[KaiserJeep]

The last moon program paid it's R&D back in spades. We got silicon chips, solar panels, composite materials, CNC machine tools, microprocessors (first calculators, then PCs), the Internet, vacuum food dehydration, zero gee manufacturing techniques, and much more. That's the nature of R&D, you never quite know in advance what you will discover, or what the practical applications of that discovery are.

R&D advances in two ways. The first one is in a 100% war such as WW2. The second is a Cold War, such as we had with the USSR and are now trying to have with China. We still have a head start in space, particularly anything above Low Earth Orbit. We should extend that lead, and cash in on all the resulting new technology.

Has it occurred to anyone that managing an artificial ecology in a space colony or on someplace like Mars would teach us things about better managing Planet Earth?

[aldente]

KaiserJeep, you do not understand manners

[daveflat]

100% B.S. to think we went to moon. So much evidence against that there is no point in discussing it. It is almost LAUGHABLE at this point, but with so much brainwashing completely understandable. Bring it!

“There is a principle which is a bar against all information, which is proof against all arguments and which cannot fail to keep a man in everlasting ignorance - that principle is contempt prior to investigation”

[daveflat]

Honestly if you cannot see how utterly stupid this video of NASA is - than no since in even debating no?
Go on youtube and watch ---- Multiple Video Proofs Of Harnasses Fakery Of NASA - Flat Earth
I almost pissed myself it is so funny!

[ralfy]

Reminds me of

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sGXTF6bs1IU

[daveflat]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('daveflat', 'H')onestly if you cannot see how utterly stupid this video of NASA is - than no sense in even debating no?
Go on youtube and watch ---- Multiple Video Proofs Of Harnasses Fakery Of NASA - Flat Earth
I almost pissed myself it is so funny!

[daveflat]

ralfi-
At 8 min 44 seconds or so he talks about how much FILM would be needed to lug around on the moon, is that what he is saying? Because they could have made 10,000 reels it would not have mattered one bit if they were'nt on the moon. He sounds stupid. He does not address the actual footage just creates strawmen which are NOT even logical sometimes, horrible complete fraud who probably got paid.
Did you look up video and watch it that I posted?

[KaiserJeep]

daveflat, I'm an Electrical Engineer by degree with 36 years experience, and an Audio-Video hobbyist all the way back to the days of vacuum tubes. That YouTube video is technically correct and you are a fool.

[daveflat]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('daveflat', 'r')alfi- regarding moon hoax not on youtube
At 8 min 44 seconds or so he talks about how much FILM would be needed to lug around on the moon, is that what he is saying? Because they could have made 10,000 reels it would not have mattered one bit if they were'nt on the moon. He sounds stupid. He does not address the actual footage just creates strawmen which are NOT even logical sometimes, horrible complete fraud who probably got paid.
Did you look up video and watch it that I posted?

[daveflat]

Hey Kaiser, I may very well be a fool. Did you watch this video named below? At the very least tell me why they are acting so strange no? By the way I thought we cannnot post links- is that true? Thanks

Go on youtube and watch ---- Multiple Video Proofs Of Harnasses Fakery Of NASA - Flat Earth (its like 2 min 38 seconds
I almost pissed myself it is so funny!
daveflat
Coal
Coal

Posts: 21
Joined: Thu 09 Mar 2017, 10:39:22

[daveflat]

By the way, I was the rude one to say 100% B.S we went to moon. I had just watched this last video and it made me say that it seems funny to me at the end, very unnatural but I def could be wrong "Nasa Hoax Absolute Proof of Harness Wires" So NOT 100% sure we didn't go, more like 99% lol just kidding!

[daveflat]

Kinda of regarding the moon.... Can someone PLEASE explain to me these simple questions? I cannot find info on it for some reason? THANKS!

Satellites
Do Satellites never need repair? Who does the work?

How do satellites get their static electricity build up removed and endure the insane temperature fluctuations?

How do satellites reorient themselves with never ending magic recharging satellites fuel?

Thanks Again!- David Hicks

[dissident]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('daveflat', 'K')inda of regarding the moon.... Can someone PLEASE explain to me these simple questions? I cannot find info on it for some reason? THANKS!

Satellites
Do Satellites never need repair? Who does the work?

How do satellites get their static electricity build up removed and endure the insane temperature fluctuations?

How do satellites reorient themselves with never ending magic recharging satellites fuel?

Thanks Again!- David Hicks

[daveflat]

So 15 years is a relatively short life? Really? In a crazy harsh environment?

You just said:
"But with every launch costing around $600,000,000 there was no sane economic justification for such repair activity. "

Do you understand that that crazy number of almost a BILLION dollars is paid for by the satellite company right. So how many satellites do they put up on one of these trips because lets say they do 10 at once that would mean that each satellite costs $60 MILLION just to get up, THEN their is the cost to build something so reliable that it can last 15 years without malfunction and yet you simply say that they are "disposable"!!!!!! Really????? Business are in business to make PROFIT! I can ASSURE you that there are not many businesses that can afford to simply call a $60 million dollar investment (PER said Satellite) jsut to get it up not INCLUDING development and building cost!!!!! and just say its Disposable.

Again, I would not call a 15 year working life in a harsh environment, so for 15 years these thrusters are working on a limited amount of fuel that is VERY VERY hard to believe, I would imagine these things need to be reoriented quite often, DOES NOT make sense what you said, common sense that is.

If you had read any of my previous posts you would know what I think of the scum at NASA. Can you give me any other sources or is NASA the only one with this information. Not trying to be a dick.

You said:
"GEO satellites don't change orientation whatsoever (we are not talking about the launch stage but the operation stage)."


FROM WIKI:
"The ISS requires an average 7,000 kg of propellant each year for altitude maintenance, debris avoidance and attitude control. Based on current usage, it will need 105,000 kg through 2014. A Propulsion Module would have provided reserve propellant for one year of ISS orbit life in case of supply interruption. A Propulsion Module would have been attached to the Unity node of the ISS."

So ISS needs propellant 7000kg of propellant per YEAR and these satellites are good for 15 year never needing more than a "bit" of propellant and "magically' stay oriented all while never colliding with this so called other space junk". Thats ALOT you are asking me to believe and NOT believe no?

[Cog]

I will take a wild stab here, but do you believe those satellites actually exist?

[daveflat]

Before I answer YOUR question, WHY don't you LOGICALLY REFUTE my reasoning that the initial response does NOT hold up to logical scrutiny OR are you saying that the initial answer is stronger than MY rebuttal? Sounds fair no?

I am fine with what ever argument you choose, but I really would be interested in your reasoning for choosing which argument is stronger.

By the way, if this is raockman from theoildrum days, I already know I am most likely arguing with someone very very very intelligent, but I ain't so stupid either ( math skills not the best lol).

Thanks for picthing in but it seems to me since you really added no VALUE to either sides post that you are of a mind set of this particulr quote:

“There is a principle which is a bar against all information, which is proof against all arguments and which cannot fail to keep a man in everlasting ignorance - that principle is contempt prior to investigation”

We may both be guilty of the above for sure, I am willing to admit that, (are you?) I am not infallible BUT please try to read my argument with NO preconceived notions or BELIEFS, unless that is, you have actually been in outer space and ........

[Cog]

Well the question is relatively important. As a former land surveyor I have used the GPS constellation of satellites for land survey purposes for the past 20 years. They seem to be up there and doing what I need them to do.

[daveflat]

I AGREE, they do "seem" to be up there don't they? I know for a FACT though that if one of your OIL worker bee's told you I "seem" to have found a massive deposit of oil, I'm gonna go ahead and start drilling now and it will only cost $50 million to do so, you WOULD have a problem with not having enough facts. That I am sure of.

I would argue CELL towers have the ability to pass the same information as these satellites. I do not know for a fact that is true, I am NOT an expert in either satellites or cell towers.

I do appreciate that you stated "seem" to be up there, rather than call me an idiot for what is so easy to infer from my initial questions.

So rather than beat around the bush, to your other question, YES I do believe they exist. They MUST exist. I would imagine there are at least some people out there who have designed, and EVEN built these satellites. I have had people comment that there brother or whomever helped build satellites and why would they lie. So YES these satellites MOST PROBABLY do exists.

The question to me is, ARE they orbiting our planet? Supposedly there are any were from a few thousand to up to 20,000 of these things up there somewhere. I have accepted this as a fact for 44 1/2 years until about 2 weeks ago ( i honestly never questioned it). As crazy as it sounds and I KNOW it sounds crazy, BUT I WANT PROOF they are up there. The first response to my original question I would say is weak at best. I did not even have to put much consideration or time into his argument to easily raise doubts to the veracity of his answers and even more importantly, I think his initial response helped highlight the actual point of my original question which was really to bring some critical thought the to absurd reasoning you must accept to believe these satellites ARE up there, because HIS answer look to be the conventional generally accepted answer. Scary HUH?

[Cog]

I see the satellites in an indirect sort of way. GPS satellites are in an orbit so that they pass over twice in a 24 hour period. When I am doing GPS surveying, I can see on my handheld screen a lot of information. The inclination above the horizon, the number assigned to that satellite, its location in the sky, and its health(ability to transmit data). From all of that its a matter of trilateration to fix my position on the earth. The more satellites in view, the more accurate my ground location.

Now I know these are not ground signals that I am receiving, since satellites get blocked from time to time by overhead and less than overhead objects such as buildings or leaf cover. Which is why we plan out our surveying jobs to account for where the satellites will be at certain times of the day and whether we will be working around buildings or tree cover. GPS works by line of sight. If these were somehow a fake radio broadcast, tree cover and buildings would not affect the signal in this way. Its like a satellite dish at home. You have line of sight or you have zero signal.

[KaiserJeep]

I too have experienced first hand proof that we live on a round ball. My military service in the USCG happened in the early 1970's before GPS. I worked on an older navigation system called LORAN-C, which was based upon an even older system (LORAN-A) that was used by Allied bombers to navigate in Europe during WW2.

LORAN-C differed from LORAN-A mainly by the radio frequency used, which was 100 kHz, a very low frequency in the VLF (very low frequency) band. The system produced a set of 100 kHz RF pulses with a peak radiated power of two megawatts of energy. This operating frequency was selected because it was not limited to atmospheric propagation, the VLF broadcasts from the series of LORAN-C stations that we produced propagated quite well underwater and through the Earth itself. It was therefore a system usable by aircraft, surface ships, and even submarines submerged under the North polar ice.

During routine operations we did calculations for the purpose of calibrating the exact pulse timing, which was extremely precise and controlled by a set of precision time standards (i.e. "atomic clocks"). I did these manual calculations hundreds of times (before electronic calculators), at least once in every 8-hour watch. The monitor receivers were located in precisely known locations, and I would calculate the minimum travel time which was the path through the Earth's crust and part of the mantle in a straight line, and the first pulse in the signal monitor oscilloscope was always this "ground wave". I thus confirmed that the Earth was a round ball every few hours.