Why not admit that Hubble is lost and gone ?

Steve001 said:
They should hire elephants, they work for peanuts.
Click to expand...

Nope...

Peanuts-monkeys.jpg


* yes, I know its a chimp!!
 
We're still getting pictures from Hubble, and we're putting the James Webb into a higher orbit soon.

I don't know why any sane person would think Hubble's not up there.
 
Axxman300 said:
We're still getting pictures from Hubble, and we're putting the James Webb into a higher orbit soon.

I don't know why any sane person would think Hubble's not up there.
Click to expand...

"I don't know why any sane clever person would think Hubble's not up there."

I FTFY and it being corrected gives you the reason.
 
Axxman300 said:
We're still getting pictures from Hubble, and we're putting the James Webb into a higher orbit soon.

I don't know why any sane person would think Hubble's not up there.
Click to expand...

Your question answered. :D
 
Axxman300 said:
We're still getting pictures from Hubble, and we're putting the James Webb into a higher orbit soon.

I don't know why any sane person would think Hubble's not up there.
Click to expand...



Question asked and answered. Thread still open!!!
 
For the Hubble to be 'lost in outer space', wouldn't it need a bloody big rocket to free it from Earth's gravity?

Correct me if I'm wrong but I thought that objects in LEO were 'locked' into Earth's gravity, essentially constantly falling back to Earth but travelling so fast that they never did.
In order to break free from gravity, they need a bloody big rocket attached to them, right?
For example, the Apollo missions had two bloody big rocket stages to get into orbit, did a lap of the Earth, then fired up the third stage - another bloody big rocket - to break away from Earth's gravity and head for the moon.

I'm no scientist but I think "Duffy's bloody big rocket hypothesis" is roughly correct, amiright?
 
Edwin Hubble was real, right? I mean, who would make up a name like that?
 
Also isn't it pretty much an open secret that the Hubble, while doing amazing work in it's intended role as an orbital telescope, was also largely (perhaps even primarily) a backdoor research project for spy satellites, seeing as how the only functional difference between a really good orbital telescope and a really good spy satellite is which way it's facing, and that the CIA's KH-11 family of reconnaissance satellites were essentially just various hardware clones of the Hubble just pointed down.
 
Last edited:
Duffy Moon said:
For the Hubble to be 'lost in outer space', wouldn't it need a bloody big rocket to free it from Earth's gravity?

Correct me if I'm wrong but I thought that objects in LEO were 'locked' into Earth's gravity, essentially constantly falling back to Earth but travelling so fast that they never did.
In order to break free from gravity, they need a bloody big rocket attached to them, right?
For example, the Apollo missions had two bloody big rocket stages to get into orbit, did a lap of the Earth, then fired up the third stage - another bloody big rocket - to break away from Earth's gravity and head for the moon.

I'm no scientist but I think "Duffy's bloody big rocket hypothesis" is roughly correct, amiright?
Click to expand...

Yep. Although Apollo didn't "break free" of Earth's gravity; the CSM/LM stack wound up in a distant Earth orbit - along with the Moon.

The OP is manifestly idiotic on multiple levels, not the least of which is the notion that a Shuttle reboost could move the HST out of low Earth orbit, let alone "lose" it.
 
So... To sum up. We can see Hubble. We can see images from Hubble. We have no reason to believe it is missing, and no evidence overrules or negates the self evident satellite still in orbit?

I am unconvinced.
 
Tomtomkent said:
So... To sum up. We can see Hubble. We can see images from Hubble. We have no reason to believe it is missing, and no evidence overrules or negates the self evident satellite still in orbit?

I am unconvinced.
Click to expand...
You would be seeing as i have no evidence you exist either.

Sent from my LG-D855 using Tapatalk
 
Jrrarglblarg said:
The name was real but his "dueling scar" probably wasn't. Quite the character.
Click to expand...

Quite the understatement. While he had hugely impressive achievements in the real world, he ignored those in favour of making up rubbish out of whole cloth.

A most colourful character indeed.
 
So (titter), the answer to the OP question: "Why not admit that Hubble is lost and gone ?" is that we don't have to admit anything because it is still there.

Seems easy enough. :cool:
 
Gord_in_Toronto said:
So (titter), the answer to the OP question: "Why not admit that Hubble is lost and gone ?" is that we don't have to admit anything because it is still there.

Seems easy enough. :cool:
Click to expand...
You can walk out your back yard and see it. You can photograph it. Why anyone hitches their wagon to such an obviously fake claim is anyone's guess.

In the past, our protagonist has claimed that he is making absurd claims in order to teach us poor plebs, so expect so such malarkey on this one.
 
Axxman300 said:
We're still getting pictures from Hubble, and we're putting the James Webb into a higher orbit soon.

I don't know why any sane person would think Hubble's not up there.
Click to expand...


You are told you are getting pictures . You don't know the source -- might be HSC . Might not . Could be SOFIA .
And how come HSC is not under the sea , its orbit having decayed since 2008 .
Possibly by a mile an orbit which is every 95 minutes ?
You chaps are not half as smart as you imagine .
 
Malbec said:
You are told you are getting pictures . You don't know the source -- might be HSC . Might not . Could be SOFIA .
And how come HSC is not under the sea , its orbit having decayed since 2008 .
Possibly by a mile an orbit which is every 95 minutes ?
You chaps are not half as smart as you imagine .
Click to expand...

Yes we are. Wait.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom