Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

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

page: 27
11
<< 24  25  26    28  29 >>

log in

join

posted on Jul, 3 2008 @ 05:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by PsychoHazard
It is similar to what would happen if you attached a parachute to the rear end of a goat and then dropped it out of a jet at high altitude. Once the parachute was released, the goat would go down head first. The goat would then impact the ground with his face. The llamas highly endorse this idea.


Nothing special......that bit simply needed repeating.




posted on Jul, 3 2008 @ 07:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by space cadet
reply to post by Big-Brain
 


I was really hoping that rumors like this one did not start. The emotion I felt watching the Phoenix land, the emotion I saw on the faces of the operators and developers of this project , was very real. Have you seen the documentaries about the development of the lander? Awesome technology. Do you think they faked all those documentaries too? And for what reason do you purport that such an elaborate hoax would be done? Other nations are exploring Mars too, so please feel free to say why they are faking too. Really, I want to know why you think this is faked.


Why do I wonder whether it is real or not?

Well, the landing was a photoshop game scenario that people cheered for. Maybe they believed in it.

The pictures coming back are horrible all black and show nothing.

I dont see anything going on to make it real like the moon landing looks like it was done somewhere else.

Its not convincing is my problem. phoney.



sarc



posted on Jul, 4 2008 @ 02:44 PM
link   
Look at these images:





My dear readers,

center of gravity of this conical shell with Phoenix inside, with its heavy legs on the opposite side as regards to heat shield, is closer to the smaller base of the truncated cone.

Therefore the friction with Mars atmosphere at 20,000 kmph would force the conical shell to get this attitude:



This evidence is my winning card.

I have never seen stupid people as NASA's frauds. Rockets are pointed.

How can a truncated cone that runs in a fluid at 20,000 kmph stay in this attitude?



This is simplest physics, simplest aerodynamics.

How is that NASA's frauds are so imbecile?




posted on Jul, 4 2008 @ 03:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by Big-Brain
This evidence is my winning card.


It really isn't. In theory, a perfectly balanced paper cone in an ideal fluid with the wide base at the bottom would come down large base first with no other forces other than gravity if it were vertical.

If the center of mass is low enough in the craft it will be stable as it is shown in the animation/graphics. This is very simple physics, that even an invisible pink unicorn could understand. Because simply put, while the reverse direction may be more aerodynamic, the transition wouldn't be and the more stable situation is the first one, such that it wouldn't tumble to the reverse direction.

In the intermediate step, the air flow would get turbulent on the downstream side (that is, the opposite one to travel, ie the back one) and there would then be less pressure on that side, righting it back to normal.



posted on Jul, 4 2008 @ 06:40 PM
link   
reply to post by apex
 


AND, what's more, the initial trajectory of the blunt-end first is designed to continue that stability, based on the low CofG.

Even a spitting llama would understand, once he got rid of that annoying goat by dropping him face-first by parachute, that the concept is called aero-dynamic braking....using a heat shield on the wide, convex blunt end....so that the aerodynamics remain stable. The wide, blunt base helps to dissipate the heat away from the conical part, at the top. Camels understand this!!!!

The parachute parts are, thusly, protected up at the top of the cone....how else would the aardvark survive the intense frictional heat of entering an atmosphere????

Why, even a dolphin....oh, wait....dolphins are smart....hmmmmm....even a gnu knows that the other Mars landers, Spirit and Opportunity had heatshields for eraly entry and deceleration, then jettisoned for the parachute, finally an airbag system used for the final touch-down (bounce-down?).

Golly, I would imagine a numbskull like Gilligan, from Gilligan's Island, would know what an airbag is!!!! Even Paris Hilton must understand how they save her, each time she crashes her car.....



posted on Jul, 5 2008 @ 02:28 PM
link   
I don't believe it ... that there's a "new" lander.

From what I am seeing of NASA images, there must be a presence on Mars "fulltime."

I keep seeing different photos from the same place on Mars with completely different details in them : the Columbia, Utreya and Victoria Crater photos have "lapses-of-time" built into them.

They're trying to fool us again.


sarc



posted on Jul, 5 2008 @ 02:45 PM
link   
reply to post by sarcastic
 


sarc, are you feeding this thread to be farcical? Methinks...

But, just in case....let's consider 'time-lapse'....

Take a camera, mount it outdoors. Aim it at something, whatever you're interested in seeing change. Take one photo, at the same time, each day. Do this for several days. (On Earth, of course, you can't count on the weather, or the varying cloud coverage....will affect the light).

Of course, on Mars, cloud cover isn't a problem. AND naturally, everyone here knows that Mars rotates about it's axis at just slightly more than 24 hours....24 hours and 23 minutes, I believe, so one 'day' on Mars is almost the same as a 'day' on Earth....on Mars it is called a "Sol".

Also, oddly enough, Mars' orbit is pretty close to two Earth years. AND, Mars' axis is tilted, just like Earth's, so there are seasons on Mars. Of course, each 'season' lasts about 6 Earth Months. AND, no real atmosphere to speak of, the 'seasons' generally affect the Polar caps....though, may have some effect on the thin atmosphere....

BTW....we think of 'months' here on Earth, because we have that big ole' Moon, that orbits in a generally 29-day period (no pun).

There is no concept of a 'month' on Mars, since her two moons do not conform to the same pattern as ours. Unless you wish to call 30 'Sols' a Martian 'month'....but that is something for future inhabitants to decide.



posted on Jul, 5 2008 @ 03:06 PM
link   
There is not any Phoenix on Mars.

No piece of metal thrust from the bottom can land going backwards.

Lookheed Martin never tested Phoenix on the earth, impossible.

NASA's frauds don't consider earth's velocity in their calculations, imbeciles.

Instead of filming Mars with a colour camera when their rocket was close to the planet to show all the world their powerful technology, we can only see animated cartoons, gray stones, gray stones, gray stones, gray stones, gray stones, gray stones, gray stones, gray stones, gray stones, gray stones, gray stones, gray stones, gray stones, gray stones ...

And we have seen that the next rockets of NASA's frauds will have this more aerodynamic shape:





I hope Big Goat will want to abduct me, I'm ready for ascension.





posted on Jul, 5 2008 @ 03:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by space cadet
reply to post by Big-Brain
 


I was really hoping that rumors like this one did not start. The emotion I felt watching the Phoenix land, the emotion I saw on the faces of the operators and developers of this project , was very real.


i am not saying i agree or disagree. i am kind of one of those that don't call shots on these things bc i am not there to see proof of it being there or not being there.

however, emotions are only and always so real in as what are perceiving. i can watch a movie like say "the lord of the rings" and the emotions the movie invokes are very much real. this however is not proof that there was really a hobbit named frodo who went on a magical journey to save middle earth.



posted on Jul, 5 2008 @ 03:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by Big-Brain
No piece of metal thrust from the bottom can land going backwards.

Lookheed Martin never tested Phoenix on the earth, impossible.

NASA's frauds don't consider earth's velocity in their calculations, imbeciles.


Each of those statements is just another float in the ignorant parade.

Here in Missouri we have some colorful terms for people who exhibit this kind of ignorant behavior.....decorum prevents me from expressing any of them.

Big-Brain clearly has no other intent than to write outrageous, ignorant statements in order to work people up and, frankly, intentionally be a jag-off. Oops, may have expressed one of them.

This isn't a discussion. It isn't an exchange of ideas. It doesn't serve to enlighten the single character that others are seeking to enlighten. Big-Brain cannot be that brain dead.....he does lack some social graces though. And most importantly, he does not actually interact with anyone here; he simply posts the same constant drivel over and over again. The shtick is old, it's not funny, it's insulting, and it has not risen above the level of trollery.

Please, let the thread die. It's getting painful watching serious, bright people beat their heads against this wall.



posted on Jul, 5 2008 @ 05:08 PM
link   
reply to post by justamomma
 


momma, and Mr. Penny, what you both may not know, but I know --- via U2U from staff --- is about this OP. I will say no more about that.

HOWEVER, I was present and witnessed this SAME PERSON, this OP, sign on at least two dozen times, get banned repeatedly, only to come back the next day with a new username, get banned, etcetera.

That's all I will say...I witnessed, am telling you now, but not what was told to me in private.

I suggest letting it die, as Mr Penny pointed out....it will shrivel away, eventually. It's a waste of time. We tried, but it seems we are just being taken for fools, and I, for one, am not a gout. Or....goat....or whatever animal his English translation Program wishes to come up with!!

One hint....Ciao Bello!!!



posted on Jul, 5 2008 @ 09:09 PM
link   
reply to post by weedwhacker
 


If mars has polar ice, frost on the ground and a pale blue sky how do you figure it has no atmosphere?

Isnt that kind of a silly statement? Of course it has atmosphere if water vapor has a medium in which to collect and dissipate.



zebu.uoregon.edu...

crism.jhuapl.edu...



sarc



posted on Jul, 5 2008 @ 11:52 PM
link   
reply to post by sarcastic
 


Well...that pic is intriguing, I must say. Could it have been frozen CO2??

Who knows. Point is, that pic (which I believe is very old, and from a previous Mars Lander, name escapes me at the moment, but....)

It proves that NASA has been able to land robotic probes on Mars, and send back pictures. SO, the OP, "BigBrain" has shown to be a farce, since NASA has, indeed taken many pictures from the Martian surface, in years past, since they have managed to succesfully land "A Spacecraft Flying Backwards".....contrary to BB's claims otherwise.

Science always gets the goat...or the gout....sheesh, I've lost track of this person's latest translation.....

Oh...am not I the biggest smartest people in the world? You is the small brain, mine is the big gray matter....my goat, face first, is better than your goat!!!!



posted on Jul, 5 2008 @ 11:57 PM
link   
reply to post by sarcastic
 


sarc...dude!!! your own link shows that the average atmospheric pressure on Mars is one one-hundredth of Earth's!!!

What point are you trying to make??? That water boils quickly?? We know that already....liquid water cannot exist on the surface!!



posted on Jul, 6 2008 @ 06:15 AM
link   
starryskies.com...



It was once believed that Mars had an atmosphere much like Earth's and that if we could find a way to get there, we could breath Martian air. As often happens, knowledge brings a new outlook. Composition of the Martian air is 95% Carbon Dioxide, 3% nitrogen and trace amounts of oxygen and water. The density of the Martian atmosphere is only 1% of Earth.


www.nps.gov...



Columbia's exterior is covered with an epoxy-resin ablative heatshield. As Columbia entered the atmosphere at a speed of 25,000 miles per hour, its exterior reached a temperature of 2,760°C (5,000°F).


Apollo Columbia Module:



With a heatshield made by epoxy-resin, our 3 poor men inside the Columbia landed in the Pacific Ocean carbonized while steel was melting and aluminum was boiling.

Friction with air forced Columbia to get this attitude:



Our 3 poor men did not suffer, they were carbonized instantly.

About Phoenix instead, now that we have discovered the density of the Martian atmosphere is 1% of Earth, we have finally found the ultimate proof that this spectacular landing of Phoenix is only a poor FARCE.

Since the density of the Martian atmosphere is 1% of Earth, we can estimate that the friction of the Phoenix's conical shell with Martian atmosphere is 100 times lower than on the earth.

Columbia entered the earth's atmosphere at a speed of 40,000 kmph, Phoenix entered Martian atmosphere at a speed of 20,000 kmph.

Conclusion: that ludicrous conical shell covered by cork has penetrated Mars' atmosphere like a bullet and has crashed on the hard ground of Mars at the speed of 19,999 kmph.

No, I have been wrong. I have not considered AVIS (acceleration vectors inertia system), TRMS (telemetric reaction molecules system) and TIIBS (thermal ionized inverted braking system) built by Lookheed Martin.

The right velocity of deep impact against Martian ground is 19,753 kmph.

Then NASA's frauds need to make again the animation video of Phoenix's landing: no flames, the parachute doesn't open, Phoenix crashes against Martian ground at 19,753 kmph.

I am winning and you are losing.










[edit on 6-7-2008 by Big-Brain]



posted on Jul, 6 2008 @ 09:48 PM
link   
reply to post by Big-Brain
 


Finally.....B-B....final answer!

Ciao!!!

You are not worth it anymore.

Sayonara......



posted on Jul, 7 2008 @ 02:41 PM
link   
Dear WW, you must search in your brain something intelligent to refute my reasonings.

You must continue to struggle against me, you can't escape just now.

Don't you know what to say?

Yet before you seemed so bold like your friends. Where are your friends?

It is too easy to abandon the struggle because you are losing.

Do you want to be considered cowardly?

My dear readers,

surely it is sad to realize that NASA's frauds have been deceiving you for 40 years.

But the last evidence I have shown you is irrefutable, impossible to deny or disprove, incontrovertible.

This video is a gigantic hoax:

www.youtube.com...

because the density of Martian atmosphere is 1% of Earth.

No friction, no flames, no parachute, no braking, and our piece of metal crashes on the hard Martian ground at a speed of about 20,000 kmph.

In this video you can see a flock of goats that act as in a fiction, in a science fiction:

www.youtube.com...

The best character actor is the old fat mock scientist close to the flag.

Congratulations, biggest fraud.

I am winning and you are losing.



[edit on 7-7-2008 by Big-Brain]



posted on Jul, 7 2008 @ 02:55 PM
link   
reply to post by Big-Brain
 


I wished to drop out, as the goat who once landed on his face, but I'm afraid my grasp of Italian isn't great. So sorry that this ATS member is as stupid as a goat....I mean, how many goats do YOU know who launch rockets to other planets???

Why does a stupid gnu who can't understand basic science be allowed to continually post on ATS????

Oh....I know.....it was a reasonable agreement. THIS 'member' had about, oh.....let's see.....about 20 different 'usernames'....all BANNED!!!

So, this is why it's a FARCE!! Farce, farce, farce. If I could translate into Itialian, then I'd use a translation program....which I do not have.....



posted on Jul, 7 2008 @ 03:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by Big-Brain
But the last evidence I have shown you is irrefutable, impossible to deny or disprove, incontrovertible.


I assure you, it is refutable, it is quite possible to deny and disprove. Nothing is incontrovertible. In fact, you have such low credibility, I would be forced to question you even were you to claim that the sky is blue. I deny your claims, I deny your credibility. You have yet to prove a single thing other than your poor grasp of science and logic, and your unhealthy obsession with goats.


Originally posted by Big-Brain
because the density of Martian atmosphere is 1% of Earth.

No friction, no flames, no parachute, no braking, and our piece of metal crashes on the hard Martian ground at a speed of 19,753 kmph.


I assure you, 1% of Earth's atmospheric density is more than sufficient to cause friction and braking. If it took 100% to cause friction, all the thousands of bits of space debris that enter our atmosphere would make it to the surface before they burned up. Most of it barely enter the atmosphere before they are burned away to nothing, yet the upper atmosphere is very thin indeed.


Originally posted by Big-Brain
I am winning and you are losing.


No. You are running in circles, unable to prove anything. We are laughing at you. You had your chance to prove your claims, now that it is known that this is a farce, you are simply an object of amusement. Even your goats have figured that out by now. The llamas, of course, knew from the beginning.



posted on Jul, 7 2008 @ 03:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by weedwhacker
...
Why does a stupid gnu who can't understand basic science be allowed to continually post on ATS????
...


Explain your reasonings, tell me and my readers why I am wrong, why I can't understand basic science.






new topics

top topics



 
11
<< 24  25  26    28  29 >>

log in

join