Space suits... the "nail" in the coffin?

[JacksBratt]

Here is another concept that raised a question for me. Not for FE but for the agency that is supplying you with most of your proof for the globe.

I am enjoying the research of the people on the net, in regards to the Space agency of NASA, it's purported accomplishments, it's integrity and the way it is an integral card in the concept of the FE and the rabbit hole this takes us down.

Check this out and tell me what you think...

 

[Sanoy]

As I understand it the vacuum of space does not pull on the space suit it's whats on the inside that pushes out.

You know how in the ocean you have the weight of the water stacked on you? In space it's the other way around, whats in the suit is like the water.

 

[Jay1971]

Yes and going back in the 70's technology where our so called knowledge was superior at the time we were believing in NASA and went along with it. How sad I feel for myself now believing in this stuff then.

The Truth will set you free Brother. Keep up the good faith and Believe always in the Word of God

 

[majj27]

He's kind of all over the place with this. I'm not sure what he's claiming except "Space Suits aren't possible, therefore Flat Earth."

I've got stuff to do, so I'll try to respond more later, but off the bat, the water-testing idea, that "That is silly, because you're testing whether water gets IN, not whether air gets OUT" is poorly thought out.

In a pressurized container, water getting IN will displace air, which will then get OUT. You find leaks by the bubbles of the air getting pushed through the leak by being displaced by the water. That's WHY we test seal integrity and the like in water; leaks are easier to see in water than in vacuum.

 

[USincognito]

What is the Flerf obsession with NASA? Do they need a boogie man? Are they unaware of all the other space agencies globally?

 

[Halbhh]

For anyone, how to really know with certainty...

By looking for yourself first hand.

 

[Halbhh]

Here is another concept that raised a question for me. Not for FE but for the agency that is supplying you with most of your proof for the globe.

I am enjoying the research of the people on the net, in regards to the Space agency of NASA, it's purported accomplishments, it's integrity and the way it is an integral card in the concept of the FE and the rabbit hole this takes us down.

Check this out and tell me what you think...

Just get a telescope and look at the moon, sometimes Venus also. That they are spheres will be visible to your eyes.

Look, see, find out.

Direct looking to see, yourself.

 

[Jay1971]

Just get a telescope and look at the moon, sometimes Venus also. That they are spheres will be visible to your eyes.

Look, see, find out.

Direct looking to see.

God's word is truth, it doesn't teach this in the bible nowhere in the word of god will it say His Creation is a sphere maybe circle round like which is what we are seeing light's up in the firmament of His Creation but I don't what to start this up again for this has been posted already please visit here::
Is the Earth flat or round???

 

[miamited]

Hi jacksbratt,

I tend to want to see evidence when such preposterous claims are made. As another poster has said, the U.S. is not the only nation that claims to have sent people into space with a space suit on. Are we to believe then that this is some worldwide conspiracy to fool the public? Seems like an awfully lot of money wasted and then one would have to ask, for what purpose? Is there something that someone or some organization is gaining by getting the people of the world to believe that we've gone into space...but we haven't?

I think what the guy posting the video may not understand is how space suits are made. It is true that if you fill a balloon with air and carry it out of our atmosphere into the vacuum of space, that the balloon will burst. But the balloon structure has nothing built within it to keep it from continually stretching out from the pressure of the air inside. If you take that same balloon and make it out of a rubber coated fabric, then the balloon will not burst until the pressure exceeds the strength of the fabric. There are a lot of fabrics that can withstand considerable air pressure.

Similarly, if you make a space suit with 'belts' as a part of the structure, just as we do with tires, then the suit will maintain it's shape pretty well even though the air pressure inside of it is pushing out against the vacuum of space. A tire is a perfect example. If all a tire was composed of is some formed piece of rubber, well, when you put 45psi of pressure in that tire the rubber will stretch, but if you make that tire with cord in the sidewall, then the tire will not stretch when inflated. And 45 psi is just the safe running pressure for tires. You can actually put about 200 psi of pressure in a tire before it will actually blow. All that time the tire will not distend its shape much. The pressure will merely continue to build against the cord strength of the reinforced rubber until the cords rupture and the tire blows.

Trust me, a space suit doesn't have to hold in 200 psi. So, if the people who make space suits incorporate a body shape of rubberized fabric with cord reinforcement, then when the pressure outside the suit is less than the pressure inside the suit, the suit will not blow until that pressure greatly exceeds normal air pressure. Reinforced rubber has been around a lot longer than 1960. So, while the space suits of today look a lot sleeker and more modern and do a lot more things than the suit of the 60's, the basic internal structure of the suit is likely a lot the same.

I'm quite confident that when scientists first conceived of the idea of a space suit, they knew that they had to plan for the internal pressure needing to be restricted in some way. Its not like they didn't have weather balloons until 1960 and hadn't seen what happens to them as they get further out of the atmosphere.

So, for me, the basic concept of what this video is trying to uphold is flawed by his own lack of understanding as to how space suits are made. Here, just for laughs, is a short tutorial on how space suits are made. Note that it mentions that a couple of the layers are designed to allow the suit to keep its shape in changing pressure situations.

How spacesuit is made - material, production process, manufacture, making, history, used, parts, components

God bless,
In Christ, ted

 

[Halbhh]

God's word is truth, it doesn't teach this in the bible nowhere in the word of god will it say His Creation is a sphere maybe circle round like which is what we are seeing light's up in the firmament of His Creation but I don't what to start this up again for this has been posted already please visit here::
Is the Earth flat or round???

The Bible isn't about less important things like the mere numerical distance to the moon, the size of the moon, the mass of the Earth, the precise geometry behind seasons, etc.

The Bible is about God and saving our souls!

Find the real messages. -- love your neighbor, forgive, pray, abide -- and avoid snares -distractions like claims that detail that try to assert the Bible is about geometry or geology, etc. Those are always missing the real messages of those very same verses.

 

[JacksBratt]

As I understand it the vacuum of space does not pull on the space suit it's whats on the inside that pushes out.

You know how in the ocean you have the weight of the water stacked on you? In space it's the other way around, whats in the suit is like the water.

True..

So, if you had a suit and it is under 7 pounds per square inch and you put it in a vacuum.... what would it look like?

The air that was in the suit would expand, under zero pressure and maybe look like this.

 

[JackRT]

In a pressurized container, water getting IN will displace air, which will then get OUT. You find leaks by the bubbles of the air getting pushed through the leak by being displaced by the water. That's WHY we test seal integrity and the like in water; leaks are easier to see in water than in vacuum.

Not so, in a pressurized container, like a tire tube immersed in a water tank, the outside water pressure acts to compress the tube and force air out. No water enters. The "water displacement is entirely on the outside of the container. In a completely rigid container the situation is reversed. You need to think this through using physics.

 

[JacksBratt]

He's kind of all over the place with this. I'm not sure what he's claiming except "Space Suits aren't possible, therefore Flat Earth."

I've got stuff to do, so I'll try to respond more later, but off the bat, the water-testing idea, that "That is silly, because you're testing whether water gets IN, not whether air gets OUT" is poorly thought out.

In a pressurized container, water getting IN will displace air, which will then get OUT. You find leaks by the bubbles of the air getting pushed through the leak by being displaced by the water. That's WHY we test seal integrity and the like in water; leaks are easier to see in water than in vacuum.

I watched it again, just to be certain. Although he is a prominent FE person and very vocal about it... I believe the point of this video is only to discredit the NASA organization and therefore anything that it puts forth cannot be accepted as truth, without further proof.... of which... they have none.


I think it is apparent that most globe earth evidence comes through NASA. He is just pointing out that they are liars.

 

[JacksBratt]

What is the Flerf obsession with NASA? Do they need a boogie man? Are they unaware of all the other space agencies globally?

NASA is the biggest source for proof of a globe. Other space agencies are all in the same boat. None of them have ever come out to say that their suits are different, which they would have to be in order to withstand the exposure of the environment of space.

 

[JacksBratt]

For anyone, how to really know with certainty...

By looking for yourself first hand.

Can you expand on this idea for me/us?

 

[JackRT]

I think it is apparent that most globe earth evidence comes through NASA.

That simply isn't true, most globe earth evidence comes from a vast number of other sources going back about 2300 years. NASA evidence is merely the icing on the cake.

He is just pointing out that they are liars.

That is a dramatic claim for which there is zero evidence. Zero evidence seems quite typical of your posts.

 

[JacksBratt]

Just get a telescope and look at the moon, sometimes Venus also. That they are spheres will be visible to your eyes.

Look, see, find out.

Direct looking to see, yourself.

Really? That's your evidence?

So, if you lived on an Island and looked across the water to the dry land and saw that all the hills had cows on them... and you had cows.... then, the world only has cows?

If God created all things, which I fully believe that He did.... can you state with 100%, bet your life on it, that the earth is a ball because God made all the planets as spheres?

If you are going to convince me of a ball earth... that will not work. There is too much room for error.. I would certainly not bet my life on that one.

 

[majj27]

I watched it again, just to be certain. Although he is a prominent FE person and very vocal about it... I believe the point of this video is only to discredit the NASA organization and therefore anything that it puts forth cannot be accepted as truth, without further proof.... of which... they have none.


I think it is apparent that most globe earth evidence comes through NASA. He is just pointing out that they are liars.

Well, if NASA isn't your cup of tea, The ESA, APSCO, UKSA, ESRO, JAXA, KARI, CNES, or ROSCOSMOS all have launch capability, most of them operate multiple orbital satellites.

So we're not just looking at one national space program, but multiple. And that's just the ones with currently funded launch capability (and I've not listed all of them, even). Many others exist which are operating satellites of their own.

 

[Halbhh]

Can you expand on this idea for me/us?

To actually get a small telescope, even as small as 3.5" diameter lens if of good quality, and set it up, and start looking, for yourself, to see with your own eyes.

Or you can go to a amateur astronomer gathering, usually called a 'star party' to go and look through scopes the amateurs will set up, and have a look at Venus, Mars, the Moon, Jupiter, Saturn. And more if you are in a nice dark sky location, so you can get a good look of something like M31, the Andromeda Galaxy, through some good scope, often 6", 8" or more.

It's both fun and wonderful to look with your own eyes. I'd suggest a small scope, so you could look again and again, though star parties are going to have very nice scopes to look through.

 

[majj27]

If God created all things, which I fully believe that He did.... can you state with 100%, bet your life on it, that the earth is a ball because God made all the planets as spheres?

Easy bet because yo, here it is.

Himawari-8 Real-time Web - NICT