Originally posted by MrPenny
Help me and maybe some others here. What is the question you're trying to ask here? For the life of me, I'd swear the question has been answered a couple of times now.

No I will not help you understand... I made it clear enough that it was a copy of a post made at Bad Astronomy... it was a response to Ignorethefacts... it was a question directed at someone who supposedly has docked a shuttle...

Please do try to pay attention at least... the challenge was issued to go ask him directly.... I did and it takes a few days for your post to be 'screened' by the mods over there.

That is my opening question... I think I will be the judge of how I ask my question... but see how you guys are? I take the suggestion or challenge presented by one of your 'cult' and you still are not satisfied...

Zorgon,

I think you missed the entire point of my post. I was highlighting the futility and gang mentality that pervades BOTH sides of the equation. Welcome to human nature. That's why I created the alternate ATS scenario to show that exactly the same thing would happen on a mainstream board where a conspiracy theorist (I though CTer was a dirty word?) would be in the minority. The Lear and his merry men was an attempt at humour that obviously didn't hit it's mark. I guess levity has no place in matters of such importance.

When I said I don't want to believe, I should have followed by stating that to change my opinion on certain things (not ALL things) would take an overwhelming amount of proof. Even little bits of information here and that, quantifiable and of sufficient quality, would not change my mind about 9/11. Same for you I'd assume with structures on the moon. Same with someone who believes in God. There is absolutely no point in debating with some people, because frankly it won't achieve anything other than cause negativity.

And therein lies the problem with certain threads. The purpose of the thread isn't to promote discussion, it is to say "Here is X, so QED Y." It is for like-minded individuals to participate in discussion, as soon as you raise a dissenting view, the thread quickly de-rails into name calling, bickering and off-topic discussion. And just to make this crystal clear, BOTH extremes are to blame.

You appeared to take my post in a negative light, when in fact it was the sceptical side I was admonishing. Did you simply assume based on past history or expectation that I was was having a go at John and others of a similar viewpoint?

Like I said in my first post, I think John Lear's theories (musings, observations, rants, raves, etc.) are extremely entertaining. I don't really believe any of it, but I do find it very entertaining. That's not to say that I don't believe there are some things out there we (the general public) don't know about that others (the shadowy "they") are hiding. Whether we're talking about 9/11 or NASA, the Government or the Freemasons, it's fascinating to read and discuss the "what-ifs."

The problems arise when someone attaches their emotional reality and lose touch with the real world outside their imagination. The best books, movies, inventions, accomplishments, and any other noteworthy event are the products of an active imagination. The question is whether you're going to be JK Rowling or Ted Kaczynski. One enjoys writing books, the other enjoyed sending letter bombs and providing a great character for Will Farrel to play a few times.

I don't mean to preach. I just wanted to point out that it's fun to speculate and consider all of these fantastic possibilities. The fact that I don't believe most of it is in any way attached to reality doesn't detract from my fascination with it or enjoyment of it.

Originally posted by IgnoreTheFacts
What are you talking about, the BAUT forums are great. They have more brains hanging out there than most other places can dream of.

Can you prove this? I am willing to bet the number of brains lurking at ATS will rival if not surpass that 'there' place...

And if they are so great please explain to me why skeptics here thought it was important to let me know how viciously they attack me and my ideas over there when I am not even there to defend them? Sound like a right up honorable bunch to me ...




I don't suppose there is a little help from ummm certain others bring up my name there?

So you think I should change my name and post there as a pretender? Then I submit to you that you know me very little...

The Lear and his merry men was an attempt at humour that obviously didn't hit it's mark. I guess levity has no place in matters of such importance.

LOL perhaps it would have been more humorous at a different time... on the heals of my posting that the one thing that annoyed me was being branded a 'cult follower' lets say your timing was a little off...

Did you simply assume based on past history or expectation that I was was having a go at John and others of a similar viewpoint?

I admit it did sound that way yes... but I shall go back and read it again... to be sure

Originally posted by Springer
Obviously he did NOT hold his end of the deal up.

END OF STORY.

Rdube02, you have better sense than this.

Springer...

lol...thanks Springer. The sad part of this is that in this matter - I don't. I can't make sense of it at all.

At this point I now know AD very, very well - and he says he never made such a deal saying he would avoid Lear. He said the only condition was that he be civil. I've yet to know AD to tell a single lie. And he's got emails to prove it, which I guess helps.

At this point I also believe I know you fairly well - so the whole thing is just weird. You know I don't get the Lear thing - but then again, it's your forum and you should run it as you want to. If it were mine - I'd open the floodgates and let anyone dissect his arguments who wants to. I'd also allow any of his (Lear's) defenders to defend him just as hard. But you've been doing this a heck of a long time - so I'm certainly not going to question how you run things.

But boy...I'd PAY to see AD and Lear go head-to-head, no holds barred, with only the most minimum bare moderating allowed.

It would like WWF RAW...Smackdown. We could even place bets on who the debate winner would be.

Guess who I'd pick? lol....NOT the guy who doesn't know how to properly calculate weight on the moon... But that's just me...

-Ry

wow what a way to kicked out of the forums

first he debunks lear and zorgon entirely and then gets banned

im sure glad he did paste that information as the sites motto is



Deny Ignorance

Originally posted by Fett Pinkus

first he debunks lear and zorgon entirely and then gets banned

Thanks for the post FP. The former member of ATS did not debunk anyone. What was posted was an alleged schedule to be performed after undocking from the ISS. It was just plain silly. It was an insult to the intelligence of anyone who knows anything about the requirements for reentry.

Had I the time or incliniation I would take every single step in the alleged checklist and show you the padded time. I would have started with "Crew wake up" which I believe allowed almost 2 hours. That was a joke. The next was time alloted for IMU powerup. Was that a joke? Actually the joke was that it could take 54 hours to get ready for a 59 minute trip.

About the only truth was that deorbit burn (4 minutes) to landing: about 59 minutes. The other 53 hours after undocking was pure unadulterated 'filler' while the shuttle docked with various other space stations.

But thanks for your input.

Originally posted by johnlear
Had I the time or incliniation I would take every single step in the alleged checklist and show you the padded time. I would have started with "Crew wake up" which I believe allowed almost 2 hours. That was a joke. The next was time alloted for IMU powerup. Was that a joke? Actually the joke was that it could take 54 hours to get ready for a 59 minute trip.

Wait, you don't have the time to prove your own theories? Are you serious?

About the only truth was that deorbit burn (4 minutes) to landing: about 59 minutes. The other 53 hours after undocking was pure unadulterated 'filler' while the shuttle docked with various other space stations.

Before you said it was just one, now you are changing your story to "various space stations?" What gives? Now you are telling us that there is more than one secret space station up there? That the various governments were able to take such massive undertakings (in complete silence) and put them in orbit?

Please, tell us why they docked with these other "stations." I can't wait to hear this one, assuming you have the time for it.

Originally posted by COOL HAND

Wait, you don't have the time to prove your own theories? Are you serious?

Thanks for the post COOL HAND. There is only so much time in the day and I have to alot that time as I see fit. If I have a choice between taking my grandson to the bike park and enlightening you on our current space fleet I am going to take my grandson to the bike park.

Before you said it was just one, now you are changing your story to "various space stations?" What gives? Now you are telling us that there is more than one secret space station up there? That the various governments were able to take such massive undertakings (in complete silence) and put them in orbit?

If I ever said 'one' I was mistaken. There are many. The videos taken by santamonicajohn show at least 7 different space stations. There may be more.

U.S. Space station have been in orbit since the middle 1960's or before. Assuming they added one every 5 years, that would be at least 8. And when I say added I mean that new space stations were required for specific techonology to be used. They just couldn't slap on a 'guest house' to an existing space station.

Please, tell us why they docked with these other "stations." I can't wait to hear this one, assuming you have the time for it.

The main reason is to deliver fresh fruit.

Thanks for the input it is truly appreciated.

John, are these special soul catching space stations that you talk about?

Originally posted by johnlear
U.S. Space station have been in orbit since the middle 1960's or before. Assuming they added one every 5 years, that would be at least 8. And when I say added I mean that new space stations were required for specific techonology to be used. They just couldn't slap on a 'guest house' to an existing space station.

Where, then, do they launch these stations from? What kind of orbit are they on? What are the perigee and apogee? What inclination are they at? What constellations do that pass through so I can look for them myself?


[edit on 13/11/07 by COOL HAND]

Hello all...

I'm very curious about the questions 'COOL HAND' asked. As a former airline pilot I believe I have a fair understanding of how things work, but I also know there are secrets that I'm not privy to. Those 'secrets' were couched under the umbrella of 'National Security' for decades. But we live in a different world now, we are a more enlightened people (mostly) and I think we can handle the truth. The ATS forums cover many diverse topics, things that should have light shed on them. If truth is going to be uncovered, by all means do it. Tell us everything.

Originally posted by johnlear
Thanks for the post FP. The former member of ATS did not debunk anyone. What was posted was an alleged schedule to be performed after undocking from the ISS. It was just plain silly. It was an insult to the intelligence of anyone who knows anything about the requirements for reentry.

John, since it would seem you say you know a thing or two about requirements for reentry, do you think that such reentry is based on laws of physics? Specifically, does newtonian mechanics (and Kepler's laws which follow form it) apply to spaceflight?

I would have started with "Crew wake up" which I believe allowed almost 2 hours. That was a joke.

John, how many bathrooms do you think they have on the Space Shuttle? Have you ever shared an apartment (probably not, so you wouldn't know) and had to wait in line in the morning to take a leak, shave and get ready for work? There were eight (I think) people on borard STS-120, and alotting 15 minutes bathroom time to each person doesn't seem excessive.

Originally posted by buddhasystem
There were eight (I think) people on borard STS-120, and alotting 15 minutes bathroom time to each person doesn't seem excessive.

Do all of the people on board the shuttle all sleep for eight hours each at the same time? If that's the case, then I can understand that there might be a queue to use the dunny in the 'morning'.

If they are asleep at the same time, then who's in charge of the shuttle, should anything go wrong during those eight hours dreaming?

Also, if there is only one dunny that they all need to use at the same time, then are there eight beds, so they can each use one simultaneously, without needing to share a double suite?

[edit on 13-11-2007 by tezzajw]

Originally posted by johnlear
Originally posted by COOL HAND

Where, then, do they launch these stations from?

Ronald Reagan BMDTS, Woomera, Diego Garcia, Melville Island, Christmas Island, Johnston Island, Vandenberg and several others.

Well, this would mean that these alleged stations' orbits are at wildly different inclinations, and in general quite incompatible with the inclination of the ISS. Impossible.

Originally posted by johnlear
Ronald Reagan BMDTS, Woomera, Diego Garcia, Melville Island, Christmas Island, Johnston Island, Vandenberg and several others. Many are still operational, some are closed and dismantled. I believe they made a few Saturn launches off of Diego Garcia but I don't think there is any trace of that facility there now if in fact it was ever there. That was in the late 60’s or early 70’s. Johnston Island launch facility is totally dismantled. I was there about 10 years ago and the hard stand was still there but nothing else. As far as Diego Garcia I think it is all B-2’s and B-52’s now.

How did they get the equipment there?

Do you expect us to believe that a Saturn type rocket launched from those places and no one happened to witness that? Why haven't we seen complaints from the (then) Soviets about an illegal launch?

There seem to be at least 8 separate space stations. At least one passed through Orion. I don’t know about the rest.

Here, check them out for yourself.

I did, you can't seriously expect us to believe that those grainy pictures are "secret space stations" do you? If they were, why hasn't anyone else (with better equipment) ever managed to capture them and put the images on display?

It would have been more believeable if there were no pixelations around the fringes of the images.