It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Disclosure of the Moon Landing Hoax: Part 2

page: 1
17
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 24 2015 @ 07:33 AM
link   
Well we have to keep it going, boys and girls.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

There is the link to the 400pg behemoth and I'd like to continue. SayanoraJupiter recently left us wondering why the communications would decline to use phonetics when calling out alphabetical letters during such critical times as a LIGHTNING STRIKE on the Saturn V!

I'm still wondering why the rocket-booster vibrations from the craft aren't heard in Armstrong's voice as they're landing on a foreign body 240k mi away. How could that much thrust and stress not transfer into his voice? Was he reading from a script as SJ was referring to???

Any way, let's keep it civil, have fun and share knowledge and ideas! Thanks, guys and gals!
edit on 24-4-2015 by bobbypurify because: (no reason given)

edit on 24-4-2015 by bobbypurify because: (no reason given)




posted on Apr, 24 2015 @ 08:07 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Apr, 24 2015 @ 08:11 AM
link   
a reply to: bobbypurify

They have pictures of the flag they planted on the moon via satellite. How do you disprove that?



posted on Apr, 24 2015 @ 08:16 AM
link   

originally posted by: bobbypurify
Well we have to keep it going, boys and girls.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

There is the link to the 400pg behemoth and I'd like to continue. SayanoraJupiter recently left us wondering why the communications would decline to use phonetics when calling out alphabetical letters during such critical times as a LIGHTNING STRIKE on the Saturn V!


You can watch the video of the live TV broadcast here including the dialogue in context:



Not sure what this 'proves' though. It was a potentially dangerous situation, people were slightly panicked I imagine. The guy asking them to try 'SCE to auxiliary' probably was reading from a checklist, which is normal. You do realise if you are on an airliner and there is a problem, the pilots will be pouring over the reference books going through checklists?
If they were reading from scripts, who was in the rocket that people watched launch, not just on TV but there?



I'm still wondering why the rocket-booster vibrations from the craft aren't heard in Armstrong's voice as they're landing on a foreign body 240k mi away. How could that much thrust and stress not transfer into his voice? Was he reading from a script as SJ was referring to???


Regarding this, watch these videos and tell me what you think after:





And not really on this specific part of the topic - but just because it's cool if you haven't seen it:




posted on Apr, 24 2015 @ 08:18 AM
link   
a reply to: AutumnWitch657

Just trying to keep one of the best threads on ATS going. The latter was closed because it eclipsed 400 pages! The people have spoken!



posted on Apr, 24 2015 @ 08:19 AM
link   
a reply to: amicktd

I have pictures of 50ft apes with a fetish for white women. How do YOU disprove that?


i.dailymail.co.uk...



posted on Apr, 24 2015 @ 08:20 AM
link   

originally posted by: bobbypurify

There is the link to the 400pg behemoth and I'd like to continue. SayanoraJupiter recently left us wondering why the communications would decline to use phonetics when calling out alphabetical letters during such critical times as a LIGHTNING STRIKE on the Saturn V!


because comms requested SCE to AUX.. and not sierra charlie echo to AUX..


I'm still wondering why the rocket-booster vibrations from the craft aren't heard in Armstrong's voice as they're landing on a foreign body 240k mi away. How could that much thrust and stress not transfer into his voice? Was he reading from a script as SJ was referring to???


one because its a vacuum outside the craft.. second it depends on the sensitivity of the mic..
you dont hear the roar of the engines during the upper stages of a launch also..

after 5min 20 mark:


after 2 min mark:

edit on 24-4-2015 by choos because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 24 2015 @ 08:21 AM
link   
I forgot to add to my reply above, for context the amount of thrust:

LEM Descent engine

10,125 pounds-force (45.04 kN) maximum, throttle between 10% and 60% of full thrust

en.wikipedia.org...

Shuttle main engine EACH (there are three, does not include solid boosters)

Each Space Shuttle Main Engine operates at a liquid oxygen/liquid hydrogen mixture ratio of 6 to 1 to produce a sea level thrust of 179,097 kilograms (375,000 pounds) and a vacuum thrust of 213,188 (470,000 pounds).

www.nasa.gov...



posted on Apr, 24 2015 @ 08:22 AM
link   
a reply to: AgentSmith

My man! Always coming through with videos for me to waste time at my desk with.

Some hoax proponents maintain that the rockets were empty and the astros slid down the back in a shaft elevator. I don't know how much stock I put into that but the powers of production are amazing! I don't think SJ proved anything but he certainly showed how they could be reading off a script. One would think that phonetic accuracy would be a must, think how critical a mistranslation would be!!
edit on 24-4-2015 by bobbypurify because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 24 2015 @ 08:33 AM
link   

originally posted by: bobbypurify
a reply to: AgentSmith

My man! Always coming through with videos for me to waste time at my desk with.

Some hoax proponents maintain that the rockets were empty and the astros slid down the back in a shaft elevator. I don't know how much stock I put into that but the powers of production are amazing! I don't think SJ proved anything but he certainly showed how they could be reading off a script. One would think that phonetic accuracy would be a must, think how critical a mistranslation would be!!


incorrect.. it is the NAME of the object.. by calling it sierra charlie echo they are changing the name of it.. they do this many times.

like VHF.. why would they call it victor hotel lima??

if they are reading off a script you realise everyone in houston control is also reading off a script?? which involves hundreds of people that will know that its a hoax!!



posted on Apr, 24 2015 @ 08:38 AM
link   
a reply to: choos

if they are reading off a script you realise everyone in houston control is also reading off a script?? which involves hundreds of people that will know that its a hoax!!

Damn this fallacy! Choos, you come off as an intelligent fella. You do know that you only watched mission control on TV. We all know how a production works. Use your imagination here and quit being so absolute. So no, hundreds of people may have not been involved, if you're critical of the Apollo saga.

But good point on the "vhf". I wonder if that would be called victor hotel lima in such a situation. Obviously, Conrad had trouble translating.



posted on Apr, 24 2015 @ 08:47 AM
link   

originally posted by: bobbypurify

Damn this fallacy! Choos, you come off as an intelligent fella. You do know that you only watched mission control on TV. We all know how a production works. Use your imagination here and quit being so absolute. So no, hundreds of people may have not been involved, if you're critical of the Apollo saga.


people like john aaron cant make calls like SCE to AUX unless it was in the script is my point..


But good point on the "vhf". I wonder if that would be called victor hotel lima in such a situation. Obviously, Conrad had trouble translating.


it would never be called victor hotel lima..

LOS = loss of signal and AOS = aquisition of signal i believe: not called Lima October Sierra and Alpha October Sierra..


000:22:41 McCandless: Apollo 11, this is Houston. One minute to LOS Canary. AOS at Tananarive 37:04 in VHF Simplex Alpha. Over.



posted on Apr, 24 2015 @ 08:57 AM
link   
a reply to: bobbypurify

I got your point and will quit wasting my time.



posted on Apr, 24 2015 @ 08:59 AM
link   
a reply to: amicktd

You're not wasting your time, buddy. Please - stay and add to the discussion. I was trying to be light-hearted in my response but a photo is just a photo at the end of the day. Yet, it's really all we have to go off of.
edit on 24-4-2015 by bobbypurify because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 24 2015 @ 09:03 AM
link   
Not everyone who has doubts about the moon landings think that we never went to the moon. Some think only that what was presented to us was not a true and accurate account.

I have always found one thing beyond all others that assures me of this and nothing anyone says will be able to reconcile it in my head, for me, this is absolute.

In 1969 with the entire world watching, NASA was going to "live" broadcast the biggest event in human history, something that seemed impossible, the scope of which was incredibly complex and by rational standards completely untested and they were going to do it at a time when hostility between America and Russia was real and tense, at a time when the Americans had lost every other space fairing race with there cold war adversary when American confidence and opinion was waning.

Had anything that could of went wrong out of the thousands that were possible it would have meant certain death for all the astronauts involved in front of hundreds of millions of Americans and our governments most bitter foes, this would of possibly been a slow painful death for American government and the result still to this day probably can not be measured. It would have been utter chaos and the fallout from which, America may have not recovered.

Contemplating this, think, what makes more sense, sending the brave hero astronauts that America knows and loves or sending others that the public does not know while Neil, Buzz and Michael are safely on Earth filming parts in a studio so if something should happen and the astronauts that did go died, it would not be witnessed by the entire world.

I believe we went to the moon, what I don't believe is the first man to walk on it was Neil Armstrong, I don't think he or any of the others said to be on that Apollo mission were. I think it was simply far to dangerous for America to risk the stability of our entire country on the very real risk and high probability of failure. I think they sent others and I think the discrepancies in some of the video and stills is because it is a mix between real video and images and those that were done here on Earth with the crew we were told was going.



posted on Apr, 24 2015 @ 09:11 AM
link   
a reply to: AgentSmith

Hi,

I have never before seen a video from inside the Space Shuttle during launch, and I would have to look up the accelerational g-forces at that time - but in your second video (the one with the shuttle-launch) I was stumpified by seeing the copilot moving his hand freely and seemingly effortless across the instruments at about 3:48.

Do you know about the "Porsche Test"?
You sit down in the front passenger seat, then a banknote is stuck into the opening of the glove box, which is then shut.
If you can reach the banknote under full acceleration, you can keep it.

Okay, the copilot didn't have to reach FORWARD, but the fine movement of his hand are incredible



posted on Apr, 24 2015 @ 09:17 AM
link   
a reply to: ManFromEurope

Great observation. I'll have to look for that. If what you say is true, I can verify the "Porcshe Test". Buddy has a 500HP Z06 Corvette and you aren't grabbing the bank note at full throttle. No way in hell



posted on Apr, 24 2015 @ 09:22 AM
link   
a reply to: bobbypurify

Damn this fallacy.....
Use your imagination you say.


How is that proving anything?

Imagine what you will.
I don't believe there are any people who think this nonsense anymore.
You know since other countries have also sent ships to the moon.
Something tells me that they would divulge the hoax if there really was one.



posted on Apr, 24 2015 @ 09:23 AM
link   
a reply to: ManFromEurope

They only saw about 3Gs during launch. You have to remember that these were pilots trained to deal with G forces. They saw much more than 3Gs during training, and knew exactly how to tighten their body to deal with them.



posted on Apr, 24 2015 @ 09:26 AM
link   
a reply to: bobbypurify

No. I used to run an official radio network when I was younger (FCC certified operators, up to 30 stations). We rarely used the phonetic alphabet. Even when we were dealing with airborne aircraft, we rarely did unless it was something very specific and they were having trouble understanding.
edit on 4/24/2015 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
17
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join