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: 57
17
<< 54  55  56    58  59  60 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 28 2015 @ 05:37 AM
link   
a reply to: choos


Nafzger was in charge of the SSTV installation in Australia.. why would he plan to sabotage his own installation to install super secret spy equipment?


i will let that sink in for a minuite - purely for the benefit of hoax believers

who entertain the delusion that :

"Nafzger [ who wa alledgedly a key part of the alledged hoax ] installed one set of SSTV equipment - then - sabotaged that so he could install a different set of SSTV gear "

people capable of critical thinking are left wondering :

" why didnt Nafzger just install the alledged hoax equipment in the first place "

but like any good hoax delusion - the more convoluted it is the " better "
edit on 28-5-2015 by ignorant_ape because: (no reason given)




posted on May, 29 2015 @ 01:38 AM
link   

originally posted by: SayonaraJupiter

originally posted by: MarioOnTheFly
a reply to: SayonaraJupiter

How does being anti communist tie in with fake moon rocks ?


Middendorf was ... a CIA employee, basic research.


Does your basic research have a source for that claim? How would being a campaign treasurer prior to his Ambassadorial appointment in July 1969 hsve given him access to material that landed after he took up his post?




So far there has been no discussion about who was in charge of the LRL from July 1969. If Middendorf had access to the LRL he might have been tricked into transporting a fake moon rock from the NASA lab to a foreign agent, in the Netherlands.


A bit of basic research will show you how the LRL worked, that its management were not political (or even NASA) employees, and that Middendorf was nowhere near it and would not have been allowed anywhere near it.



When the CIA is involved we have to believe that there will all kinds of crazy schemes with ulterior motives.


They are not involved, and I don't have to believe anything you postulate because your fantasy world is becoming increasingly distant from the real one.
edit on 29-5-2015 by onebigmonkey because: grammar and spelling



posted on May, 29 2015 @ 02:01 AM
link   
a reply to: SayonaraJupiter


Middendorf was a .............. CIA employee,


sigh - citation required

oh - and dont embarrass yourself by quoting his resume from 1980



posted on May, 29 2015 @ 03:38 AM
link   

originally posted by: ignorant_ape
a reply to: SayonaraJupiter


Middendorf was a .............. CIA employee,


sigh - citation required

oh - and dont embarrass yourself by quoting his resume from 1980


Your no fun can't have a government conspiracy without the cia. And we'll of coure Nixon since he was a crook and all. You know it's going to just ruin his whole world.



posted on May, 29 2015 @ 04:57 AM
link   

a reply to: dragonridr
Your no fun can't have a government conspiracy without the cia


... it is common knowledge that middendorf was head of the intelligence team that took up occupancy within CIA headquarters after reagan was elected & his nefarious relations with bill casey inside the OSS/SEC .....but the propagandists expect you to believe that any individual can take up residence in CIA headquarters without being properly vetted...
edit on 29-5-2015 by Misinformation because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 29 2015 @ 05:12 AM
link   
a reply to: Misinformation

And where was he in 1969?

What CIA connection was there in 1969?

Usual proof by insinuation, no actual evidence of anything at all.



posted on May, 29 2015 @ 06:42 AM
link   

a reply to: onebigmonkey
And where was he in 1969?


the middendorf perplexity remains an equivocal enigma, although this much is certain, one of his dubious duties from 1965-1969 would of been collecting currency from howard hughes in exchange for the inevitable quid pro quo ... ergo, concordantly, vis-a-vis ...Moon Hoax Theory



posted on May, 29 2015 @ 10:10 AM
link   

originally posted by: Misinformation


a reply to: onebigmonkey
And where was he in 1969?


although this much is certain, one of his dubious duties from 1965-1969 would of been collecting currency from howard hughes


i know you are just trolling as usual but i cant help myself

if what you just stated is certain you should have proof of it because its about as certain as you receiving remuneration for your misinformation spreading to continue misleading gullible moon hoax theorists.



posted on May, 29 2015 @ 11:37 AM
link   
a reply to: Misinformation

This is meaningless babble. Please post in English.



posted on May, 29 2015 @ 07:27 PM
link   

a reply to: ignorant_ape
sigh - citation required


moon hoax theorists have a long tradition of citations that are of pre-eminent quantity... & it's quintessential the propagandists & their predecessors simultaneously disseminate the parameters facilitating the function regarding apollo's fundamental flaws or particularly similar profound predications...



posted on May, 29 2015 @ 07:36 PM
link   

originally posted by: Misinformation

a reply to: ignorant_ape
sigh - citation required


moon hoax theorists have a long tradition of citations that are of pre-eminent quantity... & it's quintessential the propagandists & their predecessors simultaneously disseminate the parameters facilitating the function regarding apollo's fundamental flaws or particularly similar profound predications...


Just out of curiosity are you a native English speaker? Or are you just joking around? If you're trying to sound intelligent by using big words it's not working. This doesn't make any sense.



posted on May, 29 2015 @ 08:28 PM
link   

a reply to: DelMarvel
are you a native English speaker? - This doesn't make any sense.


the apollo propagandists paradigm process has altered the consciousness of a significant relative quantity of credulous individuals ... indubitably certain distinct entities remain irrevocably propagandists ... Ergo, some of my posts you will understand, and some of them you will not... Concordantly, while your question may be pertinent, you may or may not realize it is also irrelevant...



posted on May, 29 2015 @ 10:51 PM
link   

originally posted by: choos
he recalls who gave it to him?? show me one article that says this.. all i have read is that he said the US state department gave it to him not whom.. if you cant provide this you are making stuff up again.


By saying 'who' gave it to him, I simply meant the US State Department. Not any specific person(s) within that group.


originally posted by: choos
so was the acting PM when he showed the real lunar rock to him a few months after the goodwill tour.. just as pointed out by OBMonkey again, how do you know he isnt confusing the two?


Based on all the points, as I've explained to you in detail..


originally posted by: choos
pity that you have to rely on a fuzzy memory of events and pin all your hopes on it without any backing evidence..

all you have is one quote from an old man trying to remember something from 40+ years ago.. and nothing else..


It can't be explained, even if nothing else supported his account, as you argue.

We can't ignore it or dismiss it, as if it's not relevant...


originally posted by: choos
why does it have to be taken as a true account?? in 1969 there was no official rocks given to anyone during the goodwill tour.. a moon rock of that size, if real, would have been invaluable..

why would Middendorf believe that giving such a valuable gift to someone who had been out of office for 11 years, with no publicity what-so-ever, be such a normal thing??


He would know what really happened, as nobody else (alive) was there, TO know.

You seem to think - unless I can absolutely prove his account is true, then it's false, and he's just a confused old man, with a fuzzy memory, etc.

Nonsense.

The evidence - a witness, giving his account.

Nothing indicates in the slightest that his account is inaccurate, or is a lie, or the ramblings of a confused old man.....


Apollo-ites can't accept the slightest possibility of being true - which shows - yet again - that they really don't want to know the truth.



originally posted by: choos
they presented a real lunar rock to show the netherlands a few months after the goodwill tour, they didnt invite Drees with his much larger rock.. Middendorf was even in attendance he never mentioned Drees and his rock..



You must understand -

An official event is nothing like this 'private' ceremony, as I've previously explained.

They have very different purposes, of course.



posted on May, 29 2015 @ 11:07 PM
link   

originally posted by: ignorant_ape
a reply to: choos


Nafzger was in charge of the SSTV installation in Australia.. why would he plan to sabotage his own installation to install super secret spy equipment?


i will let that sink in for a minuite - purely for the benefit of hoax believers

who entertain the delusion that :

"Nafzger [ who wa alledgedly a key part of the alledged hoax ] installed one set of SSTV equipment - then - sabotaged that so he could install a different set of SSTV gear "

people capable of critical thinking are left wondering :

" why didnt Nafzger just install the alledged hoax equipment in the first place "

but like any good hoax delusion - the more convoluted it is the " better "


Both of you are suffering from the well known phenomenon of Apollo Defender Spin Out. This is where you twist what someone says and you spin it so out of control by furnishing ludicrous straw man conditions. And then you sit back and chuckle at your own ideas. Well, that wasn't my idea.

I never suggested that Nafzger was the unnamed Australian workman who changed the power leads without telling anyone what he did. It looks like both of you started that story, not me.

Did either of you listen to the Nafzger tapes I posted? Nafzger said he was locked out of the building. If his story holds up. Perhaps there are some other sources that could corroborate his story, or discredit it.

Nafzger spoke of a two week investigation into the SSTV equipment explosion and also a report. Of course there would be a report, NASA made reports on everything that happened. So where is the official report?



posted on May, 29 2015 @ 11:23 PM
link   
a reply to: onebigmonkey


Why would they need to destroy and replace equipment?


It was not "they" who destroyed it - it was a single Australian workman.
It was not "they" who replaced it - Nafzger and his team in Sidney and some people from RCA replaced it.

All this replacement equipment cost like $100,000 and there would be a NASA or Goddard report filed on the SSTV explosion. I am going to take a wild guess here... the report no longer exists.

If there ever was written report on Nafzger's SSTV explosion investigation it probably was filed along with the 700+ boxes of Apollo era telemetry tapes and dumped into a Superfund landfill, a few miles from the ILC Dover headquarters. My view.



posted on May, 29 2015 @ 11:42 PM
link   
a reply to: turbonium1


You must understand -

An official event is nothing like this 'private' ceremony, as I've previously explained.

They have very different purposes, of course.


That's how I understand it. Neil Armstrong understands* it, too. I don't know why these guys don't get it.

*Charged extra money for people to view his space movies in a more private setting after his regular speaking engagement was finished.

That's the difference between an official/public event and a private/non-public ceremony... money. Big Money.

Perhaps there was also some money involved in the deal.



posted on May, 29 2015 @ 11:51 PM
link   
a reply to: turbonium1

Please provide specific and unambiguous proof that supports your claim that Middendorf is referring specifically to a piece of fossil wood, that he is referring specifically to giving that fossil to Drees, and that this specifically occurred during the Apollo 11 visit in October 1969.

Actual evidence, not your supposition and opinion.



posted on May, 29 2015 @ 11:56 PM
link   

originally posted by: turbonium1

By saying 'who' gave it to him, I simply meant the US State Department. Not any specific person(s) within that group.


so he is saying the US gov gave it to him because that would be very difficult to remember right? and being so specific about it must means he remembers it clearly right?



Based on all the points, as I've explained to you in detail..


apart from not being able to prove that Middendorf personally handed over a rock to Drees..
and also there being evidence that Middendorf showed a lunar rock that he received from the US dept to the then acting PM is all completely irrelevent right???



It can't be explained, even if nothing else supported his account, as you argue.

We can't ignore it or dismiss it, as if it's not relevant...


you have it all wrong.. there is no evidence to support your claims apart from your own imagination..

there is evidence that Middendorf showed the then acting PM a lunar rock, however this evidence doesnt rely on one mans fuzzy memory it was recorded by newspapers on the day.

the thing that cant be helped is your eagerness to completely ignore all available evidence and concentrate purely on a single quote 40+ years after from an aging man whose memory is fuzzy.



He would know what really happened, as nobody else (alive) was there, TO know.


as said before you are relying on an old mans memory from 40+ years ago..


You seem to think - unless I can absolutely prove his account is true, then it's false, and he's just a confused old man, with a fuzzy memory, etc.


well there is evidence that he showed the then acting PM a lunar rock, there is absolutely no evidence that Middendorf gave Drees petrified wood at all.. the only evidence available is pure speculation..


The evidence - a witness, giving his account.


from 40+ years ago, you are putting everything you have into an 85 year old man of what he remembers 40+ years ago..

Nothing indicates in the slightest that his account is inaccurate, or is a lie, or the ramblings of a confused old man.....



Apollo-ites can't accept the slightest possibility of being true - which shows - yet again - that they really don't want to know the truth.


once again, ill consider the truth of it if you can somehow back up your story.. using quotes from an 85 year old is not always reliable..



You must understand -

An official event is nothing like this 'private' ceremony, as I've previously explained.

They have very different purposes, of course.


and you also believe that Middendorf had nothing to do with the deception.. why didnt he bring it up when he met with the then acting PM??



posted on May, 29 2015 @ 11:58 PM
link   
a reply to: SayonaraJupiter

I suggest you look into how the public appearance thing works.

It is not uncommon in any field for people to get privileged access for extra cash, be they entertainment stars or astronauts. It's a way many people make a living when they are no longer supported by their original career. I don#t find it unreasonable: my time does not come for free, and if people want an extra piece of me then they can pay for it.

If you were to visit any Space Event, you can pay a set amount to attend a speech. If you want a photo, you pay more. If you want an autograph, you pay more. If you want to attend a meal with an astronaut, you pay more. That is how these things work.

If you have any evidence to support any claim that anyone gave Drees a gift (let alone claiming it to be lunar rock) then go ahead and produce it. Making things up and going "yeah, yeah that was it, that must be what happened" doesn't cut it.



posted on May, 30 2015 @ 12:37 AM
link   

originally posted by: Misinformation


a reply to: DelMarvel
are you a native English speaker? - This doesn't make any sense.


the apollo propagandists paradigm process has altered the consciousness of a significant relative quantity of credulous individuals ... indubitably certain distinct entities remain irrevocably propagandists ... Ergo, some of my posts you will understand, and some of them you will not... Concordantly, while your question may be pertinent, you may or may not realize it is also irrelevant...


Geez. If you're going to write pseudo–intellectual flapdoodle like this you need to start your sentences with capital letters. Sorry, but something about your paradigm process brings out my inner Grammar Nazi.

edit on 30-5-2015 by DelMarvel because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
17
<< 54  55  56    58  59  60 >>

log in

join