The Space Shuttle and the ISS are a Hoax! - Page 20

tyffty · #**191** 03-03-2010, 06:59 PM

ummm what about the various times he films outside and shows the exterior of the ISS. Just remember that you have made yourself believe this conspiracy theory, so any proof presented to you will just be denied or ignored.

You are free to express whatever you believe, and i thank you for sharing it. The facts you have presented are interesting and it is quite possible that this is a hoax. Since we all know that the first moon landing was staged.

Here are some times that i recommend investigating in those clips
6:55 video1
7:10 video3
:35 and 2:30 and 5:00 video4

anything specific that looks out of the ordinary please share. Also, it is a weak argument to simply say these videos are fake and nothing special effects cant do. Give specific reasons so i can watch them and see for myself. If you can prove that these videos are fake, it will give great support to your theory

galexander · #**192** 03-04-2010, 12:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tyffty

ummm what about the various times he films outside and shows the exterior of the ISS. Just remember that you have made yourself believe this conspiracy theory, so any proof presented to you will just be denied or ignored.

You are free to express whatever you believe, and i thank you for sharing it. The facts you have presented are interesting and it is quite possible that this is a hoax. Since we all know that the first moon landing was staged.

Here are some times that i recommend investigating in those clips
6:55 video1
7:10 video3
:35 and 2:30 and 5:00 video4

anything specific that looks out of the ordinary please share. Also, it is a weak argument to simply say these videos are fake and nothing special effects cant do. Give specific reasons so i can watch them and see for myself. If you can prove that these videos are fake, it will give great support to your theory

I am not an expert on special effects and could not go into the detail you ask. However I would claim that I don't really need to.

In science fiction films you never believe that what you are watching actually happened in reality because you were told in advance that the whole thing is a gargantuan work of fiction.

And yet you can actually see these things happening with your own eyes.

What I am saying is is that the special effects used by NASA aren't any better than the ones used in science fiction movies.

Its because you've been told that what NASA produces is real that you end up seeing that it is real.

As for your video clips:

So you can see the Earth and parts of the exterior of the ISS through a window. But what does this prove? We have already seen the Earth and the exterior of the ISS during space walks. Can you tell me what difference the window makes?

That leaves one clip remaining:

In Video 3, 7:10 it is not really clear what is going on in this rather cramped environment. A pipe flexes from side to side but this effect can easily be achieved using the appropriate flexible materials.

In summary these videos don't really make a significant impact.

galexander · #**193** 05-16-2010, 04:34 AM

I'd just like to add a note as to how bad the UV light is outside the Earth's atmosphere.

NASA scientists would claim that the UV light in space is so diffuse it doesn't really do anything. However according to the laws of quantum physics any effect is cumulative with time.

Using a speadsheet created graph based upon the Einstein-Bose equation for blackbody radiation which was over 10,000 lines long, I calculated that the intensity of UV light powerful enough to break the Si-O bond in glass was 0.04 W/m2.

This sounds like nothing but consider the following:

A watt is one joule per second. So after one hour each square metre would receive 144 joules, after a day 3,456 joules, and after a week 24,192 joules.

In other words something is bound to happen to that glass surface after the space of a day or so.

superted · #**194** 05-16-2010, 04:45 AM

"NASA scientists would claim that the UV light in space is so diffuse it doesn't really do anything. However according to the laws of quantum physics any effect is cumulative with time."

I'm no physicist but sure they simply mean that UV light has no effect over any sizeable time frame, like 10,000 years...?

Surely what your proposing only works if each UV photon has a additive effect to the previous....which isn't the case? Instead each UV photon to hit the glass acts as if it was the first and so no damage is done.

galexander · #**195** 05-16-2010, 04:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by superted

"NASA scientists would claim that the UV light in space is so diffuse it doesn't really do anything. However according to the laws of quantum physics any effect is cumulative with time."

I'm no physicist but sure they simply mean that UV light has no effect over any sizeable time frame, like 10,000 years...?

Surely what your proposing only works if each UV photon has a additive effect to the previous....which isn't the case? Instead each UV photon to hit the glass acts as if it was the first and so no damage is done.

No.

On a quantum level each photon of sufficient energy has a probability of striking the electron shell of the chemical bond in question and breaking that bond.

Once that happens the bond is permanently broken.

Each and every single photon striking the glass surface has the chance of breaking a single chemical bond.

Those single broken chemical bonds add up with time.

Simple.

superted · #**196** 05-16-2010, 05:53 AM

Hmmm, your probably right but I'm not convinced. What your saying makes sense but then you assume each or any photon has sufficient energy? How do you know what energy the UV photons from the sun have at the distance of our planet?

Could you explain why UV and not the rest of the light spectrum?

kerry · #**197** 05-16-2010, 11:27 AM

galexanders first post gave me a idea if nasa dident think of it yet
a space station. with everything in it so anyone can live in it for a long time. even the rest of a life. what if this type of space station had rockets or somthing on it so it can travel in space. imagion a space station the size of new york. exploreing space. like star treck . sending back data to ground controll.

galexander · #**198** 05-17-2010, 11:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by superted

Hmmm, your probably right but I'm not convinced. What your saying makes sense but then you assume each or any photon has sufficient energy? How do you know what energy the UV photons from the sun have at the distance of our planet?

Could you explain why UV and not the rest of the light spectrum?

superted, you appear to be a slow learner.

I only included in my calculation the WAVELENGTHS OF UV LIGHT POSSESSING THE REQUIRED PHOTON ENERGY TO BREAK THE Si-O BOND IN GLASS.

As I said quite clearly in my first post on this matter:

Quote:

I calculated that the intensity of UV light powerful enough to break the Si-O bond in glass was 0.04 W/m2.

superted · #**199** 05-17-2010, 01:08 PM

Don't be so tetchy gale.

As much as a believe the calculations of some guy on an internet forum, that throws the toys out of the pram just because I query his post....? WTF? I could not have been more civil, there was me thinking your weren't a crazy like others on this forum.

I'm sure right and all those NASA scientists are just chimps in lab coats!

Out of the Box · #**200** 05-17-2010, 02:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by superted

I'm sure right and all those NASA scientists are just chimps in lab coats!

That's besides the issue. If we cannot trust the puppet politicians, we cannot trust the media and we cannot trust our "education system" ("indoctrination system" would be more correct), then why can we trust NASA?! All are but minions of Big Brother (aka the New World Order).