Miscellaneous NASA comedies

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.
Post Reply
Starbucked
Member
Posts: 209
Joined: Wed Nov 28, 2012 11:33 am

Re: Miscellaneous NASA comedies

Unread post by Starbucked » Thu Dec 25, 2014 3:28 am

The horizon line actually appears bent and inconsistently curved rather than smoothly curved like in the photo you provided, lux.

As well, notice how natural and straight the lines of the ship and other foreground objects appear, in contrast to the horizon. Is this even possible? I'm calling complete shenanigans.

ps. Is that a teal green sky in the top hell-i-copter shot I posted? Looks like a crayon color I would have chosen for the sky when I was 6.

pps. In the YouTube comments section someone wrote, 'notice how clear the water is'. Good observation! In fact the water is crystal clear. Possibly because the divers were filmed in a pool?

anonjedi2
Member
Posts: 795
Joined: Mon Dec 31, 2012 5:50 am

Re: Miscellaneous NASA comedies

Unread post by anonjedi2 » Thu Dec 25, 2014 9:34 am

Starbucked wrote:The horizon line actually appears bent and inconsistently curved rather than smoothly curved like in the photo you provided, lux.

As well, notice how natural and straight the lines of the ship and other foreground objects appear, in contrast to the horizon. Is this even possible? I'm calling complete shenanigans.

ps. Is that a teal green sky in the top hell-i-copter shot I posted? Looks like a crayon color I would have chosen for the sky when I was 6.

pps. In the YouTube comments section someone wrote, 'notice how clear the water is'. Good observation! In fact the water is crystal clear. Possibly because the divers were filmed in a pool?
My vote: Lens distortion.

a) Whether consistently curved or bent, it doesn't really matter. The photo of the bookshelf looks bent to me.

b) Adobe Lightroom has a plugin that allows you to "flatten" your images in post production. Choose your lens and it calculates for you. It works quite well, especially if you're into taking pictures of buildings, doors, etc.

c) Yes, it's possible that the horizon would appear bent and the lines of the ship and other objects appear straight, because those items are in the foreground. When you flatten an image, the area closest to the center flattens the least. In other words, you get more correction at the edges. Just think of how the lens is shaped and you'll understand what I mean.

d) Yes, the water is crystal clear. It's the ocean, what other appearance do you expect it to have?

Here's how my logic works:

It would be easier, cheaper, and faster to just build a silly Hollywood Prop or even a real machine that will never go into orbit but can function here on Earth (which will also be used for future fakery videos) and run a fake military drill in the ocean to get your Navy boys some training. You'd be done with filming in half a day, the braindead seals would have no clue, and you can use your prop again in a different environment without having to create all new CGI. Hiring someone to do all of that CGI would take much longer. Plus, it's more realistic to use a prop because, well ... physically, it's real. This is one of the reasons why the newer generation Star Wars films can never compare to the originals. Props just look better than CGI. There really is nothing like the magic of old-school Hollywood Filmmaking! ;)

^^^^ A little holiday sarcasm for you. :P

You could also make the argument that using real props serves to appease and fool the many low level military/NASA dupes by actually giving them something physical and tangible to work on, which they do everyday for their entire careers. Perhaps they think they're "working on a space project" and may have actually had hand in testing/designing/producing something (for argument's sake) from Engineers, Project Managers, Designers, Construction, Mathameticians, etc. There are a lot of people that work at NASA. My guess is that the majority of them have real jobs and are doing real things at those jobs everyday. They may just think they're working on a spacecraft but have no idea that it's just a prop. If they can see and interact with what they think is a technological marvel that will fly into outer space, they will never question it because it's right there in front of them and they are fully invested! Theoretically, it all makes sense based on what they think they know, so it should work on paper. They're essentially trapped in a prison of their own minds.

There's no need for CGI, all the pieces are in place. They set it up as a drill and training exercise. This is called "military spending". They tell everyone that they don't film the real re-entries (those are top secret) and use the footage from the "drill" so as to not give away any military secrets, wink wink, nudge, nudge, sign on the line and keep your mouth shut. Do it for your country. Those involved in the operation believe that the "real" landing will actually happen at a later date and they don't question it for a second ... why should they? They are invested in the lie with their lives and their false reality depends on it, entirely.

If you told a paleontologist, or any scientist for that matter, or even a layperson that there are no real dinosaur fossils on display at the museum because the real fossils are "too rare" to be put on display and must be kept locked away in a vault somewhere with access only given to a small group of "top" paleontologists, do you think the majority of these people would even have a moment of doubt that the fossils are actually there, in a vault somewhere?

Of course not, the mere suggestion that the fossils don't exist would completely derail their entire lives and turn their reality on its head. Most people can't handle that sort of thing. ;)
Last edited by anonjedi2 on Fri Dec 26, 2014 11:56 am, edited 1 time in total.

Flabbergasted
Moderator
Posts: 879
Joined: Mon Nov 12, 2012 12:19 am

Re: Miscellaneous NASA comedies

Unread post by Flabbergasted » Thu Dec 25, 2014 12:21 pm

anonjedi2 wrote:It would be easier cheaper, and faster to just build a silly Hollywood Prop or even a real machine that will never go into orbit but can function here on Earth (which will also be used for future fakery videos) and run a fake military drill in the ocean to get your Navy boys some training. You'd be done with filming in half a day [...] This is called "military spending".
I completely agree. Also, they need the props to deceive school children and romantic adults at aerospatial exhibits and museums.
anonjedi2 wrote:If you told a paleontologist, or any scientist for that matter, or even a layperson that there are no real dinosaur fossils on display at the museum because the real fossils are "too rare" to be put on display and must be kept locked away in a vault somewhere with access only given to a small group of "top" paleontologists, do you think the majority of these people would even have a moment of doubt that the fossils are actually there, in a vault somewhere?
Well put.

fbenario
Member
Posts: 2240
Joined: Fri Oct 23, 2009 1:49 am
Location: Atlanta, GA
Contact:

Re: Miscellaneous NASA comedies

Unread post by fbenario » Fri Dec 26, 2014 2:17 am

anonjedi2 wrote:You could also make the argument that using real props serves to appease and fool the many low level military/NASA dupes by actually giving them something physical and tangible to work on, which they do everyday for their entire careers. Perhaps they think they're "working on a space project" and may have actually had hand in testing/designing/producing something (for argument's sake) from Engineers, Project Managers, Designers, Construction, Mathameticians, etc. There are a lot of people that work at NASA. My guess is that the majority of them have real jobs and are doing real things at those jobs everyday. They may just think they're working on a spacecraft but have no idea that it's just a prop. If they can see and interact with what they think is a technological marvel that will fly into outer space, they will never question it because it's right there in front of them and they are fully invested! Theoretically, it all makes sense based on what they think they know, so it should work on paper. They're essentially trapped in a prison of their own minds.

There's no need for CGI, all the pieces are in place. They set it up as a drill and training exercise. This is called "military spending". They tell everyone that they don't film the real re-entries (those are top secret) and use the footage from the "drill" so as to not give away any military secrets, wink wink, nudge, nudge, sign on the line and keep your mouth shut. Do it for your country. Those involved in the operation believe that the "real" landing will actually happen at a later date and they don't question it for a second ... why should they? They are invested in the lie with their lives and their false reality depends on it, entirely.

If you told a paleontologist, or any scientist for that matter, or even a layperson that there are no real dinosaur fossils on display at the museum because the real fossils are "too rare" to be put on display and must be kept locked away in a vault somewhere with access only given to a small group of "top" paleontologists, do you think the majority of these people would even have a moment of doubt that the fossils are actually there, in a vault somewhere?

Of course not, the mere suggestion that the fossils don't exist would completely derail their entire lives and turn their reality on its head. Most people can't handle that sort of thing.
Absolutely first-rate thinking. One of the best posts of the year. Extraordinarily clear-headed analysis of the manipulated reality and psychology of how psyops 'work'.

Stellar. (As one might say about NASA matters. Get it?)

Flabbergasted
Moderator
Posts: 879
Joined: Mon Nov 12, 2012 12:19 am

Re: Miscellaneous NASA comedies

Unread post by Flabbergasted » Sat Dec 27, 2014 1:11 pm

A mission patch speaks more than a thousand words. Hopefully, it is more wishful thinking on their part than reality.

Image
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_NR ... rol-39.jpg

fbenario
Member
Posts: 2240
Joined: Fri Oct 23, 2009 1:49 am
Location: Atlanta, GA
Contact:

Re: Miscellaneous NASA comedies

Unread post by fbenario » Sun Dec 28, 2014 1:01 am

^^Ha! Reminiscent of:

Image

lux
Member
Posts: 1914
Joined: Sat Oct 01, 2011 10:46 pm

Re: Miscellaneous NASA comedies

Unread post by lux » Sun Dec 28, 2014 1:09 pm

Image

omaxsteve
Banned
Posts: 192
Joined: Mon Mar 29, 2010 12:44 am
Contact:

Unread post by omaxsteve » Wed Jan 14, 2015 9:33 pm

Sometimes it does take a rocket scientist!


Scientists at NASA built a gun specifically to launch standard 4- pound dead chickens at the windshields of airliners, military jets and the space Shuttle, all travelling at maximum velocity. The idea is to simulate the frequent incidents of collisions with airborne fowl to test the strength of the windshields.

British engineers heard about the gun and were eager to test it on the windshields of their new high speed trains. Arrangements were made, and a gun was sent to the British engineers.

When the gun was fired, the engineers were shocked as the chicken hurtled out of the barrel, crashed into the shatter proof windshield, smashed it to smithereens, blasted through the control console, snapped the engineers back rest in two, and embedded itself into the back wall of the cabin like an arrow shot form a bow.

The horrified Brits sent NASA the disastrous results of the experiment along with the designs of the windshield and begged the US scientists for suggestions.

NASA RESPONDED WITH A ONE-LINE MEMO -- "DEFROST THE CHICKEN."

*********************************************************************************************************************************
I was told that this is a true story, but cannot confirm. Thought it was good for a laugh though.
regards,

Steve O.

lux
Member
Posts: 1914
Joined: Sat Oct 01, 2011 10:46 pm

Re: Miscellaneous NASA comedies

Unread post by lux » Wed Jan 21, 2015 4:48 pm

This footage, we're told, represents the view from the Huygens spacecraft as it landed on Saturn's moon Titan back in 2005.


full link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9L471ct7YDo

But, what is this footage exactly? Is it from a camera? Is it a computer animation? What is it? From what I have read about this footage it seems that is is believed to be, essentially, a photographic motion picture. Well -- sort of.

It is described as “...rendered from Huygens’ Descent Imager/Spectral Radiometer (DISR) data.”

Huh? :blink:

'Rendered'? Hmmm ... that word implies that it is not a photographic image but something artificially created.

'Imager'? What is an imager? Is it a camera? Well, if it were a camera wouldn't they call it a camera? But, they call it an 'imager' instead so I guess an imager is something that makes images but it can't be called a camera because cameras produce “real” images of things actually in front of them and imagers don't.

So, I guess that phrase “rendered from Huygens’ Descent Imager/Spectral Radiometer (DISR) data” is just a coy way of saying that it is a computer animation but with a strong implication that it represents a scene that actually existed in front of and was “perceived” by an optical device.

So, are we witnessing the birth of a new type of medium then? One that bridges the gap between cartoon and photo? Between fake and real? It's an animation but it's ... uh... real. Kind of makes it a lot easier to fool the masses doesn't it? Just make a cartoon and tell them it came from an imager-plus-real-data and they'll buy it as a real scenario that actually took place. It doesn't even have to be that realistic -- as the crappy imagery in the above video demonstrates.

In any case I'm seeing this sort blurring of the line between computer renderings and photographic imagery more and more these days. And, judging by the way that the mass audience swallows these hoax images so readily, I'd say that it seems to be working.

Maat
Member
Posts: 1422
Joined: Thu Sep 09, 2010 1:14 am
Contact:

Re: Miscellaneous NASA comedies

Unread post by Maat » Sat Jan 31, 2015 11:07 pm

*
NASA's Star Trek recruiter Nichelle Nichols,"Uhura", introducing their "shuttle" successor, Orion — as shown on StarTrek.com:
NASA-Nichelle-Nichols-introduces-Orion-StarTrek-site.jpg
Indeed, it "will take us deeper into the solar system bullshit than we have ever gone before"


full link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gNAyBekeVyw
NASA-Nichelle-Nichols-StarTrek-Orion.jpg
CBS-entertainment-StarTrek.com.jpg
So appropriate :rolleyes:

Ironic comment:
NASA-Nichelle-Nichols-StarTrek-Orion-comment.jpg
“Amazing to me is how a TV show that cancelled has had such a long reaching effect on our lives.”
If only they’d try to think it through Image


SSDD


full link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GLgnZ89b8Po


full link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UEuOpxOrA_0
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

Maat
Member
Posts: 1422
Joined: Thu Sep 09, 2010 1:14 am
Contact:

Re: Miscellaneous NASA comedies

Unread post by Maat » Sun Feb 01, 2015 1:46 am

More from CBS Entertainment for NASA

http://www.cbsnews.com/videos/kelly-ast ... periments/
CBS-News-Kelly-asstronot-twins-in-year-long-NASA-experiments.jpg
See also: http://www.nasa.gov/content/president-o ... M2eYi5YaPp

Image


Reminiscent of the twin characters in Cameron's Avatar movie script: Jake & Tom Sully
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

ICfreely
Member
Posts: 1078
Joined: Sat Feb 07, 2015 5:41 pm

Re: Miscellaneous NASA comedies

Unread post by ICfreely » Tue Mar 03, 2015 2:48 am

Leonard Nimoy's Legacy: Obama, Astronauts Sci-fi Actors Pay Tribute – space.com

"Leonard Nimoy was an inspiration to multiple generations of engineers, scientists, astronauts, and other space explorers," NASA administrator Charles Bolden said in a statement. "As Mr. Spock, he made science and technology important to the story, while never failing to show, by example, that it is the people around us who matter most."

http://www.space.com/28688-leonard-nimo ... nauts.html

smj
Member
Posts: 70
Joined: Wed Sep 10, 2014 10:29 pm

Re: Miscellaneous NASA comedies

Unread post by smj » Wed Mar 04, 2015 1:52 am

Nichelle hangin' with her far-out sista Mae Jemison on the set of Star Trek...

Image
http://vignette2.wikia.nocookie.net/mem ... -prefix=en

http://photos.state.gov/libraries/amgov ... ish_LO.pdf

smj
Member
Posts: 70
Joined: Wed Sep 10, 2014 10:29 pm

Re: Miscellaneous NASA comedies

Unread post by smj » Wed Mar 18, 2015 3:23 am

Apparently Saturn has a sci-fi soundtrack...
http://www.nasa.gov/wav/123163main_cas-skr1-112203.wav

and if you're not into sci-fi; NASA says...
Image
http://apod.nasa.gov/apod/image/0306/carina_hst.jpg
Last edited by hoi.polloi on Fri Mar 20, 2015 5:32 am, edited 2 times in total.
Reason: Typos

Selene
Banned
Posts: 193
Joined: Mon Jan 19, 2015 7:59 pm

Re: Miscellaneous NASA comedies

Unread post by Selene » Fri Mar 27, 2015 7:24 am

Not sure where to put it. Here it fits best I guess, but it could be in the ISS or rocketry in space topic as well.

Just watch and laugh about this ridiculous piece of video presented by an ADD guy who dares to call his programme "Smarter Every Day":


full link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qFjw6Lc6J2g

:wacko: :rolleyes:

Post Reply