Your favourite unsolved mystery?

Billy86

Very possible explanation here for Dyatlov and some others, think I posted it ages back so not harm in refreshing!

http://www.cracked.com/article_16671_6-famous-unsolved-mysteries-with-really-obvious-solutions.html

Rucking_Fetard

IvaBigWun wrote: »

I know its quite a long thread but try have a read of it if you can. We've had this one twice already

lol

post 1515 and then post 1529.

wingbacknr5

The disappearance of Maura Murray in 2004 was a strange case. It was made all the stranger by some sicko posting a YouTube video taunting her family on the 8th anniversary of the disappearance.

Kenny Logins

wingbacknr5 wrote: »

The disappearance of Maura Murray in 2004 was a strange case. It was made all the stranger by some sicko posting a YouTube video taunting her family on the 8th anniversary of the disappearance.

Just some nut job, and nothing to do with the case at all.

Kimbot

dodderangler wrote: »

Gotta be jack the ripper

Looks like that mystery is put to bed now too......


http://www.irishtimes.com/news/world/uk/mystery-of-identity-of-jack-the-ripper-solved-1.1921501

wingbacknr5

Kenny Logins wrote: »

Just some nut job, and nothing to do with the case at all.

Yeah more than likely, must have been very upsetting for the family and friends all the same. Always felt that there was a bit more to this case than she just wandered off into the woods after the car accident and died from exposure. Hopefully closure will be reached some day one way or another.

IvaBigWun

jonny24ie wrote: »

Looks like that mystery is put to bed now too......


http://www.irishtimes.com/news/world/uk/mystery-of-identity-of-jack-the-ripper-solved-1.1921501

Glad it wasnt Lewis Carroll then. He was always the most interesting suspect for me.

TheSheriff

This is a great thread! Spent over two hours last night reading the various links which have been given! Only half way through

Stojkovic

The alleged Moon landing in 1969.

Kenny Logins

Stojkovic wrote: »

The alleged Moon landing in 1969.

Where's the unsolved mystery?

knucklehead6

Kenny Logins wrote: »

Where's the unsolved mystery?

the mystery is that people believe it didn't happen.

Kenny Logins

Just watched Buzz Aldrin punching Bart Sibrel again. Thanks for reminding me.

check_six

Stojkovic wrote: »

The alleged Moon landing in 1969.

Kenny Logins wrote: »

Where's the unsolved mystery?

knucklehead6 wrote: »

the mystery is that people believe it didn't happen.

I think it's less a "mystery", and more shocking that they went ahead with it at all. It was very well funded and all, but so much of it was entirely seat of the pants stuff that you couldn't get away with nowadays. So many things could have gone horribly wrong, and some nearly did happen. The landing computer just gave up when they were approaching the surface of the moon and they had to do some surprise manual flying to avoid catastrophe.

As for a faked landing, I'm pretty sure the Soviets (who were in the middle of the hottest part of the Cold War) would have piped up if they couldn't actually see the Apollo craft and the other reflector devices on the surface of the moon with their telescopes.

Unless, of course, you think the Americans were working with the Nazis who were hiding in their dark side moonbase. Maybe the Space-nazis put a fake landing craft out to fool everyone?

I may have said too much already...

retalivity

it is amazing to think that they got there with systems less powerful than the phones we have in our pockets today, and haven't been able to return for 40+ years even with the rapid advancement of technology.

I think the combination of trying to beat the soviets, a sh1tload of money and a "fcuk it let's see what happens" attitude just about got them there, and as you say they couldn't get away with half the stuff today that they did then with regards to safety, risk etc.

Sunnyisland

How Scotland voted no


:-)

Insect Overlord

retalivity wrote: »

I think the combination of trying to beat the soviets, a sh1tload of money and a "fcuk it let's see what happens" attitude just about got them there, and as you say they couldn't get away with half the stuff today that they did then with regards to safety, risk etc.

There's talk of a manned mission to Mars in the next decade or so, but it's not expected that the crew will be able to return to Earth.

duploelabs

retalivity wrote: »

haven't been able to return for 40+ years even with the rapid advancement of technology.

I surmise there's nothing worth going back for

frag420

realies wrote: »

How Scotland voted no


:-)

I think I solved this one for you............I think that maybe more people voted no than voted yes!!:eek:

minotour

check_six wrote: »

.......

Personally, I like the big mysteries, and mysteries don't come much bigger than the pyramids......

From your text i cant tell if you have seen it or not, probably, but in any case, check out Revelations of the Pyramids documentary for a fascinating theory on the true purpose of the Giza pyramid. Its equal parts mind-blowing and implausible which should appeal to all mystery fans. Personally, I dont care if its true or not, it would make a great plot for a movie.

minotour

duploelabs wrote: »

I surmise there's nothing worth going back for

Nothing worth risking several lives for anyway. Sending a probe would be far easier, like a penalty kick compared to the mars rovers. Why dont they do that and send back footage of the landing site to put all that ****e to rest.

Didnt they take long range shots of the landing sites a while back to prove they were there?

check_six

retalivity wrote: »

it is amazing to think that they got there with systems less powerful than the phones we have in our pockets today, and haven't been able to return for 40+ years even with the rapid advancement of technology.

I think the combination of trying to beat the soviets, a sh1tload of money and a "fcuk it let's see what happens" attitude just about got them there, and as you say they couldn't get away with half the stuff today that they did then with regards to safety, risk etc.

I think I read somewhere that at one point the most advanced CPUs they could use on the Space Shuttle were Intel 386 chips as anything more advanced had gate sizes that were so small that cosmic radiation would mess them up. Don't know how, or even if hey got around that problem yet.

knucklehead6

minotour wrote: »

Nothing worth risking several lives for anyway. Sending a probe would be far easier, like a penalty kick compared to the mars rovers. Why dont they do that and send back footage of the landing site to put all that ****e to rest.

Didnt they take long range shots of the landing sites a while back to prove they were there?

http://www.space.com/12796-photos-apollo-moon-landing-sites-lro.html

ghogie91

How i got home last night baffling

funnights74

An File wrote: »

There's talk of a manned mission to Mars in the next decade or so, but it's not expected that the crew will be able to return to Earth.

I nominate Enda, just saying.

LordNorbury

This is one of my favs, still unsolved and only happened in 2004...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ng_jcas-sKo

Gongoozler

The sun in Australia doesn't rise in the East and set in the West. I'm so ****ing confused. I can't work out directions with maps n ****.

Billy86

Gongoozler wrote: »

The sun in Australia doesn't rise in the East and set in the West. I'm so ****ing confused. I can't work out directions with maps n ****.

Nah, it rises in Sydney and sets in Perth, so East to west. The bog water in the other hand...

Gongoozler

Billy86 wrote: »

Nah, it rises in Sydney and sets in Perth, so East to west. The Big water in the other hand...

So I'm being retarded all this time? Crap. Ok good, back to regular sun rising things.

Capt'n Midnight

retalivity wrote: »

it is amazing to think that they got there with systems less powerful than the phones we have in our pockets today, and haven't been able to return for 40+ years even with the rapid advancement of technology.

Rapid advancement ?

When the Americans go to the ISS they use what is essentially a modified Soviet ICMB first flown in 1957.

Ryanair's latest order of planes still have pretty much the same fuselage sections as the original 707 , again from 1957, the main differences are better engines , better electronics, better materials.


It's still a mystery how so many people don't understand that "ye canne change the laws of physics"


Though a lot is probably due to the efforts of marketing trying to convince us that almost every new product has some "new technology"

Mountainsandh

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

Rapid advancement ?
the main differences are better engines , better electronics, better materials.


... "new technology"

Isn't the sum of better engines, better electronics, better materials ... new technology ?