It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

NASA Hoax

page: 9
1
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 11 2005 @ 11:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by warpboost
Source




Originally posted by jra
That's just for flying around the moon though. Not to land on it.


When you get close I'm sure you could take photos through a telescope and see that we went there.


Does anyone know if the Hubbel can see thedetail with the Hubbell can see the moon's surface in detail enough to see tracks, flags, mirrors etc?

[edit on 11-8-2005 by warpboost]




posted on Aug, 12 2005 @ 12:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by warpboost
Does anyone know if the Hubbel can see thedetail with the Hubbell can see the moon's surface in detail enough to see tracks, flags, mirrors etc?


No, looking at the moon with the Hubble is like trying to use binoculars as a microscope. When looking at the moon, Hubble can capture features up to ~300 feet across. The lunar landers and the lander sites would fit in one pixel (or less) in an Hubble image of the moon.

There are a couple of problems with HST viewing things on the moon:

1. Size: An object on the moon 4 meters across, viewed from HST, would be about 0.002 arcsec in size. The highest resolution instrument currently on HST is the FOC, at 0.014 arcsec. That would work out to being able to resolve something about 300 ft across on the moon. So anything we left on the moon cannot be resolved in any HST image. It would just appear as a dot -- except see next point.

2. Motion of the moon: The HST pointing system is designed to hold it quite motionless relative to the distant stars -- but the Moon isn't. In 1 second of time, the moon moves over 0.5 arcsec. The shortest exposure time any of the HST instruments offers is 0.1 sec -- so an object we left on the Moon would appear more blurry.
source


jra

posted on Aug, 12 2005 @ 12:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by warpboost
When you get close I'm sure you could take photos through a telescope and see that we went there.


True, but the Soyuz might be a little cramped for space inside though. But one could probably attach something on the outside to take pics I guess.


Does anyone know if the Hubbel can see thedetail with the Hubbell can see the moon's surface in detail enough to see tracks, flags, mirrors etc?


Hubble can not. It's far sighted and can't focus on objects at close range.

EDIT: ah CatHerder beat me to it.

[edit on 12-8-2005 by jra]



posted on Aug, 12 2005 @ 12:37 AM
link   
Lastday Prophet-Registered at 3/22/2004. 3+22+2+0+0+4=31. 31 reversed=13. WE KNOW YOUR TRUE IDENTITY, DON'T LIE TO US!
Also, have you considered the possibility that the Apollo astronauts got lucky? Perhaps because they were in God's inner sanctum they were protected by his divine presence?
I can disregard the debunking parts of the thread the way you are and still come to the conclusion that you give out different arguements but they always come back to you. You never seem to win a victory in this war of logic.
Translation: Nothing you do seems to prove your point.



posted on Aug, 12 2005 @ 02:23 PM
link   
Nasa is getting good at this hoax stuff

plumbo, how do we get a probe to mars from the center of the earth ?




www.cnn.com...



posted on Aug, 12 2005 @ 02:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by syrinx high priest

plumbo, how do we get a probe to mars from the center of the earth ?


C'mon you're not paying attention. EVERYTHING's behind the glass at the center of the Earth. Stars, planets, galaxies, Klingons, everything. You just hit the glass at the right angle, pop through, and there you go...off to Mars which is only about the size of a basic NFL stadium. Or something.



posted on Aug, 12 2005 @ 04:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by syrinx high priest

plumbo, how do we get a probe to mars from the center of the earth ?


u said you understood my theory?





posted on Aug, 12 2005 @ 07:24 PM
link   
I gave you this link which I believe to be more accurate than the information you guys have provided.

www.hourofthetime.com...

The widget was called a "SATELLITE LOCATOR" To my knowledge they were only produced in the early 80's. I am trying to contact some of my old freinds that were around in the early days of satellite, one of them may still have one. It was over 20 years ago and I do not remember the exact name and manufacturer.

Let's settle the satellite issue once and for all.
I doubt there is anyone that is a member on this site that has more knowledge conrcerning the early days of satellite and what is necessary to send signals from one location to another than I do. I could ask some simple questions like, What was the first IRD, who made it, when was it released and what equipment was used prior to it's introduction.

What was first ? A LND, LNC, LNA, LNB, LNDC and what is the difference between each of them ?

Who were the first manufacturers of TVRO Antenna's and what were the associated electronics and who manufactured them and what was the size of the antenna necessary to recieve HBO, what was the name of the satellite it was on, how many transponders, what band was used, what was the Noise Temp, what are sparkles and would you have any ?

Some things you failed to mention concerning satellite signal transmission.
The most critical part of sending the signal is the "GAIN" of the dish, the "NOISE TEMP" of the LNA, LNB, and type of band(C, KU, KA,) each has it's advantages and disadvantages.

I have worked on antennas as large as 60 ft. They were used to recieve a signal from Russia, the uplink and downlink antennas were both 60 ft.
There is no uplink facility on the moon, an uplink is composed of more than just an antenna. Large antennas require a lot of power to transmit signals and therefore you would need a generator of some sort to provide you with at least 200 amps. No such device is on the moon

If it is necessary for NASA to have a 200 ft. Antenna to recieve a faint signal that alone proves that signals are not endless. If they were endless a 18 inch dish would work.

Let's see what the experts can tell me about satellite technology since you say I don't know.

Please address the above questions if, you can. You won't find most of this information on the web because there was no web in the early days.
Only those that were in the business would know the answers.


[edit on 12-8-2005 by Lastday Prophet]



posted on Aug, 12 2005 @ 07:28 PM
link   
So about that widget, LastDay?

The name of it, etc?

Link to somewhere that explains exactly which gadget you're talking about?



posted on Aug, 13 2005 @ 12:04 PM
link   
Where are all the naysayers, I see that no one has responded to my questions !



posted on Aug, 13 2005 @ 07:00 PM
link   
They've gotten tired, but I'm sure they will be back...



posted on Aug, 13 2005 @ 09:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by Lastday Prophet
I gave you this link which I believe to be more accurate than the information you guys have provided.

www.hourofthetime.com...


And that webpage, filled with stupidity and fantasy, is relevant to satellites how?? The illuminati is a FICTICIOUS organization; the current pop culture version of the illuminati revolves around a Novel called "The Illuminati" which is a work of fiction -- the author's first. Yet so many people refer to it as if it were a work of non-fiction, or a manual on the illuminati...

The Author's Acknowledgment Page - A Direct Quote

"Obviously this is a book unlike any I have ever written before. Prior to The Illuminati I had written nonfiction only. It is my sincere desire, as a fiction reader myself, that good, non-offensive fiction be made available to the public. I trust this is the first of many novels that I will write.

I would like to say thanks to my editor at Thomas Nelson, Janet Thoma, for all the help and encouragement she provided. Also, thanks to... while I was working on this book and two non-fiction books.

My biggest concern in writing a novel is that someone may read too much into it. Obviously, I tried to use as unrealistic scenario as possible in this story. But is purely fictional, including the characters, events, and timing. It should not be assumed that it is prophetic in any regard...

Most of all, I trust that you will enjoy reading this book as much as I have enjoyed writing it.

In Christ,
Larry Burkett"


Even though the author states the (bolded) fact that his novel is fiction, there are thousands (including you) who run around thinking it's all true.

And then there was Illuminatus! by Robert Shea and Robert Anton Wilson, the first book of a 3 part science fiction series published in 1970. Clive Barker's Imajica, published in 1991 is another work of fiction, Barker imagines the Illuminati as a place where supernatural items are collected - and hidden/destroyed, so that the general public may never see them. Again, stress the FICTION part of these stories. And then there's the two games from Steve Jackson Games which are based on the mythos: Illuminati and its trading card game reincarnation Illuminati: New World Order. Show me any published works regarding and referring to "The Illuminati" before these novels/games/cartoons/comicbooks. Unless you think the Bavarian Illuminati has grown to encompass all western civilizations in the past 240 years.


It must be difficult going through life basing your beliefs on science fiction novels, works of fiction, comic books, and card or board games...

Frankly, I'm surprised that you do not think the Forgotten Realms is also a factual piece of our history.



The widget was called a "SATELLITE LOCATOR" To my knowledge they were only produced in the early 80's. I am trying to contact some of my old freinds that were around in the early days of satellite, one of them may still have one. It was over 20 years ago and I do not remember the exact name and manufacturer.


It would be *very* interesting to see such a tool, especially when you consider that 99% of all commercial satellites 20 years ago were not using DBS and the satellites that existed at the time broadcast to a wide swath (pretty much one whole side of the planet) and were broadcasting with significantly weaker power (compared to today’s DBS sats). If these alleged devices could "find" satellites as quickly and easily as you claim, then they probably were some form of an energy band detector (detected sources of transmissions). In the meantime, for anyone with Java installed who wants to find satellites, just run this JAR and punch in your zip code, or lat/long if you're outside the US. Afterwards, knowing where satellites are relative to your geographical location, you will have a much easier time locating them with your telescope to look at them!


Let's settle the satellite issue once and for all.


Yes lets do that. But, first you have to promise to leave Fantasy Island and come discuss this rationally with the rest of the adults here.



I doubt there is anyone that is a member on this site that has more knowledge conrcerning the early days of satellite and what is necessary to send signals from one location to another than I do. I could ask some simple questions like, What was the first IRD, who made it, when was it released and what equipment was used prior to it's introduction.


What, you mean Drake, Scientific Atlanta or Chapparel? They all came out around the same time; within a few months Sony even had an IRD on the market. Depending on where you lived at the time, and what distributors you knew, you either had Scientific Atlanta or Drake (ESR24). If maybe you knew of Beamscope or North American in the 80s you might also have had Chapparel or Sony IRDs in your supply channel.

What any of this has anything to do with how radio waves are not endless is beyond me...

The world's first commercial, domestic communications satellite was Canada's (Telesat) Anik-A1 which was launched in 1972 and provided live nation-wide TV (via the CBC) in 1973. Anik A2 was also launched in 1973 and provided better coverage to the western part of Canada. In 1978 Telesat's Anik B satellite, a three-axis stabilized satellite, is launched by Delta rocket. It is the world's first domestic communications dual-band satellite, operating in both C- and Ku-bands. It was because of Anik-B the viability of consumer based satellite dishes/receivers came to be. Previous to this satellites such as Intelsat I proved the importance and use of satellite communications. In 1982, the Astra I satellite was launched, which generated new interest in satellites from the general public in Europe. With its coming it became possible for people in Europe to receive TV and radio transmissions with a small (8-12 foot) dish antenna. Home satellite receivers/dishes were truly becoming a worldwide phenomena.

The first commercial DBS service, Sky Television, was launched in 1989 and served customers in the United Kingdom. Hughes's DirecTV, the first high-powered DBS system, went online in 1994 and was the first North American DBS service. In 1996, Echostar's DISH Network went online in the United States and has gone on to similar success as DirecTV's primary competitor. Commercial DBS services are the primary competition to cable television service. An example of the most popular is Dish Network available from Satellite TV. In Canada, the two DBS services available are Bell Canada's ExpressVu and StarChoice.

DBS is the reason dishes today are 18-24 inches. There are more satellites, broadcasting to smaller areas, so a small dish can cover the position in the sky where a stationary satellite (or satellites) is always positioned.

To date you have displayed NO valuable knowledge of the topic what so ever. You've clearly shown a complete lack of understanding of basic scientific principals including heat transfer and what radio signals are made of. You're so afraid of the truth that you've not even made mention of the fact that you were 100% wrong in how an astronauts suit can transfer heat into space... it's embarrassing.


What was first ? A LND, LNC, LNA, LNB, LNDC and what is the difference between each of them ?


What sort of irrelevant question is that? Are you simply spouting off nonsense to cover up for the fact that you have *no clue* how radio signals work?

LNC is the same as an LNB - but surely you knew that... Surely you also know the difference between two LNB ends and one LND end? No? Or are you just trying to pretend that you're knowledgeable when most people won't have a clue what these letters mean. . . Your demand to differentiate a Low Noise Converter from a Low Noise Block converter is just stupid, they're the same thing (you'd know that if you knew anything).

Please add something of value to this thread at any point Prophet...


Who were the first manufacturers of TVRO Antenna's and what were the associated electronics and who manufactured them and what was the size of the antenna necessary to recieve HBO, what was the name of the satellite it was on, how many transponders, what band was used, what was the Noise Temp, what are sparkles and would you have any ?

Some things you failed to mention concerning satellite signal transmission.
The most critical part of sending the signal is the "GAIN" of the dish, the "NOISE TEMP" of the LNA, LNB, and type of band(C, KU, KA,) each has it's advantages and disadvantages.

I have worked on antennas as large as 60 ft. They were used to recieve a signal from Russia, the uplink and downlink antennas were both 60 ft.
There is no uplink facility on the moon, an uplink is composed of more than just an antenna. Large antennas require a lot of power to transmit signals and therefore you would need a generator of some sort to provide you with at least 200 amps. No such device is on the moon


Utterly ridiculous. Of course there is no massive antenna on the Moon, there didn't NEED to be one. NASA broadcast from Earth to the Moon with a strong transmitter, so the astronauts didn't need a massive dish to receive the signal. Conversely, astronauts transmitted with a moderately powered transmitter so NASA on Earth used a much larger dish to receive the signal to get as much quality as possible (they knew they were going to be relaying the signal to TV and radio stations around the world).

How do you think the probes sent to Mercury, Venus, Mars, the Asteroids, Jupiter (and it's moons), Saturn (and it's moons & rings), Uranus, Neptune, comets, and beyond can send signals back to Earth?? Those relatively small probes do not have massive dishes or massive transmitters. Oh wait, you think all of that is also a massive hoax. Even the USSR must have been part of the conspiracy... and today 30+ nations, and millions of scientists and engineers and amateur hobbyists continue to participate in this giant conspiracy of yours.



If it is necessary for NASA to have a 200 ft. Antenna to recieve a faint signal that alone proves that signals are not endless. If they were endless a 18 inch dish would work.


You clearly have no idea how radio signals work, or for that matter how electromagnetic energy works. Energy waves decrease in power over distance. Attenuation: Received power is proportional to the inverse square of distance (d km) between the transmitter and receiver (this means for there to be no signal the distance needs to be larger than infinity -- which is impossible, and that's why we can look at galaxies that are 500 billion light years away with ...gasp, radio telescopes).

To dummy it down: if you take a number X (lets say 100) and divide it by 1.1 for every 100,000 km of distance (pretending that a signal loses 10% of it's power for every 100,000km traveled), would X ever equal zero? No. What would X equal after 1,000,000km? What would X equal over 1,000,000,000km? What would X equal over (1*10^20)km ? It's never zero!

You seem to be very confused with how energy waves are blocked or absorbed by solid objects (a planet, a mountain, a building, an atmosphere, etc), and how they decrease in power over distances traveled through space (but are endless).


Let's see what the experts can tell me about satellite technology since you say I don't know.

Please address the above questions if, you can. You won't find most of this information on the web because there was no web in the early days.
Only those that were in the business would know the answers.


The glaring issue I have with you, Lastday Prophet, is you ANSWER NO QUESTIONS -- you respond to questions with questions, and you refuse to acknowledge any facts/replies to your endless questions.

I think replying to you is a waste of time, the only reason I do so is in the hopes that if somebody else without knowledge in this area reads your bull# they can at least be supplied with the facts to educate themselves before running around like a headless chicken repeating the nonsense you spout.


[edit on 13-8-2005 by CatHerder]



posted on Aug, 14 2005 @ 12:34 AM
link   
I have never seen an online a**kicking until now.



posted on Aug, 14 2005 @ 01:42 AM
link   
I tend to rarely cast a WATS vote, but your response was WAY ABOVE deserving, Cat_Herder! Superb exaample of Denying Ignorance (or perhaps in this case, pure foolishness?).

And thanx for the Satellite locator link; I don't own a telescope (yet!) as I live in a city and it would be of little value, but if my PC is Java-enabled (I'll have to check that) it'll be cool to at least know what might be passing overhead.

Thanks again and keep fighting the fools!



posted on Aug, 14 2005 @ 04:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by Lastday Prophet
Where are all the naysayers, I see that no one has responded to my questions !


I imagine trying to convince you there is a universe outside of 300 miles from the earth is akin to trying to nail diarrhea to a wall.

Lastdayprophet I wish you luck in your insane view of life. Plumbo, best of luck with your theory too. I don't know what to say to you both, other than you are wrong. Aside from that, I have to at least give you credit for sticking to your guns. I guess you guys don't have any grasp of science at all. In a few days/months/years I look forward in anticipation of your revelation of even Newton. Best of luck, because I see this whole thread going nowhere.

And also I find it amazing that this super satellite finding cigar sized object suddenly dropped out of circuation. I can believe in a great many things but HAWHAWHAW!



posted on Aug, 15 2005 @ 09:24 AM
link   
I keep coming back to see LDP's answer to Catherder, but I think his brain exploded after reading that smack-down....

plumbo, I must apologize, I thougt you meant there was a glass sphere surrounding the earth, then I thought you meant we were living in a hollow earth. I'm so silly. Now I see you mean the entire universe is within this glass sphere ? Do I finally have it right ?

Which begs the question, what is beyond the glass ?



posted on Aug, 15 2005 @ 09:38 AM
link   
May I? Just a sanity check to make sure I understand...

We live on the inside of a spherical earth. A glass sphere beginning about 300 miles up is enclosed within the Earth's sphere. EVERYTHING that we think of as "in space" exists within that glass sphere, including God Almighty. If you drill down through the Earth, you'd eventually pop out into the vast nothingness void where nothing exists. We're ALL (the cosmos, the universe, all celestial objects, and heaven itself), inside the sphere of a hollow Earth. Right?



posted on Aug, 15 2005 @ 11:15 AM
link   

CATposted on 13-8-2005 at 03:25 PM Post Number: 1609513 (post id: 1631406)

quote: Originally posted by Lastday Prophet
I gave you this link which I believe to be more accurate than the information you guys have provided.

www.hourofthetime.com...

And that webpage, filled with stupidity and fantasy, is relevant to satellites how?? The illuminati is a FICTICIOUS organization; the current pop culture version of the illuminati revolves around a Novel called "The Illuminati" which is a work of fiction -- the author's first. Yet so many people refer to it as if it were a work of non-fiction, or a manual on the illuminati...

Wrong, much of the information Cooper spoke of can be verified.
Neither did he say it was a novel, why do you twist the facts ? this is what he said:

(Quote William Cooper)
Veritas News Service - The following is fact. It is not a theory it is a genuine conspiracy. I witnessed the Top Secret/Majic documents from which this information is excerpted while a member of the United States Navy attached to the Intelligence Briefing Team of Admiral Bernard Clarey, Commander in Chief of the United States Pacific Fleet.

I certify that the following information is true and correct to the best of my memory and the research that I have accomplished. I will swear to it in any court of Law.

I can produce the names of approximately 38 U.S. Navy officers and enlisted men who witnessed these documents while in the service of their country. I can produce the names of approximately 8 people involved in the UFO deception who have witnessed these documents. I can produce the names of approximately 80 others whom I suspect have witnessed these same documents. I will not reveal the names except in a court of Law that is willing to prosecute the People and organizations involved in the conspiracy to overthrow the government of the United States of America to bring about a socialist totalitarian world government.


He clearly foretold of the coming 911, and the use of anthrax. He also stated that the ELITE would do whatever was necessary to convince the people that the threat would be Muslim extremist, again he was correct.

He also stated this, which we currently se happening:

The Constitution for the united States of America and its Bill of Rights will be scrapped. A parliamentary form of government will take its place. All military forces and individuals are to be disarmed except for an internal police force which will carry only the minimum weapons needed to maintain internal order.


Concerning NASA:
To make interstellar travel believable NASA was created. The Apollo Space Program foisted the idea that man could travel to, and walk upon, the moon. Every Apollo mission was carefully rehearsed and then filmed in large sound stages at the Atomic Energy Commissions Top Secret test site in the Nevada Desert and in a secured and guarded sound stage at the Walt Disney Studios within which was a huge scale mock-up of the moon.

All names, missions, landing sites, and events in the Apollo Space Program echo the occult metaphors, rituals, and symbology of the Illuminati's secret religion. The most transparent was the faked explosion on the spacecraft Apollo 13, named "Aquarius" (new age) at 1:13 (1313 military time) on April 13, 1970 which was the metaphor for the initiation ceremony involving the death (explosion), placement in the coffin (period of uncertainty of their survival), communion with the spiritual world and the imparting of esoteric knowledge to the candidate (orbit and observation of the moon without physical contact), rebirth of the initiate (solution of problem and repairs), and the raising up (of the Phoenix, the new age of Aquarius) by the grip of the lions paw (reentry and recovery of Apollo 13). 13 is the number of death and rebirth, death and reincarnation, sacrifice, the Phoenix, the Christ (perfected soul imprisoned in matter), and the transition from the old to the new. Another revelation to those who understand the symbolic language of the Illuminati is the hidden meaning of the names of the Space Shuttles, "A Colombian Enterprise to Endeavor for the Discovery of Atlantis... and all Challengers shall be destroyed."

Exploration of the moon stopped because it was impossible to continue the hoax without being discovered. And of course they ran out of pre-filmed episodes.




It must be difficult going through life basing your beliefs on science fiction novels, works of fiction, comic books, and card or board games...
It is you, that lives in a Realm of fantasy.
Frankly, I'm surprised that you do not think the Forgotten Realms is also a factual piece of our history.

quote:
The widget was called a "SATELLITE LOCATOR" To my knowledge they were only produced in the early 80's. I am trying to contact some of my old freinds that were around in the early days of satellite, one of them may still have one. It was over 20 years ago and I do not remember the exact name and manufacturer.

It would be *very* interesting to see such a tool, especially when you consider that 99% of all commercial satellites 20 years ago were not using DBS and the satellites that existed at the time broadcast to a wide swath (pretty much one whole side of the planet) and were broadcasting with significantly weaker power (compared to today’s DBS sats).

What does the band of a satellite have to do with being able to see it through a tool the size of a cigar ? Again you are wrong and have very limited knowledge concerning the transmission of satellite signals, Satellite signals have always been broadcast using a pattern called a "FOOTPRINT"

If these alleged devices could "find" satellites as quickly and easily as you claim, then they probably were some form of an energy band detector (detected sources of transmissions). In the meantime, for anyone with Java installed who wants to find satellites, just run this JAR and punch in your zip code, or lat/long if you're outside the US. Afterwards, knowing where satellites are relative to your geographical location, you will have a much easier time locating them with your telescope to look at them!
Wrong again in your assumptions, what does energy bands have to do with "LOOKING" through a sighting tool and seeing the actual satellite

quote: Let's settle the satellite issue once and for all.

Yes lets do that. But, first you have to promise to leave Fantasy Island and come discuss this rationally with the rest of the adults here.

quote:
I doubt there is anyone that is a member on this site that has more knowledge conrcerning the early days of satellite and what is necessary to send signals from one location to another than I do. I could ask some simple questions like, What was the first IRD, who made it, when was it released and what equipment was used prior to it's introduction.

What, you mean Drake, Scientific Atlanta or Chapparel? They all came out around the same time; within a few months Sony even had an IRD on the market. Depending on where you lived at the time, and what distributors you knew, you either had Scientific Atlanta or Drake (ESR24). If maybe you knew of Beamscope or North American in the 80s you might also have had Chapparel or Sony IRDs in your supply channel.
Wrong again, the first IRD was a GI IQ160 (general instruments) there were no others brands available at that time, and Sony was not involved in the early days of TVRO. Sony did not come into the picture until the advent of DBS, Direct and Dish, which was in the 90's.
Scientific Atlanta was used exclusively at Uplink and Downlink Facilities.


What any of this has anything to do with how radio waves are not endless is beyond me...

The world's first commercial, domestic communications satellite was Canada's (Telesat) Anik-A1 which was launched in 1972 and provided live nation-wide TV (via the CBC) in 1973. Anik A2 was also launched in 1973 and provided better coverage to the western part of Canada. In 1978 Telesat's Anik B satellite, a three-axis stabilized satellite, is launched by Delta rocket. It is the world's first domestic communications dual-band satellite, operating in both C- and Ku-bands. It was because of Anik-B the viability of consumer based satellite dishes/receivers came to be. Previous to this satellites such as Intelsat I proved the importance and use of satellite communications. In 1982, the Astra I satellite was launched, which generated new interest in satellites from the general public in Europe. With its coming it became possible for people in Europe to receive TV and radio transmissions with a small (8-12 foot) dish antenna. Home satellite receivers/dishes were truly becoming a worldwide phenomena.

Again you are wrong. Firstly I asked you about our domestic satellites and which one HBO was on. It was on GALAXY 1 (G1 ) and you needed a 12 ft. dish with an 120 degree LNA, a Chapperal polarotor 1A to recieve a clean signal. You would not be able to see any picture with an 8 ft. Dish

The first commercial DBS service, Sky Television, was launched in 1989 and served customers in the United Kingdom. Hughes's DirecTV, the first high-powered DBS system, went online in 1994 and was the first North American DBS service. In 1996, Echostar's DISH Network went online in the United States and has gone on to similar success as DirecTV's primary competitor. Commercial DBS services are the primary competition to cable television service. An example of the most popular is Dish Network available from Satellite TV. In Canada, the two DBS services available are Bell Canada's ExpressVu and StarChoice.

DBS is the reason dishes today are 18-24 inches. There are more satellites, broadcasting to smaller areas, so a small dish can cover the position in the sky where a stationary satellite (or satellites) is always positioned.
Wrong again, there are two reasons why we are now able to recieve signals on a 18 inch dish. The first is because they used KU-Band, which is a finer signal, but because of the nature of that signal it cannot peirce heavy clouds or rain. This is why you can lose a KU-Band signal in the rain, but have no problem with a C-Band signal, C-Band is a coarser signal.

Second, current KU-Band satellites transmit at a much higher wattage.
Current KU satellites transmit about 80- 100 watts, compared to early C-Band satellites that transmitted at 10-20 watts and that is why you can use a smaller dish, it has nothing whatsoever to do with the number of satellites in orbit. Do your homework !


To date you have displayed NO valuable knowledge of the topic what so ever. You've clearly shown a complete lack of understanding of basic scientific principals including heat transfer and what radio signals are made of. You're so afraid of the truth that you've not even made mention of the fact that you were 100% wrong in how an astronauts suit can transfer heat into space... it's embarrassing.

quote: What was first ? A LND, LNC, LNA, LNB, LNDC and what is the difference between each of them ?

What sort of irrelevant question is that? Are you simply spouting off nonsense to cover up for the fact that you have *no clue* how radio signals work?

LNC is the same as an LNB - but surely you knew that... Surely you also know the difference between two LNB ends and one LND end? No? Or are you just trying to pretend that you're knowledgeable when most people won't have a clue what these letters mean. . . Your demand to differentiate a Low Noise Converter from a Low Noise Block converter is just stupid, they're the same thing (you'd know that if you knew anything).

Please add something of value to this thread at any point Prophet...
The LNA (Low Noise Amplifier) was first used, and it had a seperate downconverter. Then came the LNDC, (Low Noise Downconverter) which was one peice. Then the LNC , which allowed a seperate lefthand and righthand polarization, and then the current LNB, which allows the use of several recievers.

quote: Who were the first manufacturers of TVRO Antenna's and what were the associated electronics and who manufactured them and what was the size of the antenna necessary to recieve HBO, what was the name of the satellite it was on, how many transponders, what band was used, what was the Noise Temp, what are sparkles and would you have any ?

Some things you failed to mention concerning satellite signal transmission.
The most critical part of sending the signal is the "GAIN" of the dish, the "NOISE TEMP" of the LNA, LNB, and type of band(C, KU, KA,) each has it's advantages and disadvantages.

I have worked on antennas as large as 60 ft. They were used to recieve a signal from Russia, the uplink and downlink antennas were both 60 ft.
There is no uplink facility on the moon, an uplink is composed of more than just an antenna. Large antennas require a lot of power to transmit signals and therefore you would need a generator of some sort to provide you with at least 200 amps. No such device is on the moon

Utterly ridiculous. Of course there is no massive antenna on the Moon, there didn't NEED to be one. NASA broadcast from Earth to the Moon with a strong transmitter, so the astronauts didn't need a massive dish to receive the signal. Conversely, astronauts transmitted with a moderately powered transmitter so NASA on Earth used a much larger dish to receive the signal to get as much quality as possible (they knew they were going to be relaying the signal to TV and radio stations around the world).
Wrong again, The rule is simple, if you send a signal via a dish, you need a "DISH" to recieve the signal you sent. Satellites use what is called "Microwaves" to send signal, do your homework.

How do you think the probes sent to Mercury, Venus, Mars, the Asteroids, Jupiter (and it's moons), Saturn (and it's moons & rings), Uranus, Neptune, comets, and beyond can send signals back to Earth?? Those relatively small probes do not have massive dishes or massive transmitters. Oh wait, you think all of that is also a massive hoax. Even the USSR must have been part of the conspiracy... and today 30+ nations, and millions of scientists and engineers and amateur hobbyists continue to participate in this giant conspiracy of yours.
They did'nt and can't send signals to Mercury Mars ect. I will offer proof at the end of this post.
quote: If it is necessary for NASA to have a 200 ft. Antenna to recieve a faint signal that alone proves that signals are not endless. If they were endless a 18 inch dish would work.

You clearly have no idea how radio signals work, or for that matter how electromagnetic energy works. Energy waves decrease in power over distance. Attenuation: Received power is proportional to the inverse square of distance (d km) between the transmitter and receiver (this means for there to be no signal the distance needs to be larger than infinity -- which is impossible, and that's why we can look at galaxies that are 500 billion light years away with ...gasp, radio telescopes).

To dummy it down: if you take a number X (lets say 100) and divide it by 1.1 for every 100,000 km of distance (pretending that a signal loses 10% of it's power for every 100,000km traveled), would X ever equal zero? No. What would X equal after 1,000,000km? What would X equal over 1,000,000,000km? What would X equal over (1*10^20)km ? It's never zero!

You seem to be very confused with how energy waves are blocked or absorbed by solid objects (a planet, a mountain, a building, an atmosphere, etc), and how they decrease in power over distances traveled through space (but are endless).

quote: Let's see what the experts can tell me about satellite technology since you say I don't know.

Please address the above questions if, you can. You won't find most of this information on the web because there was no web in the early days.
Only those that were in the business would know the answers.

The glaring issue I have with you, Lastday Prophet, is you ANSWER NO QUESTIONS -- you respond to questions with questions, and you refuse to acknowledge any facts/replies to your endless questions.

I think replying to you is a waste of time, the only reason I do so is in the hopes that if somebody else without knowledge in this area reads your they can at least be supplied with the facts to educate themselves before running around like a headless chicken repeating the nonsense you spout.


Here is the proof that they could not send signal to the moon or anywhere else via satellite.

The Satellites sit in a Geostationary Orbit, in other words they follow the earth as it turns.

If you send anything into space that needs to be controlled from the earth, HOW DO YOU CONTROL IT WHEN THE EARTH IS FACING THE OPPOSITE DIRECTION ?

The Satellites do not always face the moon if they follow the earth, and the only way you could possibly get a signal from the moon would be when the reciever on the earth is facing the transmitter on the moon. This alignment would only last for a moment, for the earth is always moving and likewise the moon and you cannot possibly keep them aligned. Tell me how NASA solves this problem.


WHAT A JOKE !



[edit on 15-8-2005 by Lastday Prophet]



posted on Aug, 15 2005 @ 11:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by Zanzibar
It doesnt make much sense, but does all add up. The satellites have no problem because they dont have to come back down, they are either self maintained or by astronauts.

Your jumping to conclusions as well, we have had one major disaster, that was Columbia, if Discovery is found to have any crippling problems, the Russians are always there to help if it gets ugly.



one major disaster...what about Challenger

[edit on 15-8-2005 by SeanP]



posted on Aug, 15 2005 @ 12:05 PM
link   
bummer. now I have to clean the coffee off of my monitor, after spitting it out from laughter....

""A Colombian Enterprise to Endeavor for the Discovery of Atlantis... and all Challengers shall be destroyed."





this is a fun game, maybe we can do it with baseball teams next ?



new topics

top topics



 
1
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join