BNW Brave New World
Samenzwering, verborgen agenda's en geheime geschiedenis. De zoektocht naar de wereld die achter de façade van alledag ligt.
Poe's law in actie dit.quote:Op donderdag 23 maart 2017 12:06 schreef ems. het volgende:
Hij blijft het ook doen heh. Kijken naar reacties en dan zeggen dat ze niet reageren op de manier hoe hij zou reageren. Zoveel jaar al. Je zou toch verwachten dat hij ondertussen zou hebben geleerd dat je daar niets mee opschiet. Zeker als hij zich in het echt ook zo gedraagt.
Wil je zelf bewijs uit de ruimte onderzoeken? dit is je kans!
Orgineel gevlogen 35mm & 70mm film uit Salyut ruimtestation: http://www.rrauction.com/preview_itemdetail.cfm?IN=8443
Orgineel gevlogen 35mm dia uit MIR ruimtestation: http://www.rrauction.com/preview_itemdetail.cfm?IN=8436
Apollo 15 SM SIMBAY panorama camera kopie van orgineel: http://www.rrauction.com/preview_itemdetail.cfm?IN=8350
Ik ga iedergeval op die met 35mm en 70mm bieden. Er is niet veel van Salyut online te vinden.
Orgineel gevlogen 35mm & 70mm film uit Salyut ruimtestation: http://www.rrauction.com/preview_itemdetail.cfm?IN=8443
Orgineel gevlogen 35mm dia uit MIR ruimtestation: http://www.rrauction.com/preview_itemdetail.cfm?IN=8436
Apollo 15 SM SIMBAY panorama camera kopie van orgineel: http://www.rrauction.com/preview_itemdetail.cfm?IN=8350
Ik ga iedergeval op die met 35mm en 70mm bieden. Er is niet veel van Salyut online te vinden.
Paar weken geleden hier op BNW ergens 'n post over de historische 1965 Gemini space walk was.
It jogged my memory. Whats going on in the background?
Excuse voor de copy and paste maar (helaas) kan ik 't niet beter schrijven, Als je echt in de Space Fakery onderwerp geinteresseerd bent....
Dankje wel voor de great post, anonjed:
http://cluesforum.info/vi(...)it=gemini+4#p2395418
Notes:
1) In the first 2 minutes of the video, we see Edward White struggling with his equipment. Notice the flimsy strap and other objects of the tether as they wave violently in what seems to be "wind"? Also note the speed at which the objects move, much faster than we're used to seeing things move up in the ISS and modern space walks.
2) Also in the first two minutes, notice the rotation of the Earth from East to West (with North being the top of your computer screen, not TRUE north).
3) At 2:05, notice the tether contraption reach it's limit and a "kink" sound is heard. Does sound travel through space?
4) Around 3 minutes, the astroNOT is out of the frame (to the left). At this point we can note that the shadow has creeped up higher on the portion of the craft on the right side of the frame. But we have not observed much of the curvature or positioning of the Earth change in accordance with the rotation of the craft (causing the change in shadow from the "sun"). The angle, however, has changed slightly.
5) Around 4 minutes, the Earth is now rotating slightly from SE to NW and more so around 5 minutes.
6) Around 6 minutes, the craft has returned (rotated)? back to it's previous position with the sun shown on more of the surface of the craft to the right of the frame and less shadow. The earth (or movement of the clouds) is now rotating from SW to NE.
7) Around 7 minutes we see the Earth conveniently covered completely by clouds as it continues its SW to NE rotation.
8) By 8 minutes, the Earth is rotating from West to East.
9) By 9 minutes it's rotating in an almost circular pattern from NE to SW.
10) Hardly any land whatsoever is observed on the Earth until the very end of the 9 minute clip. Also note that the straps and tether are flapping around wildly throughout the "space walk."
Some questions that come to mind for me...
1) Is it realistic to observe the Earth rotating in all of those different directions during an 8 minute portion of the alleged 20 minute space walk?
2) Is the craft moving at all, and if so, in which direction and how fast? Wouldn't the combination of the craft's speed and the Earth rotation result in various different shots of the Earth other than just seeing it with the edge on the left, taking up mostly the same space of the frame of the camera, throughout the video?
4) If the craft is relatively stationary, or "moving away" from the Earth, other than its brief rotations exposing more of the sun, how can we see the Earth go through this many different directions of "rotation" in such a short period of time?
4) Is it realistic that this much of the Earth would be covered by clouds and no visible land for 8-9 minutes? All we see is Clouds and Ocean the entire time, but if the Earth is spinning at 1000mph, is it consistent relative to the way the Earth is moving and how much Earth (clouds/oceans) we see go by in this amount of time?
5) At certain times in the video (earlier vs later, for example), the velocity of the Earth's rotation seems slower/faster than in other parts of the video. Does this make sense?
Obviously this space walk is one ridiculous fraud. I am not sure if my questions above are easy to understand but hopefully they can spark a little discussion about what we observe in this video.
One more thing to ponder:
If the astronots look down towards the Earth while they are blasting off towards space but still traveling in the atmosphere, they wouldn't see the Earth rotating at all (so we are told), because they are part of the atmosphere spinning with it. So, is there an imaginary line where they just stop being in Earth's atmosphere and are now in "Space"? What would happen if an Astronot went for a space walk right up to this imaginary line and stuck his head past it? Would the Earth stop rotating in his eyes? Would his head fall off his body and tumble back down to Earth? What would happen to an astronot or any object if half of it was still in Earth's atmosphere and the other half in space?
And finally, once you exited the atmosphere into the vacuum, shouldn't the Earth now take off at 30km per second (67,000 miles per hour) through the solar system with the astronots and craft floating in space behind it? In the 8 minutes time of this video, the Earth should be ~8933 miles away from it's original position (continuing its journey around the sun). It should be out of the view of the camera in less than a few seconds, essentially whizzing past the astronot and Gemini craft. Wouldn't they need to wait 12 months for the Earth to return back to this position so they can land on it? Or is the vacuum of space somehow dragged along with the Earth and its atmosphere?
EDIT to add:
Of course the reason we're given for this last question is that the astronot and spacecraft, as well as the moon, would be held near the Earth, due to its gravitational pull, and thus travel along the orbit with it ... but of course this makes no sense either, as the spacecraft would then eventually be pulled back to the atmosphere as well, no? By the same token, shouldn't the moon then be sucked into the Earth at some point in time? Or are we expected to believe that everything is just in perfect balance, by accident?
It jogged my memory. Whats going on in the background?
Excuse voor de copy and paste maar (helaas) kan ik 't niet beter schrijven, Als je echt in de Space Fakery onderwerp geinteresseerd bent....
Dankje wel voor de great post, anonjed:
http://cluesforum.info/vi(...)it=gemini+4#p2395418
Notes:
1) In the first 2 minutes of the video, we see Edward White struggling with his equipment. Notice the flimsy strap and other objects of the tether as they wave violently in what seems to be "wind"? Also note the speed at which the objects move, much faster than we're used to seeing things move up in the ISS and modern space walks.
2) Also in the first two minutes, notice the rotation of the Earth from East to West (with North being the top of your computer screen, not TRUE north).
3) At 2:05, notice the tether contraption reach it's limit and a "kink" sound is heard. Does sound travel through space?
4) Around 3 minutes, the astroNOT is out of the frame (to the left). At this point we can note that the shadow has creeped up higher on the portion of the craft on the right side of the frame. But we have not observed much of the curvature or positioning of the Earth change in accordance with the rotation of the craft (causing the change in shadow from the "sun"). The angle, however, has changed slightly.
5) Around 4 minutes, the Earth is now rotating slightly from SE to NW and more so around 5 minutes.
6) Around 6 minutes, the craft has returned (rotated)? back to it's previous position with the sun shown on more of the surface of the craft to the right of the frame and less shadow. The earth (or movement of the clouds) is now rotating from SW to NE.
7) Around 7 minutes we see the Earth conveniently covered completely by clouds as it continues its SW to NE rotation.
8) By 8 minutes, the Earth is rotating from West to East.
9) By 9 minutes it's rotating in an almost circular pattern from NE to SW.
10) Hardly any land whatsoever is observed on the Earth until the very end of the 9 minute clip. Also note that the straps and tether are flapping around wildly throughout the "space walk."
Some questions that come to mind for me...
1) Is it realistic to observe the Earth rotating in all of those different directions during an 8 minute portion of the alleged 20 minute space walk?
2) Is the craft moving at all, and if so, in which direction and how fast? Wouldn't the combination of the craft's speed and the Earth rotation result in various different shots of the Earth other than just seeing it with the edge on the left, taking up mostly the same space of the frame of the camera, throughout the video?
4) If the craft is relatively stationary, or "moving away" from the Earth, other than its brief rotations exposing more of the sun, how can we see the Earth go through this many different directions of "rotation" in such a short period of time?
4) Is it realistic that this much of the Earth would be covered by clouds and no visible land for 8-9 minutes? All we see is Clouds and Ocean the entire time, but if the Earth is spinning at 1000mph, is it consistent relative to the way the Earth is moving and how much Earth (clouds/oceans) we see go by in this amount of time?
5) At certain times in the video (earlier vs later, for example), the velocity of the Earth's rotation seems slower/faster than in other parts of the video. Does this make sense?
Obviously this space walk is one ridiculous fraud. I am not sure if my questions above are easy to understand but hopefully they can spark a little discussion about what we observe in this video.
One more thing to ponder:
If the astronots look down towards the Earth while they are blasting off towards space but still traveling in the atmosphere, they wouldn't see the Earth rotating at all (so we are told), because they are part of the atmosphere spinning with it. So, is there an imaginary line where they just stop being in Earth's atmosphere and are now in "Space"? What would happen if an Astronot went for a space walk right up to this imaginary line and stuck his head past it? Would the Earth stop rotating in his eyes? Would his head fall off his body and tumble back down to Earth? What would happen to an astronot or any object if half of it was still in Earth's atmosphere and the other half in space?
And finally, once you exited the atmosphere into the vacuum, shouldn't the Earth now take off at 30km per second (67,000 miles per hour) through the solar system with the astronots and craft floating in space behind it? In the 8 minutes time of this video, the Earth should be ~8933 miles away from it's original position (continuing its journey around the sun). It should be out of the view of the camera in less than a few seconds, essentially whizzing past the astronot and Gemini craft. Wouldn't they need to wait 12 months for the Earth to return back to this position so they can land on it? Or is the vacuum of space somehow dragged along with the Earth and its atmosphere?
EDIT to add:
Of course the reason we're given for this last question is that the astronot and spacecraft, as well as the moon, would be held near the Earth, due to its gravitational pull, and thus travel along the orbit with it ... but of course this makes no sense either, as the spacecraft would then eventually be pulled back to the atmosphere as well, no? By the same token, shouldn't the moon then be sucked into the Earth at some point in time? Or are we expected to believe that everything is just in perfect balance, by accident?
In the new 'reality' we will be living in,nothing will be real and everything will be true-David A.McGowan
Why do some people not credit the origin of the quotes they use under their posts?- Tingo
Why do some people not credit the origin of the quotes they use under their posts?- Tingo
quote:If the astronots look down towards the Earth while they are blasting off towards space but still traveling in the atmosphere, they wouldn't see the Earth rotating at all (so we are told), because they are part of the atmosphere spinning with it. So, is there an imaginary line where they just stop being in Earth's atmosphere and are now in "Space"? What would happen if an Astronot went for a space walk right up to this imaginary line and stuck his head past it? Would the Earth stop rotating in his eyes? Would his head fall off his body and tumble back down to Earth? What would happen to an astronot or any object if half of it was still in Earth's atmosphere and the other half in space?
Wat een fantasie hebben die lui zeg.
Egregious professor of Cruel and Unusual Geography
Onikaan ni ov dovah
Onikaan ni ov dovah
hahahahaaaaquote:
SpaceX Falcon 9 / SES-9 Sunset Launch 3/4/2016 As Seen From Palm Bay, FL
Kan je 'n downward trajectory zien.
Elon Musk and his SpaceX team, witness the historic landing of a Falcon 9 rocket:
Het lijkt meer op 'n realityTV/ made for TV docu-drama soort programma te zijn.
It is shot like a movie but presented as real. Weird.
Imo net zo erg als de totaal idiotische Mars Rover landing press conference is.
Painfully funny.
Nog erger is dat over 5,10 jaar of zo, mensen echt in Mars landingen en 'n soort reality TV soap van 'Life on Mars' of zo gaan geloven.
tnx for posting
fokking briljant!
die mars rover press conf is ook classic inderdaad.
"Is my good friend....uhhhh…in the room..?”
voor de liefhebber:
NASA HOAX 3 HOURS OF COMMON SENSE TRUTH
Huig
quote:
[..]
hahahahaaaa
tnx for posting
fokking briljant!
die mars rover press conf is ook classic inderdaad.
"Is my good friend....uhhhh…in the room..?”
voor de liefhebber:
NASA HOAX 3 HOURS OF COMMON SENSE TRUTH
1 + 1 = blauw
And a very good sense of humour.quote:
[..]
Wat een fantasie hebben die lui zeg.
And where would we all be without imagination indeed.
Anyhoos....
Misschien kan jij 'n keer in gaan op de info en de hele goede punten gebracht ipv. van flauwe distraction tactics. Misschien kan jij uitleggen wat er nou verkeerd aan de lijstje over de rare 'historische' 1965 'spacewalk' is ?
In the new 'reality' we will be living in,nothing will be real and everything will be true-David A.McGowan
Why do some people not credit the origin of the quotes they use under their posts?- Tingo
Why do some people not credit the origin of the quotes they use under their posts?- Tingo
Dat is simpel, vrijwel alles klopt daar niet van. Dat stukje waar ik zo om kon lachen is een mooi voorbeeld van hoe een verkeerde aanname (je ziet de aarde niet onder je veranderen als je in de atmosfeer zit) in uiterst vreemde conclusies resulteert. Van die mensen die zich vooral niet laten hinderen door al het gebrek aan kennis.quote:
[..]
And a very good sense of humour.
And where would we all be without imagination indeed.
Anyhoos....
Misschien kan jij 'n keer in gaan op de info en de hele goede punten gebracht ipv. van flauwe distraction tactics. Misschien kan jij uitleggen wat er nou verkeerd aan de lijstje over de rare 'historische' 1965 'spacewalk' is ?
Dat is in dit stuk erna ook erg duidelijk:
Deze mensen snappen simpelweg niet hoe zwaartekracht en orbits werken.quote:And finally, once you exited the atmosphere into the vacuum, shouldn't the Earth now take off at 30km per second (67,000 miles per hour) through the solar system with the astronots and craft floating in space behind it? In the 8 minutes time of this video, the Earth should be ~8933 miles away from it's original position (continuing its journey around the sun). It should be out of the view of the camera in less than a few seconds, essentially whizzing past the astronot and Gemini craft. Wouldn't they need to wait 12 months for the Earth to return back to this position so they can land on it? Or is the vacuum of space somehow dragged along with the Earth and its atmosphere?
EDIT to add:
Of course the reason we're given for this last question is that the astronot and spacecraft, as well as the moon, would be held near the Earth, due to its gravitational pull, and thus travel along the orbit with it ... but of course this makes no sense either, as the spacecraft would then eventually be pulled back to the atmosphere as well, no? By the same token, shouldn't the moon then be sucked into the Earth at some point in time? Or are we expected to believe that everything is just in perfect balance, by accident?
Egregious professor of Cruel and Unusual Geography
Onikaan ni ov dovah
Onikaan ni ov dovah
"And then there's another good friend of mine...oh ,er ....where is he...."quote:
[..]
hahahahaaaa
tnx for posting
fokking briljant!
die mars rover press conf is ook classic inderdaad.
"Is my good friend....uhhhh…in the room..?”
It kind of gives one that peculiar feeling of wanting to laugh and vomit at the same time.
What a bunch of self-congratulatory,shameless, lying scumbags indeed.
In the new 'reality' we will be living in,nothing will be real and everything will be true-David A.McGowan
Why do some people not credit the origin of the quotes they use under their posts?- Tingo
Why do some people not credit the origin of the quotes they use under their posts?- Tingo
Welke info? Ze roepen gewoon iets. Er zit geen enkele wetenschappelijke verklaring achter. Gewoon een groepje mensen dat graag de wereld voorliegt en goed geld verdient aan filmpjes en artikelen plaatsen.quote:
[..]
And a very good sense of humour.
And where would we all be without imagination indeed.
Anyhoos....
Misschien kan jij 'n keer in gaan op de info en de hele goede punten gebracht ipv. van flauwe distraction tactics. Misschien kan jij uitleggen wat er nou verkeerd aan de lijstje over de rare 'historische' 1965 'spacewalk' is ?
Conscience do cost.
Yes it is, because the orbit was inclined with respect to the equator. Viewed from afar, the capsule would seem to be going up and down, while going around the earth.quote:
Some questions that come to mind for me...
1) Is it realistic to observe the Earth rotating in all of those different directions during an 8 minute portion of the alleged 20 minute space walk?
Yes of course it was moving, it was in orbit. The rotation of the earth has no influence on how much of it is in the field of view, only the orientation of the spacecraft/camera was, and that didn't change.quote:2) Is the craft moving at all, and if so, in which direction and how fast? Wouldn't the combination of the craft's speed and the Earth rotation result in various different shots of the Earth other than just seeing it with the edge on the left, taking up mostly the same space of the frame of the camera, throughout the video?
None of the above, it was in orbit...quote:4) If the craft is relatively stationary, or "moving away" from the Earth, other than its brief rotations exposing more of the sun, how can we see the Earth go through this many different directions of "rotation" in such a short period of time?
Yes it is. Just look at any meteorological map.quote:4) Is it realistic that this much of the Earth would be covered by clouds and no visible land for 8-9 minutes? All we see is Clouds and Ocean the entire time, but if the Earth is spinning at 1000mph, is it consistent relative to the way the Earth is moving and how much Earth (clouds/oceans) we see go by in this amount of time?
The orbit was not very circular, so it could.quote:5) At certain times in the video (earlier vs later, for example), the velocity of the Earth's rotation seems slower/faster than in other parts of the video. Does this make sense?
Sure, easy to understand, but also clearly lacking any knowledge on orbital mechanics.quote:Obviously this space walk is one ridiculous fraud. I am not sure if my questions above are easy to understand but hopefully they can spark a little discussion about what we observe in this video.
Egregious professor of Cruel and Unusual Geography
Onikaan ni ov dovah
Onikaan ni ov dovah
Wel leuk op zich. Hij stelt zelf allerlei vragen waar hij klaarblijkelijk niet het antwoord op heeft maar weet wel even te concluderen dat het 'obviously' een fraud is.quote:Obviously this space walk is one ridiculous fraud.
Ik vraag me af of die mensen wel helemaal goed zijn.
Maar het zullen wel weer gelovigen zijn.
Conscience do cost.
Jep, zoals ik het lees staat er: ik snap niet hoe het kan dus het moet wel nep zijn.quote:
[..]
Wel leuk op zich. Hij stelt zelf allerlei vragen waar hij klaarblijkelijk niet het antwoord op heeft maar weet wel even te concluderen dat het 'obviously' een fraud is.
Ik vraag me af of die mensen wel helemaal goed zijn.
Dat is wel waar het op neer komt ja.quote:Op woensdag 12 april 2017 17:47 schreef ChrisCarter het volgende:
[..]
Jep, zoals ik het lees staat er: ik snap niet hoe het kan dus het moet wel nep zijn.
Egregious professor of Cruel and Unusual Geography
Onikaan ni ov dovah
Onikaan ni ov dovah
The orbit of Earth isn't even a circle, nor is the center of this ellipse in the middle.quote:
The orbit was not very circular, so it could.
Nor is the Earth a perfect sphere; it's actually wider at the equator, for fairly obvious reasons (it's the plane where the accretion disc once was, before the Earth became a singular massive object).
1 + 1 = blauw
NASA ja.quote:
[..]
Welke info? Ze roepen gewoon iets. Er zit geen enkele wetenschappelijke verklaring achter. Gewoon een groepje mensen dat graag de wereld voorliegt en goed geld verdient aan filmpjes en artikelen plaatsen.
In the new 'reality' we will be living in,nothing will be real and everything will be true-David A.McGowan
Why do some people not credit the origin of the quotes they use under their posts?- Tingo
Why do some people not credit the origin of the quotes they use under their posts?- Tingo
NASA snapt ten minste nog hoe orbital mechanics werken. Dat kan ik van die poster op het cluesforum niet zeggen.quote:
Egregious professor of Cruel and Unusual Geography
Onikaan ni ov dovah
Onikaan ni ov dovah
Hoaxers, pak deze kans om orginele film van Salyut ruimtestationenen te bemachtigen: https://www.rrauction.com/bidtracker_detail.cfm?IN=8443
Dit is een grote kans om zelf onderzoek uit te voeren. Ik kan ze voor je scannen op 4000 DPI wat een 5200 x 3400 plaatje geeft, 18 megapixel.
Jullie hebben het toch altijd over zelf onderzoek doen? hier is je kans.
Verder zijn er deze foto's op 70mm film van Apollo 12: https://www.rrauction.com/bidtracker_detail.cfm?IN=8280
ik kan ze inscannen op 4000 DPI voor een 8600 x 6400 plaatje, 56 megapixel.
En deze gemaakt door de Apollo 15 SM panorama camera: https://www.rrauction.com/bidtracker_detail.cfm?IN=8350
Als de film 10 inch hoog is kan ik ze niet met mijn film scanner scannen... kan misschien wel met mijn flatbed scanner.
Dit is een grote kans om zelf onderzoek uit te voeren. Ik kan ze voor je scannen op 4000 DPI wat een 5200 x 3400 plaatje geeft, 18 megapixel.
Jullie hebben het toch altijd over zelf onderzoek doen? hier is je kans.
Verder zijn er deze foto's op 70mm film van Apollo 12: https://www.rrauction.com/bidtracker_detail.cfm?IN=8280
ik kan ze inscannen op 4000 DPI voor een 8600 x 6400 plaatje, 56 megapixel.
En deze gemaakt door de Apollo 15 SM panorama camera: https://www.rrauction.com/bidtracker_detail.cfm?IN=8350
Als de film 10 inch hoog is kan ik ze niet met mijn film scanner scannen... kan misschien wel met mijn flatbed scanner.
NASA & Co. Ltd heeft natuurlijlk veel kleurrijke,psychedelische beelden van accretion disks gemaakt.quote:Op woensdag 12 april 2017 18:56 schreef Kamina het volgende:
[..]
The orbit of Earth isn't even a circle, nor is the center of this ellipse in the middle.
Nor is the Earth a perfect sphere; it's actually wider at the equator, for fairly obvious reasons (it's the plane where the accretion disc once was, before the Earth became a singular massive object).
Als je denkt dat de beelden echt fotos zijn of CGI kunstwerkjes zijn moet je zelf weten.
https://www.google.nl/sea(...)ar+telescope&imgrc=_
Met dit ding:
Nuclear Spectroscopic Telescope Array
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NuSTAR
Wat a fcking joke.
Trillions van de tax-payers 'verdient'.
In the new 'reality' we will be living in,nothing will be real and everything will be true-David A.McGowan
Why do some people not credit the origin of the quotes they use under their posts?- Tingo
Why do some people not credit the origin of the quotes they use under their posts?- Tingo
Weet je wat een artist's concept is?quote:
[..]
NASA & Co. Ltd heeft natuurlijlk veel kleurrijke,psychedelische beelden van accretion disks gemaakt.
Als je denkt dat de beelden echt fotos zijn of CGI kunstwerkjes zijn moet je zelf weten.
https://www.google.nl/sea(...)ar+telescope&imgrc=_
Met dit ding:
Nuclear Spectroscopic Telescope Array
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NuSTAR
Wat a fcking joke.
Trillions van de tax-payers 'verdient'.
Egregious professor of Cruel and Unusual Geography
Onikaan ni ov dovah
Onikaan ni ov dovah
Ja, NASA ook.quote:
[..]
Weet je wat een artist's concept is?
In the new 'reality' we will be living in,nothing will be real and everything will be true-David A.McGowan
Why do some people not credit the origin of the quotes they use under their posts?- Tingo
Why do some people not credit the origin of the quotes they use under their posts?- Tingo
