It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


[FARCE]There Is Not Any Phoenix On Mars[FARCE]

page: 11
<< 8  9  10    12  13  14 >>

log in


posted on Jun, 7 2008 @ 12:50 PM
reply to post by Big-Brain

So according to you BB
If you show a bunch of crash scenes then it proves that it wont work?

when something is tested and you'll find accidents!
Its called trial and error.

Here is something that shows for a fact that it wont work!

Documented proof it would not fly! according to your logic.

P.S. I love that song!

[edit on 7-6-2008 by SLAYER69]

posted on Jun, 7 2008 @ 01:00 PM
the nature of this post is totally inflammatory-
there is no well planned out argument counter to what we have seen or known
NASA has tested and landed test craft with rockets to slow descent and the first Mars lander 'crashed' in the inflatable...posting videos to satisfy the OP and other doubters is not a priority.
there does not always have to be a conspiracy or a veil of lies.
there is no benefit to go to mars, onlythe advancement of scientific research and discovery for all people in this world.
we also have not gone down into the ocean, nor have we broken the speed of sound on land. the space shuttle is just a fat airplane that lands 'when a mission' is over,' t never goes into space.
the internet is fake and is just a random program of arguments internationally coded to appear it may have many nations linked to it. and we don't fly.
you board jets they knock you unconcious and they rail car you over like cattle to the destinaiton of choice. and you wake up.
the only thing real in this world is that the wachowski brothers told the truth int he Matrix movies and we all have to find a way out.

i do not want to resort to name calling or point out someone's intimate nature with Goats and how much they understand and feel, but come on
As horrible as te Human Race is we are capable of a many and wonderous things-
besde landing backwards is easy- this thing does not have to take off again.

big minus for this thread

posted on Jun, 7 2008 @ 04:24 PM

Originally posted by SLAYER69
reply to post by Big-Brain

Here is something that shows for a fact that it wont work!
Documented proof it would not fly! according to your logic.

We all know airplanes can fly.
But we all smart people know pieces of metal cannot fly.

This is a historical piece of metal:

Download "Surveyor 1 - A Preliminary Report - June 1 1966" PDF
on the bottom of the page.

Mass of Surveyor on the Moon is 3000 newtons.

Two propulsion systems were used by Surveyor I. The main retrorocket employed a solid propellant in a spherical steel case. Its thrust
was of the order of 8000 to 10000 pounds (35,500 to 44,500 newtons), depending upon temperature.
The second, or vernier, propulsion system used hypergolic liquid propellants.

Someone here said that Phoenix could not be tested on the earth since Mars gravity is 38%.

NASA's frauds already on 1966 had built a probe with engine thrust 15 times superior to the weight of Surveyor.

But we have never seen Surveyor tested on the earth and we have never seen Phoenix tested on the earth.

With acronyms NASA's frauds can do everything, without them they can do nothing.

posted on Jun, 7 2008 @ 07:23 PM
reply to post by Soylent Green Is People

I saw an asteroid hit the moon sept 29 1996,naked eye and 40x magification small scope.The impact kicked up a spray of dirt in a fanned out low angle patten and dropped within 2 seconds,and was underlit by sun so that at apex it was brightest. I can bet that suresly fine dust took a few mor seconds to subside,yet the quickness was amazing,how fast it all settled down from my vantage on Earth,seeing only the 300,000 distant plus impact instantaneously.You have to imagine even under ideal viewing conditions and my above average eyesight(just slightly) and completely adapted to moonlight visual clarity,that the size of the impact being viewable threw dirt at least a few miles for me to detect it. It rose and fell fast and settled fast....not like a lingering dust cloud that I could detect. On Earth you'd almost certainly have an aftermath dust-cloud that rose and moved with the wind.

posted on Jun, 8 2008 @ 07:56 AM
The most ludicrous rocket that would be landed on the moon is this:

It is believed to have used an intricate coordination of retro-rockets to slow down the 3,000lb (1,360 kg) spacecraft from 6,000 mph (9,600 km/h) to six mph (9.65 km/h).

The Luna 9 automatic lunar station that achieved the soft landing was a spherical body with a diameter of 58 centimeters and a mass of 99 kg.
At an altitude of 8300 km the spacecraft was oriented for retro-rocket firing and its spin was stopped. At 75 km altitude, 48 seconds before landing at a velocity of 2.6 km/s, the radar altimeter sent commands to jettison the side modules, inflate the airbags, and begin retrorocket firing. At 250 meters from the surface the main retrorocket was turned off and the four outrigger engines were used to slow the craft. At a height of about 5 meters a contact sensor touched the ground, the engines were shut down, and the landing capsule was ejected, impacting the surface at 22 km/h, bouncing several times and coming to rest in Oceanus Procellarum.

“Bouncing several times”.
In fact Lunar 9 was spherical as a ball. Ha, Ha, Ha.

NASA's frauds' article explains very well the characteristics of the probe, it explains very well how the probe did to land on the moon.

The liars of the USA spoke very well about the never happened enterprise of the liars of the USSR.

NASA's frauds realized that Russians were lying but they didn't want to unmask them since they also were lying.

The fake space race allowed USA to get the supremacy on the west and allowed the USSR to get the supremacy on the communist east.

Since either were liars, nobody unmasked the other.

[edit on 8-6-2008 by Big-Brain]

posted on Jun, 8 2008 @ 09:36 AM
has anyone mentioned that the superposed "source" of "nasa fraud" witht he polar bear on an island is, infact, a photoshop as well?

So you use photoshoped images claiming their real in order to claim that Nasa uses photoshops?

I wouldn't be surprised if this guy is:

A) A loser in a basement with nothing better to do

or the much more unlikely:

B) a US government guy trying to disrupt our beliefs in our nation for God knows what reason
C) a forign spy trying to depatriot Americans.

And now to be a snobby know it all example like this guy:

HAHAHA, look at government frauds:

do they take us as foold? It's an obvious animation because NO SUCH TECHNOLOGY could possibly exist that a robot could walk!

see how ridiculous this sounds eventually?

[edit on 8-6-2008 by Gorman91]

posted on Jun, 8 2008 @ 09:51 AM
reply to post by Big-Brain

NASA's frauds already on 1966 had built a probe with engine thrust 15 times superior to the weight of Surveyor.

you just proved my point!

posted on Jun, 8 2008 @ 10:48 AM
wait, I don't get it. What does power of an engine matter? A car can go 100 MPH, but that doesn't mean everyone drives around at that speed.

Engine power is merely efficiency.

posted on Jun, 8 2008 @ 10:51 AM
reply to post by Big-Brain

edited.....A little birdie asked, why even bother anymore? And truer words were never pondered.

This entire subject is a waste of time and server space. Those of us that fell for this in an attempt (valiantly) to provide info, and education, are likely the butts of someone's joke. It is not funny, never has been....just sad.

[edit on 6/8/0808 by weedwhacker]

posted on Jun, 9 2008 @ 12:38 PM

Scientists at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena, California began counting down the spacecraft's descent from an altitude of about 60 miles (95 km) from the Moon's surface, when Surveyor was travelling at about 6,100 mph (9,800 km/h).
The altitude marking radar started the powerful main braking rocket. This burned out in about 40 seconds, about 25 miles (40 km) above the Moon's surface. The rocket's speed had been reduced to 250 mph (400 km/h).
By the time Surveyor was 13 feet (four metres) from its target it had been slowed to about eight mph (13 km/h).

My dear friend, above all the young ones,

imagine Surveyor or Luna 9 (two pieces of metal) that run in the space at 9,800 km/h. You must slow down their velocity to 13 km/h.

How can you maintain lined up the two vectors action-reaction at that terrible velocity? The two probes will begin to spin and to go toward infinite directions.

Only a magician could do it.

But you have believed that the thing was possible. It is easiest to deceive the people.

Have you seen Twin Towers while they were collapsing? Does it seem to you possible that an airplane of 150 tons can raze to the ground a powerful building of 500,000 tons? An airplane cannot make collapse even my 5 floors building.

Very oddly almost all the people have believed and no engineer of other countries has said it was impossible.

My dear young readers,

trust me, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than those two powerful skyscrapers can collapse in that way.

Don't be credulous as the greatest part of the people, reason with your head and doubt of everything.

The latins said: “Omnis homo mendax”, all the men are liars.

[edit on 9-6-2008 by Big-Brain]

posted on Jun, 9 2008 @ 01:03 PM

Are not NASA's frauds using a colour camera to take photos on Mars?

Surely this is the finest one:

posted on Jun, 10 2008 @ 03:10 PM
My dear friends, above all the young ones,

on 2005 NASA's frauds would have hit a comet, Tempel 1.

But I have observed that Tempel 1 looked like a bad animal hit in its right eye:

A NASA's frauds' stupid artist made this mistake to make that enterprise more dramatic.

I said in another forum that it was very strange that Tempel 1 looked like a bad animal hit in its right eye.

Someone told NASA's frauds what I said. They rotated Tempel 1 image 45 degrees.

In NASA Tempel 1 home page before there was this image:

Now there is this image:

I am sure that no unmanned or manned probe landed on the moon, on mars, on Titan.

I am sure no probe hit Tempel 1 in its right eye.

Books and DVDs that talk about Russian and American space enterprises are full of lies.

[edit on 10-6-2008 by Big-Brain]

posted on Jun, 10 2008 @ 06:15 PM
I'll give nasa their due.They landed Phoenix successfully and here I see a female face greeting the lander ,curiously.If you can't see the female face,don't worry.I'll find more.
last one is raw nasa image.The images are darkened and masked sometimes. I saw faces of humanoids on Mars first in Spring 2004 from both rovers. They look like us,

posted on Jun, 11 2008 @ 03:34 PM
Who keeps silent, consents.

Have you remained without words?

Truth often hurts.

posted on Jun, 11 2008 @ 04:47 PM
reply to post by Big-Brain

No....we ignore you. Silence is not acquiescence. You simply aren't worth responding to anymore.

Take care now, thank you for your posts....

posted on Jun, 12 2008 @ 01:00 PM
As murderers you are using the faculty of not to answer.

You want to extinguish the flame of the truth because it frightens you.

Before you were arrogant, now in front of the evidence you have become timid, sad, depressed.

Just as those three poor men - convinced to lie for the good of their country - that are afraid to be judged, to say something wrong, to be unmasked:

Armstrong, Aldrin, Collins, smile, you are the heroes of the space.

Why are you so sad, depressed, nervous?

[edit on 13-6-2008 by Big-Brain]

posted on Jun, 12 2008 @ 05:32 PM
so if you could stop being a troll, answer me this simple question: Why? China and Russia are going to land on these worlds soon. Why make a lie so that forign nations may discover it?

Point is, you don't lie if there's a substantial chance of being discovered.

[edit on 12-6-2008 by Gorman91]

posted on Jun, 12 2008 @ 05:37 PM

'Nuf said!!!

Yeah, they look pretty depressed to ME!!!!!!!!!!

posted on Jun, 13 2008 @ 03:22 PM

off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


posted on Jun, 13 2008 @ 03:30 PM

off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


new topics

top topics

<< 8  9  10    12  13  14 >>

log in