ENDEAVOUR - the 30-year Space Shuttle hoax

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.

ENDEAVOUR - the 30-year Space Shuttle hoax

Postby simonshack on May 21st, 2011, 8:56 pm

*
This research is dedicated to Bill Kaysing (July 31, 1922 – April 21, 2005) who once said:"I haven't done a great deal of research on the Shuttle, but several people have said that the Shuttle is actually faked, also."



ENDEAVOUR - and the spaced-out NASA effortsImage

Good day everyone,

I read today in "La Repubblica" that the Pope has been chatting with the Italian astronauts who - reportedly - finally took off in the final Space Shuttle mission "Endeavour". So I decided to have a look at what had delayed their mission and found out that it had been some lightning strikes - beautiful ones at that !

Image

Image
source: http://www.shaggybevo.com/board/showthr ... g.../page2

Then I learned that, 11 lightning strikes had also delayed the July 11, 2009 Endeavour launch.
This was back in 2009 so, of course, they only had crappy black & white cameras at the time: :rolleyes:

"NASA delays shuttle launch after nearby lightning"
http://articles.cnn.com/2009-07-11/tech ... _s=PM:TECH
Image

According to Mike Moses, the space shuttle integration manager, 11 lightning strikes had hit within a half-mile of the launch pad. In fact, this is how Wikileaks..uh...I mean...Wikinews reports it:
Lightning strikes Endeavour's launchpad. - Saturday, July 11, 2009

Image: NASA.The launch of Endeavour has been delayed at least 24 hours after the shuttle's launchpad area was struck by lightning at least 11 times this afternoon. According to NASA, technicians are currently evaluating the incident, but so far there appears to be no major damage."Sensors indicated there were 11 lightning strikes within 0.35 miles, which is inside the launch pad's threshold," said a statement on NASA's website.
http://en.wikinews.org/wiki/Space_Shutt ... ing_launch


Anyway, the 2009 Endeavour shuttle was finally launched. I then learned that the astronauts had selected "wake-up music" for themselves to wake up. One chosen song ("In your Eyes") was by one of my favorite musicians, Peter Gabriel:

STS-127 MCC Status Report #20 http://galaxywire.net/tag/endeavour/page/3/
"The combined crew of space shuttle Endeavour and the International Space Station will enjoy a day off to rest up after a challenging first half of the STS-127 assembly mission. The song “In Your Eyes,” by Peter Gabriel, was played as a wake-up call for the crew at 4:46 a.m. CDT. It was selected for Tom Marshburn, who completed his second spacewalk on Friday with Chris Cassidy."

"In your Eyes" - indeed an appropriate astronaut's 'wake-up song'. I love it ! :lol:

Then I bumped into this 2009 article about the 2009 Endeavour mission: http://livewire.wesh.com/Event/Shuttle_Launch?Page=0
This is the photograph I found showing the 2009 Endeavour launch:
Image2009 ENDEAVOUR
So I looked up what the 2011 Endeavour launch looked like. I found this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0YBWaFIs1Rc
Image2011 ENDEAVOUR
Wow! NASA probably has a camera on a tripod just standing there, year after year ! :lol:
So then I got really curious - wondering what the Apollo11 launch site looked like back in 1969 (42 years ago):
Image
Amazing, isn't it?

Here's a fascinating 'timelapse video' of the 2011 Endeavour shuttle rolling out to its launch pad:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R6QP84GIlMg

And here's a wonderful shot of the 2009 Endeavour space shuttle depicted 11 seconds after departure:
Image

*********************************************************************************************************************************+
So - I have just put together some information here regarding the Space Shuttle. Nothing more. Ok? ;)
simonshack
Administrator
 
Posts: 6319
Joined: October 18th, 2009, 9:09 pm
Location: italy

Re: ENDEAVOUR - & other modern NASA efforts

Postby simonshack on May 21st, 2011, 11:49 pm

*

The Endeavour transporter's moody and flexible shock absorbers:

Image

Disclaimer: The viewing angles and framings of these 2 pictures are purely coincidental. <_<
simonshack
Administrator
 
Posts: 6319
Joined: October 18th, 2009, 9:09 pm
Location: italy

Re: ENDEAVOUR - & other modern NASA efforts

Postby simonshack on May 22nd, 2011, 3:25 am

*

And I endeavour to ... be true to you in good times and in bad, ... for better, for worse, for richer, for poorer, in sickness and in health - until death do us part.


Not for the faint-hearted:
Giffords and Kelly swapping wedding rings:... :wub:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DwK8w19degA
simonshack
Administrator
 
Posts: 6319
Joined: October 18th, 2009, 9:09 pm
Location: italy

Re: ENDEAVOUR - & other modern NASA efforts

Postby Brutal Metal on May 22nd, 2011, 8:44 pm

I live in Florida and have seen it launch, Enough Said on this topic! I'm one of the Biggest skeptics in the fuckin word guys but sorry EVERYTHING isn't Fake! Apollo 11 Oh Yeah, Endeavor being a Real piece of machinery? Not Fake!
Brutal Metal
Member
 
Posts: 401
Joined: July 22nd, 2010, 4:58 am

Re: ENDEAVOUR - & other modern NASA efforts

Postby nonhocapito on May 23rd, 2011, 12:00 am

I don't know what they are launching in space... but they certainly are launching a lot of bullshit down on earth. Yeah I know lame remark. it's just that I find the rhetoric about the fake recovery of a probably fake individual from a certainly fake shooting quite depressing <_<

STS-70 was delayed in 1995, when woodpeckers bored holes in the foam insulation of Discovery's external tank. Since then, NASA has installed commercial plastic owl decoys and inflatable owl balloons which must be removed prior to launch.


Image
:o :blink: :lol:
nonhocapito
Administrator
 
Posts: 2462
Joined: July 10th, 2010, 6:38 am
Location: Italy

Re: ENDEAVOUR - & other modern NASA efforts

Postby simonshack on May 23rd, 2011, 1:52 am

Brutal Metal wrote:I live in Florida and have seen it launch, Enough Said on this topic! I'm one of the Biggest skeptics in the fuckin word guys but sorry EVERYTHING isn't Fake! Apollo 11 Oh Yeah, Endeavor being a Real piece of machinery? Not Fake!



Dear Brutal Metal,

Please do not assume that I am questioning the existence of the Space Shuttle program. Ok? Don't.

Now, I only ask myself due questions raised by photographic records. If they are undue, I will retract them. Ok?

I will take this step by step. Are you game, Brutal?

How come the Cape Canaveral launch pad hasn't changed aspect at all in 42 years? Have you been there lately?

Image
APOLLO 11 (1969)
Image
ENDEAVOUR (2011)
simonshack
Administrator
 
Posts: 6319
Joined: October 18th, 2009, 9:09 pm
Location: italy

Re: ENDEAVOUR - & other modern NASA efforts

Postby fbenario on May 23rd, 2011, 2:27 am

nonhocapito wrote:I don't know what they are launching in space... but they certainly are launching a lot of bullshit down on earth. [] it's just that I find the rhetoric about the fake recovery of a probably fake individual from a certainly fake shooting quite depressing

Lame? No way!

Of the 12,000 posts on this forum over the last 19 months, this is one of my favorites, and one of the all-time funniest. Both sentences are absolutely hilarious.

I have loved the tone, and humor, of your posts right from the day you joined!
fbenario
Member
 
Posts: 2167
Joined: October 23rd, 2009, 2:49 am
Location: Atlanta, GA

Re: ENDEAVOUR - & other modern NASA efforts

Postby hoi.polloi on May 23rd, 2011, 7:12 am

The launches are real. I think it's just that we're exploring the use of fake images as a security system in modern government.
hoi.polloi
Administrator
 
Posts: 4720
Joined: November 14th, 2010, 8:24 pm

Re: ENDEAVOUR - & other modern NASA efforts

Postby simonshack on May 23rd, 2011, 4:05 pm

Dear all,

Do we have any rocket scientist on board to help me out here? So, ok - the launches were real and so was the Apollo11 launch in 1969 (which, as I think we all believe here, was actually launched but only orbited for a while around Mother Earth at, perhaps, a few hundred miles altitude). FIne. That is what I have always assumed and taken for granted - and will continue to faithfully do. I promise. That is, I'll do so only once the questions submitted below are satisfactorily answered. At this moment - I don't have them, so what I'm doing here is just humbly asking a couple of questions. Some will say, undoubtedly: "Eeek! Oh no! There he goes again - questioning even the NASA launches! When will he stop? He's jeopardizing all his hard-earned credibility!" Well, let me say this once again: I am only asking a few questions, allright?

QUESTION 1: This is Apollo11 in its famous 'condensation' phase, well familiar to anyone who has watched the Apollo11 imagery. As WickedPedia will tell you (in a caption under this official NASA photo), this condensation burst took place after circa 1min of flight:

Image
"A condensation cloud forms around an interstage as the Saturn V (Apollo11) approached Mach1, one minute into the flight." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apollo_11

And yes, it is indeed an official NASA photograph: http://grin.hq.nasa.gov/ABSTRACTS/GPN-2000-000627.html

Now, at about 1min into this video of the Apollo11 launch, we do indeed see that condensation cloud: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xPXKdABiS9g&NR=1
Image

So my straightforward question is: why is the surrounding sky pitch black in this video - and bright blue in the former picture with that beautiful flagpole? (the Apollo11 launch took place at 9:32:00 a.m. local time). Thanks for a kind, straightforward answer. (bonus questions: after 1min of vertical flight, how far up would Apollo11 have been - and how did that artsy photographer manage to frame both Apollo11 and that flagpole in the foreground?)

Now, let's fast-forward 42 years in time and have a look at ENDEAVOUR 2011. Here it is, 17 seconds into its flight - soon to disappear into the thick clouds above (with all cars, boats & ships with stupid onlookers wisely kept at safe distance from the area) :
17sec
Image

Well, it doesn't disappear for the camera: here we see it at 1min22sec into the flight:
1:22
Image

And here we see it at 2min04sec into the flight, as the rocket boosters get jettisoned:
2:04
Image

QUESTION2: So my next question is: Does NASA have some sort of special, infrared (?) cameras that can shoot through the clouds - and still retain crisp colors such as those orange rocket flames? And what sort of zoom lens can follow a spaceship for over 2min of flight - and still have it almost filling the frame? Did NASA have such extraordinary photo equipment already in 1969? The point is,if such lenses exist, no matter where you were in Florida, you should have been able to film the ENDEAVOUR's ascent. So where are all the amateur videos of it? Thanks for any photographically knowledgeable answers.

Let's now take a look at the lift-off of ENDEAVOUR 2011: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0YBWaFIs1Rc
Image

As you can see, the ENDEAVOUR drifts sideways (towards the right) in the first seconds of lift-off. Here it is illustrated:
Image

Image

QUESTION 3: And this one is for the rocket scientists on board: what sort of thrust/physical forces make it drift sideways? My common sense suggests to me that this is a little strange; I would have thought that, with all that horsepower in the butt, the ENDEAVOUR would lift off in a perfectly vertical trajectory. If anything, since the shuttle is attached to the left side (as we see it) of the main booster, you would think that such an unbalanced assembly would tend to drift towards the left of our view, given the pull of the weight of the shuttle module. Thanks for a physically/mechanically knowledgeable answer.

Yes, thanks for all kind answers to these 3 questions. I want to learn! :)
simonshack
Administrator
 
Posts: 6319
Joined: October 18th, 2009, 9:09 pm
Location: italy

Re: ENDEAVOUR - & other modern NASA efforts

Postby brianv on May 23rd, 2011, 8:00 pm

Can't get the presidential car out of their own embassy in Dublin never mind get a rocket into space! :D :rolleyes:

Image
brianv
Member
 
Posts: 3825
Joined: October 18th, 2009, 11:19 pm

Re: ENDEAVOUR - & other modern NASA efforts

Postby simonshack on May 23rd, 2011, 8:18 pm

*

ENDEAVOUR 2009 versus 2011 IMAGERY COMPARED

Here's the 2009 ENDEAVOUR mission - please watch it all. VIDEO1: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WJp-aQYJfGU

And here's the 2011 ENDEAVOUR mission - please watch it all. VIDEO2: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0YBWaFIs1Rc

Today I have compared the imagery of the two ENDEAVOUR missions (2009 vs 2011).You will have to do the same yourself if you are to respond and opine about this imagery analysis - I hope you will find the time to do so before reading/observing any further (btw, still waiting for responses to my 3 questions in the post above!). I am rather stunned and shocked at this time, but let me try and submit some initial considerations - veeeery gently, so as not to sound like a nutcase jumping to conclusions...hehe! As you will see, apparently pretty much exactly the same viewing angles seem to have been retained between 2009 and 2011 at Cape Canaveral. The images sometimes shake (as on tripod-mounted cameras being bumped into), so we cannot assume that these cameras are any sort of fixed, CCTV-type cameras. We must believe that the various vantage points were, for some reason, precisely maintained between 2009 and 2011 - by some NASA photographers who even replicated almost precisely the framing/zooming of all those scenes.

The first problem, however, concerns the vegetation we may compare. You don't need to be an expert gardener to realize that what we see below is incredibly unlikely: would such wild bushland look so similar in spite of a 2-year timelapse ?

Image

Next, this 2-frame comparison of the ignition stage of the 2009/2011 ENDEAVOUR missions simply defies belief (at top left, we have the same "070" watermark - for whatever reason). Now, observe the white, cone-shaped patterns of 'condensation' - or whatever we may call them. What are the odds of such random flame/exhaust shapes to replicate in such precise fashion? I hope you are following my reasoning.
Image

Here is another comparison between the two ENDEAVOUR image pools (2009 vs 2011). Once again, the camera angles appear to be practically identical. Does the Space Shuttle travel on rails? And why has the surrounding sky suddenly turned black? Both launches supposedly took place in bright daylight :
Image

This sideview shot shows the Shuttle now travelling horizontally "at 11000mph"(ENDEAVOUR 2009) - away from the ground-based camera. How does the camera follow it? And does this not look more like a cartoon?
Image

Now, this is DISCOVERY on it last launch, feb 2011 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RxFwUG9PiYM
ImageImage
(Picture at right: the last Discovery shuttle was supposedly launched in bright daylight and clear blue skies!! ). :blink:
SO WOULD SOMEONE PLEASE EXPLAIN TO ME WHAT THE DEAL IS WITH THAT NIGHT-FLYING CARTOON AT LEFT?

DAY or NIGHT?
Here's is a gif loop of two adjacent moments of the 2009 ENDEAVOUR.
What the hell is the deal with this? Is it some kind of joke?
Does the sky turn black or blue according to one's vantage point?
This silly charade is quite offensive to human intelligence.
Image

The lives of the ENDEAVOUR astro-naughts relies on this one bolt !
Must be made out of some very reliable, Swedish steel! :lol:
Image

I'm speechless - and will have to let all this sink in. Please help with my questions above, thanks!
simonshack
Administrator
 
Posts: 6319
Joined: October 18th, 2009, 9:09 pm
Location: italy

Re: ENDEAVOUR - & other modern NASA efforts

Postby SmokingGunII on May 23rd, 2011, 8:50 pm

Keep asking the questions, Simon.

The Endeavour launch of 2011 DOES look shopped. But what about that smoke at the bottom right of the footage? It appears to come to a standstill. :o
SmokingGunII
Member
 
Posts: 557
Joined: October 23rd, 2009, 10:34 am

Re: ENDEAVOUR - & other modern NASA efforts

Postby nonhocapito on May 23rd, 2011, 11:01 pm

simonshack wrote:Well, let me say this once again: I am only asking a few questions, allright?


Hehe, fool that I am, I'm just giving it a try here.

(BTW obviously I do too imagine that the Apollo crew flew around the earth for the whole time the mission lasted, and that so did all other crews. Not only I cannot think of any other practical way to fake videos taken without gravity back in the sixties (*) , but the whole project was so compartmentalized that probably many of the engineers were tricked into believing that the module was actually on its path to the moon -- not a difficult trick as long as the astronauts were careful in respecting the 1 second and something delay in the transmission, and certain data sent back to earth was altered accordingly. Incidentally, after having watched a lot of Apollo 17 footage from a DVD set found via torrent, I noticed how from the moon the crew seem to forget about the delay, and most of the time the conversations go on in absolute real time. Maybe one day I'll have the energy to come around and share some of that material. End of the clause).

1) I find no explanation for this but to conjecture that the flagpole picture must be a photoshopped propaganda picture, created for the media probably back then in 1969. You are perfectly right in noticing that the picture makes no sense whatsoever. But even for those who believe the official story it is obvious that the whole thing was in large part propaganda, so even they probably would make peace with the fact that certain imagery distributed to the media was altered to make it more patriotic or rhetoric (meaning, in other words, that this detail might not significantly add to the "fake take off" possibility).

2) I don't know about this. Maybe they have some telescope with the path already timed in so that it automatically follows the rocket. The lack of amateur imagery is always puzzling. But in this specific case, I think people are rightfully not that enthused or interested in these damn space enterprises. They see their money going up in flames up there, I think, plus the rhetoric is embarrassing :P )

3) I obviously am not a rocket scientist so I am probably talking out of my ass but what I see here is this: the rocket actually slightly tilts to the left because of the weight. For this reason it must be designed to compensate this unbalanced take-off pushing to the right? Hence the sideways start? Just an idea. I always noticed these non-straightforward taking off with space shuttle launches, I guess I always took for granted it was a normal part of the way those things are designed to take off.

(*) well, there is the "Kubrick way", actually, so shut me up...
nonhocapito
Administrator
 
Posts: 2462
Joined: July 10th, 2010, 6:38 am
Location: Italy

Re: ENDEAVOUR - & other modern NASA efforts

Postby nonhocapito on May 23rd, 2011, 11:20 pm

simonshack wrote:*

Now here's the 2009 ENDEAVOUR mission - please watch it all (if you can bear it!)


Wow. I watched the two take offs almost frame by frame, I am amazed by how identical they are, at least in the first part until the 2011 gets (I am guessing) into the low clouds and becomes invisible to the ground cameras, while the 2009 is still filmed from the ground.
I guess this preposterous lack of variety could be blamed on the matter-of-fact mindset of engineers, who feel no need to change shots, camera angles, panning, zooming, video cuts, color, distances, year after year. Maybe they consider it a positive message to be so "scientific" without frills.
It becomes more difficult to understand it though when you think, once again, at the propaganda tool that this is supposed to be. You would expect NASA to find year after year new entertaining ways to sell this events to the masses. Think how the variety of cameras is kept fresh in race driving, to keep up with video games and stuff. Why never a shot of the crew all shaken up during take off? Wouldn't it be cool to see part of the launch from the back of the shuttle rather than the side? Why never some multiple angles shots of the take off? Why never a long distance shot from a far away helicopter? etc etc
nonhocapito
Administrator
 
Posts: 2462
Joined: July 10th, 2010, 6:38 am
Location: Italy

Re: ENDEAVOUR - & other modern NASA efforts

Postby guivre on May 24th, 2011, 8:37 am

This is supposed to be the shuttle launch shot from an airplane. Not shot by Nasa, not really recognizable either. It could basically be whatever anyone wants it to be.

Image

http://mj.933flz.com/pages/mainfeed.html?feed=204719&article=8579846
guivre
Member
 
Posts: 187
Joined: June 24th, 2010, 10:48 pm

Next

Return to Apollo, and more space hoaxes

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests