Fakery in Orbit: THE I$$

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.

Re: ENDEAVOUR - and the spaced-out NASA efforts

Unread postby fbenario on Mon Mar 26, 2012 11:42 pm

Nice. How funny.
Mysterious Geologic Structure Seen from Space

A huge, copper-toned formation in West Africa dominates a mesmerizing photo taken by an astronaut aboard the International Space Station.

Dutch astronaut Andre Kuipers snapped this hypnotic image of the so-called Richat structure in Mauritania, as the space station flew over the Sahara Desert on the Atlantic Coast of West Africa. Erosion of the various rock layers created the ring-like features that make up the sprawling structure, but the origin of the Richat structure remains somewhat mysterious, geologists have said.

The photo shows Kuipers' unique vantage point from the orbiting complex, which flies approximately 240 miles (386 kilometers) above the surface of the Earth. The image was taken on March 7 using a Nikon D2Xs camera, officials at the European Space Agency said in a statement.

http://news.yahoo.com/mysterious-geolog ... 07334.html


Image
fbenario
Member
 
Posts: 2224
Joined: Fri Oct 23, 2009 1:49 am
Location: Atlanta, GA

Re: ENDEAVOUR - and the spaced-out NASA efforts

Unread postby hollycrap on Tue Mar 27, 2012 11:25 pm

simonshack wrote:
nonhocapito wrote:
I know it is frustrating that science is such a separated world that requires so much study to be approached properly. But I don't see much ways around it. Now you Simon called photography a science. Well, maybe so (and so is propaganda, certainly), but you must admit that it is not a science like rocket engineering or nuclear physics. It is a technology, with lots of human aspects to it, that most of us can handle and understand and experience directly. That's why it is, like you say, a much safer, logic, proper terrain for us.


Dearest Nonho,

I believe the two of us share a lot in common - as far as confining our research within a manageable range of knowledge which we can both comprehend and - as we reach a given conclusion - expound in a convincing fashion. However, I also believe that the word 'science' applies equally to any sphere of knowledge determined by a set of reasonably verifiable and repeatable rules, laws, parameters, etc. Now, you mentioned two words (photography and logic) which I am not alone in considering as having a 'scientific basis' (and I don't care if the word 'scientific' sounds pompous to many folks). Let me just link to wickedpedia for simplicity's sake:

The Science of Photography: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Science_of_photography

The Science of Logic: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Science_of_Logic

I encourage you to read the first article (a decent introduction to photographic science) while, for the second (I'm sure you are already familiar with Hegel and Aristotle) I'm not asking you to read La Critique de la Raison Pure, don't worry! Rather, I'd like to bring your attention specifically to Aristotle's second of the so-called three classic laws of thought: The Principle of Contradiction

The Principle of Contradiciton
"The oldest statement of the law is that contradictory statements cannot both at the same time be true, e.g. the two propositions "A is B" and "A is not B" are mutually exclusive. This is the statement of the law given by Aristotle. It takes no account of the truth of either proposition; if one is true, the other is not; one of the two must be false."


This law of Aristotle is helpful when performing photographic comparisons of one and the same object or scenery. Let me put this in simple words: if two photographers in the jungle snap synchronous pictures of the same blue parrot crashing into a tree, it would not only be unlikely - but totally impossible for one of the two photos - once developed - to show a grey monkey crashing into the same tree. That is, of course, unless the guy is a silly joker and enjoys playing around with Photoshop.

Is photography a 'science'? Is logic a 'science'? I would certainly say so - and none of them are any more or any less 'established and academic' than, say, the science of astronomy or rocket science. In order to stay on topic here, let me get back to that 'Damaged Solar Panel' incident of November 2008 at the ISS. As I go along, I will set forth how we may use basic notions of logic and photography - in tandem - to expose the phoniness of this umpteenth, astoundingly crude NASA propaganda tripe.

But first, let me amend an incorrect caption I made in one of my earlier posts on the subject. I presented this cropped NASA picture as 'an artist impression' of the ISS's solar panels. Why did I do that? Well, because I could see it was a digital graphic image (not a photograph) at first glance - but this is of course no scientific manner of making a case, so I will elaborate further on:
Image

But then I went back to the NASA website to read their original caption more carefully:
" (4 Aug. 2008) --- Earth's horizon and station solar array panels are featured in this image
photographed by an Expedition 17 crewmember on the International Space Station."
:blink:
http://spaceflight.nasa.gov/gallery/ima ... 12652.html

Here is the full, uncropped image as posted by NASA (who clearly contends that this is a REAL photography):
Image
I don't think I need to use arrows and circles to point out why this is not a photograph. The only fairly photo-realistic-looking part of this image is the very top, white/metal suspension structure. It is clearly lit from behind (correctly I guess, since the sun appears to be behind it - and below the Earth's horizon). So what light source is illuminating all of the solar panels in such smooth and even way?

If, after 40 years+ of Moonhoax imagery analyses, we cannot agree and establish beyond debate that this alleged authentic NASA image is wholly phony, I guess we can just pack our bags and hop onto Nasa's next shuttle to Mars - and see if we can find intelligent life up there. But I know: for anyone unfamiliar with photographic science (yes, that's what I henceforth will call it) the above may not constitute a satisfactory demonstration. So let's get on.

Let's now use a little logic - and common sense - to tackle the bizzarre NASA-tale of the "Damaged Solar Panel". As the story went, it was a "highly-dangerous business" as Scott-the-astronaught had to balance upon a long robotic arm, risking electrocution if he touched the surface of the solar panels (???). Just read this article if you wish - to get a feel of the 'drama' involved:
http://www.space.com/3878-nasa-space-st ... ority.html
Image

One has to wonder - why didn't they just haul the damn thing down?
As an ol' Norwegian sailor, that's what I would do if I had a hole in my sail. :P
Image

Anyhow, remember Aristotle's Principle of Contradiction? Remember my story of the blue parrot and the grey monkey? Here are 3 pictures released by NASA and ESA to the press - to illustrate their astronaughts' harrowing day of work up at the ISS:
Image

And here I compare the parrot and the monkey:
Image

Now you will ask: "Why do they make such ravingly blatant blunders? Couldn't they do a better job of all this image fakery?"
Well, I think I have an answer for that. But before I formulate this answer, consider that the most common question of ALL is:
"How can so many people be kept quiet about this? Surely, there must be too many people involved?"

Precisely. There are too many people involved. An organizational nightmare. I would imagine that between NASA, ESA and other secretive government agencies, the people involved number in the thousands. Among those, you'll probably have a few hundred graphic designers/photo retouchers/video editors/CGI animators in charge of the relentless manufacturing of fake imagery, given the amount of phony space photos needed to uphold the ongoing sham. And they would, most likely, have deadlines to meet whenever any given mainstream media-timed newsbite of their space adventures would be needed. Imagine the stress endured by the coordinators/supervisors of this constant, chain assembly of fake images - checking and comparing them all for consistency.

Now, if you had such a golden, plum job (yes, NASA & co are rich) with a life/family to care for - and a gag order hanging over you, let me ask you: would YOU YOURSELF ever consider to speak out? No you wouldn't. It's called survival instinct - and it is the foremost priority observed by all human beings.

And that's it for today folks. Need more incontestable proof of NASA's hocus-pocus skulduggery? Stay tuned.


Another one for the album.


Image

:angry:
hollycrap
Member
 
Posts: 223
Joined: Sun Mar 25, 2012 1:04 am

Re: ENDEAVOUR - and the spaced-out NASA efforts

Unread postby lux on Wed Mar 28, 2012 2:33 am

Image

http://fotoforensics.com/analysis.php?id=adcd2b2ef686e36eb1f5eadb5ae3fbec928d5803.168412

[ADMIN: Checking broken links/images pass; this imagery analysis using fotoforensics.com doesn't seem to exist any more. 01-14-2018 -HP]
lux
Member
 
Posts: 1914
Joined: Sat Oct 01, 2011 10:46 pm

Re: ENDEAVOUR - and the spaced-out NASA efforts

Unread postby hollycrap on Wed Mar 28, 2012 3:13 am



thanks ;)

http://www.inflexwetrust.com/wp-content ... ersary.png

7tv0U.jpg
ORIGINAL: http://i.imgur.com/7tv0U.jpg

http://fotoforensics.com/analysis.php?i ... dec.400591



:o

[ADMIN: The point remains, luckily. But fixing broken links/images pass, much of the relevant links no longer link to original source. 01-14-2018 -HP]
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
hollycrap
Member
 
Posts: 223
Joined: Sun Mar 25, 2012 1:04 am

Re: ENDEAVOUR - and the spaced-out NASA efforts

Unread postby lux on Wed Mar 28, 2012 9:15 pm

Image

[ADMIN: Fixing broken links/images pass; no original found 01-14-2018 -HP]
lux
Member
 
Posts: 1914
Joined: Sat Oct 01, 2011 10:46 pm

Re: ENDEAVOUR - and the spaced-out NASA efforts

Unread postby nonhocapito on Thu Mar 29, 2012 5:11 am

lux wrote:Image


Are you kidding? This image is photoshopped. <_<

http://fotoforensics.com/analysis.php?i ... 51&fmt=ela
[ADMIN: Fixing broken links/images pass; the above fotoforensics analysis has been lost. 01-14-2018 -HP]

:P :D

BTW, is it credible that NASA would allow anyone to go up in space with hair that long? Hair that could get in the way while doing important tasks, or that a person would lose and could end up anywhere? Would a mandatory haircut be that strange before a flight?
nonhocapito
Administrator
 
Posts: 2554
Joined: Sat Jul 10, 2010 5:38 am
Location: Italy

Re: ENDEAVOUR - and the spaced-out NASA efforts

Unread postby figuringitout on Thu Mar 29, 2012 8:38 am

nonhocapito wrote:BTW, is it credible that NASA would allow anyone to go up in space with hair that long? Hair that could get in the way while doing important tasks, or that a person would lose and could end up anywhere? Would a mandatory haircut be that strange before a flight?


Apparently the astoanauts for the Apollo programme were originally going to have all their hair and body hair shaved to reduce the risk of small hairs floating around and clogging up the machinery/electronic equipment etc, but in the end they simply dropped the idea, don't know what explanation they gave, if they gave one at all. Why would they even be thinking about such a thing if it wasn't a reasonable chance of such a problem occurring? Yet another bizarre detail from the NASA/Apollo hoax to go with all the other garbage they've churned out.
figuringitout
Member
 
Posts: 20
Joined: Sun Aug 21, 2011 7:41 pm

Re: ENDEAVOUR - and the spaced-out NASA efforts

Unread postby lux on Thu Mar 29, 2012 9:11 pm

figuringitout wrote:
Apparently the astoanauts for the Apollo programme were originally going to have all their hair and body hair shaved to reduce the risk of small hairs floating around and clogging up the machinery/electronic equipment etc ... Why would they even be thinking about such a thing if it wasn't a reasonable chance of such a problem occurring?


Because they had a problem faking weightless hair in their vids, maybe?
lux
Member
 
Posts: 1914
Joined: Sat Oct 01, 2011 10:46 pm

Re: ENDEAVOUR - and the spaced-out NASA efforts

Unread postby hollycrap on Fri Mar 30, 2012 11:05 am

Image

Tracy Caldwell in the Cupola. An imaginary place on the international space station where you can gaze at the Earth below.

This gif displays two different versions available on the internet of the same "photo"

Realizing that all media from space is fake, one can only but deduce space travel is not possible, even in low earth orbit.

http://www.tineye.com/search/bb950ec30b ... f710453b9/

http://www.tineye.com/search/bb950ec30b4a359a4a4df63d9691ffbf710453b9/?sort=score&order=asc


:P

:o
Last edited by hollycrap on Fri Mar 30, 2012 11:25 am, edited 2 times in total.
hollycrap
Member
 
Posts: 223
Joined: Sun Mar 25, 2012 1:04 am

Re: ENDEAVOUR - and the spaced-out NASA efforts

Unread postby hollycrap on Fri Mar 30, 2012 11:09 am

lux wrote:
figuringitout wrote:
Apparently the astoanauts for the Apollo programme were originally going to have all their hair and body hair shaved to reduce the risk of small hairs floating around and clogging up the machinery/electronic equipment etc ... Why would they even be thinking about such a thing if it wasn't a reasonable chance of such a problem occurring?


Because they had a problem faking weightless hair in their vids, maybe?


Image
Astronaut Marsha Ivins experiencing weightlessness during STS-98.

http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/image ... 1/hair.jpg

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Weightless_hair.jpg


:rolleyes:
Last edited by hollycrap on Fri Mar 30, 2012 11:14 am, edited 2 times in total.
hollycrap
Member
 
Posts: 223
Joined: Sun Mar 25, 2012 1:04 am

Re: ENDEAVOUR - and the spaced-out NASA efforts

Unread postby nonhocapito on Fri Mar 30, 2012 11:10 am

hollycrap wrote:This gif displays two different versions available on the internet of the same "photo"


sources, please...? :rolleyes:
nonhocapito
Administrator
 
Posts: 2554
Joined: Sat Jul 10, 2010 5:38 am
Location: Italy


Re: ENDEAVOUR - and the spaced-out NASA efforts

Unread postby lux on Fri Mar 30, 2012 11:43 am

Image

This looks very odd to me. Doesn't look like weightlessness. Looks like her hair is electrically charged. Maybe they are using some sort of electronics to simulate weightlessness and that's why they considered shaving their heads -- so their hair wouldn't look like this.
lux
Member
 
Posts: 1914
Joined: Sat Oct 01, 2011 10:46 pm

Re: ENDEAVOUR - and the spaced-out NASA efforts

Unread postby hollycrap on Fri Mar 30, 2012 11:54 am

hollycrap
Member
 
Posts: 223
Joined: Sun Mar 25, 2012 1:04 am

Re: ENDEAVOUR - and the spaced-out NASA efforts

Unread postby hollycrap on Fri Mar 30, 2012 11:24 pm

Found this in a french blog

http://www.leplatdujour.com/2002/06/

Image

In my opinion mass of hair to the top left is photoshopped. there's a curly patch of hair to the left which has been cloned (and flipped) from the right. In the window on the right bottom there's a man's arm. Completely overlayed in there.

We are not to believe everything we see. We know most is fakery :wub:

:lol:
hollycrap
Member
 
Posts: 223
Joined: Sun Mar 25, 2012 1:04 am

PreviousNext

Return to Apollo, and more space hoaxes

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests