@carbac80@ironmikevoss@elonmusk You've got to be trolling.
They absolutely achieved an upright soft landing. You think it's supposed to stay upright, bobbing in the ocean? That's neither the goal or design. Within a few more test flights, it will be caught by the tower arms for full and rapid reuse.
@RayzzaSharpe@Not_yourpilot@JeremyBobo1@benwehrman You literally just outed yourself as a hack. Why would projections be needed for a FE? Why would "great circle" routes exist. This has been the reality since WAY before "3D computer graphics" existed.
@RayzzaSharpe@RDEIL@JeremyBobo1@benwehrman If I sent you any of a dozen or more photos of the full globe from Artemis II (or, Apollo, or any unmanned moon mission, or from any geo-stationary satellite) you'd just say it was fake. So, what's the point?
@RayzzaSharpe@JeremyBobo1@benwehrman 6000 years is nothing in cosmic terms. Multiply it by a million. See, you're only 6 orders of magnitude out of the scale of the universe. ๐คก
@tartarbeliever@wakenminds Drawings of completed buildings is what are common online and returned in search. Grok mentioned several archives where original construction drawings exist. Anyway, even if they hadn't survived, doesn't prove they never existed. Engineering drawing was much different then, too.
@RayzzaSharpe@JeremyBobo1@benwehrman Show me the math. The formulas, that reconcile the spherical math (trigonometry, etc.) that ships and airplanes and spacecraft all use to navigate AROUND the Earth?
Show me a flat earth simulation that I can fly within to confirm. If FE is true, there should be lots of them.
@RayzzaSharpe@JeremyBobo1@benwehrman Your time scale is also buggered. 6,000 years is a blink of an eye in cosmic time scales.
You know, there are free astronomy simulation programs, with all the proper motions of celestial bodies incorporated, that you can set to timelapse millions of years in minutes. Try one.
@RayzzaSharpe@JeremyBobo1@benwehrman Those mountains are billions of times closer than the nearest stars.
Again, your sense of scale is completely buggered.
@RayzzaSharpe@JeremyBobo1@benwehrman They appear to rotate, because the Earth is rotating beneath the star field.
How do you explain that south of the equator, the star field (and constellations) are different, they rotate in the opposite direction and around a different pole star?
@RayzzaSharpe@JeremyBobo1@benwehrman When you drive across a large plain, parallel with mountains in the far distance, do they appear to be moving? Now, multiply that distance by billions of times and the resulting apparent movement/rate of change will also be reduced by billions of times.
@RayzzaSharpe@JeremyBobo1@benwehrman If u r in a car w/windows up/eyes closed going 70 mph, do you feel the speed (ignoring the engine revs/road vibrations)? If you throw a ball in the car, does it zip away from you at 70 mph? If you exhale some smoke, does it zip away from you? Does it do so at 10 mph? Or, 150 mph?
@kingsolo4reall@SpaceX How do you think those prices will come down?
Perfecting Starship and launching 3 or 4 times as many sats per flight, at a fraction of the cost per kg to orbit, is how.
@_MaxQ_ I'm having a hard time believing that any amount of deluge water will be sufficient to preclude deflector plate erosion sufficiently enough to allow for several launches of this per day.
@PeterDClack Their durability also makes them pretty much as inert as the minerals they were made with. So, much, much more environmentally benign, even in a landfill, relative to the FF waste/emissions they mitigate.