Did NASA Fake the Mars Rovers?

reply to post by Erad3


Why are you assuming communication in space (ie: a vacuum) is similar to communication on earth?

In space they are communicating with laser pulses, microwaves and radio waves. Its not as if the Rovers are pin point sending messages back to NASA. The "Deep Space Network" which is situated in three different locations through out the globe are set up to catch the Rovers messages.

I really don't get the conspiracy here.

reply to post by Erad3


So because you don't believe its possible that means we didn't do it despite the evidence to the contrary?

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/01e86b401205.jpg[/atsimg]

I'm pretty sure we can communicate with Mars, after all aren't we still receiving signals from Voyager?

Voyager

But I guess regardless of evidence that can't be true... because of your beliefs on how far we can send signals

reply to post by Titen-Sxull


The space debris is another factor in approaching the program.

It's possible for debris to collide with anything sent from the earth into space.

marsrover.nasa.gov...

read.

that's all i can say...i think..im..gonna...go....now...

My old man always said "think before you open your mouth" I pass this little pearl of wisdom too you, along with "best to stay silent and have them think you're a fool than too open your mouth and dispel all doubt"

Paraphrased.

reply to post by Erad3


You don't think NASA took the risk of Space debris into account before they launched? You are aware NASA employs hundreds of scientists right? Sorry but I think they know a little more about how to get a rover to mars than you or I ever will.

Just as a point of contention.

It's far more easy to fake a mission to Mars than to actually do it. And technology could make it appear quite real.

I'm not saying it was or wasn't but that both possibilities exist. And that to believe either is merely a choice of perception.

Because to be honest. You weren't there when the rover was designed, you weren't there when it was loaded up as cargo for the flight. You weren't there when it deployed. You weren't there in the mission control room. You weren't there when they piled through all the astrophysics required to even conceive the idea.

Most people just trust that people in authority are offering valid statements and conclusions and trust that they wouldn't lie.

But in reality all of us base our mental constructs upon the ideas of others, not our own observations.

reply to post by Titen-Sxull


The scientist that they hire don't have to tell the truth about their study.

They can publish any misleading information that is assumed as true.

reply to post by Question why


This is the point of starting a thread.

To post about certain topics in inductive and deductive arguments.

reply to post by Erad3


What exactly would be the scientific benefit of that?

In fact what would be the point of faking the Mars rover at all? Other than scientific inquiry there's no point to what NASA does anymore.

Remember that one of the main reasons put forward for going to the moon was to beat the Russians. Who exactly is NASA trying to beat now? Why exactly would they fake the mars rover? Its of no political or scientific benefit to fake it. I just don't see why they would...

Originally posted by Titen-Sxull
reply to post by Erad3

 

What exactly would be the scientific benefit of that?

In fact what would be the point of faking the Mars rover at all? Other than scientific inquiry there's no point to what NASA does anymore.

Remember that one of the main reasons put forward for going to the moon was to beat the Russians. Who exactly is NASA trying to beat now? Why exactly would they fake the mars rover? Its of no political or scientific benefit to fake it. I just don't see why they would...

You really don't see the point to faking something like this? It's not about "beating" or upstaging someone.

It's about guiding industry to new technologies you wish to harness and develop under the guise of a program actually doing something.

The ESA has ION PROPULSION ENGINES. We still use LIQUIDS in America. Space exploration or lack thereof stimulates new technological growth.

Yes the rover is on mars. It takes 13 hours to send and receive data and directions and there is only a brief window each day when the satellite orbiting marts can transfer data back and forth between the earth and the rover. Also, it is rumored that there is a secret quantum communications radio on the rover which could provide almost instantaneous data transfer.

Originally posted by mryanbrown
Just as a point of contention.

It's far more easy to fake a mission to Mars than to actually do it. And technology could make it appear quite real.

I'm not saying it was or wasn't but that both possibilities exist. And that to believe either is merely a choice of perception.

Because to be honest. You weren't there when the rover was designed, you weren't there when it was loaded up as cargo for the flight. You weren't there when it deployed. You weren't there in the mission control room. You weren't there when they piled through all the astrophysics required to even conceive the idea.

Most people just trust that people in authority are offering valid statements and conclusions and trust that they wouldn't lie.

But in reality all of us base our mental constructs upon the ideas of others, not our own observations.

This idea is flawed and not acceptable!
NASA allows you to observer the process.

To spark the thoughts of the process leads to the misleading vividness of the program.

The spotlight effect is helping with acceptance of the belief in the program.

Give the viewers of the threads names for most people!

If I photo shop a picture of mars with the information that's a private rover then the picture is a photo shop fake.
I photo shop a picture of mars with the information that's a private rover.
Therefore, the picture is a photo shop fake.


[edit on 12-7-2010 by Erad3]

Originally posted by Erad3

Originally posted by mryanbrown
Just as a point of contention.

It's far more easy to fake a mission to Mars than to actually do it. And technology could make it appear quite real.

I'm not saying it was or wasn't but that both possibilities exist. And that to believe either is merely a choice of perception.

Because to be honest. You weren't there when the rover was designed, you weren't there when it was loaded up as cargo for the flight. You weren't there when it deployed. You weren't there in the mission control room. You weren't there when they piled through all the astrophysics required to even conceive the idea.

Most people just trust that people in authority are offering valid statements and conclusions and trust that they wouldn't lie.

But in reality all of us base our mental constructs upon the ideas of others, not our own observations.

This idea is flawed and not acceptable!
NASA allows you to observer the process.

To spark the thoughts of the process leads to the misleading vividness of the program.

The spotlight effect is helping with acceptance of the belief in the program.

Give the viewers of the threads names for most people!

If I photo shop a picture of mars with the information that comes from a private rover hidden from the public then the picture is a photo shop fake.
I photo shop a picture of mars with the information that comes from a private rover hidden from the public.
Therefore, the picture is a photo shop fake.

[edit on 12-7-2010 by Erad3]

You're idea is flawed and not acceptable!

Watching something shoot into the air, isn't the same as BEING THERE INSIDE OF IT. You have no idea what happens once it leaves your vision. And that's IF you're actually there at the launch.

If you're watching it on TV, you have absolutely no idea what is going. You don't know if what you're watching is real. You simply assume it is.

Why do you double post?
Why do you double post?

In most of your postings.

[edit on 12-7-2010 by mryanbrown]

Originally posted by kadyr80
Yes the rover is on mars. It takes 13 hours to send and receive data and directions and there is only a brief window each day when the satellite orbiting marts can transfer data back and forth between the earth and the rover. Also, it is rumored that there is a secret quantum communications radio on the rover which could provide almost instantaneous data transfer.

The Deep Space Network (DSN) is one of the largest telecommunications systems in the world.

So, each rover carries 3 much smaller antennas — one that can move in different directions called the high gain antenna, and two others that are fixed — the low gain and Ultra High Frequency (UHF) antennas.

This information provided is misleading from the standpoint of the atmosphere and weather conditions of mars.

They're testing the signal without the knowledge of the weather and atmosphere.



[edit on 12-7-2010 by Erad3]

reply to post by mryanbrown



Here's a topic you might have missed.

Sept 13, 2007
Internet search giant Google on Thursday offered 30 million dollars in prize money for companies to land a robot camera to roam on the moon and send back high-resolution snaps and data.

www.moondaily.com...

I'd say theres your bone in a stick to develop new way's and shapes for space travel.

Are you nuts? What if blue really wasnt blue??

I seem to remember thinking that the parachutes always look a liitle small for Mars' atmosphere.

This information provided is misleading from the standpoint of the atmosphere and weather conditions of mars.

They're testing the signal without the knowledge of the weather and atmosphere.



[edit on 12-7-2010 by Erad3]

2001 Mars Odyssey is a robotic spacecraft orbiting the planet Mars.

This is only 1 of the orbiting satellites of several, you'd figure they can observe the weather and atmospheric conditions...

But as we all can see by now, anything we link or show and present you with you claim to be fake, since none of us is sitting in mars at the moment... Nothing in internet is true, everything is false. Atleast i get this image from you.


END THIS TROLL POST.