Our Entire Space Program Is A Hoax And A Massive Deception

reply to post by UnlimitedSky
"There is far more to this world than taught in our schools,shown in the media,or proclaimed by the church and state.Most of humanity lives in a hypnotic trance,taking to be reality what is instead a twisted simulacrum of reality,a collective dream in which values are inverted,lies are taken as truth and tyranny is accepted as security.They enjoy their ignorance and cling tightly to the misery that gives them identity"...Thomas Cox

Originally posted by blocula
reply to post by UnlimitedSky

 

I dont recall which link i found that information in,but its the temperature of outer space and no hand stitched space suits and flimsy looking lunar modules are going to be able to withstand those unimaginably freezing,near absolute zero temperatures and especially while supposedly traveling many thousands of miles per hour...

We are living under the spell of a magnificent illusion and a sinister deception...

edit on 23-4-2012 by blocula because: (no reason given)

How delusional and uneducated can you possibly get?

Just when I think you can't get any more ridiculous, you come up with a new claim like this!

reply to post by blocula


Sounds very logical.
Perhaps to simple for the minds that can justify anything through complex caluculations and theories. That's why they don't like it.

Reminds me of Bradford Brown who wrote:
we ask for simple answers to life's questions
when we get simple ones we get confused.

100% agreed on the deception. All this deception is also to keep man from percieving himself as a multi dementional being way beyond the confines to this material world. But by constantly stimulation thought process of being in the material world, needing material things, slaving at materialism, we are kept as material prisoners, and unable to still the mind and BE anyting but material creatures.

The sky is not the limit!

We are soooooooooo much more than meets the material eye!

Originally posted by UnlimitedSky
If you look at the encounters by Robert Manro who travelled through space not in a vehicle, but by leaving his body

It's truly depressing that you place greater credibility in that claim than in proven space travel.

Thus, I believe, and always have believed that the entire space program is a hoax.

Then you're wrong. Sorry, you're just wrong. Space travel is a fact, not a hoax.
Our beginnings in space were humble, but we know they were real:

Of course, now we have much more advanced probes headed out into the solar system, and we also know for a fact that those too are real:


We also still have a manned space station up there, which can be seen quite easily from the ground, and in a telescope you can see the actual structure of the station, everything from the solar panels to the crew modules. Back when the shuttle was flying, you could see that come and go from the station as well:

I searched a bit and found all sorts of stuff on the inner and outer belts but could not find the temperature info.

Space has no temperature. Only objects in space have temperature. Trace amounts of atoms present in a given region of space have a temperature, but due to the fact that those particles are few and far between, it does not significantly impact the temperature of any given object in the same region. The temperature of any object in space is determined by its own thermal properties, including how much light it reflects, how much heat it radiates, and how much heat it generates internally, if any. Spacecraft are specifically engineered such that they will assume a safe operating temperature.

reply to post by ngchunter


Thank you for your extensive answer.

However, through observation and experience of the ones that are force feeding us information about our world I have come to refuse to take anything at face value that they try and convince us about.

Therefore, dear ngchunter, I ask you, these vids and this information that you hold so extremely firm to, are they supportive to your FIRST HAND EXPERIENCE of space travel?

have you yourself been out there in space and therefore you know this without a shadow of a doubt?

Or is it just what someone says someone else said that they say the scientist/space program are saying?

s
p
a
c
e


f
o
r

s
i
l
e
n
c
e

to hear yourself find an honest answer to the previous question........


So, if you choose then to believe this hearsay, is it then based on your deep trust in these very institutions because they have always treated us with the highest of dignity, respect and honour in every aspect? Demostrating that they hold TRUTH at the highest level?
Have they actually earned that UNCONDITIONAL trust that you have in them?

Or have you at least come across some deception from their side?
Is this why you are on ATS?

Originally posted by blocula
reply to post by UnlimitedSky

 

I dont recall which link i found that information in,but its the temperature of outer space and no hand stitched space suits and flimsy looking lunar modules are going to be able to withstand those unimaginably freezing,near absolute zero temperatures and especially while supposedly traveling many thousands of miles per hour...

We are living under the spell of a magnificent illusion and a sinister deception...

edit on 23-4-2012 by blocula because: (no reason given)

flimsy looking module eh? looks can be deceiving, a piece of paper can break a wooden ruler in half.
you dont understand anything about engineering, at all, thats why when you look at the lunar module and you see shiny stuff wrapped around it.. you think, "must be aluminium foil, ive used aluminium foil before to cook dinner, that stuff is so weak i always poke holes in it trying to lay it down" this is why you are ignorant and uneducated.

so we ask again, if space is so freezing and detrimental to the intergrity of machines/objects, how did they land the retro-reflectors on the moon? (just to appease you, assume that robots place it there and not humans)
after landing it, how did the robots move the reflectors around for positioning?

Originally posted by UnlimitedSky
reply to post by ngchunter

 

Thank you for your extensive answer.

However, through observation and experience of the ones that are force feeding us information about our world I have come to refuse to take anything at face value that they try and convince us about.

Therefore, dear ngchunter, I ask you, these vids and this information that you hold so extremely firm to, are they supportive to your FIRST HAND EXPERIENCE of space travel?

have you yourself been out there in space and therefore you know this without a shadow of a doubt?

Or is it just what someone says someone else said that they say the scientist/space program are saying?

s
p
a
c
e


f
o
r

s
i
l
e
n
c
e

to hear yourself find an honest answer to the previous question........


So, if you choose then to believe this hearsay, is it then based on your deep trust in these very institutions because they have always treated us with the highest of dignity, respect and honour in every aspect? Demostrating that they hold TRUTH at the highest level?
Have they actually earned that UNCONDITIONAL trust that you have in them?

Or have you at least come across some deception from their side?
Is this why you are on ATS?

russia offers flight to the ISS for 20million+ if you are up for it.

reply to post by choos


If you are so convinced, why don't you go for it?

Originally posted by UnlimitedSky
reply to post by ngchunter

 

Thank you for your extensive answer.

However, through observation and experience of the ones that are force feeding us information about our world I have come to refuse to take anything at face value that they try and convince us about.

Therefore, dear ngchunter, I ask you, these vids and this information that you hold so extremely firm to, are they supportive to your FIRST HAND EXPERIENCE of space travel?

Yes.

have you yourself been out there in space and therefore you know this without a shadow of a doubt?

I don't need to go to space myself to know that these spacecraft are real. I have observed and tracked them myself, not only proving they are real, but even proving that they're on the orbits they're supposed to be on. I have first hand experience observing and tracking spacecraft that are, shocker, in space! Either every amateur astronomer like myself who tracks these things is in on some massive conspiracy, or it's real.

Or is it just what someone says someone else said that they say the scientist/space program are saying?

Did you even watch the videos? I proved that these things are out there, I proved that they really are traveling through space as they were claimed to be. You can live in denial all you want, but that's all it is, blind, ignorant denial.

So, if you choose then to believe this hearsay, is it then based on your deep trust in these very institutions because they have always treated us with the highest of dignity, respect and honour in every aspect?

Excuse me, that is a giant red herring. I don't have to trust anyone, I've verified these things for myself by directly tracking them, or were you not paying attention?

Have they actually earned that UNCONDITIONAL trust that you have in them?

Trust has nothing to do with it. I see you failed to understand my post and my videos.

reply to post by UnlimitedSky


also robert monroe is only offering a means for the humans to expand their imagination, it might be good in the way that it stimulates mind use thus enabling us to be smarter and being able to come up with genius solutions to currently unknown solutions, but relying solely on the mind will provide no real benefits unless you want to remain in a dream state.

reminds me of the folks from the movie "inception" where some have become addicted to the dream state. thats where you may end up.

reply to post by UnlimitedSky
People keep saying here that theres no temperature in space and they are plainly and simply wrong > imagine.gsfc.nasa.gov...

Originally posted by UnlimitedSky
reply to post by choos

 

If you are so convinced, why don't you go for it?

honestly i would love to, if i had the spare change (are you willing to fund me?)

would you go if you had the chance? it'd be definitive proof of your "reality". or would you expand your theory so that the boundary of it are unreachable?

reply to post by choos
Doent matter to me if their charging 20 million dollars,or 20 cents,that so called space station should be called a low earth orbit station,because its not in outer space,its only around 220 miles high,which is nowhere near being within outer space...

The exosphere is the uppermost layer of earths atmosphere and extends upwards and outwards from 310 miles to 620 miles and is the last layer before outer space > en.wikipedia.org...

Originally posted by blocula
reply to post by choos

 

Doent matter to me if their charging 20 million dollars,or 20 cents,that so called space station should be called a low earth orbit station,because its not in outer space...

It's in space by the actual accepted definition of the term, being higher than 100 km and above the Karman line. No one cares that you have your own twisted definition of the term "space," which by your definition would actually mean that even geostationary satellites are not in space. That is not only absurd, it's not the actual accepted definition. No one cares and no one is going to rename the station just because it doesn't meet with your approval.

Originally posted by blocula
reply to post by choos

 

Doent matter to me if their charging 20 million dollars,or 20 cents,that so called space station should be called a low earth orbit station,because its not in outer space,its only around 220 miles high,which is nowhere near being within outer space...

The exosphere is the uppermost layer of earths atmosphere and extends upwards and outwards from 310 miles to 620 miles and is the last layer before outer space > en.wikipedia.org...

edit on 23-4-2012 by blocula because: (no reason given)

its location is sufficient for unpowered orbit. it can be orbiting the moon and still function as intended, it can orbit mars and still work as intended.

my point is that it is built for space, whether outer reaches of space or in orbit around the earth. the requirements are the same. if it can do it here it can do it there.

Originally posted by blocula
reply to post by choos

 

Doent matter to me if their charging 20 million dollars,or 20 cents,that so called space station should be called a low earth orbit station,because its not in outer space...

The exosphere is the uppermost layer of earths atmosphere and extends upwards and outwards from 310 miles to 620 miles and is the last layer before outer space > en.wikipedia.org...

edit on 23-4-2012 by blocula because: (no reason given)

The exosphere starts at about 310 to 620 miles, but as stated in your own link it extends halfway the distance to the moon. By your definition of "space," even geostationary satellites are not in space. The generally accepted definition of space starts around 100 km, at about the Karman line.

The Fédération Aéronautique Internationale has established the Kármán line at an altitude of 100 km (62 mi) as a working definition for the boundary between aeronautics and astronautics. This is used because at an altitude of roughly 100 km (62 mi), as Theodore von Kármán calculated, a vehicle would have to travel faster than orbital velocity in order to derive sufficient aerodynamic lift from the atmosphere to support itself.

Other groups have studied it and reach similar boundary lines.

In 2009, scientists at the University of Calgary reported detailed measurements with an instrument called the Supra-Thermal Ion Imager (an instrument that measures the direction and speed of ions), which allowed them to establish a boundary at 118 km (73 mi) above Earth. The boundary represents the midpoint of a gradual transition over tens of kilometers from the relatively gentle winds of the Earth's atmosphere to the more violent flows of charged particles in space, which can reach speeds well over 268 m/s (600 mph)

en.wikipedia.org...

Originally posted by blocula
reply to post by UnlimitedSky

 

People keep saying here that theres no temperature in space and they are plainly and simply wrong > imagine.gsfc.nasa.gov...

You are such a troll.

If we put a thermometer in darkest space, with absolutely nothing around, it would first have to cool off. This might take a very very long time. Once it cooled off, it would read 2.7 Kelvin. This is because of the "3 degree microwave background radiation."

The thermometer itself has a temperature, not space. Space itself has no temperature, only the objects and atoms in space have a temperature. I already said all this, your link supports exactly what I said. Incidentally, it talks about the minimum temperature an object will reach due to microwave background radiation; that radiation will keep any given object above absolute zero, but not by much, and in any case it's the object in space that has a given temperature, not space itself. Space itself is nothing, it has no temperature, and as such it acts as an insulator, which is why it takes the thermometer a long time to cool off.

reply to post by blocula

People keep saying here that theres no temperature in space and they are plainly and simply wrong >

Just in case you still don't get it, do you understand why a vacuum insulated Thermos container works? It's not because "NASA lies". You can prove this to yourself as has been explained to you already, unless you'd rather believe a lie.

Do you have a source for your quote about self directed anger? I still think that's incorrect at the least if not a lie.

Originally posted by DenyObfuscation
reply to post by blocula

 

People keep saying here that theres no temperature in space and they are plainly and simply wrong >

Just in case you still don't get it, do you understand why a vacuum insulated Thermos container works? It's not because "NASA lies". You can prove this to yourself as has been explained to you already, unless you'd rather believe a lie.

Do you have a source for your quote about self directed anger? I still think that's incorrect at the least if not a lie.

Maybe vacuum insulated containers are also just holograms?

reply to post by butcherguy

A hologram would hold more water than bloc's theories!