NASA DUMB or NASA FRAUD?

Maybe, and it's a useless gesture to bet what will happen in the future when niether of us are still living, but I am convinced that in 200 years the majority of what is accepted as scientific fact will be the subject of ridicule just like most of what ao called scientists thought 200 years ago is now. What you've said essentially is that ideas postulated since 1940 have escaped exposure as false simply because there isn't sufficient knowledge gained in 69 years to disprove what was postulated 69 years ago. This does not mean that the world of scientific inquirey has advanced to the point where it is infalible.

Remember, at one time most of the world believed the world was flat and it was people just like me that insisted it wasn't. You can think of what I go through on science forums as a modern day inquisition, the religion being mainstream science. And make no mistake, mainstream science is a faith based religion that's main objective is denial of a creator and intelligent design. To me that is the most illogical of mainstream scientific faith based assunptions.


Well, the flat-earth story is a myth. There was never a time in which whatever passed closest to the scientific establishment believed it so. The ancient Greeks figured out a round Earth and even measured the diameter. By the time of Columbus, of course -- well, let's just say Columbus got his math wrong and if there hadn't been The Americas in the way he and his crew would have perished -- exactly as the Sicilian Court and every other educated person predicted.

Actually, though, as Isaac Asimov points out in a (as usual) delightful essay, a theory of a flat Earth is not actually wrong. If you are building a house or leveling a road, you use exactly that assumption. It requires either a larger area, or a need for increased accuracy, before you need to move from the plane. For instance, a survey of the plot this building rests on does not need to account for curvature. A shot I make with a rifle does not need to account for curvature. Even a street map of my entire town does not need to account for curvature. But a survey-level map of the town would, as would gunnery that extended similar distances (say, naval guns firing at a target five miles inland).

The theory of a flat Earth is, then, correct for certain tasks. It is also provable within the error of measurement; until you get out on open water, the effects of local terrain swamp the gentle curvature of the Earth. So it isn't wrong, per se; it is incomplete. And it is wrong out of domain; a flat Earth doesn't work AT ALL for most astronomy.

(Asimov also points out that "round Earth" is in itself a simplification; close enough for most tasks, like charting a great circle route for an airliner, but inaccurate enough to cause problems with something requiring a finer calculation, such as the GPS network. As he puts it, the round-Earth theory is ALSO not wrong, but it is ALSO incomplete.)


And this is how I think the next advance in physics will be. I think the history of physics, by the way, is too short and too wrapped up with the history of Renaissance-Enlightenment-Industrial Revolution to allow any sort of prediction or graphing. I don't think you can say "It will be 'n' number of years between major advances in physics."

In any case, whatever it is will do three things;

A) It will achieve a higher level of accuracy in modeling. Where it will show up in experiments already performed is in the border of what is currently seen as noise. New experiments will have to be devised with higher levels of accuracy to test the new theory.

B) It will connect theories currently un-connected; it will show some underlying and general principle beneath other principles we already understand.

C) It will describe an entire domain we have not previously described.

What it is unlikely to do is show that, say, Ideal Gas Law, or Wein's Law, is wrong; it will merely show them as incomplete; that outside of the domain in which we have been using those laws and holding up their results to reality for hundreds of years, behavior of real systems diverge from those earlier approximations.

Nomuse, how the hell do you have the time to write so many words that nobody reads and even fewer care about? I read what you said out the same type of curiousity that makes people look at a car accident or a plane crash, and out of a sense of guilt knowing no one else would read it and the fact that I inspired you to take the time to respond. I used the flat Earth and the inquisition as a simile [or is it metaphor, I always get those two confused!] for my own plight', I know you are aware of that terminology and it's meaning.

Blah blah blah

People can see what there is and make up their own minds without the help of professional shills.

I might ask you the same. I know you are well aware that the majority of people who read your posts, including essential all of your supporters, can't follow or don't bother making the effort. You supporters are merely attracted to the central emotional ideas; you would have exactly as much support from them if you said "NASA stinks!" and made no attempt to justify it.

Oddly enough, it appears that your best and most careful readers are those who disagree with you! People like me; who make an effort to understand what you say, and who follow your references and check your work.

I hadn't realized I had 'supporters' here, maybe people who agree but supporters would emply I'm in some sort of contest or game here, and I'm not.
I try to write in a way that the average intellect can understand, because lets face it, most of the readers here won't understand complex calculations and scientific jargon anyway. This isn't a science oriented forum, it's a cospiracy forum, and my posts here are oriented towards conspiracy as it should be.
My goal has always been two fold, to learn what I could and to teach what I have learned to others in the most effective way possible, because what's the point in boring the readers or talking over thier heads using an expansive vocabulary ?
I am aware that you read my posts and answer them carefully and thoughtfully, and I show my appreciation by reciprocating and doing the same. My question was not meant to be rhetorical , I was sincerily curious about how you found the time. Hell, I can type 80 words a minute after I get a pot of coffee in me, but you produce alot more volume than I could ever in the same amount of time. Sometimes I think there's more than one of you, truthfully.
while our interactions here have not always been cordial, I would like to believe I have earned your respect, if for no other reason than my dogged tenacity when it comes to standing up for what I believe and maintaining my position steadfastly, even when it means I know it will result in ridicule and open contempt. NASA is a federal government agency attached to the taxpayers teat, and it is worthy of our most inquisitive scrutiny possible. I for one believe space exploration is an inspiration for scientific advancement, and if for no other reason than that it is worth the cost and the risk. I am simply not convinced that a government agency that is closely tied into the military industrial complex can be trusted to tell the truth, especially when billions of dollars are at stake. My experience is that when money is involved, truth becomes a secondary concern.
If NASA really landed men on the moon, it will eventually be proved , and if the opposite is true that will also be revealed. Soon , other countries will land on the moon and map it's surface from orbit with high resolution photography like has already been done on Earth, and if the evidence is there it will be found. I am firmly convinced that the moonlandings were a fraud perpetrated on the world and that Russia and the United States were actting in concert during the cold war to further an agenda that is representative of a conspiracy so large that the average man is incapable of believing it could be possible. You have to throw soveriegnty and patriotism to the wind to understand. There is no real national soverienty , it is an illusion. Just as the current economic collapse was part of the plan, the moonlanding fraud had an integral and important part to play in it too. I believe the goal was to make every human on the planet view it as a human accomplishment by representatives of the human race in an effort to unite them withen the collective human conscience and open the door for the new world order planetary government. Armstrong's did not say that's one giant leap for the united states when he stepped off the ladder, he said that's one giant leap for mankind.

Nomuse, how the hell do you have the time to write so many words that nobody reads and even fewer care about? I read what you said out the same type of curiousity that makes people look at a car accident or a plane crash, and out of a sense of guilt knowing no one else would read it and the fact that I inspired you to take the time to respond. I used the flat Earth and the inquisition as a simile [or is it metaphor, I always get those two confused!] for my own plight', I know you are aware of that terminology and it's meaning.

... IDW, your weasely, smarmy, insulting reply points out your approach perfectly.

Well done, both of you!

If you agree with my thesis that the whole space program is riddled with lies, IDW, why do you talk over my head?

I don't get where you're going.

"Effectiveness" of data-mining to bring Truth to the negotiating table?

Of course! Technically none of this information can ever be used in court. I know this.

But I also know the American people WOULD LIKE TO KNOW WHETHER they're being told the true story or not.

And SOMEBODY's got to tell the people that NASA is lying to them.

Would you prefer I remain silent????

Would it be better if the Media BULLSHIT coming from NASA is all and everything that people can GET?

Would THAT be better?

I was pointing out the obvious, if you don't like it , it's probably because I did an effective job of it and I thank you for the compliment made the only way you know how to, by doing the same thing you claim I did, only using sarcasm.
To people intent on covering up the truth, there is no honor by defintion

The point is that your own contentions that NASA has modified the images proves that your methodology is basically flawed. If they can do it so can you, if you see what I mean. Digital photography is just as useless as evidence as us computer generated graphics like the CIA used after the TWA fligh 800 downing. Digirtal photography is only a represntation of reality that can easily be manipulated, as you have pointed out yourself with some effectivenees

The point is that your own contentions that NASA has modified the images proves that your methodology is basically flawed. If they can do it so can you, if you see what I mean. Digital photography is just as useless as evidence as us computer generated graphics like the CIA used after the TWA fligh 800 downing. Digirtal photography is only a represntation of reality that can easily be manipulated, as you have pointed out yourself with some effectivenees

So, what then will convince the American public they're being lied to and taken for suckers by NASA?

Or shall we all just genuflect to the Liars anyway?

Shall we TEACH OUR CHILDREN NASA's lies?

Shall we accept the condescending interpretations of our misled scientists?

Shall we pay the taxes to support an open space program, or shall we subsidize illegal drugs and numbers games, to support the covert black ops programs?

What is the logical and reasonable path to follow here?

So, what then will convince the American public they're being lied to and taken for suckers by NASA?

Or shall we all just genuflect to the Liars anyway?

Shall we TEACH OUR CHILDREN NASA's lies?

Shall we accept the condescending interpretations of our misled scientists?

Shall we pay the taxes to support an open space program, or shall we subsidize illegal drugs and numbers games, to support the covert black ops programs?

What is the logical and reasonable path to follow here?

Nomuse, if you are still here go over to this thread and comment if you have time:
[link to www.godlikeproductions.com]

How about that QUOTE from Neil Armstrong (I think) at the commencement speech recently? He referred to a veil of secrecy NEEDING to be lifted? Someone help me out please. You know what I'm talking about it was VERY telling! The man had tears of shame on his face.

Nomuse, if you are still here go over to this thread and comment if you have time:
[link to www.godlikeproductions.com]



Err, no thanks. I don't get involved in sunspot threads.

Come on, the astronaut who DIDN"T want to have any part of the 40 year anniversary? I think he's the same guy that said for" future progress to be made a layer of truth must be reveled"? COME ON. He basically said "We have a big secret"! Someone has that clip....from the commencement speech at an Ivy League collage? We never went there!

It's not just a sunspot thread, Nomuse. There's more there than just an observation of no sunspots.

Or maybe the problem is you aren't making a good argument for your cause.

Think on this; when you see a badly xeroxed flyer tacked to a telephone pole, and the writing on it is scribbled, almost illegible, and what you can read is rambling and so badly spelled you can't make out what they are trying to say, it is YOUR fault you aren't getting the message?

All you are doing, Emily, is posting and re-posting a collection of images you ran through some filters -- intersparsed with insulting everyone who took those pictures in the first place, and anyone who doesn't instantly agree with you.

You haven't even made an effort to clarify what it is you are saying. You won't make simple, clear statements. You won't add as much as an arrow to your processed images. And you blame other people for not following you?

They can't even understand what you are trying to say, BECAUSE YOU SAY IT SO BADLY.

If your work is important, than it is worth doing the work to bring it to an audience. Learn how to present your case. Learn how to handle counter-arguments.

Come on, the astronaut who DIDN"T want to have any part of the 40 year anniversary? I think he's the same guy that said for" future progress to be made a layer of truth must be reveled"? COME ON. He basically said "We have a big secret"! Someone has that clip....from the commencement speech at an Ivy League collage? We never went there!

You're leaping blind across the grand canyon to conclusions. He could've meant almost anything

Come on, the astronaut who DIDN"T want to have any part of the 40 year anniversary? I think he's the same guy that said for" future progress to be made a layer of truth must be reveled"? COME ON. He basically said "We have a big secret"! Someone has that clip....from the commencement speech at an Ivy League collage? We never went there!

You're leaping blind accross the grand canyon to conclusions. He couldve meant almost anything

When I think about the statement it sounds like he meant science had stumblingblocks intentionally placed in the way of progress. Maybe he was talking about the idiot savant Einstein who is portrayed as a genius. Sounds like it

So sorry!

What I'm saying is, NASA is altering their photos to conceal details.

Okay?

Those details they're concealing compromise LIFE ON OTHER PLANETS -- ESPECIALLY HUMAN LIFE.

Can YOU UNDERSTAND THAT CLEARLY?

Good!

Now, BELIEVE ME OR NOT! That's what I have to say!

No, it's "White sun" crap. I was very, very slightly intrigued -- until I hit the "Flash frozen mammoths" quote. That's not a real thing. It's a bit of creotard stupidity, picked up by some people on the fringes of the global warming "debate." No...no wave of sudden cold ever froze a mammoth, or any other creature, solid in its tracks.

Simply put, the mammoth fell into a half-frozen lake, or a ravine, died and was buried and frozen in a more-or-less upright position. As for the fragments of vegetation still found "in its mouth," sure; that was it's last meal, or perhaps the last several meals still sticking to its teeth. I ask you, have you ever seen a mammoth with a toothbrush?