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: 58
17
<< 55  56  57    59  60  61 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 30 2015 @ 01:14 AM
link   
a reply to: choos


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 should tell that to Buzz Aldrin who is, appropriately for this example, 85 years old. "Buzz" was also heavy drinker in the 1970's... his memory gave out a long time ago. Buzz had CIA handlers since BEFORE he went to the "moon".

At times Buzz can be amazingly lucid in the response to a quesstion.

Buzz Aldrin's classic Nixon response to the Dutch Fake Moon Rock




Buzz Aldrin's response to Jarrah White is classic Nixon.


edit on 5/30/2015 by SayonaraJupiter because: (no reason given)




posted on May, 30 2015 @ 01:25 AM
link   

originally posted by: onebigmonkey

It is false. There is no evidence whatsoever that any rock was given by anyone to anyone during the goodwill tour. Drees was not there, it makes no sense for him to get one, and no rocks were give out. Drees appears in no photographs, TV footage or guest lists. Logic, reason, and lack of supporting evidence for your claim completely rule out your version of events.

Do you have any evidence whatsoever that Middendorf believes he is discussing the fossil in question?

We have a source that says Middendorf spoke to NOS, but nothing from NOS directly. We do not, therefore, know exactly what was said, or if we hear his words spoken directly or just related to us.

We do not know if he was referring to Drees or whether the reporter inferred that, and we do not know if Middendorf believed he was referring to the genuine lunar rock presented to the Netherlands by the US Government or the one that visited the Netherlands on tour to Rotterdam in 1970.

You have absolutely nothing concrete to base a story on other than a vague newspaper report. You don't even have anything remotely wispy.


Your argument is with the source, just like I've told you, all along.

You dispute the Middendorf quotes, as used by the source for their article.

You think the source has taken Middendorf's comments out of context, and/or even made it all up, to deliberately mislead the readers...right?

At least, it's very possible, right?

We need to see the actual NOS interview, but I've not found it, anywhere, so far.

So it is indeed possible, without the NOS interview available, to confirm/refute anything.


Why would they need to twist his words for the article, as you suggest?

What is the purpose of this? To fit/support their whole story, perhaps?

It would fit with the same story they have created, as well?


Nice...


Middendorf didn't refute any of it, btw.



posted on May, 30 2015 @ 01:35 AM
link   

originally posted by: SayonaraJupiter

Buzz Aldrin's response to Jarrah White is classic Nixon.



What specifically is "classic Nixon" about it?

As far as I'm concerned it's too bad Buzz didn't clock this bozo, too. A chance to interact with one of the iconic personalities of the twentieth century and he wastes everyone's time with this BS.
edit on 30-5-2015 by DelMarvel because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 30 2015 @ 01:40 AM
link   

originally posted by: captainpudding
Open question to those posting about the petrified wood: Why is it that if NASA says they did something and then provides thousands of photographs, hours of video and film, warehouses full of scientific data and over 1000lbs of geological samples confirming everything as well as multiple third parties verifying it, it can't be believed; but when a newspaper makes a claim with zero supporting evidence, it's suddenly infallible?


Those photos and videos are evidence of a hoax, that's the prime reason why it can't be believed.

The news article is just further confirmation of the hoax...



posted on May, 30 2015 @ 01:45 AM
link   

originally posted by: turbonium1

Your argument is with the source, just like I've told you, all along.


My argument is with the source, your interpretation of the source, and the complete lack of source from you to provide any support for this nonsense.



You dispute the Middendorf quotes, as used by the source for their article.

You think the source has taken Middendorf's comments out of context, and/or even made it all up, to deliberately mislead the readers...right?

At least, it's very possible, right?


Yep.




We need to see the actual NOS interview, but I've not found it, anywhere, so far.

So it is indeed possible, without the NOS interview available, to confirm/refute anything.


Then you need to read the thread - it was posted earlier. It is just as ambiguous as the reports that quote it, and contains no actual confirmation that Middendorf is specifically discussing this fossil, that it refers specifically to Drees, or that it is specifically discussing the Apollo 11 Goodwill Tour.




Why would they need to twist his words for the article, as you suggest?

What is the purpose of this? To fit/support their whole story, perhaps?

It would fit with the same story they have created, as well?


Nice...


You have no idea how journalism works do you?



Middendorf didn't refute any of it, btw.


Neither did he provide anything that confirms what you have decided is the truth.

You have absolutely no evidence to support any of your claims. Despite weeks of asking, you haven't provided anything to substantiate the notion that Middendorf gave Drees this fossil, that it had anything to do with the Goodwill Tour, or that anyone ever claimed it was a lunar rock.



posted on May, 30 2015 @ 01:52 AM
link   
a reply to: SayonaraJupiter

It is quite clear from this exchange that Buzz hasn't a clue what the blunder from down under is talking about.

You can therefore conclude, correctly,that the fossil was nothing to do with Apollo 11's visit.



posted on May, 30 2015 @ 02:00 AM
link   
Turbo, awhile back I was sure that the (Dutch Fake Moon Rock) DFMR was a distraction and a minor event in the Apollo Hoax narrative. I couldn't believe it. The story kept getting to me... and Middendorf, in particular, his role in this bothered me.

Then I finally realized that Middendorf was a Nixon appointee, a fervent & rabid anti-Communist, and a CIA asset.
Then I remembered the Jarrah White/Buzz Aldrin interview and it started to click in.

Buzz said all the moon rocks they presented were "encased in plastic, lucite" Does that mean that the United States presented lunar specimens on the Giant Leap tour?

Obviously, Jarrah White was then attacked in the Australian news media after the Buzz Aldrin press conference.

That's why I think you are on the right track, Turbo. This DFMR may lead to the managers of the LRL.



posted on May, 30 2015 @ 03:56 AM
link   

originally posted by: SayonaraJupiter

Buzz said all the moon rocks they presented were "encased in plastic, lucite" Does that mean that the United States presented lunar specimens on the Giant Leap tour?



the Apollo 11 astronauts never gave out any rocks during the goodwill tour of the netherlands.. the first rocks was given out several months after the netherlands visit..

remember when people have said that older people dont always have accurate memory of happenings from 40+ years ago??



posted on May, 30 2015 @ 04:08 AM
link   

a reply to: SayonaraJupiter
Middendorf was a CIA asset



without going into too much detail, eventually even the propagandists will have too concede this is more likely than not ....

Middendorf - BCCI - CIA Connection

but of course that can be "neither confirmed nor denied"

Howard Hughes - Glomar Explorer Response



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



posted on May, 30 2015 @ 04:48 AM
link   

originally posted by: SayonaraJupiter

Buzz said all the moon rocks they presented were "encased in plastic, lucite" Does that mean that the United States presented lunar specimens on the Giant Leap tour?


The Apollo 11 rocks donated as gifts to countries were encased in lucite.

Does Buzz say he gave any out? Does he say he gave any to anyone in Holland?

As he says the only rocks donated were encased in lucite, and if you are taking him at his word, then you have to acknowledge that the fossil tree was not given out by him, or anyone else from Apollo 11, during his October visit.



Obviously, Jarrah White was then attacked in the Australian news media after the Buzz Aldrin press conference.


He was attacked for good reason.



That's why I think you are on the right track, Turbo. This DFMR may lead to the managers of the LRL.



He is not on the right track. It will not lead to the LRL. There is absolutely no connection between the LRL and this alleged event.

The only fake thing here is the story itself.

There is absolutely no evidence to support the claim that anyone remotely connected with the Apollo 11 goodwill tour gave anything remotely resembling a rock to anyone at all.

None.



posted on May, 30 2015 @ 04:52 AM
link   

originally posted by: onebigmonkey

Then you need to read the thread - it was posted earlier. It is just as ambiguous as the reports that quote it, and contains no actual confirmation that Middendorf is specifically discussing this fossil, that it refers specifically to Drees, or that it is specifically discussing the Apollo 11 Goodwill Tour.



Middendorf can't be referring to anything else, but the fake 'moon rock'....

Middendorf recalled a single man - that 'he was very interested in the little piece of stone.'

This one man at the event, who took such interest in the 'little piece of stone'...

Why would this one man be described, if other people were also present at the time? The one man is singled out?

No, he is mentioned because he is the only man present at the time, other than Middendorf himself.

So this fits Drees, at the event.


And Middendorf says he knows nothing about it - the 'little stone' - being not real.

What are the odds he's talking about the one and only 'moon rock' they just found out is 'not real'???

You think he's asked about the 'official' rock, as being 'not real'?


Think again.



posted on May, 30 2015 @ 06:46 AM
link   

originally posted by: turbonium1

originally posted by: onebigmonkey

Then you need to read the thread - it was posted earlier. It is just as ambiguous as the reports that quote it, and contains no actual confirmation that Middendorf is specifically discussing this fossil, that it refers specifically to Drees, or that it is specifically discussing the Apollo 11 Goodwill Tour.



Middendorf can't be referring to anything else, but the fake 'moon rock'....

Middendorf recalled a single man - that 'he was very interested in the little piece of stone.'



thats because you are dead set that Middendorf actually gave Drees the petrified wood..

but what happens when he didnt give it to him have you even considered the possibility??
he could be refering to the lunar rocks shown to the netherlands after the goodwill tour.

point being, you dont know, you are assuming that he can ONLY refer to the petrified wood because that is what YOU want personally to have happened. you have nothing to back it up apart from speculation from Drees grandchildren and a quote from an 85 year old man of what happened 40 years ago.



posted on May, 30 2015 @ 10:14 AM
link   

originally posted by: turbonium1

Those photos and videos are evidence of a hoax, that's the prime reason why it can't be believed.



Do you have any proof, whatsoever of this statement other than "it looks funny" ?



posted on May, 30 2015 @ 11:42 AM
link   

originally posted by: Misinformation

a reply to: SayonaraJupiter
Middendorf was a CIA asset



without going into too much detail, eventually even the propagandists will have too concede this is more likely than not ....

Middendorf - BCCI - CIA Connection



A) What does this have to do with Apollo?

B) And what are you actually alleging? The CIA had Middendorf be ambassador to Holland for four years just so he could pass one fake little moon rock off on the Dutch?

This is yet another example of conspiracy theory apophenia which with the advent of the internet anyone can now extensively indulge in with very little effort at all.
edit on 30-5-2015 by DelMarvel because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 30 2015 @ 01:26 PM
link   
a reply to: onebigmonkey


He was attacked for good reason.
We all know how Buzz likes to dance around the subject! Jarrah was at least able to get Buzz on the record which is helpful to our understanding of the DFMR story.

Buzz danced on the subject of the DFMR....


Buzz dancing on the subject of just being passengers.... twiddle those thumbs Buzz!!



posted on May, 30 2015 @ 02:49 PM
link   
a reply to: SayonaraJupiter

Buzz Aldrin is an American hero.

None of this "Apollo reviewer" nonsense will ever change that. It's basically a lame attempt to glom onto the glory like some kind of suckerfish.



posted on May, 30 2015 @ 03:43 PM
link   

originally posted by: DelMarvel
a reply to: SayonaraJupiter

Buzz Aldrin is an American hero.

None of this "Apollo reviewer" nonsense will ever change that. It's basically a lame attempt to glom onto the glory like some kind of suckerfish.


I've always found him to be a bit goofy, but a hero nevertheless. I know it takes a special kind of person to be a test pilot (considering how many test pilots died while doing their job), and I also know that I am NOT that kind of person.

But back to my view of Aldrin as being "goofy" -- It seems he sometimes misses the point in some interviews and goes off on strange tangents...HOWEVER, even goofy people can be heroes. That takes nothing away from what he did during Apollo 11.


edit on 5/30/2015 by Soylent Green Is People because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 30 2015 @ 03:52 PM
link   
a reply to: Soylent Green Is People

Yeah, He's eccentric. A real American character warts and all.



posted on May, 30 2015 @ 04:10 PM
link   

originally posted by: Soylent Green Is People
But back to my view of Aldrin as being "goofy" -- It seems he sometimes misses the point in some interviews and goes off on strange tangents...HOWEVER, even goofy people can be heroes. That takes nothing away from what he did during Apollo 11.



I think this is particularly true in recent years - he is, after all, 85. He does sometimes misunderstand questions, or answers questions that weren't asked. I have seen many astronauts of his generation speak and they are all capable of incredible recall about minor details, and immense technical knowledge, but also equally prone to not hearing things clearly and not sticking to a subject. If I am half as lucid at their age I will be thankful.

It sickens me that parasites like White, and the other vermin who pursue this stupidity, will hound old age pensioners to further their own agendas, making money and fame for themselves on the backs of people who genuinely earned theirs. They expect inch perfect answers from old men about events 45+ years ago, and howl like banshees at the slightest discrepancy from what they believe should have happened, a belief usually based on ill-informed bias and educational shortcomings. They have convinced themselves of their importance in the grand scheme of things when in fact they are small in number and limited in influence.

I await the production of any evidence, any evidence at all that supports unequivocally and unambiguously the claim that anyone remotely connected with Apollo 11, the US Government, or the 1969 Goodwill Tour, gave anyone remotely like a rock, and claimed (or refused to deny) that this rock was lunar in origin.

The people claiming that this is what happened will not do this, because they don't have it, never will have it, and are relying on utter fantasy to prop up the delusion that they have some sort of trump card.

II'm done arguing about this non-story.



posted on May, 30 2015 @ 09:48 PM
link   

originally posted by: choos
thats because you are dead set that Middendorf actually gave Drees the petrified wood..


That's what all the evidence indicates. Nothing else is relevant.

You are the one "dead set" against the evidence, because it doesn't support your main argument (Apollo as genuine).

The truth is all that matters, not what you or I think is true.


originally posted by: choos
but what happens when he didnt give it to him have you even considered the possibility??
he could be refering to the lunar rocks shown to the netherlands after the goodwill tour.


What happens if he didn't give it to him? I've considered EVERY possibility, including that, because I want to know the truth, no matter what it is. To this point, I find nothing to suggest the story as reported is not accurate. Specifically, that Middendorf received the fake 'moon rock' from the US State Dept, and gave it to Drees in a private ceremony.


originally posted by: choos
point being, you dont know, you are assuming that he can ONLY refer to the petrified wood because that is what YOU want personally to have happened. you have nothing to back it up apart from speculation from Drees grandchildren and a quote from an 85 year old man of what happened 40 years ago.


You don't know, either, but I DO have supporting evidence on my side. You have nothing at all. You won't accept the possibility of it being true, despite your lack of any evidence.

That shows you have no interest in knowing the truth.

No matter how much proof there is to support it, you will never, ever accept it. Denial, at all costs, is your chosen path.


Denial of the truth, and the refusal to seek out truth, is also what keeps us from greater progress in manned space exploration. NASA, and the Apollo-ites, are more concerned with propping up the Apollo story.

If NASA would admit to our real capabilities, and milestones not yet reachs, in manned space exploration, we would have no secrets to hide, no more moon hoaxes to argue about, and we'd all be on the same side...


That's just dreaming, unfortunately.


Why Apollo-ites are so afraid of the truth, is a whole other subject itself







 
17
<< 55  56  57    59  60  61 >>

log in

join