Not a very successful prediction, considering that the page was written about three months ago.Very shortly, the world will put the Shuttle tragedy to bed, fully persuaded that the craft was brought down by a freak high upper atmosphere electrical discharge. And that will be that.
Everything I need to know I learned through Googling.
UFO writer Der Voron claims it was shot down by the Zetans because it still uses "oil" engines and not his miraculous new propulsion system.
Oil? I don't recall any part of the Space Shuttle propulsion using hydrocarbon propellants. The SSMEs use LH2/LOX. The RCS and OMS use MMH/N2O2. The SRBs use PBAN, if I interpreted Encyclopedia Astronautica correctly, which is solid propellants.
Since we're on the subject of Shuttle conspiracies. I would like to have it noted that while I was flicking through the presskits of the first Shuttle missions, looking for this information (until I remember astronautix.com) I couldn't find it. OTOH if I was looking for this kind of information regarding the Apollo missions, it is only to easy to find it in those presskits. Apollo seems to be the program, whose information has been made the most readily accessible to the public. It's important to note that the program the conspiracists are accusing of being subject to cover-ups and things is the most public program of all.
That's covering the truth by swamping you with huge piles of (des-)information. ;-) An old trick of civil servants to hide from their ministers what is really going on.Originally Posted by Glom
Harald - waiting since years for a re-run of "Yes, (Prime-)Minister" on TV.
I thought PBAN was hydrocarbon-derived. It's a synthetic, isn't it? :-?
Not that I think the "Zetans" shot it down. It was the Staypuft Marshmellow man. Who else could have control over a foamed substance like that? :roll:
Maybe, you're probably better informed than me.Originally Posted by Madcat
The SRB fuel is powered aluminum. The oxidizer is ammonium perchlorate. PBAN refers to the binder that makes it a solid mixture.
Thanks for sorting that out. Encyclopedia Astronautica has a tendancy to just designate the propellants of solid motors as 'solid' rather than stating exactly what was used. Anything else actually required comprehension skills.
I like this bitOriginally Posted by Tuckerfan
This is not a "beam" weapon like the one used to down the two WTC towers. It remotely produces local space-time distortion effects by connecting through the complex plane around which all space-time is wrapped.
You will find that these 'tesla' nuts have masses of Star Trek style technobabble to explain it, if it's all so deadly secret how do they have such detail?
And if it's all so massively devestating how come no one usesd it in a war?
One of the stories on that page says that someone is using a 'Scalar' weapon to knock the Earth off its axis!
Rules For Posting To This Board
All Moderation in Purple
*busts up laughing*It remotely produces local space-time distortion effects by connecting through the complex plane around which all space-time is wrapped.
Okay, now that is hilarious! These people may be nuts, but sometimes they are seriously funny! Or maybe I'm just letting my blood sugar get too low; it is rather close to lunchtime, after all.
The article mentioned by "The Rusty Lander" is scary in the way it is written, it appears to make sense in the way that it is written, with phrases that urge you to use critical thinking. If someone did not know any better who read it, it could very easily convince them of the wrong thing.
The article encourages you to use critical thinking skills? So apply those skills to the article itself.