"Actors" don't make correct system engineering decisions on the design of launch vehicles, nor implement major innovations leading to huge improvements in their economy of operation.
Do you have proof that Elon actually DID that? Sure, I've heard people SAY things like that, but that isn't the same thing. You can pay people to say things.
The more I've seen him talk the more I'm convinced he's a babbling idiot incapable of what you claim. The nonsense he spouts is next level... and actual engineers will testify to that. I've seen them.
Anyway, look at videos by Common Sense Skeptic and even well, Thunderf00t on youtube for another perspective.
I'm not saying to believe them 100%, but I've actually pasted a link from many of Thunderf00t's videos into gemini and asked it to fact check... and they were almost completely accurate to my surprise.
Point is, always look at all sides for a balanced perspective. My balanced perspective on the man is that he's full of it, he's an actor.
I wasn't even thinking about the Path to Exile fiasco from not too long ago, how he bragged he was the #1 player in the world at this game... and it was revealed he was paying someone else to play his character.
He shows his cards all the time, he's a real character that one... nothing and I mean nothing really adds up to mega supergenius real-life Tony Stark. Not even close to being close.
"Proof"? Where have you been for the past 20 years?
I made two remarks. The first one pertains to Musk's decision to abandon composite stage structure for stainless steel in his development of the Starliner vehicle. He made the observation, "If it takes too long, it is the wrong approach." So, they shifted to stainless steel, for which the greater ability to make changes in fabrication made it easier and faster to adopt design changes. Composite structure would have required the continual fabrication of large molds and tooling. It was the right approach and it was a high-level insight. I am a system engineer with a 40-year career, and recognized it as a basic developmental insight.
And the development of the flyback booster with landing capability was on view for the world to see. There have been very few attempts at this (aside from space shuttle variations). Boeing once had a flyback S-1C booster concept as an afterthought of the Apollo program, but NASA was not interested. (I saw the drawings and conceptual art when I was at Boeing.) Kistler Aerospace had fully developed a fully-reusable 2-stage launch vehicle and was in the midst of developing it, but the capital investment ran out. (A colleague at Boeing was working with them on it.) Musk simply went ahead and did it. All it took was landing legs and the willingness to keep some propellant in reserve for the flyback burn. Public history.
I don't care how many carping videos you reference, I know engineering, and no "actor" could have made those correct shots. He drives his people hard, but he gets things done. This is out of fashion. It is 1940s style---but that is what made that generation Great. His determination to build his own engines is another brassy move that puts him in the driver's seat. The move to methane-oxygen engines is a huge performance boost. One can easily argue that SpaceX has the most advanced rocket engines in the world, a title that once belonged to Russia. The proof is on front pages and all over the internet. Shortly, I expect NASA to cancel the SLS and replace the core and boosters with Musk's Big Booster: more capability and reusable. It takes billions of dollars to launch an SLS, because of all the expendable hardware. Do you really think that is a way to return to the Moon for a prolonged presence?
I get that you don't like that he thinks faster than you, but tough luck. There is always someone who thinks faster. Tony Stark is comic book fiction; Elon Musk is real.
SpaceX's accomplishments are real. That's not the issue. The issue is your assumption that Elon Musk personally came up with or engineered them.
Where's the evidence? Not that he approved the direction or championed it - but that he actually originated the engineering decisions you credit him for: the switch to stainless steel, reusable boosters, Raptor, methane, etc.
Every one of those technologies was developed by large teams of highly specialized engineers, and most of the underlying concepts predate SpaceX by decades. SpaceX deserves enormous credit for executing them successfully. That's very different from claiming Musk personally conceived or engineered them.
In fact, there's plenty of public footage of Musk confidently making statements about engineering, physics, and science that are simply incorrect or reveal a superficial understanding of the subject. Being the CEO and public face of a company doesn't automatically make someone the technical genius behind every breakthrough.
You also say NASA will "shortly" replace SLS with Starship. Based on what? That's speculation, not evidence.
The reality is that NASA awarded SpaceX the Human Landing System contract in 2021, and Starship is now years behind the original Artemis schedule. NASA's own Inspector General has repeatedly identified Starship's development delays as a major risk to the Artemis timeline.
So yes, SLS is expensive. No one disputes that. But holding up Starship as proof of Musk's engineering brilliance while ignoring that it's years behind on the very lunar mission NASA hired it to perform is a strange argument.
If you have evidence that Musk personally solved these engineering problems, I'd genuinely like to see it. But "SpaceX succeeded, therefore Musk is the genius behind it" isn't evidence - it's an assumption.
You can fanboy Musk all you want, my only suggestion is that you might consider being open to the possibility that the man himself might not actually match the image that the mainstream media marketing machine and his $$ have paid for. There is indisputable evidence (for the open minded, that is) out there to show that he in fact is not that man. Of course, a fan isn't going to be objective and risk losing their idol. I understand that. I wish you the best.
Musk made the Decision to switch from composite structure to stainless steel for the Starship project. It's not like someone else made the decision and he just went along with it. I never said he was responsible for the engineering either way, just the correct direction. They were otherwise laboring under the burden of using composite structure. Nobody has emerged to claim someone else made the decision.
Same thing with the choice to go reusable. He made the Decision to do it, not the design to do it. That was a correct call. Nobody has claimed otherwise.
I said I expect NASA to convert to Starship, not "will." But it is inevitable. NASA has only a dozen or so RS-25 engines remaining, each very expensive. They will not have the budget or the inventory to continue using SLS for more than a handful of future shots. It's just looking at the cards. The Starship booster, which is what I was referring to, is in existence and flying reliably. It is an obvious replacement for the SLS core stage and boosters, both in capability and dimensions. Don't confuse it with the lander.
The development of the methane-fueled Raptor engine came from Musk's ultimate plan of colonizing Mars and the prospect of making fuel from the Martian atmosphere (not an original idea, but a challenging one nonetheless). I don't personally agree that colonizing Mars will be duck soup, but the superiority of the Raptor engine is indisputable. Even Blue Origin has jumped on the methane bandwagon. Again, no one is claiming otherwise.
This is not a battle of opinions. I worked on future launch vehicle design at the Boeing Company (Advanced Launch System, Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicle, and MiIlitary Spaceplane). I know the subject. Musk has been recapitulating the entirety of modern rocketry in the course of his business, pushing aside the longstanding rocket engine vendors in the process. It's all there to see, if you have been paying attention for the past 20 years.
You want to claim that Musk is some kind of front---you prove it with evidence. You haven't shown anything but skepticism and speculation. You don't even instance any of Musk's supposed misstatements. In any case, whatever he says does not undo the correct decisions he has made, which are the proof of the pudding.
Oh, by the way---it is relevant to note that SpaceX developed the manned dragon capsule at a price much less than awarded Boeing for the CST-100...and had to bring back the Boeing crew from the International Space Station when they were stranded there by a faulty capsule. Boeing's capsule has since been in silence. The problem with your argument is that even your theory requires someone like Musk to be pulling the strings from behind the scenes. Why would they be hidden?
It is either Musk, or name who it is. Have you any experience with this industry at all?
When I try and explain it to people, I equate people like Musk to Hulk Hogan. He’s a character working for a bigger company, who’s allowed to bring his own personality to the character because it makes it feel more real. But just like with Hogan, when the times change, he can be switched from good guy to bad guy and the marks just cheer or jeer as expected. Wrestling is how all politics work
"AOC’s brother submitted her application and she was chosen by the Executive Director of Justice Democrats Out Of 10,000 Candidates
It’s all on camera. There is even footage of AOC and Alexandra Rojas both confirming this on camera
“Alexandria Ocasio Cortez is not really the congresswoman of New York's 14th congressional district. She is essentially an actress. She's merely playing the part of a New York congresswoman. I know this sounds crazy, but bear with me. In 2017, a group called the Justice Democrats held auditions for potential congressional candidates that they would run on their platform for various congressional seats throughout the country. Alexandria Ocasio Cortez's brother Gabriel submitted her for the role”
In 2017 Justice Democrats, a progressive PAC founded by former Bernie Sanders staffers and allies put out a public call for congressional candidates
They received over 10,000 nominations
AOC’s younger brother, Gabriel Ocasio-Cortez, submitted her name. AOC was working as a bartender
Justice Democrats vetted nominees and chose AOC. They then trained her and installed her as their candidate"
Remember, President Trump in 2019 said " Enjoy the show". All the actors, and Mamdani, are playing out their roles. President Trump "The Communists are finally making their move. I've been waiting and preparing for this for a long time." The goal of Socialism is Communism - Vladimir Lenin
My take is that socialism is being artificially excited so Trump can do something about it while he's in power. Can't have a solution without a problem, so the idea is to create a problem.
Everyone is now an actor? I too believed many have been replaced, but I am beginning to think I am a fool. This has gone on so long ,that its black pilling people.
This was already posted here earlier today.
I heard this years ago, right after she got into congress.
Somebody posted this earlier this morning, but it's old news, although I am sure some have not heard this before.
The irony is you cannot convince me that Elon Musk is NOT an actor.
"Actors" don't make correct system engineering decisions on the design of launch vehicles, nor implement major innovations leading to huge improvements in their economy of operation.
Do you have proof that Elon actually DID that? Sure, I've heard people SAY things like that, but that isn't the same thing. You can pay people to say things. The more I've seen him talk the more I'm convinced he's a babbling idiot incapable of what you claim. The nonsense he spouts is next level... and actual engineers will testify to that. I've seen them. Anyway, look at videos by Common Sense Skeptic and even well, Thunderf00t on youtube for another perspective.
I'm not saying to believe them 100%, but I've actually pasted a link from many of Thunderf00t's videos into gemini and asked it to fact check... and they were almost completely accurate to my surprise. Point is, always look at all sides for a balanced perspective. My balanced perspective on the man is that he's full of it, he's an actor. I wasn't even thinking about the Path to Exile fiasco from not too long ago, how he bragged he was the #1 player in the world at this game... and it was revealed he was paying someone else to play his character. He shows his cards all the time, he's a real character that one... nothing and I mean nothing really adds up to mega supergenius real-life Tony Stark. Not even close to being close.
"Proof"? Where have you been for the past 20 years?
I made two remarks. The first one pertains to Musk's decision to abandon composite stage structure for stainless steel in his development of the Starliner vehicle. He made the observation, "If it takes too long, it is the wrong approach." So, they shifted to stainless steel, for which the greater ability to make changes in fabrication made it easier and faster to adopt design changes. Composite structure would have required the continual fabrication of large molds and tooling. It was the right approach and it was a high-level insight. I am a system engineer with a 40-year career, and recognized it as a basic developmental insight.
And the development of the flyback booster with landing capability was on view for the world to see. There have been very few attempts at this (aside from space shuttle variations). Boeing once had a flyback S-1C booster concept as an afterthought of the Apollo program, but NASA was not interested. (I saw the drawings and conceptual art when I was at Boeing.) Kistler Aerospace had fully developed a fully-reusable 2-stage launch vehicle and was in the midst of developing it, but the capital investment ran out. (A colleague at Boeing was working with them on it.) Musk simply went ahead and did it. All it took was landing legs and the willingness to keep some propellant in reserve for the flyback burn. Public history.
I don't care how many carping videos you reference, I know engineering, and no "actor" could have made those correct shots. He drives his people hard, but he gets things done. This is out of fashion. It is 1940s style---but that is what made that generation Great. His determination to build his own engines is another brassy move that puts him in the driver's seat. The move to methane-oxygen engines is a huge performance boost. One can easily argue that SpaceX has the most advanced rocket engines in the world, a title that once belonged to Russia. The proof is on front pages and all over the internet. Shortly, I expect NASA to cancel the SLS and replace the core and boosters with Musk's Big Booster: more capability and reusable. It takes billions of dollars to launch an SLS, because of all the expendable hardware. Do you really think that is a way to return to the Moon for a prolonged presence?
I get that you don't like that he thinks faster than you, but tough luck. There is always someone who thinks faster. Tony Stark is comic book fiction; Elon Musk is real.
SpaceX's accomplishments are real. That's not the issue. The issue is your assumption that Elon Musk personally came up with or engineered them.
Where's the evidence? Not that he approved the direction or championed it - but that he actually originated the engineering decisions you credit him for: the switch to stainless steel, reusable boosters, Raptor, methane, etc.
Every one of those technologies was developed by large teams of highly specialized engineers, and most of the underlying concepts predate SpaceX by decades. SpaceX deserves enormous credit for executing them successfully. That's very different from claiming Musk personally conceived or engineered them.
In fact, there's plenty of public footage of Musk confidently making statements about engineering, physics, and science that are simply incorrect or reveal a superficial understanding of the subject. Being the CEO and public face of a company doesn't automatically make someone the technical genius behind every breakthrough.
You also say NASA will "shortly" replace SLS with Starship. Based on what? That's speculation, not evidence.
The reality is that NASA awarded SpaceX the Human Landing System contract in 2021, and Starship is now years behind the original Artemis schedule. NASA's own Inspector General has repeatedly identified Starship's development delays as a major risk to the Artemis timeline.
So yes, SLS is expensive. No one disputes that. But holding up Starship as proof of Musk's engineering brilliance while ignoring that it's years behind on the very lunar mission NASA hired it to perform is a strange argument.
If you have evidence that Musk personally solved these engineering problems, I'd genuinely like to see it. But "SpaceX succeeded, therefore Musk is the genius behind it" isn't evidence - it's an assumption.
You can fanboy Musk all you want, my only suggestion is that you might consider being open to the possibility that the man himself might not actually match the image that the mainstream media marketing machine and his $$ have paid for. There is indisputable evidence (for the open minded, that is) out there to show that he in fact is not that man. Of course, a fan isn't going to be objective and risk losing their idol. I understand that. I wish you the best.
Musk made the Decision to switch from composite structure to stainless steel for the Starship project. It's not like someone else made the decision and he just went along with it. I never said he was responsible for the engineering either way, just the correct direction. They were otherwise laboring under the burden of using composite structure. Nobody has emerged to claim someone else made the decision.
Same thing with the choice to go reusable. He made the Decision to do it, not the design to do it. That was a correct call. Nobody has claimed otherwise.
I said I expect NASA to convert to Starship, not "will." But it is inevitable. NASA has only a dozen or so RS-25 engines remaining, each very expensive. They will not have the budget or the inventory to continue using SLS for more than a handful of future shots. It's just looking at the cards. The Starship booster, which is what I was referring to, is in existence and flying reliably. It is an obvious replacement for the SLS core stage and boosters, both in capability and dimensions. Don't confuse it with the lander.
The development of the methane-fueled Raptor engine came from Musk's ultimate plan of colonizing Mars and the prospect of making fuel from the Martian atmosphere (not an original idea, but a challenging one nonetheless). I don't personally agree that colonizing Mars will be duck soup, but the superiority of the Raptor engine is indisputable. Even Blue Origin has jumped on the methane bandwagon. Again, no one is claiming otherwise.
This is not a battle of opinions. I worked on future launch vehicle design at the Boeing Company (Advanced Launch System, Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicle, and MiIlitary Spaceplane). I know the subject. Musk has been recapitulating the entirety of modern rocketry in the course of his business, pushing aside the longstanding rocket engine vendors in the process. It's all there to see, if you have been paying attention for the past 20 years.
You want to claim that Musk is some kind of front---you prove it with evidence. You haven't shown anything but skepticism and speculation. You don't even instance any of Musk's supposed misstatements. In any case, whatever he says does not undo the correct decisions he has made, which are the proof of the pudding.
Oh, by the way---it is relevant to note that SpaceX developed the manned dragon capsule at a price much less than awarded Boeing for the CST-100...and had to bring back the Boeing crew from the International Space Station when they were stranded there by a faulty capsule. Boeing's capsule has since been in silence. The problem with your argument is that even your theory requires someone like Musk to be pulling the strings from behind the scenes. Why would they be hidden?
It is either Musk, or name who it is. Have you any experience with this industry at all?
i agree. is he a figurehead of his companies?
he seems very distracted with Social Media.
go back and review DOGE …
ask AI what tangible, long term effect the DOGE thing had.
and chances are good, AI will act like they have no idea what you’re talking about…
When I try and explain it to people, I equate people like Musk to Hulk Hogan. He’s a character working for a bigger company, who’s allowed to bring his own personality to the character because it makes it feel more real. But just like with Hogan, when the times change, he can be switched from good guy to bad guy and the marks just cheer or jeer as expected. Wrestling is how all politics work
I disagree... He might be playing a role, but he's No actor....
"AOC’s brother submitted her application and she was chosen by the Executive Director of Justice Democrats Out Of 10,000 Candidates
It’s all on camera. There is even footage of AOC and Alexandra Rojas both confirming this on camera
“Alexandria Ocasio Cortez is not really the congresswoman of New York's 14th congressional district. She is essentially an actress. She's merely playing the part of a New York congresswoman. I know this sounds crazy, but bear with me. In 2017, a group called the Justice Democrats held auditions for potential congressional candidates that they would run on their platform for various congressional seats throughout the country. Alexandria Ocasio Cortez's brother Gabriel submitted her for the role”
Justice Democrats vetted nominees and chose AOC. They then trained her and installed her as their candidate"
https://nitter.net/WallStreetApes/status/2071825311306744268
supposedly Richard Nixon also answered a advertisement in a newspaper or magazine ?
BTW I think BHO, big Mike and Meghan Markle (and her “children”) are also actors - chosen by DS handlers.
and Ronald Reagan too
Must have struggled finding a pedophile to do it. Got a donkey instead.
i wouldnt be surprised to learn that some pedos run for office because their handlers make them
why is it that nobody is aware that the former speaker of the house Dennis Hastert is a serial child molestor?
Remember, President Trump in 2019 said " Enjoy the show". All the actors, and Mamdani, are playing out their roles. President Trump "The Communists are finally making their move. I've been waiting and preparing for this for a long time." The goal of Socialism is Communism - Vladimir Lenin
My take is that socialism is being artificially excited so Trump can do something about it while he's in power. Can't have a solution without a problem, so the idea is to create a problem.
Before anyone screams at me , I did do a search on Elon in the sidebar...Nothing came up...But if it bothers you ill delete it...🤷🏻♂️
Like Musk isnt an actor...cmon guys.
Chosen by bra size?
She could have made more on OnlyFans - and essentially be doing something more respectable than what she does now.
The Justice Democrats were also the ones who found Graham Platner for Maine using the same method.
Everyone is now an actor? I too believed many have been replaced, but I am beginning to think I am a fool. This has gone on so long ,that its black pilling people.
John Wilkes Booth was an actor
and he pretended to shoot Abe Lincoln in a theater
That is where this mania leads: to a complete inversion of reality.