Curiosity Has Not Landed - But Is Good Entertainment For The TV Brain Washed Masses

How does a Huge Scam or Hoax really work ?

The old Fable below written by: Hans Christian Andersen explains how simple big scams really work.



The Emperor's New Clothes

Two weavers who promise an Emperor a new suit of clothes that is invisible to those unfit for their positions, stupid, or incompetent. When the Emperor parades before his subjects in his new clothes, a child cries out, "But he isn't wearing anything at all!" The tale has been translated into over a hundred languages

The Plot:

A vain Emperor who cares for nothing but his appearance and attire hires two tailors who are really swindlers that promise him the finest, best suit of clothes from a fabric invisible to anyone who is unfit for his position or "just hopelessly stupid". The Emperor cannot see the cloth himself, but pretends that he can for fear of appearing unfit for his position; his ministers do the same.

When the swindlers report that the suit is finished, they mime dressing him and the Emperor then marches in procession before his subjects, who play along with the pretense. Suddenly, a child in the crowd, too young to understand the desirability of keeping up the pretense, blurts out that the Emperor is wearing nothing at all and the cry is taken up by others. The Emperor cringes, suspecting the assertion is true, but holds himself up proudly and continues the procession.

Nasa and the whole scam works in the exact same way. All of the followers of the scam will dutifully follow the story line, no matter how obsurd, ridiculous and insane the " Space Exploration Story " gets.

reply to post by chrisb9

Nasa and the whole scam works in the exact same way. All of the followers of the scam will dutifully follow the story line, no matter how obsurd, ridiculous and insane the " Space Exploration Story " gets.

What, exactly, do you find obsurd [sic], ridiculous or insane about the "Space Exploration Story?"

reply to post by chrisb9


Well go ahead and prove it instead of spouting nonsense. I dare you. I double dare you

reply to post by chrisb9


I do believe it is you who stands there naked o emperor of your b9 little kingdom, for you have shown us many invisible garments~

I see you are in need of support

For the record: Please tell us, in a meaningful way, why you think this mission is a scam

This thread was a good intention. "LEts throw it out there that the new Mars mission is faked.
Conceptually a great potential conspiracy.
Yet the fact remains the mission is indeed true
Maybe some people have learnt some great info
There are those though that missed out on the intelligence gene and will always be as
As thick as a brick

reply to post by chrisb9


No, don't change your story because you've been caught with your pants down.. More 'truthseeker' lies

Originally posted by SkepticGuy
"For the Marines, the ensuing rituals were painfully familiar. Notify the widow. Remove the wreckage. Investigate the causes.
They know this drill all too well because the Harrier is the most dangerous airplane flying in the U.S. military today.
Over the last three decades, it has amassed the highest rate of major accidents of any Air Force, Navy, Army or Marine plane now in service. Forty-five Marines have died in 143 noncombat accidents since the corps bought the so-called jump jet from the British in 1971. More than a third of the fleet has been lost to accidents".

FYI, the US took a perfectly working machine (the UK made Harrier) and bastardised it by changing significant parts. Add onto that the bulk of US Marine Harrier crashed are actually human error, whereas very few UK ones have crashed (and in fact served with distinction destroying over 100 enemy aircraft without loss) show the machine works.

Originally posted by SkepticGuy
Today exist harrier less dangerous. They can fly in our planet because the Earth has a thick atmosphere and the airplanes are helped by aerodynamic forces in take off and landing.

No, they aren't. The only way a Harrier gets off the ground in vertical lift is purely done by the engines alone. With a heavier payload, it is a combination of aerodynamic forces but still largely down to the thrust from the engine as it can take off in a very short distance.

Originally posted by SkepticGuy
You can't use them to land on Mars because its atmosphere density is 1% of the Earth's, they would roll and crash like Morpheus instantly

Atmospheric pressure has no bearing on rockets, matey. It would only matter if you were trying to fly a plane, but even then you can take that into account, build bigger wings and a lighter aircraft.

You clearly have no knowledge, at all, of how any of this is supposed to work. Instead, you keep harping on about it being impossible with no reasoning or science to show it, ask for videos (then ignore them) and continue to make yourself appear the fool. Bottom line is, if we can make rockets work like that on Earth, doing so on Mars would be eve easier due to the lower gravity, so would require less thrust.

It really is basic grade Newtonian physics that anyone over the age of 11 should be able to grasp.

reply to post by excentryk


You wrote: "For the record: Please tell us, in a meaningful way, why you think this mission is a scam".

Because NASA's engineers have not tecnology to land a probe there. They have contacted John Carmack to solve the problem, but his videos are fake and his attempts to land backwards are abosutely ridiculous:
why don't you want to understand?

I have been wrong yesterday about aerodynamic forces of Harrier

But today i have discovered, without any doubt, that Armadillo videos are fake because thrust forces,
made by computer graphics, are completely wrong

Pay attention to the video from 1:00 minutes, when the rocket is landing, ok?

www.youtube.com...

The rocket engine is placed at the bottom of the rocket, ok?

Look at the rocket at 0:57 minute. Well, the rocket is tilting to the left. John Carmack, the famous game developer, with computer simulates flames tilted toward left.

WRONG, WRONG, WRONG, WRONG, WRONG

To keep again rocket vertical, the flames, the thrust should be tilted toward RIGHT not toward LEFT.

If the thrust pushes to the left, the rocket spins counterclockwise and crashes.

Look at the rocket at 0:58 minute. Well, the rocket is tilting to the right and flames are tilted toward right.

To keep again rocket vertical, the thrust should push to the LEFT not to the RIGHT.

If the thrust pushes to the RIGHT, the rocket spins clockwise and crash like Morpheus

Use a pencil to understand my brilliant reasonings.

WOW, try to disprove my STATEMENT. (NASA often use the word "STATEMENT")

reply to post by SkepticGuy


You're still clinging to this nonsense about rockets being unable to hover or land "backwards"?

Really?

You can build such a machine yourself! In actuality, the fact you acknowledge the Harrier works is odd when you don't believe it can happen, why can the rocket not work?

It is simply a case of balancing forces. As long as the rockets give out more thrust than the force of gravity, it will go up. Balance the thrust of the rocket to match the force of gravity, it will hover.

SImples, as the famous Botswanan Rodent says...

reply to post by SkepticGuy


Gibberish.

Every action has an equal and opposite reaction.

If an object coming down under thrust tilts left, then the thrust needs to go to the left to push its centre of gravity back horizontal.

Thrust to the right would cause it to tip further. The same applies the other way round. The idea is to land as evenly as possible.

I keep repeating this - and you keep embarrasing yourself - you do not know what you are talking about. Why persist when you are so obviously wrong?

reply to post by SkepticGuy

To keep again rocket vertical, the flames, the thrust should be tilted toward RIGHT not toward LEFT.

Thrust is a vector quantity... oh, never mind, here's a video for you:

Originally posted by AlphaHawk
reply to post by chrisb9

 

You sir do have tickets upon yourself don't you?

You can't prove that Curiosity didn't go to Mars, so I fail to understand why you are so certain about it?

Acting so high and mighty just alienates you from everyone, even those that may agree with you.

HI THERE MR.STRAW MAN

If I said I just took a dump, then asked you to prove I didn't, please explain how you would go about providing proof? Thanks.

I.e. I claim I just took a dump, the burden of proof lies with ME, the one making the claims, NOT the one doubting said claims. You can be skeptical all you want, but it ends at plain hypocrisy, which YOU displayed with your post.


But here you are, no proof either, yet certain it landed, how exactly does this make you any different from what you accuse OP of??

reply to post by ThisIsNotReality


As stated several times in this thread, there are ways to prove this, one of the most important being radio direction finding...

If you think this is all faked, then you must by logical extension believe that Europe, Russia, China, Japan and all the amateur Astronomers around the world are also in on it, some of which would love to point out that NASA is full of it. Same goes for the Moon landings.

Until you can explain how such a thing could be faked, you have nothing.

reply to post by ThisIsNotReality

But here you are, no proof either, yet certain it landed, how exactly does this make you any different from what you accuse OP of??

There is a long chain of evidence that it is real. Witnesses, documents and so forth. All of it would stand up in court. What does the other side have?

Originally posted by neformore
reply to post by SkepticGuy

 

Gibberish.

Every action has an equal and opposite reaction.

If an object coming down under thrust tilts left, then the thrust needs to go to the left to push its centre of gravity back horizontal.

Thrust to the right would cause it to tip further. The same applies the other way round. The idea is to land as evenly as possible.

I keep repeating this - and you keep embarrasing yourself - you do not know what you are talking about. Why persist when you are so obviously wrong?

You have not understood.

Take a pencil and rotate it slightly counterclockwise. The thrust is below the centre of gravity. Centre of gravity is in the middle. Centre of gravity of an object is also the centre of rotation.

To make the pencil turn clockwise you must push it from the right.

If you push it from the left, pencil rotates even more counterclockwise.

The rocket would crash turning counterclockwise against the ground.

Have you seen Morpheus crash?

Yesterday about Harrier I was wrong, but today I am right, absolutely.

Armadillo Aerospace Company, that has its plant in the cellar, has used computer graphics in the wrong way.

Ehy, John Carmack, continue developing your games. Rocketry is not for you. You have the face of a child, continue to play.

Time to contact the press! You're famous now! Also make sure to contact some scientist for supportive quotes!

Originally posted by stumason
reply to post by ThisIsNotReality

 

As stated several times in this thread, there are ways to prove this, one of the most important being radio direction finding...

If you think this is all faked, then you must by logical extension believe that Europe, Russia, China, Japan and all the amateur Astronomers around the world are also in on it, some of which would love to point out that NASA is full of it. Same goes for the Moon landings.

Until you can explain how such a thing could be faked, you have nothing.

Not saying I think it's fake?... Just pointing out that the logic is wrong, that was all

What is this on the background mountains? A zig zag road?

www.stuff.co.nz...

High def photo from NASA here, you can see 'the road' in the left part of the photo:

mars.jpl.nasa.gov...

BTW, Atacama desert in Chile looks like this:

wwwpaztcn.wr.usgs.gov...

reply to post by JackHill


Hey, thanks for those helpful images verifying that a desert planet can look like a desert.

It's pretty much what we expected to see from the start. Actually though, we've already known this from the times we've been there before.

... but thanks for the input!

reply to post by chrisb9


After I post 2 stories with photo's and put forth Blatant and Bizzare statements with claims about a trip to Mars and then an obvious Hoax video as " Examples " of Obsurd and Ridiculous Claims.

The following " Einstiens " chime back in and post replies right away saying things like - AHA - You are a Liar and you are attempting to Hoax Everyone and you've been caught etc.. ( excentryk & AgentSmith )

Patting themselves on the back, as though they where modern day " Sherlocks " and somehow " Discovered " something that no one else on ATS could have possibly noticed about my stories of Examples of Lies.

Meanwhile, 99.9 % of the rest of the readers on this thread have already " Understood " that I was just making up wild stories and statements and providing them as " Examples " of just how " Insane and Ridiclous " Exotic stories can be easily made by " Anyone ".

If there where No History of " Governments " Ever lying to their people, then " No One " would Ever Doubt what they had to say today. But Unfortunately for man kind that is just not the case. In fact, just the Exact Opposite is the case of a Proven " Track Record " of Lying by All governments World Wide.

As the " Opportunity " exists, the US government will " Endeaver " to promote a new Space Scam that will Pacify the Populations " Curiosity " about space...

For those that are kind of slow, and don't get it, add the word " Rover " behind each word inside Quotation marks in the sentence just above. I see that now I must spell out and Explain every little last detail or possiblity or point that a statement might make to a few readers that just don't get it. "Never being able to Read between the lines". Having no real vision or real understanding at all.

Thanks - JackHill - for posting this Mars looking desert photo below: Is the new curiosity rover on mars? or was it sitting in a very remote desert setting like this photo below some where in the world while filming was done...?

Atacama desert in Chile looks like this: