Disclosure of the reality of UFO's

[daleksteve]

Tell me of these experiments that you and I can do to prove that the earth is round.

I think it is.... but we cannot prove it.

Ah but we can.

One of the best documented experiment methods for determining the Earth's roundness was first performed (to our knowledge) by the ancient Greeks. This was achieved by comparing the shadows of sticks in different locations. When the sun was directly overhead in one place, the stick there cast no shadow. At the same time in a city around 500 miles north, the stick there did cast a shadow.

If the Earth were flat then both sticks should show the same shadow (or lack of) because they would be positioned at the same angle towards the sun.

 

[Aldebaran]

If you think we went to the moon, maybe you can tell me how they did it. One of the major problems, today, with technology that is almost 50 years more advance, is going through the Van Allen belts of radiation.

They cannot do it right now. If the space shuttle goes more than 200 miles high in low earth orbit, they start to see flashing in their eyes.

Right there..... the moon shots are dead. The more you look, the more you will see that this was the best fake movie production ever.

The answers are out there:

 

[JacksBratt]

You can satisfy yourself that the Earth is round quite easily.
Go and buy an airplane ticket. Take a ride at 33,000 feet altitude.
Look out the window. You can see the curvature of the horizon..

Better still. Ask yourself one question. Where do all the international plane flights go each day? They don't just "go to other countries". An airplane flies on a fixed heading. For example, you buy a ticket to Spain and you fly due east. And you keep going east ... and more east ... and more east. If you want to, when you get to Spain, buy another ticket for Beijing. Then you fly east again. Constantly.

So if you believe that the Earth is flat, then sooner or later you will hit the edge. BOOM! That's it. Game over!
You're dead. You just went off the Earth, and you ran out of atmosphere. Everyone is gone.

So people who believe in the Flat Earth must also believe that every day thousands of air travelers are simply disappearing and never coming back.
Really??

That's actually really funny.

It always amazes me as to how much we accept things other people tell us.

First, according to NASA you need to be 35 to 40 thousand feet in order to begin to see the curve of the earth... very rarely do air lines fly at this altitude and if they do... that's only when you can "begin" to see the curve.
On top of that, I did this. Next time you go, take a magazine, hold the edge of it to the horizon... there is no curve. The round windows on the plane and our cognitive dissonance tell our brains that we see it, but it's not there.

This has also been shown in many video's by the FE crowd.

Second.... and most amusing...If you had taken even 5 minutes to investigate the model being presented by the FE believers.... you can circumnavigate a Flat Earth. There is no edge that you can fall off of.
Their model is a plate with Antarctica as the perimeter with an ice wall that holds everything in.

Please, before you go spouting off as to how easy it is to prove that the earth is a globe... don't embarrass yourself by stating your ignorance.

I am not a believer of the FE, However, the FE people are not hicks from some rural area in the Ozark mountains. They have done their homework....

Maybe, you should take even just a couple of hours, the length of a standard feature film, and look into it before you start giving these "solid" proofs of something that you, obviously, know nothing about.

 

[JacksBratt]

Ah but we can.

One of the best documented experiment methods for determining the Earth's roundness was first performed (to our knowledge) by the ancient Greeks. This was achieved by comparing the shadows of sticks in different locations. When the sun was directly overhead in one place, the stick there cast no shadow. At the same time in a city around 500 miles north, the stick there did cast a shadow.

If the Earth were flat then both sticks should show the same shadow (or lack of) because they would be positioned at the same angle towards the sun.

Actually, I've been down that road.

This experiment works for both the Globe model and the FE model.

This is true due to the fact that the Globe Model (GM) has the sun millions of miles away and the shadow effect is due to the curve of the earth. The FE model, on the other hand, has the sun at about 3000 to 4000 miles away and the shadow effect is do to the sun's position over the flat earth and the low altitude of the sun.

Look, I am searching for truth. I have not found enough to totally convince myself that the earth is flat. However, there are a lot of things that we take as "fact" because we have been told that they are "fact" since we began to learn.

From what I have found, all FE believers..... ALL flat earth believers started out by saying that the FE is totally laughable..... The difference is... they investigated, did their own research and asked questions.

They didn't just sit back and take unproven things as solid evidence.

So, do yourself a favor and look into it a bit.... open your mind and THINK

 

[Aldebaran]

Second.... and most amusing...If you had taken even 5 minutes to investigate the model being presented by the FE believers.... you can circumnavigate a Flat Earth. There is no edge that you can fall off of.
Their model is a plate with Antarctica as the perimeter with an ice wall that holds everything in.

Please, before you go spouting off as to how easy it is to prove that the earth is a globe... don't embarrass yourself by stating your ignorance.

Don't you see a double-standard with these statements?

 

[JacksBratt]

Don't you see a double-standard with these statements?

Sorry, not really. Am I missing something?

 

[Tomm]

I do not believe that UFO's are demonic. It is more likely that they are indeed from another world. We should not be afraid if such is the case. This would have no impact whatsoever on the reality of God. It might cause some to wonder about some of the fine points of the faith, though if proven to be true, such would not directly refute any tenets of Christianity.

I believe they are demonic.

 

[Aldebaran]

Sorry, not really. Am I missing something?

Forget it.
Did you at least look at the link I posted in post #202 about how it was possible for the astronauts to fly through the Van Allen belts?

 

[JacksBratt]

Forget it.
Did you at least look at the link I posted in post #202 about how it was possible for the astronauts to fly through the Van Allen belts?

I will look at that link as soon as I get time at home. My work computer will not run it and I'm working some long days at the moment.

 

[JacksBratt]

Forget it.
Did you at least look at the link I posted in post #202 about how it was possible for the astronauts to fly through the Van Allen belts?

WOW, you should get this guy to NASA right away... post haste...

He can save the mars mission....

Why are they wasting all their efforts in this perceived dangerous Van Allen belts when this guy can simply educate them on the truth and they can sail away..???

I'll tell you why... This guy is wrong or ill informed.

Check these out. Don't waste too much time, just go to the 3:00 mark.

or: Go to the 1:30 minute mark.

and, finally:

 

[Aldebaran]

WOW, you should get this guy to NASA right away... post haste...

He can save the mars mission....

Why are they wasting all their efforts in this perceived dangerous Van Allen belts when this guy can simply educate them on the truth and they can sail away..???

I'll tell you why... This guy is wrong or ill informed.

Check these out. Don't waste too much time, just go to the 3:00 mark.

or: Go to the 1:30 minute mark.

and, finally:

What did these videos have to do with the one I sent you? It's not even the same guy. You're trying to discredit the video I sent you by showing me 3 others that are unrelated. Maybe you should go to NASA and educate them. You seem to know so much more than NASA or any of these others about the subject.

 

[JacksBratt]

What did these videos have to do with the one I sent you? It's not even the same guy. You're trying to discredit the video I sent you by showing me 3 others that are unrelated. Maybe you should go to NASA and educate them. You seem to know so much more than NASA or any of these others about the subject.

I'm sorry... really.

I thought it was obvious.

You have a video of a guy stating that the radiation, in the Van Allen belts, is not dangerous..... Correct?

Then, I have produced links to NASA themselves stating how dangerous these particles are to equipment and humans.

Not only that, but the videos that I have posted links to, show NASA looking for ways to deal with the problem of entering into the regions of space where they will encounter dangerous radiation.

That's why I said that this guy better rush over to NASA and tell them that he has the answer.

I'm not saying that I know more than either the guy or NASA. I'm saying that this guy is claiming things are safe. NASA is spending billions of dollars trying to avoid something that according to your guy.... doesn't exist as an issue.

Maybe some of the comments that was attached to the video that you posted, would sum it up better.....Not that there aren't comments that accept, believe and congratulate the presentation, just that I looked at it the way these people did.

1/ "You want to pass this information on to the team at NASA working on the Orion launcher, because they are still trying to solve this very problem."

2/ "pretty well everything you said is false. That was not the trajectory, and NASA is still working on how to get through the "dangerous" belts with the Orion, once it has humans on board. If the radiation was no issue, what are they spending so much effort to solve it? And good try about the trajectory, this has been said before but is not the trajectory of Apollo missions. This was invented much later in an effort to dodge the issue. NASA has not solved radiation issues because of the massive extra weight that will be needed. Plastic is not the solution. Van Allen belts do have deadly amounts of radiation, stop trying to pretend it's not an issue in so that you don't have to admit that we never got to the moon, despite giving it our best efforts."


3/ "OK so why are they building the Orion space ship and they say they can't pass the van Allen belts. You say they did it 40 yrs ago so why not use that same material the apollo missions used to go thru it can someone answer this question"

 

[Aldebaran]

I'm sorry... really.

I thought it was obvious.

You have a video of a guy stating that the radiation, in the Van Allen belts, is not dangerous..... Correct?

Then, I have produced links to NASA themselves stating how dangerous these particles are to equipment and humans.

Not only that, but the videos that I have posted links to, show NASA looking for ways to deal with the problem of entering into the regions of space where they will encounter dangerous radiation.

That's why I said that this guy better rush over to NASA and tell them that he has the answer.

I'm not saying that I know more than either the guy or NASA. I'm saying that this guy is claiming things are safe. NASA is spending billions of dollars trying to avoid something that according to your guy.... doesn't exist as an issue.

Maybe some of the comments that was attached to the video that you posted, would sum it up better.....Not that there aren't comments that accept, believe and congratulate the presentation, just that I looked at it the way these people did.

1/ "You want to pass this information on to the team at NASA working on the Orion launcher, because they are still trying to solve this very problem."

2/ "pretty well everything you said is false. That was not the trajectory, and NASA is still working on how to get through the "dangerous" belts with the Orion, once it has humans on board. If the radiation was no issue, what are they spending so much effort to solve it? And good try about the trajectory, this has been said before but is not the trajectory of Apollo missions. This was invented much later in an effort to dodge the issue. NASA has not solved radiation issues because of the massive extra weight that will be needed. Plastic is not the solution. Van Allen belts do have deadly amounts of radiation, stop trying to pretend it's not an issue in so that you don't have to admit that we never got to the moon, despite giving it our best efforts."


3/ "OK so why are they building the Orion space ship and they say they can't pass the van Allen belts. You say they did it 40 yrs ago so why not use that same material the apollo missions used to go thru it can someone answer this question"

Well, in your first video, the guy specifically says that shields will be put in place to shield the crew from the radiation of the Van Allen Belts. Not too difficult. Radiation shielding has been used for quite a long time, both in space and on earth.

In the second video, he mentions that the Space Shuttle and ISS stay below the belts to stay safe. Keep in mind that the Space Shuttle used to stay in orbit for long periods of time, so that would be necessary. But any mission that goes to the moon would just go right through it relatively quickly rather than stay in the belts for extended periods of time. The shuttle probably could have done the same thing if tasked to, but being designed as an orbiter it wouldn't be much use going to the moon or mars. Same with the ISS.

In the 3rd video, I notice a lot of commentary from whoever made the video, or at least edited it suggesting that we can't go beyond earth orbit. If you listen to the context of what was being talked about, the astronaut was saying we can't go beyond earth orbit right now because all we had was the shuttle and ISS. Of course they can't go any further because they weren't designed to go anywhere else. The new spacecraft he was mentioning afterwards is designed to go further. So it's not the Van Allen belts he was referring to as keeping us from going beyond orbit, but rather the design of what our current vehicles (shuttle and ISS) are meant to do.

To summarize--orbital vehicles have to stay lower than the VA belts due to longer duration exposure. If you're going to go to the moon or mars or whatever beyond orbit, then it's not a big concern because the VA belt exposure would be much shorter.

 

[JacksBratt]

Well, in your first video, the guy specifically says that shields will be put in place to shield the crew from the radiation of the Van Allen Belts. Not too difficult. Radiation shielding has been used for quite a long time, both in space and on earth.

Shields will be put in place? Look at NASA stating that the shields necessary will be too heavy... look at the 58 second mark in this NASA video.

Not too difficult? Has been used for quite a long time? Are you sure?

In the second video, he mentions that the Space Shuttle and ISS stay below the belts to stay safe. Keep in mind that the Space Shuttle used to stay in orbit for long periods of time, so that would be necessary. But any mission that goes to the moon would just go right through it relatively quickly rather than stay in the belts for extended periods of time.

The space shuttle, at one point, went to the 400 mile mark and they saw flashes of light in their eyes when they closed them...

The time it would have taken to go to the moon would have been deadly.

The shuttle probably could have done the same thing if tasked to, but being designed as an orbiter it wouldn't be much use going to the moon or mars. Same with the ISS.

I think that you would admit that you are just guessing here. Right?

In the 3rd video, I notice a lot of commentary from whoever made the video, or at least edited it suggesting that we can't go beyond earth orbit. If you listen to the context of what was being talked about, the astronaut was saying we can't go beyond earth orbit right now because all we had was the shuttle and ISS. Of course they can't go any further because they weren't designed to go anywhere else. The new spacecraft he was mentioning afterwards is designed to go further. So it's not the Van Allen belts he was referring to as keeping us from going beyond orbit, but rather the design of what our current vehicles (shuttle and ISS) are meant to do.

I think they are trying to design it to go further. However, as the video from this post states, from the words of one of the NASA engineers dealing specifically with that problem... there is a weight problem and they have not overcome it yet.

To summarize--orbital vehicles have to stay lower than the VA belts due to longer duration exposure. If you're going to go to the moon or mars or whatever beyond orbit, then it's not a big concern because the VA belt exposure would be much shorter.

Well, you can believe that if you choose to. However, from what I have researched, from NASA's own information and video's..... and remember I fully believed it and argued tooth and nail that they really went....they didn't go... will not go back either.

The best, or most humorous video is when the astronauts are playing around on the surface while suspended on cables... they fall down and are pulled back to their feet, giving the illusion of levitation.... quite hilarious and sad at the same time.

NASA's biggest blunder was that they never could have predicted the rate at which technology was going to advance to a state that could have the everyday guy with a computer program expose them for the errors in their, then high tech, photo-graphical abilities.

 

[Aldebaran]

Shields will be put in place? Look at NASA stating that the shields necessary will be too heavy... look at the 58 second mark in this NASA video.

Not too difficult? Has been used for quite a long time? Are you sure?

Notice that she said they don't have the "ultimate answer" yet, and then went on to mention a number of radiation absorbers that we already have that work really well. Remember, it doesn't have to be perfect to work well enough.

The space shuttle, at one point, went to the 400 mile mark and they saw flashes of light in their eyes when they closed them...

The time it would have taken to go to the moon would have been deadly.

The Van Allen belts don't extend all the way to the moon.

I think that you would admit that you are just guessing here. Right?

Guessing? Can you think of a way the shuttle could have landed on the moon and then taken off again? There aren't exactly any runways already there. Landing the ISS there wouldn't happen either. So no, I'm not guessing.

I think they are trying to design it to go further. However, as the video from this post states, from the words of one of the NASA engineers dealing specifically with that problem... there is a weight problem and they have not overcome it yet.

Again, there are "good enough" measures already being used. They just don't have the "ultimate answer" to radiation yet, which is what she said in your video.

The best, or most humorous video is when the astronauts are playing around on the surface while suspended on cables... they fall down and are pulled back to their feet, giving the illusion of levitation.... quite hilarious and sad at the same time.

That's just an assumption you're still clinging to regardless of any other information you've been given, either by me or anyone else.

NASA's biggest blunder was that they never could have predicted the rate at which technology was going to advance to a state that could have the everyday guy with a computer program expose them for the errors in their, then high tech, photo-graphical abilities.

It all depends on how much the people want to believe that the space program is a conspiracy. As I'm noticing here, if a person wants to believe in conspiracies, they are going to believe in them no matter what anyone else says.
If you still believe they're just making all this stuff up to make people believe in UFO's or the idea that the earth is round and that we're someday going to make contact with aliens, then wouldn't it have been easier for NASA to tell us that space travel is easy and that we can do it anytime we want with no real problem? Why make it sound so difficult and then later claim we're doing it? Doesn't make much sense to make it sound difficult if they then want us to believe UFO's are here from other worlds, does it?

 

[JacksBratt]

Notice that she said they don't have the "ultimate answer" yet, and then went on to mention a number of radiation absorbers that we already have that work really well. Remember, it doesn't have to be perfect to work well enough.

It doesn't have to be perfect? Seriously?

Let's compare the radiation of the Van Allen belts to boiling water. If your kid was in a vessel and the designers stated "if boiling water floods the capsule.... just go to the back and hold up some bottled water as a shield...it's not perfect but it should work". Would you let them go?

In all reality, no government agency or military would send their only assets into a situation with the concepts they have in place being "less than perfect but should work well enough".

The Van Allen belts don't extend all the way to the moon.

True.

Guessing? Can you think of a way the shuttle could have landed on the moon and then taken off again? There aren't exactly any runways already there. Landing the ISS there wouldn't happen either. So no, I'm not guessing.

If your not guessing then why would you say "probably"? That usually signifies uncertainty. Again, you not going to send people into the harshest environment, the vacuum of space, and tell them "this will probably work".

.

Again, there are "good enough" measures already being used. They just don't have the "ultimate answer" to radiation yet, which is what she said in your video.

I doubt that. They do not have "good enough" measures in place or she would not have said that they have not overcome the problem yet.

Again, "Good enough" measures may be OK when you are making a sand castle or casserole.... but not when you are sending humans into the vacuum of space.

That's just an assumption you're still clinging to regardless of any other information you've been given, either by me or anyone else.

Assumptions? Look at this video of the "assumption" that I'm clinging to...

Tell me how they do the stuff in these NASA video's. Half the time they are trying to bend down to pick something up and they cannot due to the puppet master not being synchronized.

I mean really, this video says it all... it actually made me come close blowing milk out my nose. ROFL.... serous comedy passed off as reality....

It all depends on how much the people want to believe that the space program is a conspiracy.

Or believe that it's true... sheesh, how gullible are we humans?

As I'm noticing here, if a person wants to believe in conspiracies, they are going to believe in them no matter what anyone else says.

My take is that people will believe anything that NASA feeds them and refuse to open their eyes to hard true evidence when it is presented.

If you still believe they're just making all this stuff up to make people believe in UFO's or the idea that the earth is round and that we're someday going to make contact with aliens, then wouldn't it have been easier for NASA to tell us that space travel is easy and that we can do it anytime we want with no real problem?

IDK.... would that have worked. Or do they need to make space travel, of the type necessary for interplanetary travel, so complex that any being that has accomplished it must be light years ahead of our technology.
I certainly cannot guess at their motives or directives. I do know that the whole world believed it for almost 40 years...

Now, some are waking up while others still cling to the fiction as they trust a lying organization.

Why make it sound so difficult and then later claim we're doing it? Doesn't make much sense to make it sound difficult if they then want us to believe UFO's are here from other worlds, does it?

Well, they aren't claiming that we are doing it. We are far from ever traveling through space in a the way that would be required in order to go to other galaxies... Sheesh it's going to take forever to get to mars and we can see that with our naked eye.

 

[Aldebaran]

It doesn't have to be perfect? Seriously?

Let's compare the radiation of the Van Allen belts to boiling water. If your kid was in a vessel and the designers stated "if boiling water floods the capsule.... just go to the back and hold up some bottled water as a shield...it's not perfect but it should work". Would you let them go?

In all reality, no government agency or military would send their only assets into a situation with the concepts they have in place being "less than perfect but should work well enough".

First of all, they were talking about a brief pass through the Van Allen belts. Secondly, the human body is perfectly able to handle certain amounts of radiation. We get those amounts from CAT scans, Xrays, riding on airplanes, etc., so a certain amount is acceptable.

If your not guessing then why would you say "probably"? That usually signifies uncertainty. Again, you not going to send people into the harshest environment, the vacuum of space, and tell them "this will probably work".

Fine. The International Space Station is definately not designed to land on the moon.

I doubt that. They do not have "good enough" measures in place or she would not have said that they have not overcome the problem yet.

Again, "Good enough" measures may be OK when you are making a sand castle or casserole.... but not when you are sending humans into the vacuum of space.

Right, they have no overcome the problem of the amount an astronaut would receive in a mission to Mars. The Van Allen belts alone are a short-term problem. It would take months to reach Mars and that's where the general solar radiation problem comes in. It's not as strong, but exposure time would be much longer.

Assumptions? Look at this video of the "assumption" that I'm clinging to...

Tell me how they do the stuff in these NASA video's. Half the time they are trying to bend down to pick something up and they cannot due to the puppet master not being synchronized.

I mean really, this video says it all... it actually made me come close blowing milk out my nose. ROFL.... serous comedy passed off as reality....

Or believe that it's true... sheesh, how gullible are we humans?

He pushed himself back up with his arms. Gravity is much less on the moon, so it's possible to push yourself up like that. But since you don't believe it even took place on the moon, you will reject my explanation outright. And yes, you're making assumptions. You did it in your second paragraph when you describe what's happening in the video as being done by a "puppet master". That's you making an assumption about what you're seeing. It doesn't sound like any information will cause you to see it any other way.

IDK.... would that have worked. Or do they need to make space travel, of the type necessary for interplanetary travel, so complex that any being that has accomplished it must be light years ahead of our technology.

So whether space travel is depicted as easy or hard, it points to a conspiracy? In other words, no amount of information will convince you. That's a dangerous standard to live by.

Now, some are waking up while others still cling to the fiction as they trust a lying organization.

Waking up? Or ignoring any evidence given to them while they cling to conspiracy theories?

Well, they aren't claiming that we are doing it. We are far from ever traveling through space in a the way that would be required in order to go to other galaxies... Sheesh it's going to take forever to get to mars and we can see that with our naked eye.

Nobody is talking about traveling to other galaxies. Other planets would be the first step. Other star systems would be the next. Other galaxies would be impractical even by most science fiction visions.

By the way, what is your take on the rocket launched by Elon Musk with his car as the payload recently? Are you of the opinion that it was done on a stage somewhere, or faked in some other way?

 

[JacksBratt]

First of all, they were talking about a brief pass through the Van Allen belts. Secondly, the human body is perfectly able to handle certain amounts of radiation. We get those amounts from CAT scans, Xrays, riding on airplanes, etc., so a certain amount is acceptable.

Of course! What was I thinking? It's only a "brief" pass through dangerous radiation.
I suggest that NASA just forget about it all together. Why waist billions of tax dollars on this? What kind of wimps are these new astronauts any way?

In all seriousness, organizations do not waste precious funding dollars on things that are of no concern.

Fine. The International Space Station is definately not designed to land on the moon.

Phewf! Glad we cleared that up.

Right, they have no overcome the problem of the amount an astronaut would receive in a mission to Mars. The Van Allen belts alone are a short-term problem. It would take months to reach Mars and that's where the general solar radiation problem comes in. It's not as strong, but exposure time would be much longer.

Still ignoring the fact that they cannot, yet, live through the Van Allen belts anyway. So, you would just be sending corpses to Mars.

As an aside, go on YouTube and search for "Don Pettit, Tyranny of the Rocket equation". Form this, I'd say we didn't go anywhere.

He pushed himself back up with his arms. Gravity is much less on the moon, so it's possible to push yourself up like that. But since you don't believe it even took place on the moon, you will reject my explanation outright. And yes, you're making assumptions. You did it in your second paragraph when you describe what's happening in the video as being done by a "puppet master". That's you making an assumption about what you're seeing. It doesn't sound like any information will cause you to see it any other way.

Really? "He pushed himself back up with his arms". That's your explanation for this blatantly obvious proof that they were wired to the ceiling of a set?

You cannot possibly swallow this explanation. His feet weren't even on the ground and he levitated.

So whether space travel is depicted as easy or hard, it points to a conspiracy? In other words, no amount of information will convince you. That's a dangerous standard to live by.

Not near as dangerous as a belief in a lie that has been exposed by modern technology and proven by NASA's own videos and presentations.

Waking up? Or ignoring any evidence given to them while they cling to conspiracy theories?

Who is really clinging to false information here? Who is failing to accept that what we were told in the 60's and 70's was a studio production?

“It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled.”

― Mark Twain

Nobody is talking about traveling to other galaxies. Other planets would be the first step. Other star systems would be the next. Other galaxies would be impractical even by most science fiction visions.

Exactly... so... if we have aliens, from other galaxies, visiting us.... they MUST be super smarter...right?

By the way, what is your take on the rocket launched by Elon Musk with his car as the payload recently? Are you of the opinion that it was done on a stage somewhere, or faked in some other way?

In the words of Elon Musk, himself, "You can tell it's real.... because it looks so fake"..

Ya... OK Elon....!!!! that convinced me....

I could go through this and explain all the editing and mistakes that are made, but, in all reality..... you aren't going to believe it anyway.... You are totally deceived by all of this. I don't know what it would take to open your eyes.

Ask yourself "What are the temperature extremes in space"? "What does my car do in temperature fluctuations that are normal on earth"?

Check this from:Temperature Of Outer Space - The Arcana Wiki

At high earth orbit, the side of you that's in the sun will eventually reach 248 °F (120 °C). At the same time, the parts of you in the shade could eventually get as cold as -148 °F (-100 °C). The hot part is above boiling (212 °F / 100 °C), the cold part is below the harshest antarctic record (-128 °F / -89 °C).

So, as this Tesla car is floating and slowly rotating, the surfaces of all those different materials are fluctuating from 248 to minus 148 degrees..... and no adverse affects.

Sorry, I'm not buying it. My car has a hard enough time in conditions that go from minus 40 degrees to plus 100, over a one month period or longer.

The whole thing is fake...and the number of people that are waking up to it, is growing.

For those of you following this thread, that want some links to a step by step narratives of what is wrong with the "live stream" of this fakery, I will post two videos.

One is the original launch but narratives of the errors. The second is a video with narratives of what Space X changed, after the fact, in the video of their so called live stream.

Oh ya.. I know Jeranism is a FE guy.. this, however, has nothing to do with the facts he is presenting about Space X, anymore than the fact that one of my science teachers, in college, argued with me about the behavior of water below and above 4 degrees Celsius but we both agreed on the other things that he was teaching us.

Enjoy:

 

[Aldebaran]

Of course! What was I thinking? It's only a "brief" pass through dangerous radiation.
I suggest that NASA just forget about it all together. Why waist billions of tax dollars on this? What kind of wimps are these new astronauts any way?

In all seriousness, organizations do not waste precious funding dollars on things that are of no concern.

A brief pass through the Van Allen Belts don't expose the astronauts to enough radiation to be of concern, just as dental Xrays and CAT scans don't. I've already explained this to you.

Still ignoring the fact that they cannot, yet, live through the Van Allen belts anyway. So, you would just be sending corpses to Mars.

Again, a brief pass through the Van Allen Belts don't expose the astronauts to enough radiation to be of concern.

Really? "He pushed himself back up with his arms". That's your explanation for this blatantly obvious proof that they were wired to the ceiling of a set?

It's only blatantly obvious to you because you stubbornly cling to your conspiracy beliefs about cables and puppet masters.

Who is really clinging to false information here? Who is failing to accept that what we were told in the 60's and 70's was a studio production?

Those who are willing to see beyond a tiny little worldview that tells them that anything noteworthy must be fake.

Exactly... so... if we have aliens, from other galaxies, visiting us.... they MUST be super smarter...right?

Your mockery only proves that you are not teachable. Don't expect anyone to continue trying if that's the attitude you have.

In the words of Elon Musk, himself, "You can tell it's real.... because it looks so fake"..

Ya... OK Elon....!!!! that convinced me....

I have a couple friends who were near the launch site when the rocket launched. I guess their account of it shows them to be part of the big conspiracy. I think there may have been other people in the area who may have seen the launch as well.

I could go through this and explain all the editing and mistakes that are made, but, in all reality..... you aren't going to believe it anyway.... You are totally deceived by all of this. I don't know what it would take to open your eyes.

More than a bunch of Youtubers who can't even see that even their own videos discredit them. Even after that's been shown to you, you don't accept it. You just ignore it and move onto another conspiracy theory, or you just go back to square one and say that you know the truth and everyone else is lying. Beyond that, all you do is mock those who are attempting to educate you. Be willing to learn from those who know more than you. Otherwise you're just being wise in your own eyes--to an extreme degree.

Ask yourself "What are the temperature extremes in space"? "What does my car do in temperature fluctuations that are normal on earth"?

My car wasn't built for the more extreme temperature fluctuations in space. Spacecraft are. If they weren't built for more extreme conditions than a car, then they'd cost no more than a car. If my car was built for the extremes of space, it would cost more than I can afford.

At high earth orbit, the side of you that's in the sun will eventually reach 248 °F (120 °C). At the same time, the parts of you in the shade could eventually get as cold as -148 °F (-100 °C). The hot part is above boiling (212 °F / 100 °C), the cold part is below the harshest antarctic record (-128 °F / -89 °C).

So, as this Tesla car is floating and slowly rotating, the surfaces of all those different materials are fluctuating from 248 to minus 148 degrees..... and no adverse affects.

What adverse effects would you expect? Do you think Elon Musk is concerned that his car won't start while it's floating around in the asteroid belt? Think about it! (Please!)

Sorry, I'm not buying it. My car has a hard enough time in conditions that go from minus 40 degrees to plus 100, over a one month period or longer.

Don't worry. The car in space wasn't put there to get good milage.

Oh ya.. I know Jeranism is a FE guy.. this, however, has nothing to do with the facts he is presenting about Space X, anymore than the fact that one of my science teachers, in college, argued with me about the behavior of water below and above 4 degrees Celsius but we both agreed on the other things that he was teaching us.

Oh sure! A person's credibility developed from the past has no bearing on whether or not he should be taken seriously or not. That tells me all I need to know.

 

[JacksBratt]

A brief pass through the Van Allen Belts don't expose the astronauts to enough radiation to be of concern, just as dental Xrays and CAT scans don't. I've already explained this to you.

Oh.. you have already explained this to me... well, shucks.... where are my manners.

I guess I should listen to your explanation as to it being of any concern, and ignore NASA itself, who say that it is a serious problem.

I should obviously listen to you because....... well, why was that again?

Again, brief pass through the Van Allen Belts don't expose the astronauts to enough radiation to be of concern.

Well... again... NASA doesn't seem to be hearing you. Maybe you, and the guy from your one single solitary video, should get in a car and drive down there and tell them to stop wasting all of the USA's tax dollars on a problem that doesn't exist.

It's only blatantly obvious to you because you stubbornly cling to your conspiracy beliefs.

Ya, ok, so this guy can push himself up with his arms... to an upright standing position, while his feet aren't even on the ground... I get it... no problem... see it all the time.....with marionettes.

Your mockery only proves that you are not teachable.

There was no mockery in that portion of my post. I don't believe, however, that we go anywhere beyond shallow earth orbit simply because we cannot do it.

Remember.... Occum's Razor?

I have a couple friends who were near the launch site when the rocket launched. I guess their account of it shows them to be part of the big conspiracy.

No,no.. that's perfect. Did they take any video?

If they took any video with any sort of camera.. they should send it to Jeranism.. he's looking for any civilian video of this due to the overwhelming lack of it.

He did find one, however, but it was of one of Space X's tubes returning. However, it just blew up.

More than a bunch of Youtubers who can't even see that even their own videos discredit them. Even after that's been shown to you, you don't accept it. You just ignore it and move onto another conspiracy theory, or you just go back to square one and say that you know the truth and everyone else is lying. Be willing to learn from those who know more than you. Otherwise you're just being wise in your own eyes--to an extreme degree.

Maybe I would respect what your saying here if you could post even a couple of the videos you are talking about.

I believe it is you that is ignoring what is being presented here.

By the way, I am not afraid of being labeled a conspiracy theorist... it is an empty threat made by those that have no substantial evidence to counter what others are presenting, which contradicts that which has been told to us under the mask of being truth.

Also, you have no basis to say that I believe any other main stream conspiracy theory. People, with no argument, just like to lump them all together as if it were some sort of fact that if they believe the moon landings never happened.. then they must believe in the FE or 911 or whatever else you can consider condescending.

That's like saying.. "Bill was smoking weed.. he must be a heroin addict then."

My car wasn't built for the more extreme temperature fluctuations in space. Spacecraft are. If they weren't built for more extreme conditions than a car, then they'd cost no more than a car. If my car was built for the extremes of space, it would cost more than I can afford.

Are you saying that this Tesla car is specially built for space?
Here is what Elon said on Twitter:

The first Falcon Heavy’s “payload will be my midnight cherry Tesla Roadster playing Space Oddity,” Musk wrote on Twitter,

Looks like it was not a special "space hardy" version of a Tesla Roadster after all.

But, your right, it still costs more than you can afford.. or at least that I could afford.

What adverse effects would you expect? Do you think Elon Musk is concerned that his car won't start while it's floating around in the asteroid belt? Think about it! (Please!)

It's electric... so.... don't know what you mean by "start".

Hmmm what adverse effects would I expect.. Well, the dash would probably melt, then freeze, then melt, then freeze... the front windshield would crack or shatter, paint would blister.... just think of what would happen if you put any part of your car, in an oven and when it got to temperature... you threw it in ice water....

How long do you think those tires would last in a vacuum?

Oh ya, the windshield washing fluid would freeze, then boil. To put it simple, the car would be somewhat of a mess.

Don't worry. The car in space wasn't put there to get good milage.

I'm learning more and more about how you think.

Oh sure! A person's credibility developed from the past has no bearing on whether or not he should be taken seriously or not. That tells me all I need to know.

What I'm saying here.... is that just because a guy thinks the earth is flat... does not mean he's wrong if he, at another point in time, says that horses are majestic animals or that you cannot drive after drinking too much alcohol.

But, if you want to say that once someone says something that you disagree with... that nothing they ever say again is of any value...... that's your prerogative.