If NASA faked the moon landings, does the agency have any credibility at all? Was the Space Shuttle program also a hoax? Is the International Space Station another one? Do not dismiss these hypotheses offhand. Check out our wider NASA research and make up your own mind about it all.
ElSushi wrote:So digital...so magical.
Ah, le cinéma...
full link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TGBQazOQfoE
quick question: why can't we see those city night lights on the (supposed) live stream? there's nothing but black when it's on the night side of earth.
ElSushi wrote:So digital...so magical.
Ah, le cinéma...
full link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TGBQazOQfoE
quick question: why can't we see those city night lights on the (supposed) live stream? there's nothing but black when it's on the night side of earth.
That is a very good question. I guess we can't see any lights, because the whole thing is simply not a real live stream. Hypothetically, if it were real and there was a sudden power outage in a certain area, which happens to be visible, it would be seen in the live stream, but since it is fake they don't want to take the risk of being so easily exposed. It is not easy to make the fake live stream simultaneously reflect such variables like power outages. It is also surprising that they do provide night images, but not night-time live stream where you can actually see the lights below. http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/IOTD/view.php?id=76777
Also how come we never see any continental outlines in the ISS daytime live stream? What exactly is the HD camera providing? It is of no use at all!
Yesterday the ISS supply rocket ship Cygnus exploded on takeoff, we're told.
full link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A9IMdxlW0zQ
Seems to me that the rocket falls much too slowly after losing its engine. There would be no thrust at that point so it should drop like a rock, no? Instead it seems to gently float back down to the pad.
Is this because the "launch" is shot in slow motion to make the model rocket look more realistic?
lux wrote:
Is this because the "launch" is shot in slow motion to make the model rocket look more realistic?
You could be right. The footage might be fake. The event might serve a completely different purpose whatsoever.
Could there be also some sort of symbolism in the alleged explosion? Cygnus means swan. It is also a constellation known as the Northern Cross. The explosion took place in Virginia where we also have the VIRGINIA SWAN(statewide alert network). http://local.iteris.com/virginiaitsarch ... /el69.html.
Check this out as well:
The Greeks also associated this constellation with the tragic story of Phaethon, the son of Helios the sun god, who demanded to ride his father's sun chariot for a day. Phaethon, however, was unable to control the reins, forcing Zeus to destroy the chariot (and Phaethon) with a thunderbolt, causing it to plummet to the earth into the river Eridanus. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cygnus_(constellation)
We might also add to that the 'swan song'
The Swan song (in ancient Greek: κύκνειον ᾆσμα) is a metaphorical phrase for a final gesture, effort, or performance given just before death or retirement...In Greek mythology, the swan was a bird consecrated to Apollo...
Is this some kind of sick joke or simply coincidence?
Whatever it is, dear Roe77, the thought of ANY modern 2014 rocket blowing up like that on the launch pad - is absurd in itself.
Well, I guess you may argue that the "Cygnus" went a bit further up than the "Vanguard" (1957) :
..
Could NASA possibly have learned NOTHING - in all of 57 years?
I understand the absurdity of it all. Perhaps the next 'event' will be the fall of the thing called 'ISS', supposedly from technical failure.
Hadfield says that he didn’t want his pictures to look like satellite images. Rather, he wanted them to have a human element. “Some satellite images are good by chance. But it’s random. Who is it judging that the picture is okay? It’s not the satellite, it’s us. So it’s almost always better to cut out the middle man—or the middle machine.
Some of the images attributed to that Hadfield clown may be based on actual aerial photographs zoomed out and stitched together in Google Earth-style, but the ones in perspective (Florida, Cairo, etc.) are digital cartoons.
Just a cursory glance this evening over tak47's link to this NASA powered site... http://iss.astroviewer.net/index.php and bashing in a few different locations in the hope of finding a double viewing of the thing on the same day quickly came up trumps with Brisbane, Australia. Tomorrow! (probably too late now).
'Ah jeez. Thanks..ya pomy bastard!'
'No worries mate, got a screen shot of the Sheila!'
'Yeah?'
Indeed'...
So, at just gone quarter past three in the morning Oz time, the thing went 'whooosh' just South of Brisbane heading North and could possibly be seen (weather permitting) for 4 minutes 39 secs. Then, a little over 15 hours later the thing re-appears doing this...
It is basically understood that the ISS does not change direction, just circles (orbit) whilst the Earth beneath it rotates...
scud wrote:It is basically understood that the ISS does not change direction, just circles (orbit) whilst the Earth beneath it rotates...
Scud the official Nasa orbit is not a simple East-West one. It is perhaps easier to imagine it as a skewed 'diagonal' one, if you will... the flight path is also alleged to drift about a 1000km west every 90 minutes (presumably due to the Earths rotation).
It is this orbit (and hopefully one day an 'angular velocity') that we're trying to verify... assuming the skies ever sodding clear again.
It should indeed be possible to see it travel in two completely different directions (the two different 'diagonals') if they're 15 hours apart... assuming that NASA ain't lying.
It is probably illegal, but what if someone tries to aim a powerful laser pointer at the ISS? Let's say you go to a high mountain peak, buy one of the most powerful lasers and wait till IT makes its pass directly above you Well, of course, the ISS is supposed to be too high, so a laser pointer shouldn't reach it, but is this really the case? Would be worth checking. They supposedly pointed a laser at the Moon, so theoretically it should be possible.
"Camera-work" may not be the right description, Brian - there are hardly any cameras involved in the world of digital video animation.
This latest effort by the NASA Imagery Crew ("CYGNUS / ANTARES blowing up on launch pad, October 28 2014") deserves some of our attention - were it only to remind everyone what we really are looking at here. But before I even start performing any comparative analyses of the available imagery of the "Cygnus explosion", I would like to point out how incredibly sloppy the NASA hoaxers are - even when simply uploading their stuff on Youtube. Here are two clips uploaded by two (supposedly) different YT users:
ANTARES EXPLODES!!! Panic at the press site! Orbital's rocket blows up - uploaded on YT by "Matthew Travis"
(over 2 million views in one week!!!) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MZ0SgAU9LXI
That's right: the two different clips (uploaded by different YT users) have the exact same title... go figure how that could possibly be!
The TRAVIS clip is an alleged "amateur video" - whereas the WORLD OF TANKS clip is clearly meant to be an official NASA video.
I have made two (speeded up) gifs from the two clips, using roughly the same 17-second-timeline segment 'as the rocket blows up' :
"MATTHEW TRAVIS" clip_________________________________________________"WORLD OF TANKS" CLIP
As you can see, the TRAVIS clip fades to a bright blue sky - whereas the WORLD OF TANKS clip fades to a pitch-black sky. There really is no rational explanation for this - other than that these 'fiery explosions' are digital animations, likely created with After Effects or similar special fx softwares. NO real cameras were involved in the making of this imagery. NASA probably wishes to (somehow) uphold the old idea ("look mom, no stars!") that cameras' light sensors react to bright light (explosion flame in this case), totally blacking out the surrounding sky.
But wait, wasn't the Cygnus/Antares supposedly launched in daylight (bright blue sky)? Well - according to this other "amateur video", yes :
Antares Rocket Explosion at NASA Wallops - uploaded by "pixfire"(pixel fire?...)
full link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A4sahTq42mk
Note also the wildly conflicting / inconsistent soundtracks of the three above "Cygnus explosion" videos - but of course, that's what we've come to expect from the goofy NASA FAKERY CREW by now. Their sense / talent for real world audio simulation is truly astoundingly poor.
If you're not yet convinced that the available "CYGNUS EXPLOSION" imagery is yet another batch of CGI animations, here's another supposed "amateur video" of what is meant to be the very same rocket launch at Wallops, Virginia - on October 28 2014:
"Antares Explosion 10/28/14" - uploaded by "Refuge Inn"
full link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CCVTqBK_s5E
The silly clowns sure love their mushroom clouds...
Well, of course, the ISS is supposed to be too high, so a laser pointer shouldn't reach it, but is this really the case? Would be worth checking. They supposedly pointed a laser at the Moon, so theoretically it should be possible.
