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: Fakery in Orbit: THE ISS

Unread postby fbenario on Wed Oct 10, 2012 12:24 am

hoi.polloi wrote:Finally, by bullshit, I mean the general feeling that the picture you posted is probably fake by virtue of your desperation, your apparent (and unfounded) anger at the world, your fake character and your poorly thought-out attitude. Nobody can fix the problems with your heart and soul but yourself.

astronut wrote: I demand that you cease your defamation about me, that is not too much to ask.


This is also bullshit. What if I said, "I demand you cease your defamation of me" on your forum? What sense would that make? You come on here, claiming to have some truth. We doubt it. You are defaming yourself by even claiming our doubt is somehow defamation. It's a joke - a laugh! Nobody here can, or has the power to, "defame" you. By virtue of trying to stand up for your apparent "beliefs", you are also defending what appears to be a massive hoax.

You are the only person posting with such an unscientific attitude by consistently calling everyone on this forum "conspiracy theorists" for not believing you personally. Does that make any sense to you?

Hoi, your whole post is extremely thoughtful and good, and my quoted bits cut to the very core of who I think we are, both as a forum, and as human beings. Thanks.
fbenario
Member
 
Posts: 2230
Joined: Fri Oct 23, 2009 1:49 am
Location: Atlanta, GA

Re: Fakery in Orbit: THE ISS

Unread postby hoi.polloi on Wed Oct 10, 2012 12:47 am

Okay, rhetorical question time. You're banned for refusing to answer our questions, but I still have some points to make.

astronut wrote:
hoi.polloi wrote:Who are we "defaming" anyway? An Internet persona? Nobody can do that but yourself.

astronut wrote:I'm not peddling bullshit.


By bullshit, I mean your entire persona. You demand respect but you give none. You claim the ISS is real but you haven't acknowledged the fake pictures. You imply all of it is real by failure to address this crucial question. That is why you are full of bullshit.

By bullshit, I mean your fake attitude. You claim to have absolute proof of something, but all you've demonstrated is that you stand by a story about a picture you've produced. Did you even make this picture? We don't and can't know.

Yes, you can, but you are not willing to put your money where your mouth is. That speaks volumes. I'm not the one full of bullshit here, you are.


Money doesn't purchase trust. You don't get that?

Also, you ignored much of my point that you just quoted. You imply all the pictures are real - pictures you didn't produce - pictures that look fake - pictures that show clear evidence of doctoring. It indicates your mind is not functioning. Defamation my ass.

This is also bullshit. What if I said, "I demand you cease your defamation of me" on your forum?

I haven't said anything about you on "my" forum.


Would you expect me to go to your forum if you had one?

What sense would that make? You come on here, claiming to have some truth. We doubt it. You are defaming yourself by even claiming our doubt is somehow defamation.

No, I'm not defaming myself. I was accused of perpetrating a hoax, that is defamation, I am defending myself from it.


If you perpetrated a hoax, but you did not do so deliberately, there really isn't a way for us to prove it. The fact is you are promoting false information. And unless you can disprove that, then the fact is you are supporting the false information.

It isn't so much that you are just presenting your information and it's over. You are presenting your information and saying, "this is my proof that the other information is legit and above critique." Since you do not say you work for NASA, you are claiming expertise you don't have. You may be better at operating some kind of equipment to produce the picture you claim, but how it works you are not sharing. Or you don't know.


You are the only person posting with such an unscientific attitude by consistently calling everyone on this forum "conspiracy theorists" for not believing you personally.

You're conspiracy theorists for believing that there is a massive conspiracy to "hoax" the ISS in pictures and videos all over the internet, even extending to amateur videos like mine which you claim are fake.


I don't think there is a conspiracy theory. There are only suppositions and some hypotheses based on the doctored images. We are just trying to figure out why there are so many. You claim there are none. That is a fallacy. It indicates that your brain does not work, or that you are deliberately ignoring evidence of photo manipulation. Is it worth it to us even giving you a litmus test? You are ignoring our questions about how your devices work.

Furthermore, a single person can post "all over the Internet" under different names. Would that be a "conspiracy"? Nope. It would be what you do. It is what I, and many others do. I could say you're a conspiracy theorist for claiming we are working in a concerted effort on this forum. Does that make your arguments less valid?


We have the right to doubt you and claim you are full of it.

You do not have the right to falsely accuse my video of being a hoax. You have proven no such thing, nor could you since it isn't a hoax. I have given you the means to see for yourself, in person, you have refused to avail yourself of the opportunity.


YES, we DO, in fact, have the right to claim you are part of a hoax, that you are a huckster, that you are full of it, that you are bullshitting us, that you are a clown, a buffoon, a performer, a juggler, an idiot, a wordsmith, a pawn, a stooge. We have the right to say these things because they are, more or less, proving true the more we try to get real information out of you.

And don't make me laugh about suing Simon or anyone else. Your great legal argument is the following: we're supposed to take your word that you produced the images the way you say you did (which, by the way, you still haven't described in detail). And if we don't believe you, and purchase the equipment you purchased, and set it up, step-by-step, as you describe it, that's defamation? Fuck that. Describe your system and exactly how it works so we can see if it's worth our time.

Thusfar, you have made it seem as though only obstinate Internet personas whose senses of sight and reading comprehension fail them are those producing these pictures. That "illusion" doesn't hold up in my mind. Not only do I not really believe your picture, even if it did seem more legitimate before you came here defaming yourself and causing others to doubt you more and more, now I think you are just having fun peddling your nonsense and bullshit. You can't seriously believe the things you claim to. Not if you are a thinking person. You are here to make an unclear point and vague threats. If you don't, instead, produce the full system that you used to supposedly produce this picture, we'll have no choice but to conclude you are trying very hard to hide something by distracting us with a mockery of an "insulted" persona.


If you think that's "defamation", you need to "grow up" and understand this is the Internet. Do you own the name "astronut"?

I have been called out by my real name by the site administrator.


So you claim. Perhaps that is the name you'd like to go by. We have no way of knowing. Even if it's so, why do you seem so excited to share it over and over with people? I didn't read it before. You could have attempted this dispute in a personal manner but you are publicly making yourself out to be a fool and a likely sell-out.

So why don't you just comply with our request to prove your set up?

I am not going to play that game, as I already said. Anyone can claim that they "failed to find it," but that does not prove me wrong or a hoaxer. Anyone can come see ISS for themselves in my telescope, in person, live, in the eyepiece at Chiefland. That is neutral ground, I do not live there, and there will be many other amateur astronomers there as well. I intentionally picked an event attended by many for the protection of all. Safety in numbers. You can either show up and see it for yourself, or refuse and show that you lack the courage to put your money where your mouth is.


Yes, but nobody in good or bad conscience will claim they failed to find it until you share the system you used to find it.

Your demands are ridiculous:

You: "Here ye! Here ye! I made this picture. Believe this imagery is real."
Response: How can we do that? Show us how it was made.

You: "First, build the system I used from hints and clues and do what I did to produce a picture."
Response: Okay, how did you do that? How does your system work? How did a picture come out of this?

You: "First, buy these things."
Response: We're not buying anything until you explain the full system. How does your system work?

You: "I'm not telling, and if you can't spend money on the equipment I've listed thus far, figure it out and produce one yourself, then it's defamation. Huzzah!"

HUH?!?! :blink:

We're not going to beg you to comply for your amusement. You've just failed to show real character. Go and be in your "safety" in numbers of deluded individuals, but I'm happier seeking real knowledge. Thanks.

Let it go on record that the person or persons known as "astronut" who came on CluesForum, trying to defend a picture up for question, repeatedly refused to explain how the picture was produced! and only offered to demonstrate their device, in a controlled, riggable, limited environment in person rather than putting their system to the test of the Internet public!

What else can we conclude but this person or persons is/are hucksters, frauds and charlatans? I guess that was all a tiresome way of showing we should have banned him in the first place.
hoi.polloi
Administrator
 
Posts: 5061
Joined: Sun Nov 14, 2010 7:24 pm

Re: Fakery in Orbit: THE ISS

Unread postby hoi.polloi on Wed Oct 10, 2012 1:04 am

Look, fakers. Please. It's not that difficult.

Just set up one page on eHow, YahooAnswers, Instructables, WonderHowTo, HowStuffWorks, HowToDoThings, HowCast, WikiHow, DoItYourself, ExpertVillage, VideoJug, SoYouWanna or anywhere else that gives a full Do-It-Yourself breakdown of how the average person can spot and film a zoomed-in shot of the object alleged to be an International Space Station flying high above the Earth.

Something like this only actually scientific and more than following a NASA chart of rare sightings:
http://www.instructables.com/id/How-to- ... on-Pass-B/

You hoaxers need to step up the media production game or your ISS is all going to come crashing down on you, isn't it? :lol:

... on the other hand, you could start admitting your lies and come clean with the world for the benefit of all humankind.
hoi.polloi
Administrator
 
Posts: 5061
Joined: Sun Nov 14, 2010 7:24 pm

Re: Fakery in Orbit: THE ISS

Unread postby reichstag fireman on Wed Oct 10, 2012 1:36 am

Twerp-perps like astronut might amuse us by explaining why 'amateurs' (fraudsters) can apparently capture moving footage of the non-existent ISS spaceship. Yet professional astronomers with access to multi-million pound apparatus, cannot achieve the same :rolleyes:

Over the past few months, a lynchpin figure in the local astronomical society - a club that boasts access to an impressive hill-top observatory and £1m telescope of its own, has finally turned!

It's been an arduous process, lots of heated discussion - but the good fellow is now 100% sceptic. :) A whistle-blower on all the main NASA dirty-money swindles: the Apollo Hoax, the ISS fraud, the Shuttle claptrap and of course the recent Mars fake mission. And for good measure, he's another 911 Myth-buster, thanks to September Clues!

Salvation for another Soul!

Though at times it was very painful. But he finally came through which was a joy to observe. Like watching someone recover from serious head trauma. Confusion and delusions giving way to mental exhaustion, disillusionment and, finally, anger and bitterness at the life and money he allowed NASA to steal in its Trillion Dollar Larceny of Public Funds.

Ironically, his wife, a Russian and the 'non-scientist' of the two, was much more receptive to clear-thinking. And best yet, they've got another child on the way, so there's another liberated mind soon to grace this earth!

Up yours NASA - you thieving cretins!
Last edited by reichstag fireman on Wed Oct 10, 2012 4:07 am, edited 1 time in total.
reichstag fireman
Member
 
Posts: 466
Joined: Wed May 16, 2012 1:09 am

Re: Fakery in Orbit: THE ISS

Unread postby hoi.polloi on Wed Oct 10, 2012 1:51 am

For those that want to spend some time on this, because you know for a fact that we're being too skeptical, give us the missing details of this account:

Take a Meade 8" LX200 Classic Schmidt-Cassegrain telescope, a Meade Lunar Planetary Imager [somehow, presumably fitted nice because it's the same manufacturer] strapped to the viewfinder, a [somehow] "modified" Samsung SDC-435 at prime focus [prime focus? does that mean "focused"?], a 2x barlow, a video capture card [presumably doesn't matter, but what brand? how? no doubt attached to a computer?], anti-vibration pads [attached where?] and do the following:

Let Brent Boshart's software take a two-line element set and use it to predict the path of our given satellite: in this case, ISS. If you need ISS's orbital data, "load" [somehow] this into the software. Track by clicking a button or link called "track."

[missing steps].

ISS is found automatically [by something].

Put [something] in a viewfinder [which?].

Then, simply use your mouse to adjust [something's] tracking [of something] to compensate for errors. The errors could be "pointing" or "timing" errors, though we are not told what those mean or refer to.

Then, finally, the last instruction is, "put ISS in the main camera", which really doesn't make any sense at this point, since we've never been informed of the context of the steps.

It all seems like it should work, somehow. But why was the explanation so vague and useless for the average person? It's almost like he doesn't actually know how it works at all, or he's trying to make it seem more difficult than it is. Why can't it just have been explained easily?

Surely, there must be something up there floating about and getting captured by the odd, embittered, people-hating astronomer of this sort.

Simon or I might not have $3000 to blow on a project like this, but Simon -- your astronomer friends. Don't they have a telescope and can't they do something like this? Astronut may have been a blowhard, but this seems like a very simple experiment to deduce for one's self, given the equipment. Surely there is something up there that looks like the ISS? And lasers can confirm for us how far it is from the Earth? I don't believe our skepticism of astronut is enough to be skeptical of all astronomers.
hoi.polloi
Administrator
 
Posts: 5061
Joined: Sun Nov 14, 2010 7:24 pm

Re: Fakery in Orbit: THE ISS

Unread postby simonshack on Wed Oct 10, 2012 2:48 am

hoi.polloi wrote:Simon or I might not have $3000 to blow on a project like this, but Simon -- your astronomer friends. Don't they have a telescope and can't they do something like this? Astronut may have been a blowhard, but this seems like a very simple experiment to deduce for one's self, given the equipment. Surely there is something up there that looks like the ISS? And lasers can confirm for us how far it is from the Earth? I don't believe our skepticism of astronut is enough to be skeptical of all astronomers.


I'm working on it these days, Hoi. Give me just a little time. :)
simonshack
Administrator
 
Posts: 6763
Joined: Sun Oct 18, 2009 8:09 pm
Location: italy

Re: Fakery in Orbit: THE ISS

Unread postby Libero on Wed Oct 10, 2012 4:33 am

Scott Ferguson looks to be following some pretty important people on twitter including Beth Beck (see my previous post.)

https://twitter.com/astroferg/following

Additionally, here's his Flickr photostream taken from his twitter page.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/astropics/page2/
Libero
Member
 
Posts: 333
Joined: Fri Aug 24, 2012 8:21 pm

Re: Fakery in Orbit: THE ISS

Unread postby lux on Wed Oct 10, 2012 1:35 pm

reichstag fireman wrote:Twerp-perps like astronut might amuse us by explaining why 'amateurs' (fraudsters) can apparently capture moving footage of the non-existent ISS spaceship. Yet professional astronomers with access to multi-million pound apparatus, cannot achieve the same :rolleyes:

Over the past few months, a lynchpin figure in the local astronomical society - a club that boasts access to an impressive hill-top observatory and £1m telescope of its own, has finally turned!

It's been an arduous process, lots of heated discussion - but the good fellow is now 100% sceptic. :) A whistle-blower on all the main NASA dirty-money swindles: the Apollo Hoax, the ISS fraud, the Shuttle claptrap and of course the recent Mars fake mission. And for good measure, he's another 911 Myth-buster, thanks to September Clues!

Salvation for another Soul!

Though at times it was very painful. But he finally came through which was a joy to observe. Like watching someone recover from serious head trauma. Confusion and delusions giving way to mental exhaustion, disillusionment and, finally, anger and bitterness at the life and money he allowed NASA to steal in its Trillion Dollar Larceny of Public Funds.

Ironically, his wife, a Russian and the 'non-scientist' of the two, was much more receptive to clear-thinking. And best yet, they've got another child on the way, so there's another liberated mind soon to grace this earth!

Up yours NASA - you thieving cretins!


Can you identify this person? Has he been invited to join us here?
lux
Member
 
Posts: 1914
Joined: Sat Oct 01, 2011 10:46 pm

Re: Fakery in Orbit: THE ISS

Unread postby Libero on Wed Oct 10, 2012 5:51 pm

Fellow CF members,

My little Truman Burbank mind has been churning on this, so before anyone goes to plunk down 3 grand on a new astrophotography rig, I wanted to interject my 2 cents.

As a kid, I used to own a very cheap telescope. I have no idea what the magnification power of this thing was, but the only real purpose of it ended up being to give me a slightly larger view of the moon. I can tell you from experience, that even to point that thing at the moon and to get it into focus took extreme patience. If I wanted to see a bigger view of say, a particular star in the galaxy, I can't even imagine how difficult that would have been, since you really need to establish a reference to be able to aim and focus the thing -- the greater the magnification, the harder to keep things in view. For me to have pointed and tried to follow a moving object with any sort of serious magnification would have been darn near impossible. You can simulate this for free at your local sports shop or telescope dealer, or perhaps even with a set of binoculars or gun scope with magnification in your own home.

Here enters the super fantastic Brent Boshart's Satellite tracking software... obviously needed to track this thing. But here's the rub... Not only is the software free, but it has been unsupported for several years now. If you drop 3, 5, or even 10 grand on a new rig and then attempt to use this software but can't get the images that astronut produced, are you going to ask for a refund on free? If you persevere to try to get it to work and look to contact someone for assistance, who are ya gonna call? :) I have looked at some of the astrophotography sites that astronut mentioned and many there are in awe of the pictures claiming that they themselves can only obtain an image of a bright dot. And the images that Simon asked astronut if they were genuine or not and he confirmed... the ones that the photographer had better luck with obtaining a perfect image... how could this be possible to track this object with such clarity and with no jerkiness or shaking whatsoever? The physical mechanism of the actual machine moving the scope would have to be unbelievably smooth and refined, likely far surpassing in cost even the rig itself. Lastly, if we were to play the game and go by odds or chance, how many daytime photos or videos are there of the ISS in circulation on the internet vs. real, honest astrophotographers?

So lets go under the assumption for a second in that these images may not be real. What can be ascertained from the information that I have put into my last 2 posts?

In the video I provided yesterday (painfully slow today) of Beth Beck, we find out that she works for NASA and that she partly deals with the social media aspect of their marketing. In the :47 to 1:27 mark (you may need to pause and let it queue), we find out that she was specifically working on the space shuttle and space station projects at the time and letting people know that there are actually astronauts up there. Coincidentally, the submission of Scott Ferguson's 'NASA's Greatest Fans' video has been added to youtube by a username of bethbeck. He also follows her on twitter, so we can assume some sort of shallow relationship, at best.

Disclaimer : The next few lines are completely hypothetical and conspiratorial. :D

Based on the information above, could we not make an assumption of the following formula expressed as a silly mathematical equation?

Beth Beck's job purpose + astronut's job purpose = Lux's second conclusion

lux wrote:
lux wrote:My view ... is that there may be an object up there which was put there just for the purpose of amateur viewing via telescopes or other such observations.


Which would be easier? Placing a phony ISS in actual orbit around the Earth to give amateur astronomers something to look at ... or,
... placing some phony amateur astronomers who present fake images that they say they captured of the ISS?


I might take it one step further to hypothetically and conspiratorially state that the formula might even be this:

Beth Beck's job purpose + videos provided to certain astrophotographers (real or not) from movie studio claiming them to be real who then disperse them to the various media outlets (without validation, I might add) = added validity of existence of spacecraft and lots of sales of astrophotography equipment in hopes of catching the big moment.

The one I mentioned above may easily explain why hoi is not getting the answers he is requesting from astronut.


Finally, I wanted to mention that Beth Beck has a blog that I have posted below. It's chock full of cool pics including some from her trips to Italy, snaps from the French king of photographers of the ISS and even some from 9/11. I forget... in the satellite photos that she has posted from NASA, is the smoke blowing the way that has been determined it should be blowing?

http://bethbeck.wordpress.com/
Libero
Member
 
Posts: 333
Joined: Fri Aug 24, 2012 8:21 pm

Re: Fakery in Orbit: THE ISS

Unread postby lux on Wed Oct 10, 2012 7:05 pm

Oct 10th, 2012 video:


full link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rHJOLi5OZU8

Some cool space ship models, huh?
lux
Member
 
Posts: 1914
Joined: Sat Oct 01, 2011 10:46 pm

Re: Fakery in Orbit: THE ISS

Unread postby simonshack on Thu Oct 11, 2012 12:52 am

Libero wrote: I have looked at some of the astrophotography sites that astronut mentioned and many there are in awe of the pictures claiming that they themselves can only obtain an image of a bright dot.


Yes, Libero. A bright dot. That's what most honest observers report seeing in their telescopes - such as this guy:


The Space Shuttle and the ISS are a hoax!

As impossible as it may sound at first, and I have been studying this phenomena for several years now, but it would appear that the International Space Station (ISS) and the Space Shuttle are a complete hoax. I have managed to prove this by directly viewing the ISS through a privately owned telescope (a Newtonian of 6 inch aperture at low magnification and using manual tracking). On every occasion I have viewed the ISS, and I am an experienced observer, a perfectly round object is revealed presenting no angular projections whatsoever. This entirely goes against what we have officially been told regarding the exact configuration of the ISS which could loosely be described as shaped somewhat like an ‘aeroplane’.

Please do read the full article:
http://www.webspawner.com/users/shuttlehoax/


[ADMIN: The above links seems to have been removed. Please try this archived version instead:
https://web.archive.org/web/20120924052 ... uttlehoax/
-HP 1-17-18]


So this bat-thing (larger than two football fields) allegedly circling the earth 15 days a day at the measly altitude of about 380km can only be seen as a dot in powerful telescopes ??? Whereas we can clearly see all the craters of the Moon (at about 380,000km) with a pair of cheap binoculars?
Image
simonshack
Administrator
 
Posts: 6763
Joined: Sun Oct 18, 2009 8:09 pm
Location: italy

Re: Fakery in Orbit: THE ISS

Unread postby Libero on Thu Oct 11, 2012 7:11 am

Does anybody happen to have any voice recognition software handy? :D Aw, heck.. you probably won't need it.


Edit: Switched to direct youtube link. Compare the narration on this video to Scott Ferguson's (aka messierhunter) 'NASA's Greatest Fans' contest video below that previously posted.


2nd Edit: Please disregard and I deleted both video links. It appears that the person submitting the original video I was referring to is a different entity altogether and may have just been 'using' the telescope.
Last edited by Libero on Thu Oct 11, 2012 5:29 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Libero
Member
 
Posts: 333
Joined: Fri Aug 24, 2012 8:21 pm

Re: Fakery in Orbit: THE ISS

Unread postby lux on Thu Oct 11, 2012 2:58 pm

simonshack wrote:
Libero wrote: I have looked at some of the astrophotography sites that astronut mentioned and many there are in awe of the pictures claiming that they themselves can only obtain an image of a bright dot.


Yes, Libero. A bright dot. That's what most honest observers report seeing in their telescopes - such as this guy:


The Space Shuttle and the ISS are a hoax!

As impossible as it may sound at first, and I have been studying this phenomena for several years now, but it would appear that the International Space Station (ISS) and the Space Shuttle are a complete hoax. I have managed to prove this by directly viewing the ISS through a privately owned telescope (a Newtonian of 6 inch aperture at low magnification and using manual tracking). On every occasion I have viewed the ISS, and I am an experienced observer, a perfectly round object is revealed presenting no angular projections whatsoever. This entirely goes against what we have officially been told regarding the exact configuration of the ISS which could loosely be described as shaped somewhat like an ‘aeroplane’.

Please do read the full article:
http://www.webspawner.com/users/shuttlehoax/[/i]




Very interesting article indeed. Also, the "balloon satellite" idea in the article provides food for thought for the Satellite Musings thread.

Now, I must say that "Lux's first conclusion" (i.e., a dummy object being used to sub for the ISS) may be winning out over "Lux's second conclusion" (i.e., nothing there at all, just fake "amateur astronomer pics").

Or, perhaps I should now introduce "Lux's third conclusion" which is a combination of both the above ideas. That is, a dummy balloon satellite combined with faked ISS photos from planted "amateur astronomers." A relatively inexpensive yet nearly undetectable scam netting billions.
lux
Member
 
Posts: 1914
Joined: Sat Oct 01, 2011 10:46 pm

Re: Fakery in Orbit: THE ISS

Unread postby Heiwa on Thu Oct 11, 2012 6:16 pm

Questions/suggestions to SpaceX about Dragon re-entry after visit to ISS :
It is suggested that Dragon decelerates from 9 000 m/s to very low speed during 30 minutes probably at around 0.5g only using a heat shield of PICA material (and then deploys parachutes). Can you provide any scientific data to support the suggestion that a PICA heat shield can in fact decelerate a space ship like Dragon and get rid of the heat without the space ship behind the heat shield burning/getting damaged?
The distance travelled during re-entry to Earth is very long. If you re-enter a minute too late or early you may end up 60x9 000=540 000 m away from the expected landing site where your little boat (my speciality) is waiting. Re-entry is not easy. Suggest SpaceX describes the problem more in detail in the press kit.
Best regards
Heiwa

Answer from SpaceX:
Hi Heiwa,
Unfortunately, due to the proprietary nature of this information, we are unable to provide answers to these specific technical questions. My apologies.
Best,
Hannah
HANNAH POST | Communications |SpaceX
1 Rocket Road, Hawthorne, CA 90250
hannah.post@spacex.com 310.219.7840

:lol: :D :P
Heiwa
Banned
 
Posts: 1062
Joined: Tue Oct 20, 2009 6:20 pm

Re: Fakery in Orbit: THE ISS

Unread postby lux on Thu Oct 11, 2012 7:11 pm

^ Proprietary information? :o

Yeah, and WE (USA taxpayers) are the proprietors since OUR dollars (via NASA appropriations) are paying for this hoax!
lux
Member
 
Posts: 1914
Joined: Sat Oct 01, 2011 10:46 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Apollo, and more space hoaxes

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests