Rosetta's Philae probe makes historic landing on comet

I haven't read up on this comet, so if you're game, I'll interrogate you. If not, I'll wait until someone has the info. You see, it makes me vomit and hurts my eyes to have to look at the explanations given out for this stuff in large amounts, so I'll get snippets by asking questions.

Ok, how far away was this comet when this little beast landed on it?

How far away from what? We can't read your mind. You must be wearing aluminum foil or something.

The answer is roughly 30 light minutes.

credibility.

it is what most spaceman/spaced-out-men debates essentially rely upon.

why and how is credit is measured and given can only be determined by the individual that is being asked to acknowledge the claim/s made by the credit seeking source.

if a rag clad vagrant were to claim he/she was the owner of a Lamborghini, it would seem prudent to view said claim as unlikely to be true.

sure, it could be possible. recently inherited and in probate. won in a competition and in process of being sold.  of such sentimental value that rough-sleeping and refuse eating is preferable to disposal for currency.

however, when year upon year said vagrant, still rag-clad and starved looking, makes further claims of gulfstream jet ownership, supermodel intimacy, and other such far-fetched claims, the chances are he is lying.

quoting the private plate of the lambo, or the airfield that hangars the jet, or the proclivities of miss delavigne, will do nothing to substantiate his/her nonsense.

the credibility of the space industry can also only be given subjectively, but for me the ranting, piss soaked tramp really needs to be hosteled, deloused, and found some beneficial activity, to remove the disturbance it creates.

The answer is roughly 30 light minutes.

Ok, so going by mainstream science's ways...am I correct is saying that this supposed comet is landed upon by this contraption, 334,800,000 miles away from Earth?
And this probe not only managed to land on it but it also managed to come in behind it at 35,000 mph through it's burning tail and debris, to land perfectly on it?
Seriously, is this how it's supposed to have happened?

credibility.

it is what most spaceman/spaced-out-men debates essentially rely upon.

why and how is credit is measured and given can only be determined by the individual that is being asked to acknowledge the claim/s made by the credit seeking source.

if a rag clad vagrant were to claim he/she was the owner of a Lamborghini, it would seem prudent to view said claim as unlikely to be true.

sure, it could be possible. recently inherited and in probate. won in a competition and in process of being sold.  of such sentimental value that rough-sleeping and refuse eating is preferable to disposal for currency.

however, when year upon year said vagrant, still rag-clad and starved looking, makes further claims of gulfstream jet ownership, supermodel intimacy, and other such far-fetched claims, the chances are he is lying.

quoting the private plate of the lambo, or the airfield that hangars the jet, or the proclivities of miss delavigne, will do nothing to substantiate his/her nonsense.

the credibility of the space industry can also only be given subjectively, but for me the ranting, piss soaked tramp really needs to be hosteled, deloused, and found some beneficial activity, to remove the disturbance it creates.

That seems like a very fair assumption. I agree with that.

if a rag clad vagrant were to claim he/she was the owner of a Lamborghini, it would seem prudent to view said claim as unlikely to be true.

...

quoting the private plate of the lambo, or the airfield that hangars the jet, or the proclivities of miss delavigne, will do nothing to substantiate his/her nonsense.

That's why you would want the hobo to show you this car of his. It's not an unreasonable request. People question NASA.. well they have the equipment, the capability. Seems more than plausible. People say conspiracy, I say show me the car!

Quote

if a rag clad vagrant were to claim he/she was the owner of a Lamborghini, it would seem prudent to view said claim as unlikely to be true.

...

quoting the private plate of the lambo, or the airfield that hangars the jet, or the proclivities of miss delavigne, will do nothing to substantiate his/her nonsense.

That's why you would want the hobo to show you this car of his. It's not an unreasonable request. People question NASA.. well they have the equipment, the capability. Seems more than plausible. People say conspiracy, I say show me the car!

I agree. I say, let us all see the spaceships and examine them physically and that way we can all be sure on what we are dealing with.
What's the chances?
I'd say about the same as the vagrant getting you the log book for his supercar and private jet.

to not recognise conspiracy is to claim responsibility is attributable to a single person.

possible, in fact complete understanding of any lie may not be possible by anyone or any group that is tasked with its telling.

compartmentalization and delegation easily explain the genuine sincerity of any claimant, when their conviction of the overall premise is taken into account.

they (the individual) may believe the story, in fact the idealistic urge to support the truth by means of disingenuous contribution is the preferred motivation of the true Machiavellian.

I agree. I say, let us all see the spaceships and examine them physically and that way we can all be sure on what we are dealing with.
What's the chances?
I'd say about the same as the vagrant getting you the log book for his supercar and private jet.

There are a number of spacecraft on display that you can go and see. You can also watch the launches. Physically examine prior to launch? No way. Using the car analogy, that would be like inviting every fruit loop on the internet to poke at the engine and brakes of a billion $ race car just before start; not going to happen for very good reasons.

Lets start with what we can agree on and then we can try to ascertain what it is we would like from the opposing argument.
These are just my thoughts off the top of my head:
1) Do we all at least agree that it would be much easier to fake this to the public than to actually go out and do it?   Just because you fire a rocket into the atmosphere doesn't mean it is being sent long distances. 
2) If NASA was involved in this type of conspiracy they would most likely ensure that no loose ends were exposed.

If I could question NASA (or whichever organization did this), I would tell them that they no doubt know of a growing group of people who believe space travel to be a conspiracy.    Is there something you can show those people that would help them believe that this isn't all nothing more than somewhat easily produced fake video footage?

Now since we obviously can't question them here, at least we can ask the people who represent them.. so I put the question to you, i.e. the non-skeptics..."Based on what we the public see, you have to at least acknowledge the possibility that this is fake.. and what would you show to or tell a skeptic that you think could strengthen the validity of these space missions?

These are just my thoughts if anyone is interested in engaging them.

Quote from: hoppy on November 12, 2014, 04:09:21 PM

I'll tell you scepti. It is magic 

Excellent answer, hoppy. 

To people without sufficient understanding, I suppose it is magic.

To people who make an effort to understand, it is science and engineering.

1) Do we all at least agree that it would be much easier to fake this to the public than to actually go out and do it?   Just because you fire a rocket into the atmosphere doesn't mean it is being sent long distances. 

No. If we're talking about a handful of people, maybe. This is a huge institution, existing for a long time. In an outfit like that, it would be -very- difficult to keep the conspiracy in line. Possible? Maybe. Likely? No. Plus the countless enthusiasts who have verified their findings. 

2) If NASA was involved in this type of conspiracy they would most likely ensure that no loose ends were exposed.

Assuming conspiracy, I'm sure it would try.

Is there something you can show those people that would help them believe that this isn't all nothing more than somewhat easily produced fake video footage?

Every shred of evidence in favour of NASA/Space travel being legit is automatically shot down as fake.  Yet, over in the "excursion to the antarctica" thread Pongo says:

All pics from high altitude balloons I've seen show a flat earth. It's some of our strongest photographic evidence.

You can't have it both ways. You'll be glad to know the urge to find the edge of the earth is so strong, the fund is currently at... $1,300/$4,000,000.. which hasn't budged in close to a year.

i.e. the non-skeptics..."Based on what we the public see, you have to at least acknowledge the possibility that this is fake.. and what would you show to or tell a skeptic that you think could strengthen the validity of these space missions?

First, we're all sceptic. I for one do have a small part of me that does reserve judgement on things I can't verify first hand. Space travel, Evolution, etc.
However, with the supporting evidence that I can see I tend to believe because:
A) A large scale conspiracy is not likely. Need solid proof of this before I start discounting entire branches of science.
B) There's enough supporting evidence that what they say is likely true.
Just because there HAVE been fakes, doesn't automatically mean it's ALL fake.

Legion, do you believe that cars, computers and airplanes actually exist?

If yes, you are the most indoctrinated and brainwashed cretin in the world.
If no, you are a real truth seeker that relies on logic and common sense.

Lets start with what we can agree on and then we can try to ascertain what it is we would like from the opposing argument.
These are just my thoughts off the top of my head:
1) Do we all at least agree that it would be much easier to fake this to the public than to actually go out and do it?   Just because you fire a rocket into the atmosphere doesn't mean it is being sent long distances. 
2) If NASA was involved in this type of conspiracy they would most likely ensure that no loose ends were exposed.

If I could question NASA (or whichever organization did this), I would tell them that they no doubt know of a growing group of people who believe space travel to be a conspiracy.    Is there something you can show those people that would help them believe that this isn't all nothing more than somewhat easily produced fake video footage?

Now since we obviously can't question them here, at least we can ask the people who represent them.. so I put the question to you, i.e. the non-skeptics..."Based on what we the public see, you have to at least acknowledge the possibility that this is fake.. and what would you show to or tell a skeptic that you think could strengthen the validity of these space missions?

These are just my thoughts if anyone is interested in engaging them.

I am not sure how easy it would be to fake this. Understand that there will be thousands of photos, video footage and sensor telemetry from this. Not to mention all the documentation must be scientifically rigorous and is often published. It might be easier in the short term to fake but I am not sure how I personally could gauge that. In the long term: no way. The constant spinning plate act of making sure anyone whose name is attached to this never divulges the cover up becomes increasingly difficult as time goes on.

In regards to the evidence NASA could provide it is already out there. Look through a telescope and you can see the ISS in pretty good detail. There are millions of photos and thousands of hours of video. There are moon rocks. There is independent reception of radio signals from the Apollo 11 mission. It goes on and on. Conspiracy subscribers will always find a way to disbelieve the truth.

Quote from: sceptimatic on November 12, 2014, 04:12:09 PM

Quote from: hoppy on November 12, 2014, 04:09:21 PM

I'll tell you scepti. It is magic 

Excellent answer, hoppy. 

To people without sufficient understanding, I suppose it is magic.

To people who make an effort to understand, it is science and engineering.

No, it's not science and engineering at all. It's downright blatant lies with a bunch of willing well paid crap actors of the Z list category, happily taking part in spinning a yarn, because, well,it's just a yarn...no one gets hurt, do they?
Correct. Nobody gets hurt, except in the pocket and if the truth ever came out....in their trusting mind.

How in the hell any rational person can take this serious will remain a mystery to me. But having said that, I suppose the brightest memory gymnasts hang onto star trek/ star wars series as if it was real, so what the hell, eh?....let this be real as well. 

Quote from: dishymars on November 12, 2014, 11:41:00 PM

Lets start with what we can agree on and then we can try to ascertain what it is we would like from the opposing argument.
These are just my thoughts off the top of my head:
1) Do we all at least agree that it would be much easier to fake this to the public than to actually go out and do it?   Just because you fire a rocket into the atmosphere doesn't mean it is being sent long distances. 
2) If NASA was involved in this type of conspiracy they would most likely ensure that no loose ends were exposed.

If I could question NASA (or whichever organization did this), I would tell them that they no doubt know of a growing group of people who believe space travel to be a conspiracy.    Is there something you can show those people that would help them believe that this isn't all nothing more than somewhat easily produced fake video footage?

Now since we obviously can't question them here, at least we can ask the people who represent them.. so I put the question to you, i.e. the non-skeptics..."Based on what we the public see, you have to at least acknowledge the possibility that this is fake.. and what would you show to or tell a skeptic that you think could strengthen the validity of these space missions?

These are just my thoughts if anyone is interested in engaging them.

I am not sure how easy it would be to fake this. Understand that there will be thousands of photos, video footage and sensor telemetry from this. Not to mention all the documentation must be scientifically rigorous and is often published. It might be easier in the short term to fake but I am not sure how I personally could gauge that. In the long term: no way. The constant spinning plate act of making sure anyone whose name is attached to this never divulges the cover up becomes increasingly difficult as time goes on.

In regards to the evidence NASA could provide it is already out there. Look through a telescope and you can see the ISS in pretty good detail. There are millions of photos and thousands of hours of video. There are moon rocks. There is independent reception of radio signals from the Apollo 11 mission. It goes on and on. Conspiracy subscribers will always find a way to disbelieve the truth.

And people like you will always find a way to simply believe anything you're told, as long as it's told by those you hero worship.

How in the hell can a witness become credible against the system?
Any witness won't get the chance. And anyone getting any air time by any means will be labelled a fruit loop. Are you saying you can't see this happening?

How, indeed? It must be impossible for a whistleblower to ever be credible or taken as anything other than a nutcase. Here we Google a recent one.

Quote from: JimmyTheCrab on November 13, 2014, 02:39:08 AM

Quote from: sceptimatic on November 12, 2014, 04:12:09 PM

Quote from: hoppy on November 12, 2014, 04:09:21 PM

I'll tell you scepti. It is magic 

Excellent answer, hoppy. 

To people without sufficient understanding, I suppose it is magic.

To people who make an effort to understand, it is science and engineering.

No, it's not science and engineering at all. It's downright blatant lies with a bunch of willing well paid crap actors of the Z list category, happily taking part in spinning a yarn, because, well,it's just a yarn...no one gets hurt, do they?
Correct. Nobody gets hurt, except in the pocket and if the truth ever came out....in their trusting mind.

How in the hell any rational person can take this serious will remain a mystery to me. But having said that, I suppose the brightest memory gymnasts hang onto star trek/ star wars series as if it was real, so what the hell, eh?....let this be real as well. 

Blah..blah...blah..

Yes, we get the idea.  Do you have to keep yapping the same crap out over and over again?

Why don't you attempt to include some actual content in your posts?

Legion, do you believe that cars, computers and airplanes actually exist?

If yes, you are the most indoctrinated and brainwashed cretin in the world.
If no, you are a real truth seeker that relies on logic and common sense.

What?

How in the hell any rational person can take this serious will remain a mystery to me.

LOL..... I'm guessing everything is a "mystery" to you sceptimatic.

Quote from: sceptimatic on November 13, 2014, 06:04:46 AM

How in the hell any rational person can take this serious will remain a mystery to me.

LOL..... I'm guessing everything is a "mystery" to you sceptimatic.

It wouldn't need to be if people would stop lying their arses off.

It wouldn't need to be if people would stop lying their arses off.

This is so funny... the forum's resident liar calling everybody else liars.  You've been caught out once too often lying sceptimatic to accuse others of the same thing.  Maybe if you told the truth a little more often here, people wouldn't repeatedly take the piss out of you.

Think about it.

why no posts of the incredible, fantastic photos i glimpsed earlier today of the 'probe' (when did this morph from being a space alien bumhole invasion device term, into a space turd attaching device term?) both just before, and after, its glorious (hallelujah) landing on its catchy named new perch?

perhaps those who are not duped are still laughing, while the believers celebrate effusively (but no more effusively than frumpy stereotype defying ESA sci-matron, its just not possible to emulate such.......behaviour?), or lay prostate before their televisions just trying to comprehend the unbelievable achievement they believe regardless.

i cannot decide which should be first, in the interest of comedic value, on the bill.

in-bound photo of 'lander' looking like the first piece of a decoupage upon an ink black void.

the hysterical theatrics of matronly-aunt-rocket-scientist just going way off the reservation, with ironically no reservations.

or the protracted, dead-pan dialogue describing the 'three bouncy bounces' that increased the excitement, or hilarity, dependent on the viewers disposition.

maybe a montage, of the truly incredible photos, leading into the unbelievable (and bouncy) reaction of ESA nut-job, followed by fantastic explanations of the bouncy climax to an embarrassing overall performance.

comedic gold.

why no posts of the incredible, fantastic photos i glimpsed earlier today of the 'probe' (when did this morph from being a space alien bumhole invasion device term, into a space turd attaching device term?) both just before, and after, its glorious (hallelujah) landing on its catchy named new perch?

perhaps those who are not duped are still laughing, while the believers celebrate effusively (but no more effusively than frumpy stereotype defying ESA sci-matron, its just not possible to emulate such.......behaviour?), or lay prostate before their televisions just trying to comprehend the unbelievable achievement they believe regardless.

i cannot decide which should be first, in the interest of comedic value, on the bill.

in-bound photo of 'lander' looking like the first piece of a decoupage upon an ink black void.

the hysterical theatrics of matronly-aunt-rocket-scientist just going way off the reservation, with ironically no reservations.

or the protracted, dead-pan dialogue describing the 'three bouncy bounces' that increased the excitement, or hilarity, dependent on the viewers disposition.

maybe a montage, of the truly incredible photos, leading into the unbelievable (and bouncy) reaction of ESA nut-job, followed by fantastic explanations of the bouncy climax to an embarrassing overall performance.

comedic gold.

So explain what people working on the project are doing.

Quote from: RuSpinningAround? on November 13, 2014, 02:55:27 PM

why no posts of the incredible, fantastic photos i glimpsed earlier today of the 'probe' (when did this morph from being a space alien bumhole invasion device term, into a space turd attaching device term?) both just before, and after, its glorious (hallelujah) landing on its catchy named new perch?

perhaps those who are not duped are still laughing, while the believers celebrate effusively (but no more effusively than frumpy stereotype defying ESA sci-matron, its just not possible to emulate such.......behaviour?), or lay prostate before their televisions just trying to comprehend the unbelievable achievement they believe regardless.

i cannot decide which should be first, in the interest of comedic value, on the bill.

in-bound photo of 'lander' looking like the first piece of a decoupage upon an ink black void.

the hysterical theatrics of matronly-aunt-rocket-scientist just going way off the reservation, with ironically no reservations.

or the protracted, dead-pan dialogue describing the 'three bouncy bounces' that increased the excitement, or hilarity, dependent on the viewers disposition.

maybe a montage, of the truly incredible photos, leading into the unbelievable (and bouncy) reaction of ESA nut-job, followed by fantastic explanations of the bouncy climax to an embarrassing overall performance.

comedic gold.

So explain what people working on the project are doing.

does my obvious disdain for the idea that there is any 'project' not discourage seeking an answer for 'people, working on' said projects exact 'doings' by you seem rather silly?

which persons activity interests you the most? for how long a period, overall, and for what portion of each 24h day-cycle the period covers?

the answer is of course: i have no idea.

the fantastical expansion upon tv/film characters lives and back stories is not uncommon, though not a particular interest of mine.

the genre is fanfiction, where various sub-genres of varying (invariably shades of bad i'd guess) quality and length can be found. my limited forays into its archives revealed the usual internet blend of stupidity, anger and lots of porn.

arya and gendry, the song of sound and scat. thats funny, if you get it, which most wont.

so what do the people on the television do when we can't see them?

Quote from: inquisitive on November 13, 2014, 03:23:27 PM

So explain what people working on the project are doing.

<blah, blah, blah, blah>...

i have no idea.

...<blah, blah, blah, blah>

Meaningful part distilled out.

You can save yourself and everyone else a lot of time by just answering the question.

The jokers are cranking up the Hollywood fantasies with their latest joke of landing the little fridge sized probe with ready to fire anchor bolts onto a little so called comet, and as all Hollywood productions go - there must always be hitches to give the ever willing public something to AWE over, as in, those little anchor bolts just did not fire into the rock and the little probe done a bunny hop to land near a hill in shadow of the sun. Hahahahaha.
They only have so many hours before their batteries run out, apparently, due to this solar panel in the shadow escapade.
What's the betting that they manage to fire some booster on it and put it in the sun to re-charge it's duracell batteries?

I made a joke about it tweeting and yet it apparently has. 
It seemed over the moon (pardon the pun) that it landed and started goading the mother ship that launched it onto the comet. So while that Rosetta (are you better, are you well well well) ship is orbiting around this comet...this little proble is waiting for it to pass and then tweeting it whilst showing it, its willy, shouting," nah nah, look at me on here, on this little rock in space and you buzzing around me like a fly." 


I just have to make some predictions for what's next because there's no way they're going to let this thing die so quickly.

My guess is, it will jump up and land in the sunlight, then it will have fixed it's bolt shooting rock piercing feet rockets.
It will then begin to drill and probably find little bed bugs or something silly, inside the rock. Maybe a few huge super diamonds as well, probably.

Then I think some little silly script writer will pen in a disaster. Like something on the lines of. " space bacteria of some sort is attacking the probe and is eating the metal skin away. The probe has tweeted an SOS , telling Rosetta that it's not feeling as better as her and can Rosetta help it. It's so disturbing and we hope to get enough info on these space bacteria to find out if  they're going to be a trheat to planet Earth in the future."

Some crap like this will come out, I can feel it.
How far do they have to go with this pathetic fantasy stuff before people wake up and actually smell the frigging coffee? 

I can almost see them sat there laughing their arses off - and some shouting, " hey, it's my turn now - I can beat your silly fantasy."

I'm just waiting for a rocket launch with the rocket shaped exactly like a dildo with bollocks on the launch pad, where people will all start chuckling and say, "oh my, doesn't that rocket look like a dildo with balls." To be told by whichever capital lettered space organisation will respond, " oh, I suppose it does but those spherical containers are a new high pressure fuel tank that can propel the rocket all the way to the larger asteroid, ZXY front pancetta 20116555390001158277001 DPSTEEKZ, which will then act as scoops to gather the rocks and stuff up, to be scooped up by the next probe, SCOOPTER-WEETAKKINZAPEEZ."

I hope their plan works.  It would be a shame to see a decade worth of work go to waste.

The jokers are cranking up the Hollywood fantasies with their latest joke of landing the little fridge sized probe with ready to fire anchor bolts onto a little so called comet, and as all Hollywood productions go - there must always be hitches to give the ever willing public something to AWE over, as in, those little anchor bolts just did not fire into the rock and the little probe done a bunny hop to land near a hill in shadow of the sun. Hahahahaha.
They only have so many hours before their batteries run out, apparently, due to this solar panel in the shadow escapade.
What's the betting that they manage to fire some booster on it and put it in the sun to re-charge it's duracell batteries?

I don't think there are any boosters to do the job, but it doesn't weigh much, and there are some moving parts, so we'll see.

I made a joke about it tweeting and yet it apparently has. 

The whole Twitter thing is silly, IMO, but I'm a cranky old guy. Harmless, but silly.

It seemed over the moon (pardon the pun) that it landed and started goading the mother ship that launched it onto the comet. So while that Rosetta (are you better, are you well well well) ship is orbiting around this comet...this little proble is waiting for it to pass and then tweeting it whilst showing it, its willy, shouting," nah nah, look at me on here, on this little rock in space and you buzzing around me like a fly." 

OK...

I just have to make some predictions for what's next because there's no way they're going to let this thing die so quickly.

My guess is, it will jump up and land in the sunlight, then it will have fixed it's bolt shooting rock piercing feet rockets.
It will then begin to drill and probably find little bed bugs or something silly, inside the rock. Maybe a few huge super diamonds as well, probably.

Then I think some little silly script writer will pen in a disaster. Like something on the lines of. " space bacteria of some sort is attacking the probe and is eating the metal skin away. The probe has tweeted an SOS , telling Rosetta that it's not feeling as better as her and can Rosetta help it. It's so disturbing and we hope to get enough info on these space bacteria to find out if  they're going to be a trheat to planet Earth in the future."

Excellent! Some predictions that can actually be tested. We'll see how well you did in a few days.

Some crap like this will come out, I can feel it.

Uh, oh! You're already hedging your predictions. No confidence in yourself?

How far do they have to go with this pathetic fantasy stuff before people wake up and actually smell the frigging coffee? 

<more stuff probably best left out of the "upper fora">

Quote from: sceptimatic on November 14, 2014, 06:21:27 AM

Some crap like this will come out, I can feel it.

Uh, oh! You're already hedging your predictions. No confidence in yourself?

Sounds to me like a medical emergency.