A Space & astronomy forum. SpaceBanter.com

Go Back   Home » SpaceBanter.com forum » Others » Misc
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Hagar still willingly bending over to let NASA do it to him



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old December 8th 17, 04:03 AM posted to alt.astronomy
palsing[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,068
Default Hagar still willingly bending over to let NASA do it to him

On Thursday, December 7, 2017 at 4:57:35 PM UTC-8, Bast wrote:

Of course a signal from a satellite will keep requiring re-aiming, where the
moon farther away would not appear to move quickly from your reference point
on earth.


Just how quickly do you think the moon travels across the sky? A lot faster than you think... since the Earth rotates through 4 degrees per minute, and the moon is only about 1/2 degree across, it takes the moon about 2 minutes to move its own diameter in the sky... so someone pointing an antenna at it would have to re-adjust that antenna quite often.

Man went to the moon, that has been accepted as fact across the whole world for more than 50 years now. I saw it live on TV, along with everyone else. Many have tried to disprove this, and all have failed, every question has been answered. If you say otherwise, that would be an extraordinary claim, and the burden of proof would be on *you*. The video you offer is laughable.. Got any 'real' proof? I didn't think so...
  #12  
Old December 8th 17, 02:41 PM posted to alt.astronomy
Bast[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,917
Default Hagar still willingly bending over to let NASA do it to him



palsing wrote:
On Thursday, December 7, 2017 at 4:57:35 PM UTC-8, Bast wrote:

Of course a signal from a satellite will keep requiring re-aiming,
where the moon farther away would not appear to move quickly from your
reference point on earth.


Just how quickly do you think the moon travels across the sky? A lot
faster than you think... since the Earth rotates through 4 degrees per
minute, and the moon is only about 1/2 degree across, it takes the moon
about 2 minutes to move its own diameter in the sky... so someone
pointing an antenna at it would have to re-adjust that antenna quite
often.

Man went to the moon, that has been accepted as fact across the whole
world for more than 50 years now. I saw it live on TV, along with
everyone else. Many have tried to disprove this, and all have failed,
every question has been answered. If you say otherwise, that would be
an extraordinary claim, and the burden of proof would be on *you*. The
video you offer is laughable. Got any 'real' proof? I didn't think
so...




I saw it "live" on TV too,......but I was a child who didn't know any
better.

ALTHOUGH,....even back then I wondered why the ASTRO-NOTS looked like see
through ghosts, when the regular TV shows always showed solid people.

ALSO,......while I thought it was kind of cool that the ships manuvering in
space always moved in jerky motions.
e.g. they would be sitting still,....suddenly just move in some direction,
and stop dead again.
....Even as a kid I realized that the mass and momentum of objects on earth
would cause them to start moving slowly and build in speed.
Then have to slow down before they stopped.
As you would expect in real life.
Even with massive engines the Saturn boosters sat there for a few seconds
when they were lit, and then the ship started moving slowly and then gained
speed.

Of course many years later we have robotics that are controlled by geared
microcontrolled DC stepper motors that do operate with the same "jerky"
motions" I saw with Apollo spacraft maneuvers in space.
.....But what were the stepper motors back then connected to, out in space
???


I've just offered you the proof of the fakery,.....now it's up to you to
explain the stepper motor spacecraft.




And what idiot would use a telephoto severely focused antenna to pick up
radio signals ?

Have you ever seen a radio dish antenna that professional astonomers use ?
They are massive, and can pick up signals from a wide arc.
Unless they have to be severely focused to pick up a very specific signal
from a satellite near earth....perhaps 200 miles away.


The NASA "science" is falling apart.
Just like the global warming science.
And just like the Democratic party science.


Just like J.R being shot,.....it turns out it was all dream, that was
performed by actors, from scripts, on theater stages.







  #13  
Old December 8th 17, 05:47 PM posted to alt.astronomy
Sarah Ehrett
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 119
Default Hagar still willingly bending over to let NASA do it to him

On Thu, 7 Dec 2017 19:03:48 -0800 (PST), palsing
wrote:

On Thursday, December 7, 2017 at 4:57:35 PM UTC-8, Bast wrote:

Of course a signal from a satellite will keep requiring re-aiming, where the
moon farther away would not appear to move quickly from your reference point
on earth.


Just how quickly do you think the moon travels across the sky? A lot faster than you think... since the Earth rotates through 4 degrees per minute, and the moon is only about 1/2 degree across, it takes the moon about 2 minutes to move its own diameter in the sky... so someone pointing an antenna at it would have to re-adjust that antenna quite often.

Man went to the moon, that has been accepted as fact across the whole world for more than 50 years now. I saw it live on TV, along with everyone else. Many have tried to disprove this, and all have failed, every question has been answered. If you say otherwise, that would be an extraordinary claim, and the burden of proof would be on *you*. The video you offer is laughable. Got any 'real' proof? I didn't think so...


LOL. Poor old delusional Bast. All her references come from old
sci-fi TV shows and cartoons.
  #14  
Old December 8th 17, 05:58 PM posted to alt.astronomy
Sarah Ehrett
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 119
Default Hagar still willingly bending over to let NASA do it to him

On Thu, 7 Dec 2017 19:57:34 -0500, "Bast"
wrote:



Sarah Ehrett wrote:
On Thu, 7 Dec 2017 18:47:16 -0500, "Bast"
wrote:



Sarah Ehrett wrote:
On Thu, 7 Dec 2017 01:03:29 -0500, "Bast"
wrote:

Perhaps he can still learn something, and let his hemorrhoids heal up

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BUZr0Wr0v-s

If you still miss the point hags,.....NASA faked Apollo

That is a lie. And I'm still waiting for your response to the
nagging radio signals to and from the moon which have become your
personal inconvient truth.

https://www.theguardian.com/technolo...-laser-funding


snip


Another fail for you Bast.



Oh **** facepalm,....that even reads like a fairytale, or a harry potter
novel. Maybe Lord Voldemort helped them aim the antenna ??


I don't see you refuting anything, Bastie ..... Maybe if you didn't
live in a fantasy land?

You write a few lines of crap that you are virtually claining is verified
by SNOPES ?


Nope. Stop lying Bast.

You do realize that even if I swallow your version of events, you just made
my argument for me, don't you ?


I'll give you a little hint, Bastie: I know all about satellites.
But go on....

If you have a moving satellite (closer) or the moon (farther away)
Of course a signal from a satellite will keep requiring re-aiming, where the
moon farther away would not appear to move quickly from your reference point
on earth.


This is all simple enough to sort out.

Your claim is about a moving satellite in space.

The burden of proof is therefore on you to name, specifically, the
satellite(s) we have in orbit in 1969 which had the capabilities you
claim in your argument?

And be specific, Bast. All satellites are named and or numbered and
tracked.

I anxiously await your answer to my question.

  #15  
Old December 8th 17, 06:48 PM posted to alt.astronomy
Bast[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,917
Default Hagar still willingly bending over to let NASA do it to him



Sarah Ehrett wrote:
On Thu, 7 Dec 2017 19:03:48 -0800 (PST), palsing
wrote:

On Thursday, December 7, 2017 at 4:57:35 PM UTC-8, Bast wrote:

Of course a signal from a satellite will keep requiring re-aiming,
where the moon farther away would not appear to move quickly from
your reference point on earth.


Just how quickly do you think the moon travels across the sky? A lot
faster than you think... since the Earth rotates through 4 degrees per
minute, and the moon is only about 1/2 degree across, it takes the
moon about 2 minutes to move its own diameter in the sky... so someone
pointing an antenna at it would have to re-adjust that antenna quite
often.

Man went to the moon, that has been accepted as fact across the whole
world for more than 50 years now. I saw it live on TV, along with
everyone else. Many have tried to disprove this, and all have failed,
every question has been answered. If you say otherwise, that would be
an extraordinary claim, and the burden of proof would be on *you*. The
video you offer is laughable. Got any 'real' proof? I didn't think
so...


LOL. Poor old delusional Bast. All her references come from old
sci-fi TV shows and cartoons.






I am trying to dumb things down so even you and Hagar can try understand.
Obviously, it's not dumbed down enough for you yet.

However, it is interseting how you can't comprehend, but still know what to
delete from my posts.
.....It's almost like you are trolling. Which is why I won't waste much time
responding to you.

But that's okay, as all my posts are still there for others to read,...and
do thier own research.
So I win.









  #16  
Old December 8th 17, 06:52 PM posted to alt.astronomy
Bast[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,917
Default Hagar still willingly bending over to let NASA do it to him



Sarah Ehrett wrote:
On Thu, 7 Dec 2017 19:57:34 -0500, "Bast"
wrote:



Sarah Ehrett wrote:
On Thu, 7 Dec 2017 18:47:16 -0500, "Bast"
wrote:



Sarah Ehrett wrote:
On Thu, 7 Dec 2017 01:03:29 -0500, "Bast"
wrote:

Perhaps he can still learn something, and let his hemorrhoids heal
up

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BUZr0Wr0v-s

If you still miss the point hags,.....NASA faked Apollo

That is a lie. And I'm still waiting for your response to the
nagging radio signals to and from the moon which have become your
personal inconvient truth.

https://www.theguardian.com/technolo...-laser-funding


snip


Another fail for you Bast.



Oh **** facepalm,....that even reads like a fairytale, or a harry
potter novel. Maybe Lord Voldemort helped them aim the antenna ??


I don't see you refuting anything, Bastie ..... Maybe if you didn't
live in a fantasy land?

You write a few lines of crap that you are virtually claining is
verified by SNOPES ?


Nope. Stop lying Bast.

You do realize that even if I swallow your version of events, you just
made my argument for me, don't you ?


I'll give you a little hint, Bastie: I know all about satellites.
But go on....

If you have a moving satellite (closer) or the moon (farther away)
Of course a signal from a satellite will keep requiring re-aiming,
where the moon farther away would not appear to move quickly from your
reference point on earth.


This is all simple enough to sort out.

Your claim is about a moving satellite in space.

The burden of proof is therefore on you to name, specifically, the
satellite(s) we have in orbit in 1969 which had the capabilities you
claim in your argument?

And be specific, Bast. All satellites are named and or numbered and
tracked.

I anxiously await your answer to my question.








Are you really that dumb that you don't think the military has their own
satellites ?
And no one outside of the military knows where they are , or can access
them.

Hey,...maybe that was what was in Hitlery's emails.


  #17  
Old December 8th 17, 10:34 PM posted to alt.astronomy
Sarah Ehrett
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 119
Default Hagar still willingly bending over to let NASA do it to him

On Fri, 8 Dec 2017 12:48:05 -0500, "Bast"
wrote:



Sarah Ehrett wrote:
On Thu, 7 Dec 2017 19:03:48 -0800 (PST), palsing
wrote:

On Thursday, December 7, 2017 at 4:57:35 PM UTC-8, Bast wrote:

Of course a signal from a satellite will keep requiring re-aiming,
where the moon farther away would not appear to move quickly from
your reference point on earth.

Just how quickly do you think the moon travels across the sky? A lot
faster than you think... since the Earth rotates through 4 degrees per
minute, and the moon is only about 1/2 degree across, it takes the
moon about 2 minutes to move its own diameter in the sky... so someone
pointing an antenna at it would have to re-adjust that antenna quite
often.

Man went to the moon, that has been accepted as fact across the whole
world for more than 50 years now. I saw it live on TV, along with
everyone else. Many have tried to disprove this, and all have failed,
every question has been answered. If you say otherwise, that would be
an extraordinary claim, and the burden of proof would be on *you*. The
video you offer is laughable. Got any 'real' proof? I didn't think
so...


LOL. Poor old delusional Bast. All her references come from old
sci-fi TV shows and cartoons.






I am trying to dumb things down so even you and Hagar can try understand.


No one believes you, Bastie, your broken english aside. You're a
conspiracy whacko on the Internet and Hagar and I are both engineers.
  #18  
Old December 8th 17, 10:57 PM posted to alt.astronomy
Sarah Ehrett
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 119
Default Hagar still willingly bending over to let NASA do it to him

On Fri, 8 Dec 2017 12:52:51 -0500, "Bast"
wrote:



Sarah Ehrett wrote:
On Thu, 7 Dec 2017 19:57:34 -0500, "Bast"
wrote:



Sarah Ehrett wrote:
On Thu, 7 Dec 2017 18:47:16 -0500, "Bast"
wrote:



Sarah Ehrett wrote:
On Thu, 7 Dec 2017 01:03:29 -0500, "Bast"
wrote:

Perhaps he can still learn something, and let his hemorrhoids heal
up

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BUZr0Wr0v-s

If you still miss the point hags,.....NASA faked Apollo

That is a lie. And I'm still waiting for your response to the
nagging radio signals to and from the moon which have become your
personal inconvient truth.

https://www.theguardian.com/technolo...-laser-funding


snip


Another fail for you Bast.


Oh **** facepalm,....that even reads like a fairytale, or a harry
potter novel. Maybe Lord Voldemort helped them aim the antenna ??


I don't see you refuting anything, Bastie ..... Maybe if you didn't
live in a fantasy land?

You write a few lines of crap that you are virtually claining is
verified by SNOPES ?


Nope. Stop lying Bast.

You do realize that even if I swallow your version of events, you just
made my argument for me, don't you ?


I'll give you a little hint, Bastie: I know all about satellites.
But go on....

If you have a moving satellite (closer) or the moon (farther away)
Of course a signal from a satellite will keep requiring re-aiming,
where the moon farther away would not appear to move quickly from your
reference point on earth.


This is all simple enough to sort out.

Your claim is about a moving satellite in space.

The burden of proof is therefore on you to name, specifically, the
satellite(s) we have in orbit in 1969 which had the capabilities you
claim in your argument?

And be specific, Bast. All satellites are named and or numbered and
tracked.

I anxiously await your answer to my question.


Are you really that dumb that you don't think the military has their own
satellites ?


Good question Bastie! Let's try this again since the info on the
comsat's I'm asking about in 1969 is NO LONGER CLASSIFIED:

The burden of proof is therefore on you to name, specifically, the
satellite(s) we have in orbit in 1969 which had the capabilities you
claim in your argument?

And be specific, Bast. All satellites are named and or numbered and
tracked.

And no one outside of the military knows where they are ,


Bastie, any good collegiate Astronomy class can track the satellites
in space. There is a University in the UK who takes great pride in
tracking all the satellites in space.

or can access them.


Goal post move.

I still nxiously await your answer to my question.
  #19  
Old December 9th 17, 12:37 AM posted to alt.astronomy
Bast[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,917
Default Hagar still willingly bending over to let NASA do it to him



Sarah Ehrett wrote:
On Fri, 8 Dec 2017 12:48:05 -0500, "Bast"
wrote:



Sarah Ehrett wrote:
On Thu, 7 Dec 2017 19:03:48 -0800 (PST), palsing
wrote:

On Thursday, December 7, 2017 at 4:57:35 PM UTC-8, Bast wrote:

Of course a signal from a satellite will keep requiring re-aiming,
where the moon farther away would not appear to move quickly from
your reference point on earth.

Just how quickly do you think the moon travels across the sky? A lot
faster than you think... since the Earth rotates through 4 degrees
per minute, and the moon is only about 1/2 degree across, it takes
the moon about 2 minutes to move its own diameter in the sky... so
someone pointing an antenna at it would have to re-adjust that
antenna quite often.

Man went to the moon, that has been accepted as fact across the whole
world for more than 50 years now. I saw it live on TV, along with
everyone else. Many have tried to disprove this, and all have failed,
every question has been answered. If you say otherwise, that would be
an extraordinary claim, and the burden of proof would be on *you*.
The video you offer is laughable. Got any 'real' proof? I didn't
think so...

LOL. Poor old delusional Bast. All her references come from old
sci-fi TV shows and cartoons.






I am trying to dumb things down so even you and Hagar can try
understand.


No one believes you, Bastie, your broken english aside. You're a
conspiracy whacko on the Internet and Hagar and I are both engineers.







Good for you.
So please get back to keeping the cans clean on your trash pickup route, and
leave the science to those of us who can comprehend it


  #20  
Old December 9th 17, 12:48 AM posted to alt.astronomy
Bast[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,917
Default Hagar still willingly bending over to let NASA do it to him



Sarah Ehrett wrote:
On Fri, 8 Dec 2017 12:52:51 -0500, "Bast"
wrote:



Sarah Ehrett wrote:
On Thu, 7 Dec 2017 19:57:34 -0500, "Bast"
wrote:



Sarah Ehrett wrote:
On Thu, 7 Dec 2017 18:47:16 -0500, "Bast"
wrote:



Sarah Ehrett wrote:
On Thu, 7 Dec 2017 01:03:29 -0500, "Bast"
wrote:

Perhaps he can still learn something, and let his hemorrhoids
heal up

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BUZr0Wr0v-s

If you still miss the point hags,.....NASA faked Apollo

That is a lie. And I'm still waiting for your response to the
nagging radio signals to and from the moon which have become your
personal inconvient truth.

https://www.theguardian.com/technolo...-laser-funding


snip


Another fail for you Bast.


Oh **** facepalm,....that even reads like a fairytale, or a harry
potter novel. Maybe Lord Voldemort helped them aim the antenna ??

I don't see you refuting anything, Bastie ..... Maybe if you didn't
live in a fantasy land?

You write a few lines of crap that you are virtually claining is
verified by SNOPES ?

Nope. Stop lying Bast.

You do realize that even if I swallow your version of events, you
just made my argument for me, don't you ?

I'll give you a little hint, Bastie: I know all about satellites.
But go on....

If you have a moving satellite (closer) or the moon (farther away)
Of course a signal from a satellite will keep requiring re-aiming,
where the moon farther away would not appear to move quickly from
your reference point on earth.

This is all simple enough to sort out.

Your claim is about a moving satellite in space.

The burden of proof is therefore on you to name, specifically, the
satellite(s) we have in orbit in 1969 which had the capabilities you
claim in your argument?

And be specific, Bast. All satellites are named and or numbered and
tracked.

I anxiously await your answer to my question.


Are you really that dumb that you don't think the military has their
own satellites ?


Good question Bastie! Let's try this again since the info on the
comsat's I'm asking about in 1969 is NO LONGER CLASSIFIED:

The burden of proof is therefore on you to name, specifically, the
satellite(s) we have in orbit in 1969 which had the capabilities you
claim in your argument?

And be specific, Bast. All satellites are named and or numbered and
tracked.

And no one outside of the military knows where they are ,


Bastie, any good collegiate Astronomy class can track the satellites
in space. There is a University in the UK who takes great pride in
tracking all the satellites in space.








Riiggghhhht.
And I'm sure they even track all the steath aircraft in the world, and sell
that information to those bad ol' Ruskies.

And BTW,.....did they have this wonderful database ALREADY ESTABLISHED BACK
IN THE 1960'S ?

Geez,.....no wonder the Iraqis were able to hide all those W.M.D from
us,....The damn British /POL Geeks . sold us out.

You really are a piece of work aren't you






 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
FR Bending of Light -- Proof oriel36[_2_] Amateur Astronomy 0 January 25th 10 09:14 PM
FR Bending of Light philippeb8 Astronomy Misc 221 December 8th 09 07:31 PM
A question about the bending of light. brian a m stuckless Policy 0 May 1st 06 11:46 PM
A question about the bending of light. brian a m stuckless Policy 0 May 1st 06 04:53 PM
A question about the bending of light. brian a m stuckless Astronomy Misc 0 May 1st 06 04:53 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:31 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 SpaceBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.