[FARCE]There Is Not Any Phoenix On Mars[FARCE]

Originally posted by Big-Brain
By the way, why doesn't Phoenix on Mars take pictures of stars?

Originally posted by weedwhackergeeze....no one seems to notice my earlier post, about the stars. They are REALLY, REALLY far away!!!!!!!
The Earth orbits the Sun....the diameter of that orbit is about 186,000,000 miles. Want to change that into km? Then just multiply by 1.6

What rubbish are you saying?

“The stars are really, really far away”. What would you want to say?

Well, the stars are a long way away. In light terms Mars is a few minutes away, while Proxima Centauri is 3.2 light years away. So they don't change their apparent position much when you move around the solar system. Not enough to be useful, anyway.

And why would you need Phoenix to take pictures of stars? That's what Hubble, COBE and Arecibo, etc, are for.

reply to post by elevatedone


My thread is not only about Phoenix lander.

Phoenix lander enterprise is a pretext to talk about all fake space enterprises, about American and Russian liars.

I am not off topic.

Dear moderator. On this site, there are THOUSANDS of topics where people go off topic a lot. Nobody bothers them. Somehow, when WW and other NASA defenders go off topic, they don't get the warning, nothing. BB, for nothing, gets warned and banned.

Simple logic, mr. moderator: NASA has sent a bird to Mars. The author of this topic is saying that it never happened. ANYTHING THAT NASA DOES can be used as evidence for fraud work. This is legal even in supreme court.

I HOPE IT IS ENOUGH FOR SKUNK WORKS!!!!!!!!!!!!!?????????????????????????????????????????

What a discipline....never seen anything like that. Your friend W Wacker (or whatever) claims that there were aliens on the Moon. And that is at SPACE EXPLORATION. Nobody warned him? Why?

Because this site is for ENTERTAINMENT ONLY. Not to really expose anything. Whenever anybody gets close to really revealing anything, they send dozens of agents, and moderators are helping them.

I can see the whole game clearly.

reply to post by Big-Brain


as response to BB, et al (his alter-ego greshnik)

You asked, directly two questions. One is why doesn't Phoenix take pictures of stars. I think that answer is obvious.

Your second question is, what does it matter if the diameter of the Earth's orbit is 186,000,000 miles. Well, it compares well with the first question, as answered.

I am still waiting, BB, for your response about your idea of sending one person to Mars, instead of robotic probes. Exactly HOW would you do that?

If you think $420M is a lot of money, it is CHUMP CHANGE compared to what it would cost to send JUST ONE human to Mars, and back. Not to mention, it is incredibly unfeasible to send only one person. Do you have any idea, AT ALL, of the time involved to get from the Earth to Mars??

Thought not. That is WHY Phoenix is on Mars. It is far, far cheaper (not to mention, safer) to send robots to explore a distant planet, before we send Humans. IN FACT, the mission of these robots is to provide DATA to help plan future HUMAN missions!!!!!

If you can't understand that, then you are truly lost. We tried to help you, but some just can't seem to learn.....very sad.

edit....I need to buy a new computer keyboard....keys stick....





[edit on 6/26/0808 by weedwhacker]

Originally posted by greshnik
Simple logic, mr. moderator: NASA has sent a bird to Mars. The author of this topic is saying that it never happened.

I can see the whole game clearly.

Yes, that's indeed what he has said, then proceeds to go on rambling, incorrectly I might add, about photographing stars from the Moon. Nor, for that matter, has he even remotely proven that Phoenix isn't indeed on Mars.

You're not seeing much clearly at all, in truth. Using the pictures of tired astronauts as proof of their so called lying proves that rather conclusively.

To send a man to mars, without first doing some exploration, is the height of folly. Man will, in my not so humble opinion, be on Mars by the end of this century. Pathfinder, Sojourn, Phoenix, and the Vikings are the forerunners of those men and women.

[edit on 6/27/2008 by seagull]

Originally posted by greshnikYour friend W Wacker (or whatever) claims that there were aliens on the Moon. And that is at SPACE EXPLORATION. Nobody warned him? Why?

I think that would be Mr. John Lear and the Dream Catcher

reply to post by SickSoul


Yup!! SickSoul....I was just repeating what John Lear had said....obviously, BB is not well-versed in the history of ATS, nor in any of the sciences, in general.

He does seem to herd goats.....or llamas....not sure which......

Originally posted by weedwhacker
...
The relative position of the stars, when seen from the Moon, are exactly the same as when viewed from Earth.
If it were possible to see a discernible change in the stars, then we'd see it every year as the Earth orbits the Sun. (hint....the stars are very, very far away...)
See, this is mostly for the OP of this thread....with his large brain and all...to figure out. See, the diameter of the Earth's orbit, at about 186,000,000 miles is nearly 750 times a larger distance from the Earth to the Moon. What possible good would it have been to take pictures of the stars?
...

At least one of those poor men that took part at the biggest farce of the 6 moon landings would have been able to take some photos of stars only, not to prove they were on the moon, but to bring on the earth a memory of the interesting starry sky seen from the moon.

Yes, “the stars are very, very far away “, “the relative position of the stars, when seen from the Moon, are exactly the same as when viewed from Earth”, but NASA's frauds don't know it.

www.hq.nasa.gov...

Reference system instrumentation

The establishment of reference coordinates is a problem that is not unique to space vehicles. However, the great distances and long durations of time over which the reference system of a space vehicle must be maintained lead to difficulties that do not occur in the case of aircraft.

Gyroscopes, which are merely elaborate spinning wheels, will maintain a fixed direction in space if they are not subjected to disturbances. In a practical case, however, it is just a question of time before the orientation of a gyro drifts away from the desired reference direction. The disturbing effects of high accelerations during launching, coupled with the relatively long duration of space flights, make it very difficult to establish a satisfactory preset reference system using gyros alone.

Instruments such as accelerometers or pendulums are of no use here. An accelerometer will always indicate zero in the weightless environment of a space vehicle, and a pendulum will simply assume any random position.
The stars provide a natural reference system which may be used in orienting a space vehicle. Star-tracking telescopes attached to the space vehicle can detect any disturbance of the attitude of the vehicle and signal operation of an appropriate torque-producing mechanism for correction.

Have NASA's frauds steered their rockets looking at the stars like Vikings when discovered America?

reply to post by Big-Brain


As usual, BB...you are missing the point. I am not using contractions, because I know it confuses your translation program.

Did you bother to see the OTHER eighteen Apollo Astronauts, as THEY were interviewied???


No, of course not. Because, then your claims are like a goat, am being a llama, am tryihg to am being trying....oops, very hard, use your translation program....or jsut LEARN BLOODY ENGLISH!@@!!!!!

Sorry if I got amd...oeh, ees....I ahve to make the croection...am mad, but must be madd cause itis mprtant.

Am using llamas, and goats.....just to keep it on the up-and-up.

(good luck with that!!!)

Originally posted by Big-BrainHave NASA's frauds steered their rockets looking at the stars like Vikings when discovered America?

Well the vikings drank some pretty strong stuff back then, so they probably saw stars all over the place anyway.

I think that luck and currents played a bigger role than star navigation when they drifted ashore where they did.

BB

We don't know that the stars would look the same - from the Moon they could theoretically see the Earth and the stars at the same time (like we see the Moon and the stars). Those would be amasing pictures.

I am sure WW and the troops will now demonstrate why this is impossible...

reply to post by greshnik


greshnik....can you not read English?!?!?!!!!!

Am assuming you are a human, since you are posting on this Forum. That means you are likely connected tot he Internet. Which is located on Earth. OK, Earth is also know as Terra....it could also be called Sol III

"Sol" being the SUN, which is the Star at the Center of the Solar System....

Oh, wait....why bother? You, nor your buddy, your mate, your chubby bunny mate BB care anything at all, about science. You and your boyfriend just wish to laugh your llamas off, because it sees amusing to you. Well, it is not amusing. Even goat can see this, now.

Am not you being ashamed yet???

Originally posted by seagull
...
You're not seeing much clearly at all, in truth. Using the pictures of tired astronauts as proof of their so called lying proves that rather conclusively.
...

youtube.com...

Do those three poor men seem to you tired?

I repeat what I said in a previous post:

"Those three poor men should be very happy, content, glad, excited, enthusiastic.

Instead they are sad, they are frightened in front of all those people, they are afraid to say something wrong, they feel guilty to have accepted to lie for the good of their country.

What do you think they did in the quarantine with several scientists? They were indoctrinated. At that press conference look like pupils that have not studied.

They are hating the moment in which they said yes to those false people that convinced them to take part in that biggest farce.

You are totally right, greshnik, those three poor men were not the kind of men able to lie for whole life.

Surely WW or PsychoHazard, that knows the depth of human mind, will be able to give us another logical explanation".

Tired is not the right word that can explain that situation.

My dear readers,

would you want to see another astonishing way to land a probe going backwards?

This probe is Huygens that landed on Titan in 2004:

www.youtube.com...

As you can observe, Huygens had only a central rocket that could brake its velocity. This system makes the probe very unstable like Phoenix 12 rockets system.

As usually no video exist about Huygens tested on the earth.

Surely about Cassini Huygens enterprise we must wonder: how could NASA's frauds steer Cassini to Saturn at the distance of 1,500,000,000 km?



What are those buffoons doing?

Then, let us reason: if you must steer Cassini to Saturn at the distance of 1,500,000,000 km, you must see where it is as regards to Saturn.

Can you see Cassini and Saturn on your computer screen like those buffoons simulate to do?

We could use this scale: 1 mm = 10,000 km (about the earth's diameter).

1,500,000,000 km : 10,000 km = 150,000 mm : 1000 = 150 metres.

They would need a screen 150 metres large to follow Cassini that runs to Saturn with an error of 1 mm = 10,000 km.

Originally posted by Big-BrainAs you can observe, Huygens had only a central rocket that could brake its velocity. This system makes the probe very unstable like Phoenix 12 rockets system.

Because evidently, a small youtube video is proof that
A) it only had one rocket, and
B) that rocket could not pivot at all.

As usually no video exist about Huygens tested on the earth.

Only, it's ESA for this, so why would NASA make a film of it?

Then, let us reason: if you must steer Cassini to Saturn at the distance of 1,500,000,000 km, you must see where it is as regards to Saturn.

Um, yeah, so why do you need to know or see where it is compared to Earth? Just work out the trajectory and launch it, and it gets there 8 years later (or whatever). You don't need to tell it too much, as it's all worked out and is basically unguided other than that.

Originally posted by apex
...
Um, yeah, so why do you need to know or see where it is compared to Earth? Just work out the trajectory and launch it, and it gets there 8 years later (or whatever). You don't need to tell it too much, as it's all worked out and is basically unguided other than that.

What biggest rubbish are you saying?

NASA's frauds must always cheat making things more and more complicated. They have not steered Cassini directly to Saturn as you, I and all the people have thought.

No, it would have been too “simple”.

They would have used this trajectory:

[img]http://science.nasa.gov/newhome/headlines/images/cassini/cassiniorbit.gif[/url]

They would have used fly-by to increase velocity (greatest rubbish) but, doing it, they would have increased a lot their trip to Saturn and would have used much more propellant.

Do NASA's frauds want to take the piss out of us? YES, THEY DO

Originally posted by Big-Brain

Originally posted by apex
...
Um, yeah, so why do you need to know or see where it is compared to Earth? Just work out the trajectory and launch it, and it gets there 8 years later (or whatever). You don't need to tell it too much, as it's all worked out and is basically unguided other than that.

What biggest rubbish are you saying?

NASA's frauds must always cheat making things more and more complicated. They have not steered Cassini directly to Saturn as you, I and all the people have thought.

No, it would have been too “simple”.

Which is exactly what that image shows. Trajectories might be simple and parabolic in a nice, pretty much uniform gravitational field for a bullet on Earth, but in 3D space with large masses, it gets more complex. A trajectory using only rocket fuel for speed would need a huge rocket to reach Saturn, so gravitational slingshot has to be used.

reply to post by Big-Brain


You truly need to go to school.....sorry, but your lack of understanding is showing, clearly.

Originally posted by apex
...
Which is exactly what that image shows. Trajectories might be simple and parabolic in a nice, pretty much uniform gravitational field for a bullet on Earth, but in 3D space with large masses, it gets more complex. A trajectory using only rocket fuel for speed would need a huge rocket to reach Saturn, so gravitational slingshot has to be used.

Explain in simple words how did NASA's frauds steer Cassini to Saturn making it follow this simple trajectory:



We are in 3D space, but NASA's frauds can maintain Cassini on a bidimensional plane and can steer their probe to a target 1,500,000,000 km distant and you believe in them.

Yesterday I was abducted by an alien, do you believe in me?

Originally posted by Big-Brain
Explain in simple words how did NASA's frauds steer Cassini to Saturn making it follow this simple trajectory:

We are in 3D space, but NASA's frauds can maintain Cassini on a bidimensional plane and can steer their probe to a target 1,500,000,000 km distant and you believe in them.

Yesterday I was abducted by an alien, do you believe in me?

No, and I don't believe you believe what you just said either.

Other than that, all the other major masses are on the same plane, and as such the probe is attracted by gravity to them, and similarly any deviation from the Solar System's plane will result in an attractive force towards it again.