02 Feb 2020 19:00:01 Look, hsf. Firstly I want to apologise for a comment made below somewhere. "it's not like i was expecting to actually learn anything from hsf. ".
I am still bitter from a conversation with an 'engineer' that said my thoughts are worthless, for he has been trained. I am sure you understand why? (still no excuse)
This has however flowed into our conversation and turned me in to some what of a hypocrite and for that I am sorry. Although we may disagree on things, this does not subtract from the value of your opinion.
OK, now that's out there. By personal experience I mean have you learnt any of this first hand, through your own experiences or are you excepting what you are told? . I know with the above questions this would be hard, I was generalising really.
You remember when Ed ask if we wanted the Space/ Astro page? . I was as excited as you about space and the new missions and all the amazement they find. (planet size diamonds, a possible Dyson sphere, vampire stars etc etc) .
I have always struggled believing the Moon landings and Apollo missions, there was a lot of stuff I had seen that suggested the possibility of it being fake. Then Ed mention or rather posted a video by Bart Sibrel showing NASA and the Apollo astronauts faking being half way to the Moon. And this fake shot is the same as the picture of the Earth from the Moon. It was used in textbooks etc and its fake. Why fake it when you have been to the Moon? . You just wouldn't fake it.
NASA and other space agencies have launched countless equipment in to space to the outer planets that they could have used to take a full view picture of the Earth. But they haven't. They have photoshopped 2d data over a globe model and then make it look pretty. Why? .
Then we have the whole Van Allen belt problem, which NASA still hasn't figured out how to get a human past it. All except the Apollo crews, that is. Probably because 1960's bacofoil had some very peculiar properties, especially when it comes to deflecting solar radiation and comic rays.
I am not even sure we have got a craft of any sort past the VA belts if I am honest, so that put's everything in the 'space' category in to question. Things that reinforce this logic is when MS science women ( I forget her name) start putting out videos saying "the air around the Earth is millions of degrees hot, and that's fact".
I eave it at that for now as this, is turning out to be an essay and i don't want to delete it out of this tiny box, which I have done before.
P. S. Please don't think 1960's bacofoil has any special properties. This was sarcasm. :)
02 Feb 2020 12:16:49 I prefer to call it educating myself rather than being spoon fed. I didn't learn this at school or college, I took the time to research it all myself because I'm an enormous nerd at heart. I use a combination of my own logic and the evidence that's put in front of me to decide whether I think it's true or not. I don't just blindly follow whatever NASA or which ever governing body is in charge says.
I don't know what you mean by "personal experience". I can only assume it's a rhetorical or sarcastic question, as clearly I'm not an astronaut and I'm not old enough to have witnessed the creation of the universe, obviously.
Also I know nothing of Polonium 218, I did quickly look up what you were referring too, but didn't find anything to answer your question. I will have a look a bit later and see if I can come up with anything that might explain it.
02 Feb 2020 07:57:35 "10). Yes, Earth was more or less a molton ball of rock during its early stages, it took a billion or so years for it to cool down enough to form a crust over the mantle"
A very definitive answer, hsf. So can you explain why there are polonium 218 halos frozen inside of the granite? As polonium 218 isotopes only have a half life of 3 minutes. If granite took 'billions or so years for it to cool' they simple would not be there.
01 Feb 2020 18:07:01 I know nothing of lasers so I couldn't comment on that.
It's actually publicly available where the locations are. It's the landing sites for Apollo 11, 14 and 15. As well as Luna 17 and 21.
And the reason we can't do it from home, is because lasers that powerful are not available for commercial use. As I said earlier, I know nothing of lasers but I did find this reddit post from someone who worked on the APOLLO (observatory, not the rockets) project.
01 Feb 2020 17:33:34 At this point in time I am pretty sure you will only get conjecture as answers for all these questions.
They only thing that I can say is fact, is how they try to figure out where the water came from.
They use a deuterium/ hydrogen isotopic ratio. Water from comets have 3 times the ratio of Earths water, which is why they think it came from the asteroids which have a similar ratio to that of Earths.
Every theory for these questions would be so hard to prove or even disprove. Make's me think of that quote from Tesla.
01 Feb 2020 17:45:32 These are all fair questions Ed. Some of them likely don't have definitive answers as of yet.
1). The water would likely vapourise on impact yes, however Earths gravity would stop the gas phase water from leaving our planet and it would end up being stored in the atmosphere. Over millions of years the planet would be showered with intense rains, eventually forming oceans. Water can also be stored in the mantle on a molecular level, so not all of the it would be vapourised on impact, but instead forced into and absorbed by the mantle.
2). Supernova. During a stars life time it's core is fusing atoms to create new atoms, the older the star the heavier the atoms being fused. In the beginning, the stars will fuse atoms to create light elements such as hydrogen and helium, toward the stars end, it will be creating heavy elements such as Iron and Gold. When the stars core has "filled up" so to speak, it succumbs to it's gravity and goes supernova. This releases all of the fused atoms out into space at 99% the speed of light and creates giant nebulae that span light years across. It's within these nebulae that everything is formed. Stars, asteroids, planets, comets and moons.
3). Lots, that's the only way to put it. The standard model suggests that during the "proto" phase of the solar system, every single planet that formed was finding it's correct orbital path in relation to other planets. During this time the Oort cloud and Kuiper Belt were disturbed by huge gravitational forces like Jupiter and Neptune, this caused large volumes of comets to come inward towards the Sun. Using the Moon as evidence (based on crator impacts), it's thought that we were hit with thousands of comets in a few million years.
4). The comets stopped bombarding us once the orbital paths of the gas giants were settled. The best way to explain this is to show you a simulation of a solar system formation. This video is from the California Academy of Sciences, and shows how we believe solar systems are formed. youtube.com/watch?v=yXq1i3HlumA
5). Can be explained via the solar system formation simulation above.
6). Inside a Stars core. See #2
7). I've not looked into the Theia hypothesis too much, but I did read that it was thought to be an ocean world. So that could mean it formed in a Hydrogen and Oxygen rich area of a solar system. As those are the two atoms needed to make water. However, that would just be using my own logic as I haven't looked into it.
8). Yes, some of it would. The Earth used to have rings around it, much like Saturn did, and we still do have a very, very faint ring around us. This was caused by the collision between Earth and Theia, with large amounts of rock, ice and mantle being ejected into space, then coalescing in our orbit due to gravity and forming the Moon. Which by the way has large deposits of water ice, as well as an iron core. Samples of Moon rock taken from the Moon showed that the composition of the Moon is almost identical to Earth, which means it must have been a part of Earth at some point.
9). Large amounts of it would have been vaporised. But it's an enormous body of water that's bound to a rocky planet estimated to be between Mars and Venus in size. Comets are an example of water making it through the atmosphere and they are much smaller in size.
10). Yes, Earth was more or less a molton ball of rock during its early stages, it took a billion or so years for it to cool down enough to form a crust over the mantle. Funnily enough, it's thought that the first moment life could appear on the planet, it did. Which bodes well for people who believe we're not alone in the universe.
11). Yes, but Theia was obliterated on impact and Earth is a bigger volume of mass, so has stronger gravity.
12). I'm not sure if I'm understanding the question properly, is this a follow on question to #11? If so, then it being obliterated would explain why it couldn't hold it's water.
01 Feb 2020 16:24:56 Yes. Because we have mirrors up there that we bounce lasers off, so we can accurately measure the distance between the Earth and the Moon. These were planted into the Moon on the very first Moon landing.
01 Feb 2020 15:49:18 Kuiper Belt and Oort cloud are the most likely candidates. The most widely used and believed theory is that it all came from comet impacts, there is a lot of evidence to suggest this. It's not conclusive and it's something that they've been trying to get a definitive answer for quite a while now.
There is also another theory that was gathering pace a few months ago, that suggested our planet got it's water from a major collision with another planet. That planet being the hypothetical "Theia" which smashed into us a few billion years ago. This collision is also widely believed to be the reason our moon formed too.
30 Jan 2020 23:00:08 Haha. I am surprised I haven't heard of that.
As I have said before, I have dabbled in astro-photography and even tough I still don't know what I am looking at, I still amaze in its wonder.
This is a link to someone I know that compiled a 400 hour exposure. I can go into the actual specs but they aren't needed. Basically if you print this to actual size it would be 8 metres tall.
Wide view of Orion: (or the Firmament in all its glory?)
30 Jan 2020 21:31:32 I just watched the documentary 'Missing 411' and I can't imagine what these families are going through.
Its one thing that a nation park wouldn't keep any sort of record on people that go missing within its boundaries and then want to charge over $1,000,000 to release the files, they don't have? . But for the FBI not to consider that a child that has gone missing under these circumstances, would not be linked to any sort of criminal activity is quite frankly shocking! .
30 Jan 2020 21:39:53 My brother, who calls me a 'Unicorn hunter', saw some of hangman1128's videos and said "they really do actually look like trees! ".
It's amazing how people (myself included) cannot see what is right in front of their eyes, because they aren't looking for it.
30 Jan 2020 08:42:05 Yeah the 'mud flood' videos you posted are quite compelling. Think you got me on to the channel 'Wise Up' on YT? . His videos made a lot of sense and it does look like solidified mud/ ash (forming a type of concrete) covering buildings etc.
Its trying to get this one into perspective that's difficult. I think I am right in saying that every religion has it's own version of a 'Great Flood'? . And this would all tie in with the 'petrified giant tree' theory (which has made me see nothing but trees every time I look at a mountain, now, if I'm honest) .
Then we have the 'petrified Titans' and the very thorough research done by the channel you refer to on a particular mountain. The fact these people/ channels show you why they think what they do, rather than telling what is so. To me, makes it all the more convincing. It's just such a mind blowing topic.
30 Jan 2020 00:00:31 How hard would it be to change the history of a nation?
In today's age, I would say quite hard what, with social media, the internet and general connectivity to everything.
50-100 years ago is a whole, other matter and the further you go back, even easier to achieve. It does make you think. Well, at least it does, me. It was different back then.
Sadly, the Fomenko books are not something you can read in 20-30min sections. It needs large chunks of time to digest/ study/ research, to understand on the level that I like to understand. Hopefully I can do that soon. It does all seem linked to a few of your recent post with tartarian/ tartary history which appears to be unwanted parts that don't comply with the MSBS.
30 Jan 2020 00:02:29 Not seen the 1962 footage before, is that for real? . haha did the guy who was supposed to be the 'face on the moon', forget to come to work that day?
26 Jan 2020 16:19:13 Maybe edit that to say Batman instead then, Ed? . Although I was only stating a fact unlike Pope who was predicting the inevitable.
This is why I was (or rather wasn't) saying what I did on another post on here the other day.
26 Jan 2020 09:20:30 Strangely enough I only found out about 'The Crown' of 'The City of London', last week whilst researching Fomenko related 'history'.
25 Jan 2020 21:55:24 It's still below that magic barrier that only 60's tech can get through, Ed. The James Webb telescope is ( I think) supposed to be set in an Earth orbit of 1-1.5 million miles. So a Moon, Earth picture is possible. Maybe their CGI department aren't convincing enough, which is what's causing the delay.
JWT and Artemis are, as I have said before, going to be intriguing.
25 Jan 2020 21:24:23 I haven't listened to the post above this. I will try to later (probably fall asleep to it) .
These are the same "proofs" used for flat earth. I haven't seen any counter arguments disproving these experiments, yet. Are there any? .
They (the experiments) seem to prove no Earth movement. This still has no preference towards a flat or globe Earth. I still struggle with Airey's failure. I understand what is being said, it's not something I know about so thinking and visualising multiple elements at once, for me, takes time for me to make an opinion, so I know it isn't a parrot-effect.
The problem for me, is that everyone seems to ignore (but still use as proof for a globe) is all the NASA photoshop Earth pictures. I mean build a camera/ satellite/ (balloon? ) specifically for that purpose, a full view of the amazing planet, Earth. I just can't understand why they haven't. unless there is some sort of barrier/ waters/ radiation that is preventing it.
Southern Monkey · 02 Feb 2020 20:25
