Our Entire Space Program Is A Hoax And A Massive Deception

Originally posted by DenyObfuscation
reply to post by longjohnbritches

 

According to semantics if our feet are on the surface of earth then the rest of us is in outer space. Boundry BA

Where do you find any definition of outer space that would support your notion? Your statement is not "semantics", it is simply false.

Like most anything in science or mathematics. Points , parameters, boundaries are chosen by the author. For example there is nothing that really changes from the center of the earth's core with respect to gravity out into deep deep space.
There ARE ways of sub divisions of that distance by means of measurements. Atmospheric ,PSI, Troposphere, Ionosphere, oxygen and radiation content etc.
And actually if there is a boundary for one concept it is unlikely it is a boundary for other concepts.
You see it is not as if there is a yellow police tape wrapped around the planet that says BOUNDRY.
All boundaries or points of reference are in flux physically and philosophically

reply to post by longjohnbritches

For example there is nothing that really changes from the center of the earth's core with respect to gravity out into deep deep space.

Nothing changes? How about its intensity?

You see it is not as if there is a yellow police tape wrapped around the planet that says BOUNDRY. All boundaries or points of reference are in flux physically and philosophically

But the distinctions are not without differences. The lines are drawn for reasons and regardless of where those lines are it seems the OP is attempting to redefine his initial premise.

Originally posted by DenyObfuscation
reply to post by longjohnbritches

 

For example there is nothing that really changes from the center of the earth's core with respect to gravity out into deep deep space.

Nothing changes? How about its intensity?

You see it is not as if there is a yellow police tape wrapped around the planet that says BOUNDRY. All boundaries or points of reference are in flux physically and philosophically

But the distinctions are not without differences. The lines are drawn for reasons and regardless of where those lines are it seems the OP is attempting to redefine his initial premise.

I am not arguing about there utility. But as I said they are there at the wim of the author unless challanged by convention.

Originally posted by longjohnbritches


I am not arguing about there utility. But as I said they are there at the wim of the author unless challenged by convention.

Are you referring to blocula or just any author? Because, blocula has been challenged and proven wrong about his definition of space. Each division creates an opportunity for definition. However, convention has already defined space as was noted:

jra's previous post

Boundary

There is no clear boundary between Earth's atmosphere and space, as the density of the atmosphere gradually decreases as the altitude increases. There are several standard boundary designations, namely:

-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.

-The United States designates people who travel above an altitude of 50 miles (80 km) as astronauts.

-NASA's mission control uses 76 mi (122 km) as their re-entry altitude (termed the Entry Interface), which roughly marks the boundary where atmospheric drag becomes noticeable (depending on the ballistic coefficient of the vehicle), thus leading shuttles to switch from steering with thrusters to maneuvering with air surfaces.

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).

Originally posted by Gibborium

Originally posted by longjohnbritches


I am not arguing about there utility. But as I said they are there at the wim of the author unless challenged by convention.

Are you referring to blocula or just any author? Because, blocula has been challenged and proven wrong about his definition of space. Each division creates an opportunity for definition. However, convention has already defined space as was noted:

jra's previous post

Boundary

There is no clear boundary between Earth's atmosphere and space, as the density of the atmosphere gradually decreases as the altitude increases. There are several standard boundary designations, namely:

-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.

-The United States designates people who travel above an altitude of 50 miles (80 km) as astronauts.

-NASA's mission control uses 76 mi (122 km) as their re-entry altitude (termed the Entry Interface), which roughly marks the boundary where atmospheric drag becomes noticeable (depending on the ballistic coefficient of the vehicle), thus leading shuttles to switch from steering with thrusters to maneuvering with air surfaces.

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).

edit on 5/16/2012 by Gibborium because: spelling correction

edit on 5/16/2012 by Gibborium because: grammar

All authors are subject to the best knowledge of their time. Convention changes like the subjects.
Your concept of the OP is merly an opinion in flux.
ira's blurb substanciates my opinion of bounrary.
At least for the mean while.

Originally posted by longjohnbritches

Originally posted by Gibborium

Originally posted by longjohnbritches


I am not arguing about there utility. But as I said they are there at the wim of the author unless challenged by convention.

Are you referring to blocula or just any author? Because, blocula has been challenged and proven wrong about his definition of space. Each division creates an opportunity for definition. However, convention has already defined space as was noted:

jra's previous post

Boundary

There is no clear boundary between Earth's atmosphere and space, as the density of the atmosphere gradually decreases as the altitude increases. There are several standard boundary designations, namely:

-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.

-The United States designates people who travel above an altitude of 50 miles (80 km) as astronauts.

-NASA's mission control uses 76 mi (122 km) as their re-entry altitude (termed the Entry Interface), which roughly marks the boundary where atmospheric drag becomes noticeable (depending on the ballistic coefficient of the vehicle), thus leading shuttles to switch from steering with thrusters to maneuvering with air surfaces.

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).

edit on 5/16/2012 by Gibborium because: spelling correction

edit on 5/16/2012 by Gibborium because: grammar

All authors are subject to the best knowledge of their time. Convention changes like the subjects.
Your concept of the OP is merly an opinion in flux.
ira's blurb substanciates my opinion of bounrary.
At least for the mean while.

Ok but but in the end they crossed all (boundaries of the realms of once an impossibility,) but come 1969 they did break all boundaries and flew to the moon and was seen and monitored by people with ham radios, telescope fanatics and the likes.

They also got round the van allen belt, and some say how come if that is the case why did they not suffer any radiation sickness..
Well they did and most are suffering big time over it but people like the op do not do basic research and check before spouting out, that they never got past it the van allen belt ( Another boundary breaker in itself).

Them astronauts must have been sh*ting themselfs wandering what was gonna be on the moon, if they would pass the belt etc.

soon there will be more boundaries that will be broken hopefully in my lifetime who knows ..

reply to post by denver22


Naw, don't take it peronal, Better things to do now. Later.

Originally posted by longjohnbritches
reply to post by denver22

 

Naw, don't take it peronal, Better things to do now. Later.

ok run along and do your homework be back soon when you have done some basic research ta ta for now
u got school in the morning ask the science teacher about it you never know he may be able to help you cross your boundaries to do with space bye bye little john you must pull your britches up and knuckle down and learn
you have much to learn young jedi see you tomorrow after supper ljb

peace

reply to post by longjohnbritches


Oh, but you miss the point. Most boundaries have set points and are non movable. Take for instance the boundary of a stop sign. Even though states have the ability to designate exactly where before the intersection a vehicle must stop before it enters the intersection, the sign is still a STOP sign. When in place, a vehicle must stop. There is no opportunity to redefine the use, term, or definition of stop. It means just that, STOP.

Space has been defined as that place where conventional transport must change in order to reach a point where orbit or continued travel is no longer impacted as to draw that transport back to the earth. LEO, Low Earth Orbit is just that, a place in space above the Earth where the gravity of the Earth can no longer pull an object (satellite, rocket, capsule, ISI, etc) back to the surface.

Thus, the definition of space cannot be arbitrarily changed by blocula just to suit his desire to make it fit his argument. Man has not only entered space, he has traversed it all the way the Moon. And, there are future plans for man to traverse space all the way to Mars as well.

reply to post by denver22
What exactly do i have available for me to research? All i have is their photos,their films,their rockets going up into the sky,their capsules floating in the ocean and thats about it.All i have to research is what they tell me and what they want me to believe and they like to lie all the time and so why should i automatically believe everything they tell me without question? Why should i robotically accept whatever they show me without suspicion?

Originally posted by PrinceDreamer


Now if yo want to argue that the Moon photo's are fake, I will give that some traction, I believe we went to the moon, I just think the photo's are fake to keep something hidden. I think they realised once they were on the Moon they couldn't show the real photographs and so hastily had to make some up hence there are errors in them. But that could be me just being a simpleton like you

Squyres probably knows something about it and that is why he is snail mailing us on mars (the little machines that are supposedly finding action of water.) Probably not too many employees from NASA are people that I would want to meet up in heaven probably wouldn't rank any of them.

Originally posted by denver22
reply to post by MarkScheppy

 

I definitley think we wen't to the moon as like you say the technology we had even in 40s let alone the sixties
yes some astronauts lost there lives tragically

R.I.P i would not be happy if i was one of the family who lost their loved ones in that accident only to get them saying its all a hoax ..

You only hear of one group that is private now working on a launch vehicle, Suborbital systems, and they aren't flocking to develop space vehicles for low earth orbit or high earth orbit.

But hey in the eighties we had the flux capacitor and that was more than enough fodder to fill people's imaginations, because Marty could time travel back and forth.

Originally posted by blocula
reply to post by denver22

 

What exactly do i have available for me to research?

Try almost a hundred pages of posts with evidence and links that you choose to ignore and read
there is such thing as a search engine p.s use it

reply to post by denver22
Almost 100 pages of supposed evidence,thats been spoon fed and force fed to the sheeple of the world for far too long,that i have for almost 100 pages,continuously exposed as being most likely possible and highly suspicious lies,hoaxes,fakes and deceptions...

We saw the rockets go up and we saw the capsules floating in the ocean and everything else that we were shown in-between were power tripping pcych-ops,rotoscopic effects and green/blue screen pipe-dreams upon our televisions

reply to post by blocula


Another thing bloc since your mood allways says telepathic and you have stated numerous times that you have that power then what is my next line on this post --- --- - ------, -- -- --- -- ---- ------- .

Originally posted by blocula
reply to post by denver22

 

Almost 100 pages of supposed evidence,thats been spoon fed and force fed to the sheeple of the world for far too long,that i have for almost 100 pages,continuously exposed as being highly possible and very suspicious lies, hoaxes, fakes and deceptions...

Bloc buddy all you have exposed is that you have a problem paying attention with facts and logic for almost a hundred pages now.

You are willing to believe aliens are on the moon, ooh and just for the record astronauts give credence to your claims of that so why would you still not think we have gone then? the astronauts only go to back up your moon ark thread ......

Originally posted by blocula
reply to post by denver22

 

We saw the rockets go up and we saw the capsules floating in the ocean and everything else that we were shown in-between were power tripping pcych-ops,rotoscopic effects and green/blue screen pipe-dreams upon our televisions

edit on 17-5-2012 by blocula because: (no reason given)

Do not forget they were tracked with ham radios people observed with telescopes .

do not make me laugh blue screen pipe dreams as you could monitor the rockets my boy so tell me is that blue screen must try harder my boy ..

reply to post by blocula


do we have to do everything for look bloc READ THE LINK PLEASE

en.wikipedia.org...

THIS IS YOUR BASIC RADIATION RESEARCH.

Have you even read about the effects of radiation in space that some of these poor astronauts got while achieving mans dream ? are you aware that some got really ill because of raditaion?

P.S i will get the email for you so you can tell the astronauts families that you think that they are lying and it is all a hoax stay tuned bloc ..

reply to post by blocula


Silence is golden while ignorance is bliss a bloc .

conspiracies are out there but this is not one of them

p.s can you explain the mirror up on the moon ?
use your search engine and get back to me please with an answer

Originally posted by TWISTEDWORDS
Actually, the space program is not a hoax at all. It is just that our scientists have finally admitted something to themselves. Our earth is our fishbowl, yes a fishbowl. We can't survive outside this fishbowl, just like a fish can't survive outside its water. So far we have been unable to find a suitable planet like our own, so what's the point of trying to go to space when there is nowhere to go to? Also, our scientists can't figure out how to travel vast distances in a short amount of time, so again what's the point? It looks more and more like we are stuck here on this planet for quite some time.

Would avail us nothing, must as no possession is of any avail without the possession of the good.

Mars goes into profitless because there are no immediate resources that humans go and take. Insanity, I tell ya. I would go out in a flaming space shuttle if you have to go and die anyway.