Comments by "snuffeldjuret" (@snuffeldjuret) on "Thunderf00t" channel.

  1.  @hans-joachimbierwirth4727  If that is how you react to a reality check, I feel sorry for you.
    1
  2.  @hans-joachimbierwirth4727  Starship is meant to serve more purposes than that though (e.g. sending Starlink satellites into LEO), which is why your statement that "No human rating, no Starship." is so erroneous. Your analogy with the ocean lines would be fitting if it economically made sense to have it cross a small lake, so your analogy fails as well.
    1
  3.  @hans-joachimbierwirth4727  lol, when you start talking about the name, we all know you are grasping at straws. I have no time for your nonsense, goodbye.
    1
  4.  @zybch  currently.
    1
  5. indeed, and when that crab grabs that knife, i am watching like a hawk. Rat with a pizza is great watching as well. Humanity would be either great curiosity or great entertainment for aliens.
    1
  6.  @godfather7339  what is the cost/kg to LEO?
    1
  7. 1:04 you don't think SpaceX have any scientist employed?
    1
  8. his attitude was still horrible, like how he reacted to the tethered hop in the vacuum chamber, so it was actually the last TF video I watched as a subscriber.
    1
  9. when he lands people on the moon?
    1
  10. 36:25 you have no evidence for this claim. Just because someone watches a video of this footage doesn't mean they believe it is aliens.
    1
  11. 26:04 yea that is what I saw in my head as well, just, squish!
    1
  12. I recall that name from an idiot in a comment section :P.
    1
  13. and NASA is fake and we never landed on the moon, the firmament, val allen belt etc etc.
    1
  14.  @soupisgoodfood42  I don't think that is it at all. I looked into what TF was referencing and as I understand it it is supposed to be about how the glare is non-circular due to the aperture of the camera is non-circular, and thus when the aperture rotates when the camera rotates so does the glare. I presume this would only be the case for near circular objects though, so unless the shape of the aperture is diamond-like I would not be convinced that is the correct explanation.
    1
  15.  @memescrublord9614  he went on and on about how falcon 9 landing and reuse was a failure for not having re-flown in the early days...
    1
  16. Elon has more successes than fails though...
    1
  17.  @sciarkadatul411  I am sure it was super smug and don't hold up :P.
    1
  18.  @JackSparrow-re4ql  you do realize that SpaceX actually sends things to orbit, right? Including astronauts?
    1
  19.  @JackSparrow-re4ql  no private entity had done it before. Also, orbit is since the 60's, and that was ROSCOSMOS, and later NASA ofc., so feel no need to try to educate me on the subject :P. It is funny how you try to make an accomplishment of a private citizen not a big deal just because it just rivals, not exceeds, the accomplishments of the mightiest countries in the world :P. I mean, it is hilarious :D. I am not in any cult, but you are clearly in an Elon hating cult, which is actually even more annoying than the Elon cult :P.
    1
  20.  @JackSparrow-re4ql  I am just telling you how it is. No matter how easy you say it is, Spacex/Elon was still first. "Get a fucking life." Look yourself in the mirror mate. I don't like to be mean, but it is obvious you are the one who is dissatisfied with your current life.
    1
  21. he had to sell about that much within a year, so this was a good time. Do you think he should have waited? Don't think you are informed just because you watched some TF video.
    1
  22. you can't get all air out... you'll leave so much air that you need in the tube.
    1
  23.  @ELFanatic  "... as Elon would like you to believe." is usually said by people who don't know what Elon says. Maybe they know what Elon has said one time and probably misinterpret it, but that's it. There is a reason why Elon is pushing for 100% reusability, which seems to contradict your statement.
    1
  24.  @BenderLens  you are basically saying "good job" when "great job" is more applicable. Not sure how that is hard for you to understand.
    1
  25.  @BenderLens  That is what you all say, no matter how reasonable a person is. If they are not a part of your TF CSS cult, they are irrational fanbois.
    1
  26.  Nim Chimpsky  and there is far too much hatin'.
    1
  27.  Nim Chimpsky  your comment including "There's far too much Musk idolizing if you ask me!"
    1
  28.  Nim Chimpsky  no, a statement of yours, the statement I quoted.
    1
  29.  Nim Chimpsky  :D
    1
  30. well said.
    1
  31.  @Bacteriophagebs  how long were the shuttle missions compared to crew dragon missions? What is best, 7 people for 4 days or 4 people for 7 days?
    1
  32.  @Bacteriophagebs  "Seems about the same." Indeed. The problem for your argument is that the space shuttle's longest mission was 17 days, compared to 5 months (planned) for Dragon capsule. So 4 people for 150 days = 600 peopledays vs. 7 people for 17 days = 119 peopledays.
    1
  33.  @Bacteriophagebs  with you saying that, I assume you'll accept my point of view and reject your own once the mission lasts 5 months?
    1
  34.  @Bacteriophagebs  that is besides the point so stick to the topic. We are comparing the STS with Falcon 9+Crew Dragon here now. 600 persondays vs 120. If the only thing you have to say why 600 isn't 5 times as good as 120 is "we'll see if it lasts that long", then if we actually see that you have to admit that it is 5 times as good.
    1
  35.  @Bacteriophagebs  do you honestly think it is even likely that they'll end the mission beforehand, given how involved NASA (and JAXA) are? TBH though, there isn't much more to say than that I really, really, really hope you'll remember this conversation and start question yourself a bit more once they splashdown in late April or early May. It is important to question things, but that includes questioning yourself.
    1
  36.  @ns0557212  so unless you currently are the CEO of a successful company, you're trash. Got it :D.
    1
  37. great comment.
    1
  38. I feel sad for you as TF is peddling so much bs about Elon. Maybe you are alright if you dismiss most of what TF says though.
    1
  39. yeah I am only here to auto-dislike the video and read the comments :).
    1
  40.  @whateverrevetahw6846  Reading the comments is way more informative than watching his crappy video, and takes less time.
    1
  41.  @whateverrevetahw6846  that does not address what I wrote.
    1
  42.  @whateverrevetahw6846  Is it his success or is it SpaceX's success?
    1
  43.  @whateverrevetahw6846  Speaking of Starship, Musk just said: "But, much more important, is that this design is capable of full & rapid reusability. Long way to go from design to making it actually fully & rapidly reusable with high payload, but at least success is one of the possible outcomes haha." What a "con man" he is, LOL!
    1
  44.  @whateverrevetahw6846  huff and puff all you want, if you do not address what I say, you lose the argument by default.
    1
  45.  @whateverrevetahw6846  you are projecting mate.
    1
  46.    maybe they don't want him to get the views? To not please TF and people like Sean Orr who writes "Please make a video where you see what percentage of your comments is antifans and them show them how much money you make off of that same percentage."
    1
  47. I am not much for TF humor but I lolled hard at 2:57
    1
  48. makes for better video for debbie downers to watch :P. TF certainly doesn't follow "the principle of charity", and understandably so because it would be a lot more difficult for him to produce videos if he did.
    1
  49.  @mlgpro2241  if TF doesn't interpret what people say correctly, why should we interpret what TF says correctly?
    1
  50.  @mlgpro2241  the things he interpreted wrong, do you think it was bad enough that you can suspect TF intentionally misinterpreted things?
    1