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
Hi all,
Vanilla are planning an update to the site on April 24th (next Wednesday). It is a major PHP8 update which is expected to boost performance across the site. The site will be down from 7pm and it is expected to take about an hour to complete. We appreciate your patience during the update.
Thanks all.

Hoaxesssss innnnn Spaaaaaace

Options
12467…11

Comments

  • Options
    #92
    King Mob
    Registered Users Posts: 25,226 ✭✭✭✭King Mob


    bfa1509 wrote: »
    The rehashed space suits are depressurised and have hinges. The first spacesuits (i.e. during the "moonlandings") were at 1atm and had no hinges, shells, or anything else to maintain the flexibility during the space walk.

    Even at 4.3 psi, this would be the equivalent of 296Kg of mass resting on 1 m^2 of fabric


    What's incorrect about it?

    You're right, most materials can go to MPa or even GPa before failure but 101kPa on a material is a stress that is far beyond that which humans can manipulate further


    The nature of the material is irrelevant. 101Kpa is the same when it's on latex, kevlar or steel. The material still has to resist it, and there is no way it can remain flexible under this pressure. When you move you cause a volume change in the suit, which means compressing the air inside even further. No human could compress anything that has 101Kpa already inside it.
    So how can people open soda cans?


  • Options
    #93
    Cheerful Spring2
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,705 ✭✭✭Cheerful Spring2


    odyssey06 wrote: »
    It was during a test of the radar \ aerial defence system.
    These reports seem to have started coming in since that new system was activated by the US military. All credit to the system, but I'd be very surprised if it's such an upgrade it can now pickup previously undetected advanced alien spacecraft.
    So, they are UFOs.
    It's waaay too early to say to say they are UFOs of alien origin.

    The objects were tracked by multiple US warships. Nimitz battlegroup has many ships. Every radar picked them up. One operator in radio interview said during a radio show, they even shut down the radar to see if there was a problem, after a reboot objects were still on screen. It was not just a radar sighting, planes took off from the carrier to engage the targets and objects were spotted eyes on by multiple pilots, some of have already come forward and have briefed congress members. The object had no sign of propulsion, no exhaust nothing. It was just a big silver object with no propulsion doing incredible speeds in the sky. The pilots were flying modern advanced aircraft and not could keep up.


  • Options
    #94
    M5
    Registered Users Posts: 10,161 ✭✭✭✭M5


    bfa1509 wrote: »
    You havent' presented a single scientific article supporting your arguments.

    The default position is backed up by 100s of peer reviewed studies including the experiment itself.

    Your position is backed up by YouTube


  • Options
    #95
    Muppet Man
    Registered Users Posts: 1,650 ✭✭✭Muppet Man


    OP - I have no engineering background and would probably be supportive of your stance if the yanks only landed once. That would have won them the space race. It makes no sense to fake it 6 times....

    That aside you do need to address overhwelming evidence, like photographic evidence of the moon landings from the Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter - here, images of all the Apollo craft and even images of the tracks left behind from the lunar exploration vehicle that they had:


    https://www.scientificamerican.com/gallery/apollo-11-lander-spotted-by-lunar-satellite/

    How did they get there?

    Muppets man

    PS masterful trolling though... lol


  • Options
    #96
    storker
    Registered Users Posts: 5,644 ✭✭✭storker


    The Nal wrote: »
    Something to do with beating the Soviets, beating communism, not being shown up by the Soviets

    And yet, when the Americans faked the moon landings, the Soviets, with international prestige at stake, said...nothing, even though they had already sussed out that getting to the moon was impossible.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #97
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    storker wrote: »
    Sanitation engineer is my guess.


    Someone that takes the piss?


    Yip, that tracks.


  • Options
    #98
    M5
    Registered Users Posts: 10,161 ✭✭✭✭M5


    Still waiting for moon retro reflectors do be "debunked" OP.

    Kindof a trump card unless you can rebuff (funnily enough the exact reason they put them (note plural) there)


  • Options
    #99
    cuppa
    Registered Users Posts: 538 ✭✭✭cuppa


    Love this video.
    "An amazing documentary on the Apollo navigation system and on-board computer."
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xQ1O0XR_cA0


  • Options
    #100
    Cork Boy 53
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 3,829 ✭✭✭Cork Boy 53


    Along with all his other off the wall posts, the OP also stated that NASA admitted that humans have never flown beyond low Earth orbit or past the Van Allen belts. I would love to see evidence of this claim but I would hazard a guess that none will be forthcoming from the OP.


  • Options
    #101
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    Cork Boy 53 wrote: »
    Along with all his other off the wall posts, the OP also stated that NASA admitted that humans have never flown beyond the Van Allen belts. I would love to see evidence of this claim but I suspect that none will be forthcoming from the OP.


    He has gone quiet, so he might have been banned from all social media for not tidying his bedroom.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #102
    Dohnjoe
    Registered Users Posts: 17,775 ✭✭✭✭Dohnjoe


    Posted this before



    Excellent little piece, basically they didn't have the technology to fake it


  • Options
    #103
    storker
    Registered Users Posts: 5,644 ✭✭✭storker


    Overheal wrote: »
    Ok... what is your engineering background? Super curious now.

    He's standing in front of a mural of a suspension bridge?


  • Options
    #104
    martingriff
    Registered Users Posts: 10,685 ✭✭✭✭martingriff


    So 7 pages in and still no near what cereal box the OP got his qualifications in after sending off the tokens


  • Options
    #105
    Peatys
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,881 ✭✭✭Peatys


    bfa1509 wrote: »
    I already said that the ISS crossing overhead could be anything, a satellite, a plane, a balloon. And with regard the retroreflectors, the only evidence you have is based on hearsay.

    What engineering background did you say you have? I've seen the iss with my dad's cheap bicolours. Have you tried to look at what's up there? Do you think it looks like a balloon?

    Date: Sat Jul 27, 10:40 PM
    Visible: 6 min
    Max Height: 52°
    Appears: 10° above W
    Disappears: 11° above ESE

    You've a week to find even the most basic scope or binoculars. First hand knowledge is always the best knowledge.


  • Options
    #106
    bfa1509
    Registered Users Posts: 1,022 ✭✭✭bfa1509


    Overheal wrote: »
    Ok... what is your engineering background? Super curious now.

    The old maths skills getting a little rusty? Too afraid to engage?

    Tell me where the errors are.


  • Options
    #107
    King Mob
    Registered Users Posts: 25,226 ✭✭✭✭King Mob


    bfa1509 wrote: »
    The old maths skills getting a little rusty? Too afraid to engage?

    Tell me where the errors are.

    So you were lying when you said you had an engineering background.

    Gosh its lookimg bad for the conspiracy theory.


  • Options
    #108
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    King Mob wrote: »
    So you were lying when you said you had an engineering background.

    In fairness he never claimed to be a GOOD engineer :D


  • Options
    #109
    Dohnjoe
    Registered Users Posts: 17,775 ✭✭✭✭Dohnjoe


    bfa1509 wrote: »
    The old maths skills getting a little rusty? Too afraid to engage?

    Tell me where the errors are.

    You are avoiding most questions and points here.

    You are essentially maintaining that the history of manned space flight is a hoax, which begs the following.. (and keeping it very simple)

    A) If the ISS doesn't exist (!), 1. Explain the continuous live feed, 2 Explain the fact that it can be viewed with binoculars and telescopes, every time, consistently, if that's not the ISS, what is it, with evidence

    B) If the manned lunar landings never happened 1. Explain how each were faked, with evidence

    C) How have millions of people (scientists, astronomers, astronauts, crew, researchers, 400,000 involved in the US space program, the Russian space programs, international space programs) all kept it a "secret", how has there been not one single leak?

    D) Why? What is the motive that the US/Russia/every nation worked together to create a gargantuan lie?

    or

    E) You simply can't wrap your head around it, so rather than accept that, you've decided that millions of experts are wrong and have created this immense hoax

    You would rather entertain that the entirety space flight and human beings in space is fake than admit you can't understand it. The narcissism and delusion in that type of thinking is absolutely staggering (or we are being trolled)


  • Options
    #110
    Peatys
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,881 ✭✭✭Peatys


    Dohnjoe wrote: »
    (or we are being trolled)

    I think you're into something


  • Options
    #111
    Overheal
    Registered Users Posts: 81,640 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    bfa1509 wrote: »
    The old maths skills getting a little rusty? Too afraid to engage?

    Tell me where the errors are.

    Oh I have the math right here. But before sharing it we have to acknowledge the pretenses under which you started this conversation: starting with that you have a background in engineering. What is that background?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #112
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    ^^^ school time...


  • Options
    #113
    skerry
    Registered Users Posts: 2,804 ✭✭✭skerry


    Here's a video of Space Shuttle Discovery launching from KSC in 2009, recorded with my own camera and viewed with my own eyeballs. It launched, docked with the ISS, had the craic, and came home again.

    Disclaimer.....this most definitely happened.



  • Options
    #114
    Ipso
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,995 ✭✭✭Ipso


    Hmm. Very Kubrickesque!


  • Options
    #115
    Peatys
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,881 ✭✭✭Peatys


    skerry wrote: »
    Here's a video of Space Shuttle Discovery launching from KSC in 2009, recorded with my own camera and viewed with my own eyeballs. It launched, docked with the ISS, had the craic, and came home again.

    Disclaimer.....this most definitely happened.


    You're just one of the Illuminati. Away with your lies!


  • Options
    #116
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    Ipso wrote: »
    Hmm. Very Kubrickesque!

    Especially the handcam technique used by more edgy directors like Kubrick.

    Unfortunately it's clearly fake.

    You can see the stars in the background from 1:20 onwards don't move like the "space shuttle".

    We know it's a fake because Kubrick would be far too professional for there to be two specs of dust on the lens.


  • Options
    #117
    bfa1509
    Registered Users Posts: 1,022 ✭✭✭bfa1509


    bfa1509 wrote: »

    Before can explodes: If there is 250 kPa of pressure inside the can and 1atm (101kPa) outside, this would be the equivalent of 149kPa or 149,000 Newtons/square meter of pressure acting on the internal wall of the can. Lets say a space suit has 1atm pressure inside and is in space, and for arguments sake has an internal surface area of 1 square metre. This means that there is 101,000 Newtons of pressure force acting on the wall of the space suit. Lets say you took 1 metre squared of the space suit fabric, asked two men to hold the corners, then exert 101,000 N of force on the material. This would be the equivalent of the men holding 1.01 tonnes of weight between them. Imagine the stretch that would cause on the material? No matter how strong or flexible it is, it would be impossible for a man to stretch it further in order to move.
    Overheal wrote: »
    Oh I have the math right here.

    If you had it, you would have posted it. Next.


    I challenge anyone to take the mathematical example I gave above and point out the errors. Anyone with a masters qualification? Maybe a Phd? Any NASA engineers out there? (Because I can assure you, this problem has plagued them before. Which is why they had to add an outer shell and hinges to the new revision and a depressurisation step)

    I'll be waiting.


  • Options
    #118
    skerry
    Registered Users Posts: 2,804 ✭✭✭skerry


    bfa1509 wrote: »
    If you had it, you would have posted it. Next.


    I challenge anyone to take the mathematical example I gave above and point out the errors. Anyone with a masters qualification? Maybe a Phd? Any NASA engineers out there? (Because I can assure you, this problem has plagued them before. Which is why they had to add an outer shell and hinges to the new revision and a depressurisation step)

    I'll be waiting.

    I have a PhD and have worked for NASA, but I'm not an engineer so not gonna attempt to debate on the above as you seem to have the blinkers on either way.

    I'm genuinely not clear on what your argument is anymore though. Are you saying that because you can't get your head around the science behind the space suits that the space program doesn't exist as a whole, or that the moon landings never happened, or what??


  • Options
    #119
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    bfa1509 wrote: »
    Which is why they had to add an outer shell and hinges to the new revision and a depressurisation step)


    Sorry, why would they need to do this if they can't go to space. You know the Van Allen belt :rolleyes::pac:


  • Options
    #120
    M5
    Registered Users Posts: 10,161 ✭✭✭✭M5


    Deleted User wrote: »
    Especially the handcam technique used by more edgy directors like Kubrick.

    Unfortunately it's clearly fake.

    You can see the stars in the background from 1:20 onwards don't move like the "space shuttle".

    We know it's a fake because Kubrick would be far too professional for there to be two specs of dust on the lens.

    Go into your street and see how many stars you can see.then take a photo of the sky and see how many stars you see!

    Basic, basic photography


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #121
    bfa1509
    Registered Users Posts: 1,022 ✭✭✭bfa1509


    skerry wrote: »
    I have a PhD and have worked for NASA, but I'm not an engineer so not gonna attempt to debate on the above as you seem to have the blinkers on either way.

    I'm genuinely not clear on what your argument is anymore though. Are you saying that because you can't get your head around the science behind the space suits that the space program doesn't exist as a whole, or that the moon landings never happened, or what??

    I'm not claiming there is no space program, there definitely is. I do believe that thousands of research projects have been carried out in the name of space travel. And I think the world has benefited greatly from the program (and has suffered greatly too as it has also contributed to advances in weaponry)

    But I don't believe we are anywhere near close enough to solving the greatest problems of space travel (yet). JFK made a promise America couldn't keep. That's where the deception started. We were made to believe in the 60s that we were many decades ahead of where we actually were/are

    What stage we are at right now, I really am not sure. There are definitely satellites very high up, maybe at 400km and further. I certainly don't believe there is a manned satellite 400km above the earth's surface in zero gravity.


Advertisement