The first person on Mars is ‘likely to be a woman’, NASA Administrator Jim Bridenstine has said.
“It’s likely to be a woman, the first next person on the Moon. It’s also true that the first person on Mars is likely to be a woman,” CNN cited Bridenstine as saying on a science and technology radio talk show “Science Friday”.
The NASA administrator did not identify a specific person but said women are at the forefront of the agency’s upcoming plans.
Minimum one way length of journey is 5 months, a very complicated journey, astronauts have to carry oxygen, water, food etc. Then return journey if it is missed in particular time, then it could be delayed by months.
Almost a year staying in space. LOL.
They can't fool all the people all the time.
Just came to my mind. Did any machine returned to earth before manned flight returned to earth from moon. Even for 200kms they do dry run of the empty capsule many times.
Next time if they claim they're sending humans to Mars, ask them how many times the capsule landed and returned from Mars.
Manned flight is not an aeroplane that can be steered by a pilot, either it is automatic control or it is controlled from ground.
If there is evidence of "fakery and fantasy" by NASA, how do I assure myself that the evidence is reliable? My view is (and I may be wrong about this) that if this evidence is presented by experts in the field, there is a greater likelihood of that evidence being sound.
For instance, I know that the respected brother, Abu Muhammad, is a transmitter of information related to astronomy because he has a personal interest in the topic. But I don't know if he is an expert in the subject. So if he makes a claim that differs from the mainstream view in astronomy (this is entirely hypothetical; I am not in any way insinuating that he has made any such claim), I am skeptical of its veracity.
Similarly, your post gives off the vibe that NASA is not entirely truthful about the information it releases, so I don't know if this is an opinion that is echoed by the mainstream of experts in the field or if it is a minority opinion.
From reading your posts on various topics, you have always come across as very objective, knowledgeable and very even keeled. However, your opinion about NASA sounded slightly idiosyncratic, so I wanted to know if you were speaking in the capacity of an expert, in which case I would have to tweak my own personal views on NASA. I understand NASA to be non nefarious, by and large, even though it may have some unscrupulous elements in its bureaucracy, as is the case in most organizations. So I guess the question I am asking is should I view NASA more as an instrument of political propaganda than a as center for research and design?
If you can refute any of it you should reply in that thread.
Also check the fake live streams interviews from the ISS on YouTube. That really should suffice.
If I saw a video of someone making a coin go through a solid table and he's claiming supernatural abilities then i don't need to be an expert in supernatural abilities to know how it was actually done using slight of hand, magnets and lots of practice. Evidence is evidence and the best evidence is when it's their own material. Many defeated people your approach to deflect what's being said or presented so whenever I read or even asked about being an expert I immediately know the person is not interested in the facts at all.
I'm not saying that you're in that group of people. In your case you could have asked for what I'm referring to or the evidence but you asked if I'm an expert. This is why i prodded not because of any offense or anything else. Being an expert is important in some things absolutely but one should know how to distinguish between the two.
I have to confess off the bat that English is not a first language for me, so I may not be able to convey well what I am trying to say or ask. I did not know that my question was typical of diversionary tactics, and I am sorry if that is how I came across.
Sir, I have immense respect for you and your views, and this forum has given me a glimpse of the temperament of the people who side with the truth. Whenever I have been confused by a controversy, I have tried to convince myself that the stand taken by the majority of established members of this forum is closer to the truth.
I am no expert, and I do not possess the analytical skills required to evaluate evidences based on merit, which is why I am a muqallid of the views of this forum in both religious and worldly matters. If it is the established view of this forum that NASA is not trustworthy, then I would like to adopt that view as being closer to the truth.
Are you saying that there are some things in which it is not important to be an expert to hold a particular view?
This cannot be undone and I am sure it will be greatly appreciated.
We apologise but you have been denied access to report posts in this thread. This could be due to excessively reporting posts and not understanding our forum rules. For assistance or information, please use the forum help thread to request more information. Jazakallah