|
Post by Dead Hoosiers on Oct 25, 2008 15:50:53 GMT -4
|
|
|
Post by laurel on Oct 25, 2008 16:06:08 GMT -4
|
|
|
Post by frenat on Oct 25, 2008 16:29:33 GMT -4
No. Why should they have to? All they had to do was get to orbit, which we already know they can do, put on a spacesuit and open the freaking door.
|
|
|
Post by laurel on Oct 25, 2008 17:06:11 GMT -4
If China can hide 100 000 troops under New York City for years, I'm sure they could manage to fake some EVA video.
|
|
|
Post by PhantomWolf on Oct 25, 2008 18:40:45 GMT -4
No they didn't, and anyone that can't tell debris from a bubble need to get their eyes checked. (As for the "No stars" argument......)
|
|
|
Post by Apollo Gnomon on Oct 25, 2008 22:22:03 GMT -4
Besides, if China could hide 100k troops under NYC for years, wouldn't that be more likely to prove that they have the technology to actually do a spacewalk than not?
|
|
|
Post by archer17 on Oct 27, 2008 3:44:46 GMT -4
No, they didn't fake it, but their controlled media makes these kinda theads happen. Ever listen to CRI (China Radio International)? 'Nuff said.
|
|
|
Post by LunarOrbit on Oct 27, 2008 11:56:05 GMT -4
The media around the world often creates their stories in advance of the actual events and just leave certain details blank until they are known. Obituaries of well known people are written before they die... and sometimes they are accidentally published. Oops. This isn't "faking the news", it's "being prepared".
|
|
|
Post by JayUtah on Oct 27, 2008 14:27:57 GMT -4
Let's not forget the recently discovered speech written for Nixon, which he was to have given had Apollo 11 failed to lift off the lunar surface.
|
|
|
Post by laurel on Oct 27, 2008 16:03:51 GMT -4
|
|
|
Post by JayUtah on Oct 28, 2008 2:20:29 GMT -4
True, but the point is that it was written in advance and we agree that it was sensible to have done so. If you have reports written in advance to cover all of the likely outcomes, it's only a matter of time time before an inappropriate one is released accidentally. If the Nixon administration writes a speech in advance for a contingency, then it's just good thinking. If the Chinese news agency does the same thing, they're typical disinformationists. Granted the Nixon administration did a better job of handing the President the right sheet of paper, but let's not rush to judgment on the writing of the report itself, using a double standard.
|
|
|
Post by Kiwi on Oct 28, 2008 8:39:09 GMT -4
If you have reports written in advance to cover all of the likely outcomes, it's only a matter of time time before an inappropriate one is released accidentally. A good example is the famous photo taken on 3 November 1948 of U.S. President-elect Harry S. Truman with a great big grin on his face as he holds up a copy of the Chicago Daily Tribune which has the headline, "DEWEY DEFEATS TRUMAN".
|
|
|
Post by laurel on Oct 28, 2008 9:57:37 GMT -4
I like that photograph! In the 1999 Ontario election, I did volunteer work for a candidate who won by 58 votes, and I remember being amused by a newspaper article that said he had lost. This kind of thing happens when they're in a rush to report election results I guess.
|
|
|
Post by archer17 on Oct 30, 2008 0:22:16 GMT -4
True, but the point is that it was written in advance and we agree that it was sensible to have done so. If you have reports written in advance to cover all of the likely outcomes, it's only a matter of time time before an inappropriate one is released accidentally. If the Nixon administration writes a speech in advance for a contingency, then it's just good thinking. If the Chinese news agency does the same thing, they're typical disinformationists. Granted the Nixon administration did a better job of handing the President the right sheet of paper, but let's not rush to judgment on the writing of the report itself, using a double standard. Granted. But, to me it's the "premonitional" dialog that hurt them here IMO. While we had "speeches" in place for various scenarios I doubt they involved dialog between our astronauts and "ground control." That, to me is a significant difference. Am I wrong here?
|
|
|
Post by jaydeehess on Nov 18, 2008 19:37:22 GMT -4
So the flag 'waves' and is proof of it being in a turbulent water tank but the "bubbles" travel in straight lines indicating no turbulence. Typical conspiracy bunk that refuses to take all thing s into account.
I must say that I also like the comment that since the capsule does not rotate it must be a fake. Wow, blows the lid off of all those fake shuttle orbits as well then.
|
|