ENDEAVOUR - and the spaced-out NASA efforts

[strypey]

*

BELIEVE IT OR NOT: THIS IS SUPPOSED TO BE A REAL NASA VIDEO


full link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fmkH7bot3oA

Indeed, this video looks totally fake. However, I see no evidence on the YouTube link that suggest it is an official NASA video. Can you give us the link to the original on a NASA-hosted site, or some other evidence it was published by NASA as real?

It may be that this was a NASA-produced simulation, designed to illustrate some educational material.

[reichstag fireman]

Did you introduce yourself, Danyl? Perhaps in your introduction you can explain your promotion of the Peak Oil fraud, too.

[Maat]

Indeed, this video looks totally fake. However, I see no evidence on the YouTube link that suggest it is an official NASA video. Can you give us the link to the original on a NASA-hosted site, or some other evidence it was published by NASA as real?

It may be that this was a NASA-produced simulation, designed to illustrate some educational material.

Strypey,

Re that "STS-126 approach to the ISS on Nov 16, 2008", you'll find the original NASA toons of it at: http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/shutt ... index.html

Specifically: http://spaceflight.nasa.gov/gallery/vid ... l/fd3.html
And yes, they are definitely purported to be and presented as real by NASA

Now please introduce yourself in the Required topic here: viewtopic.php?f=32&t=838

[Maat]

Did you introduce yourself, Danyl? Perhaps in your introduction you can explain your promotion of the Peak Oil fraud, too.

Reichstag, would you please clarify to whom and what you are referring?

[rick55]

I just wished you would read about the "Wonderbolt" - for future reference.

I looked at this just now along with the several pages in the original thread on the shuttle and the thing that strikes me first is that if we're victims of a shuttle hoax on this scale that something is wrong with our minds-- my mind in particular. It didn't occur to me that the shuttle images on the 747 were fake however in 1980 when I first saw it on... yes!... TV!... it struck me as impossible and bizarre. I just never followed up on that initial shock, the initial intuition that something's not right.

If the shuttle images from the beginning have been faked, then the scale of this is now in league with major major mind control and an existing police state already. It seems impossible... yet the bolt and the other points on the shuttle thread do strike me as valid.

Are we already in a type of reality show like that movie Jim Carrey starred in? How is the scale of this deception even possible? What artifact of the human homo sapien mind is so weak that this can be done to us? Is everyone in a position of authority with any meaning tapped on the shoulder by an Illuminati agent and paid or blackmailed to participate in the charade? How far does the charade go? I know for a fact I'm not personally conducting or perpetrating a charade... or am I being used somehow without knowing it? All sense of reality breaks down on consideration that that shuttle program has been completely faked. How can they possibly have gotten away with this?

So back to the bolt. I had to convert the 78000 kg to tons to get a feel for it since I have better experience with tons, as in a 5 ton truck.
https://encrypted.google.com/search?q=5 ... CAYQ_AUoAQ

Here is a 1 ton pickup.
http://www.google.com/search?q=1+ton+pi ... 5MqZZ-boi4

Here is an 86 ton locomotive.
http://carsandtrains.com/ironroad/wpy/wp97_skagway2.jpg

To get a better feel for the shuttle bolt problem, I suppose you could say that since there appear to be two bolts on the shuttle, and they hold the shuttle to the rocket engine, and even hold while the shuttle crazily rotated upsidedown while rocketing off into space (which shocked me when I saw it on liftoff every time), that the equivalent would be to try to lift that locomotive using just two bolts attached to imaginary cranes. Here are some cranes...

http://www.google.com/search?q=giant+cr ... CAYQ_AUoAQ

Here is a crane lifting what looks like an 86 ton locomotive
http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7014/6483 ... 4fc1_z.jpg

Right away we can simply see that the 4 heavy bars and connections between the crane and the locomotive are much more substantial than the shuttle bolt connection, and yet the shuttle is a similar weight and under the stress of motion and significant added g forces on rotation and liftoff.

Here's a view of the shuttle where we can see a substantial connector at least at the base. The triangular connector at the top is still admittedly a problem just from looking at it and thinking about the stress on that connection from 86 tons like that.
http://www.universetoday.com/wp-content ... Kremer.jpg

From the top, we can see how tiny it looks. In this next image, it even seems as though the shuttle is leaning backwards. One begins to wonder what kind of disconnect mechanism is in there... if not the thickness or gauge of the hook. Working with wire a bit, I realize that gauge matters when trying to make something weatherproof and windproof. Too thin a wire and it will definitely snap. Same thing with cables. One wonders what type of connection is at the base of the triangle too.
http://www.nasa.gov/images/content/1253 ... usage1.jpg

Here's another odd picture.
http://www.csmonitor.com/var/ezflow_sit ... ll_600.jpg

It looks like there are shock absorbers on the back. The front triangle looks like its been welded to the 747 sloppily but with a LOT of welding metal. If this is all fake, the Christian Science Monitor is participating in the deception because they wrote...

http://www.csmonitor.com/Science/2012/0 ... nian-video

They then raised the orbiter 60 feet (18 meters) off the ground so that the carrier aircraft could be positioned underneath. Discovery was then lowered onto the jumbo jet's three protruding attach points to achieve a "soft" mating.

RELATED: Are you scientifically literate? Take our quiz!

Work continued throughout the day Sunday to secure, or "hard" mate, Discovery to the 747, before removing the hoist sling and backing the paired vehicles out of the MDD on Monday morning. [How Space Shuttles Fly on 747 Jets (Photos)]

Apparently, when CSM asks readers if they're scientifically literate in the middle of this article, they must be referring the scientific terms like "the three protruding attach points" on the 747. Imagine that... we call those thing a ma jigs... "protruding attach points". Setting it down is "soft mate" and I guess tightening the bolt would be the "hard mate" that took all day. The scientific literacy for shuttle fans would also include the MDD or "Mate-Demate Device"....

http://mashable.com/2012/04/16/space-sh ... jumbo-jet/

http://media.photobucket.com/image/rece ... 905-03.jpg

The shuttle is lifted by crane in the MDD, and the 747 rolls under it where they softmate and hardmate it. Here are more google pics of that... I'll continue to look for clues as to exactly what a hardmate looks like... we'll consider it to be "space shuttle porn".

http://www.google.com/search?q=shuttle+ ... CAYQ_AUoAQ

[simonshack]

*

Anything odd with the shadows here?


full link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E4PILOsEzBo

[iCONOCLAST]

Simon, the shadows in the video do not match the "backdrop" in terms of rotation of the craft with respect to the sun .. the backgrounds flip quite suddenly in the video from "earth view" to blue to black. The "backdrop" is not concealed with an exhaust plume.. a pretty piss poor effort considering they are burning 5 000 Kg fuel a second! Perhaps the NASA artist was a little bored and the shadow "animated" the video a little. The resolution of the background varies throughout the video. I can't see an umbilical that would connect the external fuel tank to the shuttle engine. F A K E as a $3 note!

[hoi.polloi]

Are we already in a type of reality show like that movie Jim Carrey starred in? How is the scale of this deception even possible? What artifact of the human homo sapien mind is so weak that this can be done to us? Is everyone in a position of authority with any meaning tapped on the shoulder by an Illuminati agent and paid or blackmailed to participate in the charade? How far does the charade go? I know for a fact I'm not personally conducting or perpetrating a charade... or am I being used somehow without knowing it? All sense of reality breaks down on consideration that that shuttle program has been completely faked. How can they possibly have gotten away with this?

People do not question experts to the point that the experts are actually challenged, because at a certain point it becomes rude or frustrating or violent. We have a natural distrust of experts, but that distrust is overcome on a daily basis - not with actual study of the subjects in question - but by a choice to stop questioning them and start believing them because it is more comfortable.

We like our experts too, maybe because they're people and hey - who cares what they think? Right? It's still all about breakfast, lunch, dinner, finding a toilet and finding a bed. So if they think there are men flying around the Earth in a tin can, big deal.

Eventually, it all comes down to that decision. Most people are too stressed out to question it. It is too distressing to imagine a billion people with greater expertise than you in an area of study that could completely warp your reality - or kill you.

Instead of sitting with trust, we choose to stop reasoning and wait for a "victor" to emerge that we can go with. There happen to be a lot of people really good at argumentation on this planet. It seems there are fewer who actually know what they are talking about.

[fbenario]

We have a natural distrust of experts, but that distrust is overcome on a daily basis - not with actual study of the subjects in question - but by a choice to stop questioning them and start believing them because it is more comfortable.
...
Eventually, it all comes down to that decision. Most people are too stressed out to question it. It is too distressing to imagine a billion people with greater expertise than you in an area of study that could completely warp your reality - or kill you.

Instead of sitting with trust, we choose to stop reasoning and wait for a "victor" to emerge that we can go with. There happen to be a lot of people really good at argumentation on this planet. It seems there are fewer who actually know what they are talking about.

Excellent. Apropos of this, and I hope helpful to everyone who needs some backbone:

Everything can be taken from a man or a woman but one thing: the last of human freedoms is to choose one’s attitude in any given set of circumstances, to choose one’s own way.

–Victor Frankl

[VivekAnand]

An interesting thread-let that ties in two stories on this Forum, Flight 93 and the Columbia Shuttle disaster.

Read this interesting comment on youtube:

"When the Shuttle Columbia disentigrated over a 800 mile streatch of Texas and Louisiana during its re-entry to Earth, it was traveling at over 8,000 MPH. From California to Florida in less than 15 minutes.
All bodies were recovered. ALL.
They found enough of the space shuttle to rebuild most of it during their investigation.
When Flight 93 crashed, there should have been almost 300 tons of debris along with 10 tons of human remains.
But they recovered no debris or body parts, whatsoever."

And so I went to check on the Columbia Disaster News and photos section of the WWW and found he is right.

Check out some of these pictures... if they are indeed of the shuttle:







That last image is supposedly of the recovered wheel well... looks to be in spectacularly fine shape...

All images gotten from Nasa's own investigation, here: Columbia Accident investigation Board:

http://caib.nasa.gov/photos/sub_section ... bnails=yes

So, Columbia left a Debris field enough to reconstruct it significantly.

And Flight 93 left this?



And a bucketful of scrap?

Hmmmm.....


Also, Sally Ride? Ride Sally Ride?

[simonshack]

That last image is supposedly of the recovered wheel well... looks to be in spectacularly fine shape...

Spectacularly pristine indeed! Looks like some "COLUMBIA debris" got luckier than other "COLUMBIA debris" :



Dear Vivek, that "COLUMBIA DISASTER" (although more effort seems to have been put into its 'photographic back up story') sounds just as phony as the tale of "FLIGHT 93" - and indeed - just as bogus as the entire Space Shuttle fable.


COLUMBIA (CARTOON) DISASTER :

Meet "Dan McNew", the alleged "amateur videographer" who purportedly captured the COLUMBIA form his backyard just as it disintegrated ( while apparently flying sideways - at a 90 degree angle! ...)



full link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=clseDHnTx08




You may also wish to watch our boy Dan McNew(s) interviewed on FOX News...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I_CYFHQX ... ature=plcp


**********************************************************************

And, once again (just like on 9/11), the clowns recruited to put together that "COLUMBIA debris evidence" used some old rim-less tires retrieved from some scrapyard...

"COLUMBIA TIRE"1 :


"COLUMBIA TIRE" 2 :


"FLIGHT 175 TIRE" (found lying under a scaffolding on 9/11)


And just a little trivia: Columbia's actual planned launch date was Jan 11, 2001. But the launch was delayed 18 times...

The silliness of it all (and of its planners) is probably the most baffling side of these legerdemains for mass consumption.

ps: Oh and btw, Vivek: dId you know that aircraft tires can be used to bring down steel buildings?
FIRESTONE DEMOLITION TIRES : viewtopic.php?p=2362909#p2362909

[VivekAnand]

Meet "Dan McNew", the alleged "amateur videographer" who purportedly captured the COLUMBIA form his backyard just as it disintegrated ( while apparently flying sideways - at a 90 degree angle! ...)



full link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=clseDHnTx08




You may also wish to watch our boy Dan McNew(s) interviewed on FOX News...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I_CYFHQX ... ature=plcp


**********************************************************************

And, once again (just like on 9/11), the clowns recruited to put together that "COLUMBIA debris evidence" used some old rim-less tires retrieved from some scrapyard...

"COLUMBIA TIRE"1 :


"COLUMBIA TIRE" 2 :


"FLIGHT 175 TIRE" (found lying under a scaffolding on 9/11)


The silliness of it all (and of its planners) is probably the most baffling side of these legerdemains for mass consumption.

ps: Oh and btw, Vivek: dId you know that aircraft tires can be used to bring down steel buildings?
FIRESTONE DEMOLITION TIRES : http://www.cluesforum.info/viewtopic.ph ... 9#p2362909

Interesting Simon, in the McNewsmaker fantasy clip, two things stood out for me:

1) Something (a glass reflection, but on what?) comes and leaves the screen from right lower/middle at 0:27

2) All those birds chirping, man taking movie sees the shuttle EXPLODE and not as much a cheep from him? None of the Oh My God, just a casual pan-back at the contrail?

And those them thar tires.

Let's call them FIREANDBRIMSTONE Tires. Or better yet, BENBEN Tires.

They did after all crash the Greek Orthodox church, did they not?

Which reminds me to ask all the excellent english speakers here, if Orthodox is the right way and heterodox the wrong, then why is man/woman sexuality called heterosexuality and same sex sexuality called Homosexuality? It should be called Orthosexuality, no? Heterodoxy and Orthodoxy. Which is right and which is left? I mean wrong?

[fbenario]

Which reminds me to ask all the excellent english speakers here, if Orthodox is the right way and heterodox the wrong, then why is man/woman sexuality called heterosexuality and same sex sexuality called Homosexuality? It should be called Orthosexuality, no? Heterodoxy and Orthodoxy. Which is right and which is left? I mean wrong?

The ortho- prefix does in fact mean 'right', but the hetero- prefix does not mean 'wrong'.

The homo- prefix means 'same', hetero- means 'different'.

No, it should NOT be called orthosexuality.

[Wombat2012]

This is honestly the funniest website on the net...you guys crack me up!!

Oh...you're serious...? Holy crap.

OK..."sideways drift" of the shuttle at takeoff. Easy...in any side-on shot you can see the damn thrust from the three main shuttle engines, angled away from the boosters downward thrust. It gives a "sideways push". Simple.

The launch pad looks pretty much the same now as in 1969? Probably because it's the same damn pad.

The tyres survived to one extent or another? Of course they fricking did...rubber takes a lot to destroy. After the most horrifying airliner crashes, often the wheels are the only recognisable things left. They take a long time to burn, and absorb a hell of a lot of heat before melting. The shuttle tyres were a special compound anyway to cope with the extremes of temperature they had to bear.

Same position of camera "sitting on a tripod year after year". It's mounted in a little bunker in the same position year after year...the camera changes, the position doesn't. It's like you going outside and finding your letterbox in the same position it was in last year...wow, how odd!!!


The "single bolt" (chortle). I drive trains. Big trains. Big long heavy trains. Trains over a mile long pulling over 10,000 tonnes of coal. Behind the two lead locomotives is the coupling, which "hinges" on a single bolt. One single steel bolt taking all the run outs and run ins and drag and draft forces of 10,000 tonnes behind it smacking into it and pulling away from it. Seeing as how the shuttle isn't just "hanging there" with all it;s weight on that bolted area, and is supporting itself by the thrust of it's engines, it's no surprise.

Keep up the funny stuff guys...

[simonshack]

This is honestly the funniest website on the net...you guys crack me up!!

I'm glad you're amused, Wombat. I also have lots of fun with this hilarious NASA stuff.

You wrote:
"The launch pad looks pretty much the same now as in 1969? Probably because it's the same damn pad."

Well, you see - it was more about the vegetation - not about the launch pad itself:

Compare the bushes seen in the foregrounds here - between 2001 an 2011:






You wrote:
"The tyres survived to one extent or another? Of course they fricking did...rubber takes a lot to destroy. After the most horrifying airliner crashes, often the wheels are the only recognisable things left. They take a long time to burn, and absorb a hell of a lot of heat before melting. The shuttle tyres were a special compound anyway to cope with the extremes of temperature they had to bear."

Well, tires may well survive - but then, how do the rims of those tires totally disappear? Do they vaporize, perhaps?

You wrote:
"Same position of camera "sitting on a tripod year after year". It's mounted in a little bunker in the same position year after year...the camera changes, the position doesn't. It's like you going outside and finding your letterbox in the same position it was in last year...wow, how odd!!!"

You must have missed some parts of the logic and reasoning regarding this issue, dear Wombat. Take a better look at what I am pointing out here. Warning: you need to use your cognitive faculties when looking at these 8 images:



You wrote:
"The "single bolt" (chortle). I drive trains. Big trains. Big long heavy trains. Trains over a mile long pulling over 10,000 tonnes of coal. Behind the two lead locomotives is the coupling, which "hinges" on a single bolt. One single steel bolt taking all the run outs and run ins and drag and draft forces of 10,000 tonnes behind it smacking into it and pulling away from it. Seeing as how the shuttle isn't just "hanging there" with all it;s weight on that bolted area, and is supporting itself by the thrust of it's engines, it's no surprise."

Oh well...You've just gotta LOVE this bolt! It secured the lives of all these NASA astronots for 30 years - and 135 missions!


Do you do this for a living, Wombat?