Curiosity Has Not Landed - But Is Good Entertainment For The TV Brain Washed Masses

New page just for me as per last post on p19.

How do we know that we know how it is done ?

I am not expecting a reply. Good luck w it

So I am expected to believe that the thousands of people directly involved in bringing Curiosity to Mars are complicit in a cover-up? Hmmm....conspiracies just dont work if it would require too many people to keep the lid on it. Neither would such a conspiracy fulfill any purpose.

reply to post by Skyfloating


Dont be ridiculous you're avoiding the question.

None of them is on mars with it . Are you ?

Originally posted by ZIPMATT


Dont be ridiculous you're avoiding the question.

None of them is on mars with it . Are you ?

So you are saying that hundreds of technicians, engineers, government officials, NASA officials, journalists, satellite operators, foreign observers, competitors, enemies-of-the-U.S. are too stupid to see a Hoax?

I am not saying I know they didnt , you are putting that slur on me - please do not .
I am saying we dont know that it is up there , or that it is .
They are still questions until they are answered.
Sorry about that .

Originally posted by ZIPMATT
I am not saying I know they didnt , you are putting that slur on me - please do not .
I am saying we dont know that it is up there , or that it is .
They are still questions until they are answered.
Sorry about that .

If it is being said that we werent up there, that would require either fantastic stupidity or fantastic evil from many hundreds of people, including countries who would LOVE to say we werent on Mars. It does not make sense...in any way. All the money invested has to be accounted for somehow...are the accountants also part of the cover-up?

reply to post by SkepticGuy


Nice dodging there. You say fake. I say prove it. I win.
Also going "herp derp it's impossibru!" does not make it so.

Originally posted by Skyfloating

If it is being said that we werent up there, that would require either fantastic stupidity or fantastic evil from many hundreds of people, including countries who would LOVE to say we werent on Mars.

You have become an accuser . Please leave me out of this here .

It does not make sense...in any way. All the money invested has to be accounted for somehow...are the accountants also part of the cover-up?

You are obviously defending this matter .

Therefore I defer the argument . Its pointless. Like i said , good luck w it / I dont care / no disrespect

Originally posted by ZIPMATT


You have become an accuser . Please leave me out of this here .

Im asking critical questions before I swallow the idea that "Curiosity has not landed and Im brainwashed".

Isnt it good to ask questions?

Originally posted by Skyfloating

Originally posted by ZIPMATT


You have become an accuser . Please leave me out of this here .

Im asking critical questions before I swallow the idea that "Curiosity has not landed and Im brainwashed".

Isnt it good to ask questions?

No comment

Reply to SkepticGuy's lack of perspective:

Originally posted by neformore

... neformore's point was:

Simply because there are too many people, from all over the world who are capable of monitoring this. They are capable of hearing the signal commands sent out, and received back, and measuring the timing, comparing it with rudimentary and simply science (speed of light, distance, time), planet orbit and spin. They can decode the signals being sent, understand the telemetry and work out for themselves where things are.

And they are not necessarily governmental people, they are independent scientists, amateurs, astronomers and radio hams - from all around the world.

and then you said:

Poor reasonings, follow my discourse with attention please.

I don’t care of boring, insipid, monotonous, repetitious, tedious, unexciting, uninteresting, unvaried pictures from Mars. You can fake signals sending them with satellites to the Earth.

Actually his reasoning is sound. You should actually ADDRESS his points if you believe there is basis for disagreement. Fact is, we can easily tell the difference between a signal sent from Mars surface or Mars orbit ... easily ... and so can any other nation that happens to own a radar dish.

They immediately realize between 1961 and 196... that the enterprise is impossibile. They have poor technology, poor computers, poor mechanical devices, and no ideas on how to land a rocket backwards.

...and...

Never one video about Snoopy, about Phoenix, and now about Curiosity tested in Death Valley.
During the test, Curiosity would be dead in Death Valley like a rolling stone.

Okay, in the '60s, they didn't have the necessary computing power to control multiple rockets. Today we do.

No pilot could adjust quickly enough to steer a multi-rocket platform alone. With such a vehicle, a pilot could only express a desired direction to the computer, which then makes it happen with hundreds of small course adjustments each second.

A programmed course of action replaces the human pilot, the computer doesn't even know the difference.

You sound very adamant about your stance on this. Please EXPLAIN why this is beyond our capabilities...if you can. Sure it's a challenge to engineer, but the principles are quite basic ... and well within our capabilities.

I imagine we don't see such rocket platforms used on Earth because there's no niche where they'd be cheaper or better~

ROCKETS ARE MADE TO GO FORWARDS NOT BACKWARDS.

ROCKETS are NOT designed to go forward! They are designed to counter gravity ... direction is completely irrelevant.

SIMPLE PHYSICS. ALSO A CHILD WOULD UNDERSTAND.

Okay, there is one thing that I do know, with certainty, about you ... you are NOT a physicist.

Originally posted by SkepticGuy
Poor reasonings, follow my discourse with attention please.

I don’t care of boring, insipid, monotonous, repetitious, tedious, unexciting, uninteresting, unvaried pictures from Mars. You can fake signals sending them with satellites to the Earth.

No. You can't.
You obviously don't understand this at all.
If I send a signal on earth, and its heard from different places, the source of the signal can be pinpointed to me.
Thats called Direction Finding

Similarly, if a signal comes from space, the area of space it is coming from can be located, and the use of satellites as relays can be ruled out - that is how SETI distinguishes between human generated signals and potential signals from elsewhere. The speed of the signal, the time it takes to travel and the doppler shift of the planet spins involved can all be measured independently from different points on earth. If they came from a satellite, it would be pinpointed.

Reason please, this is what happened: John Fitzgerald Kennedy, in 1961 decides to land on the moon to overcome Russia in the space race. But he is a politician and doesn't understand nothing about technology.
He meets NASA engineers to tell them about moon landing and they are dismayed and tell Kennedy that it is impossible, they have not technology to do it.
Kennedy doesn't want to abandon his idea and insists on landing astronauts there.
NASA engineers put into the job, but they don't succeed in their attempts.

Here are the evidences of their failure:

Before going there, they must test Snoopy, they must know if it is able to land backwards on its flames as a
helicopter. To do it, they build Langley crane. They hang Snoopy to the crane with safety cables.
They immediately realize between 1961 and 196... that the enterprise is impossibile. They have poor technology, poor computers, poor mechanical devices, and no ideas on how to land a rocket backwards.

THEY HAVE NOT TECHNOLOGY, EVEN TODAY, TO BUILD A ROCKET THAT CAN LAND BACKWARDS ON ITS OWN FLAMES.
NO VIDEO EXISTS ABOUT SNOOPY HUNG AT LANGLEY CRANE ABLE TO HOVER LIKE A HELICOPTER.
IT IS AN IMPOSSIBLE ENTERPRISE WITH OLD AND NEW TECHNOLOGY TOO .

Lunar Lander Research Vehicle - I don't see a crane attached to this - do you?

By the way amateurs can do it....

Unreasonable Rockets Blue Ball

Armadillo Aerospace Scorpius

And the Pro version
NASA's DCXA

Admittedly the last test of DCXA it fell over. Stuff happens. It completed a lot of flights before that.

Heres Lockheed Martins Missile Defence Active Kill Vehicle

ROCKETS ARE MADE TO GO FORWARDS NOT BACKWARDS. SIMPLE PHYSICS. ALSO A CHILD WOULD UNDERSTAND.

Discuss about this argument, not about boring Photoshop pictures please.

Rockets are made to provide a thrust reaction. Newtonian physics says that every action has an equal and opposite reaction. A downward facing rocket nozzle can brake an object and allow it to touch down gently given sufficient thrust and correct timing.

Anyway, not photoshop - videos of actual projects doing what you say can't be done.

Something a child can see, and would hopefully - now - understand.

Originally posted by korath
I'm assuming NASA has the means to decide whereabouts this thing was going to land. With all the talk about structures on Mars and whatnot, why didn't they aim for a spot like that? Who cares if it finds water? Show me a picture of a structure standing there and the whole mission was worth it.

But no, just more pictures of rocks.

Have you even tried to READ what the mission is about? You know READING is what made us less ignorant. READING informs you. OK, maybe you can only speak to your computer: Let me help :

Question : "Please query the internet about the Curiosity mission"
Reply : What aspect do you want to know?
Question : what is its purpose?
Reply : To determine if life ever existed on Mars and possibly if it still does.
Question : Why a crater?
Reply : Because of the large amount of sedimentary material in the crater.
Question : Why sedimentary material
Reply : Jesus are you an ATS conspirator, go to a library it's quicker !

I'm sorry, the technology is poor like in Europe?? Our technology is not 'poor' thank you. Do you know anything about ESA and its accomplishments? Clearly not... Another imbecile that thinks NASA is the beginning and end all of space exploration.. and here lies the problem. Congratulations on proving beyond a shadow of a doubt your complete ignorance of the subject.

I suggest you and anyone else confused familiarises themselves with this list of ESA projects.
You might be surprised to learn that some missions are either nothing to do with NASA or joint efforts. They even have their own spaceports, rockets and everything So in some cases no NASA involvement at all.

Some notable missions past, present and future talked about everyday including on ATS that are either sole ESA efforts or joint missions with NASA:

Hubble Space Telescope, James Webb Space Telescope, Herschel Space Observatory, Planck, Mars Express, Rosetta, SOHO, Venus Express, Exomars, etc..

en.wikipedia.org...

Originally posted by g146541
reply to post by mikemck1976

 

Nice pic there!!!
Suppose we could get a pic of the flags on the moon?
Mars is farther away than the moon right?
We should have some good photos of the moon then.

This . . .

I don't understand how anyone could trust NASA after they went and said

"Oops, we lost the original moon landing footage"

Real convenient

reply to post by JPhish

This . . .

I don't understand how anyone could trust NASA after they went and said

"Oops, we lost the original moon landing footage"

Where did they say that?

reply to post by SkepticGuy


Just to prove you can't read, and are simply trolling for the sake of it - you've missed the fact that I live in the UK.