Off Topic Dark Matter and other Astronomy information.
- Thread starter BBFs Unpopular View
- Start date
-
Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
-
- Status
yeah the guys like that spiel, they always pitch the new project as being the dogs bollocks, then the bugs start appearing because the testing was half arsed and the project budget and time constraints kick in.
Don't you know, us IT people like to make it as coomplicated and problem prone as possible
[HASHTAG]#gottajustifyourexistence[/HASHTAG]
Shades of Eric Von Daniken then? That was a bandwagon I jumped on when I was 13 and naïve. I remember Horizon dismantling him page by embarrassing page - after I'd told all my schoolmates, teachers and family to watch on tv as my hero would 'prove' the existence of aliens throughout our history.
Been a cynic ever since.
That bloke and all that ancient aliens stuff is complete bollocks I am sure you'll agree.
The truth might be that there have been advanced civilisations (not with spaceships or computers as we know them) and their techniques have been lost due to cataclysmic events in earth's history. Take the stuff I mentioned earlier about closer planet orbits and electrical interactions between planets, they are enough to completely strip away every trace of a given civilisation, the few survivors hide in caves ect and come out and are essentially cave people again with all the advancement in knowledge lost forever and having to be relearned.
if such a thing happened today suddenly, we'd revert to same, cave people
Just on this one point - Experts in Oriental studies have claimed that no verifiable Chinese inscriptions or Ming wrecks have ever been found outside the known trade area from China to east Africa.Yeah I read the wiki and it's been called Pseudohistory
If you've read the book, he details the evidence which includes carvings on rock in places like Sacremento up one of it's rivers, the remains of Chinese junks or ships found also, aborigine accounts from god knows when about strange people that resemble Chinese of the time, Asian chickens in the US and Mexico as well as similar laquer work and many other things. I read the book some years ago so can't comment on the maps but I don't doubt the reaction from historians who have had their whole careers questioned.
Both of use said definately, but really, neither of us have any business of saying it.
Yes you're right we shouldn't say definitely when we don't know for certain. I will change my comment to 'highly unlikely' that Columbus used a Chinese map to get to America - he maintained all his life that he'd landed in Asia anyway, never acknowledging America!
Are these experts Oriental?
Menzies work ranges from inscriptions, maps, cartography, animals, fruits, laquer works, navigation and a whole other lot of stuff even genetic descendents. Like I said compelling reading even if not all correct."Verifyable" is an important word and in this case it is used in the negative towards Menzies work when it should be neutral, it could or could not disprove accepted history.
I could imagine historians when they read his claims tho..
You must log in or register to see images
and
You must log in or register to see images
EDIT The wrecks, Menzies is a seaman and navigator, they have been found where the chinese would have to had traveled during their journey, even if they are unconfirmed, that is interesting.
Last edited:
Must already have happened in Latchford, then
Sure looks like it
You must log in or register to see images
Sure looks like it
You must log in or register to see images
That must be the making of the ship canal. A few of your native Irish bit the dust digging that ****er
That must be the making of the ship canal. A few of your native Irish bit the dust digging that ****er
Show me an large building site where someone hasn't died
[HASHTAG]#dangerousjob[/HASHTAG]
It is interesting but from what I've read there's so many flaws, that what he claimed, could never have happened.
And I'm sure the accpted history is flawless..
because people agree on it
Do you remember being taught Columbus was a ****ing monster and was the father of the slave trade at school?
'Accepted' history isn't flawless, we all know the victors write the history!And I'm sure the accpted history is flawless..
because people agree on it
Do you remember being taught Columbus was a ****ing monster and was the father of the slave trade at school?
true that. I remember what I was taught in school, then I learnt the real history thereafter. State school taught history is mostly propaganda in every country in the world
School 'history' mostly presents you with a few peoples views on a few things - you start learning when you start questioning and challenging those views ... that is if you want to ............ You could say names, dates, places are important but you have to research to find out exactly what happened... and more importantly .... why!
............ You could say names, dates, places are important but you have to research to find out exactly what happened... and more importantly .... why!
I think it bounced three times.
Some of the findings are very interesting, especially the abundance of hydrocarbons, they will certainly not exist on a rock that formed from dust in space, it just is not possible. They require temperature and pressure as well as an organic source, ergo any comet with an abundance of hydroarbons would have to have come from a planet, most likely one obliterated or.. as speculated on, when the planets were in closer orbits they stripped massive amounts of material from each other through plasma interaction between bodies, both are a good explanations. One thing is clear, all comets and asteroids are not just lumps or rock or ice rock and those asumptions are pretty recent and entirely wrong.
The comets and asteroids are also electrical too, something recently accepted in the past couple of years which explains the reactions of them and that the tail of a comet is not actually made entirely of ice melting as it approaces a sun, one comet blew up to to a size bigger than jupiter, as it went past saturn. That event could only be electrical. NASA also tell us that there is an electrical circuit between saturn and it's moons.
Also, Saturn's rings have got to be held in place by electrical forces, othewise they would be all over the shop from every gravitational infleunce that has effected them over the millions of years, yet they settle back into that uniform tidy ring formation
There is much speculation that Venus was a comet that got caught by the solar system.
Lets get to the moon first eh before we start talking landing people on cometsNot looking to get into that whole fiasco, not something I am interested in though I will say this, anyone who travels through the 2 sometimes 3 radiation belts around the earth (twice - there and back) without any protection as well as the rest of the journey, will not live as long as those astronauts did. Any moon mission needs to have radiation shielding, and that is mainly why all of our missions even today are low orbit missions, and even there in lower orbit Astronauts still see flashing lights from particles penetrating their eyes, and that's with Earth's protective EM shielding. That type of shielding is too heavy for earth launched craft, today even, it would have to be brought up bit by bit and assembled in space, something not possible back then.
That's just imo btw but I do have valid reasons for having that opinion.
Van Allen called the conspiracy theories regarding radiation as 'preposterous'. Gemini XI spent more time in and around the Van Allen Allen belts than any of the Apollo missions. Bill Anders, a real particle physicist and radiation specialist who flew on Apollo VIII (unlike that ****ing charlatan Ralph Renee, who tried to pass himself off as a physicist in one farcical conspiracy-fest) estimates the 4-day journey (5.6 and 7 on later missions) exposed them to little more radiation than working a year in a nuclear power station.
Now this IS a problem when were talking a year, 18 months in deep space on the voyage to Mars, especially if journeys slingshot around the sun to gain speed. In fact, this is why Buzz aldrin, amongst others, suggests a one way ticket for the initial pioneers until shelters can be transported to Mars (constructed in space, as you suggest) and spacecraft themselves can be shielded. And it should be middle-aged people like myself (or those with appropriate skills anyway) making that trip.
Even then, as in the Apollo programme, a solar flare will kill people unshielded in its path. Nevertheless, these are better odds than our ancestors faced crossing oceans. Think how many Pacific islanders died populating those islands by crossing that vast ocean on flimsy little rafts. Humans must explore.
School 'history' mostly presents you with a few peoples views on a few things - you start learning when you start questioning and challenging those views ... that is if you want to
And yes I agree, history is important and that is why it is re written, the lessons of history are important.
That I was not aware of, the Gemini 11 mission that is. Just read their orbit as 1,370 km (highest ever orbit), the second Van Allen belt is from 1000 km to 60,000 km so they just ventured barely inside of it to be fair. I reckon that was for reasons of safety.
The belts can indeed be dangerous depending on circumstances as there can be intense radiation flux that can reach levels to do significant damage to human cells and DNA and the craft its self, newer satelites are even more prone to damage than the old ones due to smaller circuits being able to absorb smaller charges. This would be singificantly more exposure than working at a nuclear plant, but that is vague, are we talking a decades ago nuclear plant or a modern one, there is a difference, the former giving more exposure. This radiation is trapped within the belt and travels around the earth.
So I am not sure the Gemini mission is a good yard stick for how dangerous the belts are.
The presence of the high radiation fluxes in the Van Allen belts limits long duration manned missions to operation below about 1200 km altitude.
Then there is radiation all the way to the moon too once you venture outside of our magnetosphere. So, that's a lot of radiation for those astronauts with no apparent effects.
This is why I am "suspicious"
People can live a lie if they believe it is "for the good of the nation"
Last edited:
That I was not aware of, the Gemini 11 mission that is. Just read their orbit as 1,370 km (highest ever orbit), the second Van Allen belt is from 1000 km to 60,000 km so they just ventured barely inside of it to be fair. I reckon that was for reasons of safety.
The belts can indeed be dangerous depending on circumstances as there can be intense radiation flux that can reach levels to do significant damage to human cells and DNA and the craft its self, newer satelites are even more prone to damage than the old ones due to smaller circuits being able to absorb smaller charges. This would be singificantly more exposure than working at a nuclear plant, but that is vague, are we talking a decades ago nuclear plant or a modern one, there is a difference, the former giving more exposure. This radiation is trapped within the belt and travels around the earth.
So I am not sure the Gemini mission is a good yard stick for how dangerous the belts are.
The presence of the high radiation fluxes in the Van Allen belts limits long duration manned missions to operation below about 1200 km altitude.
Then there is radiation all the way to the moon too once you venture outside of our magnetosphere. So, that's a lot of radiation for those astronauts with no apparent effects.
This is why I am "suspicious"
Behave. The Apollo missions passed through @ 20,000mph and were through it in hours. Gem XI stayed there for days.
Faulty logic. You can endure low radiation levels for long periods and high radiation levels can damage DNA severely in an hour or less so that doesn't stack up mate.
As an analogy, you can stand next to a fire for a long time and be fine, step into the fire and it won't take long for you to burn to a crisp.
The 1200km distance orbit is an operational standard for safety, I'm not making that up
It's set at that limit because of radiation don't you know.
I think you need to behave.
Faulty logic. You can endure low radiation levels for long periods and high radiation levels can damage DNA severely in an hour or less so that doesn't stack up mate.
As an analogy, you can stand next to a fire for a long time and be fine, step into the fire and it won't take long for you to burn to a crisp.
The 1200km distance orbit is an operational standard for safety, I'm not making that up
It's set at that limit because of radiation don't you know.
I think you need to behave.
And Conrad and Gordon endured more radiation on Gem 11 than they did on Apollo12
- Status