This is how NASA would respond to an asteroid impacting Earth

a reply to: NicSign

Every rocket filmed in space is your proof. QED.

You know full well that even if you were strapped to a rocket yourself and shown the proof in person you would still clamp your eyes shut and go 'lalalalala not listening'. You're not interested in any proof, why are you bothering to ask? You're just here to parrot something you heard but don't understand. You actually haven't bothered to provide any proof, just posted videos and gone "there, see?", and thrown some word salad around. Explain the maths yourself. You do some work instead of standing on the shoulders of dwarves.

a reply to: OneBigMonkeyToo

but every rocket film either doesn't show the rocket go into space or if it does the footage is highly edited and potentially fake

a reply to: OneBigMonkeyToo

but every rocket film either doesn't show the rocket go into space or if it does the footage is highly edited and potentially fake

a reply to: OneBigMonkeyToo

but every rocket film either doesn't show the rocket go into space or if it does the footage is highly edited and potentially fake

a reply to: OneBigMonkeyToo

but every rocket film either doesn't show the rocket go into space or if it does the footage is highly edited and potentially fake

originally posted by: NicSign
a reply to: Soylent Green Is People

again you claim that there is an equal and opposite force due to gas movement from pressure gradient force but fail to provide proof

The proof is that I know if I throw an object, and that object has a lot of mass, then that mass pushes back at me a lot. If I throw an object with only a little mass, that mass pushes back at me a little.

Again, think of the skateboard example I gave above. The force on the skateboard backward in the opposite direction of the force of me throwing an object would be more for the more massive object. That shows a correlation between the force in the direction thrown and the resulting force in the opposite direction.

a reply to: NicSign

You make my point for me.

Prove they are fake.

I have personally met, shaken the hand and heard the testimony of people who have been to Earth orbit in the Shuttle and who have been to the moon and back. They could not have done that if your unproven University of YouTube version of reality was true.

Prove your case, use your own words, show your workings.

a reply to: Soylent Green Is People

again throwing an object is not the same thing as gas moving due to pressure gradient force. The rocket does not push the gas out. The exhaust must push off the atmosphere and then in turn push the rocket

a reply to: OneBigMonkeyToo

people can tell lies. it's just alleged witnesses and hearsay

a reply to: NicSign

Differences in pressure gradients cause a gas to move from high pressure to low pressure. That moving gas applies a force in one direction, and as a result there is an equal force in the opposite direction.

Throwing an object applies a force in one direction, and as a result there is an equal force in the opposite direction.

a reply to: Soylent Green Is People

so then why in this video, there is no observed opposite force on the scale around 5:45

a reply to: NicSign

Do you think that there is a conspiracy regarding us humans being told that rockets CAN and DO perform as advertised?
Thus explaining our missions to the planets, asteroids, the moon, comets, etc.
Do you think this is a conspiracy?

a reply to: spacedoubt

yes it's all a lie. people believe because they do not know better.

originally posted by: NicSign
a reply to: spacedoubt

yes it's all a lie. people believe because they do not know better.

Good. Please start a thread about your conspiracy, and stop derailing this one. Asking nicely.

www.usatoday.com...

In a NASA simulation of a fictional scenario, New York City was hit with an asteroid packing 1,000 times the destruction of the nuclear bomb dropped on Hiroshima.

The exercise, which was part of the "National Near-Earth Object Preparedness Strategy and Action Plan" published by the White House, played out at the the 2019 Planetary Defense Conference in College Park, Maryland, last week. It was a worst-case scenario showing what would happen if a giant space rock crashed into Earth in 2027.

Paul Chodas, the NASA engineer who designed the exercise, told AFP the simulated asteroid and its terrifying outcome is "highly unlikely" but he wanted "the issues to be exposed and discussed."

hate to think the damage an event over NYC would do

originally posted by: NicSign
a reply to: OneBigMonkeyToo

but every rocket film either doesn't show the rocket go into space or if it does the footage is highly edited and potentially fake

I noticed you posted this 4 times, I will refrain from that and post this just once

only 1 camera change which moves from the floor to outside of rocket, we then ride into space on the back of that rocket

The video is not highly edited, as proven by only 1 change of camera then by your logic it must be fake, have you the skills to prove its fake, if so prove right here, right now its fake (give or take a week or 2 for you to research seems fair)

Video below needs to be proven fake by NicSign, you can set the timescale



and just for giggles, your research does not need to be as in depth as this guys

a reply to: UpIsNowDown

I can’t see the second video. In the first one, why do they always make a video cut or transition right before rocket is shown entering space? Why all the editing?

a reply to: NicSign

You were asked to prove it to be fake, not give production feedback.

Any time you're ready...

The reason for the camera change is so obvious I'm not even going to bother explaining it, but I'm glad you concede it's when they got to space, where the returning recording of the live feed continues to show the rocket engine working just fine in the absence of air.

When you're done failing to prove that launch footage to be fake you can continue to fail to prove all the other ones are - believe it or not, no-one has to take your word for it so we'll need some of those annoying 'fact' things.