ENDEAVOUR - the 30-year Space Shuttle hoax

[pov603]

This isn't on the same topic but as I am here reading and having just traveled back by 'plane today, I find it strange why now, when booking flights, one is 'informed' as to which type of 'plane the journey will be taken in.
Can you imagine saying 'Oh, I see that the 7:40 flight is on an Airbus 320, do you have one around the same time on a Boeing 737?'.
Anyone know why and since when this information is being 'informed' to the 'genpop'?

[simonshack]

*

As you surely all know by now, the ISS (International Space Station) is today apparently only served by the Russian SOYUZ module - the 30-year-old Space Shuttle program having now been laid off. The USA, we are told, now relies on this SOYUZ module to go back to the ISS. We should therefore focus our research efforts on the SOYUZ module - a tiny capsule hosting 3 astronots which gets parachuted back to Earth after its ISS voyage...

Well, here are three officially released images of a 2011 landing of the SOYUZ module:

1:

2:

3:


It is up to YOU to decide if the above 3 images all make sense - within a real world perspective.

[disinpho]

It is up to YOU to decide if the above 3 images all make sense - within a real world perspective.

In these pictures, who or where are the astronots? If they replaced the capsule with a dogsled the picture would make so much more sense!

[simonshack]

*

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


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

Indeed Simon.

While at first I had been hesitant regarding recent NA$A fakery, videos like this make me not so doubtful!
1) The choppiness of the background rotation is unexplainable, and seems to have that Xbox quality of graphical stuttering/slow draw times.

2) If this video has been sped up 6x, then we should see land masses on the digital earth no? I mean yes, the real earth has lots of water, and tons of clouds too, and also lots of LAND... but in this video, no sign of land mass, or any city lights like so many other space shots of earth depict.

3)The shuttle has that implanted look to it. Artificial in a sense, it has a funny sheen and perfect resolution and unchanging focus, despite the several rapid zooms in and out. It seems to me to also have the funny outline around its perimeter, ala' the Superman flying scenes from the 80's!

Oh yes, - hilarious, isn't it? I'm glad you noticed that too, MitchMatrixx.

But of course - it could just be some standard ghosting artifact, huh ?
Or doubling? An overly compressed video? Multipath distortion perhaps?

Let me know what you think! I don't suppose you believe NASA would fake all of this, do you?

[simonshack]

*

IMPORTANT NOTICE:I have now spent many hours splitting this NASA thread into two parts.



1: This one remains the "ENDEAVOUR - and the spaced-out NASA efforts" thread - and is all about the Space Shuttle program.

2: The other, new thread is called "Fakery in Orbit: THE ISS" - and is all about the International Space Station (and related issues).


Please observe this distinction from now on, thanks!

[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: http://www.cluesforum.info/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?