The Challenger - details covered up for decency?

Overheal

Master of the Omniverse wrote: »

It shows six crew members ,their photos of later years,their new jobs.when I said previously that I cannot get you to Z without you investigating A B and C first ,what I meant by this is you have to understand the bigger picture to realise what is going on.not just NASA ,but all the deceptions,then it makes sense.its not just about money.its about controlling our perception.

Then why did you say it was about "Funding,funding,funding" ?

Master of the Omniverse

Do you think al queda crashed into the twin towers?is democracy real or an illusion?did HIV begin life in an African jungle?why during the cold war did america and.Russia work closely together on weather weapons?

Master of the Omniverse

Overheal wrote: »

Then why did you say it was about "Funding,funding,funding" ?

Because money is power.

Overheal

Master of the Omniverse wrote: »

Do you think al queda crashed into the twin towers?is democracy real or an illusion?did HIV begin life in an African jungle?why during the cold war did america and.Russia work closely together on weather weapons?

Stick to the thread topic. Last warning about spam.

Overheal

Master of the Omniverse wrote: »

Because money is power.

The power to lose the Cold War to Russia? I'm again, not sure what would be the point of blowing up a Shuttle and then secretly re-inserting dead people into regular society.

Master of the Omniverse

Overheal wrote: »

The power to lose the Cold War to Russia? I'm again, not sure what would be the point of blowing up a Shuttle and then secretly re-inserting dead people into regular society.

I've really enjoyed this thread,but I need my bed .there's a crash coming, and I need to get up early to prepare the vegetable patch .take care everybody.

King Mob

Master of the Omniverse wrote: »

It shows six crew members ,their photos of later years,their new jobs.when I said previously that I cannot get you to Z without you investigating A B and C first ,what I meant by this is you have to understand the bigger picture to realise what is going on.not just NASA ,but all the deceptions,then it makes sense.its not just about money.its about controlling our perception.

The video has been posted before. It shows pictures of people who look nothing like the astronauts with similar names. It offers no sources for any of it. And of course, it makes no sense.

If there was a conspiracy to deliberately destroy the Shuttle, there is no sensible reason at all for the conspirators to keep the astronauts alive.

It would have been far simpler, easy and more secure to blow them up with the shuttle. Or if that wasn't possible it would have been better to have them killed in secret right after.

It makes no sense for them to keep the astronauts alive, let them back into the world, set them up with new identities but for some reason allow them to use their own, or similar names. Not to mention without letting them get plastic surgery if we are to accept the premise in the video that they look the same.

The only reason this part of the conspiracy exists is because the person who dreamed this one up needed some convincing, eye catching evidence to sell their theory.
And it kind of works as long as you don't think too hard about it.

So do you have an explanation for why the didn't simply kill the astronauts?

SNAKEDOC

I bet if i traveled america i'd find someone who looks a fair bit like myself. Its not unusual. Ive seen pictures of two guys that are like twins who happened to be seatsd next to each other on a plane having never met before. Its very easy to come up with this crap. Thats all this one is. Crapeola.

endacl

Master of the Omniverse wrote: »

I've really enjoyed this thread,but I need my bed .there's a crash coming, and I need to get up early to prepare the vegetable patch .take care everybody.

The vegetables are in on it too...

Master of the Omniverse

King Mob wrote: »

The video has been posted before. It shows pictures of people who look nothing like the astronauts with similar names. It offers no sources for any of it. And of course, it makes no sense.

If there was a conspiracy to deliberately destroy the Shuttle, there is no sensible reason at all for the conspirators to keep the astronauts alive.

It would have been far simpler, easy and more secure to blow them up with the shuttle. Or if that wasn't possible it would have been better to have them killed in secret right after.

It makes no sense for them to keep the astronauts alive, let them back into the world, set them up with new identities but for some reason allow them to use their own, or similar names. Not to mention without letting them get plastic surgery if we are to accept the premise in the video that they look the same.

The only reason this part of the conspiracy exists is because the person who dreamed this one up needed some convincing, eye catching evidence to sell their theory.
And it kind of works as long as you don't think too hard about it.

So do you have an explanation for why the didn't simply kill the astronauts?

The foundation of freemasonry is that they always look after their own.they are not gonna kill their own,not unless they **** up.

Master of the Omniverse

endacl wrote: »

The vegetables are in on it too...

Yes,I always had my suspicions about those feck in carrots

King Mob

Master of the Omniverse wrote: »

The foundation of freemasonry is that they always look after their own.they are not gonna kill their own,not unless they **** up.

That's not really an answer.

We'll leave aside the fact you have zero reason to think these astronauts are freemasons.
(Were they freemasons who became astronauts or were they astronauts who became freemasons?)

Why would these freemason astronauts agree to do this? Why would they agree to pretend to be dead, trick everyone on the planet, then accept low paying jobs such as teaching?

Why, if the freemasons "take care of their own" do they send their own off and force them to take teaching jobs in public with flimsy fake identities?

Are all of these astronauts dead now since they ****ed up and let their identities get out and blew the entire conspiracy?

You're going to have to explain the conspiracy a little better if anyone is going to take it seriously.

seamus

Once the simplest answer is most likely the truth. How many people would be required to carry out a conspiracy whereby 7 astronauts are not loaded onto the shuttle? Presumably the entirety of the ground control. If not, then you would need to build a fake cockpit apparatus to which ground control were connected and "fooled" into thinking they were interacting with the astronauts. Who builds that cockpit?

And so on. Once you start to scratch the surface of any such theory, the plausibility quickly decreases. Either way you're talking about a conspiracy of which hundreds of people are aware, and none have said anything.

It's also endearingly naive. If NASA wanted a disaster to secure more funding, they would have just blown up the shuttle with the 7 on it rather than going to elaborate lengths to keep them alive. Never underestimate the callousness of some people when they want to succeed - Martin Shkreli is a good example.

Master of the Omniverse

Listen ,we are just going round in circles with this aspect of the thread.the truth always comes out sooner or later.you ever watched the space station interviews? To myself and many people the astronauts look like they are just bobbing up and down on a harness in front of a green screen.for zero gravity they sure look uncomfortable .over and out,beam me up Scotty, I got better things to be doing.

King Mob

Master of the Omniverse wrote: »

Listen ,we are just going round in circles with this aspect of the thread.the truth always comes out sooner or later.

Nope. This discussion is pretty direct and to the point. We've highlighted the issues that make the conspiracy theory a joke. You have not addressed them, nor provided a shred of evidence.

Master of the Omniverse wrote: »

you ever watched the space station interviews? To myself and many people the astronauts look like they are just bobbing up and down on a harness in front of a green screen.for zero gravity they sure look uncomfortable .over and out,beam me up Scotty, I got better things to be doing.

So can you at least explain two things before you abandon the claims you made:
1. Why would they fake the ISS?
2. This lady's hair: http://www.space.com/18163-astronaut-sunita-williams-100-space-days.html

ScumLord

SNAKEDOC wrote: »

I appreciate that yes it was more of a servicable than a reuseable craft but they had four for a reason so to expedite a launch if necessary and a shuttle was always available for launch while one was in orbit.

If they could get a shuttle into space the next question would be can they actually carry out the repair work in space?

Master of the Omniverse wrote: »

So the booster rockets are empty shells and they come back down to be reused

You do know how rockets work, right? They use a solid fuel that get's burned up leaving nothing behind.

Master of the Omniverse wrote: »

You think "The Matrix" is just a film?

He's just disappeared down the rabbit hole.

Our eyes tell us that the crew entered the challenger,yet how do we know that they didn't just walk out the other side and down a ladder ,stopping off at the coffee machine on the way .this is where the deception comes in.

At the coffee machine? I don't think the shuttle comes with a back door. A second walk way and ladder would be clear for anyone to see on the launch platform.


I don't understand how people can compare a scientist, with the weight of hundreds of years or scientific experimentation, probably naturally talented physicist from a young age, who gets world class education from a peer reviewed colleges, works their way up through the scientific community to be respected for the contributions to science. With some guy with a youtube channel, someone with little education, that's incapable of doing the maths, and refuses to follow real science because they just don't get it.

weisses

seamus wrote: »

Once the simplest answer is most likely the truth.

I agree with you there

Using that as a tool you als must have serious doubt with parts of the official 9/11 story then

Or is it used selectively to fit ones narrative

seamus

weisses wrote: »

Using that as a tool you als must have serious doubt with parts of the official 9/11 story then

No...?

weisses

seamus wrote: »

No...?

Bummer that its used so selectively

Joshua J

weisses wrote: »

Bummer that its used so selectively

Come on weisses you know better than that. As far as CT's are concerned an unproven CT applies occums razor. Now if that CT gets proven it will also apply occums razor. It's more like Schrodinger's razor actually. Tis handy.

Master of the Omniverse

King Mob wrote: »

Nope. This discussion is pretty direct and to the point. We've highlighted the issues that make the conspiracy theory a joke. You have not addressed them, nor provided a shred of evidence.


So can you at least explain two things before you abandon the claims you made:
1. Why would they fake the ISS?
2. This lady's hair: http://www.space.com/18163-astronaut-sunita-williams-100-space-days.html

Its cheaper to fake it in the studio than build and launch one.stingy ****s.I'm so pleased you mentioned the hair.first time I saw the hair I laughed so much i nearly gave myself a hernia.do you think she has shares in l'oreal( she's so not worth it).

Pegmatite

Master of the Omniverse wrote: »

Its cheaper to fake it in the studio than build and launch one.stingy ****s.I'm so pleased you mentioned the hair.first time I saw the hair I laughed so much i nearly gave myself a hernia.do you think she has shares in l'oreal( she's so not worth it).

This is amazing, so their was a very real attempt at a cover of the causes of Challenger disaster. At very real attempt of conspiracym which has been documented. By among others a nobel prize winner and a three star general. But Master of the Omniverse just ignores that and goes with THEY FAKED THE EXPLOSION.

Master of the Omniverse

Pegmatite wrote: »

This is amazing, so their was a very real attempt at a cover of the causes of Challenger disaster. At very real attempt of conspiracym which has been documented. By among others a nobel prize winner and a three star general. But Master of the Omniverse just ignores that and goes with THEY FAKED THE EXPLOSION.

The explosion was real.Obama is also a Nobel prize winner(what for ,for peace? Jaysus give me strength)and a three star general,whose job it is to deal in death.yes the explosion was real,its just that nobody was on board,apart from maybe a few cockroaches.

Master of the Omniverse

I think that you all must give me proof,concrete proof that the crew died on board the challenger.of course you can't.the same way I can't give you concrete proof that they didn't.so why don't we all be grown up about it and close the thread .life is too feck in short.

Pegmatite

Their are seven bodies in the ground. Go and dig them up and get some DNA tests done.

Pegmatite

Master of the Omniverse wrote: »

The explosion was real.Obama is also a Nobel prize winner(what for ,for peace? Jaysus give me strength)and a three star general,whose job it is to deal in death.yes the explosion was real,its just that nobody was on board,apart from maybe a few cockroaches.

Well Dick Feyman has a Nobel Prize for his work on Quantum Electro Dynamics

And both Feyman and the general tried to expose a conspiracy to cover up the cause of the explosion.

And you are just trolling now.
Or have some sort of mental health issue

Master of the Omniverse

Pegmatite wrote: »

Well Dick Feyman has a Nobel Prize for his work on Quantum Electro Dynamics

And both Feyman and the general tried to expose a conspiracy to cover up the cause of the explosion.

And you are just trolling now.
Or have some sort of mental health issue

Its a shame you have to make this personal.I hope.you all eventually wake up,take care everybody.

King Mob

Master of the Omniverse wrote: »

Its cheaper to fake it in the studio than build and launch one.stingy ****s.

No it's not. On top of still needing to launch the entire station, as well as make all of the modules for it, you need to bribe every single space agency on the planet as well as every astronomer and a huge chunk of the aerospace industry.
And this is on top of the costs of building a fake studio as well as for all the special effects needed to make it look like zero g.

Could you explain how much you think it would have cost just to fake?

Master of the Omniverse wrote: »

I'm so pleased you mentioned the hair.first time I saw the hair I laughed so much i nearly gave myself a hernia.do you think she has shares in l'oreal( she's so not worth it).

Why is it funny exactly?
You didn't explain what I asked. How are they able to fake floating hair on screen in real time?
You must have a good explanation for this if you find it so hilarious.
So let us all in on the joke.

Master of the Omniverse wrote: »

I think that you all must give me proof,concrete proof that the crew died on board the challenger.of course you can't.the same way I can't give you concrete proof that they didn't.so why don't we all be grown up about it and close the thread .life is too feck in short.

You have been given concrete proof. You have been shown video of the astronauts entering the shuttle and the shuttle consequently being blown up. You have now newly released audio logs detailing the disaster. There is pages and pages of senate hearing transcripts that all attest to the fact the astronauts died. The list goes on, but you aren't going to listen.
You have absolutely no reasons to doubt the actual events. You cannot provide a coherent, rational alternative that makes sense and isn't full of fundamental plot holes. The theory you are providing is abject nonsense and you are unable to explain any of the issues we have pointed out, despite your misplaced confidence. And of course, you haven't the tiniest crumb of evidence for any of it.

All you have is your recollection of a Youtube video making unsourced and unsupported claims which you didn't bother to check.

Why would that be convincing to anyone?
Why do you think these two sides are equal?

endacl

Master of the Omniverse wrote: »

I think that you all must give me proof,concrete proof that the crew died on board the challenger.of course you can't.the same way I can't give you concrete proof that they didn't.so why don't we all be grown up about it and close the thread .life is too feck in short.

Who owes you proof?

Dohnjoe

Master of the Omniverse wrote: »

I think that you all must give me proof,concrete proof that the crew died on board the challenger.of course you can't.the same way I can't give you concrete proof that they didn't.so why don't we all be grown up about it and close the thread .life is too feck in short.

It's easy to pick holes in anything and then hide behind questions demanding people "prove" every detail to the nth degree (which may or may not suit depending on someone's subjective understanding, or world view, or mood..)

It's far more logical to compare the two theories

One theory - Challenger blew up, the astronauts died, it was an accident. There is a large mountain of strong substantiated evidence from multiple sources for this

Second theory - Challenger was deliberately blown up, the astronauts are alive. There's almost no evidence for this as far as I can tell, apart from a youtube video