Columbia destroyed by megalightning?

Post by **HM-PuFFNSTuFF** » Fri Feb 25, 2005 6:01 pm

I call megabullshit.

Post by **[xeno]Julios** » Fri Feb 25, 2005 7:23 pm

er - i remember the columbia going down in daylight, with a clear sky. That looks like night time to me.

Post by **R00k** » Fri Feb 25, 2005 7:27 pm

So the picture wasn't taken from the ground?

Post by **R00k** » Fri Feb 25, 2005 7:29 pm

I don't wanna! :icon23:

Post by **Maiden** » Fri Feb 25, 2005 7:52 pm

HM-PuFFNSTuFF wrote:I call megabullshit.

lol

Post by **[xeno]Julios** » Fri Feb 25, 2005 7:57 pm

riddla wrote:
[xeno]Julios wrote:er - i remember the columbia going down in daylight, with a clear sky. That looks like night time to me.
because they're still in the ionosphere in that shot. the only backdrop is space itself

who took that picture, and from where? I didn't know that you could see past our atmosphere with a normal camera from earth.

Post by **Nightshade** » Fri Feb 25, 2005 7:57 pm

I'm not an expert in meteorology or photographic analysis, but I think that guy in the first link is a kook. I say that because I tend to be highly skeptical of anyone that points to a single piece of inconclusive evidence and screams "OMG WTF!!! IT HAS TO BE THIS!!! COVERUP! CONSPIRACY!!! OMFG!!!"
That said, I think it's possible it was struck, it happens to airliners pretty much every time they fly, although it's just regular lightning. I thought that there was rather substantial evidence supporting the official explanation?

Post by **[xeno]Julios** » Fri Feb 25, 2005 8:01 pm

Interesting articles - just skimmed them, but they don't reek of conspiracy.

One thing though:

If the fate of Columbia was indeed the result of megalightning, then scientific misperception has cost human lives. And it is now placing other lives at risk as well.

I don't see how this is the case - whether or not the scientists buy/bought into this theory, how would that change the fact that columbia went down?

Post by **denzii** » Fri Feb 25, 2005 8:08 pm

some of you ppl will believe anything.

edit

Post by **Nightshade** » Fri Feb 25, 2005 8:08 pm

Nonsense. NASA should have planned another mission to equip the Columbia with a megalightningrod before it landed.

Post by **Nightshade** » Fri Feb 25, 2005 8:08 pm

denzii wrote:You ppl will believe anything.

Who says we're all believing it?

Post by **Nightshade** » Fri Feb 25, 2005 10:01 pm

Not that one. It doesn't show anything identifiable or even close to conclusive.

Post by **[xeno]Julios** » Fri Feb 25, 2005 10:52 pm

[xeno]Julios wrote:who took that picture, and from where? I didn't know that you could see past our atmosphere with a normal camera from earth.

Post by **Nightshade** » Fri Feb 25, 2005 10:53 pm

Can you honestly look at that image and say without a doubt what it is?

Post by **HM-PuFFNSTuFF** » Fri Feb 25, 2005 11:00 pm

It's a seabird.

Post by **R00k** » Fri Feb 25, 2005 11:06 pm

OMG ITS REPS GIRLFRIEND! :icon11: :icon28:

Post by **HM-PuFFNSTuFF** » Fri Feb 25, 2005 11:09 pm

that's lightning

Post by **losCHUNK** » Fri Feb 25, 2005 11:46 pm

R00k wrote:OMG ITS REPS GIRLFRIEND! :icon11: :icon28:

:icon19:

Post by **[xeno]Julios** » Fri Feb 25, 2005 11:51 pm

riddla wrote:
[xeno]Julios wrote:
[xeno]Julios wrote:who took that picture, and from where? I didn't know that you could see past our atmosphere with a normal camera from earth.
rtfa.

still can't find an answer - how do you take a picture from earth with a normal camera, in broad daylight, and have it look like that? I'm not questioning the fact that lightning can or cannot occur without clouds - i realize that this lightning is theorized to come from space - i JUST WANT TO KNOW HOW THE FUCK YOU MAKE THE PICTURE LOOK DARK IN DAYLIGHT

Post by **R00k** » Fri Feb 25, 2005 11:52 pm

the article claims it was an astronaut on the shuttle that took the pic.

edit: nevermind, it doesn't say that at all, it just sort-of implied it.

it was taken by an amateur astronomer from the earth.

Post by **[xeno]Julios** » Fri Feb 25, 2005 11:54 pm

R00k wrote:the article claims it was an astronaut on the shuttle that took the pic.

what? - how do you get a shot from a shuttle window that shows the trail of your own craft from a distance. That long streak in the photo is presumably the "wake" of the craft right?

so if you took the pic from the craft, you couldn't possibly get that angle.

I also can't find the place where it says the photo was taken from shuttle - way too tired to read it carefully :P

edit: never mind - read your post

Post by **[xeno]Julios** » Sat Feb 26, 2005 12:04 am

riddla wrote:telescope-->camera mount-->camera

I didn't realize you could get "dark" shots of the sky at day time - how does that work? I thought you had to wait till night.

Post by **losCHUNK** » Sat Feb 26, 2005 12:11 am

personally i think it was destroyed by some sort of explosion of some kind

Post by **[xeno]Julios** » Sat Feb 26, 2005 12:12 am

riddla wrote:you can, just involves being in the shade or shading the lens from direct light sources. one of the main reason you see modern large telescopes inside the domes. the dome can provide shading from the consequential light of day.

ah kewl - thanks

Post by **eepberries** » Sat Feb 26, 2005 3:21 am

LIES. EVERYBODY KNOWS THE COLUMBIA CRAFT WAS KNOCKED OUT OF THE SKY BY A LURKING UFO. THAT BRIGHT LINE YOU SEE IF THE UFO MAKING ITS SPEEDY ESCAPE