Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

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

page: 4
11
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join

posted on Jun, 2 2008 @ 09:52 AM
link   
reply to post by blimpseeker
 


blimp, no anymosity toward B-B.....just annoyance at the ignorance repeatedly displayed. Look up at my post, just scroll. Then seek out 'An End To The Moon Conspiracy' thread.....all will be clear.

B-B raises NO VALID POINTS! None whatsoever.

blimp, would you answer me....how would the Phoenix lander be tested on Earth? In an environment that is so different than Mars'???

It cannot.....but a computer simulation can be used......computers we have today, but didn't have in the 1960s, during Apollo.

Getting the point yet?? B-B thinks, because it used to be necessary to do actual tests, proof-of-concept, using actual hardware four decades ago, that we still must. We DO NOT need to anymore!!!!




posted on Jun, 2 2008 @ 09:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by blimpseeker
another thing that doesn't sit well with me with the Phoenix is the heat shield, the way that it just falls off, doesn't seem possible with the wind pressure pushing it up into the lander. it would have to be "shot" off as an ejection seat on a plane would be.


Either it would be ejected using some sort of explosive bolts, or the lander is slowed down while releasing it, either with rockets or a parachute.


why not better quality pictures? why not video of the lander...uh...landing like the armadillo has from underneath?
I'm with Big Head...SHOW ME THE VIDEO!
]


How would you video it landing on Mars exactly? And consider that while you can take good quality images, they don't necessarily need them. They don't go to Mars for the scenery, you know. Also to transmit better quality images of the landers foot, it would need more power, power that would be better used for something useful on the lander, like it's actual job.



posted on Jun, 2 2008 @ 10:10 AM
link   
Are you talkin about he "live coverage of the landing?" I thought that was the fakest thing in the world. Infact they showed it on the ground while they were still counting down. It had to be blatant. No way they expected us to believe it was real, I don't know what to say else about it. Nasa and all government groups don't do anything for people, its a strategic set up to increase the amount of money taken out of your paycheck every week.



posted on Jun, 2 2008 @ 10:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by blimpseeker
how about we take off the hate hats and look at this question with the respect it deserves..


The question deserves no repect, contemplation, reasoning, or logic, and sadly, any response at all is a gargantuan waste of time. Good thing I had two minutes to type this.

This is very simple, goats should understand this.....you cannot test a craft intended to land on Mars, on Earth. The only result you would get is a pretty good idea how the craft would work on Earth...not Mars. Incredibly, because of this, the existence of a video showing a successful test of the Phoenix lander on Earth, would lend credibility to the conspiracy theory that the Phoenix did not land on Mars. Yet, like a great deal of the general population....some people have decided to forgo serious contemplation, reason, and logic in order to troll up some folk on the Internet.

Go, troll, go......



posted on Jun, 2 2008 @ 10:39 AM
link   
This is a clear example of how conspiracy's start.


Imagine the moon conspiracy, did it start like this?




im hoping it didnt because there would be alot of people who would feel very stupid right now.



posted on Jun, 2 2008 @ 10:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by blimpseeker
reply to post by weedwhacker
 

seems like an awful lot of anymosity towards someone that has brought up a pretty legitimate question.

why no video of the phoenix test flights?

i smell a conspiracy here of the highest order.

how about we take off the hate hats and look at this question with the respect it deserves..

you guys remind me of those ancient priests that would burn anyone at the stake brave enough to bring up a concept that didn't agree with the common thought of the day.

how about we all take a deep breath and find the video hu?

There is no video of it being "test flown" on Earth because it was never test flown on Earth...it is designed to land on the 1/3 gravity of Mars -- it would not work on Earth because our gravity is 3X that of Mars.

I have seen videos of the engines being tested in a documentary about Phoenix, but I don't think it is on YouTube (not every film made by NASA is on YouTube -- not even close. Many of NASA's film archives are publically accessible, just not on YouTube). In that documentary, the craft was supported from the ceiling of the test facility and the engines were ignited.

So there are your answers -- the engines were tested, as seen in a public documentary for all to see; and the craft itself cannot be test flown on earth due to Earth's higher gravity.

No conspiracy here, not even a whiff of one.

ps -- read the "End to the Moon Conspiracy" thread and you will see why there is plenty of animosity towards "Big-Brain".

[edit on 6/2/2008 by Soylent Green Is People]

[edit on 6/2/2008 by Soylent Green Is People]



posted on Jun, 2 2008 @ 10:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by SLAYER69
reply to post by Big-Brain
 


enough said!

www.youtube.com...


That video clearly shows the technology however it doesn't show it hurtling towards the ground and a fast rate and managing to land safely, so maybe big brain does have a point.



posted on Jun, 2 2008 @ 10:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by JOINTHERESISTANCE
so maybe big brain does have a point.


Yup, but it's just the top of his head. Kinda' pointy.


This is gonna' get deleted.



posted on Jun, 2 2008 @ 11:01 AM
link   
reply to post by JOINTHERESISTANCE
 


Whether it's falling quickly or falling slowly, the physics are still the same.

If the technology works and the physics works (both of which we know to be true), then the whole Phoenix spacecraft can work.

In fact the technology and the physics is old. This system of landing on Mars has been done before in 1976 with the Viking landers. Landing Phoenix was only applying an old solution to a new problem.

The Russians have successfully landed probes on the Moon and Venus using this SAME landing technology. Are their pictures of Venus and the Moon simply hoaxes also?


Edit: spelling

[edit on 6/2/2008 by Soylent Green Is People]



posted on Jun, 2 2008 @ 11:06 AM
link   
reply to post by JOINTHERESISTANCE
 


JOIN....ever heard of a parachute??

'hurtling toward the ground', indeed!!!

How do you think the Mercury, Gemini and Apollo capsules got their humans back to Earth safely? Or, the Soviets???

Earth's atmosphere is much thicker than Mars' of course....so a parachute all the way to landing is feasible. Not on Mars, though. A parachute was used to slow some of the descent speed, but the final portion had to be done with the thrusters....all computer programmed, pre-programmed...and any number of things could have failed, and the Lander would have crashed.

jeez....modern commercial jets can land by themselves. (OK....there needs to be a human there, but the concept is similar)

The Phoenix could not be directly remote-controlled....too much time lag....so it had to be specifically programmed to do it itself.

I didn't design it, but I can certainly understand how much creativity and expertise went into it....



posted on Jun, 2 2008 @ 11:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by JOINTHERESISTANCE
This is a clear example of how conspiracy's start.


No, this is how mass stupidity propagates into religious/social cults with the members ultimately concluding they don't need to pay taxes anymore. Conspiracies usually start with a SHRED of evidence or at least a REASONABLE doubt of the existing facts at hand. BB has shown us neither. The entire thread is a big waste of time.



posted on Jun, 2 2008 @ 11:22 AM
link   
ok, so we did countless tests on the moon lander on earth back in the 60's for a lander that was to land in zero g's but we don't need to do any on a lander that is to land on an atmosphere closer to what we have here on earth than the moon does?

sorry NASA apologist but that argument is flawed.



posted on Jun, 2 2008 @ 11:22 AM
link   
double post

[edit on 2-6-2008 by blimpseeker]



posted on Jun, 2 2008 @ 11:22 AM
link   
Anyone have info on why the russians missions failed to land and how the design was different to pheonix??? BB is just desperate for the truth and needs to broaden his mind please help him do so in a positive way. Conspiracys exist for a reason, and that reason is you cant fool everyone all the time. We are fed truth constantly with one hand while the other hand stick lies up our butt.



posted on Jun, 2 2008 @ 11:26 AM
link   
I justr don't understand why we grill NASA on other stuff but everyone seems to be offended and downright angry and calling for the OP to be banned when the phoenix was questioned?
if asking strange questions is a reason to be banned than Zorgon, Mikesingh and all those other rock watchers need to be banned also!

something is afoot here...



posted on Jun, 2 2008 @ 11:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by JOINTHERESISTANCE
This is a clear example of how conspiracy's start.


By next week, there will be multiple web sites, a video for $34.95, and a book on Amazon.
I give it a week before it hits C2C.

Goat or Pig, depending on the part of the world, can be the equivalent of words not allowed on ATS. Interesting way to circumvent the rules. I see no "SNIP" anywhere. Since that is the case; I have no trouble saying that this appears to be a theory invented by someone with an Axe to grind against the US who probably could care less about the topic. Only a Swine would insult our intelligence this way. Just this "Goats" opinion.



posted on Jun, 2 2008 @ 11:45 AM
link   
i think the phoenix lander did land there,but NASA will not share any new knowledge with us.. they only let us see what they think is ok for us to see...

to me NASA is a scam and it's sad cause some of them know it as well..i'm sure there are a bunch of people with NASA who wish they could share the truth with us.

i say go for it...drop the motherload of knowledge!


blow us away


i dare you



edit sorry for being so harsh on NASA..i love NASA,but knowing what i know now it is so frustrating.

[edit on 2-6-2008 by Skipper1975]



posted on Jun, 2 2008 @ 11:47 AM
link   
reply to post by blimpseeker
 


Perhaps because we are aware of how the word "Goat" is being used and the OP's real intent is pretty obvious. His post is an obvious attempt to bait people. Present a valid case without the name calling and insults and the same people will give it consideration. Some legitimate evidence would be useful also.



posted on Jun, 2 2008 @ 11:50 AM
link   
reply to post by blimpseeker
 


blimp....I invite you to thoroughly read all of the B-B posts. It will blow your mind.

As I mentioned before (this is a response to your post) you mentioned tests, in the 1960s, for the Lunar Lander. (You said zero G, but there actually IS gravity on the Moon....)

As I've said, the 1960s were quite different. We didn't have 4MB memory capacity in our computers of those days.....the transistor was cutting edge technology!!!! Printed circuits? Not even yet....

There were basic computers onboard, and lots of Apollo tech probably filtered down to your laptop today.....but a Human was still the best computer that Apollo had!!!

Consider the early 1960s....most people still had Black and White TVs. American cars had huge fins. The first portable 'transistor' radios were being sold, and taken to the beach!

No cable TV, no satellite TV. If you lived in a big city, you had three network channels on your TV....plus some local channels, and PBS....so about nine channels.

To consider....the early Astronauts were test pilots first and foremost. New airplane/aircraft designs were tested, as best they could, but had to be done with hardware, sometimes at the cost of human lives.

The Mercury capsule....when John Glenn flew, didn't have a computer onboard. Any guidance was calculated by computers on the ground. That data was transmitted up as needed....

That was the early 1960s.

Today, I have more power in the SD card I put into my camera (8GB) than we could have imagined, back then. Instead, it was hundreds of human brains (far more powerful than any computer we have yet built) working toward a goal. New tools exist, meaning powerful computers that didn't exist in the 1960s.

Point I am trying to make is: This poerful computing tech we have at our fingertips, today, means we do not have to do the kind of tests we have seen, in archival footage from the 1960s.



posted on Jun, 2 2008 @ 11:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by blimpseeker
I justr don't understand why we grill NASA on other stuff but everyone seems to be offended and downright angry and calling for the OP to be banned when the phoenix was questioned?
if asking strange questions is a reason to be banned than Zorgon, Mikesingh and all those other rock watchers need to be banned also!

something is afoot here...


Partially, I think it's the tone of the original post.
Add in the fact that the OP seems to have a history of sorts here on ATS, and it's not a fine and glowing one.
Then add in the idiocy of some of the claims made by the OP. (As a clarification, please note that I did not classify the OP as an idiot, I applied the term to certain claims made BY the OP.)
Examples?
"NASA doesn't have the ability to land a rocket backwards". Tell that to the Surveyor probes that landed 'backwards' on the Moon. Tell that to the Viking landers that did the same trick on Mars. Tell that to teams working on the Lunar Lander Challenge. Tell it to pilots of the Harrier jet. When confronted by a fairly solid body of evidence proving that NASA (and other groups working with less sophisticated technology and smaller budgets) not only *can* do this particular trick, but *has* done it, his only defense is "IT'S ALL FAKE! NOBODY BUT ME IS SMART ENOUGH TO SEE THAT IT'S ALL FAKE!". That's a tried-and-true debating tactic known as the "Temper Tantrum".

"There's no proof that the Phoenix Lander was tested on Earth". No...but there's plenty of proof that the engines were tested, and plenty of solid reasons why there's no real way to test the landing sequence on Earth. Even setting aside the dissimilar environments (3x gravity, and thicker atmosphere), there's another reason not to expose a Mars lander to any more of Earth's atmosphere than absolutely necessary. You do NOT want to risk contaminating the lander...and most importantly, its biological experiment package...before launch. Does any of this sink in to the OP? Not an iota. Queue up more insults and proclamations about his own vast intellect.

In short, it's not that he's asking questions, it's that, even in the face of presented evidence, he's ignoring answers, and doing it with an attitude that's pretty much guaranteed to pi....errr....I mean make people irate.





new topics

top topics



 
11
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join