Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

The Challenger - details covered up for decency?

Options
13»

Comments

  • Options
    #62
    ScumLord
    Registered Users Posts: 28,789 ✭✭✭✭ScumLord


    King Mob wrote: »
    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.
    And because we can see the ISS orbiting from the ground with the naked eye they'd have to make sure to put something up there, something about the size of the ISS.


  • Options
    #63
    seamus
    Registered Users Posts: 68,317 ✭✭✭✭seamus


    ScumLord wrote: »
    And because we can see the ISS orbiting from the ground with the naked eye they'd have to make sure to put something up there, something about the size of the ISS.
    They stuck a balloon up there with a little maglite hanging out of it. It's solar-powered.


  • Options
    #64
    weisses
    Registered Users Posts: 9,447 ✭✭✭weisses


    seamus wrote: »
    They stuck a balloon up there with a little maglite hanging out of it. It's solar-powered.

    I was thinking Chinese lanterns (admittedly they fooled me before)


  • Options
    #65
    cuppa
    Registered Users Posts: 538 ✭✭✭cuppa


    What?
    So you are saying the old NASA joke of "need another seven astronauts" is really "nasa astronauts still alive" :pac:

    Any how here is Sunita Williams on the ISS giving a fantastic tour.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=doN4t5NKW-k


  • Options
    #66
    SNAKEDOC
    Registered Users Posts: 943 ✭✭✭SNAKEDOC


    Reply to an earlier post on an atlantis rescue mission and repairs in space. The idea would have been to send the atlantis shuttle up with only commander and pilot effecting a rescue and allowing the lose if the columbia shuttle but saving its crew. In orbit repairs were cery much a reality also as was peoven on the very next shuttle mission to the ISS where a small tile was replaced. So a reacue or repair was very much in the realm of possibility but nasa just didnt think it necessary.
    On challenger why oh why would faking a shuttle explosion be a giid idea. Some of the comments here have absolutly no ground to stand on


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #67
    EternalHope
    Closed Accounts Posts: 177 ✭✭EternalHope


    ScumLord wrote: »
    And because we can see the ISS orbiting from the ground with the naked eye they'd have to make sure to put something up there, something about the size of the ISS.
    I saw a documentary with the claims about the challenger crew and it also said the ISS is a fake and that parts of it - i think it was space walks- are shot in a water tank on earth. He even gave an example of water leaking in to a... visor is it - the thing they wear on their heads

    I do not know if it is the same documenatry but was on youtube


  • Options
    #68
    SNAKEDOC
    Registered Users Posts: 943 ✭✭✭SNAKEDOC


    These ideas have no basis. The iss required space walks to peice it together anyway and as we know and can see on a regular basis it is most defianatly up there so why say space walks are faked under water.


  • Options
    #69
    ScumLord
    Registered Users Posts: 28,789 ✭✭✭✭ScumLord


    EternalHope wrote: »
    I saw a documentary with the claims about the challenger crew and it also said the ISS is a fake and that parts of it - i think it was space walks- are shot in a water tank on earth. He even gave an example of water leaking in to a... visor is it - the thing they wear on their heads
    I wouldn't really believe it. Photos taken in space are clearly not taken in a water tank, any experience with photography would instantly discount that one. Water doesn't travel through water to well and distorts images. It would be instantly obvious if that was the case.


  • Options
    #70
    SNAKEDOC
    Registered Users Posts: 943 ✭✭✭SNAKEDOC


    I think you meant light doesnt travel through water too well.


  • Options
    #71
    Master of the Omniverse
    Registered Users Posts: 356 ✭✭Master of the Omniverse


    Its a shame that you all are so certain about this matter.I keep an open mind.NASA has a reputation for deception,as long as they get funding what does it matter to them.everything else in this world is a fix,or hadn't you noticed?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #72
    SNAKEDOC
    Registered Users Posts: 943 ✭✭✭SNAKEDOC


    on what matter do you refer to. The space walks, challenger, or what. Do you not believe any of the given events or what do you believe.


  • Options
    #73
    Dohnjoe
    Registered Users Posts: 17,799 ✭✭✭✭Dohnjoe


    Master of the Omniverse wrote: »
    Its a shame that you all are so certain about this matter.I keep an open mind.NASA has a reputation for deception,as long as they get funding what does it matter to them.everything else in this world is a fix,or hadn't you noticed?

    That's not an open mind


  • Options
    #74
    King Mob
    Registered Users Posts: 25,229 ✭✭✭✭King Mob


    Master of the Omniverse wrote: »
    Its a shame that you all are so certain about this matter.I keep an open mind.NASA has a reputation for deception,as long as they get funding what does it matter to them.everything else in this world is a fix,or hadn't you noticed?
    A reputation that seems to be entirely fictional and springs from your completely baseless assumptions.
    This not a good foundation to build a theory on.

    And people here have given you and others plenty of opportunity to present your case. The fact that we're not convinced has nothing to do with whether our minds are open.


  • Options
    #75
    ScumLord
    Registered Users Posts: 28,789 ✭✭✭✭ScumLord


    Master of the Omniverse wrote: »
    Its a shame that you all are so certain about this matter.I keep an open mind.NASA has a reputation for deception,as long as they get funding what does it matter to them.everything else in this world is a fix,or hadn't you noticed?
    Except NASA are developing new scientific techniques and products being sold to private companies and individuals. They're a public body with thousands of employees. Those employees are some of the smartest and most driven people on the planet and you think they'll all be happy to sit around in NASA doing nothing after they've found out their childhood dreams are nothing but a lie?

    It's like saying iPhones don't actually exist and all the employees are sitting around living it up, just because you don't own an iPhone.

    There's no reason at all to believe that NASA isn't doing what it's saying it's doing. The fact we all use satellites on a daily basis, the fact we know more about space today, the fact that there are thousands of other institutes around the world and some in American opponents, scrutinising NASAs data and using it to develope their own scientific insights all go to show NASA is actually outputting real science that can be applied in the real world. They couldn't just be making it all up. That would imply a level of predictive intelligence that only a god could have.


  • Options
    #76
    Overheal
    Registered Users Posts: 81,917 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    Middle Eastern states would also have a direct political reason to discredit Western cover-ups about space etc.


Advertisement