It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by DJW001
reply to post by StalkingGoogle
from Stages to Saturn: A Technological History of the Apollo/Saturn Launch Vehicle by Roger E. Bilstein
"The large vehicle boosters of the Saturn program borrowed liberally from the accumulated engine technology of the ICBM's..."
You have just cited a source that indicates that ICBMs were developed prior to and independently of the Saturn series. Congratulations, you have proven yourself wrong.
Originally posted by StalkingGoogle
Originally posted by MacTheKnife
As to the rest of your questions let's just start with a simple info-graphic on the Apache Point project.
physics.ucsd.edu...
[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/bd2d2c5801da.gif[/atsimg]
... and take it from there.edit on 4/8/11 by MacTheKnife because: smaller graphic so it doesn't get cropped as much
So you have access to this information, you've apparently reviewed it, and you still don't see the absurdity of it? I'm afraid I really can't help you, though I did try. Good luck to you sir.
Originally posted by SayonaraJupiter
Nixon had no choice but to fake the Apollo moon landings because they could not risk another failure in the eyes of the world. Kennedy's mandate was accomplished... Hollywood style...
You brazen hypocrite.
Originally posted by FoosMNo, I gave pure facts. The issue is you tend to skip over them when they are not convenient to your worldview.
He's talking about the public image of joining the military.
Before the Vietnam debacle, defending one's country by serving in the military was considered to be a great honor;
Oh so now you are saying all those volunteers that join the military post vietnam, post 911, dont do it out of honor and respect for their country? Thats rich. So what are they doing it for?
No, he's saying plenty different.
So it was to manipulate the USofA citizens. Well your not saying anything different then I am.
Um, the US does have a history of being militaristic. It's one of its biggest stereotypes. Also not really relevant.
Plus, why would Eisenhower have to reassure the world that the US intentions were peacefull, unless, the US had a history of being militaristic? I mean, if Switzerland decided to land men on the moon, I doubt the world would need reassuring that their intentions were nothing but peaceful.
How many of these missions? Are they a majority of the total missions launched by NASA, ever? Because "for the most part" means "a majority".
You cant prove that. Because many Shuttle missions, as JW had stated in his videos, as posters have stated in this thread, have been top secret.
Not as an effective spy satellite, no, IIRC.
Hubble cant be pointed to Earth?
Politics and money. We've told you this before.
Yeah, why are we mapping the magnetic field of Jupiter and not landing men back to the moon, establishing long term bases like we have in Antarctica?
You're just throwing incredulity at the wall to see what sticks, aren't you? This is not relevant. Stop questioning everything.
Oh yeah? Like who? And how many countries are they based in? As a matter of fact, how many foreign bases are on USofA soil, if there isnt any, why not? What right does the US have to put military bases in foreign countries? How is the constitutional?
The United States is not under martial law, and you know it. Your hyperbolic statements and arguments by questioning in this post are largely irrelevant to the subject at hand.
Oh, you mean like the USofA.
Originally posted by 000063
I do like how, according to StalkingGoogle's argument, every part of the United States Government, ever, is part of the military because they eventually answer to the President. Including Amtrak.
Originally posted by StalkingGoogle
Originally posted by MacTheKnife
No US administration has really been a proponent of manned space flight. Grand speeches and long term promises are the rule. The Moon is old hat and something new is needed to stir the public to vote (for me!) whatever is proposed.
No US administration has really been a proponent of manned space flight...yet the Bush administration promised we'd be on the moon in four years. Never mentioned among snippets about this claim of his is the supposed fact that we've already been there, and still have access to the technology supposedly used then, yet it will take four years to develop it? You mean they can't just dust off the old landers and use them again? hahaha
Saying "the desire to explore and understand is part of our character," President Bush Wednesday unveiled an ambitious plan to return Americans to the moon by 2020 and use the mission as a steppingstone for future manned trips to Mars and beyond.
[snip]
The president unveiled what he billed as a "new course" for the nation's space program in a speech at NASA headquarters, shifting the long-term focus from the space shuttle and the international space station to the creation of a new manned space vehicle that will be flying with a crew in 10 years and will return humans to the moon within 16 years.
Bush proposed spending $12 billion over the next five years on the effort. About $1 billion of that will come from an increase in NASA's budget, while the other $11 billion would come from shifting funds from existing programs within NASA's current $86 billion budget. The overall NASA budget would stay at about 1 percent of the federal budget, according to White House figures.
But some in Congress questioned whether the funding would be enough to achieve the president's ambitious goals. And the project drew criticism from groups who say the money would be better spent on domestic programs.
Originally posted by StalkingGoogle
Originally posted by MacTheKnife
While it's certainly crafty to hide in plain sight, the OP was trying to poison the well by declaring all the sims done in the open as "fakes".
You call it "poison the well", I call it an accurate reflection of reality. Simulations are fakes, by any reasonable definition. Speaking of poisoning the well...nice try.
Originally posted by StalkingGoogle
Originally posted by MacTheKnife
Last general theory I can recall is that the inner Earth is not just 1 big dynamo but rather a collection of lesser ones that added up and (mostly) look like one big dynamo...Rocks have shown this reversal has happened many times in the past so the theory of multiple dynamos seems on solid footing.
This "dynamo" hypothesis has been almost universally discredited by virtually all of known physics, it relies on hitherto undiscovered processes and phenomena. The Earth's magnetic field is a result of electric fields in space. All magnetic fields are a result of electric fields. There is no other known way to generate magnetic fields. This kind of cartoonish pop science turns my stomach, it's just another indication of the force-fed ignorance so many people suffer.
Originally posted by FoosM
You cant prove that. Because many Shuttle missions, as JW had stated in his videos, as posters have stated in this thread, have been top secret.
Originally posted by jra
Originally posted by FoosM
You cant prove that. Because many Shuttle missions, as JW had stated in his videos, as posters have stated in this thread, have been top secret.
What?! Many of the Shuttle missions have been top secret? I don't think so...
Out of 135 Shuttle flights. 9 of them were missions for the DoD. 7 of those were classified, 1 partially classified and 1 unclassified.
In what bizarro universe does 8 out of 135 equal "many"?
Between 1982 and 1992, NASA launched 11 shuttle flights with classified payloads, honoring a deal that dated to 1969, when the National Reconnaissance Office—an organization so secret its name could not be published at the time—
Originally posted by Aloysius the Gaul
reply to post by FoosM
You can't find a list of the shuttle missions???
Here's a hint - wiki list of shuttle missions
I can give you more hints if you want?
I'm sure you'll get an apology for getting the number wrong - which is much less than your many egregious falsehoods and mistakes - but his comment still stands - 11/135 doesn't seem like a good case to defend "many".....edit on 8-8-2011 by Aloysius the Gaul because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by FoosM[
I posted NRO, JRA posted DoD.
See where this is going?
nevermind... I guess if you could you would see that Apollo is a hoax...
Im surprised you didnt chastise JRA for posting his misleading number.
Tsk-tsk. Right or wrong, its all about the stars for you guys, right
Originally posted by backinblack
Yes DJW, that is correct but there are also alteration done during flight..
As you and others have stated, they MUST have occurred to alter the attitude of the craft to protect the astronauts from radiation.
These were NOT taken into account..
Originally posted by FoosM
I posted NRO, JRA posted DoD.
Im surprised you didnt chastise JRA for posting his misleading number.
Many shuttle missions have been partly or entirely military in nature.
USAF gained the use of up to one third of all launches[1] and the right to requisition the next available launch for high-priority payloads.[5] It renovated an existing launch site at Vandenberg Air Force Base in California to send shuttles into polar orbits[4] and established the Manned Spaceflight Control Squadron at NASA Mission Control in Houston. The squadron's personnel would monitor military shuttle flights, ahead of a future mission control center in Colorado that would monitor an expected 12 to 14 military shuttle flights each year.[1]
“NRO requirements drove the shuttle design,” says Parker Temple, a historian who served on the policy staff of the secretary of the Air Force and later with the NRO’s office within the Central Intelligence Agency. The Air Force signed on to use the shuttle too, and in 1979 started building a launch pad at Vandenberg Air Force Base in northern California for reaching polar orbits.
Neither the Air Force nor the NRO was ever comfortable relying exclusively on NASA’s vehicle, however. Delays in shuttle launches only increased their worry; even before the 1986 Challenger accident, they were looking for a way off the shuttle and back onto conventional rockets like the Titan. The uneasy relationship between the Air Force, NRO, and NASA assumed a human face in 1979, when the military chose its first group of shuttle astronauts. Two years before the shuttle’s first launch, the NRO selected 13 Manned Spaceflight Engineers as potential payload specialists, all but one from the Air Force. The new military astronauts ranged in age from 24 to 36. Most had advanced degrees in engineering; one was a Ph.D. They were experienced in satellite flying and acquisition. And they believed they were the vanguard of the Air Force in space. Only one of that first group ever made it to orbit.
T.K. (Ken) Mattingly, an Apollo-era astronaut who also reached the rank of rear admiral before retiring from the Navy in 1989, commanded the shuttle’s fourth mission, in June 1982, which carried the program’s first classified payload. He describes the relationship between the NASA astronauts and the MSEs in those early days as “sour.”
Nor did the MSEs have much support within the Pentagon. Jeff DeTroye, one of the first 13 military astronauts, was assigned to escort General Lew Allen, Air Force chief of staff, during a visit to Los Angeles for the 20th anniversary of the NRO in 1981. Upon learning of DeTroye’s involvement in the shuttle, Allen was blunt. He had played “a primary role in canceling the Manned Orbiting Laboratory [a proposed military space station of the 1960s], and had he had his way, would have canceled the shuttle,” DeTroye says. Allen made it clear he thought there was no role for man in space, period, according to DeTroye.
Today, the astronauts remain bound to silence. Says Mattingly, “The accomplishments were first-class. I would give anything if someone would say, ‘Here’s what we did. You should be proud of it.’ ” As for the Ross-Shepherd spacewalk on STS-27, we still can’t say for certain that it happened. There is another clue, however. On February 14, 2001, astronauts Tom Jones and Robert Curbeam were in the middle of their third spacewalk of space station assembly mission STS-98. NASA public affairs had advertised it beforehand as the 100th American spacewalk. But just as the astronauts were about to say something to mark the event, pilot Mark Polansky radioed them on a private channel to warn them off. According to Jones’ 2006 memoir, Skywalking, “Somebody had done a recount, and discovered that the real 100th EVA [extravehicular activity] had been two days ago on EVA-2.” How could that happen? Had there been a secret spacewalk that never made it into the official tally? Maybe someday we’ll all be cleared to know.
Originally posted by FoosM
Now you guys can sit there and defend this militarization of space using "civilian" infrastructure paid for by your taxed monies, but I think its disgusting. One military mission, is too many. Sorry, but you guys have priorities screwed up.