Shuttle crashs

Wow Tom, wow. Good luck winning that whole acting argument. That is honestly one of the most stupid theories I have ever heard. What about the fact that her husband has dissapeared from the face of the Earth? Oh ya it's because he's dead.

Quote

She should be even more pissed at herself for being able to cry on cue and act perfectly but not getting paid the millions of dollars she could have with a lucrative acting career.

The woman was likely coached my federal agents on how to act, what to say, and how to force herself into a crying wreck by thinking of her dead childhood dog. It doesn't matter how or why, all that matters is that she's in on it.

This is not only a very stupid thing to say, it's also extremely insulting. Shame on you!

I really think we're onto something here.

Quote

Then my former youth group leader is part of "they."  Sorry, but that's an awfully silly notion and it's downright insulting to the families of the dead astronauts.  By the way, she married Bill Thompson this year and was a keynote speaker at this year's memorial ceremony at the space mirror at the Kennedy Visitor Center.  Sorry Tom, she's still in the public eye, your theory doesn't work.

When she's not weeping at memorial ceremonies and speaking to the media she probably flies down to Arizona to visit her husband for a couple months.

That's a very serious and very insulting claim, and it's up to you to prove it.  It's also completely different than the claim you made about five minutes ago about immediate family being spirited away and given new identities.  When that didn't pan out you resorted to this.

The woman should be ashamed for conspiring with the military to fake her husband's death.

You should be ashamed of yourself for disparaging a widow without proof.

It's more likely that several astronaut fatalities have been due to actual failures of the flights or launches.

Ok am I the only one who notices that this is a HUUUUUUUUUUUUUUGE hole in the FE thoery? Seriously keep this up RE-ers.

everything that points to a "conspiracy" is a huge hole

Especially one of this magnitude.

I don't see any huge holes here other than some of the statements made that the shuttle couldn't land without 10000' of runway, etc...

Tom Bishop: The widow is acting here husband's death.

That is a huge and sickening at the same time hole.

Mr. Bishop being rude is not a hole in his theory.

No he really believes that the widow is acting his death because he thinks he never went to space. I'm sure the widow would like to talk to him.

I would like Tom Bishop to provide us with evidence of his outlandish claims. Otherwise aplogise for slandering an innocent widow and bringing shame on the name of the FES.

Wow Tom, wow. Good luck winning that whole acting argument. That is honestly one of the most stupid theories I have ever heard. What about the fact that her husband has dissapeared from the face of the Earth? Oh ya it's because he's dead.

He's not dead. NASA just relocated him away from the public eye. I'm sure once the media hype dies down his family will be reunited with him if they haven't already.

Now, I suppose it's possible that his family doesn't even know that he's still alive, but I doubt that NASA is that cruel.

Quote from: ROUND000 on June 16, 2008, 02:27:25 PM

Wow Tom, wow. Good luck winning that whole acting argument. That is honestly one of the most stupid theories I have ever heard. What about the fact that her husband has dissapeared from the face of the Earth? Oh ya it's because he's dead.

He's not dead. NASA just relocated him away from the public eye. I'm sure once the media hype dies down his family will be reunited with him if they haven't already.

You're a sick man Tom, a sick man. He's dead. Gone. Bye bye. Nada. No more. DEAD. Why don't you speak with the widow yourself? She'd be like "YOU FREAK HE'S DEAD!!" Who would want to live a life pretending your husband is dead? Tom you'll loose the argument no matter what. This kind of proves Earth's roundness. And also who would want to live hidden the rest of their lives, no matter how much money they are payed?

Quote from: ROUND000 on June 16, 2008, 02:27:25 PM

Wow Tom, wow. Good luck winning that whole acting argument. That is honestly one of the most stupid theories I have ever heard. What about the fact that her husband has dissapeared from the face of the Earth? Oh ya it's because he's dead.

He's not dead. NASA just relocated him away from the public eye. I'm sure once the media hype dies down his family will be reunited with him if they haven't already.

Now, I suppose it's possible that his family doesn't even know that he's still alive, but I doubt that NASA is that cruel.

You know, I could make up anything I want too. Know what? World War II never happened. It all just got written into the textbooks and everybody else forgot about it or is included in the conspiracty. All those people that died? Yeah, they got taken away somewhere. Or something.
That doesn't make it true, though, and you have less than no proof for what you've said.

Quote from: Tom Bishop on June 16, 2008, 06:00:14 PM

Quote from: ROUND000 on June 16, 2008, 02:27:25 PM

Wow Tom, wow. Good luck winning that whole acting argument. That is honestly one of the most stupid theories I have ever heard. What about the fact that her husband has dissapeared from the face of the Earth? Oh ya it's because he's dead.

He's not dead. NASA just relocated him away from the public eye. I'm sure once the media hype dies down his family will be reunited with him if they haven't already.

Now, I suppose it's possible that his family doesn't even know that he's still alive, but I doubt that NASA is that cruel.

You know, I could make up anything I want too. Know what? World War II never happened. It all just got written into the textbooks and everybody else forgot about it or is included in the conspiracty. All those people that died? Yeah, they got taken away somewhere. Or something.
That doesn't make it true, though, and you have less than no proof for what you've said.

Well Tom? What false statement are you going to present us with now?

Tom Bishop claims that we have never gone into space along with other FE'rs.  My question is what about the shuttles that crashed on their return trip?  Where they not coming from space?

The reason why is because every once in a while, NASA sends a shuttle just a little ways upward until the shuttle gets out of sight, commands the shuttle to stay there for a few days, then makes it crash. They don't come from space.

Quote from: Wakka Wakka on January 26, 2008, 08:06:36 PM

Tom Bishop claims that we have never gone into space along with other FE'rs.  My question is what about the shuttles that crashed on their return trip?  Where they not coming from space?

The reason why is because every once in a while, NASA sends a shuttle just a little ways upward until the shuttle gets out of sight, commands the shuttle to stay there for a few days, then makes it crash. They don't come from space.

The problem with your statement is in FET you can't command the shuttle to stay up for a couple of days.  It has nothing to orbit.  And cannot sustain atmospheric flight for half and hour much less days. 

Which means your statement FAILS epically.

Quote from: the_flutist on June 16, 2008, 07:11:21 PM

Quote from: Wakka Wakka on January 26, 2008, 08:06:36 PM

Tom Bishop claims that we have never gone into space along with other FE'rs.  My question is what about the shuttles that crashed on their return trip?  Where they not coming from space?

The reason why is because every once in a while, NASA sends a shuttle just a little ways upward until the shuttle gets out of sight, commands the shuttle to stay there for a few days, then makes it crash. They don't come from space.

The problem with your statement is in FET you can't command the shuttle to stay up for a couple of days.  It has nothing to orbit.  And cannot sustain atmospheric flight for half and hour much less days. 

Which means your statement FAILS epically.

 Actually, they can. NASA just doesn't want people to know about it.

Now Tom is just 5,999,999,999 steps away from Holocaust denial.

Actually, they can. NASA just doesn't want people to know about it.

I can't see how they can. Fuel's heavy stuff, and the shuttle needs to lug around those huge tanks to just get up to orbit. If there's no orbit, just a constant 9.8 m/s^2 acceleration towards the planet regardless of how high you go, then there's no way the shuttle could maintain an altitude.

I don't see any huge holes here other than some of the statements made that the shuttle couldn't land without 10000' of runway, etc...

I don't see any explanation for why you disregarded the touchdown miss distance in your accounting of the necessary runway length.  By my calculations you're a few hundred feet short of a suitable runway there guy.  Not to mention the shuttle's current launches have all been going in the wrong direction to reach it.

I never claimed it was specifically Lajes (though it may be). And the miss distance is baloney and you know it but won't admit it.   Your claims become less and less supportable by evidence so you abandon the attempt to support them and instead resort to repetition.

Quote

Actually, they can. NASA just doesn't want people to know about it.

I can't see how they can. Fuel's heavy stuff, and the shuttle needs to lug around those huge tanks to just get up to orbit. If there's no orbit, just a constant 9.8 m/s^2 acceleration towards the planet regardless of how high you go, then there's no way the shuttle could maintain an altitude.

 As I said before, NASA's trying to keep it a secret.

I never claimed it was specifically Lajes (though it may be). And the miss distance is baloney and you know it but won't admit it.   Your claims become less and less supportable by evidence so you abandon the attempt to support them and instead resort to repetition.

"baloney" huh?  The only reason I resort to repitition is because idiots like you never face the evidence presented.  Touchdown miss distance is almost always in excess of 1300 feet, you failed to account for that.  You wish to inappropriately frame the argument as "could they ever safely land at wideawake" when the question should actually be "could they usually (let alone always) safely land at wideawake."  This is supported by the evidence:
sts-65 touchdown miss: 913m rollout: 3112m - the rollout alone was too long
sts-58 touchdown miss: 1030m rollout: 2938m
sts-28 touchdown miss: 1680m rollout: 1833m
sts-38 touchdown miss: 430m rollout: 2712m
sts-51c touchdown miss: 839m rollout 2240m

Ahh the metric system...run away run away.

Ahh the metric system...run away run away.

Whats so scary about the metric system that you have to run away?

I am American and spit in the metric system's general direction. 

Do you also spit in the general direction of good education and healthy diets in the spirit of being American?

Strangely no.