wolfy 12 Posted July 4, 2014 Author Share Posted July 4, 2014 Monkeys Fist, on 04 Jul 2014 - 1:57 PM, said: http://m.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-lincolnshire-28153130 I'd like to see the video of this so I can rip it to bits. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Renton 22391 Posted July 4, 2014 Share Posted July 4, 2014 What did you think about the football and cannon ball, Renton? It was explained in the video, the ball was obviously very light and slowed by air resistance. On a planet with an atmosphere, air resistance is always a factor (but not in vacuum, as has been demonstrated many times). In the next experiment, a car fell at EXACTLY the same speed as a tyre, did you not get to that bit, and if so care to explain it? While we're here, out of interest can you name ANY evidence presented to you that would change your mind about your theory. Because from what I've seen here and on the other forum, you simply dismiss contrary evidence out of hand, every single time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Renton 22391 Posted July 4, 2014 Share Posted July 4, 2014 (edited) I'd like to see the video of this so I can rip it to bits.Well it's publicly available, but we know you will declare it fake. But, if you can, I'd just like you to take us through the process of how this appears on a local BBC website to brainwash us sheeple. Who orchestrates it? Are the children actors, perks, schills or sims? What technology is required for the hoax? What would happen to whistle blowers? What's to gain from it? Thanks in advance. Edited July 4, 2014 by Renton Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wolfy 12 Posted July 4, 2014 Author Share Posted July 4, 2014 It was explained in the video, the ball was obviously very light and slowed by air resistance. On a planet with an atmosphere, air resistance is always a factor (but not in vacuum, as has been demonstrated many times). In the next experiment, a car fell at EXACTLY the same speed as a tyre, did you not get to that bit, and if so care to explain it? While we're here, out of interest can you name ANY evidence presented to you that would change your mind about your theory. Because from what I've seen here and on the other forum, you simply dismiss contrary evidence out of hand, every single time. Yes the ball was slowed by air resistance. We are told that any two objects of the same shape no matter what their mass is, will fall at the same rate. It's obviously not true. The simple fact is, a more dense object against a similar less dense object will fall faster because the air resistance under it is more easily pushed around it. The heavier the objects, the higher drop is needed to properly see the result by eye alone. Denpressure is gravity, 100% as far as I'm concerned. One piece of evidence that would make me change my full view to mainstream view would be to watch a real space rocket launch. there are conditions to this. 1. I have to be able to inspect the rocket on the launch pad to make sure it's the real thing. 2. I have to be able to watch the astronauts get into the rocket with no visible means of getting out of it at launch. These alone would change my mind and accept I've been wrong. As an added bonus, I'd like to watch the rocket all the way into space with the special cameras they have, that they show us on TV, except I want to view it in real time from the off. This is not paramount but would fully nail it. What's my chances of doing this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkeys Fist 43580 Posted July 4, 2014 Share Posted July 4, 2014 Give NASA a call: 0800 LOONALERT. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkeys Fist 43580 Posted July 4, 2014 Share Posted July 4, 2014 What exactly would you be looking for on your pre-launch inspection then Wolfy? I did not know you were a rocket engineer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wolfy 12 Posted July 4, 2014 Author Share Posted July 4, 2014 Renton: I would preferably like to be stood as close as this to the rocket. This way I won't need any special clothing or ear plugs. Maybe I could grow my hair a little to deflect the noisy blast from this huge thunderbird rocket, complete with Virgil puppet inside. Once I see Virgil prance over to the rocket and jump inside , I will be convinced. These rockets are nothing compared the the NASA ones, are they? I mean, you have to stand about 10 mile away from those. These ones you can watch close up. Almost like watching farmer Giles plough his field in his little tractor. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5D26xtDrhTs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Renton 22391 Posted July 4, 2014 Share Posted July 4, 2014 Yes the ball was slowed by air resistance. We are told that any two objects of the same shape no matter what their mass is, will fall at the same rate. It's obviously not true. The simple fact is, a more dense object against a similar less dense object will fall faster because the air resistance under it is more easily pushed around it. The heavier the objects, the higher drop is needed to properly see the result by eye alone. Denpressure is gravity, 100% as far as I'm concerned. One piece of evidence that would make me change my full view to mainstream view would be to watch a real space rocket launch. there are conditions to this. 1. I have to be able to inspect the rocket on the launch pad to make sure it's the real thing. 2. I have to be able to watch the astronauts get into the rocket with no visible means of getting out of it at launch. These alone would change my mind and accept I've been wrong. As an added bonus, I'd like to watch the rocket all the way into space with the special cameras they have, that they show us on TV, except I want to view it in real time from the off. This is not paramount but would fully nail it. What's my chances of doing this? Who falls faster, one identical twin with a parachute or one without? For obvious security reasons you'll never get your wish, which is handy because it means you can keep your delusions. It's almost as if you don't want to face evidence that refutes your theory........ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wolfy 12 Posted July 4, 2014 Author Share Posted July 4, 2014 What exactly would you be looking for on your pre-launch inspection then Wolfy? I did not know you were a rocket engineer. Just that it looks legit and not just a small ballistic missile disguised as a space rocket and bigged up for TV. Then I'd look inside to see where the astronauts sit, see if it matches TV. You know, stuff like that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wolfy 12 Posted July 4, 2014 Author Share Posted July 4, 2014 (edited) Renton, on 04 Jul 2014 - 2:24 PM, said:Renton, on 04 Jul 2014 - 2:24 PM, said: Who falls faster, one identical twin with a parachute or one without? For obvious security reasons you'll never get your wish, which is handy because it means you can keep your delusions. It's almost as if you don't want to face evidence that refutes your theory........ For obvious security reasons? They let female reporters stand right near them in that video I posted. I feel sorry for the watchman in that little silver caravan next to the launch pad. You see, security clearance is the key with all of this stuff. We will never get to see any of it because it's shrouded in secrecy. the Russians just let any clown on. I think people looking at that video can clearly see how they are taking the piss out of the public. If not, then maybe one day they will see it, because this stuff just gets more ridiculous and in your face as time goes on. It's like they are taking turns in how they can do the most ridiculous things to laugh at us all, whilst we stand back in amazement. The parachute example you put out is not the issue. You stated that it does'nt matter about mass and you even tested a knife and tennis ball to prove it. that video tells you, it's not true. Edited July 4, 2014 by wolfy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevin Carr's Gloves 4067 Posted July 4, 2014 Share Posted July 4, 2014 For obvious security reasons? They let female reporters stand right near them in that video I posted. I feel sorry for the watchman in that little silver caravan next to the launch pad. You see, security clearance is the key with all of this stuff. We will never get to see any of it because it's shrouded in secrecy. the Russians just let any clown on. I think people looking at that video can clearly see how they are taking the piss out of the public. If not, then maybe one day they will see it, because this stuff just gets more ridiculous and in your face as time goes on. It's like they are taking turns in how they can do the most ridiculous things to laugh at us all, whilst we stand back in amazement. The parachute example you put out is not the issue. You stated that it does'nt matter about mass and you even tested a knife and tennis ball to prove it. that video tells you, it's not true. How far away from the rocket do you think she is then? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wolfy 12 Posted July 4, 2014 Author Share Posted July 4, 2014 How far away from the rocket do you think she is then? Not very far. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkeys Fist 43580 Posted July 4, 2014 Share Posted July 4, 2014 Not very far.Is that because the density of the flatmosphere hasn't blocked our view of the bottom of the rocket, or are you just guessing? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevin Carr's Gloves 4067 Posted July 4, 2014 Share Posted July 4, 2014 Not very far. Your maths is beyond shit. Go on have a look at everything else in the shot and try and estimate a distance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Meenzer 15836 Posted July 4, 2014 Share Posted July 4, 2014 I would say it's approximately 18 denmetres. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wolfy 12 Posted July 4, 2014 Author Share Posted July 4, 2014 (edited) Monkeys Fist, on 04 Jul 2014 - 2:51 PM, said:Monkeys Fist, on 04 Jul 2014 - 2:51 PM, said:Is that because the density of the flatmosphere hasn't blocked our view of the bottom of the rocket, or are you just guessing? Not quite. It's because she is stood near a green screen with the silly rocket video played on it. A little stage blower and some noise, then voila, job sorted for the masses to enjoy as being real. They are telling us to our faces that it's all a circus act and they are telling us we are all clowns for believing it. Edited July 4, 2014 by wolfy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wolfy 12 Posted July 4, 2014 Author Share Posted July 4, 2014 Your maths is beyond shit. Go on have a look at everything else in the shot and try and estimate a distance. I don't need to. We all know what green screen is, don't we? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevin Carr's Gloves 4067 Posted July 4, 2014 Share Posted July 4, 2014 I don't need to. We all know what green screen is, don't we? We all know what a wanker is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkeys Fist 43580 Posted July 4, 2014 Share Posted July 4, 2014 I would say it's approximately 18 denmetres.Pfft, you haven't taken into account refraction due to Sun crystals and the distorting effects of the negative colour spectrum. Amateurish. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wolfy 12 Posted July 4, 2014 Author Share Posted July 4, 2014 We all know what a wanker is. Well, yeah, I suppose most would know that, I'll give you that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkeys Fist 43580 Posted July 4, 2014 Share Posted July 4, 2014 Not quite. It's because she is stood near a green screen with the silly rocket video played on it. A little stage blower and some noise, then voila, job sorted for the masses to enjoy as being real. They are telling us to our faces that it's all a circus act and they are telling us we are all clowns for believing it. Discounting your mental health for a minute, if you were as close as she, would that be close enough for you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Meenzer 15836 Posted July 4, 2014 Share Posted July 4, 2014 Pfft, you haven't taken into account refraction due to Sun crystals and the distorting effects of the negative colour spectrum. Amateurish. 846 deninches then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Renton 22391 Posted July 4, 2014 Share Posted July 4, 2014 For obvious security reasons? They let female reporters stand right near them in that video I posted. I feel sorry for the watchman in that little silver caravan next to the launch pad. You see, security clearance is the key with all of this stuff. We will never get to see any of it because it's shrouded in secrecy. the Russians just let any clown on. I think people looking at that video can clearly see how they are taking the piss out of the public. If not, then maybe one day they will see it, because this stuff just gets more ridiculous and in your face as time goes on. It's like they are taking turns in how they can do the most ridiculous things to laugh at us all, whilst we stand back in amazement. The parachute example you put out is not the issue. You stated that it does'nt matter about mass and you even tested a knife and tennis ball to prove it. that video tells you, it's not true. Whatever, when you get a chance, check that BBC story out, and explain to me what it is, how 'they' got it published, and possible motives. There are literally thousands of video out there like it if you want to use a different example. It's getting a bit tired now you constantly evading questions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wolfy 12 Posted July 4, 2014 Author Share Posted July 4, 2014 Discounting your mental health for a minute, if you were as close as she, would that be close enough for you? Yep, that would be fine, as long as I had full camera view of it all and the supposed astronauts getting inside and taking off, it would be enough for me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Meenzer 15836 Posted July 4, 2014 Share Posted July 4, 2014 Yep, that would be fine, as long as I had full camera view of it all and the supposed astronauts getting inside and taking off, it would be enough for me. We should start a fundraising drive to make this happen. I hereby contribute 92,384 denpounds. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now