Discovery Launches at 11:38 EDT. Expects to Reach and Dock With ISS in 44 Hours!

Originally posted by COOL HAND

Originally posted by johnlear
Ronald Reagan BMDTS, Woomera, Diego Garcia, Melville Island, Christmas Island, Johnston Island, Vandenberg and several others.

How did they get the equipment there?

Do you expect us to believe that a Saturn type rocket launched from those places and no one happened to witness that? Why haven't we seen complaints from the (then) Soviets about an illegal launch?

Good points, Cool Hand! Indeed, picture an American President calling his Soviet counterpart... "Dmitry... Turn down that music, Dmitry, will ya... Yes... So we about to launch an ultra-secret military station... Sure, I'll give you the coordinates... No, I promise it's not a nuke... I'll fax the exact orbit parametes in half-hour... Thanks. Bye."

reply to post by zorgon


What was the point of that post?

I am guessing that you are trying to prove a point, but I did not see what that point was.

reply to post by zorgon


O.K.....Try it again without being rude. Might I remind you....regardless of where you originally posted it....you also put it here....presumably so it could be read and possibly commented on.

Where is your conflict? It takes about 3 hours for a Soyuz capsule to undock and land. What's the problem with that? It re-enters, pops a few big 'chutes and floats down somewhere on an expansive treeless plain.

A very basic level of understanding should be adequate to explain this to yourself.


[edit on 13-11-2007 by MrPenny]

My family once went on an RV trip. Along the way, we'd have to do some housekeeping things such as empty the wastewater tank, refill the freshwater tank, check the straps and what-not that held some stuff on the roof and rear end. When we got to the campground where we were going to stay for several days, we popped out the awning, dropped the jacks to take eliminate the rocking motion when people walked around, hooked up the TV antennae, connected to the power service, things like that. It took us a few hours to get everything in place and we had a great time for the next several days.

When we were preparing to leave, it took us most of our last day to get everything put back in place to travel. Granted, we were tired and sad that our vacation was coming to an end, but things just seemed to take longer to pack up than they did to unpack. I wasn't running a clock or anything, but by the time we stowed everything we'd taken out and gave the vehicle a little TLC, the summer sun was setting; we started after breakfast that morning.

Given that it can take several hours to pack up an RV to go down the road, it shouldn't really be any wonder that packing up the orbiter to land would take a while. We were leaving out on an 8 hour trip and needed to be home 36 hours later. If we'd waited until we had only 8 hours to get home to start packing it in, we wouldn't have made it.

The logic of claiming there's something unreasonable about the length of time it takes to get to and from somewhere as exotic as the ISS is just mindboggling. It obviously doesn't matter to people who believe in that theory whether there's credible data to refute their theory because they'll just say the data is fake. I'll just fall back on the old common sense theory. If it takes a family of 4 an entire day to packup an RV for a road trip, it's not unreasonable that it could take a day or more to prepare for the orbiter to get ready to land. Throw in the redundancy that NASA always employs and you've got yourself a couple of days worth of junk to do.

Originally posted by buddhasystem
picture an American President calling his Soviet counterpart... "Dmitry... Turn down that music, Dmitry, will ya... Yes... So we about to launch an ultra-secret military station... Sure, I'll give you the coordinates... No, I promise it's not a nuke... I'll fax the exact orbit parametes in half-hour... Thanks. Bye."

Hmmmm Yup that's about right LOL sounds about the same kind of conversation in the James Bond films and Red October

You do realize that the "cold war' was just a coverup so both sides could control their people and 'fleece' them for money to build up their arsenal? Pick up a Book called "Two Sides of the Moon" and I have some nice CIA docs to peruse...

Only think you got wrong is the part about the nukes... Even the Polyus had nuclear mines

Originally posted by zorgon
You do realize that the "cold war' was just a coverup so both sides could control their people and 'fleece' them for money to build up their arsenal?

Arsenal to fight who??? Man oh man...

Zorgon, I was born in the Soviet Union and based on what I saw growing up, the notion of secret collusion of the United States and the Soviets is crock. Of course you can believe what you want to believe. The war was real -- the Soviets fought in Afghanistan and the US created the Al-Qaeda to fight a very real proxy war against them. Before that there was Vietnam etc etc. Try to research the number of US pilots lost over the USSR when flying recon missions. You will be surprised.

Of course you will say that all of that was staged, but you know,
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occam's_Razor"

Occam's principle still works imho.




[edit on 13-11-2007 by buddhasystem]

Originally posted by StudioGuyI'll just fall back on the old common sense theory. If it takes a family of 4 an entire day to packup an RV for a road trip, it's not unreasonable that it could take a day or more to prepare for the orbiter to get ready to land.

LOL You talk about credibility and then use your camping trip as a 'reasonable logic' explanation to compare to shuttle procedures?

So I suppose they just toss stuff all around the shuttle like most campers do?
Well as skeptics love to point out to me.. your comparing apples to oranges..

Also it takes my crew of 4 to set up our camp in 4 to 5 hours, tear down about the same as we clean the site spotless....

But then we are pros at that and so are the shuttle crews...

Originally posted by COOL HAND
What was the point of that post?

Rest assured that none of my posts make any sense whatsoever, as I am sure Mr Penny will be happy to attest to..

So don't sweat it

reply to post by zorgon


Why won't you simply settle the confusion and answer me?

reply to post by zorgon

Here is the reply from the 'shuttle jockey'


=DrivinWest;1108668 Just a ground controller *sigh* - I used to be an ADCO for the ISS.

Damn. Cool that you followed it up, though. Would have been even cooler if he didn't turn out to be a ground jockey.

Oh well....the debate continues.....

Originally posted by buddhasystem
Arsenal to fight who??? Man oh man...

Why the non hostile Aliens of course... Von Braun said it... and even Shirley MacLaine brought that up in the CNN UFO's Are They Real Larry King special last Friday

Zorgon, I was born in the Soviet Union and based on what I saw growing up, the notion of secret collusion of the United States and the Soviets is crock.

So? I was born in Germany and my father was not privy to all of Hitler's secrets either and my great grandfather was a Tenor on the Don Kossack Choir

Of course you can believe what you want to believe.

Its not a question of belief... I follow trails of evidence that lead me to these concepts. They may not all be correct, but I have amassed a lot of information that tells me otherwise...

The war was real -- the Soviets fought in Afghanistan and the US created the Al-Qaeda to fight a very real proxy war against them. Before that there was Vietnam etc etc. Try to research the number of US pilots lost over the USSR when flying recon missions. You will be surprised.

Why would I be surprised? Sure the wars are real... certainly for those who die in them and their families... but what about the cause?

You yourself just made an outrageous statement as a 'matter of fact' "the US created the Al-Qaeda" Is this public knowledge? Can you back this statement with proof? I don't doubt that, just like I don't doubt that Sadam was propped up by our government until he had to go...

I can find all kinds of reports from the time our leaders lined soldiers up in rows at various distances from an a bomb test to see the effect while they hid in control bunkers to the forced shots soldiers in Iraq must take...

I try to stick to the space stuff though... its a little less depressing.

It is space commands goal to arm space... NASA is part of this NASA is officially under the DoD and not a 'public entity" any more.

Space Warfare Center... from the mission statement..
"...long-range plans to control and exploit space....."
"...all four space mission areas: space control, space forces support, force enhancement and force application. "...

AF Space Command mission statement...
"The Space Force Mission is to defend the United States through the control and exploitation of space. Air Force Space Command makes space reliable to the warfighter (i.e. forces personnel) by continuously improving the command's ability to provide and support combat forces — assuring their access to space. In addition, the command's ICBM forces deter any adversary contemplating the use of weapons of mass destruction. "

There is not one word or hint of peaceful use of space in ANY of their statements, anywhere


The Russians have a big edge in scalar weapons... I have been working on preparing that but its not finished yet... (and also I am not yet sure how much I should put out there)

Of course you will say that all of that was staged, but you know,
Occam's principle still works imho.

Occam's razor dulls when you apply it without having all available facts.

Americas Four Manufactured Enemies
1. Russians
2. Terrorists
3. Asteroids
4. Alien Invasion

#1 Been there done that.. #2 Current news
#3 look around the web all the talk about NEO's and NASA and CHINA already know how to hit targets accurately
#4 already even here at ATS there has been talk about and attempts at 'alien false flag' operations

Of course this is attributed to von Braun... and as we all know from this thread he gets kilometers confused with miles and take readings from defective instruments on board Apollo 8

(...if the instruments were so defective, I wonder how they managed to get back home )




[edit on 13-11-2007 by buddhasystem]

[edit on 13-11-2007 by zorgon]

Originally posted by MrPenny
Why won't you simply settle the confusion and answer me?

Ignore the facts just did... in the post below yours

Originally posted by COOL HAND

I did, you can't seriously expect us to believe that those grainy pictures are "secret space stations" do you? If they were, why hasn't anyone else (with better equipment) ever managed to capture them and put the images on display?

It would have been more believeable if there were no pixelations around the fringes of the images.

Thanks for the post COOL HAND. No, COOL HAND, I don't seriously expect you to believe anything I say including the Fleet 21 battleships, the 70 foot nuclear powered Fast Attack Subs, the secret space stations or the U. S. moon mining operation or the Mars operation.

Let me run this by you again. The following was suggested by a former member of ATS and I think it is entirely appropriate:

1. All of my claims are only possibilities.
2. I could be completely misinformed.
3. All of what I believes might not be true.

What I am posting about secret space station, moon mining operations, secret battleship and submarines etc. is information that I believe, based on information available to me, to be true.

You are not required to believe it, heck you are not even required to read it. You are certainly welcome to critcize my ideas within the boundaries of the T&C.

why hasn't anyone else (with better equipment) ever managed to capture them and put the images on display?

That would take time and money. Up to now John Lenard has, as far as I know, been the only one to do it. If I were to do it I would propose using a 16 inch cassegrain. Then I have to develope a mount which will be able to match the orbital speed. Then I have to get a video camera to capture the image.

Then I have to get to an area with no light pollution to get the best image and now I have to have a power source for the mount and the video camera.

That takes a lot of time, money and effort. And frankly, I don't need to do all that because I already have a pretty good idea of whats up there. Its not worth my time, money and effort to do all that just to prove what I already know.

And I certainly don't feel I have to prove it to anyone else. Why?

Thanks for the post.

Originally posted by zorgon
You yourself just made an outrageous statement as a 'matter of fact' "the US created the Al-Qaeda" Is this public knowledge? Can you back this statement with proof? I don't doubt that, just like I don't doubt that Sadam was propped up by our government until he had to go...

en.wikipedia.org...

Robin Cook, former leader of the British House of Commons and Foreign Secretary from 1997-2001, has written that Al Qaeda and Bin Laden were, "a product of a monumental miscalculation by western security agencies" and that the mujahideen that formed Al-Qaida were "originally ... recruited and trained with help from the CIA".[58]

Occam's razor dulls when you apply it without having all available facts.

And it lobotomizes you if you start inserting arbitrary statements in your discourse, like "this bright spot on the Moon is an alien reactor" or "there are 8 super secret military stations in orbit, and the shuttle fleet is secretely docking them".

Of course this is attributed to von Braun... and as we all know from this thread he gets kilometers confused with miles and take readings from defective instruments on board Apollo 8

(...if the instruments were so defective, I wonder how they managed to get back home )

I developed a spreadsheet that models a simple 1D flight from the Earth to the Moon (I could have done it in any programming language, but I wanted to post it in a way that's accessbile to anyone). Pity ATS does not allow to upload an xls file. Anyway, it's instructive to see the values of the craft's acceleration as the flight progresses. There is a HUGE plateu where the acceleration is really miniscule. I mean, it's hard to measure a value of 10^-4 m/s2 in metric system. Real hard. I have no idea what precision was the instruments use or what method was employed (and nobody from the CT was able to provide me with this info), but it's logical to assume that there is an inherent error in that estimate.

Originally posted by IgnoreTheFacts
Oh well....the debate continues.....

LOL it will...

When BAUT didn't post my question I tracked him down

Seems he is currently employed here..

European Space Agency (ESA): 01/04 - Present
Deutsches Zentrum für Luft- und Raumfahrt (German Center for Air and Spaceflight), Oberpfaffenhofen, Germany

and is seeking admission to school here...

Target Schools: Stanford, MIT, Berkeley, UCLA, Texas, Rice
Target GMAT: 710+

I wrote him a letter and invited him over here... I will see what happens...

At least language won't be a barrier

[edit on 13-11-2007 by zorgon]

Originally posted by buddhasystem

John, how many bathrooms do you think they have on the Space Shuttle? Have you ever shared an apartment (probably not, so you wouldn't know) and had to wait in line in the morning to take a leak, shave and get ready for work? There were eight (I think) people on borard STS-120, and alotting 15 minutes bathroom time to each person doesn't seem excessive.

Hmmmm. I see what you mean. Well when the 8th person finishes won't it be time for the first person to go again?

Now I see why it takes 55 hours to get back after undocking, everybody is going potty for goodness sakes.

Originally posted by buddhasystem

And it lobotomizes you if you start inserting arbitrary statements in your discourse, like "this bright spot on the Moon is an alien reactor" or "there are 8 super secret military stations in orbit, and the shuttle fleet is secretely docking them".

I never said Alien
I never said '8'
and I am more inclined to them 'meeting' up with another ship that matches the orbit to offload say a tank of "lunar generated liquid' like HE3...

But hey... everyone knows the shuttles are empty on the way down...

Pity ATS does not allow to upload an xls file. Anyway, it's instructive to see the values of the craft's acceleration as the flight progresses.

Send it to me I can post it on my website and link it here

[email protected] If its a large file use yousendit.com but I can receive 20 megs in the mail

Originally posted by johnlear
1. All of my claims are only possibilities.
2. I could be completely misinformed.
3. All of what I believes might not be true.

What I am posting about secret space station, moon mining operations, secret battleship and submarines etc. is information that I believe, based on information available to me, to be true.

Sure, John. Misniformation is one thing. But, do you believe in events that according to you are taking/have taken place while apparently violating laws of physics? For example, the importance of the craft's orbit inclination is a known fact (to those who care to research it). If a space shuttle is launched for a rendevouz with the ISS, there little to nothing that can be done to change its inclination, making visits to the alleged secret stations impossible -- you were kind enough to suggest the location of launch pads for those secret launches. Similarly, your claims about Moon's gravity contradict Kepler's laws which seem to work amazingly well in describing the motion of celestian bodies. Your claims of lunar atmosphere contradict a host of observables. These observables are also information available to you. How come it gets discarded? You try to use math on one occasion and you refuse to do it on the other. Why such lack of consistency?

And I certainly don't feel I have to prove it to anyone else. Why?

Because it's a discussion forum and not a pulpit, although it would seem that you consider it as such.

Originally posted by johnlear
Now I see why it takes 55 hours to get back after undocking, everybody is going potty for goodness sakes.

You can try to laugh it off but your original point was about two hour gap in daily schedule, and not 55 hrs. I think I explained the 2hrs as morning routine and snack time. Next.

Originally posted by zorgon

Originally posted by StudioGuyI'll just fall back on the old common sense theory. If it takes a family of 4 an entire day to packup an RV for a road trip, it's not unreasonable that it could take a day or more to prepare for the orbiter to get ready to land.

LOL You talk about credibility and then use your camping trip as a 'reasonable logic' explanation to compare to shuttle procedures?

So I suppose they just toss stuff all around the shuttle like most campers do?
Well as skeptics love to point out to me.. your comparing apples to oranges..

Also it takes my crew of 4 to set up our camp in 4 to 5 hours, tear down about the same as we clean the site spotless....

But then we are pros at that and so are the shuttle crews...

Yeah, you got me there. This was totally apples and bananas. I think of it more as a metaphoric extrapolation. What you're basically saying is that it takes 8-10 times longer for the crew of the orbiter to break away from the ISS, stow their gear, prepare their vehicle to endure the stress of reentry, don their life support gear, slow down from a speed in excess of 17,500 miles per hour, and make a one-shot-deadstick landing with a very narrow margin for error than it does for you and your merry band of professional renaissance festival campers to tear down your tents and leave the area spotless. (by the way, that's not a slight. Just an observation based on your avatar and the image you posted. I'm assuming you enjoy it and are therefore merry when the opportunity arises)

It took my Dad a little longer to get us ready to head out. Maybe part of that was that I was 10 years old and under his feet the whole time. I still think the logic of how much work it takes to stow a camper's gear (not talking about the junk people throw around, by the way) to the amount of work to stow and prepare the orbiter is valid.

To be honest, I really don't care what the orbiter was doing and whether they visited a secret space station. Perhaps you could, since I'm a newbie around here, point to some sort of information on the alleged space stations that are up there and what sort of missions they are on? I read Dale Brown's "Silver Tower" and thought it was extremely entertaining. Perhaps there's a real world equivalent that is equally fascinating?

[edit on 13-11-2007 by StudioGuy]