Shenzhou 7?

[ChrLz]

First up, if you wish to keep parroting your jpl friend, WHERE IS THE ORBITAL ANALYSIS?

What work did he actually do at JPL?  I used to run a marine science centre, but I knew virtually nuthin' about, say, large fishing boat diesel engines or deep sea trawling net technology...

That is so ironic that I actually started laughing!

Laugh it up.  I'll let the audience decide.  YOU said:

China has not had space-age technology for almost 60 years like the US and Russia has.

They DID have space age technology going back well over 55 years as I pointed out.  The fact that YOU now had to CHANGE THE GOALPOSTS by adding on the bit about manned flights simply shows you have learnt your conspiracy theorist trade well - from Jarrah White?  He'd be proud of you.  But is *any* notoriety good?

The further fact that you seemed to miss that I stopped listing their achievements at forty years ago (remembering YOU said 60) and then still you managed to miss the reference to Shenzou 5, which you now say you think happened!!??!! is so self-contradictory it makes your argument incomprehensibly ridiculous.

One minute you say this:

If they were moving at the rate we were in the 60's, they'd already have landed a man on the moon.

The next it is:

China has not had space-age technology for almost 60 years

Do you honestly not see the contradictions in that argument?  The US was able to land people on the Moon in just 8 years from the time JFK made his statement.  Yes, they had some prior technology.  Yes, they took some of that from elsewhere.  But here we are just talking about China putting people into ORBIT, some forty years later, in a much more cooperative political climate, with the benefit of prior & new technology, what they bought from Russia, copying other countries (as they all do).  And incredibly, you think they already HAVE done this (Shenzhou 5), so ... it's just this later one that they faked?   

Of course.  What a superbly engineered argument.  Almost as good as the ones you originally brought us about Apollo being faked.  You stridently believed THOSE too, didn't you..


Vincent, I strongly suggest you change your name before trying to get work in any field that involves any sort of application of logic.  Any employer who saw you first denigrate Apollo like you did and then completely turn yourself around, and then, having learnt NOTHING, do exactly the same thing with Shenzhou, will not go near you.

What do you think your role model, Mike Collins, believes?  What would he think of what you are doing now?

[Andromeda]

You have not acknowledged the various challenges to Dr Qu Zheng's 'expertise'.

Amateurs don't work as engineers at JPL.

1. He is NOT an engineer.

2. he doesn't work at JPL, he is affiliated to them.

[Jason Thompson]

If his wrists are the only things moving back and forth, there's no force actually pushing his legs in the opposite direction.

Rubbish. The force of moving his wrists puts an equal and opposite reaction on the rest of his body.

When you sit down and twist your wrist back and forth your wrist twists relative to your arm. Your arm is static because it is attached to the rest of your body, the mass of which is held in place by gravity. Remove the gravity and the twist of your wrist will transmit a torque all the way through the rest of your body.

Like I said, watch Buzz Aldrin on the early part of his Gemini 12 activities, before he tehters himself with short loops.

This is basic Newtons laws.

No, that is your limited understanding of them. Precisely the kind of understanding that caught NASA out with their early EVAs, when the astronauts found that even the smallest movement sent them twisting off in unexpected directions.

I have already addressed Gemini claims MANY times on this thread. As he pushes down or up while exiting (which he clearly is) inertia takes the tether and strap upward or downward based on his movement.

Oh dear god, how many more times do I have to tell you this? WATCH the video I posted. The specific instances I am referring to occur well BEFORE Ed White exits the capsule, while he is sitting on the edge. He is NOT moving in a way that would cause either of those things to float 'upwards', and yet they do.

[Jason Thompson]

Amateurs don't work as engineers at JPL.

So what? Does Dr Zheng? What exactly are his areas of expertise? The fact that he works at or for JPL does not automatically make him an expert in spacewalks.

You stated that China has the capability to put a man into space.

I did not.

An unmanned spacecraft can be tracked. There is no independent film of a Chinese man walking in space. It was all released by China. So if they launched an unmanned Shenzhou, who would know?

Ah, so you don't know how they could tell the difference between manned and unmanned spacecraft, therefore nobody does? You REALLY need to cultivate an understanding of just what is involved in these things before you start passing judgement on them.

[Jason Thompson]

If they don't understand spaceflight, (Like many countries don't),

Which countries 'don't understand' space flight? There's a world of difference between understanding and having the resources to actually do it.

[Jason Thompson]

Just because China USES Russian technology doesn't mean they have learned how to properly put it to work.

They don't USE Russian technology, they based their own spacecraft on it. That's not the same thing at all.

[Inanimate Carbon Rod]

Vincent, we're still waiting for the results of your underwater flag waving experiment. When will you provide them?

When I perform it.
No such experiment has been conducted on my part for two reasons.

1.) I don't have a mini flag.
2.) I don't have a clean pool outside of my cousins' pool. That still brings option 1 against me.

• Purchase flag from http://www.miniatureflagshop.com/china.html
• Locate clean pool
• Experiment
• Post results here
• Bask in the admiration of this forum AND become established as a major force in the space industry because you found out what those godless communists where getting up to

Not that you're going to do any of stuff as, like the last four time, you'll come up with an excuse.

[Inanimate Carbon Rod]

What do you think your role model, Mike Collins, believes?  What would he think of what you are doing now?

Actually, I'm surprised Vincent has role model of Mike Collins as Mike carried out a space walk of which no independent footage exists, for a country that has had space travel technology for a short time.

[Jason Thompson]

Vincent, if you don't have the flag why did you say you were heading off to perform the test? And why do you need a clean pool? All you need is to make a flag move underwater. For something like a mini flag a bathtub will serve the purpose.

[Echnaton]

Just because someone says something appears so doesn't mean that what they see doesn't exist.

No it doesn't.  Nor does it mean that what is seen happens for a specific cause. So rather than argue semantics, I'll restate my point.  You have no training or expertise in this area nor do you have a full accounting for the movements of the astronauts that can be examined.  An accounting that would definitively demonstrate the differences between movement in space from movement under water.   Yet despite a lack of demonstrable expertise and and objective demonstrations of the principles you involve you claim it "appears" to be a hoax.  On top of that you have a history of uncritically accepting hoax theories.  That is reason I say your statements of "appears" do not constitute an argument. 

[Jason Thompson]

When Greeks looked up in the skies and noticed that some "stars" appeared to move, was that a lack of understanding?

No, that was an empirical observation that did not require a complex understanding of the laws of physics. They observed, they catalogued. The movements were undeniably real. What they did not understand was what the planets were and why they were moving.

What you are doing is a whole world away from cataloguing obvious empirical observations. You are applying interpretation to the movements you see. Interpretation that relies on a knowledge framework you simply do not have. Furthermore, you presume to argue with those who DO have that framework.

There's a reason why an episode of Frasier made comedy out of the titular character arguing with a heart surgeon with years of experience and full training because he'd downloaded a couple of bits from the internet. See if you can figure out the parallels there...

[SolusLupus]

No. But it helps explain that just because a technology works, doesn't mean the operator understands how to use it. Just because China USES Russian technology doesn't mean they have learned how to properly put it to work. This goes for any country that attempts spaceflight. Not just China.

What about it is so difficult to understand, honestly?  They have universities in China, where you can learn mathematics, engineering, rocketry, any number of things.  They'd naturally select the best of the best of their fields in order to work on this project.  It's not like this is art, where you draw a masterpiece.  It's not like you have to have a certain kind of magic spell to go in a spacesuit.

As I have said, I believe Shenzhou 5 was likely real. I have seen video of the inside of the cabin in zero g for a few minutes at a time. But sitting in a pressurized cabin and then actually evacuating all the air and relying on nothing but a pressure suit and then getting out to walk around near a bunch of sharp metal is a totally different story. Who knows? Maybe they have faulty pressure suits, don't want to risk man or have simply not mastered the technology yet.

Or maybe you're pulling speculations out of your ass to justify being right just this once about uncovering a huge conspiracy, while consistently ignoring that the effort required to fake it is significantly greater than actually going out there and doing the damn thing.

[twik]

So, in other words, you don't doubt that the technology is capable of sending people into orbit, you doubt that the Chinese people are capable of understanding the technology.

No. I don't say only China can't understand it, but they do have a hunger to be a world power. If they don't understand spaceflight, (Like many countries don't), then they will have to fake it in order to establish their position in the world of space.
It has nothing to do with specifically hating Chinese. It has to do with hypothesizing a mission was faked. That mission just happens to have been a Chinese one.

Countries do not understand space flight. People do.

Do you really believe that China cannot put together a team of scientists and engineers to be able to achieve what the US, Russia and the EU were able to do? They sure have a lot of people. Surely some of them are smart enough to figure it out, especially when they have a lot of information from previous experiences to draw from?

I don't believe you hate the Chinese. I think you seriously underestimate what a combination of determination, intelligence, and economic power can achieve.

And for some reason, it disturbs you to think of humans in space. I'm not sure why.

[ka9q]

Or doing independent research into the technicalities of spacecraft and orbital mechanics?

Much of my knowledge is self-taught. But I also went to two universities and obtained two engineering degrees. And I've continued to learn on the job throughout my career. I consider all three learning methods essential to being a good engineer.

One of the things I learned during and after college is that while self-teaching can give you very deep knowlege in specific areas that interest you, you often have significant gaps in that knowledge. More important, you are often unaware of those gaps -- you don't know what you don't know. A formal education tends to fill in those gaps, and through exposure to many different professors and fellow students, you also get a better appreciation of how much more there is that you don't know (and probably never will know). This process continues as you work in industry with other engineers, each of whom has their own personal specialties and experiences.

Knowing what you don't know is sometimes even more important than knowing what you know. You learn what you're especially good at, you learn to tell when something is outside your competence, and where to go and who to talk to when that happens.

[ka9q]

• Bask in the admiration of this forum AND become established as a major force in the space industry because you found out what those godless communists where getting up to

In the early 1980s I had the honor of meeting the late Geoffrey Perry, teacher at the Kettering Grammar School (aka "junior/senior high school" to us Yanks) in the UK, who became world famous for the detective work he did in the 1960s and 70s with his students on the secretive Soviet space program. Geoff and his very young students, armed with little more than a cheap shortwave receiver and a lot of curiosity and cleverness, managed to figure out the existence of the then secret Plesetsk Cosmodrome. We don't know if the intelligence agencies already knew this, but the public certainly didn't.

So it's entirely possible for a highly motivated individual to become a respected authority on another country's space program. But you have to be right. That entails a lot of hard work, dead ends, and most of all seriously listening to other people's ideas and suggestions.

That was one of the things that immediately impressed me about Geoff. He gave the definite impression that there wasn't anyone in the world from whom he couldn't learn something interesting. In fact, he came up to me after my talk and told me that I'd just helped him solve one of his longstanding puzzles about Soviet space practice. I had explained that large orbital plane changes are dangerous in that if you do them in one maneuver, an engine failure partway through the burn could result in an inadvertent re-entry. It seems he'd noticed the Soviets doing plane changes in a roundabout fashion and couldn't understand why. It was a definite kick to learn that I'd helped someone so accomplished.