Is it real?

[Hannu2]

Credibility depends on what they say they have been done. One video is never credible, if somebody say that they have visited in Saturn. It is technically so much beyond anyone have done, that there have to be much more technical documents. For example, there are insane amount of published documents about Apollo program, which can be checked and they agree with all known scientific and technical facts. If there were just couple of old videos of films, probably no one would believe. History and achievements of official Russian and Chinese space programs are also well enough documented and verified that there are not sane doubt against them.

[Darnok]

7 minutes ago, razark said:

Well, NASA does release footage of things they do, and tend to be pretty clear when they're showing artists' representation.

 

But why look at the video in the first place?  There's no way something like a mission to Saturn could be kept secret for this long.

Have heard about VW cheating with it engine tests? Or about Panama Papers?
How things like this could be kept in secret for years and any space mission wouldn't be possible?

5 minutes ago, Hannu2 said:

Credibility depends on what they say they have been done. One video is never credible, if somebody say that they have visited in Saturn.

What if someone says he visited Moon, had one video about this and lost it?
Is that credible source?

[magnemoe]

2 hours ago, Gaarst said:

If the Chinese went to Mars I'm pretty sure we'd have more than a single YouTube video to prove it.

This, in short huge news as an manned mission to another planet would be on front pages everywhere. 

[Darnok]

9 minutes ago, p1t1o said:

No, we are back to "if it looks real then its probably real, if it looks fake, then its probably fake." Because it is VERY hard to make something fake look *really* "real" to a human eye. That is not opinion, it is due to the nature of our biological components. Even the very latest state-of-the-art CGI only fools you for a little while, and that is without close scrutiny.

I did not say compare it to NASA footage, ok I mentioned the space shuttle and the ISS which both have heavy NASA involvement, but there are other people aboard the ISS at least. What I meant was, *any* type of industrial recording, specifically from the space industry but other footage would count as well. What Im getting at is footage shot in similarly heavy-machinery and human-safety types of environments, regardless of which organisation is involved.

But even if we take footage comparison out of the picture entirely - compare it to your own eyes, your own eyes should tell you there are things "off" about the Saturn footage. Even strange things that dont look how you expect dont look fake, "fake" is a specific property and the saturn clip has it.

 

I am not arguing that Saturn clip is fake or not, I am only asking how other people make distinction of which video is real and which isn't.

Personally I don't believe in any space related video, no matter who release it, what quality (both in resolution and details) it has... because at some point, like Gravity movie and "real" ISS video, I am unable to say which is real and which isn't.

If NASA would release some directors cuts from Gravity and say it is theirs video would you be able to say it is fake?
I probably wouldn't be able to do that.

 

[razark]

5 minutes ago, Darnok said:

Have heard about VW cheating with it engine tests? Or about Panama Papers?

Heard of, yes.  Know a lot about, no.

 

6 minutes ago, Darnok said:

How things like this could be kept in secret for years and any space mission wouldn't be possible?

Seriously?

How the flipping hell do you hide a multi-decade space program requiring multiple launches, millions of people, trillions of dollars, and who knows what else, when you can't even hide emissions test fakery and banking papers?

[Elthy]

1 minute ago, Darnok said:

If NASA would release some directors cuts from Gravity and say it is theirs video would you be able to say it is fake?
I probably wouldn't be able to do that.

They wouldnt release it since its a fake.

[Codraroll]

12 minutes ago, WinkAllKerb'' said:

image are real , you can see them ... interpretation of image are another concern wich fall in shamanism - 50 000, cult place - ???? now, school all the crappy stuff and bloodbath around religion in history book and crusade

also remind that prehistoric don't use internet ... and school allow to build stuff loccally in the whole not locally, undereducated population don't help at all ...

now if you ask me a country list of less educated people ratio ... ask UTF-8#q=who%20there%20leader%20and%20what%20do%20they%20expect (blabla politics i don't care either)

 

What the hell is this supposed to mean?

There's not being good in English, and there's this... perfect spelling, but everything else being a total and complete mess. Grammar, sentence structure, punctuation, and even topic are all completely incomprehensible.

Did you ever look over your post and think "yeah, this will make sense to the average reader" before submitting it?

 

For the record, whenever threads like "is this obviously fake thing real" are posted, the fact that posts like this are the only ones sort-of defending the OP, should speak volumes about the question at hand.

[Darnok]

1 minute ago, razark said:

Heard of, yes.  Know a lot about, no.

 

Seriously?

How the flipping hell do you hide a multi-decade space program requiring multiple launches, millions of people, trillions of dollars, and who knows what else, when you can't even hide emissions test fakery and banking papers?

How can you hide CIA, FBI, NSA and whatever secret services there are on Earth?

 

I forgot about Mars TV series... does human in space suit walking on Mars looks real in those videos?

[razark]

1 minute ago, Darnok said:

How can you hide CIA, FBI, NSA and whatever secret services there are on Earth?

 

The CIA, FBI, and NSA are rather well-known.  Some of their activities are rather less well known, but the last few years have shown that even those can be hard to cover up.

 

But somebody is going to notice if we stick them in a damn big rocket and shoot them to Saturn!  None of the things you talk about is as large, encompassing, expensive, personnel intensive, or noticeable as a mission to the outer solar system.

[Darnok]

Just now, razark said:

The CIA, FBI, and NSA are rather well-known.  Some of their activities are rather less well known, but the last few years have shown that even those can be hard to cover up.

 

But somebody is going to notice if we stick them in a damn big rocket and shoot them to Saturn!  None of the things you talk about is as large, encompassing, expensive, personnel intensive, or noticeable as a mission to the outer solar system.

How can you hide every submarine and military ship? Do you know location of every submarine on Earth? Do you know even location of few submarines on Earth?
All of them are more expensive than every space programs ever done on Earth? And they can be kept in secret, how is this possible?

Do you know location of all military bases around the world? There are thousands of people working there... how many military bases you are aware of?

 

[razark]

1 minute ago, Darnok said:

How can you hide every submarine and military ship? Do you know location of every submarine on Earth? Do you know even location of few submarines on Earth?
All of them are more expensive than every space programs ever done on Earth? And they can be kept in secret, how is this possible?

Do you know location of all military bases around the world? There are thousands of people working there... how many military bases you are aware of?

 

Are you literally insane?

[Codraroll]

5 minutes ago, Darnok said:

If NASA would release some directors cuts from Gravity and say it is theirs video would you be able to say it is fake?

I probably wouldn't be able to do that.

Not unless you started asking the question "where is this filmed from and how did they do it?". No real-world space missions have featured people zipping around with a camera, straying far away from the station to get all sorts of fancy angles and perspectives, or attaching and operating huge high-quality cameras in cramped spaces like a Soyuz capsule, at least without the camera operator constantly getting in the way. And when perspectives shift so that the same action is captured from multiple angles without time passing, you know fakery is at hand. It might be feasible to have one guy film the work, but setting up multiple cameras for no other purpose than watching astronauts is a huge waste of resources.

And of course, you have to assess the plausibility of the stuff that happens on video. A space station in orbit of Saturn is, given current technology, ludicrously implausible. Putting this much mass in Earth orbit alone requires dozens if not hundreds of very expensive launches. Just assembling the components would need years of preparations and hundreds of people across dozens of very specialized workshops. Sending it to Saturn would be a couple orders of magnitude more complicated than that again. Doing it in secret would be literally impossible. Heck, just the engine plume from the transfer burn from the Earth into interplanetary space would probably have been visible to the naked eye over large parts of the world.

 

6 minutes ago, Darnok said:

How can you hide CIA, FBI, NSA and whatever secret services there are on Earth?

You can't, that's the short answer. Once the agency starts employing more than a handful of people, it will show up in paperwork. And the people working there are, well, people. They have lives, friends, families and commuter routes. It's very hard to hide a large organization for any length of time. You can, to some extent, hide the activities they are working on, but the existence of the organization itself will be known to observers and the general public.

[Darnok]

1 minute ago, razark said:

Are you literally insane?

Looks like you are not aware of many huge things that were built on Earth, so how you can be aware of things made in space?

 

[p1t1o]

Ok this is disintegrating into a discussion about what, if *anything* can be relied upon with 100%, philosophical-grade "proof".

*Any* discussion can be instantly degraded into this very same quagmire if one wilfully ignores the essential social assumptions that people need to make inorder to stay sane, ie: the physical workld that we can see/hear/touch is "real". Things we experience are "real". Other people are real. Nothing is imaginary except those things which we deliberately and conciously imagine, etc etc... That is what gets us through day-to-day.

Pretending that one is skeptical of something/everything because you dont have in front of you extensive physical evidence actually on-hand can be done by anyone and is not even particularly hard, even a 4 year old can do it - you never hear a toddler ask his mum: "Why? Why? Why? Why? Why?".

It doesn't generate much interesting discussion IMO.

Edited January 9, 2017 by p1t1o

[Elthy]

At first i thought you are being sarcastic, but now im not sure anymore. Do you realy belive its possible to cover up a manned mission to Saturn?

[Darnok]

4 minutes ago, Elthy said:

At first i thought you are being sarcastic, but now im not sure anymore. Do you realy belive its possible to cover up a manned mission to Saturn?

If US military wouldn't tell anyone about dropping two nukes on Japan you wouldn't know about this
Do you know how many nukes were testes and exactly where? How can you cover up nuclear explosions?

 

[razark]

18 minutes ago, razark said:

How can you hide every submarine and military ship?

You can't.  We have satellites that track some of them and other means to locate them.  Hell, some of them are findable using google maps... (Or is that fake?)

 

20 minutes ago, Darnok said:

Do you know location of every submarine on Earth?

Of course not.  That's the entire point of submarines, though, isn't it?  (You do believe those exist, right?)

 

20 minutes ago, Darnok said:

Do you know even location of few submarines on Earth?

Yes.

 

20 minutes ago, Darnok said:

All of them are more expensive than every space programs ever done on Earth?

Spread out over decades, multiple countries, and we know they exist.  The cost and expanse of a manned Saturn mission would far outstrip those expenditures, though.  Not exactly something you can bury in the budget as "pencils" or "coffee cups" and not have some questions asked.

 

20 minutes ago, Darnok said:

And they can be kept in secret, how is this possible?

They're not secret.  We know about them.  We watch them.  We keep track of who has what where and when.

 

20 minutes ago, Darnok said:

Do you know location of all military bases around the world?

All of them? No.  Can I pull up a map and point to quite a few of them?  Yes.  And there's an entire group of people that get paid to do things like locate and know about military bases around the world.

Do you know the location of every dog in the world?  Do dogs therefore not exist?

 

 

Again:

How the flipping hell do you hide a multi-decade space program requiring multiple launches, millions of people, trillions of dollars, and who knows what else, when you can't even hide emissions test fakery and banking papers?

Edited January 9, 2017 by razark

[Elthy]

5 minutes ago, Darnok said:

How can you cover up nuclear explosions?

You cant (anymore), but thats a different topic...

[Tex_NL]

3 minutes ago, Darnok said:

If US military wouldn't tell anyone about dropping two nukes on Japan you wouldn't know about this
Do you know how many nukes were testes and exactly where? How can you cover up nuclear explosions?

 

Hiding something on earth is orders of magnitude easier than hiding something in space.
When a satellite around Mars fires an RCS thruster it will light up like an X-mas tree. Easily spotted from earth with a dish pointed in the right direction. (And these days there are ALWAYS dishes pointed at Mars.)
If a tiny RCS puff around Mars is visible, do you REALLY think a big ass interplanetary ship leaving earth orbit stays hidden? And that's just the ship leaving orbit. Constructing a ship like that in orbit would take months and multiple launches. Absolutely impossible to hide everything.

[Elthy]

Also there isnt even a reason to hide that, which is making this even weaker than your standart conspiracy theory.  Wasnt there a rule against conspiracy stuff some time ago?

Edited January 9, 2017 by Elthy

[p1t1o]

29 minutes ago, Darnok said:

If US military wouldn't tell anyone about dropping two nukes on Japan you wouldn't know about this
Do you know how many nukes were testes and exactly where?

That says "One cannot be sure of what weapons are dropped where or when."

30 minutes ago, Darnok said:

How can you cover up nuclear explosions?

This says "How can one *not* know when and where a nuclear weapon is detonated."

 

So? What gives? Where would you like the discussion to go next?

[tomf]

I would just like to leave this link here Betteridge's law

It basically says that whenever the headline ends with a question mark the answer is no.

[Kryten]

45 minutes ago, Darnok said:

If US military wouldn't tell anyone about dropping two nukes on Japan you wouldn't know about this
Do you know how many nukes were testes and exactly where? 

The USA conducted 1,054 tests and two operational uses. 928 on the Nevada Test Site, 105 in the Pacific Proving Grounds, three in the South Atlantic (on rockets fired from a ship), three in Alaska, two in New Mexico, two in Mississippi, one in Colorado, and the remainder in areas of Nevada that are not formally part of the NTS. 

Russia performed 715 tests. 456 at Semiplatinsk, 224 at Novaya Zemlya, and the others in various other locations throughout the USSR that saw a few tests each. I'm not going to list them just for a forum post, but the lists are out there.

The United Kingdom performed 45 tests. 21 took place on Australian territory; seven at Maralinga and two at Emu Fields on the Australian mainland, and the rest on various islands. The other 24 tests took place at the Nevada Test Site in the US.

France has performed 210 nuclear tests. Four took place at Reggane and thirteen in In Ekker, both now in Algeria, with the rest taking place in French Polynesia 

China has performed 45 tests, all at Lop Nur in Xinjiang.

India has performed six tests, all at Pokhran in Rajasthan.

Pakistan has performed six tests, five at Ras Koh and one in the Kharan desert; both in Chagai district.

The DPRK has performed five nuclear tests, all at Pyungge-Re in North Hamgyong province.

Will that do?

[Darnok]

3 minutes ago, Kryten said:

The USA conducted 1,054 tests and two operational uses. 928 on the Nevada Test Site, 105 in the Pacific Proving Grounds, three in the South Atlantic (on rockets fired from a ship), three in Alaska, two in New Mexico, two in Mississippi, one in Colorado, and the remainder in areas of Nevada that are not formally part of the NTS. 

Russia performed 715 tests. 456 at Semiplatinsk, 224 at Novaya Zemlya, and the others in various other locations throughout the USSR that saw a few tests each. I'm not going to list them just for a forum post, but the lists are out there.

The United Kingdom performed 45 tests. 21 took place on Australian territory; seven at Maralinga and two at Emu Fields on the Australian mainland, and the rest on various islands. The other 24 tests took place at the Nevada Test Site in the US.

France has performed 210 nuclear tests. Four took place at Reggane and thirteen in In Ekker, both now in Algeria, with the rest taking place in French Polynesia 

China has performed 45 tests, all at Lop Nur in Xinjiang.

India has performed six tests, all at Pokhran in Rajasthan.

Pakistan has performed six tests, five at Ras Koh and one in the Kharan desert; both in Chagai district.

The DPRK has performed five nuclear tests, all at Pyungge-Re in North Hamgyong province.

Will that do?

And you know this from what source?

[p1t1o]

3 minutes ago, Darnok said:

And you know this from what source?

Plz no.