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: 15
17
<< 12  13  14    16  17  18 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 28 2015 @ 08:22 AM
link   
a reply to: bobbypurify

You are the one that chooses to answer members posts nobody forces you, so members will reply to you.

Making claims like something doesn't look right is not the way to prove your argument.

If his claim re the pictures and parallax are true go take some pictures and prove it just maybe if you did that and you see he is wrong something may register with you!




posted on Apr, 28 2015 @ 08:26 AM
link   

originally posted by: bobbypurify

You don't seem to understand how movie magic works. Or, you'd consider it slightly instead of being completely sold on Apollo's authenticity.


i get how movie magic works.. i also understand that movie magic cant do anything about falling dust..


We don't know what factors NASA did to the film to achieve what they wanted, if that's what they did. But, we can see by speeding it up it becomes rather terrestrial. But I'm speaking to a crowd that somehow is oblivious to the film being in slow motion perhaps.


it doesnt.. lunar dust proves slow motion wrong.. the falling of objects coupled with the astronauts speed proves it is all in lunar gravity..



posted on Apr, 28 2015 @ 08:28 AM
link   
a reply to: wmd_2008

I only brought it up because you misrepresented it. Go back to my original response to you. Remember, lateral comparisons? Feel free to debunk it all you want.



posted on Apr, 28 2015 @ 08:30 AM
link   
a reply to: choos

It's sand Choos. No moisture on the moon and Armstrong's footprint is of that formed in moist dirt. Moon biggy spits up sand that behaves as it does in an atmosphere and not shooting sand up 6x what it should be. Take that into account.



posted on Apr, 28 2015 @ 08:33 AM
link   
a reply to: bobbypurify

sand falls at the same rate as dust.. changing the composition doesnt help your argument..

and why would it rise 6x higher than it should?? are you not aware of the power of each wheel?? where does the energy come from to kick up the dust (sand if you will) 6x higher??



posted on Apr, 28 2015 @ 08:42 AM
link   
a reply to: choos

So dust/sand behaves the same on Earth as the moon? Gotcha



posted on Apr, 28 2015 @ 08:45 AM
link   
a reply to: bobbypurify

not what i said, not what i suggested..

dust, falls at the same rate as sand on the lunar surface..

dust, falls at the same rate as sand on earth, in a vacuum..
edit on 28-4-2015 by choos because: had to clarify because some people wont get it.



posted on Apr, 28 2015 @ 08:48 AM
link   

originally posted by: TheWhisper

originally posted by: amicktd
a reply to: TheWhisper

Why? You guys haven't addressed many questions in this thread. All I have seen is childish replies when it doesn't fit your conspiracy thats been debunked numerous times on ATS already. How about you address ScientificRailgun's statement on page 2 of this thread.


Childish you say, lets see how childish the Apollo Lunar Surface Journal (ALSJ) is. May we show you a link to the NASA website and we asked you to read 1 November 2012.
www.hq.nasa.gov...

Well nothing seems wrong does it?

May we show you the cached version of that link 3 June 2013 read again the 1 November 2012.
web.archive.org...://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/alsj.funpix.html

Now you see that credits in the Apollo archive on the NASA just get deleted. Maybe you will defend this action but The Whisper can tell you that is historical fraud (in our opinion) as the date is not changed they just deleted it. If you are interested in the email written by the ALSJ chief editor to AwE130, in which he confirms the proper credits you have to go here.
planet.infowars.com...

Now you know what is gone happen this pro Apollo group will jump on this post and will start complaining to get the Whisper banned for posting this. They only like to use TAC to silence other people. Don't speak me from childish behavior, look at the ALSJ chief editor and ask yourself if he is already childish what will all this dudes under him be?


Everytime someone gave you sources/evidence that went against your theory you just gave a little joke reply, so I wrote this thread off as a joke. No need to debate something with someone not willing to listen to the other side.

Do I believe they landed on the moon? Yes
Do I believe they landed on the moon exactly when they say they did? Who knows?
Do I believe they stopped going to the moon? Hell no
Do I think there is more to the moon than they portray? Definitely

I love this topic, but didn't like how closed minded you were about it.

edit on 28-4-2015 by amicktd because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 28 2015 @ 08:59 AM
link   
a reply to: choos

I was just giving you some of your own medicine, brotha. I understand what you're saying. I just disagree completely. The rover footage is extremely evident that slow motion is in play. Yes, I realize that just fed 6 "you don't understand gravity" comments but "I don't care, I love it."



posted on Apr, 28 2015 @ 09:05 AM
link   
a reply to: bobbypurify

thats all you have.. "looks like it"

all of your theories are based on "looks like it"

when you go watch a magic show and they cut someone in two, it must be real because it looks like it??

why dont you work out WHY it looks the way it does??



posted on Apr, 28 2015 @ 09:19 AM
link   
a reply to: choos

Because it looks like it. It's all MOVIE MAGIC, baby! As conclusive as you are, I guess I'll act like it too. nobody has independently verified the landings outside of NASA, when they have had all resources to do so and it would be a data-filled explosion into understanding even more about our closest neighbor. No excuses your side can make will be logical, just pure apologies.

Why did they bring that buggy? They seem to hop around at higher rates of speed than that lumbering joke. Was it a golf cart for their clubs? Maybe it held their hammer and feather collection?



posted on Apr, 28 2015 @ 09:23 AM
link   

originally posted by: bobbypurify
a reply to: choos

Because it looks like it. It's all MOVIE MAGIC, baby! As conclusive as you are, I guess I'll act like it too. nobody has independently verified the landings outside of NASA, when they have had all resources to do so and it would be a data-filled explosion into understanding even more about our closest neighbor. No excuses your side can make will be logical, just pure apologies.

Why did they bring that buggy? They seem to hop around at higher rates of speed than that lumbering joke. Was it a golf cart for their clubs? Maybe it held their hammer and feather collection?


You're kind of just being rude, you're talking about your opinion which is fine but not proof of anything.


nobody has independently verified the landings outside of NASA


Why do you say this? India has and if you accept radio transmissions coming from where they're supposed to then so have the Soviets and anyone else who picked up the transmissions. Did you ignore my last long post?

They can't even get the physics right in Gravity so I really don't know how they could do such an awesome job back then when no Hollywood movie has ever got it right.

edit on 28-4-2015 by AgentSmith because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 28 2015 @ 09:31 AM
link   

originally posted by: bobbypurify
a reply to: choos

Because it looks like it. It's all MOVIE MAGIC, baby! As conclusive as you are, I guess I'll act like it too. nobody has independently verified the landings outside of NASA, when they have had all resources to do so and it would be a data-filled explosion into understanding even more about our closest neighbor. No excuses your side can make will be logical, just pure apologies.


think about the difference between your conclusiveness and my own..

what is your conclusiveness backed by?? looks like it!!

mine is backed by physics..


Why did they bring that buggy? They seem to hop around at higher rates of speed than that lumbering joke. Was it a golf cart for their clubs? Maybe it held their hammer and feather collection?


the video is freely available is it not?? have you ever wondered why in over 40 years not a single hoax theorist has not examined the gravity in the clip?? why??

surely if what im saying about faking lunar gravity is wrong it would be easily proven by hoax theorists right?? they have had over 40 years to do so.. im still waiting..

is it that maybe the video is displaying lunar gravity and that they cant actually prove that it isnt?? if it is displaying lunar gravity then what is going to happen when you speed it up?? if i analyse it after speeding it up will it be earths gravity??



posted on Apr, 28 2015 @ 09:40 AM
link   
a reply to: AgentSmith

im not being rude at all. If I added up all the underhanded insults flung at me, this wouldn't even be close.

India didn't verify anything other than a graphic of the landscape. I don't remember Gravity claiming to be correct. All I've seen are claims of transmissions which aren't proof of anything. The Russians themselves sent recordings supposedly around the moon which may have fooled the U.S. All of these proofs don't stand up to the mountain in front of us, which is that nobody has replicated Apollo since, and time is a cold b##ch. Proven science is all about replication, in fact, it's needed. Maybe that's why text books are leaving Apollo out and why it's always ignored by deep space travel. I like how a poster earlier compared Apollo to Wright Bros. in regards to current deep space travel and Apollo being left out of the speculation. Great analogy that really didn't help the intended argument



posted on Apr, 28 2015 @ 09:47 AM
link   
a reply to: choos

Jarrah White made 16 jump salute perfectly timed with Mythbusters wire support on Earth with the calculated sped up film, not 2.45x that is ridiculous. Sand and dust behave different on Earth because of atmosphere. Calling it "dust" and then calculating it as such isn't science, it's misleading. Plus, it's not like you can focus on anything in such grainy footage, certainly not a spec of sand/dust.



posted on Apr, 28 2015 @ 09:51 AM
link   

originally posted by: bobbypurify

India didn't verify anything other than a graphic of the landscape.


India's Chandrayaan probe has imaged evidence of the Apollo 14 and 16 landing sites (technically they didn't, I found the evidence in their images).

They have also, along with Japan, found evidence of the impact of the Apollo 15 LM's engine n the landing site at Hadley Rilĺe.

I have also examined their images to show that the cameras provide fine detail inside Haldey Rille and the surrounding mountains that are visible in Apollo images but not Lunar Orbiter iamges. They have done the same at Taurus-Littrow (as has China's orbital probe), and in images of Theophilus crater on Apollo 14's mission.
edit on 28-4-2015 by onebigmonkey because: (no reason given)

edit on 28-4-2015 by onebigmonkey because: missing I



posted on Apr, 28 2015 @ 09:54 AM
link   
a reply to: bobbypurify

back to jarrah white?? the same jarrah white who has put out atleast two videos with incorrect maths, and when shown to him he either ignores it or deletes the comments???

and im not talking about large objects..

im referring to the dust or sand and how gravity affects it..

and why are you assuming that dust will fall at a different rate than sand?? on the lunar surface or in a vacuum any object regardless of mass will fall at the same rate.. i am NOT making it up it!!!

also i dont need to follow a single speck of dust.. i can follow the majority of it.. gravity affects all objects equally.. one speck of dust will NOT be affected with different gravity than the specks of dust around it!!!!

p.s. jarrah's jump is perfectly timed?? i guess you havent checked it have you?? it probably just "looks like it" so it must be right??
edit on 28-4-2015 by choos because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 28 2015 @ 10:02 AM
link   

originally posted by: bobbypurify
a reply to: choos

Jarrah White made 16 jump salute perfectly timed with Mythbusters wire support on Earth with the calculated sped up film, not 2.45x that is ridiculous. Sand and dust behave different on Earth because of atmosphere. Calling it "dust" and then calculating it as such isn't science, it's misleading. Plus, it's not like you can focus on anything in such grainy footage, certainly not a spec of sand/dust.


Mythbusters Moon hoax results

Since were referring to Mythbusters now!



posted on Apr, 28 2015 @ 10:16 AM
link   
Here's a case in point - at the moment the version of this on my website uses a poor copy of the Apollo 14 Preliminary Science Report. I got my own copy of it today, originally published in 1971, so I am able to use a proper version of the photograph AS14-80-10448, taken by Apollo 14 over the east side of Theophilus crater.

I've not scanned the page as I don't want to break the spine, so I took a photo with my little camera:



Here's a crop of the interesting bit of that image, showing a boulder trail and several other rocks:



Now here's Chandrayaan's view of the same area:



And here is the best quality image of the same area pre-dating Apollo from Lunar Orbiter:



Apollo 14, in orbit around the moon, took a photograph showing details that weren't available before Apollo 14 but can be found in later images taken by an Indian probe.
edit on 28-4-2015 by onebigmonkey because: more f***ing typos and clarification



posted on Apr, 28 2015 @ 10:32 AM
link   

a reply to: choos
it sounds like you are sour that they deleted your name..
the bottom line is that it is in the right section now..


I wouldnt know if he is or not,, but he certainly should be.... although it is not surprising since the ALSJ will only credit vetted propagandists ....time & time again, moon hoax theorists will point out things overlooked by the propagandists, then the propagandists run down there and try too take credit for it which only exposes the propagandists lack of integrity..

-see, the propagandists have run out of there own ideas & failed to produce the smoking gun that proves the apollo paradigm ,therefore they must haunt various moon hoax forums trolling the research of moon hoax theorists hoping too jump their claims.....







 
17
<< 12  13  14    16  17  18 >>

log in

join