Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

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

page: 25
36
<< 22  23  24    26  27  28 >>

log in

join

posted on Aug, 20 2012 @ 01:09 PM
link   
reply to post by Questionablesanity
 


Just to get you up to speed quickly Questionablesanity, the reason a front for space operations is so desperately required is that you cannot launch heavy payloads into space without people asking questions.

Let's do a hypothetical. Say by 1965 the Navy wanted to put something very particular in space that weighed 50,000 pounds. This thing, whatever it was, was needed as part of some military project. Had there not been NASA, then the payload could not be launched without the Navy giving at least some accounting of what it was doing. Of course they could lie and say it was a super sophisticaed weather satellite or what have you, but having to give one accounting after the next for these payloads would create suspicion among members of congress and the community at large. At some point, and fairly early on, we'd catch on, and in fact we have. We can see what they are up to in space. Given the circumstances, it is all rather obvious.

So NASA from its inception was a way to put anything in space the Army, Navy, Air Force wanted(within the limitations of technical feasibility) without having to explain anything.




posted on Aug, 20 2012 @ 01:38 PM
link   
reply to post by chrisb9
 


Soon enough my dear friend Mr Obama will announce that the USA confirms the existance of other life forms in the outer space in order to promote NWO plans! For the ones that are not TV brain washed masses will keep what i am saying in the back of their heads and when it happens will understand that whatever happens around us is in fact part of the biggest play in human 's history.

Let the ones that don't believe you. Keep searching and keep up the good job. Very nice thread!

Flag it people!



posted on Aug, 20 2012 @ 04:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by Gibborium
reply to post by patrick1000
 


Well, decisively, I wondered when you would show up here. You've been busy making up aliases, I have counted about 50+ at present. Of course, that is just the number I have run across. I would think you would be tired of being band on ATS by now.

I'd love to message you privately about that and will be doing so as soon as I am capable to do so with the required number of posts.



posted on Aug, 20 2012 @ 06:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by patrick1000
reply to post by Questionablesanity
 


So NASA from its inception was a way to put anything in space the Army, Navy, Air Force wanted(within the limitations of technical feasibility) without having to explain anything.


that makes no sense at all - military launches are still routinely reported on, even when the payload is "classified" - how would this be any different if there was not a civilian space agency??



posted on Aug, 20 2012 @ 06:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by JesusChristwins
reply to post by chrisb9
 


Soon enough my dear friend Mr Obama will announce that the USA confirms the existance of other life forms in the outer space in order to promote NWO plans! For the ones that are not TV brain washed masses will keep what i am saying in the back of their heads and when it happens will understand that whatever happens around us is in fact part of the biggest play in human 's history.

Let the ones that don't believe you. Keep searching and keep up the good job. Very nice thread!

Flag it people!


So if they DON'T announce anything, then it's just a matter of time until you guys make up some conspiracy story that "the truth" is hidden - and IF they announce it, then it's *also* a conspiracy to promote NWO plans?

Sorry: Lol?! I mean, no matter what, we can't get away from the conspiracy, can't we?



posted on Aug, 20 2012 @ 06:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by flexy123

So if they DON'T announce anything, then it's just a matter of time until you guys make up some conspiracy story that "the truth" is hidden - and IF they announce it, then it's *also* a conspiracy to promote NWO plans?

Sorry: Lol?! I mean, no matter what, we can't get away from the conspiracy, can't we?



What do you mean "it's just matter of time........that the "truth" is hidden" - can't you use ATS's search function??

Sheesh!!



posted on Aug, 21 2012 @ 10:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by patrick1000

Let's do a hypothetical. Say by 1965 the Navy wanted to put something very particular in space that weighed 50,000 pounds. This thing, whatever it was, was needed as part of some military project. Had there not been NASA, then the payload could not be launched without the Navy giving at least some accounting of what it was doing.


You really need to read up on your American history, Patrick. In 1965 the cold war was raging and it was pretty easy to get away with anything by simply saying "We need to _______ to fight communists!" The people were more than happy to support that, they didn't care what was being launched, all they knew is that if it was to fight the Soviets, they wanted it.



posted on Aug, 31 2012 @ 12:57 PM
link   



The Quality of Photo's from Mars today in 2012 are not as good as way back in 1976 Because of...???


A. Industrial Pollution on Mars today in 2012 is much worse now than it was way back in 1976.

B. The Camera's where Much Better way back in 1976 as compared to the digital camera's of 2012.

C. The whole Nasa Mars Probe Landing Gig is just One Great Big Ole Scam...


Ding, Ding, Ding Ding, Ding. - - The Correct Answer is " C "


C. The whole Nasa Mars Probe Landing Gig is just One Great Big Ole Scam...



Your reasonings are very good and get a lot of humour

All NASA's enterprises are fake, they have not technology to make them
edit on 31-8-2012 by Smartguy because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 1 2012 @ 11:27 AM
link   
www.lockheedmartin.com...

Above the image you can read:

SPACE EXPLORATION
To Be Human is to Explore

No, I don't agree with you. To be Human is to show real things

Instead you show the image of Phoenix made by an artist

It is strange that you don't show the real image of Phoenix. Haven't you test it in your airport?

And it is strange that we can't see the real image of Mars Curiosity Lander, made directly by NASA and Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL). Haven't they test it too?

There are only artistic images. Very strange. Haven't they tested Mars Phoenix Lander and Mars Curiosity Lander on the earth before landing them on Mars? Very strange

This strange behavior reveals that they have never landed Phoenix and Curiosity on Mars (and any other probe)



posted on Sep, 1 2012 @ 01:26 PM
link   
reply to post by Smartguy
 

Here is a good place to see pictures of the Phoenix Lander:
Lockheed Martin

Click on the below picture of the Phoenix Lander for the full rez pic on Lockheed Martin's web site



This would be a good place to start to see some actual photos of the Curiosity Rover. Clicking the link below will direct you to the Jet Propulsion laboratory, Mars Science Laboratory Curiosity Rover.
Mars Science Laboratory Curiosity Rover Search

And here is a video of Curiosity being tested to get you started:
Curiosity Clean Room

And here is a link to the multimedia page for the building of Curiosity. The last page is the beginning and the first page is the most current:
Multimedia Page for Curiosity

So you can see the Phoenix Lander and Curiosity are real, they were built, tested, and Curiosity is now on Mars roving around as a good Mars Rover should be doing.

edit on 9/1/2012 by Gibborium because: picture inclusion



posted on Sep, 1 2012 @ 01:32 PM
link   
reply to post by Smartguy
 

Phoenix lander


edit on 9/1/2012 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 1 2012 @ 03:56 PM
link   
Thank you for the photos.

There is only a little problem: NASA's engineers build spacecraft that can't fly. They are made using
science fiction and technology fiction.

Look at this crucial spacecraft:



Show us only one test of this spacecraft parachuted from a helicopter to verify its capacity to land like a helicopter, and able to land Curiosity on the fields of our loved earth with cables, doing all these things by itself
without a pilot.

Show us only one test of Phoenix parachuted from a helicopter at Lockheed Martin airport.

Haven't they done any test?

No.

Unacceptable answer. If you invent a new spacecraft, you must test it to see if it works perfectly.

If you are not able to show its tests, you are defrauding us. You say that it flies perfectly, but we have seen only a complicated toy that can't fly.



posted on Sep, 1 2012 @ 04:03 PM
link   
reply to post by Smartguy
 



Show us only one test of Phoenix parachuted from a helicopter at Lockheed Martin airport.


How would throwing a spacecraft designed to land itself in a world with one third of Earth's gravity out of a helicopter test anything?



posted on Sep, 1 2012 @ 04:30 PM
link   
reply to post by chrisb9
 


Its funny how you and those who believe like you are the "real" thinkers and the rest of us who know that we have a machine on mars now and that we went to the moon in the 60's are not . What are we again? Oh the sheeple thats right. Baaaaaaa. And you probably werent even around in the 60's.



posted on Sep, 1 2012 @ 04:35 PM
link   
reply to post by chrisb9
 


Oh and secondly, I live not a mile from a NASA facility here in Hampton Virginia. Go ahead and look it up. The people who work there, live in normal everyday ranch type houses just like the rest of us. Oh some live in older victorian type homes as there are a lot of older houses here in Hampton, one of the US's oldest cities. They are not rich, or living high on the hog in fancy mansions. Not these guys anyway and these are the original NASA guys here.



posted on Sep, 1 2012 @ 04:43 PM
link   
reply to post by Smartguy
 


Or ding ding ding, IT HAS A DUST COVER OVER IT RIGHT NOW and the cover is covered with dust from the landing. But for some people its much more fun to see it another way I guess. Have fun.



posted on Sep, 2 2012 @ 12:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by DJW001
reply to post by Smartguy
 


How would throwing a spacecraft designed to land itself in a world with one third of Earth's gravity out of a helicopter test anything?


On Mars, if it was true (we can’t be sure up to when we will really measure it), the gravity would be 38% of the earth’s.
But you, before sending Curiosity to Mars, must test it to verify if that flying crane is able to slow down velocity from 360 km/h to 0 km/h and to land Curiosity softly on that planet.
Therefore you build an identical spacecraft with more power, able to land on the earth, doing all the things by itself
You can’t send a very expensive probe to Mars without testing it on the earth

If you had done it, you would be proud to show that wonderful spacecraft able to do incredibile things

Instead you have not invented that astonishing spacecraft and you can show nothing

Try to image: people are on a large field. A helicopter comes with vertical height 3 km. A big metallic base with 4 rocket engines is parachuted down. The parachute slows down its velocity, then the parachute detaches and the 4 engines fire.

That big metallic base continues its fast descent and, instead of tilting in every direction, is able to keep horizontal attitude.

At the end it is able to land Curiosity softly with cables. And it does all these things by itself without pilot.

It would be amazing, astonishing. All the people would be incredulous, unable to believe.

You landed 6 big LEM on the moon but you never tested them at Langley Crane. Another big hoax.
edit on 2-9-2012 by Smartguy because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 3 2012 @ 03:17 AM
link   
reply to post by Smartguy
 



On Mars, if it was true (we can’t be sure up to when we will really measure it), the gravity would be 38% of the earth’s.


We know that it is true because we have measured it. We have observed the orbital periods of its satellites. We have Newton's equations. The rest is simply mathematics.


But you, before sending Curiosity to Mars, must test it to verify if that flying crane is able to slow down velocity from 360 km/h to 0 km/h and to land Curiosity softly on that planet.


Same principle as above. We know the impulse of the rocket engines, we know the velocities involved. The rest is simple mathematics.


Therefore you build an identical spacecraft with more power, able to land on the earth, doing all the things by itself


Why? It is much easier to model mathematically and test the individual components for reliability.


You can’t send a very expensive probe to Mars without testing it on the earth


It was tested:




posted on Sep, 3 2012 @ 03:52 AM
link   
reply to post by Smartguy
 


I just read your post and noticed your username is 'Smartguy'. This is either an attempt at deception or some sort of joke. I stopped bothering to try and reason with people like you some time ago because your way of thinking is literally so feeble minded and simplistic that there is no chance on Earth you could even begin to comprehend the basics required to understand any argument against your 'beliefs'. Every time I read a post like yours I feel an overwhelming degree of sadness at how even with the wealth of information available to people today, on some it's just wasted because they don't possess the necessary initiative or brainpower to make use of it. To try and build a foundation of understanding for you in order to get to the stage where you could start to understand and comprehend what is required, one would have to literally start at the level of education normally given to a 5 year old. There is an increasing trend in this not only on these boards, but in general. I don't know if it is becoming more apparent due to the ease at which people can communicate, or if there is an actual falling trend in average intelligence. But either way it's incredibly depressing.



posted on Sep, 3 2012 @ 09:51 AM
link   
reply to post by DJW001
 


www.youtube.com...

Stop the video at minute 03:07 Have these NASA’s actors tested the Flying Crane hanging it to that
ridiculous telescopic crane?

How could they verify if it was able to slow down velocity from 360 km/h to 0 km/h and to land Curiosity softly on the ground using a foolish telescopic crane?

Those persons are only actors that simulate to speak of technological things.

Dear friend DJW001, you say:
“It is much easier to model mathematically and test the individual components for reliability…
The rest is simple mathematics”.

No, you are saying nonsense. Image that you have a rocket that weighs 100 kg. You put a rocket engine that has 100 kg of thrust and mathematically 100-100 = 0 and the rocket should stay right in vertical attitude. Instead the rocket would tilt in every direction and would crash.

Phisics is much more important than mathematics. Mathematics can offer a big help, but before you must solve phisics problems of BALANCE IN 3D SPACE. The Flying Crane must balance in vertical and horizontal attitude.

Have you seen this video:

www.youtube.com...

NASA’s engineers are still today looking for a rocket that can land on the moon. Why? Northrop grumman landed 6 big “Snoopy” on the moon or not? Not at all.

They landed on the Moon with 6 identical “Snoopy” with a comic strip.

www.examiner.com...

Dear friend DJW001 this is a video of yours:

www.youtube.com...

Again, again and again only animated cartoon. Again, again and again many actors that simulate to have a fantastic technology, but this technology doesn’t exist. It is only technology fiction.

edit on 3-9-2012 by Smartguy because: (no reason given)





new topics

top topics



 
36
<< 22  23  24    26  27  28 >>

log in

join