Faking Space Rockets

I have heard many flat earthers claim rockets are designed to fly high and far enough to crash out of site or out at sea as a means of continuing the conspiracy of space flight.

How does the continued retrieval of Falcon 9 rockets fit in this conspiracy?

On the 8th of November, a Falcon 9 carrying an Argentinian satellite (are they now also a part of the conspiracy) took off and landed at the Vandenberg launch site. It's flight path could be seen by anyone in southern California all through its flight. The payload section of the rocket could be seen at take off but not at landing. There were no observed pieces of the rocket streaking away to sea.

How does this fit in with the conspiracy?

To be honest, I don't see how SpaceX landing their boosters is a problem for FET.  The rocket goes up and the booster comes back.  What does the shape of the earth have to do with any of that?

Now the video from the booster and second stage might be a different story.

To be honest, I don't see how SpaceX landing their boosters is a problem for FET.  The rocket goes up and the booster comes back.  What does the shape of the earth have to do with any of that?

Now the video from the booster and second stage might be a different story.

More to the point might be, "Who is paying for all these launches to supposedly go 'nowhere'?"

Space Launch Report, 2017 LAUNCH STATS
       2017 LAUNCH VEHICLE/SITE STATISTICS
========================================================
       by Ed Kyle      as of December 27, 2017
========================================================

       YEAR TO DATE LAUNCH VEHICLE SUMMARY

Calendar year launch vehicle results, ranked by number of successes, with launch total as the first tiebreaker and vehicle payload mass as the second tiebreaker. 
Low Earth Orbit (LEO) missions have orbital periods less than 2 hours. Deep Space missions include heliocentric, planetocentric, and solar system escape trajectories.

=========================================================   
Vehicle            Overall           By Orbit Type
                   Launches      Earth-Orbit Earth-Escape
                  (Failures)      LEO   >LEO  Deep Space
=========================================================
Falcon 9             18(0)       11(0)   7(0)    -
R-7                  14(1)       10(1)   4(0)    -   
CZ (DF-5)            13(1)        8(0)   5(1)    -
Ariane 5              6(0)         -     6(0)    -
Atlas 5               6(0)        2(0)   4(0)    -
H-2A                  6(0)        2(0)   4(0)    -
Proton                4(0)         -     4(0)    -
Vega                  3(0)        3(0)    -      -
PSLV                  3(1)        2(0)   1(1)    -
Delta 4               1(0)         -     1(0)    -
CZ-7                  1(0)        1(0)    -      -
Zenit                 1(0)         -     1(0)    -
GSLV Mk3              1(0)         -     1(0)    -
GSLV                  1(0)         -     1(0)    -
Soyuz 2-1v/Volga      1(0)        1(0)    -      -
Delta 2               1(0)        1(0)    -      -
Antares 230           1(0)        1(0)    -      -
Rokot/Briz KM         1(0)        1(0)    -      -
Minotaur 4            1(0)        1(0)    -      -
Minotaur-C            1(0)        1(0)    -      -
CZ-6                  1(0)        1(0)    -      -
KT-2                  1(0)        1(0)    -      -
KZ-1A                 1(0)        1(0)    -      -
CZ-5                  1(1)         -     1(1)    -
SS-520-4              1(1)        1(1)    -      -
Electron              1(1)        1(1)    -      -
---------------------------------------------------------
Total                90(6)       50(3)  40(3)    -     

SpaceX claims an average cost/launch of $US60 million so even at half that figure those 90 launches would be worth about $US 2.7 billion.
So is someone going to suggest that NASA is paying that out on top of its own costs and these massive bribes to all the foreign governments that support the space industry?

SpaceX claims an average cost/launch of $US60 million so even at half that figure those 90 launches would be worth about $US 2.7 billion.

Actually, SpaceX launches for 1/2 the price or less than their competition, so the average cost per launch is probably $100 million or better.

If you were to look at the entire space economy, you'd find that it's worth well over $300 billion, and is only growing.  Seriously, how do you build such a massive economy based on a lie?
https://www.spacefoundation.org/news/space-foundation-report-reveals-global-space-economy-329-billion-2016

Quote from: rabinoz on October 08, 2018, 04:36:47 PM

SpaceX claims an average cost/launch of $US60 million so even at half that figure those 90 launches would be worth about $US 2.7 billion.

Actually, SpaceX launches for 1/2 the price or less than their competition, so the average cost per launch is probably $100 million or better.

If you were to look at the entire space economy, you'd find that it's worth well over $300 billion, and is only growing.  Seriously, how do you build such a massive economy based on a lie?
https://www.spacefoundation.org/news/space-foundation-report-reveals-global-space-economy-329-billion-2016

And, of course, NASA pays that "$253 billion, commercial space activities" bribe out of their $19 billion total budget.I don't think that these flat-earthers ever do the sums.

I personally believe NASA is doing lots of secret research and probably selling the results. Do they even talk about the experiments they do in space?

I personally believe NASA is doing lots of secret research and probably selling the results. Do they even talk about the experiments they do in space?

Not exactly. Some experiments in the ISS and space are privately funded.

I personally believe NASA is doing lots of secret research and probably selling the results. Do they even talk about the experiments they do in space?

If it is "secret research" how can you have any knowledge of it? NASA does publish and has published a tremendous amount of material.
If you haven't read it all, or even seen what it was about, why would you suspect that they do not publish about the experiments they do in space?

NASA certainly launch spacecraft for the US military and I doubt much will be released on exactly what they do - but that's the military's doing.
The U.S. Military Has Been in Space From the Beginning and this applies to many countries including Russia, Israel, Iran, China and North Korea.

Most of this seems to be evidence against "Faking Space Rockets".

I personally believe NASA is doing lots of secret research and probably selling the results. Do they even talk about the experiments they do in space?

Yes, they do.  Right here (among other places): https://ntrs.nasa.gov/search.jsp

Quote from: faded mike on October 10, 2018, 08:53:06 AM

I personally believe NASA is doing lots of secret research and probably selling the results. Do they even talk about the experiments they do in space?

Not exactly. Some experiments in the ISS and space are privately funded.

Thanks

Quote from: faded mike on October 10, 2018, 08:53:06 AM

I personally believe NASA is doing lots of secret research and probably selling the results. Do they even talk about the experiments they do in space?

If it is "secret research" how can you have any knowledge of it? NASA does publish and has published a tremendous amount of material.
If you haven't read it all, or even seen what it was about, why would you suspect that they do not publish about the experiments they do in space?

NASA certainly launch spacecraft for the US military and I doubt much will be released on exactly what they do - but that's the military's doing.
The U.S. Military Has Been in Space From the Beginning and this applies to many countries including Russia, Israel, Iran, China and North Korea.

Most of this seems to be evidence against "Faking Space Rockets".

 I know their is a a whole system of ideas worked out that all fit together, but i just don't believe that our science, or rather the science of the professionals is as limited as we're told. I think the people who stear this thing could be so smart, they make it look like it works one way, when really it doesn't, evidenced by all the anomalous info out there. If we live in an "energy economy" then there would be certain images to keep up as well.

Quote from: faded mike on October 10, 2018, 08:53:06 AM

I personally believe NASA is doing lots of secret research and probably selling the results. Do they even talk about the experiments they do in space?

Yes, they do.  Right here (among other places): https://ntrs.nasa.gov/search.jsp

Thanks

I know their is a a whole system of ideas worked out that all fit together, but i just don't believe that our science, or rather the science of the professionals is as limited as we're told.

What "inside information" do you  have to come to that opinion?
Do you actually read any of this "science of the professionals" or do you base you opinions on all the anti-science videos out there.
For example there is idea out there expressed in videos like these:

I think the people who steer this thing could be so smart, they make it look like it works one way, when really it doesn't, evidenced by all the anomalous info out there.

What "inside information" do you  have to come to that opinion?
It's all could be but what do you mean "by all the anomalous info out there"? Is it stuff posted by conspiracy theorists (conspiritards)?

If we live in an "energy economy" then there would be certain images to keep up as well.

Sure, it could be said that we live in an "energy economy" but there are no magic sources. 
Maybe there are some as yet unknown sources but what evidence have you got that there are hidden sources.

There are posted on the Internet many people trying to profit by selling the designs for "free energy", "over unity" and "vacuum energy" machines.
My question to all of these is simply, "If these machines work why haven't YOU made a fortune selling energy?"

My question to all of these is simply, "If these machines work why haven't YOU made a fortune selling energy?"

Because it's FREE energy, duh!

You believe they are not real, I've heard the car companies buy the rights, over and over again...? I've also heard that people get "shut up". John Hutchison said his lab got raided and taken away several times. He made crystal batteries and other controversial stuff. Levitation/ melding of materials, destruction of solid metal by radio waves...
I believe Toyota paid him to come work with them, but i don't know much else.

Quote from: rabinoz on October 12, 2018, 07:19:00 PM

My question to all of these is simply, "If these machines work why haven't YOU made a fortune selling energy?"

Because it's FREE energy, duh!

If it's FREE energy why don't you use it to power your car and home.

PS I use "FREE energy" for a big fraction of my home use. Uncle Sol doesn't charge a cent, though the installation costs were not free.
      Of course my "FREE energy" comes from a fusion reactor that "burns" hydrogen.

You believe they are not real, I've heard the car companies buy the rights

Yes, conspiracy nutters say all sorts of crap.

With how much information gets out, do you really think people are able to stop this information actually getting out?

The video Rab showed is an example of pure stupidity.
Let's hypothetically say planes magically fly without fuel (ignoring the electric ones which still don't use free energy). Then why bother loading fuel or pretending to? If it is to con people, and these people get suspicious over quick refuellings, why wouldn't they make more of a show of it?

There is not a single reason to accept any of that garbage.

Yes, we can be deemed to live in an energy economy, because everything you do takes energy.

You believe they are not real, I've heard the car companies buy the rights, over and over again...? I've also heard that people get "shut up". John Hutchison said his lab got raided and taken away several times. He made crystal batteries and other controversial stuff. Levitation/ melding of materials, destruction of solid metal by radio waves...
I believe Toyota paid him to come work with them, but i don't know much else.

There are two (or more ) sides to every story. You might read RationalWiki, John Hutchison.

Fraudulent footage
Hutchison himself claims to have replicated the results numerous times prior to 1991, while admitting some footage he has released since (at $100 per tape) was faked, as he is no longer able to recreate the effects. He assumed that nobody would notice that the "levitating" objects were actually falling in front of an upside-down camera or held up with invisible strings, which he initially tried to convince his audience were cords supplying power to the levitating objects.

Quote from: John Hutchison

The string is not string but #32-gauge double polythermalized wire on a takeup up reel with 20 to 50000 volts DC. The the[sic] main apparatus was turned on, causing the toy plastic ufo to fly all about in amazing gyrations. This was a pretest to gryphon films airing this fall for fox TV. I did not need the extra high voltage 2000 time period so the toy levitated without a high voltage hook up during the filming for gryphon there was a string on the toy no high-voltage dc but interesting movements.

Tim Ventura later removed this explanation from the American Antigravity website, and claimed that Hutchison got "creative" with the footage because the EPA won't let him do experiments anymore.

9/11 nonsense
When asked why he is unable to demonstrate the results of his experiment anymore, Hutchison claims he has been coerced and had his work destroyed by the government, which then used his technology to do 9/11.

Why do so many people prefer to believe the scammers and deny the obvious evidence? The never-ending hope of "something for nothing" I suppose.