.0

Mars Missions
NASA deliberately edits its own "raw" images and fakes data loss.
NASA deliberately released low resolution versions of their mars orbiter imaging to encourage public hype about the Cydonia Menasae.
NASA browns out the sky in its Rover imagery
NASA is faking the colors of the martian sky
NASA contrives the results of its mars missions before launch.
NASA continues to manually edit "raw" images.
Blue Skies Over Gusev Crater

All this talk about assassins, and still the only thing found against NASA is bad management.

NASA's bad management is no news at all. Every single monopoly I can think of has been plagued with management issues, and NASA was created to help win the cold war, not to explore the universe on a tight budget.

The real bad news (also old news) is that the famous O-rings were just the consequence of bad internal communication and decision taking chains. And the really bad decision was to use manned missions for everything, instead of limiting the expense and risk to where astronauts really make a difference.

But all of this points to another problem: they are not the tight, closed-lips organization that your conspiracists require.

I'll start off by saying you're quoting your own inane gibberish here Tom. But lets go through them step by step. If there's nothing at the end then you've wasted precious hours of my life and I have a contractual right to kill you.

The Apollo Sun is Not Real
http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=26006.0

You seem to misunderstand how digital photography works, and so ramp up filters so to enlarge a difference where there was none. Throughout all ten pages of TB stamped crap your actual point remains elusive.

Rooster Tails from the Lunar Rover

Again your point is elusive. You see things that are either non existant or difficult to measure. Edethran explained simply why the particles move in that way.

A Close Look at the Lunar Lander
http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=26010.0

You're convinced the lunar lander is, somehow, made of curtain rods and cardboard. You feel able to say this just from looking at a picture. As markjo points out, you make no point, other than "meeeeeeh look!" THis thread is best summed up by JC:

There is no scotch tape, and those curtain rods are structural components.  Your lack of knowledge is as sad as your willingness to delude yourself, Tom.

What Happened on the Moon?
http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=18509.0

Again, you make no point, or conjecture. Simply post a deeply flawed documentary.

 Trekky did a good job of picking it apart. Go back and read.

Mars Missions
NASA deliberately edits its own "raw" images and fakes data loss.
...

You've posted these before, and they've been picked apart before. A misunderstanding of colour addition coupled with a desire to see all NASAs actions as somehow "wrong".

But here's your fallacy: Even if they edit the images that does not (inherently) make them fake. You argue that NASA cannot go into space and land on mars, yet post images that support the fact they've been into space and landed on mars.

Also, I'll just ask... what did Sir Charles W. Shults III get his knighthood for?



So... all "evidence" debunked. Ages ago by fellow FES members.

Now you die.