Phnom Poon wrote: ↑Sat Jan 18, 2020 5:55 pm

Joker Poker wrote: ↑Sat Jan 18, 2020 5:52 pm researched the faking of Spacex.

lol
over and out, major tom

Here's another laughable effort from Spacex

At the 41:58 minute mark you have bits of fluff flying past and getting stuck on the studio rocket. They want to pretend that it is travelling in excess of 26500 Kmh.

At 43:50 a large bit of fluff gets stuck on the rocket engine at 26583 Kmh.

At 44:34 a bit of fluff floats off into the studio setting at 26572 Kmh. Oh, you'll notice that the rocket body near the engine seems to be made out of plastic bags. Commentator later tries to brush of the fluff as being solid oxygen - you can't make this up.

Then at 51:06 they are in the swimming pool for the separation of the cargo - you can tell because of the air bubbles - just like the ones you see in so many NASA videos.

you are quite right, I can see it now
solid oxygen, preposterous!
why are there no stars if they are in space?
and i see they're using a super wide-angle lens to make the earth appear round
do they think we're fools?

what a card

I don't know if the joker is just delusional or a troll, but his repeated attempts to discredit the efforts to get off of the planet are at least somewhat amusing. As for me being a holy man? Not sure where that comes from but anyone who knows me knows I have nothing but contempt for any sort of organized religion. Keep going joker. At least you are providing some levity to a serious topic.

Johnny

IraHayes wrote: ↑Sun Jan 19, 2020 10:09 am
I will have more confidence in expert predictions when they are able to successfully predict exactly what the weather will be like in 1 weeks time.

The weather predictions these days, for next week, are actually very good.
The progress has been quite remarkable. I am a little bit in tune with that stuff.
It can kinda kill my week when they get it wrong,
so i study it hard, and then check it against which way the wind does actually blow next Sunday at 11 am.

"Ah, we all know the weather forecasters don't know nothin'.."
is a bit out of touch with both the science, and with the weather, these days.

I know what you are saying, Ira, about the variables in predictive modelling, but science is pretty rigorous in ensuring these factors are taken into account, and given due weight.
Their profession's reputation depends on them not overstepping the mark with this sort of stuff.

You do not get 97% of all scientists on earth agreeing on something, if it does not have a very solid foundation.
Ever heard of 97% of any group agreeing on anything before? -and these folk are, you know, not the bottom of the class exactly.

Scientists are the most conservative people on the planet.
If they are all singing, in tune, "Huston, we have a problem here" we should listen, and act.
I reckon anyway.

Joker Poker wrote: ↑Sun Jan 19, 2020 2:18 pm

Phnom Poon wrote: ↑Sat Jan 18, 2020 5:55 pm

Joker Poker wrote: ↑Sat Jan 18, 2020 5:52 pm researched the faking of Spacex.

lol
over and out, major tom

Here's another laughable effort from Spacex

At the 41:58 minute mark you have bits of fluff flying past and getting stuck on the studio rocket. They want to pretend that it is travelling in excess of 26500 Kmh.

At 43:50 a large bit of fluff gets stuck on the rocket engine at 26583 Kmh.

At 44:34 a bit of fluff floats off into the studio setting at 26572 Kmh. Oh, you'll notice that the rocket body near the engine seems to be made out of plastic bags. Commentator later tries to brush of the fluff as being solid oxygen - you can't make this up.

Then at 51:06 they are in the swimming pool for the separation of the cargo - you can tell because of the air bubbles - just like the ones you see in so many NASA videos.

NASA (and now SpaceX) sure did/do pull off a lot of David Copperfield type shit when I would watch the shuttle take off. IDK how they pulled off the Challenger exploding when my classmates and I were watching it. damn, I love magic.

the entire scientific edifice is highly suspect
starting perhaps with pythagoras
but culminating in galileo, newton, einstein, hawking, etc

i beg to differ:

More from fakex.

newkidontheblock wrote: ↑Thu Aug 20, 2020 8:46 am
You’re kidding, right?

There was a huge analysis done right after that Challenger explosion.

NASA at the time was on the ropes. Gimmicks like the first woman teacher in space instead of safety.

Turned out to be a faulty O Ring, that should have never left the factory.

There was (at the time) a frame by frame analysis of the O ring leak then flames, then explosion.

David Copperfield is illusions. Aluminum foil (courtesy of the NASA space program) is not.

Minor mishaps happen just like with anything else. The lunar module computer shut down just before the Eagle landed on the moon. Fortunately engineers had anticipated such a possibility, and it then restarted itself in time to guide the landing.

Been a bit of analysis done since then too:

Then you listen to Elon Musk. He knows that humans have never been to the moon. But he gets so much money from NASA he has to play the game. Then he talks about setting up a colony on Mars.

The first step would be to set up a hotel in space. Then get money from paying customers. It could be like a huge wheel, which spins, to create something like gravity.

The next step would be to send an unmanned rocket to the moon, and have it return to the earth. It would be necessary to get this right, before humans ever go there.

If they do set up a space hotel, or a colony on the moon, the amount of equipment they need to take would take dozens of flights to get it there, which makes it very expensive. We will see if NASA will hand out huge amounts of money, or it will never happen.