Nasa administrator announces plans to ‘go to the moon and stay’

a reply to: turbonium1

The fake footage doesn't work, sorry.

Seeing a rocket fly beyond the atmosphere - directly above us, not over the frickin' ocean - should have been done already, at least once, so until that happens (which it never will), you have nothing at all but fake footage, and fake audio of a 'crew' flying into space!

Do you really believe they would fly all rockets out of sight, for our 'safety'? Come on, get serious. Planes fly over people all the time, and they say rockets can't do one flight over land? Are you kidding me? That's a joke, and you know it.

Illusions do this all the time - a magician only shows what they want you to see, but never anything else.

A black curtain is behind the illusionist. He makes a woman levitate in air, and you are amazed. It seems true, from where you see it. However, you are not allowed to see behind the black curtain, for 'safety reasons'.

The rocket flies behind a black curtain, too - it is called the Atlantic Ocean.


Get the idea, now?

Minotaur rocket launch from Mid Atlantic Missile Range at Wallops Island Virginia

Bet you didn't knw there was a launch facility in Virginia ??

www.youtube.com...

Can watch as its tracked up the coast

In fact I can see the rockets from here when weather is good

So much for your stupid comments about not being able to see rockets

I wonder if any of this has to do with the supposed "surprise" discovery that the moon sits in the middle of Earth's atmosphere.

I don't pretend to know exactly what this means, or why it took them over 20 years to confirm the findings.

"The Moon flies through Earth's atmosphere," said physicist Igor Baliukin of Russia's Space Research Institute.

In fact, at an average distance of 384,400 kilometres (238,855 miles), it's almost smack-bang in the middle of it.

You know what's even more interesting? That means no human being has ever actually been outside of Earth's atmosphere. Guess we've got some work to do…

www.sciencealert.com...

a reply to: turbonium1

What is painfully obvious to see is that these rockets are not flying into space, or into Earth orbit. Not when we see them veer off to altitudes of airplanes, not a chance in hell. It makes no sense to even DO such a thing, if it was going into Earth orbit, anyhow.

So, if no rockets go into space i assume that you also believe that satellites are fake. Do tell, how do they fake for example the ISS? Which we can see for ourselves.

originally posted by: turbonium1
Impossible, actually.

How all of those rockets shoot up, and veer off laterally, over the ocean, flying out of sight....

If rockets went into space, why are they veering off laterally?

They claim the rockets veer off laterally to gain speed, which allows the rocket to 'break away' from the Earth's orbit.

But the rockets veer off well below Earth's orbit, which would waste a lot of their precious fuel, which makes no sense. Because if the rockets were really going up, into Earth's orbit, to gain enough speed in orbit, to break away from orbit, then all the rockets would fly straight up, until they reach orbit, or near to orbit, and THEN veer off in an orbital path.

Look at their altitude when they veer off laterally...planes fly at the same altitudes, for Pete's sake!

Nowhere close to orbit, that's for sure.


What is painfully obvious to see is that these rockets are not flying into space, or into Earth orbit. Not when we see them veer off to altitudes of airplanes, not a chance in hell. It makes no sense to even DO such a thing, if it was going into Earth orbit, anyhow.


That's why rockets fly over the ocean, out of sight. They never fly above airplane altitudes, they just drop into the ocean, far out of view. It is purely an illusion, and nothing more.

Because the gradual veering-off is exactly what they need to achieve a low-earth orbit. The Soyuz rockets launch over Kazakhstan and Asia, so you can observe the launch for a lot longer than the USA launches.

The Soyuz rocket does any significant veering off at altitudes well above commercial airplanes.



Air is much thinner at those altitudes, and gets even thinner with higher altitudes.

I'd asumme the Space Shuttle had a very similar lift-off / orbit insertion trajectory.


www.youtube.com...

Here's a footage of a Shuttle launch filmed from an airliner. Note how the Shuttle is still going pretty much upwards (with only a slight angle) when it reaches the aircraft's altitude. More significant angle is reached much higher:


www.youtube.com...

A detailed but easy to understand explanation for the need to roll and pitch on launch.

www.popsci.com...

a reply to: OneBigMonkeyToo

You don't really think that our Flat Earth friend is going to change his/her mind, do you?

a reply to: oldcarpy

I doubt it, but as I often point out in order to be able to say "I told you so" you actually have to have told them.

The link might also help explain things to people who actually want answers when they ask questions.

originally posted by: turbonium1
Impossible, actually.

How all of those rockets shoot up, and veer off laterally, over the ocean, flying out of sight....

If rockets went into space, why are they veering off laterally?

If a rocket were launched straight up to a height of (for example) of the International Space Station, which is 200 miles up, Earth's gravity would pull it virtually straight back down.

The space station or anything in orbit, such as a rocket, moves laterally so that as Earth's gravity pulls it back down, the Earth's surface curves away from the point it would "hit" if the earth didn't curve.

That curve is relatively constant, so as long as the laterally-falling rocket, satellite, or space station is moving fast enough in that lateral direction, it would constantly miss the curving ground.

That's called a orbit.

a reply to: Box of Rain

You do realise that you are replying to a poster that does not believe in gravity?

a reply to: oldcarpy

As pointed out - post information here for the benefit of those who come to read the thread

Not for the Flat Earth retards who we know are not going to believe anything except the voices in their head...…...

a reply to: firerescue

Fair enough. I have always thought that most FE's are just in it for the sake of argument and do not believe in it really. Then there are the scary ones that believe anything they see on the net and Youtube videos.

originally posted by: oldcarpy
a reply to: turbonium1

What is painfully obvious to see is that these rockets are not flying into space, or into Earth orbit. Not when we see them veer off to altitudes of airplanes, not a chance in hell. It makes no sense to even DO such a thing, if it was going into Earth orbit, anyhow.

So, if no rockets go into space i assume that you also believe that satellites are fake. Do tell, how do they fake for example the ISS? Which we can see for ourselves.

Thousands of satellites are not seen, yet somehow, the 'ISS' is easily visible, right?

What you claim to see above Earth is not relevant, anyway. Proving what is there, or not there, is what matters here.


Look at so-called 'satellite' dishes which supposedly bounce signals off satellites, for TV's -

It's a miracle that TV dishes, even when pointing to the ground, somehow manage to get crystal clear signals, from satellites orbiting the Earth..... indeed!!

originally posted by: Box of Rain

originally posted by: turbonium1
Impossible, actually.

How all of those rockets shoot up, and veer off laterally, over the ocean, flying out of sight....

If rockets went into space, why are they veering off laterally?

If a rocket were launched straight up to a height of (for example) of the International Space Station, which is 200 miles up, Earth's gravity would pull it virtually straight back down.

The space station or anything in orbit, such as a rocket, moves laterally so that as Earth's gravity pulls it back down, the Earth's surface curves away from the point it would "hit" if the earth didn't curve.

That curve is relatively constant, so as long as the laterally-falling rocket, satellite, or space station is moving fast enough in that lateral direction, it would constantly miss the curving ground.

That's called a orbit.

You cannot even prove the existence of Earth is spherical, let alone a ball screaming through a vast endless universe, which requires a universal glue, called 'gravity', to exist....

All of this cannot be proven, but, hey, who cares?


If gravity existed, it would already be well-proven, over and over again. Science requires proof. Accepting that gravity exists at all, without any proof, is bad enough.
But to accept it as a universal force of all things, is absurd.

a reply to: turbonium1

Satellites as well as the ISS, can be seen passing overhead. Your incredulity, as usual, serves as inadequate proof that they are not there.

Any time you wish to provide evidence that the objects passing overhead with predictable regularity are not satellites, that satellites do not provide me with a TV service and they were not put into orbit by rockets then you just go right ahead.

a reply to: turbonium1

If gravity existed, it would already be well-proven, over and over again. Science requires proof.

Go jump off a building. The taller the better.

originally posted by: OneBigMonkeyToo
a reply to: turbonium1

Satellites as well as the ISS, can be seen passing overhead. Your incredulity, as usual, serves as inadequate proof that they are not there.

Any time you wish to provide evidence that the objects passing overhead with predictable regularity are not satellites, that satellites do not provide me with a TV service and they were not put into orbit by rockets then you just go right ahead.

What evidence is there for satellites orbiting Earth? None.

NASA says the ISS is going over southern Nebraska around 11:25 PM, to 11:42 PM, and skies should be clear, so if you are lucky enough to live there, you'll be able to see the ISS as it orbits Earth!!


You assume this light is a spacecraft orbiting the Earth.

NASA said the ISS would fly above you at a certain time, which matched up to an object you saw above Earth, so you assume what you saw that night, was the ISS, moving above you, in Earth 'orbit'...


You don't see anything more than a light, in the dark skies of nighttime, in the distance, above you......

How can you even know what the light is, or WHERE it is, then?


You don't know. Nobody can identify it - that's the whole point, actually.


What you did was assume NASA was telling you the truth, which is not exactly synonymous with NASA's word.


Because NASA said the ISS would be above you, at that time, then it can only be the ISS in Earth orbit, of course!


And now, you believe I must show evidence that it is NOT the ISS, right?


Sorry, but you haven't shown any evidence it IS the ISS, in the first place!


Nice try, though.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: turbonium1

If gravity existed, it would already be well-proven, over and over again. Science requires proof.

Go jump off a building. The taller the better.

Why don't you jump off a building, and see if you feel a force from below, that comes up, and is pulling you downward, towards the surface of Earth. Which would prove there is a very powerful force, emanating outward, from within the center of Earth....or see if you feel nothing at all pulling you downward, to the Earth's surface.


Do you understand the difference between falling, and pulling?

A fall is not the same as a pull, obviously.


When you see objects drop from air, to the Earth, you assume the objects were 'pulled' downward, to Earth. How do you know if the objects were 'pulled' down to Earth, or if the objects simply fell to Earth, from air, because objects have more mass than air, which means they drop, or fall, through air, and hit the surface, which has far greater mass than the objects do?


We feel the difference between being pulled, or not being pulled, obviously.

If you are on a roof, and step off the roof, you will fall to the ground, of course.

But if you are on the roof, and a rope grabs on to your waist, and you are pulled off the roof by the rope, you feel that pulling force, on you, coming from below.


You wrongly assume a pulling force is there, which doesn't exist at all. No matter how you insist a force is pulling you downward, it doesn't exist. Except in your own mind, anyway

a reply to: turbonium1

Thousands of satellites are not seen, yet somehow, the 'ISS' is easily visible, right?

Visual tracking of satellites has been used for 60 years to spot satellites . The earliest satellites were all visually tracked

Tracking teams known as MOONWATCH were set up by Smithsonian to track and report satellites passing over to give scientists data on their orbits

en.wikipedia.org...

Even relatively small objects could be spotted

The ISS measures 240 x 358 feet (72 m x 108 m) . Much of it is made of highly reflective materials such as the solar panels

I

originally posted by: turbonium1

originally posted by: OneBigMonkeyToo
a reply to: turbonium1

Satellites as well as the ISS, can be seen passing overhead. Your incredulity, as usual, serves as inadequate proof that they are not there.

Any time you wish to provide evidence that the objects passing overhead with predictable regularity are not satellites, that satellites do not provide me with a TV service and they were not put into orbit by rockets then you just go right ahead.

NASA said the ISS would fly above you at a certain time, which matched up to an object you saw above Earth, so you assume what you saw that night, was the ISS, moving above you, in Earth 'orbit'...


You don't see anything more than a light, in the dark skies of nighttime, in the distance, above you......

How can you even know what the light is, or WHERE it is, then?

www.youtube.com...

Not just a light.

ow do you know if the objects were 'pulled' down to Earth, or if the objects simply fell to Earth, from air, because objects have more mass than air, which means they drop, or fall, through air, and hit the surface, which has far greater mass than the objects do?

Why do objects fall? Why do they fall towards earth? You said mass is involved here.

BTW, Einsteinian gravity has nothing to do with pulling, it's simply the geometry of spacetime.

a reply to: turbonium1

I know for a fact it is the ISS, I've seen it, looked at it through high powered binoculars and photographed it.

I've seen satellites with my own eyes pass overhead.

When I was a student I was involved in setting up a satellite dish on the roof of an education centre and downloading the images to a computer, on schedule, from NOAA and METEOSAT satellites. This was in the late 1980s, and people have been doing it for decades. I therefore have direct experience of using the output from them, just as many amateur satellite meteorologists do on a daily basis. What experience do you have to back up your position? What have you done to actually prove your point other than spout ridiculously ill-informed nonsense and demand evidence you won't believe?

Now, again, where is your evidence that the ISS is not what the sane and educated world knows it to be? Where is your evidence that the satellites that can be seen with our own eyes and whose data we can intercept directly are not actually there, and that the rockets that launched them did not do so. Give me one good reason why I should accept the empty proclamations and pointless hyperbole of someone who knows absolutely nothing about the subject over my own experience and knowledge and that of many others.

Evidence. Where is it?