Jump to content

Doctor What

  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Doctor What

  1. Your appealing to incredulity and failure to reply properly is so telling. It is good indication of responses to be received about idiotic videos claiming wires. Pathetic ad hominem. I have not any NASA innocence, I am not afflicted with all junk that you immerse yourself with. If you post any video I will have seen it already - it is all copy paste between youtube kooks. But I will watch it and answer for sure. problems are you have already shown you are not a reasonable person - you are afraid to be wrong. This is a crock of shit. The fabrics woven into the suit make them incredibly tough. The ways astronauts moved on the moon are most easiest, friction is lower with inertia the same. None of the astronauts were goofing. But always you people complain about no jumping up and here you are saying too much. THIS is pathetic. It is all clear and transparent to all who spend time away from idiots on youtube. If you took same times to study the things you don't know, all would be clearer. Is it not amazing that all smart and academic people have no problem with these, but strangely conspiracy theorists are so easily fooled. The fantasies are held up by people of your type who are not able to admit errors or listen to their crazy theories explained. It is nothing like this and please do not suggest you have reason and objective analysis. No-one who believes flat earth, no space, no iss, fake apollo has any of those skills. The opposite. Edit: Thank you for "ignoring me" as you said, I prefer if you did, your replies are not clever.
  2. Of course there are no harnesses and wires. I think people who think ISS is faked are very clueless. You are not even aware of this crazy circular logic. Oh yes you do. To whom is this for, because you are not ignoring me. A truly dumb statement of course. No, folds in folded shirts, like when taken from new packaging after buying, In weightless there is not gravity to pull down and stretch fabrics. It's strange how useless youtube videos make you their servant and simple explanations pass over your head. Perhaps if you are so sure you can post some examples and I can laugh at your failures.
  3. Yes, this correct. What you are forgetting is diffusion from atmosphere making pin point looking circular. Summary of your claim is because your eye sees a dot it must be a circle dot. That is just silly. zoom of stellarium shows it properly. Have you a problem admitting errors? The referencing for binoculars and telescope is assuming you zoom in just like with the binoculars and telescope. It is very obvious.
  4. Thanks to you for sharing such insightful observation. Stellarium shows only the generics layout for overall sky. If you go into zoom mode, it shows up the phases - I have found a video for showing this at 4 minutes: Daytime astronomy: imaging Mercury and Venus - YouTube
  5. Of course there aren't and no doubt also that you turn a blind eye to any simple explanation and refutes! You really have not a clue about this do you ? Girls put hair gel to stop their hair trailing in the eyes. Four minutes 20 seconds shows what happens with hair smacking in to her face: What weightlessness feels like on Zero-G planes - YouTube You believe the words of fools on youtube and ignore the words of people who show this. Some issues arise with pointy clothes caused by folds, no ironing board and t-shirts worn straight from folded package. What is a rupertism? If it is somebody trying to explain easy things to a person, then correct. You can lead a horse to water, but find a person with crazy views and they die of thirst.
  6. This is a joke right? Your base for your claim is a software print - it is ridiculous.
  7. No, please don't play games, do me a favour and post any image of Mercury please to support your post. I challenge you to do this.
  8. Yes, you deliberately choose context to make it sound like they doubt first missions. Context proven wrong by many references saying this was not the case. You are so typical of conspiracy claimer, it becomes this search for plays on words rather than provide clear evidence. And don't be such a horse's rearend, when you yourself have been led to water with good explanations for your rubbish and choosing not to accept such obvious replies! And of course the crazy continues. There isn't any videos with this obvious harness and hair gel for stopping hair going in their eyes. Why is it always the very uninformed people who flag up such useless things.
  9. I laugh at the man who says this after he posts such honk about Klingons and Hitler. It is accurate except one thing, Of course I made daft mistake and people are allowed to make mistakes yes? The part for dividing 64 with 1.4 is of course wrong because angular distance is not linear. Better would be to put distance to the Sun and work out with right angled triangle. Thank heavens for wikipedia this time!
  10. With all people of bad understanding, never will they admit their errors.
  11. No, that is looks like Stellarium - it is a representation. This Week, Catch a Rare Glimpse of Mercury in the Night Sky | Gearfuse Starting 6/30 (Thursday) you can actually see the planet Mercury with the naked eye. This coming week is the best time to check out the elusive Mercury, since most nights it’s extremely difficult to see. Spotting Mercury will take a bit of looking, however. The best way to catch a glimpse of the planet is to spot the two stars nearby, Castor and Pollux. Mercury should appear on the horizon right after sunset, since it’s just completed it’s “morning sky” orbit. If you’re having trouble, try using a telescope or binoculars to scan the west-northwestern horizon. Mercury will appear to be a bright “star” that has a slightly yellowish-orange tint. Though this Thursday will be the best time to see Mercury, you’ll be able to check out our neighboring planet until around July 13th, when it’ll become too dim to see with the naked eye. I can agree that you are talking bollox. Problem is not Mercury but is your failing to understand simple geometry. You are realising of course that this picture is not at correct scale? Five question marks demands proper answer. Sun has width of 1.4 million kilometres and is one half of one degree angular diameter. Mercury is 64 million kilometres of distance from the Sun. When Mercury is sideways on to our views it is 64 divided by 1.4 to give angular distance. This is 45 degrees. It is very obvious now how it is able to be seen.
  12. Wowie, a quote with wrong context - this is very impressive just as your two light sources with one shadow. Also from video: "2024 Return to the Moon" "We're trying very hard to do something we did 50 years ago". From page: Elon Musk: I think Apollo 11 was one of the most inspiring things in all of human history. Arguably the most inspiring thing. And one of the most universally good things in history. The level of inspiration that provided to the people of Earth was incredible. And it certainly inspired me. I’m not sure SpaceX would exist if not for Apollo 11.
  13. Some more of Tesla quotes - This metal, it would seem, has an origin entirely different from that of the rest of the globe. .... It is a well-known fact that the interior portions of the globe are very hot, the temperature rising, as observations show, with the approach to the center at the rate of approximately 1 degree C. for every hundred feet of depth. The difficulties of sinking shafts and placing boilers at depths of, say, twelve thousand feet, corresponding to an increase in temperature of about 120 degrees C., are not insuperable, and we could certainly avail ourselves in this way of the internal heat of the globe. ... By realizing such a plan, we should be enabled to get at any point of the globe a continuous supply of energy, day and night ... The observation of this wonderful phenomenon impressed me strongly that communication at any distance could be easily effected by its means, provided that apparatus could be perfected capable of producing an electric or magnetic change of state, however small, in the terrestrial globe or environing medium. It is very difficult for doing this. I tried to do this and have only got two together: Cars Toons: Mater’s Tall Tales - Moon Mater - Official Disney Junior UK HD - YouTube Enjoy.
  14. Being There (1979) -- Bloopers - YouTube
  15. Empire of the Sun - Cadillac of the Sky - YouTube
  16. Poor example. Many here are not happy to wear masks. With your simplistical system you say they all must wear masks or go to imaginary place where the mobile phones are not voting, or what? What is alternative? As system is now but without bastards pulling strings and kind people work to hold together. Now I must go out and make some daisy chains and sing ommmm - because this all will never happen. Edit: Many here think also that 4g and 5g are not good for people's conscious. How will this work for mobile phones? Should all vote on mobile phones to remove 4g and 5g then tough luck to 49.9 losers? Sucks.
  17. Who controls the police? If it is not counted correctly who controls complaints? I noticed you bypassing 50.1% controlling 49.9% - this still sucks.
  18. Supposing reality is fully reset. Now, who will be counting the votes? And who makes the person put on the mask? And what is his penalty if he refuses? Who organises this? Who controls the media to have fairness? Who checks on the people from the answers to the questions? Your solution says democracy. It says that 50.1% tell 49.9% their duty. That sucks.
  19. You are defending poor claims - so yes, waste of time. That is untrue statement in regards for my post. This is not true, the proof in the video does this and the arguments are it proves you wrong. It is neither of these for me to supply evidence to refute your poor observations. These observations are not even your own. Giving you evidences of your claim being wrong is not bait and it is verystrange from you. It is also very strange how you make claims of wrong shadows and have no explanation for your claims. I have given you all explanations and the picture in my post shows even more the effect of slopes on surfaces. It is very telling that you are not admitting the clear obvious.
  20. This suits me. Your rants are noise for the viewers - examples not provided as expected.
  21. Of course you will never supply examples for your hot air rant. Ad hominem arguing is the lowest form of rant. You pointed out a failure of logic. On two options: Option 1 is claimed no explosives were looked for. Option 2 is none were found. Option 1 is involving instruction for investigators to avoid to look for them, even though as shown by @Eldnah, possibly explosive on jets can be used. Now we need people to be deceptive in covering up findings. Option 2 has no problems. NIST paper advises such search was carried out, so your "neutral" choice makes the authors as liars.
  • Create New...