Comments by "The Esseboy" (@TheEsseboy) on "NASA's Plan to Build A Telescope on the Moon" video.

  1. It's a 1 year mission, so no maintenance needed. There is no wind or moving parts after it is assembled, so no maintenance required.
    3
  2. Ehm, if you look back in time, you literally can look anywhere...you clearly do not know how the expansion of the Universe works.
    2
  3. God existing is an assumption made on claims by a unscientific book...and defining their gender and characteristics is hilarious when they haven't adressed the lack of evidence...and lack of possibilities of proving supernatural things can be proven. If god where to exist it would not be beautiful, it would mean that he is one of the most evil beings ever.
    2
  4. Oh, so landing inside a circular crater is hard? It is literally a target mark...with todays cameras and computers it would be a walk in the park to get it within 10 meters, and that is fine, there is a lot of tolerance as the lander in the middle doesn't have to be precise, you can adjust that by tensioning the cables.
    2
  5.  @zzurmzp  Because in the grand scheme of things it is pretty good. Laser precision if you wanna be pedantic is much much better than 100 meters, usually it's centimeter or millimeter level of precision
    2
  6.  @paulkerman8906  The probability of loosing engines increases exponentially as you increase the amount of engines, to get the Starship rated for humans would require them to increase the mean time between engine failures 10 fold...as a single engine failure could have a cascade effect and damage more engines. We are not talking 1 vs 9 engines, we are talking 33 vs 9, and to add to the complexity they have much higher chamber pressures, are full flow designs and use Methane instead of RP-1. My best guess is that Starship will be ready for human flight 2026 the earliest, but much more realisticly in the 2030s, if they do not drop the Raptor engine and use a much simple engine and suffer the weight penalty.
    2
  7. Really? You think studying hydrogen is the same as making nuclear weapons?! You clearly have no clue about nuclear weapons, the mission objectives or spaceprograms in general.
    2
  8.  @kennethterrell1167  And how many square miles is the surface of the moon?
    2
  9.  @kennethterrell1167  Wrong, 14,700,000 square miles, so once every 400 years, a ping pong ball sized meteroid hit a square mile of the moon....
    2
  10. What sources does the Bible cite? Has it been peer reviewed? 🤨
    2
  11. I think you mistook this video for a Bible study vid.
    1
  12. Starship have never flown successfully, and last time it did it lost 20% of its engines...unless they can increase engine mean time between failures by 1000%, it will never fly crewed missions.
    1
  13.  @paulkerman8906  EZ?
    1
  14.  @paulkerman8906  The falcon 9 does not have 33 engines in the first stage...it has 73% fewer engines.
    1
  15. Starship is already delayed by 4 years...and they have no working plan of fixing their current issues with poor engine reliability.
    1
  16. Ehhh, there is literally no evidence for extraterrestrial beings on earth...touch grass bro
    1
  17. Except Starship is a failure and will probably never be able to fly reliably enough for a crewed mission.
    1
  18. ​ @TheBogdanator The craters are billions of years old...they were created by impacts from all the debris when the solar system formed....not from recent impacts...
    1
  19. Ehh, even if you mined 10% of the moons mass, it would not change its orbit one bit... And here we have the prime example of dunning-kruger effect 😂 There is no cycle to geniuses...how many we have is a function of Living standards and how many humans there is.
    1
  20. Ehm, you know those craters are billions of years old...they are from the formation of the solar system....or have you seen many being created on the moon recently?
    1