Cool Mission?

  • 577 Replies
  • 34595 Views
*

Timeisup

  • 3670
  • You still think that. You cannot be serious ?
Cool Mission?
« on: December 12, 2022, 12:13:46 PM »
https://petapixel.com/2022/12/12/two-photographers-chosen-for-spacex-moon-mission/

What do you have to say about this. I for one can’t wait to see the images.
Really…..what a laugh!!!

Re: Cool Mission?
« Reply #1 on: December 12, 2022, 07:37:24 PM »
They have weird hair.



After that, I can say that 100% of all space missions are NASA or SpaceX pulling flim-flam.



Particularly check out video one, where they show using a vacuum room, that contrary to my theories (I figured no atmosphere means no air resistance), no air means no propulsion and no ignition. Thus showing that there is no means of visiting outer space.



Btw, the average spaceship is supposed to travel around 25,000 to 40,000 mph. 140 million miles away? Based on the distance to Mars, this takes about 15 years. But supposedly, there are ones that can go roughly 10 times this. Right... Btw, it takes several minutes to even take off. I have a hard time believing even the 25,000 mph estimate.

Mars photos? Or yellow/red filter?





And so on.

Cool mission? Or a waste of tax money?  I've looked at the actual amount of time it would take to get to Mars. We're not there yet, even if space travel is a real thing. 

But since we're talking about the moon, we on Earth haven't even seen its backside firsthand. So yeah.

« Last Edit: December 12, 2022, 08:12:09 PM by bulmabriefs144 »



Quote from: Themightykabool
crazy people don't know they're crazy.

*

Stash

  • Ethical Stash
  • 13398
  • I am car!
Re: Cool Mission?
« Reply #2 on: December 12, 2022, 08:14:58 PM »
Wow, you people will stumble all over yourselves because of some random meme that speaks to your narrative. Without even a thought of actually examining it. So lazy.

1) Wind-Blown Martian Sand
This pair of images from the Mast Camera on NASA's Curiosity rover shows the upper portion of a wind-blown deposit dubbed "Rocknest." The rover team recently commanded Curiosity to take a scoop of soil from a region located out of frame, below this view. The soil was then analyzed with the Chemistry and Mineralogy instrument, or CheMin.

The colors in the image at left are unmodified, showing the scene as it would appear on Mars, which has a dusty red-colored atmosphere. The image at right has been white-balanced to show what the same area would look like under the lighting conditions on Earth.

The rounded rock located at the upper center portion of the images is about 8 inches (0.2 meters) across.

Image credit: NASA/JPL-Caltech/MSSS

2) A collage comparing two images — one that appears to show a rock formation in Bulgaria and another of a near-identical formation in a purported "original NASA photo of Mars" — has been shared hundreds of times on Facebook since 2014. The image comparison, however, is a hoax; NASA stated that the purported Mars photo was not taken by the US space agency.

The image was posted to a Facebook group called "Collective Action Against Bill Gates. We Wont [sic] Be POISONED!!!" here on February 4, 2021.

[NASA told AFP in a February 6 email the top image in the purported comparison "is not a NASA photo of Mars". The image is also not listed on NASA's publicly available Mars Media Library as seen here.

https://www.boomlive.in/world/fake-news-nasa-mars-mission-photos-12000

3) same as #1. And how would someone know one was a mars picture and one was Devon island? Have you verified that or did you just post a meme with 2 images and some text on them? Do a little homework for a change.

4) pareidolia.

Re: Cool Mission?
« Reply #3 on: December 12, 2022, 09:51:31 PM »
Wow, you people will stumble all over yourselves because of some random meme that speaks to your narrative. Without even a thought of actually examining it. So lazy.

Says the person who is so lazy that they literally don't bother to check whether martian art actually is real.




One of the exact locations mentioned in video two. It's real. Atacama Desert.

1) Wind-Blown Martian Sand
This pair of images from the Mast Camera on NASA's Curiosity rover shows the upper portion of a wind-blown deposit dubbed "Rocknest." The rover team recently commanded Curiosity to take a scoop of soil from a region located out of frame, below this view. The soil was then analyzed with the Chemistry and Mineralogy instrument, or CheMin.

Also lazy enough to believe that wind exists without atmosphere. If you'll notice from video one, they tried turning on a fan with conditions approximating Mars (heavy CO2, almost no oxygen, thin air in general). No dice. You could have a wind blow in a filled with CO2 but without air pressure, wind doesn't happen).

The colors in the image at left are unmodified, showing the scene as it would appear on Mars, which has a dusty red-colored atmosphere. The image at right has been white-balanced to show what the same area would look like under the lighting conditions on Earth.

After months of exploring, we have managed to discover an abandoned Martian city. Note the red sky, the weird domed architecture and rocketlike buildings. There's even a fountain of pure lava springing up from underground.



Oh wait, no... that's Ashgabat in Turkmenistan, known for its odd buildings.



The rounded rock located at the upper center portion of the images is about 8 inches (0.2 meters) across.

Image credit: NASA/JPL-Caltech/MSSS

2) A collage comparing two images — one that appears to show a rock formation in Bulgaria and another of a near-identical formation in a purported "original NASA photo of Mars" — has been shared hundreds of times on Facebook since 2014. The image comparison, however, is a hoax; NASA stated that the purported Mars photo was not taken by the US space agency.

Lemme guess. You learned this from snopes?

The image was posted to a Facebook group called "Collective Action Against Bill Gates. We Wont [sic] Be POISONED!!!" here on February 4, 2021.

[NASA told AFP in a February 6 email the top image in the purported comparison "is not a NASA photo of Mars". The image is also not listed on NASA's publicly available Mars Media Library as seen here.

https://www.boomlive.in/world/fake-news-nasa-mars-mission-photos-12000

Find me a picture from Mars then. Any picture. And I'll show you an obscure desert they picked instead. Well maybe not me personally, but someone with picture locating software.

3) same as #1. And how would someone know one was a mars picture and one was Devon island? Have you verified that or did you just post a meme with 2 images and some text on them? Do a little homework for a change.

Maybe because anyone who is not lazy like you can type it into the search engine? Where they literally call it "Mars on Earth." Hmmmmm...



Mars researchers return to Devon Island, Nunavut, for 'twin mission' with Utah

They do these "training missions" in locations that are "like Mars" in order to filter for "pictures of Mars." Are you actually that gullible? Or are you trying to convince me? Because the latter case, you're wasting your time.

4) pareidolia.

Hardcore denial filter. When you don't even have the ability to think when presented with images, either your brain is busted, or you are being paid by certain persons to keep a lie going. I hope they pay you well then, because the long term consequences of all of this mean you get screwed for life. More infrastructure, more taxes, less money in your wallet. Only in hopes that globalism somehow hurts your enemies when it definitely does not help you.
« Last Edit: December 12, 2022, 10:01:28 PM by bulmabriefs144 »



Quote from: Themightykabool
crazy people don't know they're crazy.

*

Stash

  • Ethical Stash
  • 13398
  • I am car!
Re: Cool Mission?
« Reply #4 on: December 12, 2022, 11:00:50 PM »
Lemme guess. You learned this from snopes?

Let me guess, all of your knowledge and intellect comes from memes and manga.

*

JackBlack

  • 21903
Re: Cool Mission?
« Reply #5 on: December 13, 2022, 03:07:17 AM »
After that, I can say that 100% of all space missions are NASA or SpaceX pulling flim-flam.
You mean you can assert pure BS, with no rational justification?
And instead just spam a load of delusional BS?

Your first video starts out with really crappy CGI, and then falsely claims that a fan not working in a vacuum somehow magically proves there can't be any thrust in a vacuum.
Considering it starts out so poorly, and spouts such dishonest BS I see no reason to give it any further thought.

The second is just someone baselessly asserting their opinion that the photos from Mars were taken on Earth and demanding irrefutable proof they were taken on Mars.

Btw, the average spaceship is supposed to travel around 25,000 to 40,000 mph. 140 million miles away? Based on the distance to Mars
The average spaceship is in orbit around Earth, with a velocity measured relative to Earth.

If they are going to go to Mars, they will be going faster than that.
So more pathetic nonsense.

Mars photos? Or yellow/red filter?
Which one?
Do you mean the one that FEers and other conspiracy nuts blatantly lie about by pretending it is an "original NASA photo of Mars", with no justification or source at all?
This shows the level of dishonesty they are willing to stoop to.
They are willing to blatantly lie to everyone, take an image, photoshop and then falsely claim that NASA says it is a photo of Mars.

That level of dishonesty shows how truly desperate FEers and other conspiracy nuts are to pretend it is all fake.
If it really was fake, why would they need to be that dishonest?

As for the last image, I take it you think clouds are really bunnies because they sometimes kind of look like one?

I've looked at the actual amount of time it would take to get to Mars. We're not there yet
You mean you have made some wild claim based upon your own opinion with no rational justification at all, demonstrating either a complete lack of understanding or wilful dishonesty, to pretend we aren't there yet.

Says the person who is so lazy that they literally don't bother to check whether martian art actually is real.
You mean yourself?

One of the exact locations mentioned in video two. It's real. Atacama Desert.
Now try showing an image from there, and one from Mars, to show they are the same location (rather than just some similar appearance), with a link to an official source of the photo allegedly from Mars.

Also lazy enough to believe that wind exists without atmosphere.
Mars has an atmosphere.
It not being as thick as Earth doesn't mean it doesn't exist or can't have wind.

After months of exploring, we have managed to discover an abandoned Martian city.
And more dishonest FE BS.

Find me a picture from Mars then. Any picture. And I'll show you an obscure desert they picked instead. Well maybe not me personally, but someone with picture locating software.
You mean you will deflect and refuse to provide the alleged original source, while still boldly claiming it was taken on Earth?

Maybe because anyone who is not lazy like you can type it into the search engine?
And what? Find a bunch of conspiracy nuts claiming the photos are from there rather than Mars?
Anyone can take a photo of Mars and slap on "DEVON ISLAND" and then boldly proclaim it is from there.

Are you actually that gullible?
Do you think we are that gullible, because you are spouting unsubstantiated garbage with no rational justification at all.
You seem to have just looked for whatever BS you can online which appeared to support your fantasy and accepted it without question.

Hardcore denial filter.
That does seem to be what you are suffering from.
You can't accept the missions to Mars are real, so you look for whatever dishonest BS you can to deny it.
« Last Edit: December 13, 2022, 03:16:21 AM by JackBlack »

Re: Cool Mission?
« Reply #6 on: December 13, 2022, 05:23:30 AM »
Lemme guess. You learned this from snopes?

Let me guess, all of your knowledge and intellect comes from memes and manga.

Actually while I like to meme stuff, a fair portion comes from books and research. I just don't discount anything, nor believe something just because people in funny outfits say so.

And btw, none of these pictures were memes. Real pictures. For reference, this is a meme.



And yes, you are that gullible.

If I were to wear this:

Would you believe I am telling the truth? Would being a NASA scientist, even a junior one, trump the ability to make one's own decisions?
https://philonotes.com/2022/05/appeal-to-authority-argumentum-ad-verecundiam

You truly are gullible.





Quote from: Themightykabool
crazy people don't know they're crazy.

*

Stash

  • Ethical Stash
  • 13398
  • I am car!
Re: Cool Mission?
« Reply #7 on: December 13, 2022, 05:58:33 AM »
You truly are gullible.

Actually, what’s interesting is that you’re the one who falls for memes without even bothering to check to see if there’s any validity to them. Which is beyond lazy. And what’s really disappointing is that I thought you were smarter than this. Instead when confronted with actual evidence that seems to counter your opinions, you default to the age-old FE bag of conspiracy, indoctrination, and lies. You’re smarter than that, but, well, maybe not.

So, in the spirit that you seemed to have embraced, it will be quite easy to just dismiss all of your no-evidence claims as simply lies and indoctrination into the hubris that comes with unfounded conspiracies. No more need to respect your posts with actually looking into what you’re claiming. It can just be assumed they are lies and leave it at that.

Re: Cool Mission?
« Reply #8 on: December 13, 2022, 07:48:56 AM »

Btw, the average spaceship is supposed to travel around 25,000 to 40,000 mph. 140 million miles away? Based on the distance to Mars, this takes about 15 years.

Btw, it takes several minutes to even take off. I have a hard time believing even the 25,000 mph estimate.

 I've looked at the actual amount of time it would take to get to Mars.

Having a spot of bother with basic arithmetic?

You totally botched it.

5 to 8 months, if you do the calculation correctly.

Since you can't even get a simple arithmetic problem correct, (and then base an entire belief system on it) your credibility on mathematical or scientific "analysis" is pretty well shot.

Thanks for playing, but now it's time for you to let the grown-ups talk.

Re: Cool Mission?
« Reply #9 on: December 13, 2022, 09:59:30 AM »

Btw, the average spaceship is supposed to travel around 25,000 to 40,000 mph. 140 million miles away? Based on the distance to Mars, this takes about 15 years.

Btw, it takes several minutes to even take off. I have a hard time believing even the 25,000 mph estimate.

 I've looked at the actual amount of time it would take to get to Mars.

Having a spot of bother with basic arithmetic?

You totally botched it.

5 to 8 months, if you do the calculation correctly.

Since you can't even get a simple arithmetic problem correct, (and then base an entire belief system on it) your credibility on mathematical or scientific "analysis" is pretty well shot.

Thanks for playing, but now it's time for you to let the grown-ups talk.

"mph" means miles per hour. It looks like bulmabriefs used those numbers as miles/day instead of miles/hour and got, not surprisingly, an answer 24 times too large. Oops.

But, hey... what's an error by almost one and a half orders of magnitude among friends, right?

I'm not sure what "several minutes to even take off" means. It takes years to prepare a complex mission for launch. At launch time, the rocket engines will usually start and run for a moment to stabilize before actual liftoff, but not minutes. If bulmabriefs is talking about the slow rise of the whole rocket assembly from the launch pad for the first few seconds, well, so what? What matters is the velocity at the end of the burn, not the velocity at the start of the burn, which is zero (relative to the launch pad).
"Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts." - Daniel Patrick Moynihan

*

boydster

  • Assistant to the Regional Manager
  • Planar Moderator
  • 17757
Re: Cool Mission?
« Reply #10 on: December 13, 2022, 10:04:36 AM »
Wrapping one's mind around something moving up to 40k mph in a frictionless environment might be a lot to process too, to be fair. Imagine trying to maintain that kind of pace up within an atmosphere like Earth's, it's insanity, and if someone is just extrapolating out to space with what they intuitively understand from observing the world around them, it's an easy mistake to make. Until you have a think about it, anyway.

*

JackBlack

  • 21903
Re: Cool Mission?
« Reply #11 on: December 13, 2022, 12:32:01 PM »
Actually while I like to meme stuff, a fair portion comes from books and research.
And how much of that was from research?
Are you saying you knowingly provided falsehoods?
If so, that wouldn't be surprising at all given how you acted with regards to sidereal days.

I just don't discount anything, nor believe something just because people in funny outfits say so.
Sure you do.
Look at how you have acted in this thread. You have entirely discarded the possibility of any photos actually coming from Mars.
And likewise, you have just believed something because conspiracy nuts you agree with said it.

If you were actually acting in the way you claim, you would accept the possibility that photos have come from Mars, and the memes you posted are incredibly dishonest.

And btw, none of these pictures were memes.
They certainly are memes.

You truly are gullible.
We aren't the ones accepting faked photos, such as your acceptance of a conspiracy nut claiming a photo is claimed by NASA as being from Mars.
So you certainly seem to be the gullible one here, unless you knowingly lying to everyone.

Re: Cool Mission?
« Reply #12 on: December 13, 2022, 06:22:35 PM »
Quote
They certainly are memes.

They are pictures.

Quote
meme
mēm
noun

A self-propagating unit of cultural evolution having a resemblance to the gene (the unit of genetics).

A meme is something that basically repeats and evolves as it repeats.



For example, the film Highlander has the quote "There can be only one!" If I repeated this, but with cats, that would be a meme.



This is a picture. That you don't understand the difference means your education needs improvement, not mine.



Quote from: Themightykabool
crazy people don't know they're crazy.

Re: Cool Mission?
« Reply #13 on: December 13, 2022, 07:03:28 PM »
Wrapping one's mind around something moving up to 40k mph in a frictionless environment might be a lot to process too, to be fair. Imagine trying to maintain that kind of pace up within an atmosphere like Earth's, it's insanity, and if someone is just extrapolating out to space with what they intuitively understand from observing the world around them, it's an easy mistake to make. Until you have a think about it, anyway.

I always tell people that if you cannot duplicate it with the observations you have at hand, it's fake science.

I have told Miss Goo that the best explanation that I can come up with for this strange behavior is that momentum cannot be created or destroyed in a frictionless environment. That is, if you are already falling and someone takes away the air, you continue to fall until you hit the ground. If you midair and the air is taken away, you are stuck in midair.

But this means that if you can't reach the speed on Earth, you very definitely cannot reach it if you manage to leave the Earth, because you cannot add momentum (you only continue at your current rate).



Quote from: Themightykabool
crazy people don't know they're crazy.

*

Stash

  • Ethical Stash
  • 13398
  • I am car!
Re: Cool Mission?
« Reply #14 on: December 13, 2022, 08:17:55 PM »
I always tell people that if you cannot duplicate it with the observations you have at hand, it's fake science.

Open heart surgery is fake science?

*

JackBlack

  • 21903
Re: Cool Mission?
« Reply #15 on: December 14, 2022, 12:17:24 AM »
A meme is something that basically repeats and evolves as it repeats.
Like delusional BS FEers spout.
Especially when they do things like take an image, and then blatantly lie about it, slapping some text on it, to try and pedal their BS.

I always tell people that if you cannot duplicate it with the observations you have at hand, it's fake science.
Which is really just a pathetic way to reject you don't understand or don't agree with.

There is plenty of science that the vast majority of people do not have access to observations to duplicate it with on hand.
A simple example would be old photography methods, which is now only practiced by very few people.
Another example would be anything that involves rain, when it isn't raining. There are plenty of things which require particular conditions which don't always occur.
If you live in a place where it never snows, is snow fake science?

I have told Miss Goo that the best explanation that I can come up with for this strange behavior is that momentum cannot be created or destroyed in a frictionless environment.
Momentum can never be created or destroyed, at least that is the current understanding.
Instead, it must be conserved.
This means if you want to move, you need to push something.

When air slows you do, it is you exchanging momentum with the air.
When air speeds you up, it is you exchanging momentum with the air.

In both cases, the total change in momentum is 0.
In any reference frame, the momentum you gain is countered by the momentum the air loses, or vice versa.

The simplest way to "gain" momentum in a frictionless environment is to throw something away.
The more massive it is, and the faster you throw it, the more momentum it has in one direction, and thus the more you will gain in the opposite direction.

This is how a rocket works, by throwing out exhaust gas at high speed.

So no, this does not mean that if you can't do it in the air you can't do it in space, nor does it mean your momentum is fixed if there is no air.

*

disputeone

  • 24826
  • Or should I?
Re: Cool Mission?
« Reply #16 on: December 14, 2022, 04:13:50 AM »
I always tell people that if you cannot duplicate it with the observations you have at hand, it's fake science.

Open heart surgery is fake science?

Open heart surgery can be duplicated. That's why it is often successful, as we know the anatomy and what needs to be done for each procedure.

If we just guessed every time it would be messy.
Quote from: Stash
I'm anti-judaism.

Quote from: Space Cowgirl
Whose narrative is it to not believe the government?

Quote from: Wolvaccine
speech should be a privilege. Not a right.

Re: Cool Mission?
« Reply #17 on: December 14, 2022, 05:28:41 AM »

Btw, the average spaceship is supposed to travel around 25,000 to 40,000 mph. 140 million miles away? Based on the distance to Mars, this takes about 15 years.

Btw, it takes several minutes to even take off. I have a hard time believing even the 25,000 mph estimate.

 I've looked at the actual amount of time it would take to get to Mars.

Having a spot of bother with basic arithmetic?

You totally botched it.

5 to 8 months, if you do the calculation correctly.

Since you can't even get a simple arithmetic problem correct, (and then base an entire belief system on it) your credibility on mathematical or scientific "analysis" is pretty well shot.

Thanks for playing, but now it's time for you to let the grown-ups talk.

Ohhh I'm sorry, you were gullible  enough to believe their math?

We are told (even though the rocket takes off with a great deal of sound and fury, signifying nothing) that once the rocket leaves Earth, it goes 25,000 mph. This with no air to combust, and no friction to push off of. Far from 25,000 it shouldn't even go its regular speed, unless we assume maintained momentum. If we assume that, whatever speed it leaves earth at is it. Not going fast enough? Stuck in Earth's orbit.
 In actual fact, a regular helicopter takes off much faster, but assuming we were to believe this...

 25,000 (mph) x 24 (mpd) x 365 (mpy)

Yeah, I did miss a decimal point. ;D But still!

Exit velocity at the time of exit is as fast as you gonna go, due to the fact that in space, nothing can ignite without air.

So unless you're constantly rerouting your own air to breathe into ignition... oh I'm afraid you won't reach Mars on time or in one piece. Odds are it's pretty expensive to burn fuel and air at the constant rate needed to get there, and there no time for all those navel-gazing photographs they bring back. Oh and btw, not just the rear needs gas to move but the entire surface around the shuttle, or it's burning fuel yet staying in place. Oh and also, btw? Most of that speed was with two giant boosters. 25,000 mph? We are lucky if the shuttle itself travel 550 mph.

We have zero proof that this speed is maintained because it's happening offscreen. We have zero proof that when it started to angle left or right, as you see in EVERY space mission that doesn't blow up, that they didn't in fact fly to some unpopulated area instead.

Meanwhile, you've sold the taxpayer this expensive trip which basically sucks huge resources, and you think they wouldn't just fake the entire thing? A trip to a desert? Or a risky mission in space? Remember, the goal of any system is to make profit. Astronauts are employees not Samaritans.

In any given news of a takeoff, they get to a certain point and they switch to pictures from "the shuttle leaving Earth". They don't show the space craft veer away or that it leaves our sight (oh look, the parabola), or that there is significantly more atmosphere that they just sorta skipped.



Even an unmanned rocket just sorta veers left (and down). Almost as though we are expected to believe it can go up by going left (and down). Look at it. It heads left and down, and they suddenly switch to a shot "in space". Uhhh how? Last we saw it was heading left (and down), and I assume they explain this away by curvature. Actually if the shuttle is heading up we lose sight of it (so again we can't prove it goes anywhere).

 This is the madness that plagues little minds of RE ppl.

Quote
Open heart surgery is fake science?

Where did you get that from that?

Open heart surgery can be seen, and yield results identical  to an animal and a person.



If open heart surgery somehow couldn't be done on an animal but you expected it to work on a person you might have a valid point.  So let's look at this video again.



On Earth, with no air, we have no ignition. We have no propulsion. Yet we expect this to play out in space with no air?
« Last Edit: December 14, 2022, 05:38:56 AM by bulmabriefs144 »



Quote from: Themightykabool
crazy people don't know they're crazy.

Re: Cool Mission?
« Reply #18 on: December 14, 2022, 08:58:35 AM »

Ohhh I'm sorry, you were gullible  enough to believe their math?

This with no air to combust, and no friction to push off of.

We have zero proof that this speed is maintained because it's happening offscreen. We have zero proof that when it started to angle left or right, as you see in EVERY space mission that doesn't blow up, that they didn't in fact fly to some unpopulated area instead.

Remember, the goal of any system is to make profit.

Your incorrect math, your conclusion. No one else's.

Oxidizer. Rockets don't get primary force by pushing off air.

Telemetry. Photography.

No.

*

Stash

  • Ethical Stash
  • 13398
  • I am car!
Re: Cool Mission?
« Reply #19 on: December 14, 2022, 09:34:08 AM »
Quote
Open heart surgery is fake science?

Where did you get that from that?

Open heart surgery can be seen, and yield results identical  to an animal and a person.

From:

I always tell people that if you cannot duplicate it with the observations you have at hand, it's fake science.

"With the observations you have at hand..."

Do you have open heart surgery observations at hand?

*

JackBlack

  • 21903
Re: Cool Mission?
« Reply #20 on: December 14, 2022, 12:09:54 PM »
Ohhh I'm sorry, you were gullible  enough to believe their math?
Yeah, I did miss a decimal point. ;D But still!
It isn't "their math". It is basic math, which it appears you can't do.
You didn't miss a decimal point, you left out 24 hours in a day.
The question is if this was intentional or you just failing at basic arithmetic.

But what is clear, is that it is certainly dishonest.
At 25 000 miles per day, it would be 15.3 years. At 40 000 miles per day it would be 9.6.
So you pick the slowest speed to get the longest time.
This shows it was a factor of 24.
If you include that factor of 24 you get 0.4 to 0.6 years. Changing it by factors of 10 (for a decimal place) will not bring that to 15.


This with no air to combust, and no friction to push off of.
You not understanding how rockets work doesn't mean they don't.
Unlike Jet Engines, rockets carry fuel and oxidiser with them.
That means they have everything they need for combustion and don't need air.
And they push off their exhaust gases.

Your claims are entirely nonsense.

Odds are it's pretty expensive to burn fuel and air at the constant rate needed to get there
Why assume it is constant?
Why not assume it is done in brief periods with the majority of the time spent in free fall?

not just the rear needs gas to move but the entire surface around the shuttle, or it's burning fuel yet staying in place.
Why?
Because your delusional garbage says so?

Here is a simple question for you, say you have a spring, between 2 weights, with those weights initially held together by a short string compressing the spring, with all of this in a vacuum.
The string then breaks. What happens?
Do they magically just sit there, with the spring compressed with no force to keep it compressed, all because of your pathetic demand?
Or do they do what logic dictates they must, the spring expands, pushing the 2 blocks apart, with the blocks then continuing on their way once they lose contact with the spring?

We have zero proof that this speed is maintained because it's happening offscreen. We have zero proof that when it started to angle left or right, as you see in EVERY space mission that doesn't blow up, that they didn't in fact fly to some unpopulated area instead.
Considering all the objects in space, sending back photos of Earth, providing GPS, providing internet and TV, and that you can see the ISS, I would say there is plenty of proof.

Conversely, where is anything to support your baseless claims? No where.

Remember, the goal of any system is to make profit.
No, it isn't.
Just because you crave money doesn't mean everyone does.
The space race was basically a contest to try to prove their were better than their rivals, with no concern for profit.

Remember, the government can just put money into a black budget which then no one gets to find out about.
Much easier to get lots of money than trying to fake going to space.

oh look, the parabola
No, the curvature.

Almost as though we are expected to believe it can go up by going left (and down). Look at it. It heads left and down
No, as if intelligent people understand that it isn't just going up, it is going into an orbit.
Because it is going into an orbit, it will need to travel sideways. And as it does so, the curvature of Earth will make it appear to be going down.

This is the madness that plagues little minds of RE ppl.
No, this is the madness that plagues little minds of FEers that wish to reject reality because they don't comprehend quite basic things.

Where did you get that from that?
So you have all the observations on hand to demonstrate open heart surgery? No looking it up, no trysting other sources.

Open heart surgery can be seen, and yield results identical  to an animal and a person.
Clearly a fake video, and not something you have on hand.
Why should we believe this video, but not the video above which showed the rocket in space?
Because this video doesn't contradict your delusional fantasy, while the other one does?
Not good enough.

So let's look at this video again.
Unless you want to specify a certain point in it, with a timestamp, NO, as it is dishonest BS as already explained.
You not understanding how rockets work, and wanting to pretend they should work like a fan, doesn't mean they don't work.

Re: Cool Mission?
« Reply #21 on: December 14, 2022, 10:04:02 PM »
Quote
Open heart surgery is fake science?

Where did you get that from that?

Open heart surgery can be seen, and yield results identical  to an animal and a person.

From:

I always tell people that if you cannot duplicate it with the observations you have at hand, it's fake science.

"With the observations you have at hand..."

Do you have open heart surgery observations at hand?

Dog is dying. Open heart surgery is performed. Dog gets better.
Human is dying. Open heart surgery is performed. Human gets better.

These are results. They are results you can take to the bank.

Neither gunpowder nor rocket candy or acetone peroxide ignite in a vacuum.
But somehow this works in the vacuum of space.

Just delusional are you to see a non-result with your own eyes and still conclude something should work?

Further, note the video from earlier. It's a straight up news video, exactly as shown.

So answer a question for me, okay?

At around 2:53, they switch from a rocket just in the sky to the outside of the rocket in space.

Who is recording this shot outside the ship?

Now, clearly you don't understand the question for let me spell it out for you.

This shot is impossible from the shuttle. It is impossible from the ground. It is only possible if a satellite "just happens" to be flying nearby, and "just happens" to take a shot of the shuttle. Or if an astronaut gets out of the shuttle do the incredibly dangerous maneuver of recording his own ship.

Or if the entire shot was taken on a set.

Some of these events would involve an excess of coincidence. The other is the real event.



Oh look, I made a space shuttle move across from near Earth.

Where is this picture shot from? I'll tell you. It wasn't. I compiled this picture

and this picture on layers,

and simply moved the ship layer.

It's fake, of course, but this is the point. You need to wake up and smell the impossible photography here. There is no way to take a picture of a shuttle outside the shuttle, which is exactly what this video showed. They just made a better fake than me, with smoke or flames going out the back.   And maybe they showed the Earth rotating if they wanted to really convince you.
« Last Edit: December 14, 2022, 10:10:13 PM by bulmabriefs144 »



Quote from: Themightykabool
crazy people don't know they're crazy.

*

Stash

  • Ethical Stash
  • 13398
  • I am car!
Re: Cool Mission?
« Reply #22 on: December 15, 2022, 02:48:06 AM »
Quote
Open heart surgery is fake science?

Where did you get that from that?

Open heart surgery can be seen, and yield results identical  to an animal and a person.

From:

I always tell people that if you cannot duplicate it with the observations you have at hand, it's fake science.

"With the observations you have at hand..."

Do you have open heart surgery observations at hand?

Dog is dying. Open heart surgery is performed. Dog gets better.
Human is dying. Open heart surgery is performed. Human gets better.

These are results. They are results you can take to the bank.

I always tell people that if you cannot duplicate it with the observations you have at hand, it's fake science.

"With the observations you have at hand..."

Do you have open heart surgery observations at hand?

What's your evidence? How do you know it's not fake science? Have you personally observed open heart surgery and the results? That seems to be your criteria to determine whether all things are fake or real. Your words, not mine.

*

JackBlack

  • 21903
Re: Cool Mission?
« Reply #23 on: December 15, 2022, 03:12:01 AM »
Dog is dying. Open heart surgery is performed. Dog gets better.
So you have a dying dog at hand right now, upon which you can perform open heart surgery to demonstrate it?
Or do you need to refer to observations you don't have at hand?

Neither gunpowder nor rocket candy or acetone peroxide ignite in a vacuum.
Try it with the appropriate scales, and the appropriate fuels, at the appropriate flowrates to give the appropriate pressure in the combustion chamber.

Just delusional are you to see a non-result with your own eyes and still conclude something should work?
No, that would be you being delusional.
Failing to understand something and so declaring it to be impossible.

Who is recording this shot outside the ship?
Not who, WHAT.
It is being filmed from a camera attached to the rocket.

Now, clearly you don't understand the question for let me spell it out for you.
You mean clearly we do understand and you are going to spout some dishonest BS to dismiss reality.

This shot is impossible from the shuttle.
Firstly, it isn't a shuttle.
But more importantly, WHY?
What makes it impossible to mount a camera to the rocket to record and transmit that footage?

Oh look, I made a space shuttle move across from near Earth.
You mean you made an image not found link?

Regardless you making a crappy, obviously fake gif, in no way compares to the countless footage you are unable to show fault with.

You need to wake up and smell the impossible photography here.
No, you need to wake up start justifying your delusional BS.
There is nothing that makes such a shot impossible.
If you wish to assert it is, you need to explain why.

*

MaNaeSWolf

  • 2623
  • Show me the evidence
Re: Cool Mission?
« Reply #24 on: December 15, 2022, 05:47:57 AM »
https://petapixel.com/2022/12/12/two-photographers-chosen-for-spacex-moon-mission/

What do you have to say about this. I for one can’t wait to see the images.
Im curious about the mission profile.

If they take off and land with the Starship it invalidates the requirement for Orion as the only Human lunar transport vehicle. This is a big problem for NASA, Boeing, LM and a bunch of space companies. Safety first you say. Sure, but they still need to prove the LoC numbers, but I dont see why the FAA would clear the flight if is not at least a good understanding of the safety factors involved in this flight.
Either way, even if it is a Crew Dragon Launch to Starship type of mission, this will shake the Artemis missions.

Its a very interesting mission all round. We just dont yet know when its going to happen. Before A2? Im thinking closer to Artemis 3
If you move fast enough, everything appears flat

Re: Cool Mission?
« Reply #25 on: December 15, 2022, 05:49:11 AM »
Quote
Open heart surgery is fake science?

Where did you get that from that?

Open heart surgery can be seen, and yield results identical  to an animal and a person.

From:

I always tell people that if you cannot duplicate it with the observations you have at hand, it's fake science.

"With the observations you have at hand..."

Do you have open heart surgery observations at hand?

Dog is dying. Open heart surgery is performed. Dog gets better.
Human is dying. Open heart surgery is performed. Human gets better.

These are results. They are results you can take to the bank.

I always tell people that if you cannot duplicate it with the observations you have at hand, it's fake science.

"With the observations you have at hand..."

Do you have open heart surgery observations at hand?

What's your evidence? How do you know it's not fake science? Have you personally observed open heart surgery and the results? That seems to be your criteria to determine whether all things are fake or real. Your words, not mine.

I'm sorry that you misunderstood what I mean by at hand. Yes, I known people to get some sort of bypass surgery. When done successfully, they are still with us. The observations at hand doesn't mean I hold the scalpel. What it does mean is that I see the end effects as successful.

There's something you should know about me. I shun hospitals. I haven't been to one in over four years, and when my time comes to need a hospital, I would probably reject it. But yes, I do believe those work, and as a matter of fact, I have an (estranged due to divorce) uncle who just now recovered fromone heart surgery or another.

Real science has real results. Because of Edison and Tesla, you flick on a lightbulb, and there is light.

Fake science, when the principles behind it are tested, they all fall apart. You know propulsion and ignition doesn't work in a vacuum. And I've shown you before how zero gravity is a trick using specialized planes and patterned flight.

I would instead compare the science of Elon Musk to a magic show. Not only SpaceX, but also the latest push towards electric cars. He says this is about making the public able to fly to Mars. In a magic show, sometimes you pull members of the "audience" who are in on the trick. But in the future, VR technology will convince people they have traveled to Mars. Just don't take off your helmet because obviously the air isn't safe to breathe (actually, you'd discover you're in Canada rather quick).
I suppose none of you have read the Wizard of Oz book where everyone wears glasses that tint things green.

Likewise with electric cars, we are told that it will save the environment. But they don't mention what happens offscreen. Look, clean energy! The car spits out nothing! Oh? So, I suppose you want to take a trip at out power plant to see how clean your energy is. What's that? In order to generate that energy they're using coal in increased amounts? That when they are using solar energy, they are typically mining new metals, resulting in deforestation? That nobody can afford these cars except fatcats? That they personally pollute the Earth way worse in the production end because there isn't a clean way to make giant batteries? Oh yeah, and there's increased oil use to ship all these rare earth metals where they're wanted.

By the way, I went to a "clean energy" station (we were visiting a manatee reserve). Now maybe some of the power came from solar, but we were getting some kind of steam or other vapor output.

Yes, there is a distinct difference between science that is real and practical, and science that is a tax scheme.



Quote from: Themightykabool
crazy people don't know they're crazy.

*

MaNaeSWolf

  • 2623
  • Show me the evidence
Re: Cool Mission?
« Reply #26 on: December 15, 2022, 05:57:59 AM »
I cant believe bulmabriefs144 is not an actual meme
If you move fast enough, everything appears flat

Re: Cool Mission?
« Reply #27 on: December 15, 2022, 08:13:51 AM »
Rockets can ignite without air. It's called oxidizer.



Where's the air?

*

NotSoSkeptical

  • 8548
  • Flat like a droplet of water.
Re: Cool Mission?
« Reply #28 on: December 15, 2022, 08:45:34 AM »

Neither gunpowder nor rocket candy or acetone peroxide ignite in a vacuum.
But somehow this works in the vacuum of space.

Just delusional are you to see a non-result with your own eyes and still conclude something should work?

Rockets igniting in a vacuum.....

Rabinoz RIP

That would put you in the same category as pedophile perverts like John Davis, NSS, robots like Stash, Shifter, and victimized kids like Alexey.

Re: Cool Mission?
« Reply #29 on: December 15, 2022, 08:50:47 AM »
You know propulsion and ignition doesn't work in a vacuum.

1/4A3-3T Rocket Motor VS 5 Hp Shopvac - blue - right - short


1/4A3-3T Rocket Motor Vs 5 Hp Shopvac - black - left side


Shrugs….