Discovery Launches at 11:38 EDT. Expects to Reach and Dock With ISS in 44 Hours!

page: 4
11
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join

posted on Oct, 24 2007 @ 07:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by johnlear

free time (its not a sweat shop you know).


*WARNING - IRONY*

OH MY GOD, John Lear, if you're not going to take this debate seriously I think you should be banned from posting ever and unless you're going to post documentary evidence proving everything you've ever said is irrefutably correct then you should be banned even from turning on your computer. I'm completely unable to think for myself or come to my own conclusions without living proof that all your ideas are correct, how dare you come on to a website like this and make suggestions and hypothesise about things, do you think ATS is designed to encourage thought and debate or something? It's your responsibility to share with us everything you've ever learned or known about everything, and if you don't you're a traitor to your country and more to the point I can't sleep at night.

*IRONY ENDS*

Hmmm. 44 hours worth of faffing around, basically. I would be less inclined to believe that's possible were it not for the fact that I know exactly how many hours a day I waste faffing around. Mostly on this website, in fact. Plus I have the advantage of not having to do it in zero gravity. Also if I make even the tiniest mistake in my calculations, it actually makes very little difference to the world at all. In fact, it's been said of what I do that it disproves chaos theory - literally nothing I do creates hurricanes in Florida, however hard I flap my tiny, tiny wings.

My point being, we can't treat a space-based schedule as we would our own dayjobs - more or less every action has to be rehearsed and performed carefully and accurately.

As for the mystery message, would it not be reasonable to suppose that they were e-mailed data that informed them exactly how to perform their next action? Perhaps they've had problems with their spam filters....or perhaps the message was Domino's pizza telling them they could have the supreme topping with extra peppers after all. No wonder they were relieved.

But, let's assume for the moment that JL is correct (there's a thought) - and they stop off twice rather than once, only at different venues. Rather than being a long time to make one stop, isn't 44 hours, given all we've discussed above, strike you as a very short time in which to perform two stops? What would they do if something went wrong - if they missed the orbital bus, so as to speak, and were late? How could they possibly explain it? Isn't that too risky?

If they're allowing ridiculous amounts of time anyway, wouldn't they go the whole hog and give themselves 72 hours or even longer?

Just a thought. Thanks for the post, Mr Lear, right you may be, wrong you may be, entertaining - always.

LW

EDIT: inserted irony warnings, just in case.

EDIT: turns out I can't spell, either.

[edit on 24-10-2007 by LoneWeasel]

[edit on 24-10-2007 by LoneWeasel]




posted on Oct, 24 2007 @ 07:21 AM
link   
reply to post by zorgon
 


Zorgon, you should really learn and do some REAL research concerning your thermal concerns. Your assumptions based on your ignorance is making you look bad, but not to worry, your only looking foolish to those that properly understand the subject matter...and around here that may be precious few. Please, please go out and about to find out more about which you do not know before trying to make a point about thermodynamic radiation.

To properly explain the complexities would require a whole difference thread, and it would not be done properly on this BB due to the large amount of people that would interject their "opinion" and derail the engineering talk. I could point you to a few places that could help your ignorance concerning this matter if you would like....



posted on Oct, 24 2007 @ 07:55 AM
link   
for what ever reason..there can't be any delay they are racing
to get things done by 2010.



posted on Oct, 24 2007 @ 09:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by zorgon

Originally posted by they see ALL
Sure it might be hard to see a hologram that is in space, but still
.




And while we are talking groceries... does anyone else see a problem with the garbage disposal? I mean stuff your trash into a very expensive Progress Module and just drop it into the Pacific?

When you have an empty Shuttle that could take it back and you coudl reuse the Progress for modules or part?

Seems a waste to me... Imagine all the Little Mirs's you could make with those old Progesses... No logic here... I just don't see the Russians being that wasteful






[edit on 23-10-2007 by zorgon]



You do realize that the shuttle is a glider when it enters earths atmosphere? You aren't gonna glide much if you are overweight are ya?



posted on Oct, 24 2007 @ 09:55 AM
link   
Listening to Fox just now they were talking about three cracks that can't be seen with the naked eye and the Scientist were arguing that the shuttle should not go up. It seems that when the vote was counted the upper elitist got there way and off it went.

Now Fox is reporting about the cracks, IMO....it wouldn't surprise me if NASA is going to use this to cover there timing and butts.

It seems just after that segment they were showing the lift off of China's Lunar thingy and talking about Japen's that went up last week.

For myself I think the timing of all this is ??????ionable.

John and/or Zorgon do either of you think that maybe just maybe NASA might be up to something dealing with what is happening in the Moon sector at this time?



posted on Oct, 24 2007 @ 11:20 AM
link   
Why is it that some of you are so shocked that the shuttle would hook up with a Secret Space Station? Do you really believe we're only taking cargo in space which we hear about? It's not like our government hasn't had secrets before.
John you said something similar to this: If the Shuttle couldn't undock from the Secret Space Station, then we might find out. I was thinking if the young lady reading Shuttles itinerary off her computer had accidently read the black-ops one instead. Reading something like this: "Space Shuttle Discovery has now completed the rendezvous with SSS and will check for repairs before proceeding."



posted on Oct, 24 2007 @ 11:33 AM
link   
how many of you people here work for nasa? or on the shuttle projects? how many of you are astronomers, astrophysicists, shuttle engineers, or anything even remotely similar?

so how in the world would you know exactly why the shuttle takes as long as it takes to dock with the ISS?

do you even know what a complicated maneuver it is to dock two objects traveling thousands of kilometers per hour?

so think about that a little. maybe read something, something thats not written on some website with a retarded name (i wasnt referring to this one, by the way
)).

actually, theres an easy way to prove this, and to see how complicated this procedure is. theres a game which you can download for free, its called orbiter, and within the game you can, among other things, fly the shuttle. and it a simulation, so everything is as it is in real life, from takeoff to the docking.

so go ahead, if you ever manage to do it, 44 hours will look really, really, fast.

and stop listening to crazy people for a while...



posted on Oct, 24 2007 @ 11:35 AM
link   
This may have been answered before, but I have a question. If there is a secret space program that is responsible for the SSS, moonbase, Mars missions, etc... why do they need the shuttle? Obviously they got everything up there just fine without the shuttle before, why do we need it now? If this secret space program is on the scale you claim it is, that little bit of extra supplies the shuttle brings is not going to be nearly enough to support the entire secret space program now is it? They would have to have another way to supply it. So why use the shuttle at all? You can't claim we have this entire huge secret space program/ secret astronauts/bases on the moon/bases on mars... and it is all supplied by a few rocket launches and a partially full shuttle. It doesn't work both ways. It's either a very small program with no moon/mars bases, or it's not the shuttle that supplies it. You said before they carry too much food for just the ISS. Well, they do not carry near enough food to supply the entire secret space program on the scale you claim it is. So either the secret space program a lot smaller then you claim it is, or they are not using the shuttle to supply it. Which one is it? Can't have it both ways.

Edit: If your going to claim they grow fruits/veggies on the moon... well you also claim they run ships between the SSS and the moon. Why are we taking the risk of launching the shuttle with extra fruits/veggies to the SSS if the moon can supply it then? You've told so many stories, that they are conflicting now. Huge secret space program, secret bases in orbit, on the moon and on Mars...but the only way to supply all of it is a half full shuttle, and a few rockets? You guys are looking foolish. Your attempt to prove this conspiracy is undermining your conspiracy on the size of the secret space program. Just stick with one story or the other.

[edit on 24-10-2007 by b309302]



posted on Oct, 24 2007 @ 11:37 AM
link   
reply to post by MountainStar
 



Why is it that some of you are so shocked that the shuttle would hook up with a Secret Space Station?


It's not shock (except for some of the claims which are not well thought out at all.) It's basic common sense, reason and logic that compels most of us to question the fact that the USA has a complete, separate space station up there. Some of us actually are part of the big "evil" military-industrial complex and understand how projects and programs like this would work...you know...the HUGE multidisciplinary, inter-agency, well over 500 private vendors and contractors.....get it? The logistics of implementing a project of this nature, that leads to a complete, functional secret program is huge. We're not talking about an experimental aircraft here. It's not like when the are building the ISS they just order two of everything and throw it up there.

That's the logical way of approaching this. To sit there and assume it is up there, means you should understand the logistics of project and program implementation. If you do not, then it is easy to come on some internet BB and make some pretty ignorant claims.

And I'll say this again, sure, it is technically feasible to have a completely secret large space station in orbit...but just because it is technically feasible does not mean that thousands of people have worked on the project, and thousands of people have implemented the program....and no one knows. Secret is one thing, but it takes a flying leap of absurdity to jump to John's conclusion on this one.

And John should know better, having come from the aviation industry. He knows how this stuff works. I bet, unless he is deluded, deep down he knows darn well this is bunk. Fun to imagine, and fun for him to be the "conspiracy master" but that is all. The thing that scares most of us normal people is how many people take him seriously, without using their own heads to ferret out why there is more evidence, tons more evidence, why his outlandish ideas are not true.

Remember, it's called DENY IGNORANCE...not encourage ignorance or even spread ignorance. To over look that simple, simple saying is inexcusable.



posted on Oct, 24 2007 @ 11:47 AM
link   
I have no proof, but I have always assumed that the Airforce has had secret albeit smaller fleet of Space Shuttles or their next generation of space craft for many of their own needs/concerns. It's a perfect fit for the Airforce, can't "Aim higher" than space and don't tell me they wouldn't want/need it. The military would want to keep some capability to themselves for contingencies and for sure the budgetary money is there to fund it. John, your thoughts on this?


It wouldn't make sense to me for the NASA Shuttles to go resupply any secret military space station, they would use their own "in house" fleet of spacecraft. Just my opinion.

BTW John you need to add the Shuttle to your list of flying accomplishments, your missing that ........aren't you......?



posted on Oct, 24 2007 @ 12:05 PM
link   
IgnoretheFacts.....Stop bringing common sense into the argument!

I am stunned at the conspiracy info some people have conjured around this topic. It almost the perfect case study for how concpiracy theories work. If people trully dont understand something, they begin to create scenarios that they do understand that fit into what they know.

And there are alot of people who do not understand orbital physics or jus basic science.

Things in space take time. You are moving at 17,000 mph.....you need to plan ahead. Its not a race to get everything done as fast as you can. And you do it all before you dock.....because guess what.....if the huttle is broken you are staying on the ISS for a while. Why risk undocking and not being able to get back because of a broken latch......or a glitch....or whatever. Its risk management 101.

Both are easily visible from earth of you know when and where to look. But you are going to get a maximum of about 8 minutes (sometimes just 1 minute) so ...wait for it.......plan ahead. This one was taken last night.




Amatuer telescope with the sun as a backdrop. And yes you can use telescopes to stare at the sun.....just get a solar filter and you are fine. Its not a government based gizmo to stare into your mind.





Here is another taken using a webcam and an amateur telescope.





[edit on 24-10-2007 by Rapacious]

[edit on 24-10-2007 by Rapacious]



posted on Oct, 24 2007 @ 12:15 PM
link   
Forget facts... just use what John and Zorgon say. They have conflicting conspiracies now
They are trying to prove we have a HUGE secret space program with space stations, moon bases, mars bases, etc... yet at the same time they are trying to prove that a half full shuttle and a few rockets is all that supplies this HUGE secret space program
If there was another way to do it, why risk using the shuttle then?!?!? Their own theories are countering each other. How big the secret program is getting, yet it is all supplied from half a shuttle and a few rockets. Pick one or the other. This is too funny.



[edit on 24-10-2007 by b309302]



posted on Oct, 24 2007 @ 12:20 PM
link   
Originally posted by pavil



The military would want to keep some capability to themselves for contingencies and for sure the budgetary money is there to fund it. John, your thoughts on this?


Thanks for your post pavil. I estimate that on a scale of zero to one thousand, zero being that we don't know anything the government has in technology and 1000 being we know everything they have, that most of us who keep informed on secret space stations, the mining on the moon, the base on Mars know about .5 to .7. The rest know nothing.


It wouldn't make sense to me for the NASA Shuttles to go resupply any secret military space station, they would use their own "in house" fleet of spacecraft. Just my opinion.


My opinion is that the U.S. Space Command has an airplane that can use a regular runway and go to and land on the moon.


BTW John you need to add the Shuttle to your list of flying accomplishments, your missing that ........aren't you......?


Yes, pavil, I am missing that but sleeper says I have flown much better.



posted on Oct, 24 2007 @ 12:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by johnlear
My opinion is that the U.S. Space Command has an airplane that can use a regular runway and go to and land on the moon.


They do. I am not sure if it's operational characteristics allow it to fly to the moon (actually, I am quite sure that it can't, it is just an orbiter) But it can take on and land from pretty much any international commercial airport if necessary, provided they have the support facility and equipment there to get it flight ready again after re-entry (which can be done in under a few hours).

But that has nothing to do with the secret space station, John, and you know it.



posted on Oct, 24 2007 @ 12:29 PM
link   
John, what about my facts? Your claiming the secret space program is huge.. yet at the same time your trying to prove the only way to supply it is with half a shuttle and some rockets. You claim they carry too much food for the ISS, but not nearly enough for what you claim is the true size of the secret space program. Your disproving your own theories now. If there is another way to supply the secret space program ( and there must be given the size you claim it is), then why risk using the high profile shuttle flights to bring additional supplies? That makes no sense. One or the other John... your compromising your secret space program theory with this theory.



posted on Oct, 24 2007 @ 12:29 PM
link   
It's like I've said before.....once you realize they are simply finding articles that fit their "big picture", and actually get into the details of these people's conspiracies....they completely collapse in the face of reality and logic.

The entire thing is a false front built on suggestive rhetoric and knowing winks; taking advantage of the fantasies and imaginations of others. It is so goofy, it isn't even a good conspiracy. Take for instance zorgon's photo of the shuttle with a module filling half of its bay....his "wink, wink, nudge, nudge," comment was that "why is it only half full? Where did the other half go?".....Ya ding dong....space craft are loaded by mass...not volume.

I back IgnoreTheFacts on this....it promotes ignorance, and is a symptom of the dumbing down of Western culture. That's one reason I think some find it aggravating....We may be relying on some of these people to keep our bank accounts safe and reliable, or our health records confidential....God help us all....

Conspiracy Master indeed....by that standard....where is Dr. Suess' forum?

[edit on 24-10-2007 by MrPenny]



posted on Oct, 24 2007 @ 12:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by Rapacious
IgnoretheFacts.....Stop bringing common sense into the argument!

I am stunned at the conspiracy info some people have conjured around this topic. It almost the perfect case study for how concpiracy theories work. If people trully dont understand something, they begin to create scenarios that they do understand that fit into what they know.

And there are alot of people who do not understand orbital physics or jus basic science.

Things in space take time. You are moving at 17,000 mph.....you need to plan ahead. Its not a race to get everything done as fast as you can. And you do it all before you dock.....because guess what.....if the huttle is broken you are staying on the ISS for a while. Why risk undocking and not being able to get back because of a broken latch......or a glitch....or whatever. Its risk management 101.

Both are easily visible from earth of you know when and where to look. But you are going to get a maximum of about 8 minutes (sometimes just 1 minute) so ...wait for it.......plan ahead. This one was taken last night.




Amatuer telescope with the sun as a backdrop. And yes you can use telescopes to stare at the sun.....just get a solar filter and you are fine. Its not a government based gizmo to stare into your mind.





Here is another taken using a webcam and an amateur telescope.





[edit on 24-10-2007 by Rapacious]

[edit on 24-10-2007 by Rapacious]


OMG the photochopping and airbrushing of those photo's are sooo obvious. Nasa has managed to screw with your photos too.

Hey while you are at it, can you please zoom in on one of the photos, relly close so that we can only see 20 pixels. Than color an area with the very rough shape of some mining equipment?

Thanks



[edit on 24-10-2007 by sr71b]



posted on Oct, 24 2007 @ 12:36 PM
link   
John oh John, backed yourself into another corner here. Which one is it John? Were using the shuttle and rockets to supply the secret space program? ( In which case this program is a lot smaller then you claim it is given the limited amount of supplies delivered). Or they have another way to supply it, in which case there is no reason to risk a high profile shuttle flight to do it. Pick one... I'm waiting...

[edit on 24-10-2007 by b309302]



posted on Oct, 24 2007 @ 12:48 PM
link   
Originally posted by b309302




John, what about my facts? Your claiming the secret space program is huge.. yet at the same time your trying to prove the only way to supply it is with half a shuttle and some rockets. You claim they carry too much food for the ISS, but not nearly enough for what you claim is the true size of the secret space program. Your disproving your own theories now. If there is another way to supply the secret space program ( and there must be given the size you claim it is), then why risk using the high profile shuttle flights to bring additional supplies? That makes no sense. One or the other John... your compromising your secret space program theory with this theory.



Thanks for the post b309302. Half a shuttle and a few Russian rockets? Merely the barest tip of the tail of the secret space program. Its merely a gentle 'bump' into reality.

On a scale of zero to one thousand, zero being we know nothing about the governments secret technology, one thousand being we know everything, most of us are far less than one. Some of even think that Neil Armstrong was the first human to set foot on the moon.


The first step in grasping the reality of the secret space program is to try and imagine how little we all know. And therein lies the major obstacle to greater knowledge.



posted on Oct, 24 2007 @ 12:50 PM
link   
I think those of us with common sense can give the old man a rest now. His fancy story has been shredded pretty good here, and he knows if he tries to defend it reasonably it will only make him look more ignorant. I almost feel sorry for him. It's like when a child has been caught fibbing, but just wont admit it.

John, please drop this one. You have to face the facts that there are people here that can easily debate you reasonably and with common sense/logic to make your fanciful conspiracy here look like a piece of swiss chease. And, if you pursue it further, the obvious display of your ignorance concerning these matters will only risk you loosing some of your fan club that hang on your every word concerning some of your other "tall tales".

Why risk it John? Just bow out gracefully so you can go back to things that CAN'T be proven....like bucket excavators on the moon and people living on your anus.......I mean Uranus. Sorry.





new topics

top topics



 
11
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join