|
Post by grashtel on Jun 22, 2010 2:10:44 GMT -4
Yes i do, and probly know more about them then most people on here since i have access to information that you and others cannot. So would you care to provide examples of information that you have access to that people on this forum don't? Or is it just more meaningless bluster from you?
|
|
|
Post by grashtel on May 20, 2010 14:59:21 GMT -4
There is an intriguing idea for a nuclear rocket that doesn't need an external propellant supply at all. When a atom of U-235 or Pu-239 fissions, a large part of the energy that is released comes out as the kinetic energy of the fission products. Nuclei are positively charged, so they can be electrostatically guided and, in principle, directed out the back of a rocket engine. The Isp would be extremely high for this rocket, so high that it might not produce usable thrust even at very high power levels. But it would be another way to build a nuclear rocket. I believe that a Fission-Fragment rocket is pretty much what you are describing
|
|
|
Post by grashtel on May 13, 2010 17:11:17 GMT -4
Unfortunately fanaticism isn't limited to just religious types, any belief system can result in it.
|
|
|
Post by grashtel on May 13, 2010 3:30:42 GMT -4
The High Frequency Active Auroral Research Program (they presumably decided to leave the F out of the acronym because HFAARP would tend to be pronounced like someone passing gas), a research program that studies the ionosphere and aurora by pretty much poking it with high frequency radio waves and seeing what happens.
|
|
|
Post by grashtel on May 11, 2010 15:15:58 GMT -4
In the height of the satanic cult scare, I had a casual acquaintance with a therapist who said a former patient of her's had had some involvement in a satanic cult, despite the fact the patient denied it. Her evidence, a series of phone calls with no caller speaking. She figured out the "cult connection" and started making promises to the caller not to divulge anything the patient said about the cult. After a few of those statements the cult (or whoever) stopped calling her. Uh-huh, I think this is evidence to support my theory that you have to be crazy to study psychology/psychiatry.
|
|
|
Post by grashtel on May 10, 2010 17:43:42 GMT -4
You could have found out this information if you visited space and astronomy sites, or any news site after the LCROSS mission. Or even Wikipedia
|
|
|
Post by grashtel on May 10, 2010 6:55:11 GMT -4
Has anyone el;se read that story by Arthur C Clarke about a fictional first moon mission? They discover that the moon has a thin atmosphere and they fire a missile into it to illuminate it and it turns out to be a Coca Cola advert! ;D Where did Clarke get his information from? In an astronomy encyclopaedia I read it says that Mercury has a very thin astmospher made out of various transient gas molecules. Are we sure the moon is not the same? After all it has a gravitational field that could attract gas molecules in the same way. The Moon does have an atmosphere, though it is extremely tenuous being what would be considered an extremely good quality vacuum on Earth, your house probably contains more atmosphere than there is on the whole surface of the Moon (the Lunar atmosphere is estimated to have a total mass of about ten tons). From a little searching it was first confirmed to exist in 1971 but had been speculated about for decades before that.
|
|
|
Post by grashtel on Apr 30, 2010 1:13:24 GMT -4
This is an interesting situation. Had Jarrah understood the nature of these video artifacts I strongly suspect he would not have made his concession quite so readily. But having made it, I doubt he can now un-make it as that would entail admitting a mistake that he did not, in fact, make. How much do you want to bet that as soon as Jarrah finds out about this (and assuming that he manages to understand the explination) that the video/post/comment/whatever will "mysterious" disappear for everywhere he can get at it and he will claim that he never admitted to it?
|
|
|
Post by grashtel on Apr 27, 2010 0:31:49 GMT -4
Hi Author. I don't know if I can pick 5 that stand out above others because it's a cumulative thing. The visual record bothers me, the lighting effects etc. There's the loss of interest in going back there too. Obama has just shelved the new planned moon mission. The Russians and Chinese may follow. Remember the sci-fi stories of the 1960's? Arthur C Clarke etc? They always projected a future in which by the dawn of the 21st century we'd have bases on the moon and sometimes Mars, and be sending manned missions to the outer planets and even going interstellar. Any sci-fi fan from the 60's who could see into the future to the present time would gasp in dismay! "What!? It's 2010 and you still haven't gone back above low Earth orbit, even once!?" Those are the first things that spring to mind. Sci-fi fans from the 60s would also expect us to have flying cars (possibly nuclear powered), are going going to claim that the automotive industry is a conspiracy as well?
|
|
|
Post by grashtel on Apr 21, 2010 22:32:49 GMT -4
Item the second: They also asked about the lack of rover tracks in several rover Hasselblad photos. I myself have seen this ,and I explained that the work of the astronauts would obscure tracks. They agreed this would do some obscuring, that the surface underneath the rover, inaccessible to working astronauts, often appears 'pristine' as well. After some thought, I posited that the dust brought forward by the back mesh wheels, as well as that kicked back by the front, would obscure the track of the front wheel underneath the rover. To show it in action, I linked to 16mm footage of the Apollo 16 'test drive'. It makes sense to me, but this isn't my area of expertise. What do the other members of this fine community think? If you look closely at the left of AS15-88-11899 you will see that the rover tracks are often not very easily visible to begin with (IIRC this is due to the mesh tyres tending to drop dust back into the tracks) and how far the dust kicked up by the astronauts could travel in the one sixth gravity airless environment of the moon in sufficient quantities to obscure the tracks completely. Another nice thing about that photo is that it is a part of a pan which contains one of the popular images ( AS15-88-11901 to be exact) for HBs making the "no tracks" claim and that if you follow the pan around you can show of the tracks "mysteeriously" disappear as they get close to where the astronauts have been walking around.
|
|
|
Post by grashtel on Mar 6, 2010 8:19:49 GMT -4
You know, I can't even be sure what blackbriar1 was claiming. His posts were so vague and full of misunderstanding that all I could discern is that he thought something was fishy. It would be easier have a discussion if the posts more specific so replies could be less based on guesses of what he really meant. I think it boiled down to something along the lines of despite his spending whole minutes researching it he couldn't figure out how Apollo was done so it must have been faked.
|
|
|
Post by grashtel on Mar 4, 2010 21:34:48 GMT -4
I once read a CT who vermently believed that this sot of thing was a result of someone changing the timeline and that certain people could still remember glimpes of the old one. I think that this counts as further evidence that some people shouldn't be allowed to read science fiction (or possibly any fiction) because they can't tell the difference between it and reality. I'm pretty sure that something very much along those lines was used in a story I have read somewhere.
|
|
|
Post by grashtel on Feb 28, 2010 10:55:54 GMT -4
Regan National Airport has three runways, one that points at the Pentagon, one that points at the White House, and one that points at the US Capital Building. This makes any claims of any of those having "militarily secure airspace" or "formidable defenses" rather implausible.
|
|
|
Post by grashtel on Feb 19, 2010 10:15:03 GMT -4
I find it hard to believe some "automated system" at BAUT banned you for no good reason, with no warning. Were you quoting something with offensive language? Porphyry said that he was banned before his first post which would fit with an over eager spam/sockpuppet detection system triggering on something about him (username, email, IP, ect) and blocking his account. Which as BAUT does use such systems is plausible. Also the Contact Us form on BAUT until fairly recently wasn't set up properly (it was sending to a dead addy IIRC) so him saying that he tried to use it and didn't get a response is also plausible.
|
|
|
Post by grashtel on Feb 13, 2010 11:52:24 GMT -4
Of course he is confident about it, in Straydog02's mind Apollo being a fake is a FactTM and therefore any research supporting that position must also be true. Of course in the universe that the rest of us live in that line of reasoning doesn't actually work.
|
|