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: 2
17
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 24 2015 @ 09:32 AM
link   
a reply to: AutumnWitch657

I don't live in a world of having to have proof. If it comes out someday that Apollo was a production, emphasis on if, your world of proof will be what?

Those other countries that sent "ships" to the moon also didn't confirm the landings.




posted on Apr, 24 2015 @ 09:34 AM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

thanks, nice to have people who actually work in the field weigh in. SJ also said he/she works in a profession dealing with communications over radio. Hopefully you two can use your expertise to piece together a nice little debate.



posted on Apr, 24 2015 @ 09:41 AM
link   
a reply to: choos

Choos, my brotha - you don't think that standing just inches on top of a rocket wouldn't cause your voice to vibrate? I'm not worried about outside the LEM. There's plenty of material and particles for sound and vibration inside of it.



posted on Apr, 24 2015 @ 09:51 AM
link   
a reply to: bobbypurify

the rocket noise wont make it inside the cabin.. the combustion occurs in a vacuum.. vibration will probably be heard but not from the microphone only to the astronauts inside, you cant even hear astronauts talking in the background.. its got to do with microphone sensitivity..

but that would be some serious vibration if you could hear the voice vibrate.. it may not even be flight worthy..



posted on Apr, 24 2015 @ 09:54 AM
link   

originally posted by: Helious
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.


I've often considered this as well and honestly, it makes a lot of sense. Boy, the 20th century saw advances in propaganda that were never imagined before because of the technological leaps and bounds the century bred. I am certainly not against people walking on the moon. I'm not even against Apollo being accuratte - I've just got some doubts and I don't think it happened.



posted on Apr, 24 2015 @ 09:58 AM
link   
a reply to: choos

Standing directly on top of a rocket booster wouldn't make your voice vibrate? Dude, my 2015 Jeep Grand Cherokee, here in the winter when the wheel wells get chock full of snow and ice will make my ride shake when I get going 65+ MPH on the toll road, which, in turn, will make my voice vibrate. Enough so that my girlfriend asked why I sounded funny on the phone. True story.



posted on Apr, 24 2015 @ 10:00 AM
link   
a reply to: bobbypurify

It's a diffuse motor, throttled down to minimum power during landing.



posted on Apr, 24 2015 @ 10:01 AM
link   
a reply to: bobbypurify

you dont think that large a vibration coming from the rocket engine alone is not an issue??? remember there is no terrain like your jeep to cause vibration and there is no atmoshpere to cause any buffeting neither..

if the LM had that level of vibration from the engine it most likely wouldnt be flight worthy..



posted on Apr, 24 2015 @ 10:14 AM
link   
a reply to: bobbypurify

Hi there

I despise these 2 threads. Simply ignorant is what it is!
I already posted in the 1st thread, about how there is proof that it was impossible to hoax the moon landing.
Nobody replied to it... it was ignored.

Please respond to this. without ad-hominem please.




posted on Apr, 24 2015 @ 10:26 AM
link   
a reply to: combatmaster

www.youtube.com...

Jarrah White does a fine job disputing his video.

"Did NASA have the technology to fake the moon walk videos in 1969? Of course they did! But with the release of a certain video by SG Collins, a large number of deniers have claimed otherwise. This response should set the record straight.

In summary, Collins claims that there were no high speed video cameras in 1969. False. High speed video cameras first came into existence in the early 1960s and the fastest they could shoot at was 60fps.
www.motionvideoproducts.com...
en.wikipedia.org...

Collins then says that the Ampex HS-100 magnetic disk recorder, which was used to for slow motion instant sports relays, could only store 30 seconds of footage. Irrelevant. You could just as easily feed recordings from videotape into the disk recorder piece by piece and then record its slow motion playback on a second videotape.

And finally, Collins says that shooting on 35mm film and then converting those recordings to videotape would require five (actually six) 1,000 ft magazines, and then a series of cutting, splicing, and transferring. This is true, but also irrelevant. The entire Apollo 11 EVA (if broadcast at 10fps - see below) could fit on a single 2,300 ft magazine of 16mm film - you know, the type of film specifically used for television.

Also unveiled is a new discovery that the Apollo 11 moonwalk was broadcast, not at 10fps as claimed, but more likely at 24fps. This revelation further throws into doubt the official story since it shows the moonwalk was recorded using equipment that reportedly wasn't in their possession when they departed Earth.

Viewers wishing to combat the sheer number of blogs, websites and news articles praising and falling blindly behind Collins' video are invited to mirror this rebuttal. A download is here:
www.moonfaker.com..."


You should watch just to get an opposing view point. It's only 25 mins



posted on Apr, 24 2015 @ 10:35 AM
link   
Until a moon hoax beliver can give me a good reason (or lets start with just a reason), why the USSR would have gone along with the moon hoaxes (and they would have had to since they were monitoring every aspect of what Nasa was up to)...i refuse to even entertain the thought that the landings might be fake.

Coupled with the fact that building the Saturn V and everythign else cost so much money and took so much effort that they may as well have flown to the moon. I just aint buying it. But mostly for the first reason i gave
edit on 24-4-2015 by 3danimator2014 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 24 2015 @ 10:44 AM
link   
a reply to: 3danimator2014

Here's a quip from Jarrah White tackling your question. Not necessarily that I agree with all of it but it may offer some opposing information to consider.


www.moonfaker.com...

Q: How could so many people have kept quiet about the hoax?

A: Secrets of such magnitude have taken place. The Soviet N-1 program alone involved hundreds of thousands of scientists and engineers; yet the designing, developing, and launch of the N-1 rocket remained a well-kept secret for forty years until the USSR collapsed in 1991.

Bottom line, if Russia could keep a secret that involved thousands of people for so long, so could NASA. And anyway, not everyone at NASA would have needed to be in on the conspiracy. For example, as stated above, the technicians at Houston Mission Control Center would be unable to distinguish the difference between simulations and the real missions. Hence there is no need for them to ‘keep quiet’ about anything.

Likewise for the remainder of NASA staff and contractors located on the ground. Once the rockets were out of sight they had no way of knowing whether the CSM continued to the Moon, came down shortly afterwards, or just stayed in earth orbit. Everyone just assumed it happened the way it was reported and they had no reason to suspect otherwise. Ultimately there were only three eyewitnesses for each mission, not thousands.



Q: Why did the Russians remain silent?

A: Jarrah can see three reasons.

Firstly, if you really want to know what Russia thought of manned lunar exploration, just ask Jodrell Bank’s Sir Bernard Lovell. In May of 1963, the President of the Soviet Academy of Sciences Mstislav Keldysh instructed him to inform NASA’s deputy administrator Hugh Dryden that Russian had to postpone manned moon flights indefinitely, because they could see no way to protect their cosmonauts from the insurmountable dangers posed by solar flare radiation3, 4, 5, 6. Well into 1966, around the time Russia put Lunik 10 in lunar orbit, Sir Bernard remained in contact with the Soviets asking when they intended to send a human to the moon.
In 1999, Sir Bernard was quoted by the BBC along these lines: “I had frequently asked my Soviet contacts when they intended to send a human being to the moon and their response was always ‘when we can be absolutely certain of getting him back alive’. And they did not believe the Americans would do this and in fact it’s pretty clear that the Americans did take considerable risk.”

 


Mod Note: External Source Tags – Please Review This Link.
Mod Note: Quoting External Sources - Please Review This Link



edit on Fri Apr 24 2015 by Jbird because: trimmed quote added link and ex tags



posted on Apr, 24 2015 @ 10:56 AM
link   
a reply to: bobbypurify


Im not buying reason 1 at all. They wouldnt not have had to say anythign about letha radiation. They just would have had to expose the americans. Then the space race would have been won by them and they could cite that there was no need to get to the moon anymore

Reason 2 im not buying and reason 3 is irrelevant. The state of the space industry nowadays has absolutely nothing to do with it at the height of the cold war and space race.

fact is, someone and some secrets would have come out by now. No organisation and no gevernment is that good at hiding anythign on this scale for this long without leaks. Sorry..still not buying it.

Are you also telling me that the US government has made a deal with every country and every space agency to this day to photoshop any image that ANTYONE takes from the moon so it corroborates the hoaxes? Do you guys not realise how insane the scope of the hoax would have to be?

 

Mod Note: Excessive Quoting – Please Review This Link
edit on Fri Apr 24 2015 by Jbird because: removed large quote



posted on Apr, 24 2015 @ 11:04 AM
link   
a reply to: 3danimator2014

How sure are you that there was a two-sided space race? What Russian sources do you have that make you think they were in a race with us?

For reasons two and three: you don't think cooperating and striking deals with a supposed "space enemy" isn't reason enough to understand why they may keep quiet? Okay. So you've never kept a secret for someone because they were your friend?

Why do people always equate U.S. government? If Apollo was a hoax why is it that the entire government is in on it? Then, you multiply that by other country govts and all the sudden it's "astronomical". All from something you created.



posted on Apr, 24 2015 @ 11:15 AM
link   

originally posted by: bobbypurify
a reply to: 3danimator2014

How sure are you that there was a two-sided space race? What Russian sources do you have that make you think they were in a race with us?

For reasons two and three: you don't think cooperating and striking deals with a supposed "space enemy" isn't reason enough to understand why they may keep quiet? Okay. So you've never kept a secret for someone because they were your friend?

Why do people always equate U.S. government? If Apollo was a hoax why is it that the entire government is in on it? Then, you multiply that by other country govts and all the sudden it's "astronomical". All from something you created.



Well, not you are getting too conspiratory for me...i do belive the space race happened and i cant entertain the thought that it didnt.

it doesnt matter if the whole govt or not was in on it. the logistics are still staggering and i sinply cannot believe that THAT many people who would have been in on it have kept quiet till now.



posted on Apr, 24 2015 @ 11:17 AM
link   
People landed on the moon.

Lunar Laser Ranging Experiment

They placed reflectors on the moon during the Apollo program (11, 14, and 15 specifically) to be used for experiments measuring the distance between the earth and the moon. Universities conduct these experiments frequently. Through these experiments they've been able to determine that the moon is receding away from the earth at a rate of 3.5 cm per year.

Those reflectors were placed by people. On the moon. Sorry. All of the "moon landing hoax" stuff has been thoroughly debunked decades ago. I understand this is a conspiracy website, but some conspiracies make the rest of us look like wackos. The Moon landing hoax is one of those. It's right up there with Reptilians. They landed on the moon. With even consumer equipment you can perform the Lunar Laser Ranging Experiment yourself.

Now tell me all those experiments are fake.



posted on Apr, 24 2015 @ 11:23 AM
link   
a reply to: 3danimator2014

People in power makes deals and have secrets. That's not conspiracy, it's common sense in my opinion



posted on Apr, 24 2015 @ 11:26 AM
link   
a reply to: ScientificRailgun

^^^ This.

If you had a lot of money and knew what you were doing, you could buy the equipment to verify this for yourself. Anyone is allowed to shine a laser at the Moon and have it reflect back and be detected -- they don't hide the coordinates of those reflectors.

So, Moon landing Hoaxers -- the onus is on you to prove we didn't go to the Moon. Who wants to pony up the money to buy the computers and lasers to test the reflectors independently?



posted on Apr, 24 2015 @ 11:34 AM
link   

originally posted by: bobbypurify

For reasons two and three: you don't think cooperating and striking deals with a supposed "space enemy" isn't reason enough to understand why they may keep quiet? Okay. So you've never kept a secret for someone because they were your friend?


you said this earlier:



I also know that Russia wasn't trusted then and isn't now.
www.abovetopsecret.com...


has your opinion changed?
we arent talking about a little secret of who slept with who, we are talking about proportions of a hoax that is capable of fooling engineers and scientists of any nationality ofr more than 40 years.. and the secret can so easily be passed to people you dont trust??



posted on Apr, 24 2015 @ 11:37 AM
link   
a reply to: MystikMushroom

They'll just say the retroreflectors were put up there by unmanned rovers. They won't be able to site any evidence of the design, development or launch of these missions or provide any proof (even a sketch on a napkin somwhere that these missions ever existed) whatsoever, but trust them, that's how it happened.



new topics

top topics



 
17
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join