uh oh. another nail. sorry guys.

Quote from: Papa Legba on February 13, 2018, 02:34:53 AM

Quote from: rabinoz on February 13, 2018, 02:22:20 AM

At least when I'm wasting your time you can't be annoying other people.

So you're only purpose is to waste my time?

I did not say that!

You clearly did.

More lies for your mad lies thread!

So, seems NASA felt the need to make a full size fake Saturn V...

I wonder what they wanted one of those for?

Here is a video of a bunch of fake engineers who look suspiciously like Hollywood stagehands ragging it around with ropes and booting it for some reason... Science, possibly?

So, seems NASA felt the need to make a full size fake Saturn V...

I wonder what they wanted one of those for?

Here is a video of a bunch of fake engineers who look suspiciously like Hollywood stagehands ragging it around with ropes and booting it for some reason... Science, possibly?

Maybe if you had read the text that goes with the video, you might have found out.

On October 14, 1966, a "boilerplate" full Saturn V and Apollo spacecraft stack inside the Vehicle Assembly Building is rocked back and forth by employees pushing with their feet and pulling with a rope so that stability and stresses which might result from winds at the launch pad can be measured.

Maybe if you had read the text that goes with the video, you might have found out.

Quote

On October 14, 1966, a "boilerplate" full Saturn V and Apollo spacecraft stack inside the Vehicle Assembly Building is rocked back and forth by employees pushing with their feet and pulling with a rope so that stability and stresses which might result from winds at the launch pad can be measured.

How did they work out the precise amount of booting and ragging from stagehands needed in order to replicate specific wind speeds, markbot?

Isnt it interesting how some people want so badly to believe that the earth is flat that they are willing to dismiss the over whelming amount of evidence to support the fact that the earth is round.  Much of this belief is bible based, and just the thought of being misled by the bible is out of the question for these people.  Space is very much real, Elon Musk is not fake and yes, I hate to break it to you guys but the earth is in fact round.  Bible on the other hand, very much fake

Isnt it interesting how some people want so badly to believe that the earth is flat that they are willing to dismiss the over whelming amount of evidence to support the fact that the earth is round.  Much of this belief is bible based, and just the thought of being misled by the bible is out of the question for these people.  Space is very much real, Elon Musk is not fake and yes, I hate to break it to you guys but the earth is in fact round.  Bible on the other hand, very much fake

The bible is not fake. A lot of what's inside the Bible however, is a matter of faith. (although it has some good advice it took 'science' nearly 2 centuries to learn such as the importance of washing your hands. Prior to the 1800s, doctors saw no problem going from handling a dead person who died of a serious illness or disease, straight to delivering someones baby (without any hygiene). Clues as to why this was a bad idea were in the bible. If I hold up a bible, you cant tell me it's fake. What is it then? CGI?

Also you should quit parroting everything you hear and look deeper into the universe. What you see is not the complete picture

Quote from: markjo on February 13, 2018, 05:34:05 PM

Maybe if you had read the text that goes with the video, you might have found out.

Quote

On October 14, 1966, a "boilerplate" full Saturn V and Apollo spacecraft stack inside the Vehicle Assembly Building is rocked back and forth by employees pushing with their feet and pulling with a rope so that stability and stresses which might result from winds at the launch pad can be measured.

How did they work out the precise amount of booting and ragging from stagehands needed in order to replicate specific wind speeds, markbot?

You're the expert in aerodynamics, you do the math.

Quote from: firejimmy on February 13, 2018, 06:20:09 PM

Isnt it interesting how some people want so badly to believe that the earth is flat that they are willing to dismiss the over whelming amount of evidence to support the fact that the earth is round.  Much of this belief is bible based, and just the thought of being misled by the bible is out of the question for these people.  Space is very much real, Elon Musk is not fake and yes, I hate to break it to you guys but the earth is in fact round.  Bible on the other hand, very much fake

The bible is not fake. A lot of what's inside the Bible however, is a matter of faith. (although it has some good advice it took 'science' nearly 2 centuries to learn such as the importance of washing your hands. Prior to the 1800s, doctors saw no problem going from handling a dead person who died of a serious illness or disease, straight to delivering someones baby (without any hygiene). Clues as to why this was a bad idea were in the bible. If I hold up a bible, you cant tell me it's fake. What is it then? CGI?

Also you should quit parroting everything you hear and look deeper into the universe. What you see is not the complete picture

The bible is in fact fake and I can use your works to prove it.  Just the fact that you say "its a matter of faith" proves that.  What your actually saying is, I know some of the stuff in the bible sounds crazy and unbelievable and in some cases even stupid, but I want you to just go with it.  Forget all reasonable thought and critical thinking and just go with it.  Look, im not saying the bible is not good for anything, it can be a good moral guide, it has some nice stories but a science book it is not.  The examples you chose do prove that even in those days some people had common sense but that doesnt mean it was guidance from God.  You have to think about what makes sense, does it make sense that there was a global flood that covered even the highest of mountains?  Of course not, and science has proved it to be untrue.  Does it make sense that the sun stood still?  Of course not especially since now we know its the earth that is moving, not the sun.  Does it make sense that there was a splitting of the red sea?  These are laughable and yet people still choose to live their lives by these tales.  The bible also talks about God communicating with people, if that is possible why doesnt he communicate with people now?  Its because just as there are those professing to be Gods people today, so too was this true thousands of years ago.  So yes, the fact remains, bible is most definitely fake. 

Sure valid points. I don't think the bible is trying to be scientific though. That said, the dimensions of the ark are mathematically feasible. The fact that Noah was several hundred years old when he built the thing is not.

Science has looked at whether a flood event happened and they believe there was an event. Obviously not the whole world, but as far as the people who lived in that region, it was the whole world as they understood it at the time. (certainly their corner of the world).

I do not follow the bible or any doctrine, but I do not believe the bible is fake. It is a very loose account of history and the thoughts of people who lived at the time. Then translated over and over and as the church evolved, I'm sure plenty of chapters or stories were omitted if it didn't fit the church politics of the times.

As a people, these things make up a part of who were are and where we came from culturally. That is why, regardless of what I think, they should be preserved

Bible is just stolen stories made up by man.

https://listverse.com/2013/06/30/ten-influences-on-the-bible/

Quote from: rabinoz on February 13, 2018, 03:05:33 AM

Quote from: Papa Legba on February 13, 2018, 02:34:53 AM

Quote from: rabinoz on February 13, 2018, 02:22:20 AM

At least when I'm wasting your time you can't be annoying other people.

So you're only purpose is to waste my time?

I did not say that!

You clearly did.

We all know that reading comprehension in not one the Voodoo Priest's abilities. What I  said was

And the only idiot that could confuse a Physics book with a satellite is our one only Demented Voodoo Priest.

Mr Demented Voodoo Priest no real person could possibly be as ignorant, demented and as idiotic as you so obviously you are nothing but a useless alt troll.

At least when I'm wasting your time you can't be annoying other people.

Bye, bye.

So "wasting your time" so that "you can't be annoying other people" is just one of my more useful accomplishments.

Therefore,  when the Demented Voodoo Priest claims that my only purpose is to waste Mr Demented Voodoo Priest's  time
the totally idiotic useless  Mr Demented Voodoo Priest is resorting to its usual deceptive practices.

Bye bye,  have a nice productive day performing your obligatory Voodoo Rituals and pass my best wishes to your human controller.

Sure valid points. I don't think the bible is trying to be scientific though. That said, the dimensions of the ark are mathematically feasible. The fact that Noah was several hundred years old when he built the thing is not.

Science has looked at whether a flood event happened and they believe there was an event. Obviously not the whole world, but as far as the people who lived in that region, it was the whole world as they understood it at the time. (certainly their corner of the world).

Ok, so the Arks dimensions, is it mathematically possible?  Can you fit all of the required animals in that amount of space, yes its possible.  But you have to look at more than mathematically.  You need to think about it realistically.  Can you fit the animals, their food for a year in that space.  In addition, feed them, clean after them, and keep them from eating each other?  Most definitly not.  The Noahs ark fable, never happened. 

Quote from: Shifter on February 13, 2018, 07:07:31 PM

Sure valid points. I don't think the bible is trying to be scientific though. That said, the dimensions of the ark are mathematically feasible. The fact that Noah was several hundred years old when he built the thing is not.

Science has looked at whether a flood event happened and they believe there was an event. Obviously not the whole world, but as far as the people who lived in that region, it was the whole world as they understood it at the time. (certainly their corner of the world).

Ok, so the Arks dimensions, is it mathematically possible?  Can you fit all of the required animals in that amount of space, yes its possible.  But you have to look at more than mathematically.  You need to think about it realistically.  Can you fit the animals, their food for a year in that space.  In addition, feed them, clean after them, and keep them from eating each other?  Most definitly not.  The Noahs ark fable, never happened.

Well it could work if he took 2 of each animal from a hobby farm lol, just not every animal that ever existed on Earth. I can believe a local flood event happened. I can believe someone built a means to save himself. But the story itself is a fable. Exaggerated at best, totally made up at worst. Like David and Goliath. If there was a 'Goliath', he was probably just bigger and taller than everyone else and got a nickname

Imagine centuries from now, stories about the WWE wrestlers came to light. Would they think Dwayne Johnson was made of rock? lol

Quote from: firejimmy on February 13, 2018, 08:05:04 PM

Quote from: Shifter on February 13, 2018, 07:07:31 PM

Sure valid points. I don't think the bible is trying to be scientific though. That said, the dimensions of the ark are mathematically feasible. The fact that Noah was several hundred years old when he built the thing is not.

Science has looked at whether a flood event happened and they believe there was an event. Obviously not the whole world, but as far as the people who lived in that region, it was the whole world as they understood it at the time. (certainly their corner of the world).

Ok, so the Arks dimensions, is it mathematically possible?  Can you fit all of the required animals in that amount of space, yes its possible.  But you have to look at more than mathematically.  You need to think about it realistically.  Can you fit the animals, their food for a year in that space.  In addition, feed them, clean after them, and keep them from eating each other?  Most definitly not.  The Noahs ark fable, never happened.

Well it could work if he took 2 of each animal from a hobby farm lol, just not every animal that ever existed on Earth. I can believe a local flood event happened. I can believe someone built a means to save himself. But the story itself is a fable. Exaggerated at best, totally made up at worst. Like David and Goliath. If there was a 'Goliath', he was probably just bigger and taller than everyone else and got a nickname

Imagine centuries from now, stories about the WWE wrestlers came to light. Would they think Dwayne Johnson was made of rock? lol

So, that does mean that not everything in the bible was meant to be taken literally, in fact almost none should be taken literally especially the part that talks about the earth being flat...LOL

It is a guide. I do not believe it to be a wiki on the flat earth though. Even with Catholic education they had no problem teaching a globe earth model and astronomy as we know it.

It would be foolish to take something that was apparently written nearly 2000 years ago about life in the days a further 2000+ years ago that has thus been translated many times as literal.

There are plenty of good tidbits, such as washing your hands and obviously the bit about not murdering people is pretty good advice too 

Science has looked at whether a flood event happened and they believe there was an event. Obviously not the whole world, but as far as the people who lived in that region, it was the whole world as they understood it at the time. (certainly their corner of the world).

Funny, but I do agree with Shifter here on some of the points.

The localized flood does not even need to happen that fast, and the water needs to rise not a lot. You lose your farmland, and houses. Even if it took twenty or thirty or even more years, with no written history, it becomes a flood in the oral history passed down the line. "See those tall rocks there in the water? That is where we lived and grew crops before the flood."

But where and when this flood happened, I do not know. I think I read something related to the Sumerian problem. The flood was used as the answer to why there was all of a sudden such a culture and language with no relation to others in the area. The earlier civilization had been drowned and from them came the Sumerians. Sounded a tad too Hyborian Age to me, but the flood mechanic (time taken, water level change) sounds plausible.

Quote from: firejimmy on February 13, 2018, 06:20:09 PM

Isnt it interesting how some people want so badly to believe that the earth is flat that they are willing to dismiss the over whelming amount of evidence to support the fact that the earth is round.  Much of this belief is bible based, and just the thought of being misled by the bible is out of the question for these people.  Space is very much real, Elon Musk is not fake and yes, I hate to break it to you guys but the earth is in fact round.  Bible on the other hand, very much fake

The bible is not fake. A lot of what's inside the Bible however, is a matter of faith. (although it has some good advice it took 'science' nearly 2 centuries to learn such as the importance of washing your hands. Prior to the 1800s, doctors saw no problem going from handling a dead person who died of a serious illness or disease, straight to delivering someones baby (without any hygiene). Clues as to why this was a bad idea were in the bible. If I hold up a bible, you cant tell me it's fake. What is it then? CGI?

Also you should quit parroting everything you hear and look deeper into the universe. What you see is not the complete picture

Now this is a first Shifter taking sense. Your correct about the hand washing. Up until the early part of the 19th century doctors did indeed think hygiene was not important! In fact to have a really dirty apron stained with every kind of body fluid was seen as a badge of honour among many doctors. Ignaz Philipp Semmelweis a young Austrian doctor carried out an on the job experiment at a hospital were the infant mortality rates and death in childbirth from infections were sky high. He brought in hand washing, and low and behold both the infant mortality rates and infection rates dropped like a stone. The evidence was clear, good hand hygiene and wearing clean aprons was a good idea.......you would think. The problem was he upset the establishment, who went back to the old ways, death rates went back up, and he eventually due to poor mental health and stress caused by all this stramash was committed to an asylum where he soon died. A few years later germ theory was discovered and everyone started washing their hands! Go look it up, it’s a really fascinating story about how people, even with the evidence staring them right in the face can dismiss it out of hand! Much the same thing happens around here! I imagine papa nitwit never washes his hands.

I like this piece of medical history:
https://acphospitalist.org/archives/2015/03/anesthesia.htm

“Gentlemen, this is no humbug!”

Quote from: Papa Legba on February 13, 2018, 05:47:42 PM

Quote from: markjo on February 13, 2018, 05:34:05 PM

Maybe if you had read the text that goes with the video, you might have found out.

Quote

On October 14, 1966, a "boilerplate" full Saturn V and Apollo spacecraft stack inside the Vehicle Assembly Building is rocked back and forth by employees pushing with their feet and pulling with a rope so that stability and stresses which might result from winds at the launch pad can be measured.

How did they work out the precise amount of booting and ragging from stagehands needed in order to replicate specific wind speeds, markbot?

You're the expert in aerodynamics, you do the math.

You're the expert in everything NASA ever did, ever, markbot...

So if you don't have the answer I suggest it is because one does not exist.

Very much like the Saturn V itself.

Quote from: markjo on February 13, 2018, 06:54:05 PM

Quote from: Papa Legba on February 13, 2018, 05:47:42 PM

Quote from: markjo on February 13, 2018, 05:34:05 PM

Maybe if you had read the text that goes with the video, you might have found out.

Quote

On October 14, 1966, a "boilerplate" full Saturn V and Apollo spacecraft stack inside the Vehicle Assembly Building is rocked back and forth by employees pushing with their feet and pulling with a rope so that stability and stresses which might result from winds at the launch pad can be measured.

How did they work out the precise amount of booting and ragging from stagehands needed in order to replicate specific wind speeds, markbot?

You're the expert in aerodynamics, you do the math.

You're the expert in everything NASA ever did, ever, markbot...

So if you don't have the answer I suggest it is because one does not exist.

LOL!!  Obviously you missed the hints in my reply.  You know, when I mentioned aerodynamics and math.

Just because you aren't clever enough to work out the math doesn't mean that the egg heads at NASA aren't.

Very much like the Saturn V itself.

So you're saying that the tens of thousands of people who watched and felt the Saturn V blast offs were all victims of mass hallucinations?

Quote from: Papa Legba on February 14, 2018, 01:01:14 AM

Quote from: markjo on February 13, 2018, 06:54:05 PM

Quote from: Papa Legba on February 13, 2018, 05:47:42 PM

Quote from: markjo on February 13, 2018, 05:34:05 PM

Maybe if you had read the text that goes with the video, you might have found out.

Quote

On October 14, 1966, a "boilerplate" full Saturn V and Apollo spacecraft stack inside the Vehicle Assembly Building is rocked back and forth by employees pushing with their feet and pulling with a rope so that stability and stresses which might result from winds at the launch pad can be measured.

How did they work out the precise amount of booting and ragging from stagehands needed in order to replicate specific wind speeds, markbot?

You're the expert in aerodynamics, you do the math.

You're the expert in everything NASA ever did, ever, markbot...

So if you don't have the answer I suggest it is because one does not exist.

LOL!!  Obviously you missed the hints in my reply.  You know, when I mentioned aerodynamics and math.

Just because you aren't clever enough to work out the math doesn't mean that the egg heads at NASA aren't.

How do I work out the math on a bunch of vagrants booting and ragging on ropes?

More importantly, how did the egg heads at NASA?

It's not like anyone is actually measuring their efforts in the video, is it?

Could it be you have no idea and are just lying, shitposting and saying NO U again, markbot?

I think it could.

Oh and here is the video again...

I notice you cut it from my reply, as if you did not want anyone to watch it...

Now why would you do that, I wonder?

The NASA bandwagon is full of satire......

Let's recap.....
Mini moons in different sizes, camera rails, rocket  simulations, ascent stage crane.....etc. etc.
All ingredients are present to shoot a nice studio Apollo saga.

But noooooooo it was all about uhhhhh testing and uhhhhhh more testing...
I thought they knew everything about the moon because of unmanned probes and many photographs. ?
Why are artist making an indistinguishable mini moon ass seen from varying approach distances that look extremely realistic on a 1969 film....?
Test or movie ?

I admire you Papa for keeping up with those 'spacetravel' supporters who should understand themselves that within NASA the whole Apollo missions are considered a rotten tomato.
If only those deluded fanboys that are here by the numbers would understand that even NASA wants to end this munlunding nonsense once and for all.
The current crop of astronauts and spokesmen give numerous hints about the inpenetrable VAB's and that no one has gone beyond LEO,that you should see stars on the daylight side of the moon in large numbers etc.
But the enthousiastic Apollotrek fans just won't let go.....
It's like those Elvis fans that still claim the king is alive and well somehwere.....

The NASA bandwagon is full of satire......

Let's recap.....
Mini moons in different sizes, camera rails, rocket  simulations, ascent stage crane.....etc. etc.
All ingredients are present to shoot a nice studio Apollo saga.

But noooooooo it was all about uhhhhh testing and uhhhhhh more testing...
I thought they knew everything about the moon because of unmanned probes and many photographs. ?
Why are artist making an indistinguishable mini moon ass seen from varying approach distances that look extremely realistic on a 1969 film....?
Test or movie ?

I admire you Papa for keeping up with those 'spacetravel' supporters who should understand themselves that within NASA the whole Apollo missions are considered a rotten tomato.
If only those deluded fanboys that are here by the numbers would understand that even NASA wants to end this munlunding nonsense once and for all.
The current crop of astronauts and spokesmen give numerous hints about the inpenetrable VAB's and that no one has gone beyond LEO,that you should see stars on the daylight side of the moon in large numbers etc.
But the enthousiastic Apollotrek fans just won't let go.....
It's like those Elvis fans that still claim the king is alive and well somehwere.....

Naturally you have some evidence to back up your claims.
You know, evidence supporting your idea that NASA wants to admit the landings were fake.  Or evidence of any of the other stuff you claim.

Quote from: markjo on February 14, 2018, 06:48:43 AM

Quote from: Papa Legba on February 14, 2018, 01:01:14 AM

Quote from: markjo on February 13, 2018, 06:54:05 PM

Quote from: Papa Legba on February 13, 2018, 05:47:42 PM

Quote from: markjo on February 13, 2018, 05:34:05 PM

Maybe if you had read the text that goes with the video, you might have found out.

Quote

On October 14, 1966, a "boilerplate" full Saturn V and Apollo spacecraft stack inside the Vehicle Assembly Building is rocked back and forth by employees pushing with their feet and pulling with a rope so that stability and stresses which might result from winds at the launch pad can be measured.

How did they work out the precise amount of booting and ragging from stagehands needed in order to replicate specific wind speeds, markbot?

You're the expert in aerodynamics, you do the math.

You're the expert in everything NASA ever did, ever, markbot...

So if you don't have the answer I suggest it is because one does not exist.

LOL!!  Obviously you missed the hints in my reply.  You know, when I mentioned aerodynamics and math.

Just because you aren't clever enough to work out the math doesn't mean that the egg heads at NASA aren't.

How do I work out the math on a bunch of vagrants booting and ragging on ropes?

That isn't what you asked before.  Maybe you should review the posts that you're replying to.

More importantly, how did the egg heads at NASA?

My guess is that they used the geometry of the Saturn V and calculated how much stress various amounts of wind should impart on the rocket in much the same way that architectural engineers calculate the wind loads on skyscrapers.  Then they pushed and pulled on the the rocket to simulate those winds to see if it could actually handle those loads.

It's not like anyone is actually measuring their efforts in the video, is it?

How do you know that there weren't a bunch of sensors inside the rocket that were being monitored.  Just because you didn't see it doesn't mean that it didn't happen.

Could it be you have no idea and are just lying, shitposting and saying NO U again, markbot?

I think it could.

No, I think that it's more likely that you're the one who's full of shit.

Oh and here is the video again...

I notice you cut it from my reply, as if you did not want anyone to watch it...

Now why would you do that, I wonder?

Maybe I just wanted to pare down the size of the reply.

Quote from: Papa Legba on February 14, 2018, 09:57:36 AM

Quote from: markjo on February 14, 2018, 06:48:43 AM

Quote from: Papa Legba on February 14, 2018, 01:01:14 AM

Quote from: markjo on February 13, 2018, 06:54:05 PM

Quote from: Papa Legba on February 13, 2018, 05:47:42 PM

Quote from: markjo on February 13, 2018, 05:34:05 PM

Maybe if you had read the text that goes with the video, you might have found out.

Quote

On October 14, 1966, a "boilerplate" full Saturn V and Apollo spacecraft stack inside the Vehicle Assembly Building is rocked back and forth by employees pushing with their feet and pulling with a rope so that stability and stresses which might result from winds at the launch pad can be measured.

How did they work out the precise amount of booting and ragging from stagehands needed in order to replicate specific wind speeds, markbot?

You're the expert in aerodynamics, you do the math.

You're the expert in everything NASA ever did, ever, markbot...

So if you don't have the answer I suggest it is because one does not exist.

LOL!!  Obviously you missed the hints in my reply.  You know, when I mentioned aerodynamics and math.

Just because you aren't clever enough to work out the math doesn't mean that the egg heads at NASA aren't.

How do I work out the math on a bunch of vagrants booting and ragging on ropes?

That isn't what you asked before.  Maybe you should review the posts that you're replying to.

Quote from: Papa Legba on February 14, 2018, 09:57:36 AM

More importantly, how did the egg heads at NASA?

My guess is that they used the geometry of the Saturn V and calculated how much stress various amounts of wind should impart on the rocket in much the same way that architectural engineers calculate the wind loads on skyscrapers.  Then they pushed and pulled on the the rocket to simulate those winds to see if it could actually handle those loads.

Quote from: Papa Legba on February 14, 2018, 09:57:36 AM

It's not like anyone is actually measuring their efforts in the video, is it?

How do you know that there weren't a bunch of sensors inside the rocket that were being monitored.  Just because you didn't see it doesn't mean that it didn't happen.

Quote from: Papa Legba on February 14, 2018, 09:57:36 AM

Could it be you have no idea and are just lying, shitposting and saying NO U again, markbot?

I think it could.

No, I think that it's more likely that you're the one who's full of shit.

Quote from: Papa Legba on February 14, 2018, 09:57:36 AM

Oh and here is the video again...

I notice you cut it from my reply, as if you did not want anyone to watch it...

Now why would you do that, I wonder?

Maybe I just wanted to pare down the size of the reply.

Like you pared down the size of this one, psycho?

And sensors inside the rocket would only measure its motion, not the force that is being applied.

To measure that, you would need to monitor the stagehands doing the booting and ragging.

And no one is doing that.

So they will not know the force being applied by them.

As ever, you are engaging in lying, shitposting, saying NO U and circular argumentation...

Plus timewasting, natch.

Any chance of stopping it?

And sensors inside the rocket would only measure its motion, not the force that is being applied.

To measure that, you would need to monitor the stagehands doing the booting and ragging.

And no one is doing that.

So they will not know the force being applied by them.

Not necessarily.  If you calculate how much sway to expect, then you can induce that much sway and measure the stresses on the vehicle.

Quote from: Papa Legba on February 14, 2018, 12:02:11 PM

And sensors inside the rocket would only measure its motion, not the force that is being applied.

To measure that, you would need to monitor the stagehands doing the booting and ragging.

And no one is doing that.

So they will not know the force being applied by them.

Not necessarily.  If you calculate how much sway to expect, then you can induce that much sway and measure the stresses on the vehicle.

Are you mad?

You don't decide the outcome of a test before it is even conducted.

You firstly calculate the wind forces on the vehicle, then replicate them in order to measure the stresses and strains that result.

And having a bunch of Hollywood stagehands boot and rag on your multi-million dollar rokkit with ropes, whilst taking no measurements whatsoever of how much force they are applying, is the most unscientific and ridiculous method imaginable of achieving that result.

All of which is visible in the video you keep removing because you do not want us to see how absurd it is...

Here it is AGAIN:



Back on ignore for you, psycho.

Quote from: markjo on February 14, 2018, 12:15:11 PM

Quote from: Papa Legba on February 14, 2018, 12:02:11 PM

And sensors inside the rocket would only measure its motion, not the force that is being applied.

To measure that, you would need to monitor the stagehands doing the booting and ragging.

And no one is doing that.

So they will not know the force being applied by them.

Not necessarily.  If you calculate how much sway to expect, then you can induce that much sway and measure the stresses on the vehicle.

Are you mad?

You don't decide the outcome of a test before it is even conducted.

No, but you can try to predict the outcome of the test beforehand.

You firstly calculate the wind forces on the vehicle, then replicate them in order to measure the stresses and strains that result.

Yes, because you want to make sure that your calculations were correct. 

And having a bunch of Hollywood stagehands boot and rag on your multi-million dollar rokkit with ropes, whilst taking no measurements whatsoever of how much force they are applying, is the most unscientific and ridiculous method imaginable of achieving that result.

Again, you have no idea of what measurements are being made off camera.

All of which is visible in the video you keep removing because you do not want us to see how absurd it is...

Right, because no one saw it the first 3 times that you posted it.

Here it is AGAIN:

Yes, here it is.  Again.  Do you feel better now?

Back on ignore for you, psycho.

You keep saying that, and yet you keep replying.