HAPPY HOAX ANNIVERSARY!!! (Rockets can't fly in a vacuum)

  • 3179 Replies
  • 142086 Views
*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 25498
Re: HAPPY HOAX ANNIVERSARY!!! (Rockets can't fly in a vacuum)
« Reply #2820 on: January 09, 2020, 01:43:00 AM »
This rocket seems to gain quite a lot of speed after take-off (Watch the telemetry HUD, lower left). What are you talking about?



Can you verify this as being real?

Can you verify the fuel?
Can you verify the thrust?
Can you verify anything about this rocket?

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 25498
Re: HAPPY HOAX ANNIVERSARY!!! (Rockets can't fly in a vacuum)
« Reply #2821 on: January 09, 2020, 01:55:02 AM »
I can bring up a screen shot of the starship enterprise or the armageddon shuttles going up...and so on. What would I be proving to you?
And can you go watch that yourself? No!
Meanwhile, you can go watch the launch of these rockets.

You may as well be rejecting that grass is green.
And you've watched many or some or one...have you?

If so, tell me where you were and what rocket you observed and also how you verified it to be what you were told.

Quote from: JackBlack

It's not really about daring. It's more to the point of, it wouldn't happen.
So now you are going to the extreme of saying all these rocket launches which have been observed by countless people, are just pure fiction?
I'm not doubting rocket launches. I'm telling you that space rockets do not exist.
I'm not questioning real rockets....only questioning the hogwash of how supposed space rockets work.

Quote from: JackBlack

Good job going down the path of complete insanity and claiming basically everyone on Earth is in on the conspiracy.
Who's going down that route? It appears you're getting all worked up and making up stuff to fit your own agenda.
Everyone on Earth?
In on the conspiracy?

No I'm not, so who's sitting there reeling off bullcrap?
Normally I wouldn't play this tit for tat but I feel you need to be brought down a peg or two as you've had all the fun insulting whilst passing the buck.

Let's see if you enjoy the tit for tat or whether it's just your modus operandi.

Quote from: JackBlack

You're spouting it all off without the faintest knowledge of whether it's all real or not.
No. Simple physics dictates rockets MUST work. And there is plenty of evidence, evidence which you cannot refute at all. This includes evidence you can obtain yourself, such as using GPS.
Simple physics do not dictate rockets work.
The so called simple physics are a big con.
The way rockets work is by use of external atmospheric pressure to counteract the stored energy of the object pitted against it.

Your physics is not real physics.

Quote from: JackBlack

You see, simplicity kills off the fantasy and people want to adhere to fantasy
Yes, simplicity kills your fantasy and shows that rockets must work in a vacuum.
The problem is that you are clinging to your fantasy.
Simplicity is showing the space rocket fantasy up for what it is.


Quote from: JackBlack

When you present your evidence I'll be happy to counter it as I do.
You clearly don't understand what countering is. It isn't just dismissing it as hogwash. It is showing a problem with it.
I fully understand what it is. It's what I'm doing now which is infuriating you.

*

Stash

  • 6639
Re: HAPPY HOAX ANNIVERSARY!!! (Rockets can't fly in a vacuum)
« Reply #2822 on: January 09, 2020, 01:58:08 AM »
This rocket seems to gain quite a lot of speed after take-off (Watch the telemetry HUD, lower left). What are you talking about?



Can you verify this as being real?

Can you verify the fuel?
Can you verify the thrust?
Can you verify anything about this rocket?

Of course not. But why am I supposed to suspect otherwise that it's not real? It's not the only one out there for one. There are plenty. And I'm not in the business of immediately thinking it's a fabrication and amateur rocketeers are liars just so they can refute your personal musings. Narcissistic much?

Conversely, what evidence do you have? What evidence do you have that shows this is a fabrication? It's only just you saying so because it doesn't fit your world view. Sorry, that's not good enough. Evidence, not just your musings is required. A million points of evidence have been shown as to how rockets work and how they work in a vacuum and you haven't presented a lick of evidence of how they don't.

What would evidence look like to you that shows you are wrong? What would evidence look like to you that shows you are correct?

If you presented a video, or a paper, or a book, or, god forbid, some math, that showed you had an actual reality stance, I would take notice and not dismiss out of hand like you do for everything. But you present nothing to even remotely back your musings up. Nothing. Just dismals for the not so modern world and insults. Curious that you have no evidence.

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 25498
Re: HAPPY HOAX ANNIVERSARY!!! (Rockets can't fly in a vacuum)
« Reply #2823 on: January 09, 2020, 03:30:20 AM »
This rocket seems to gain quite a lot of speed after take-off (Watch the telemetry HUD, lower left). What are you talking about?



Can you verify this as being real?

Can you verify the fuel?
Can you verify the thrust?
Can you verify anything about this rocket?

Of course not. But why am I supposed to suspect otherwise that it's not real?
You're not supposed to do anything. You can choose what you want to do and you have. You chose to accept it all as legitimate without (as you admit) knowing the truth.

It also does not give you grounds to call me wrong in questioning it and refusing to believe it until satisfied that facts prove me wrong.
This hasn't happened and this is where I am.

Quote from: Stash
It's not the only one out there for one. There are plenty. And I'm not in the business of immediately thinking it's a fabrication and amateur rocketeers are liars just so they can refute your personal musings. Narcissistic much?
There are plenty of pictures of men on the moon or rovers on mars or drawings of voyagers into deep space....as we are told. And son on and so on and so on.
Thousands and thousands of pictures, words, models and even video of all kinds of stuff, that, to any normal everyday go about your life person will accept as a truth and argue as a truther, without actually knowing the truth.

Can you understand that?
Of course you can jump up and shout as loud as you want that they're all real.
They're being questioned because people see too much dodgy stuff with a lot of it.

Trust me on this; if I didn't see anything that gave me a mind to question it, I wouldn't be questioning.
But this is not the case.

Quote from: Stash
Conversely, what evidence do you have? What evidence do you have that shows this is a fabrication?

It depends on what you decide is evidence.
I have done small  experiments with evacuation chambers and also simple logical deductions as well as seeing what I believe to be discrepancies with a lot of what we're shown.
Silly stuff like atmosphere changing as a rocket launches, for no reason legitimate wise but it makes perfect sense why things would be altered if we were being duped.

You know what I'm talking about so don't waste your time asking me to prove it. It's all there in the videos we are told to accept as a truth.

Quote from: Stash
It's only just you saying so because it doesn't fit your world view.
Of course it doesn't fit my world view. It doesn't fit because I see too many discrepancies.
It fits your world view because you simply adhere to the schooling you received and the mass peer pressure of those around you conforming to that mindset.

You're certainly not doing it by producing facts. You're merely appealing to authority as your factual evidence.

Quote from: Stash
Sorry, that's not good enough. Evidence, not just your musings is required.
My evidence will never suit you.
Equally you do not possess the evidence that will suit me.
I simply want facts.
Can you provide the facts from your person?

Quote from: Stash
A million points of evidence have been shown as to how rockets work and how they work in a vacuum and you haven't presented a lick of evidence of how they don't.
Of course.
We've been told rockets placed satellites 23,000 miles into space.
Rockets dropping rovers into mars atmosphere that was supposedly so close to a vacuum and yet used parachutes.
I could go on and on and on with all this so called evidence.
Voyager 1 and 2 supposedly billions and billions of miles into deep space and still sending back data.
Something sent from the 70's, apparently.
And yet we struggle to communicate on Earth.

It beggars belief that people fall for this utter utter garbage but they do.


Quote from: Stash
What would evidence look like to you that shows you are wrong?
Very simple.
Visiting a rocket on the launchpad to see and inspect it to see if it is made of what we are told.
Then viewing the space where the so called astronauts sit.
And then once satisfied with that, watching those same so called astronauts get into the rocket and be strapped inside with a camera videoing the capsule door firly closed as well as any other potential exits under camera surveillance.
Then watch it lift off from the very same vantage points of the so called experts seen looking out of windows at the supposed same thing.

That's it. If that happened I would not even want to see it go out of sight. I would accept I'm totally wrong from that point.

What's the chances of that happening?



Quote from: Stash
What would evidence look like to you that shows you are correct?
Not being able to see he physical truth of any of this stuff. That's evidence enough that something is amiss but only physical proof of seeing what I'm arguing against will put the cat amongst the pigeons.

Quote from: Stash
If you presented a video, or a paper, or a book, or, god forbid, some math, that showed you had an actual reality stance, I would take notice and not dismiss out of hand like you do for everything. But you present nothing to even remotely back your musings up. Nothing. Just dismals for the not so modern world and insults. Curious that you have no evidence.
You don't have to take notice. You can ditch this right now and just sit back and smirk.
I'm not asking you to accept what I say. I'm simply putting my point across as strongly as you people are, whether you accept any of it or none of it.

What I argue with you people is not for your benefit. You lot are merely the counterargument to my counterargument. Or basically, you lot are the resistance to the potential reality by adhering to fiction as your reality...from my side...and obviously vice versa.

The people who really count are those who are interested, who can see there's issue with what we're told.
They're the people that will sit back and take notice, amid you and others attempts to try to badger me out of it.
« Last Edit: January 09, 2020, 03:35:27 AM by sceptimatic »

*

rabinoz

  • 26528
  • Real Earth Believer
Re: HAPPY HOAX ANNIVERSARY!!! (Rockets can't fly in a vacuum)
« Reply #2824 on: January 09, 2020, 03:45:46 AM »

Incorrect! Those are screenshots of a video of a real SpaceX Falcon 9-heavy launch that numerous people watch.
I can bring up a screen shot of the starship enterprise or the armageddon shuttles going up...and so on. What would I be proving to you?
By all means pretend they're real but don't expect me to swallow it.
I'm not pretending that they are real.
I just see no reason to doubt that rockets can produce higher thrusts in a vacuum.
And you've never posted evidence that would make me change my opinion.

Quote from: sceptimatic
Quote from: rabinoz
I imagine that you could easily go and observe such launches yourself if you dared.
Of course. I suppose I go hitch a ride to mars on the next manned flight.....eh?
Stop being totally ridiculous! Thousands observe rocket launches from quite a few places on earth.
But it's not my problem if you are unable to face reality.

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 25498
Re: HAPPY HOAX ANNIVERSARY!!! (Rockets can't fly in a vacuum)
« Reply #2825 on: January 09, 2020, 04:09:15 AM »

Incorrect! Those are screenshots of a video of a real SpaceX Falcon 9-heavy launch that numerous people watch.
I can bring up a screen shot of the starship enterprise or the armageddon shuttles going up...and so on. What would I be proving to you?
By all means pretend they're real but don't expect me to swallow it.
I'm not pretending that they are real.
I just see no reason to doubt that rockets can produce higher thrusts in a vacuum.
And you've never posted evidence that would make me change my opinion.
Like I said to stash. I'm not interested in changing your opinion. Feel free to believe in what you want. It's not my business to tell you.
However, I will tell you that rockets into the space they tell us about, is nonsense...and this is what we're arguing.
You admit you have no evidence so you're reliant on simply being told or acceptance of what you believe is fact, by mass opinion and diagrams that do not show a reality in terms of you knowing it for sure.


Quote from: rabinoz
Quote from: sceptimatic
Quote from: rabinoz
I imagine that you could easily go and observe such launches yourself if you dared.
Of course. I suppose I go hitch a ride to mars on the next manned flight.....eh?
Stop being totally ridiculous! Thousands observe rocket launches from quite a few places on earth.
But it's not my problem if you are unable to face reality.
Thousands observe rocket launches?
How many thousands observe space rocket launches?
Just show me some proof from your own knowing of your facts.

*

rabinoz

  • 26528
  • Real Earth Believer
Re: HAPPY HOAX ANNIVERSARY!!! (Rockets can't fly in a vacuum)
« Reply #2826 on: January 09, 2020, 04:38:18 AM »
However, I will tell you that rockets into the space they tell us about, is nonsense...and this is what we're arguing.
Yes, you tell us that but you never post any evidence only words that come from your imagination and nowhere else.

Quote from: sceptimatic
You admit you have no evidence
Where did I "admit that"? You are the one that has nothing.

Quote from: sceptimatic
so you're reliant on simply being told or acceptance of what you believe is fact, by mass opinion and diagrams that do not show a reality in terms of you knowing it for sure.
And what is wrong with believing experiments done by others when they fit with my own experience?
Whatever you might claim one person, no matter how "smart" cannot dream all the explanations for these things.

Quote from: sceptimatic
Quote from: rabinoz
Quote from: sceptimatic
Quote from: rabinoz
I imagine that you could easily go and observe such launches yourself if you dared.
Of course. I suppose I go hitch a ride to mars on the next manned flight.....eh?
Stop being totally ridiculous! Thousands observe rocket launches from quite a few places on earth.
But it's not my problem if you are unable to face reality.
Thousands observe rocket launches?
How many thousands observe space rocket launches?
Just show me some proof from your own knowing of your facts.
No, you are the one that differs from what almost everybody else claims is real so the onus is one you to come up with evidence.
So you show some proof that your idea of how gases behave is correct when it simply does not make sense to anyone else.

You claim that the atmosphere "stacks" and causes a nett downward force on objects but fluids cannot do that.

And I don't remember you ever having given any logical reason why all these space agencies, including SpaceX, Blue Origin, Arianespace, ROSCOSMOS, ISRO, JAXA, NASA, Rocket Lab, Virgin Galactic and a few others would waste billions of dollars a year launching rockets that do nothing!

Why would they do that?

Re: HAPPY HOAX ANNIVERSARY!!! (Rockets can't fly in a vacuum)
« Reply #2827 on: January 09, 2020, 06:53:30 AM »

Maybe we can try another approach.
Why do you feel arrows don't need to be pushing on the rocket - when you claim the rocket sits on the barrier.
If the barrier is pushing the rocket, does it not mean there should be a force line?

[/url]
https://cdn4.explainthatstuff.com/how-hovercraft-works.png[/img][/url]

]
https://images.slideplayer.com/23/6642676/slides/slide_5.jpg[/img][/url]
It's not a case of simply having A force line. There's never one particular force line. It's a case of mass expansion to mass compression in a chain reaction scenario.

It's like allowing a compressed spring (rocket gas to burn) to be released from above so it expands (uncoils) towards the ground. BUT..........BUT..... imagine directly under that uncoiling spring you have a uncoiled spring (atmosphere) which absorbs the expansion of the above spring (rocket gas/burn) and is then compressed itself, until that strength of uncoiling from above cannot compress it any more.
It's at this exact point where the rocket is at a stage of being able to be held, or ride atop of that spring uncoiling from it whilst balancing on that spring below.


Now all you have to understand from this point ion is the rocket thrusting continuously or to get back to the spring, the spring from above (rocket/gas/burn) continuously uncoiling at that strength and the below spring (atmosphere) compressing and holding to enable that ride on that spring.


Now equate that to the trampoline analogy I gave with the direct push into a delve in the trampoline and you see how it's directly contained for only the specific time required at each thrust.

We all understood your pov and are attempting to help you work through your thoughts....

See above in bold.
The top side of the rocket spring also pushing the rocket UP.
There would be a force line transmitting from groubdspring to the rocketspring up to rocket.

Draw that arrow on your green bar.
« Last Edit: January 09, 2020, 06:58:57 AM by Themightykabool »

Re: HAPPY HOAX ANNIVERSARY!!! (Rockets can't fly in a vacuum)
« Reply #2828 on: January 09, 2020, 06:57:41 AM »
Scepti quote:

"any rational person should see that."




Scepti is apprently the only rational person on planet earth.
Maybe we need a denP redefiniton of "rational".

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 25498
Re: HAPPY HOAX ANNIVERSARY!!! (Rockets can't fly in a vacuum)
« Reply #2829 on: January 09, 2020, 09:47:30 AM »
However, I will tell you that rockets into the space they tell us about, is nonsense...and this is what we're arguing.
Yes, you tell us that but you never post any evidence only words that come from your imagination and nowhere else.
There's evidence been posted many a time. It may not be accepted as concrete proof but you've seen many experiments.

Quote from: rabinoz

Quote from: sceptimatic
You admit you have no evidence
Where did I "admit that"? You are the one that has nothing.
Show me some real evidence then, that you know to be concrete.

Quote from: rabinoz

Quote from: sceptimatic
so you're reliant on simply being told or acceptance of what you believe is fact, by mass opinion and diagrams that do not show a reality in terms of you knowing it for sure.
And what is wrong with believing experiments done by others when they fit with my own experience?
Whatever you might claim one person, no matter how "smart" cannot dream all the explanations for these things.
Nothing at all wrong with believing anything from others if that's how you run with stuff. Just as long as you don;t use them as factual when you cannot prove anything.

Quote from: rabinoz

Quote from: sceptimatic
Quote from: rabinoz
Quote from: sceptimatic
Quote from: rabinoz
I imagine that you could easily go and observe such launches yourself if you dared.
Of course. I suppose I go hitch a ride to mars on the next manned flight.....eh?
Stop being totally ridiculous! Thousands observe rocket launches from quite a few places on earth.
But it's not my problem if you are unable to face reality.
Thousands observe rocket launches?
How many thousands observe space rocket launches?
Just show me some proof from your own knowing of your facts.
No, you are the one that differs from what almost everybody else claims is real so the onus is one you to come up with evidence.
So you show some proof that your idea of how gases behave is correct when it simply does not make sense to anyone else.

You claim that the atmosphere "stacks" and causes a nett downward force on objects but fluids cannot do that.

And I don't remember you ever having given any logical reason why all these space agencies, including SpaceX, Blue Origin, Arianespace, ROSCOSMOS, ISRO, JAXA, NASA, Rocket Lab, Virgin Galactic and a few others would waste billions of dollars a year launching rockets that do nothing!

Why would they do that?
They wouldn't and don't do that.
It's all nonsense.

Anything that is launched (in my opinion) is either a missile or a simple fabricated lightweight effigy that goes nowhere. Most likely a helium/hydrogen vertical blimp/balloon like effort.

Re: HAPPY HOAX ANNIVERSARY!!! (Rockets can't fly in a vacuum)
« Reply #2830 on: January 09, 2020, 10:14:45 AM »
However, I will tell you that rockets into the space they tell us about, is nonsense...and this is what we're arguing.
Yes, you tell us that but you never post any evidence only words that come from your imagination and nowhere else.
There's evidence been posted many a time. It may not be accepted as concrete proof but you've seen many experiments.

Quote from: rabinoz

Quote from: sceptimatic
You admit you have no evidence
Where did I "admit that"? You are the one that has nothing.
Show me some real evidence then, that you know to be concrete.

Quote from: rabinoz

Quote from: sceptimatic
so you're reliant on simply being told or acceptance of what you believe is fact, by mass opinion and diagrams that do not show a reality in terms of you knowing it for sure.
And what is wrong with believing experiments done by others when they fit with my own experience?
Whatever you might claim one person, no matter how "smart" cannot dream all the explanations for these things.
Nothing at all wrong with believing anything from others if that's how you run with stuff. Just as long as you don;t use them as factual when you cannot prove anything.

Quote from: rabinoz

Quote from: sceptimatic
Quote from: rabinoz
Quote from: sceptimatic
Quote from: rabinoz
I imagine that you could easily go and observe such launches yourself if you dared.
Of course. I suppose I go hitch a ride to mars on the next manned flight.....eh?
Stop being totally ridiculous! Thousands observe rocket launches from quite a few places on earth.
But it's not my problem if you are unable to face reality.
Thousands observe rocket launches?
How many thousands observe space rocket launches?
Just show me some proof from your own knowing of your facts.
No, you are the one that differs from what almost everybody else claims is real so the onus is one you to come up with evidence.
So you show some proof that your idea of how gases behave is correct when it simply does not make sense to anyone else.

You claim that the atmosphere "stacks" and causes a nett downward force on objects but fluids cannot do that.

And I don't remember you ever having given any logical reason why all these space agencies, including SpaceX, Blue Origin, Arianespace, ROSCOSMOS, ISRO, JAXA, NASA, Rocket Lab, Virgin Galactic and a few others would waste billions of dollars a year launching rockets that do nothing!

Why would they do that?
They wouldn't and don't do that.
It's all nonsense.

Anything that is launched (in my opinion) is either a missile or a simple fabricated lightweight effigy that goes nowhere. Most likely a helium/hydrogen vertical blimp/balloon like effort.
How do satellites get into position?

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 25498
Re: HAPPY HOAX ANNIVERSARY!!! (Rockets can't fly in a vacuum)
« Reply #2831 on: January 09, 2020, 10:38:29 AM »
How do satellites get into position?
They don't.

Re: HAPPY HOAX ANNIVERSARY!!! (Rockets can't fly in a vacuum)
« Reply #2832 on: January 09, 2020, 01:45:41 PM »
How do satellites get into position?
They don't.
Sorry, but that is what my dish points at.  How do you think satellite TV works?
« Last Edit: January 09, 2020, 01:51:55 PM by inquisitive »

Re: HAPPY HOAX ANNIVERSARY!!! (Rockets can't fly in a vacuum)
« Reply #2833 on: January 09, 2020, 01:51:17 PM »
I didn't say it sits on crap.
I paraphrased.
The point is you are just repeatedly saying it is sitting on crap without telling us what force is acting on the rocket.
Until you tell us what force is acting on the rocket and where that force is applied to the rocket you haven't even attempted to explain it.
Likewise, until you tell us what force is acting on the gas to have it exit the rocket and what the reactionary force to that is (i.e. what the gas is pushing off to leave the rocket), you have failed to even attempt to explain it.

Stop just repeatedly lying by saying you have explained it when you have made no attempt to.

Again, tell us how the gas accelerates out of the rocket and how the rocket moves forwards.
Tell us what 2 bodies are interacting for each of these situations and what force is being applied where.

The only thing in your favour is, nobody is willing to back me up to say that I did explain it
And the fact that you never explained it and never made any attempt to, instead repeatedly dodging requests to explain it and just lying and saying you have.
And the mountains of evidence that rockets do work in space which you just ignore.
And basic physics and the evidence which backs that up.

Now what is in your favour?
People that feel a need to reject the reality of rockets working in space because they disprove their FE fantasy, who are incapable of providing an explanation of how rockets work and instead just repeatedly assert that they have, and who are completely incapable of showing any problem with the conventional explanation of how rockets work.

However, I know I have explained and that's good enough for me.
See, it is statements like these which show you aren't acting like you are just providing your opinion. These statements show that you are acting like you are providing facts.

In the meantime show me how your space rockets work.
I already have repeatedly. You were unable to show a single thing wrong the explanation and instead just dismissed it as nonsense.
Go back and read what has already been provided.
Or if you don't want to do that, actually provide an explanation of how rockets work.
Or address the issue that has been plaguing your side of this thread before you joined.
What happens in a vacuum? Does the gas leave the tube? If so, how?
What is it pushing against? The only object available is the rocket, which would mean it is pushing against the rocket and thus rockets work.
If it isn't pushing against the rocket then the only options are that it pushes against itself or it doesn't need to push against anything, either way allowing rockets to work in a vacuum.

And you've watched many or some or one...have you?
I'm not the paranoid one rejecting reality. I have enough evidence to conclude that rockets will work in space and see no need to go watch them.
You are the one who should be going to watch them considering you think they are fake.

Now, if someone claimed NCC1701 USS enterprise was being launched, that I would want to go and see, as that would either be a stealing of a name, or almost certainly a fake as it relies upon pure fiction to work.

I'm not doubting rocket launches.
Yes you were. You dismissed the launches people see as fake.

I'm not questioning real rockets
No, you are outright rejecting them. Remember, real rockets work in space. If you reject rockets working in space, you are rejecting real rockets.

No I'm not, so who's sitting there reeling off bullcrap?
Still you, where you quite happily change your story as it suits you, repeatedly contradicting yourself.

Simple physics do not dictate rockets work.
Then why are you completely incapable of refuting this very real simple physics which demands they do work?

Just repeating the same pathetic dismissals shows that you have no case and that you know you have no case.

Trust me on this; if I didn't see anything that gave me a mind to question it, I wouldn't be questioning.
And what gives you a mind to question it?
The fact that they are incompatible with your FE fantasy?

What from reality gives you mind to question it?
You are yet to demonstrate any problem at all with it.
Instead, the only "problem" seems to be that they show you are wrong.

I have done small  experiments with evacuation chambers and also simple logical deductions as well as seeing what I believe to be discrepancies with a lot of what we're shown.
Silly stuff like atmosphere changing as a rocket launches, for no reason legitimate wise but it makes perfect sense why things would be altered if we were being duped.
You know what I'm talking about so don't waste your time asking me to prove it. It's all there in the videos we are told to accept as a truth.
No, we don't know what you are talking about.
So far the only experiment you have provided is one where beads bounced off a spinning disk in a vacuum chamber.
Nothing challenging real physics or the reality of rockets working in space.

Simple logical deductions show you to be completely wrong, which is why you have been repeatedly ignoring them or dismissing them as nonsense.

Of course it doesn't fit my world view. It doesn't fit because I see too many discrepancies.
[/quote]
What discrepancies?
Discrepancies with reality, which you are unable to provide a single one?
Or just discrepancies with your FE fantasy?

Again, stop with the insults. It fits our world view because it is backed up by mountains of evidence and actually makes sense. It has nothing to do with being brainwashed or peer pressured into it.

It beggars belief that people fall for this utter utter garbage but they do.
Except again, you are yet to show a single problem with it.
The only problem seems to be that it shows you are wrong.

Why should people reject reality, just because it shows you are wrong?

Visiting a rocket on the launchpad to see and inspect it to see if it is made of what we are told.
Then viewing the space where the so called astronauts sit.
And then once satisfied with that, watching those same so called astronauts get into the rocket and be strapped inside with a camera videoing the capsule door firly closed as well as any other potential exits under camera surveillance.
Then watch it lift off from the very same vantage points of the so called experts seen looking out of windows at the supposed same thing.
i.e. an extremely high standard which you know you will not get unless you pay a lot of money.
i.e. you have absolutely no interest in finding out the truth and instead just want to reject it at all costs because it shows you are wrong.

Not being able to see he physical truth of any of this stuff.
No, that is not evidence to any sane person.
The people who own it all have no obligation to meet your demands to show you that it is real.

That is not evidence that you are correct at all.


I'm simply putting my point across as strongly as you people are, whether you accept any of it or none of it.
You might think you are, but you are not.
You are failing to provide any logical arguments to back up your claims, or any evidence to back them up, while repeating having your claims refuted.

In order to be putting your point as strongly as we are putting ours, you would need to provide diagrams clearly showing a force on the rocket. You would need to explain how the gas and rocket accelerate, including what force is acting where and what the reactionary force to it is.

You would need to address the issues which you flee from.

However, I will tell you that rockets into the space they tell us about, is nonsense...and this is what we're arguing.
And that is the problem.
You "tell" us. You don't provide any rational argument against them. You don't provide any problem with the explanations of how they work. You don't provide any alternative explanation which actually explains anything and you flee from the issues which show they MUST work.

Stop just "telling" us and start justifying your claims.
Provide actual explanations.
Provide actual problems with the explanations we have provided.
Deal with the issues that have been presented.

There's evidence been posted many a time.
What evidence?
I am yet to see any from you.
There has been plenty of claims of such evidence being presented, but never any actual evidence.

How do satellites get into position?
They don't.
Then you need to deal with what is faking them, where for GPS, with so much information available, the only option would be to completely blanket Earth in transmitters which would very noticeable and still has the potential for serious failure.
The only rational explanation for how GPS works is with satellites.

*

rabinoz

  • 26528
  • Real Earth Believer
Re: HAPPY HOAX ANNIVERSARY!!! (Rockets can't fly in a vacuum)
« Reply #2834 on: January 09, 2020, 02:34:47 PM »
And I don't remember you ever having given any logical reason why all these space agencies, including SpaceX, Blue Origin, Arianespace, ROSCOSMOS, ISRO, JAXA, NASA, Rocket Lab, Virgin Galactic and a few others would waste billions of dollars a year launching rockets that do nothing!

Why would they do that?
They wouldn't and don't do that.
It's all nonsense.

Anything that is launched (in my opinion) is either a missile or a simple fabricated lightweight effigy that goes nowhere.


Quote from: sceptimatic
Most likely a helium/hydrogen vertical blimp/balloon like effort.
Stop being totally ridiculous and start facing the real world out there!

Do these look like "helium/hydrogen vertical blimp/balloon like" things?




And, like it or not, the International Space Station is up there.
You can see it with unaided eyes coming over at predicted times.
You can measure its transit time between locations thousands of kilometres apart and so a couple of people can determine its speed.

3 Observations, One ISS, One Conclusion - ISS IS VERY VERY FAST by WheresWa11y


You can photograph it with an ordinary camera or better through a telescope and see its shape.

Only someone quite out of touch with reality could possibly deny that something is up the travelling at about 7 km/sec and no helium balloon or aeroplane can do that.

But I guess if you are happy with your dreamland it doesn't really matter.

*

Shifter

  • 16395
  • Blind to the truth
Re: HAPPY HOAX ANNIVERSARY!!! (Rockets can't fly in a vacuum)
« Reply #2835 on: January 09, 2020, 03:33:41 PM »
Only someone quite out of touch with reality could possibly deny that something is up the travelling at about 7 km/sec and no helium balloon or aeroplane can do that.

Wrong.

Whatever it is, it is not travelling. That requires fuel and it's been up there for years.

It is actually falling.
A Future Is Not Given To You. It Is Something You Must Take For Yourself

*

rabinoz

  • 26528
  • Real Earth Believer
Re: HAPPY HOAX ANNIVERSARY!!! (Rockets can't fly in a vacuum)
« Reply #2836 on: January 09, 2020, 05:34:10 PM »
Only someone quite out of touch with reality could possibly deny that something is up the travelling at about 7 km/sec and no helium balloon or aeroplane can do that.

Wrong. Whatever it is, it is not travelling.
Not wrong! The ISS is travelling along a trajectory in curve spacetime. You can call it "falling" if you like but the ISS is still travelling.
And I'm far from the only one that uses travelling in that context:
Quote from: Phys.org
ISS completes 100,000th orbit of Earth: mission control
"Today the ISS made its hundred thousandth orbit around Earth," the mission control centre based in the Moscow region said in a statement.
Travelling at an altitude of about 250 miles (400 kilometres) and a speed of about 17,500 miles (28,000 kilometres) per hour, the space station circles the Earth once every 90 minutes.
Its "anniversary orbit" lasted from 7:35 am to 9:10 am Moscow time (0435 to 0610 GMT), mission control said.
The ISS has now travelled 2.6 billion miles "or about the distance of 10 round trips to Mars," NASA said on the station's official Twitter feed.

"This is a significant milestone and is a tribute to this international partnership made up of the European Space Agency, of Russia, Canada, Japan and the United States," US flight engineer Jeff Williams said from the station in a video posted by NASA.


Quote from: Shifter
That requires fuel
The only fuel used in that the ISS used as it travelled those 2.6 billion miles was a relatively small amount for the periodic reboots.

Quote from: Shifter
and it's been up there for years. It is actually falling.
You can look on it as falling if you need simplistic explanations like that but the ISS is still travelling.

Stop being such a pedantic fuss-pot intent on nothing more than proving others wrong - when clearly you are the one that's wrong.
« Last Edit: January 09, 2020, 08:38:12 PM by rabinoz »

*

Shifter

  • 16395
  • Blind to the truth
Re: HAPPY HOAX ANNIVERSARY!!! (Rockets can't fly in a vacuum)
« Reply #2837 on: January 09, 2020, 08:24:12 PM »

Stop being such a pedantic fuss-pot intent on nothing more than proving others wrong - when clearly you are the one that's wrong.

The use of 'fusspot' makes you sound old.

Tim the context you provided 'travelling' is a clumsy word at best

I guess I am travelling at near 30km/s around the galactic core right? But who would boast about that in such a way

A Future Is Not Given To You. It Is Something You Must Take For Yourself

*

faded mike

  • 1694
  • new world tattoo drill scar
Re: HAPPY HOAX ANNIVERSARY!!! (Rockets can't fly in a vacuum)
« Reply #2838 on: January 09, 2020, 09:05:44 PM »
This rocket seems to gain quite a lot of speed after take-off (Watch the telemetry HUD, lower left). What are you talking about?



Can you verify this as being real?

Can you verify the fuel?
Can you verify the thrust?
Can you verify anything about this rocket?

Of course not. But why am I supposed to suspect otherwise that it's not real? It's not the only one out there for one. There are plenty. And I'm not in the business of immediately thinking it's a fabrication and amateur rocketeers are liars just so they can refute your personal musings. Narcissistic much?

Conversely, what evidence do you have? What evidence do you have that shows this is a fabrication? It's only just you saying so because it doesn't fit your world view. Sorry, that's not good enough. Evidence, not just your musings is required. A million points of evidence have been shown as to how rockets work and how they work in a vacuum and you haven't presented a lick of evidence of how they don't.

What would evidence look like to you that shows you are wrong? What would evidence look like to you that shows you are correct?

If you presented a video, or a paper, or a book, or, god forbid, some math, that showed you had an actual reality stance, I would take notice and not dismiss out of hand like you do for everything. But you present nothing to even remotely back your musings up. Nothing. Just dismals for the not so modern world and insults. Curious that you have no evidence.
What occurred to me reading this is the degree of censorship or absent info in the world.
" Using our vast surveillance system, we've uncovered revolutionary new information..."
           -them

I am not a druggy

*

rabinoz

  • 26528
  • Real Earth Believer
Re: HAPPY HOAX ANNIVERSARY!!! (Rockets can't fly in a vacuum)
« Reply #2839 on: January 09, 2020, 09:07:14 PM »

Stop being such a pedantic fuss-pot intent on nothing more than proving others wrong - when clearly you are the one that's wrong.
The use of 'fusspot' makes you sound old.
Not much I can do about that as the alternative does not seem all that attractive.
And other words that I could have used were far less complimentary so let's stick to "pedantic fuss-pot" or would you prefer "nit-picking pedant" in future?

Quote from: Shifter
Tim (wot?) the context you provided 'travelling' is a clumsy word at best
Well, I'm in pretty good company. The site Phys.org used it in exactly the same context as do many others.
And 27,600 km/h sure is travelling :o!

Quote from: Shifter
I guess I am travelling at near 30km/s around the galactic core right? But who would boast about that in such a way
Well, according to my sources you are travelling at nearer 230±30 km/s but what's a few hundred km/s around here.
But you can work it out.
The solar system is supposedly 26,490±100 ly from Sagittarius A* and the orbital period is about 230 million years.

But who's boasting about it?

*

rabinoz

  • 26528
  • Real Earth Believer
Re: HAPPY HOAX ANNIVERSARY!!! (Rockets can't fly in a vacuum)
« Reply #2840 on: January 09, 2020, 09:09:58 PM »
What occurred to me reading this is the degree of censorship or absent info in the world.
Where is there any hint of "censorship or absent info" in relation to how rockets get thrust in a vacuum?

*

faded mike

  • 1694
  • new world tattoo drill scar
Re: HAPPY HOAX ANNIVERSARY!!! (Rockets can't fly in a vacuum)
« Reply #2841 on: January 09, 2020, 10:44:55 PM »
I've heard they don't tell how much fuel they use.
" Using our vast surveillance system, we've uncovered revolutionary new information..."
           -them

I am not a druggy

*

Stash

  • 6639
Re: HAPPY HOAX ANNIVERSARY!!! (Rockets can't fly in a vacuum)
« Reply #2842 on: January 09, 2020, 11:01:19 PM »
I've heard they don't tell how much fuel they use.

A 1 second search:

"The first stage of the Saturn V rocket, using five F-1 rocket engines, produced 7.5 million lbs. (3.4 million kilograms) of thrust and was used during launch for about 2 minutes. It gobbled up 20 tons (40,000 pounds) of fuel per second."

A 1 minute search would reveal a whole lot more. I don't know where you hear your non-information from, but maybe put a little effort in before you start off a statement with "I heard..."

*

faded mike

  • 1694
  • new world tattoo drill scar
Re: HAPPY HOAX ANNIVERSARY!!! (Rockets can't fly in a vacuum)
« Reply #2843 on: January 09, 2020, 11:24:47 PM »
I've heard they don't tell how much fuel they use.

A 1 second search:

"The first stage of the Saturn V rocket, using five F-1 rocket engines, produced 7.5 million lbs. (3.4 million kilograms) of thrust and was used during launch for about 2 minutes. It gobbled up 20 tons (40,000 pounds) of fuel per second."

A 1 minute search would reveal a whole lot more. I don't know where you hear your non-information from, but maybe put a little effort in before you start off a statement with "I heard..."
So thats like 20 bathtubs full (cubic metre of water weighs a ton) per second? For 5 minutes?
" Using our vast surveillance system, we've uncovered revolutionary new information..."
           -them

I am not a druggy

*

Stash

  • 6639
Re: HAPPY HOAX ANNIVERSARY!!! (Rockets can't fly in a vacuum)
« Reply #2844 on: January 09, 2020, 11:43:13 PM »
I've heard they don't tell how much fuel they use.

A 1 second search:

"The first stage of the Saturn V rocket, using five F-1 rocket engines, produced 7.5 million lbs. (3.4 million kilograms) of thrust and was used during launch for about 2 minutes. It gobbled up 20 tons (40,000 pounds) of fuel per second."

A 1 minute search would reveal a whole lot more. I don't know where you hear your non-information from, but maybe put a little effort in before you start off a statement with "I heard..."
So thats like 20 bathtubs full (cubic metre of water weighs a ton) per second? For 5 minutes?

Whether factual or not is for you to decide. But the point is, all the info you seek is easy to find and whatever you heard about it being hard to find is rubbish.


*

Stash

  • 6639
Re: HAPPY HOAX ANNIVERSARY!!! (Rockets can't fly in a vacuum)
« Reply #2845 on: January 09, 2020, 11:46:19 PM »
This rocket seems to gain quite a lot of speed after take-off (Watch the telemetry HUD, lower left). What are you talking about?



Can you verify this as being real?

Can you verify the fuel?
Can you verify the thrust?
Can you verify anything about this rocket?

Of course not. But why am I supposed to suspect otherwise that it's not real?

You're not supposed to do anything. You can choose what you want to do and you have. You chose to accept it all as legitimate without (as you admit) knowing the truth. Maybe you should adjust your musings to accommodate evidence rather than just dismiss everything as fake. Far more sciency to do so.

It also does not give you grounds to call me wrong in questioning it and refusing to believe it until satisfied that facts prove me wrong.
This hasn't happened and this is where I am.

I just look at it logically. Lots of amateur rocketeers post their launches on YT with telemetry info. They show their rockets gaining speed. I'm not of a mind that these regular folks are conspiring to dupe people. No motive, no crime. There's a lot of stuff, most stuff in fact, we as humans don't have first-hand truth of. That doesn't mean all of those things are fake.

Quote from: Stash
It's not the only one out there for one. There are plenty. And I'm not in the business of immediately thinking it's a fabrication and amateur rocketeers are liars just so they can refute your personal musings. Narcissistic much?
There are plenty of pictures of men on the moon or rovers on mars or drawings of voyagers into deep space....as we are told. And son on and so on and so on.
Thousands and thousands of pictures, words, models and even video of all kinds of stuff, that, to any normal everyday go about your life person will accept as a truth and argue as a truther, without actually knowing the truth.

Can you understand that?
Of course you can jump up and shout as loud as you want that they're all real.
They're being questioned because people see too much dodgy stuff with a lot of it.

Trust me on this; if I didn't see anything that gave me a mind to question it, I wouldn't be questioning.
But this is not the case.

Nothing wrong with questioning, but dismissing everything out of hand seems dodgy at best.

Quote from: Stash
Conversely, what evidence do you have? What evidence do you have that shows this is a fabrication?

It depends on what you decide is evidence.
I have done small  experiments with evacuation chambers and also simple logical deductions as well as seeing what I believe to be discrepancies with a lot of what we're shown.
Silly stuff like atmosphere changing as a rocket launches, for no reason legitimate wise but it makes perfect sense why things would be altered if we were being duped.

You know what I'm talking about so don't waste your time asking me to prove it. It's all there in the videos we are told to accept as a truth.

I think I remember an experiment you mentioned with ball bearings or something. What would probably serve you well is if your wrote up the experiments and your findings and presented them. That would go a long way to legitimize your perspective not just with the REr's but with FEr's as well. As it stands, your "I have done small experiments..." seems dodgy and insincere. Something to think about.

Quote from: Stash
It's only just you saying so because it doesn't fit your world view.
Of course it doesn't fit my world view. It doesn't fit because I see too many discrepancies.
It fits your world view because you simply adhere to the schooling you received and the mass peer pressure of those around you conforming to that mindset.

You keep spouting this notion that anyone who doesn't share your world view is a sheep droning on about things that they were taught or force fed by society. That is simply not the case in all instances within humanity. Your hubris in this regard is overwhelming. Many people study, learn, experiment, and explore to conjure, engineer, and build many of the modern devices we have that would have seemed like magic decades earlier. It's called progress.

To perpetually insult people with this notion shows a distinct lack of credence to any of your musings. Your musings should support themselves under extreme scrutiny alone - Because they are extreme, alternate notions without evidence your burden is great and must be handled with humility, not hostility. Again, you may want to examine the evidence put forth and see if it can be accommodated within your notions rather than just dismiss and rail against. You just might find out even more, maybe even learn something.

Quote from: Stash
Sorry, that's not good enough. Evidence, not just your musings is required.

My evidence will never suit you.
Equally you do not possess the evidence that will suit me.
I simply want facts.
Can you provide the facts from your person?

I guess according to you, unless you've had a heart transplant or been in the OR when someone did, heart transplants are a fiction, bereft of fact.

Your evidence would never suit me because you have never attempted to provide any and for that reason alone. If you showed me a video from an amateur rocketeer that showed, for instance, theirs never gained speed, and a bunch of them, I would definitely take notice. So far, there doesn't seem to be anything on the planet from a third party that backs up your musings.

Quote from: Stash
A million points of evidence have been shown as to how rockets work and how they work in a vacuum and you haven't presented a lick of evidence of how they don't.

Of course.
We've been told rockets placed satellites 23,000 miles into space.

My Direct TV dish on my house points up into the sky in the exact direction where it is claimed a geostationary satellite is. If I don't believe now I have to add AT&T to the the ever deepening conspiracy bucket.

Rockets dropping rovers into mars atmosphere that was supposedly so close to a vacuum and yet used parachutes.

"...there is an atmosphere on Mars — just not much of one, It’s less than 1% of Earth’s...On Earth a parachute can easily slow a spacecraft (or a person) down enough to achieve a gentle landing, but InSight’s parachute could only slow the spacecraft to about 200 miles/hour — still way too fast...InSight then used rockets to slow the spacecraft down enough for a gentle landing...the Martian atmosphere couldn’t slow InSight down enough for a safe landing, but it did a lot of the work. Between aerodynamic braking and the supersonic parachute, the Martian atmosphere was still responsible for slowing InSight down from a screaming 11,300 miles/hour to about 200 miles/hour. Not bad for a few wisps of carbon dioxide..."

See, this is something you could poke around and explore, even debunk after knowledge gained. Even I could see how your musings could accomplish this after learning as much as I have about DP.

I could go on and on and on with all this so called evidence.
Voyager 1 and 2 supposedly billions and billions of miles into deep space and still sending back data.
Something sent from the 70's, apparently.
And yet we struggle to communicate on Earth.

It beggars belief that people fall for this utter utter garbage but they do.

"Voyager 1 data takes about 19 hours to reach Earth, and signals from Voyager 2 about 16 hours." I'm not sure why you would have a problem with that.

Quote from: Stash
What would evidence look like to you that shows you are wrong?
Very simple.
Visiting a rocket on the launchpad to see and inspect it to see if it is made of what we are told.
Then viewing the space where the so called astronauts sit.
And then once satisfied with that, watching those same so called astronauts get into the rocket and be strapped inside with a camera videoing the capsule door firly closed as well as any other potential exits under camera surveillance.
Then watch it lift off from the very same vantage points of the so called experts seen looking out of windows at the supposed same thing.

That's it. If that happened I would not even want to see it go out of sight. I would accept I'm totally wrong from that point.

What's the chances of that happening?

Zero chance. But the same goes for just about everything. What are the chances of me believing that F1 drivers really rip around Monaco like I've seen on TV? I'll never be in Monaco, I'll never be in the pit, I'll never see the driver get strapped into the most advanced land vehicle ever designed. Ergo, I don't believe an automobile can exist that supposedly performs all of those wondrous duties, nor do I believe the people privy to and responsible for it?

Quote from: Stash
What would evidence look like to you that shows you are correct?
Not being able to see he physical truth of any of this stuff. That's evidence enough that something is amiss but only physical proof of seeing what I'm arguing against will put the cat amongst the pigeons.

Then why do you believe in a dome as opposed to myriad other explanations of our world? There is no physical truth to a dome or a carbonite sun buried in the north pole. How do you reconcile that those notions you have aren't amiss due to lack of 'physical truth'?

Quote from: Stash
If you presented a video, or a paper, or a book, or, god forbid, some math, that showed you had an actual reality stance, I would take notice and not dismiss out of hand like you do for everything. But you present nothing to even remotely back your musings up. Nothing. Just dismals for the not so modern world and insults. Curious that you have no evidence.
You don't have to take notice. You can ditch this right now and just sit back and smirk.
I'm not asking you to accept what I say. I'm simply putting my point across as strongly as you people are, whether you accept any of it or none of it.

You're not putting it across as strongly because you present no evidence, experiments, backing of any sort for you claims. The proponderence of evidence is vastly against you especially considering you present zero.

What I argue with you people is not for your benefit. You lot are merely the counterargument to my counterargument. Or basically, you lot are the resistance to the potential reality by adhering to fiction as your reality...from my side...and obviously vice versa.

The people who really count are those who are interested, who can see there's issue with what we're told.
They're the people that will sit back and take notice, amid you and others attempts to try to badger me out of it.

You could upend the course of history and revolutionize the bulk of technology used around the world if you could show a smidge of what you claim is true. So far, no takers. Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar and maybe you're barking up the wrong tree.

*

Stash

  • 6639
Re: HAPPY HOAX ANNIVERSARY!!! (Rockets can't fly in a vacuum)
« Reply #2846 on: January 09, 2020, 11:47:48 PM »
This rocket seems to gain quite a lot of speed after take-off (Watch the telemetry HUD, lower left). What are you talking about?



Can you verify this as being real?

Can you verify the fuel?
Can you verify the thrust?
Can you verify anything about this rocket?

Btw, can you verify you are not Heiwa?

*

rabinoz

  • 26528
  • Real Earth Believer
Re: HAPPY HOAX ANNIVERSARY!!! (Rockets can't fly in a vacuum)
« Reply #2847 on: January 10, 2020, 12:38:50 AM »
I've heard they don't tell how much fuel they use.
And where did you "hear" that "they don't tell how much fuel they use"?

NASA themselves published every last detail of each lunar mission.
These compiled after the mission to report failures, anomalies and compare the performance with the design.
Here's the one on Apollo 11, SATURN V LAUNCH VEHICLE FLIGHT EVALUATION REPORT-AS-506 APOLLO 11 MISSION.

*

Bullwinkle

  • The Elder Ones
  • 19446
  • Standard Idiot
Re: HAPPY HOAX ANNIVERSARY!!! (Rockets can't fly in a vacuum)
« Reply #2848 on: January 10, 2020, 12:51:13 AM »
This rocket seems to gain quite a lot of speed after take-off (Watch the telemetry HUD, lower left). What are you talking about?



Can you verify this as being real?

Can you verify the fuel?
Can you verify the thrust?
Can you verify anything about this rocket?

Btw, can you verify you are not Heiwa?

 ;)

Re: HAPPY HOAX ANNIVERSARY!!! (Rockets can't fly in a vacuum)
« Reply #2849 on: January 10, 2020, 02:24:20 AM »
Come on guys.  Less than 5 pages to go to get another scepti century thread.

I sense you are waning.  You have 95 pages of this bullshit, another 5 is nothing. You can do it!
Quote from: mikeman7918
a single photon can pass through two sluts

Quote from: Chicken Fried Clucker
if Donald Trump stuck his penis in me after trying on clothes I would have that date and time burned in my head.