CubeSat

  • 203 Replies
  • 26749 Views
*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 41780
Re: CubeSat
« Reply #90 on: December 10, 2011, 03:29:54 PM »
- I have working model rockets in my garage which travel straight upwards until they fade out of sight. But just because I have working rockets doesn't make me a space power.

Have you ever launched a "model rocket" the size of an airliner in front of thousands of witnesses and on live television?
Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.
Quote from: Robosteve
Besides, perhaps FET is a conspiracy too.
Quote from: bullhorn
It is just the way it is, you understanding it doesn't concern me.

Re: CubeSat
« Reply #91 on: December 10, 2011, 03:40:30 PM »
That is not his main argument--and you know it. He explains and the comments from readers confirm this is not underwater. I challenge you to show that the "bubbles" accelerate. Of course, you'll just put on a tin foil changshans. He has a Ph. D. He's published this in a major science magazine. What do you have? An unidentified source? Do you have anyone with a relevant degree supporting your claim that it's clearly fake?

Yes, that is his main argument. He doesn't really go any further than "No." and "Yeeeeeah." It's not very becoming for a "doctor."

But PhD's are a dime a dozen anyway. Here's a PhD from NASA itself calling China's space walk a hoax:

http://www.theepochtimes.com/n2/china-news/shenzhou-vii-fake-spacewalk-5809.html
You must must missed: "Watch as the taikonaut comes out of the hatch. Observe his movements. Imagine him in a bulky suit underwater, then watch as he waves to the camera. Thatís clearly not underwater; his motions are too rapid to be impeded by water. The movement of the straps and other things hanging off the suit donít look like they are underwater either; they look like they are in microgravity."

Please tell me who this Ph. D. from NASA you're referencing in Epoc Times is. I can't confirm his qualifications or employment at NASA. Did you do your homework? Be sure that you get the name order correct.

Also the Epoc Times serves a political agenda that just happened to align with your crazy conspiracy theory. Yellow journalism still exists!

Keep it serious, Thork. You can troll, but don't be so open. We have standards

*

Tom Bishop

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 17732
Re: CubeSat
« Reply #92 on: December 10, 2011, 03:42:18 PM »
Quote from: ClockTower
I challenge you to show that the "bubbles" accelerate. Of course, you'll just put on a tin foil changshans.

It has been demonstrated that they are wave blower bubbles and not debris escaping from the hatch.

" class="bbc_link" target="_blank">Check out the 3:00 minute mark on the second video (link with timestamp)

The bubble moves upwards and then downwards. If it was just debris escaping the hatch the debris would travel in one direction away from the craft, not change directions back towards the craft.

The bubble can also be seen expanding as it moves upwards.

But why would debris be escaping from the hatch 10 minutes after the hatch was opened anyway? The cabin gets depressurized almost immediately.
« Last Edit: December 10, 2011, 03:44:32 PM by Tom Bishop »

?

OrbisNonSufficit

  • 3124
  • I love Gasoline.
Re: CubeSat
« Reply #93 on: December 10, 2011, 03:46:19 PM »
Tom those videos that you posted are highly contested.  Neither is proof of anything.

China's Space Walk Was FAKE (part 2)

Did you watch the second video I posted? It's more detailed than the first and pretty compelling.

China released dialogue between the astronauts before the rocket even left the ground. This is absolute evidence that the mission was a carefully orchestrated fake.

The dialogue contained things like "The target is captured 12 seconds ahead of predicted time." Why would China have fake dialogue like that?

The evidence is overwhelming and compelling. Why whole thing stinks of a hoax.

I do not know why they faked a dialog, how could I?  But a faked dialog does not equate to a faked mission. 

Tom ill give it to you that this mission does indeed look faked to me, but i also have some concerns that;

1.) I have only watched two videos regarding the launch and both were trying to prove it was faked, this may skew my opinion a tad.  The whole point of these videos is to convince people of a hoax...

2.) I really do not a have a good grasp of orbit patterns/ sun positions, and to what degree these can be affected by elevation.

3.)  NASA, Japan, and many other space programs have called the launch a hige success.  If NASA did indeed wish to maintain global military supremacy i have reservations believing that they would not look for every opportunity to discredit the chinese.  It seems odd that with all of this "evidence" that they would refrain from calling the chinese out.  If the had the balls to fake a Lunar Landing, im pretty sure they have the balls to call the chinese liars.

4.)  Whenever i am shown videos of Astronauts underwater as evidence that space walks can be faked, i always see like tons upon tons of bubbles.  But in the videos that are "faked" there are many fewer, and are usually seen as only a few at a time, but quite often are seen alone.  So the space debris theory often has stronger appeal to me than bubbles.

Re: CubeSat
« Reply #94 on: December 10, 2011, 03:47:11 PM »
Quote from: ClockTower
I challenge you to show that the "bubbles" accelerate. Of course, you'll just put on a tin foil changshans.

It has been demonstrated that they are wave blower bubbles and not debris escaping from the hatch.

" class="bbc_link" target="_blank">Check out the 3:00 minute mark on the second video (link with timestamp)

The bubble moves upwards and then downwards. If it was just debris escaping the hatch the debris would travel in one direction away from the craft, not change directions back towards the craft.

Why would debris be escaping from the hatch 10 minutes after the hatch was opened anyway? The cabin gets depressurized almost immediately.
Tom, just so you know... Saying it is true doesn't make it true. Show us how you calculated the acceleration at the various marks. Tell us how you can demonstrate, as you claim has been done, that there are 'wave blowers'.

There are many reasons a piece of debris might appear to change directions. Did you consider any of them?
Keep it serious, Thork. You can troll, but don't be so open. We have standards

*

Tausami

  • Head Editor
  • Flat Earth Editor
  • 6767
  • Venerated Official of the High Zetetic Council
Re: CubeSat
« Reply #95 on: December 10, 2011, 03:51:02 PM »
Tom those videos that you posted are highly contested.  Neither is proof of anything.

China's Space Walk Was FAKE (part 2)

Did you watch the second video I posted? It's more detailed than the first and pretty compelling.

China released dialogue between the astronauts before the rocket even left the ground. This is absolute evidence that the mission was a carefully orchestrated fake.

The dialogue contained things like "The target is captured 12 seconds ahead of predicted time." Why would China have fake dialogue like that?

The evidence is overwhelming and compelling. Why whole thing stinks of a hoax.

I do not know why they faked a dialog, how could I?  But a faked dialog does not equate to a faked mission. 

Tom ill give it to you that this mission does indeed look faked to me, but i also have some concerns that;

1.) I have only watched two videos regarding the launch and both were trying to prove it was faked, this may skew my opinion a tad.  The whole point of these videos is to convince people of a hoax...
What's you're point?

2.) I really do not a have a good grasp of orbit patterns/ sun positions, and to what degree these can be affected by elevation.
Alright

3.)  NASA, Japan, and many other space programs have called the launch a hige success.  If NASA did indeed wish to maintain global military supremacy i have reservations believing that they would not look for every opportunity to discredit the chinese.  It seems odd that with all of this "evidence" that they would refrain from calling the chinese out.  If the had the balls to fake a Lunar Landing, im pretty sure they have the balls to call the chinese liars.
They're all in it together.

4.)  Whenever i am shown videos of Astronauts underwater as evidence that space walks can be faked, i always see like tons upon tons of bubbles.  But in the videos that are "faked" there are many fewer, and are usually seen as only a few at a time, but quite often are seen alone.  So the space debris theory often has stronger appeal to me than bubbles.
Obviously they took steps to avoid it. They just weren't perfect.

?

OrbisNonSufficit

  • 3124
  • I love Gasoline.
Re: CubeSat
« Reply #96 on: December 10, 2011, 03:51:26 PM »
Quote
Please tell me who this Ph. D. from NASA you're referencing in Epoc Times is. I can't confirm his qualifications or employment at NASA. Did you do your homework? Be sure that you get the name order correct.

Good luck trying to get him to give you proof that someone worked at NASA, ive been trying to get proof of Joe Gavin's job at NASA during the Lunar Lander development.  Every link i have found puts him as vice president of Grumman Corp at the time, or as an executive for Grumman working on the project.  But Tom still claims that he was a NASA manager (not sure what that even means or how high up Manager is). 

And Tom if you found a source of Gavin's employment that contradicts my source please post it in the other thread, I really do not want to derail this one.

?

OrbisNonSufficit

  • 3124
  • I love Gasoline.
Re: CubeSat
« Reply #97 on: December 10, 2011, 03:56:30 PM »

Quote
What's you're point?

it has an agenda?

Quote
They're all in it together.

Not according to Tom...  NASA wants to further the world's perception that the US has space dominance, meaning if NASA saw these issues, they would call china out on them, not congratulate them on a job well done.

Quote
Obviously they took steps to avoid it. They just weren't perfect.
I have a hard time believing that.  I've seen some amazing things done with CGI and photo shop, it just seems like a bubble would be a non issue to remove...


*

Tausami

  • Head Editor
  • Flat Earth Editor
  • 6767
  • Venerated Official of the High Zetetic Council
Re: CubeSat
« Reply #98 on: December 10, 2011, 03:59:57 PM »

Quote
What's you're point?

it has an agenda?

Quote
They're all in it together.

Not according to Tom...  NASA wants to further the world's perception that the US has space dominance, meaning if NASA saw these issues, they would call china out on them, not congratulate them on a job well done.

Quote
Obviously they took steps to avoid it. They just weren't perfect.
I have a hard time believing that.  I've seen some amazing things done with CGI and photo shop, it just seems like a bubble would be a non issue to remove...

1) Doesn't mean it's wrong.
2) I don't think Tom ever said that, and if he did he's wrong.
3) They clearly missed it.

?

OrbisNonSufficit

  • 3124
  • I love Gasoline.
Re: CubeSat
« Reply #99 on: December 10, 2011, 04:09:30 PM »


Quote
1) Doesn't mean it's wrong.
2) I don't think Tom ever said that, and if he did he's wrong.
3) They clearly missed it.

1.) true, but i am always weary of bias.
2.)
Quote
There is a Space Travel Conspiracy. The purpose of NASA is to fake the concept of space travel to further America's militaristic dominance of space. That was the purpose of NASA from the get-go: To put ICBMs and other weapons into space (or at least appear to). "Scientific exploration of new frontiers for all mankind" was just a front.
3.)I have a heard time believing that, since they have been accused of space travel fraud before.  Im pretty sure they would make sure to do a better job the second time.

*

Tom Bishop

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 17732
Re: CubeSat
« Reply #100 on: December 10, 2011, 04:10:28 PM »
You must must missed: "Watch as the taikonaut comes out of the hatch. Observe his movements. Imagine him in a bulky suit underwater, then watch as he waves to the camera. Thatís clearly not underwater; his motions are too rapid to be impeded by water. The movement of the straps and other things hanging off the suit donít look like they are underwater either; they look like they are in microgravity."

The Bad Astronomy guy apparently didn't watch the " class="bbc_link" target="_blank">second video. There is evidence that the speed of the footage was changed to make it seem like the astronaut is moving through less resistance than he is. Watch through the whole video.

Quote
Please tell me who this Ph. D. from NASA you're referencing in Epoc Times is. I can't confirm his qualifications or employment at NASA. Did you do your homework? Be sure that you get the name order correct.

It says right there in the second paragraph of the Epoch Times article:

"The Epoch Times contacted Chinese expert Dr. Qu Zheng, who worked at NASAís Jet Propulsion Laboratory, to scientifically analyze the video discrepancies of the spacewalk broadcast."

There is evidence " class="bbc_link" target="_blank">here that Qu Zheng is really a JPL employee. Jarrah White contacts him for comment. His email address is zheng.qu@jpl.nasa.gov, which can be searched for on Google for additional reference of his existence.

Not according to Tom...  NASA wants to further the world's perception that the US has space dominance, meaning if NASA saw these issues, they would call china out on them, not congratulate them on a job well done.

Just a note: NASA did not congratulate China on a "job well done." Where did you get that from?

Clearly NASA wouldn't congratulate them on a job well done if they saw the poor production values of this space fraud. In the Epoch Times article a NASA scientist is flat out calling China's space walk a hoax. You can't just say things like that and possibly strain international relations without permission from higher up. So yeah, NASA did call them out on it, even if they did not release an official statement calling it a hoax.

Also, I never said that they were all in on it. Clearly NASA and China have some kind of grudge. China requested to help with and join the International Space Station project on three separate occasions and was refused.
« Last Edit: December 10, 2011, 04:40:32 PM by Tom Bishop »

?

OrbisNonSufficit

  • 3124
  • I love Gasoline.
Re: CubeSat
« Reply #101 on: December 10, 2011, 04:31:17 PM »
Quote
Just a note: NASA did not congratulate china on a "job well done." Where did you get that from?

Clearly NASA wouldn't congratulate them on a job well done if they saw the poor production values of this space fraud. In the Epoch times article a NASA scientist is flat out calling China's space walk a hoax.

the following is in reference to an earlier space flight, and not the one that we are discussing, so it carries less weight, but still shows NASA congratulating china and wishing them a safe future.  Also NASA wished for a successful mission for the space walk, but i could not find anything following the space walk, but then again i did not search for a long time.

Quote
The launch was met with praise from around the world. For example, Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi of Japan called the launch "a great feat".[5] United States President George W. Bush congratulated Chinese President Hu and wished China continued success.[6] U.S. State Department spokesman said that the United States wished to "applaud China's success in becoming only the third country to launch people into space".[5] NASA Administrator Sean O'Keefe called Shenzhou 5 an "important achievement in human exploration" and wished China "a continued safe human space flight program."[6]
« Last Edit: December 10, 2011, 04:33:52 PM by OrbisNonSufficit »

*

El Cid

  • 169
  • ...And the truth shall set you free.
Re: CubeSat
« Reply #102 on: December 10, 2011, 04:33:32 PM »
I would be quite unable to lift Mount Everest.  If I tried, I would be filled with an overwhelming sense of impossibility.  There is something about trying to do something and failing.  So I try to convince myself I never really wanted to.  I don't try.  Not forever, of course.  The thought of never, ever being able to do it is horrifying...but maybe someday...just not today

*

Tausami

  • Head Editor
  • Flat Earth Editor
  • 6767
  • Venerated Official of the High Zetetic Council
Re: CubeSat
« Reply #103 on: December 10, 2011, 04:40:49 PM »
I would be quite unable to lift Mount Everest.  If I tried, I would be filled with an overwhelming sense of impossibility.  There is something about trying to do something and failing.  So I try to convince myself I never really wanted to.  I don't try.  Not forever, of course.  The thought of never, ever being able to do it is horrifying...but maybe someday...just not today

Umm... if you say so...

*

Tom Bishop

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 17732
Re: CubeSat
« Reply #104 on: December 10, 2011, 04:57:44 PM »
the following is in reference to an earlier space flight, and not the one that we are discussing, so it carries less weight, but still shows NASA congratulating china and wishing them a safe future.  Also NASA wished for a successful mission for the space walk, but i could not find anything following the space walk, but then again i did not search for a long time.

Quote
The launch was met with praise from around the world. For example, Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi of Japan called the launch "a great feat".[5] United States President George W. Bush congratulated Chinese President Hu and wished China continued success.[6] U.S. State Department spokesman said that the United States wished to "applaud China's success in becoming only the third country to launch people into space".[5] NASA Administrator Sean O'Keefe called Shenzhou 5 an "important achievement in human exploration" and wished China "a continued safe human space flight program."[6]

Shenzhou-5 wasn't as publicized as Shenzhou-7 and there wasn't a hoax outcry. With the fake astronaut dialogue, rumblings about a hoax of Shenzhou-7 were happening all over the internet before the rocket even took off. We were talking about it here on these forums before the space walk footage came in.

Xinhua, the official press agency of the government of the People's Republic of China, listed the countries who congratulated China on its Shenzhou-7. The US, UK, or Russia isn't included among them:

http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2008-09/28/content_10129558.htm

It's possible that the US congratulated China after that article was published, but I doubt it.
« Last Edit: December 10, 2011, 05:00:56 PM by Tom Bishop »

*

zarg

  • 1181
  • Saudi Arabian inventor of Dr. Pepper
Re: CubeSat
« Reply #105 on: December 10, 2011, 05:27:05 PM »
Just to clarify:

There is no Flat Earth Conspiracy. NASA is not hiding the shape of the earth from anyone. The purpose of NASA is not to 'hide the shape of the earth' or 'trick people into thinking it's round' or anything of the sort.

There is a Space Travel Conspiracy. The purpose of NASA is to fake the concept of space travel to further America's militaristic dominance of space. That was the purpose of NASA from the get-go: To put ICBMs and other weapons into space (or at least appear to). "Scientific exploration of new frontiers for all mankind" was just a front.

Thanks but I already understand your beliefs about the motives and scope of the conspiracy. Your idea is that NASA employees themselves believe the world is round out of ignorance, because they have never actually seen Earth from space; their purpose in creating fake round Earth photographs and such is to convince people that they have been to space when they have not.

That's not a new theory, as far as I know; it's the one you've had all along. And it's still a conspiracy theory, just as it always has been. So please explain to me why Roundy claims that "the current theory is that there is no Conspiracy". What is your response to this? I think "the current theory" is a constantly fluctuating vagueness that happens to be the opposite of whatever it is that you FE'ers can't think of an answer to at the time.

This thread is not about the Chinese space program; it's about CubeSat, which still has not been reconciled with FET.  If you can make your own satellite and it takes pictures of itself revolving around a spherical Earth, what then?


Quote
- I have working model rockets in my garage which travel straight upwards until they fade out of sight. But just because I have working rockets doesn't make me a space power.

Well Tom, actually, there's this thing called CubeSat, you see...
Quote from: Cat Earth Theory
[Lord Wilmore's writings] are written the way a high schooler thinks an educated person should sound like.  The pathetic pseudo-academic writing can't hide the lack of any real substance.

*

Roundy the Truthinessist

  • Flat Earth TheFLAMETHROWER!
  • The Elder Ones
  • 27043
  • I'm the boss.
Re: CubeSat
« Reply #106 on: December 10, 2011, 05:35:32 PM »
So please explain to me why Roundy claims that "the current theory is that there is no Conspiracy". What is your response to this? I think "the current theory" is a constantly fluctuating vagueness that happens to be the opposite of whatever it is that you FE'ers can't think of an answer to at the time.

Please don't misunderstand me; I never meant to imply that the theory that there is no Conspiracy is the only one believed right now.  It's simply one that's gained a lot of momentum of late and one that many FEers have come to agree with.  Obviously there are still FEers (like Tom) who believe in the Conspiracy.
Where did you educate the biology, in toulet?

*

Tom Bishop

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 17732
Re: CubeSat
« Reply #107 on: December 10, 2011, 05:44:23 PM »
Quote
Thanks but I already understand your beliefs about the motives and scope of the conspiracy. Your idea is that NASA employees themselves believe the world is round out of ignorance, because they have never actually seen Earth from space; their purpose in creating fake round Earth photographs and such is to convince people that they have been to space when they have not.

Correct, that is my belief.

Quote
That's not a new theory, as far as I know; it's the one you've had all along. And it's still a conspiracy theory, just as it always has been. So please explain to me why Roundy claims that "the current theory is that there is no Conspiracy".

I don't know what Roundy means by that.

Quote
This thread is not about the Chinese space program; it's about CubeSat, which still has not been reconciled with FET.  If you can make your own satellite and it takes pictures of itself revolving around a spherical Earth, what then?

You can make satellites, but you can't launch them. Only approved Government Contractors can launch stuff into orbit. Publicly available rocket technologies that can reach space are not available to the public as a matter of law.

The universities who work on CubeSat give the devices to NASA or the ESA contractors, along with a whole lot of money, to put it into orbit. Instead of putting the devices into orbit they launch it on a stratellite - a high altitude dirigible that can reach the edge of space.

The same process is used when countries or companies come to NASA wanting satellites.

Indeed, NASA has a balloon program:

"Large unmanned helium balloons provide NASA with an inexpensive means to place payloads into a space environment."

"Many important scientific observations in fields such as hard x-ray/gamma- ray and infra-red astronomy, cosmic rays and atmospheric studies have been made from balloons."

Even telescopes can be hung from balloons.
« Last Edit: December 16, 2011, 11:36:41 AM by Tom Bishop »

*

zarg

  • 1181
  • Saudi Arabian inventor of Dr. Pepper
Re: CubeSat
« Reply #108 on: December 10, 2011, 05:57:21 PM »
So please explain to me why Roundy claims that "the current theory is that there is no Conspiracy". What is your response to this? I think "the current theory" is a constantly fluctuating vagueness that happens to be the opposite of whatever it is that you FE'ers can't think of an answer to at the time.

Please don't misunderstand me; I never meant to imply that the theory that there is no Conspiracy is the only one believed right now.  It's simply one that's gained a lot of momentum of late and one that many FEers have come to agree with.  Obviously there are still FEers (like Tom) who believe in the Conspiracy.

But you yourself clearly aren't among those who no longer believe in the Conspiracy, as evidenced by the second thread I linked to. So why did you respond by telling me about this new theory, as opposed to actually answering the question according to your own belief? It's nothing but more evasiveness, as you have been doing throughout this whole thread, and as Tom has done by hijacking the thread with his arguments against the Chinese program.

I'm looking for an actual explanation -- not vague allusions to some "other" theory, nor the copout of "a theory has to start somewhere" -- of how a satellite (either NASA's, if it's not a conspiracy, or CubeSat's) orbits Earth and why its photography evidently displays a spherical object.
Quote from: Cat Earth Theory
[Lord Wilmore's writings] are written the way a high schooler thinks an educated person should sound like.  The pathetic pseudo-academic writing can't hide the lack of any real substance.

*

zarg

  • 1181
  • Saudi Arabian inventor of Dr. Pepper
Re: CubeSat
« Reply #109 on: December 10, 2011, 06:36:22 PM »
First, thank you Tom for giving the first straight answer in 6 pages.


The universities who work on CubeSat give the devices to NASA or the ESA contractors, along with a whole lot of money, to put it into orbit. Instead of putting the devices into orbit they launch it on a stratellite - a high altitude dirigible.

Now come on Tom, you know that isn't true. It doesn't take much research time to determine that not all are put under the care of NASA or ESA. And they do go into orbit. These are your satellites that you built by yourself with no outside help, that return telemetry directly back to you, and that telemetry proves that they are in orbit.

Let's say for the sake of argument that they are all launched by the Conspiracy. What difference would it make? Even if you built the rockets yourself, you could still say it never went to space because you weren't in the rocket yourself. You see, either way, you're entirely dependent on the satellite itself to prove whether or not the launch was a success. If you have proof from your satellite that it is in fact in space, how it got there becomes a moot point.

The NEE-01 Pegasus will launch next year and have a live video feed from space. Is it a lie, Tom?
« Last Edit: December 10, 2011, 06:38:28 PM by zarg »
Quote from: Cat Earth Theory
[Lord Wilmore's writings] are written the way a high schooler thinks an educated person should sound like.  The pathetic pseudo-academic writing can't hide the lack of any real substance.

*

Rushy

  • 8971
Re: CubeSat
« Reply #110 on: December 10, 2011, 06:40:46 PM »
Tom, have you explained yet how DirecTV launched their satellite fleet? Their launches were not sponsored/endorsed or even touched by NASA. They were done by a private company.

*

Tom Bishop

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 17732
Re: CubeSat
« Reply #111 on: December 10, 2011, 07:20:32 PM »
Quote from: zarg
Now come on Tom, you know that isn't true. It doesn't take much research time to determine that not all are put under the care of NASA or ESA.

I didn't say they were. That's why I said "NASA or ESA contractors." Only certain government approved contractors can put things into orbit.

Quote from: zarg
And they do go into orbit. These are your satellites that you built by yourself with no outside help, that return telemetry directly back to you, and that telemetry proves that they are in orbit.

You need outside help to put it into orbit, the government doesn't allow the public to put payloads into space.

Quote from: zarg
Let's say for the sake of argument that they are all launched by the Conspiracy. What difference would it make? Even if you built the rockets yourself, you could still say it never went to space because you weren't in the rocket yourself. You see, either way, you're entirely dependent on the satellite itself to prove whether or not the launch was a success. If you have proof from your satellite that it is in fact in space, how it got there becomes a moot point.

You don't build the rockets yourself. The rockets technologies which can reach space or anything near it are very classified.

In order for these universities to get things into space they have hand over their cubesats to government contractors who are authorized to put things into space.

Quote from: zarg
The NEE-01 Pegasus will launch next year and have a live video feed from space. Is it a lie, Tom?

The Ecuadorian Space Agency may have built that little cubesat, but they aren't going to launch it. The Ecuadorian Space Agency doesn't have launch capability. Only a relatively small handful of countries claim to have the capability to launch things into space. Like the "Canadian Space Agency," Ecuador will use either a NASA or ESA partner to launch the device.

The video feed will look like this: http://www.wired.com/gadgetlab/2009/09/the-150-space-camera-mit-students-beat-nasa-on-beer-money-budget/

(Slight curvature at the edge of space occurs from the fact that the observer is looking down at a circle)

Quote from: Irushwithscvs
Tom, have you explained yet how DirecTV launched their satellite fleet? Their launches were not sponsored/endorsed or even touched by NASA. They were done by a private company.

Was that company a government contractor and one of NASA's biggest partners? Because I'm betting it was.
« Last Edit: December 10, 2011, 07:33:59 PM by Tom Bishop »

*

Roundy the Truthinessist

  • Flat Earth TheFLAMETHROWER!
  • The Elder Ones
  • 27043
  • I'm the boss.
Re: CubeSat
« Reply #112 on: December 10, 2011, 07:24:55 PM »
So please explain to me why Roundy claims that "the current theory is that there is no Conspiracy". What is your response to this? I think "the current theory" is a constantly fluctuating vagueness that happens to be the opposite of whatever it is that you FE'ers can't think of an answer to at the time.

Please don't misunderstand me; I never meant to imply that the theory that there is no Conspiracy is the only one believed right now.  It's simply one that's gained a lot of momentum of late and one that many FEers have come to agree with.  Obviously there are still FEers (like Tom) who believe in the Conspiracy.

But you yourself clearly aren't among those who no longer believe in the Conspiracy, as evidenced by the second thread I linked to.

Second thread you linked to where?  ???

I should point out that I sometimes play the part of devil's advocate when it comes to Conspiracy topics, as I haven't completely ruled it out (some of the points, like Tom's about the shoddy appearance of the lunar lander, seem shockingly plausible).  But my general belief is that there's sufficient evidence that the Earth appears curved from high above it, and that there sure seem to actually be satellites whizzing high above us, so that the necessity of a Conspiracy is effectively nullified.

The opinion I espouse in this thread represents my sincere belief regarding FET and the Conspiracy.
« Last Edit: December 10, 2011, 07:29:02 PM by Roundy the Truthinessist »
Where did you educate the biology, in toulet?

*

zarg

  • 1181
  • Saudi Arabian inventor of Dr. Pepper
Re: CubeSat
« Reply #113 on: December 10, 2011, 07:30:04 PM »
Second thread you linked to where?  ???

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=52049.msg1277798#msg1277798


Quote
I should point out that I sometimes play the part of devil's advocate when it comes to Conspiracy topics, as I haven't completely ruled it out (some of the points, like Tom's about the shoddy appearance of the lunar lander, seem shockingly plausible).  But my general belief is that there's sufficient evidence that the Earth appears curved from high above it, and that there sure seem to actually be satellites whizzing high above us, so that the necessity of a Conspiracy is effectively nullified.

Great, so you believe there's no conspiracy. That's settled, then. Now, answer:

Quote
I'm looking for an actual explanation -- not vague allusions to some "other" theory, nor the copout of "a theory has to start somewhere" -- of how a satellite (either NASA's, if it's not a conspiracy, or CubeSat's) orbits Earth and why its photography evidently displays a spherical object.
Quote from: Cat Earth Theory
[Lord Wilmore's writings] are written the way a high schooler thinks an educated person should sound like.  The pathetic pseudo-academic writing can't hide the lack of any real substance.

*

zarg

  • 1181
  • Saudi Arabian inventor of Dr. Pepper
Re: CubeSat
« Reply #114 on: December 10, 2011, 07:48:13 PM »
Quote
Let's say for the sake of argument that they are all launched by the Conspiracy. What difference would it make? Even if you built the rockets yourself, you could still say it never went to space because you weren't in the rocket yourself. You see, either way, you're entirely dependent on the satellite itself to prove whether or not the launch was a success. If you have proof from your satellite that it is in fact in space, how it got there becomes a moot point.

You don't build the rockets yourself. The rockets technologies which can reach space or anything near it are very classified.

In order for these universities to get things into space they have hand over their cubesats to government contractors who are authorized to put things into space.

...Tom, please. Did you even read what you just replied to? The satellite is what proves whether or not it made it to space. All you've done here is repeat that they don't build their own rockets. That is irrelevant. The satellites send back proof that they are in space. And they built the satellites. The satellites are not fabrications from NASA. It's theirs. They built the satellite. It's their very own satellite. And it's telling them it's in space. Their satellite. In space. Get the picture? The travel accommodations are irrelevant. The fact remains, it's in space.


Quote
The video feed will look like this: http://www.wired.com/gadgetlab/2009/09/the-150-space-camera-mit-students-beat-nasa-on-beer-money-budget/

(Slight curvature at the edge of space occurs from the fact that the observer is looking down at a circle)

No it won't look like that, because that craft didn't break into orbit. It only went to the stratosphere and then came right back down. The CubeSat will be in orbit, and the video feed will show all 360 degrees of the sphere.
« Last Edit: December 10, 2011, 07:50:02 PM by zarg »
Quote from: Cat Earth Theory
[Lord Wilmore's writings] are written the way a high schooler thinks an educated person should sound like.  The pathetic pseudo-academic writing can't hide the lack of any real substance.

*

Rushy

  • 8971
Re: CubeSat
« Reply #115 on: December 10, 2011, 08:08:56 PM »


Quote from: Irushwithscvs
Tom, have you explained yet how DirecTV launched their satellite fleet? Their launches were not sponsored/endorsed or even touched by NASA. They were done by a private company.

Was that company a government contractor and one of NASA's biggest partners? Because I'm betting it was.

You would lose that bet. The company is not partnered with NASA and is not a government contractor, nor is it government funded.

http://www.ilslaunch.com/

*

El Cid

  • 169
  • ...And the truth shall set you free.
Re: CubeSat
« Reply #116 on: December 10, 2011, 09:08:08 PM »
So please explain to me why Roundy claims that "the current theory is that there is no Conspiracy". What is your response to this? I think "the current theory" is a constantly fluctuating vagueness that happens to be the opposite of whatever it is that you FE'ers can't think of an answer to at the time.

Please don't misunderstand me; I never meant to imply that the theory that there is no Conspiracy is the only one believed right now.  It's simply one that's gained a lot of momentum of late and one that many FEers have come to agree with.  Obviously there are still FEers (like Tom) who believe in the Conspiracy.

But you yourself clearly aren't among those who no longer believe in the Conspiracy, as evidenced by the second thread I linked to.

Second thread you linked to where?  ???

I should point out that I sometimes play the part of devil's advocate when it comes to Conspiracy topics, as I haven't completely ruled it out (some of the points, like Tom's about the shoddy appearance of the lunar lander, seem shockingly plausible).  But my general belief is that there's sufficient evidence that the Earth appears curved from high above it, and that there sure seem to actually be satellites whizzing high above us, so that the necessity of a Conspiracy is effectively nullified.

The opinion I espouse in this thread represents my sincere belief regarding FET and the Conspiracy.
Satellites exist?  So this satellite picture of Antarctica is real?

« Last Edit: December 10, 2011, 09:09:55 PM by El Cid »

*

Tom Bishop

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 17732
Re: CubeSat
« Reply #117 on: December 10, 2011, 10:44:30 PM »


Quote from: Irushwithscvs
Tom, have you explained yet how DirecTV launched their satellite fleet? Their launches were not sponsored/endorsed or even touched by NASA. They were done by a private company.

Was that company a government contractor and one of NASA's biggest partners? Because I'm betting it was.

You would lose that bet. The company is not partnered with NASA and is not a government contractor, nor is it government funded.

http://www.ilslaunch.com/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Launch_Services

"ILS was formed in 1995 as a private spaceflight partnership between Lockheed Martin (LM), Khrunichev and Energia."

It's a joint venture between three large government contractors, which makes ILS a... government contractor.

Indeed, Lockheed Martin is NASA's #1 contractor. I don't know why you think this company is unconnected to NASA.

« Last Edit: December 11, 2011, 09:31:21 AM by Tom Bishop »

Re: CubeSat
« Reply #118 on: December 10, 2011, 11:22:18 PM »
My uncle owns a fishing company in the Gulf of Mexico, sometimes he sells fish products to stores such as walmart, occasionally an employee at NASA buys fish sticks from walmart and proceeds to eat them... Does that make my uncle part of the conspiracy?  ???

If so, that's pretty cool  8)
You, sir, can't comprehend the idea of bottoms.

*

Moon squirter

  • 1405
  • Ding dong!
Re: CubeSat
« Reply #119 on: December 11, 2011, 12:37:50 AM »


Quote from: Irushwithscvs
Tom, have you explained yet how DirecTV launched their satellite fleet? Their launches were not sponsored/endorsed or even touched by NASA. They were done by a private company.

Was that company a government contractor and one of NASA's biggest partners? Because I'm betting it was.

You would lose that bet. The company is not partnered with NASA and is not a government contractor, nor is it government funded.

http://www.ilslaunch.com/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Launch_Services

"ILS was formed in 1995 as a private spaceflight partnership between Lockheed Martin (LM), Khrunichev and Energia."

It's a joint venture between three large government contractors, which makes ILS a... government contractor.

Indeed, Lockheed Martin is NASA's #1 contractor. I don't know why you think this company is "unconnected to NASA."

Tom, please can you provide the following evidence:

1. That LM is a US government department and not an autonomous commercial entity that markets goods and services to other gov and non-gov entities.
2. That ILS is a US government project and is controlled by the US government.
« Last Edit: December 11, 2011, 12:40:37 AM by Moon squirter »
I haven't performed it and I've never claimed to. I've have trouble being in two places at the same time.