You specifically claim that voyager 1 is a hoax I see. How is it then that amateur radio operators have dected a signal from voyager 1, 98AU away from earth? http://www.southgatearc.org/news/april2006/voyager1.htm

STS60, thanks a lot for your replies. Besides Nicolas in the first page, (BertL and JayUtah to some extent also), you were the only poster to really REPLY to my article.

Well, I'm trying to reply to you. But exactly what I'm addressing is not yet clear to me, which is why I've asked the list of clarifying questions in post 71.

Now first of all: don't mix Comet Shoemaker-Levy 9 with the rest of the links you provided.

The SL9 images are included because some of them contain images (albeit faint ones) of Europa. You brought up Europa (not "Europe") by making what sounded like a claim about Voyager not imaging Europa (Europe moon "photo" from Galileo, since despite "19,000 pictures" no "photos" of Europe here... http://voyager.jpl.nasa.gov/image/jupiter.html). Of course, a few seconds is all it takes to Google up beautiful view of Europa taken by both Voyager 1 and Voyager 2... not to mention by other spacecraft.

All your links belong in one of two categories:
- observable from Earth;
- NOT observable from Earth.

Europa is observable from Earth. (Hint: It's known as a "Galilean" moon for a reason.) It's also observable from low Earth orbit, as shown in the Hubble image provided.

Comet Shoemaker-Levy impact on Jupiter is the only thing that belongs in the first category.

So was the Deep Impact collision with Tempel 1. So are hundreds of spacecraft, from the Apollo spacecraft tracked to the Moon by numerous individuals and organizations, to the deep-space probes tracked by stations around the world, to the geosynchronous TV broadcast satellites "tracked" by fixed home dishes, to the Shuttle, ISS, and numerous other satellites tracked visually by any human being who simply looks up when and where orbital mechanics says to... the same orbital mechanics which guides every other body, natural or manmade, in our solar system.

It also belongs, from another perspective (End Times or not) in the End Times category, but that's another story.

Agreed. I'm a space engineer, with a background in space physics and astronomy. I'm not interested in Illuminati this or End Times that, and such discussion is off-topic for this forum anyway.

__________________
"Slapping a guy on the head is just as funny now as it was eighty years ago."

Are you claiming that only Luna 1 was a hoax, and that every other claimed space mission was authentic?

__________________
"Facts are stubborn things." --John Adams
Clavius Moon Base

From my first post: Soviet Union's Luna 1 "spacecraft" hoax, early 1959, marks the begin of the relevant stage for implementing the ultimate goal.
From Illuminati's controlled Wikipedia: "Luna 1 was the first of a number of spacecraft to reach the vicinity of the Moon"

I am not interested in "Illuminati" claims. This is a space forum, and I am interested in your claims about spaceflight.

Which items, besides those that I explicitly marked (ISS, MIR, Skylab, Space Shuttle) are not clearly delimited by Luna 1?

All that is clear is that you believe Luna 1 was a hoax. All you have to do is simply answer the questions "yes" or "no", and we have a basis for further discussion.

For your convenience, I will repeat the questions here:

What exactly do you think is real? Yes or no to the following:

1a. Space Shuttle in low Earth orbit.
1b. ISS in low Earth orbit.
2. Other satellites (communications, sensing, imaging, astronomy) in low Earth orbits.
3. Commercial Earth-imaging satellites in low Earth/sun-synchronous orbits.
4. Commercial communications satellites in geosynchronous (including geostationary) orbits.
5. Tracking (e.g., GPS) satellites in medium Earth orbits.
6. Spacecraft in lunar orbit (e.g., Selene, just launched by the Japanese).
7. Spacecraft in Sun-observing orbits (e.g., SOHO, Ulysses).
8. Spacecraft orbiting Mars/Jupiter/Saturn (e.g., Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter).
9. Spacecraft on interstellar trajectories (Pioneer 10/11, Voyager 1/2).

__________________
"Slapping a guy on the head is just as funny now as it was eighty years ago."

MM, let me strongly suggest a post containing simply "Yes, or "No", answers to sts60's questions, before you post any other comments

__________________
"I have this theory that the Apollo missions were faked when NASA found out that general relativity was wrong because the Earth was expanding due to the Sun's iron core being influenced by magnetic waves from the electric universe after being perturbed by Planet X and thereby causing global warming. Where should I start a thread about this?" ~ ToSeek

"Those are the people that wonder how a thermos knows whether to keep something hot or keep something cold." ~ NeoWatcher

Explicit answer:

---- These are hoaxes as explicitly mentioned
1a. Space Shuttle
1b. ISS

---- These are not hoaxes
2. Other satellites (communications, sensing, imaging, astronomy)
3. Commercial Earth-imaging satellites
4. Commercial communications satellites
5. Tracking (e.g., GPS) satellites

---- These are hoaxes, as defined by the Luna 1 line:
6. Spacecraft in lunar orbit (e.g., Selene, just launched by the Japanese).
7. Spacecraft in Sun-observing orbits (e.g., SOHO, Ulysses).
8. Spacecraft orbiting Mars/Jupiter/Saturn (e.g., Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter).
9. Spacecraft on interstellar trajectories (Pioneer 10/11, Voyager 1/2).

Ah, thanks for the clarification.

Now,

1. why exactly can satellites exist in low to geosynchronous orbit, but not in lunar orbit, or any of the other orbits mentioned?

2. And how do you account for the fact that such spacecraft are tracked by ground stations around the world?

3. And why exactly must the Shuttle and ISS (and presumably Soyuz) be hoaxes?

4. And how do you account for the fact that you can take their orbital elements and predict exactly when and where they will appear and how they will move across the sky - exactly as is done with other Earth satellites? ISS and Shuttle are easy naked-eye objects, and the orbital mechanics that predicts their appearance and motion to any observer on Earth is absolutely identical to that which does the same for other satellites (e.g., Iridium satellites and their famous "flares").

__________________
"Slapping a guy on the head is just as funny now as it was eighty years ago."

These are hoaxes? What are the objects I've seen in the sky from my own yard, that many amateurs have imaged from their own telescopes that look like the ISS and shuttle in orbit? What is the thing that is launched regularly, lands regularly, seen by millions?

What is your evidence that these are hoaxes?


What is your evidence that these are hoaxes?

__________________
I say there is an invisible elf in my backyard. How do you prove that I am wrong?

Disclaimer: Avatar is not an official NASA image and does not imply any specific interplanetary or interstellar capability.

The Leif Ericson Cruiser

Thank you for giving us a more specific claim. Here is direct proof of the space station as photographed by my telescope as it tracked the station going over my head on June 25th, 2007.

For those who can view youtube videos, here's a video of the pass, this image is just one frame of that video.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=An4kwPUM66E

Another shot I took of the space station using a b/w camera while it was passing more directly overhead, hence closer. Taken a year before on June 17th, 2006.

The station always looks exactly as it should, you can visibly see it being constructed in orbit over time. I'm just a private citizen, not a conspirator, so how is it that I'm able to see the space station on orbit every time my computer tells me that it should be visible?

Your telescope is obviously a living machine that has been infected by a NASA mind control virus and is now part of a grand conspiracy to blind the public from The Truth.

By the way, can I join up with the Grand Conspiracy? I wrote a scathing review of Scorpion Down, a painfully ridiculous book about how the Soviets sank the USS Scorpion, and I'm now apparently a government disinformation agent in the high echelons of the Pentagon, working in the payroll of George W Bush, at least according to a woo-woo site called militarycorruption.com. When do I get my first paycheck?

First of the issues raised by sts60
"albeit faint ones".... now we are getting back to what, as stated in the first post, this thread is all about. If you know what the key I gave in the first post is:
_ _ _ A _
L _ _ _ I N G
... then you know what I mean.

Because the middle section is simply just too provable for him to be able to refute.
He probably used to claim they were hoaxes too.



Also, Occam, understanding your frustration and agreeing with your sentiments, I would consider you a valued member and hope that you don't leave BAUT

I actually don't. What is this supposed to mean? I've been puzzling for a while and the only things I can come up with for the second part is "Lizard king", "Lacking" or "Laughing". I can't come up with anything for the first part.

EDIT I just don't see why you speak in riddles so much.

__________________
Spread the Love!

That's why I find the shuttle and ISS claims, especially, to be astonishing. After all, it isn't very hard to see the things yourself. I'm waiting for an explanation on how these "hoaxes" were pulled off, but obviously I'm not holding my breath.

Yes, I understand the frustration, though the comments did go overboard. Occam, I hope you're just having a bad day, and can come back after you cool down.

__________________
I say there is an invisible elf in my backyard. How do you prove that I am wrong?

Disclaimer: Avatar is not an official NASA image and does not imply any specific interplanetary or interstellar capability.

The Leif Ericson Cruiser

---- These are hoaxes as explicitly mentioned
1a. Space Shuttle
1b. ISS

Direct observation refutes your claim.

---- These are hoaxes, as defined by the Luna 1 line:
6. Spacecraft in lunar orbit (e.g., Selene, just launched by the Japanese).
7. Spacecraft in Sun-observing orbits (e.g., SOHO, Ulysses).
8. Spacecraft orbiting Mars/Jupiter/Saturn (e.g., Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter).
9. Spacecraft on interstellar trajectories (Pioneer 10/11, Voyager 1/2).

What is your evidence that these spacecraft are hoaxes?

What alternate scenario explains the evidence (such as it is) that such spacecraft exist? And what evidence can you provide that your scenario is, in fact, the actual state of affairs and not just a fanciful hypothesis?

What makes them necessarily hoaxes? Do you claim it's technically impossible to do what these spacecraft purport to be doing? Or do you believe these missions are technically possible, but simply fabricated instead for some other reason?

__________________
"Facts are stubborn things." --John Adams
Clavius Moon Base

Occam,

After trying to read thru this incoherent rant, I agree with you. I can't take it anymore either. Can I borrow your razor so I can cut my throat?

A game playing troll.

Occam, I agree with you 100%, and I'm glad someone had the cojones to write it.

__________________
Scienara: A rejection of reason and evidence.

This ain't the Wheel of Fortune and you sure as heck aren't Vanna White. This is a science board. Quite trying so hard to be clever. Getting to the point quickly and clearly will do nicely, thank you very much.

__________________
Brett
Peters Creek, Alaska
─────────────────────────────────────────────
My moderation comments will appear in this color.
To report a post (even this one) to the moderation team, click the reporting icon in the upper-right corner of the post:
─────────────────────────────────────────────
◄ Rules For Posting To This Board ► ◄ Forum FAQs ► ◄ Conspiracy Theory Advice ► ◄ Alternate Theory Advice ►

I think he's playing Hangman.

Pat I'd like to solve the puzzle.

cleAn
LookING

I tried to fill the blanks myself, and I think that the answer is:
TODAY
LACKING
What does it mean? I have no idea, actually I think that he just picked 2 words at random...
Because he doesn't have a theory and is making things up on the fly?

In GLP land they think he means TIDAL LOCKING.

Going by GLP experiences:

MM never gives any direct answers.

MM never gives any evidence.

All he actually seems to have is his theories. His standard way to present them is to ask questions and present fill in the blanks puzzles like in this thread.

It seems to be an attempt to lead people to his conclusions, by having them answer "leading" questions. (It's a technique. He likes techniques, as shown by his common "big lie" claim.)

Cheers,


P.S. I'm very surprised that he has posted any "answers" at all (not they they contain any content).

__________________
Reality moves at the speed of light.
If the text of this post is blue, it's a "Moderator comment".
[ The RULES of the Forum ] [ Forum FAQs ] [ Conspiracy Theory advice ] [ Alternate Theory Advice ]
To report a post (even this one) to the moderation team - use the /!\ icon at the top-right of the post.

There are two open issues:
- how was the space travel hoax manufactured;
- what was the ultimate goal.

The second issue has just been answered.
Put yourself in the place of the Illuminati as they launched Copernicus. What was their major problem? Correct, the moon was.
The first thing required by the mother of all hoaxes, heliocentrism, was not a hoax of the stellar parallax type. It was the moon hoax, aka TIDAL LOCKING.

The hoax at the very bottom of the pyramid of lies.

You continue to talk in riddles.

You have not heeded Moderator Serenitudes warning.
You are unclear, vague and a game player.

You demonstrate a severe lack of scientific understanding. And if I read this last post right...

You seem to believe in the Geocentric Model and that all the stellar parallax and measurements and space technology must therefor be a hoax or fake because it undermines and disproves this model?

No there is only one open issue where is your proof.

__________________
If it's just us, it seems like an awful waste of space.
Contact Carl Sagan

http://davidsuniverse.wordpress.com/

As a by-the-by, I was in Western Australia when Skylab came down and remember the whole excitement in the media.

Not completely sure what this means in the context of the claims in this thread however, as I have not yet mastered the intricacies of gibberish.

__________________
"I'd take the awe of understanding over the awe of ignorance any day." - Douglas Adams

"Certainly, in the topsy-turvy world of heavy rock, having a good solid piece of wood in your hand is often useful." - Ian Faith

Actually, you've been asked for specific evidence for your claims, starting with your claim that the Shuttle is a hoax.

I'm going to assume this isn't a joke, and will ask a serious question: Why would the moon be a major problem for anyone?

If you're going to argue for Geocentrism, you'll also be asked to explain your particular version of Geocentrism, provide evidence for it, and explain what it has to do with your moon hoax claims. Please get to it.

__________________
I say there is an invisible elf in my backyard. How do you prove that I am wrong?

Disclaimer: Avatar is not an official NASA image and does not imply any specific interplanetary or interstellar capability.

The Leif Ericson Cruiser

I agree completely and it's a pity someone had to commit suicide to say what a lot of us are thinking.

__________________
Dog

The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, but wiser people so full of doubts. - Bertrand Russell

Yup, I think you hit the nail on the head. It took 4 pages but he finally rambled out his conspiracy theory. That would explain why he thinks geocentric orbits are the only possible kind (though other than the name, I don't fully understand how that would work in a geocentric model of the solar system - the earth isn't rotating in that model so they should just fall right back to earth). Sadly for him, simple observations refute this completely.

By the way, if you're going for pure geocentrism MM, then I assume you'd like to suggest that the galilean moons of jupiter are all a hoax as well, hence your vague references about voyager encountering jupiter? If that is indeed your suggestion, then could you explain why I can see the 4 galilean moons orbiting jupiter in my telescope night after night? And why do they cast shadows on jupiter itself, as seen here with ganymede's shadow?

There are two open issues:
- how was the space travel hoax manufactured;
- what was the ultimate goal.

No. The open issue is whether there has been a hoax. You just presume there has been, and then leap ahead to attribute the un-evidenced hoax to the predetermined enemy.

What evidence or observation can you present, associated with the allegedly hoaxed missions, that can be explained only by their having been hoaxed?

Put yourself in the place of the Illuminati as they launched Copernicus...

Begging the question.

You have the cart way before the horse. You have a huge web of speculation beginning with geocentrism. And because certain space missions, if authentic, wouldn't fit your speculation, you simply declare them to be hoaxes. It doesn't work like that. The observable success of certain space missions is the hard evidence that refutes your theory.

__________________
"Facts are stubborn things." --John Adams
Clavius Moon Base