Advertisement
Where is Report Post on mobile? We've made a slight change, see here
Have your say on the future of the 'Save Draft' feature in this poll
MODs please see this information notice in the mod's forum. Thanks!
How to add spoiler tags, edit posts, add images etc. How to - a user's guide to the new version of Boards

We landed on Mars... again? [Mod note post #1]

1101113151619

Comments



  • Deflection tactic because he can't admit that he can't answer any of the questions and he's not allowed to question his own beliefs.





  • Incoming tantrum/disappearance/victim card

    It's such a routine at this stage





  • The issue is that NASA uses a different definition of when "space" starts to what the FAI and others use.





  • This is because you don't understand what you are talking about.

    Have you ever been on a rollercoaster, or driven at speed over a hump back bridge and momentarily lifted out of your seat, or in an express elevator going down a tall building? That is essentially what is happening in Bransons craft and also the ISS. They are going very, very fast and the craft is falling. Just happens that the likes of the ISS is falling at a similar speed to how fast its travelling so it stays at the same level of orbit as it falls around the side of the earth.

    No doubt someone else will be along to explain it more scientifically for you if needed, but I doubt you'll listen.





  • That NASA and the ESA need to agree where space start.

    The NSA should be able to help out with this.



  • Advertisement



  • There are different definitions, so there isn't one line. Most agree Branson (approx 80km high) went into space. It's not really some big debate

    Do you believe any of the space program has been faked?





  • With this analogy you are implying that gravity acts in a direction tangential to the circumference of the earth, which everyone knows is not true. But you place your faith in false science in order to explain indefensible, and quite laughable fabrications of "space travel". It doesn't matter how fast you travel, gravity will always act in a direction towards the centre of the earth, hence gravity should be the same no matter how fast you are travelling.





  • Correct, which is why the specific gravity of space is the same throughout the universe





  • You do realise you can temporarily simulate no gravity in a plane correct?

    Again, why are you constantly ignoring any questions about your theories or views after claiming you were happy to answer questions?





  • Praise the lord, we're getting somewhere at last!! So now you know that we can simulate space, so why is it so hard for you to comprehend that all space footage is simulated?

    I think we've made good progress today.



  • Advertisement


  • And again, you're demonstrating that you don't actually know what you're talking about.

    What is "real science" according to you?

    Why are you still ignoring questions?

    Why do you think ignoring questions is helping you?

    Do you not realise that everyone can see that's what you're doing and it's very obvious why you are doing it?





  • Like I said, you don't understand what point you are arguing.

    https://www.quora.com/Why-does-the-ISS-have-to-move-so-fast


    Now are you claiming that the ISS doesn't exist? That the definition of where space begins it wrong? That nobody has been to the moon? That Branson didn't go up in a rocket plane? That NASA doesn't exist? That the earth is flat?

    What exactly is it that you are claiming is faked?





  • So is the moon landings filmed from within a 747 doing parabolic arcs then? Where was this plane flying when doing those films? How about the footage of a live stream of Tim Peak running a marathon on a treadmill on the ISS, was that during a parabolic arc inside a 747 as well? How do you account for the fact that the live stream went on for several hours and the parabolic arcs give only a momentary simulation of weightlessness?

    Why do NASA do their training in swimming pools to get partial simulation of weightlessness if hoping in a plane is so simple to get the training in?

    How do you account for normal people being able to take photos of the ISS flying infront of the moon etc with regular photographic kits if it isn't up there?





  • Absolutely, now we're getting somewhere, you have finally committed to one of your theories.

    In a plane, in hyperbolic flight, a few moment of weightlessness can be simulated.

    You are suggesting that every piece of footage from space, including the 24 hour feed from the ISS, is faked. Which immediately begs many questions:

    1. Why?
    2. How do they fake 24 hours continual weightlessness in e.g. the ISS?
    3. Do you believe the earth is not a globe?




  • I'm bit confused now.

    If you now suddenly understand how parabolic flights can cause weighlessness, what was your issue with Branson's flight?

    Earlier you were arguing that it must of have been fake because it wasn't possible to have weighlessness like that.

    Now you're claiming that all space missions are faked like that? That doesn't make sense.

    Again, this demonstrates exactly why you aren't willing to answer any questions. You know that if you do, the contradictions in your position would become obvious and it will lead to more embarrassments like this. So you avoid answering questions so that you don't trip yourself up.

    This is dishonest, but par for the course for conspiracy theories and anti science beliefs.


    Why do you think this is fooling anyone though.

    Do you think anyone is actually dumb enough to believe your running and hiding from points is convincing?





  • Lol! "Hyperbolic flight"

    It's amazing how quickly your story changes. You believe he went to space but you don't believe he experienced zero gravity and that it was a parabolic simulation, despite all the news reports and Branson himself claiming that he experienced "zero-g". Are you saying Branson and all the news media are liars?





  • Didn't change anything, I never wrote that Branson wasn't experiencing weightlessness. Might want to reread other people's posts more carefully. I wrote that hyperbolic flight can generate weightlessness for periods of time (usually 20 to 30 seconds). After I wrote that you seem to think that is backs your claim that "all space footage is simulated". Okay, how is that achieved? demonstrate with evidence

    Also to repeat the earlier questions

    1. Why?
    2. How do they fake 24 hours continual weightlessness in e.g. the ISS?
    3. Do you believe the earth is not a globe?






  • You keep laughing at people for not using terms correctly, yet you keep misusing them yourself.

    You still don't seem to understand how gravity, freefall and orbits work either.

    And this is all in addition to your constant dodging of questions you can't answer.

    You're showing yourself up as a very dishonest person.

    You know this as you won't even attempt to justify why you are ignoring questions.


    Anyway, to address your latest contradictory claims and to clear up the misunderstanding you have.

    Yes, Branson went to space. He passed the Karman line in a parabolic, sub orbital flight.

    Do you dispute this happened?


    He experienced weightlessness because he was in free fall for a short time.

    This is not different from how people on the ISS and in other space missions experience "zero g". It's only different in that when something is in orbit its free falling for a long time.

    Technically there's no such thing as "zero gravity" as it's a force that is felt all through the universe.

    Do you dispute this? Do you not understand this?


    Again this is not something the media or Branson ever lied about. The issue is that either you don't understand basic science or you're being deliberately obtuse to satisfy your bizarre beliefs.

    We're still not even sure what those beliefs are because your too afraid and ashamed to actually lay them out in a clear and concise way.

    My money is still on you being a flat earther. All of your arguments are straight out of their play book.





  • Just on a point of order Branson did not pass the karman line. he only went to 80KM. The karman line is 100KM. Bezos will be going as far as the karman line.



  • Advertisement


  • Wow, even the cracks are showing in this thread.

    So is Bezos going to cross it or not? I don't see how they can just tickle these imaginary lines. Branson claims to spend 40seconds in zero-gravity and now Bezos is going "as far as the karman line".

    You would think they would go an extra few millimeters so as not to create such ambiguity 😆





  • There's no confusion, Bezos is going to a different height above Earth than Branson, both are considered to be entering space. Both flights experience several minutes of weightlessness and views of the curvature of Earth

    Why aren't you answering any of the dozens of straight forward questions put to you?

    e.g. do you believe the Earth is not a globe?

    Do you believe the ISS is real or no?





  • It is not a crack at all. It is quite clear how high Branson got and what altitude bezos is aiming at. It has been stated several times previously in the thread. Somebody just got it wrong and i corrected them. At least they attempted to post something they believed was true. that is something you have been too afraid to attempt so far.

    Post edited by ohnonotgmail on




  • Sorry, you're demanding answers to questions after pages of ignoring and dodging points put to you.

    You've already accepted that parabolic flights can result in "zero g". You claimed that all space missions are faked this way.

    But now you are again saying that this is impossible.

    You are again tripping over your silly childish beliefs and you're too afraid to try and defend them.

    Continuing to ignore points only serves to prove this fact.





  • And it's not as if it's just this thread he is doing it on.





  • Nowhere does it state that they used a parabolic flight to simulate zero g. But there are countless articles that claim Branson "floated in zero gravity". Are you saying they are all liars, and if so, how would they all keep it a secret?

    And you even have older articles showing Branson training on parabolic flight simulators in which he states: "It has certainly whetted our appetite to experience space for real."

    Lol! 😆





  • At an altitude of 100km, gravity is almost the same as on Earth. They are experiencing zero-g because their respective crafts start to slow down, thus inducing the several minutes of weightlessness

    Explained here (at 3:28)






  • Why do people keep feeding this obvious troll?





  • In my experience many of these people aren't trolls, they really believe this stuff



  • Advertisement


  • The second article isnt referring to the space flight. It's referring to the flight in the picture.

    You should read articles before posting them.

    Also you are still ignoring questions.



Advertisement