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: 7
17
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 25 2015 @ 04:12 AM
link   

originally posted by: DelMarvel

originally posted by: turbonium1

They have to say Apollo is genuine,


The Russians have to say Apollo is genuine? The Chinese have to say it? The Indians have to say it? The Japanese have to say it?

Why? Who could possibly be enforcing that?

Once again, this gigantic story with huge amounts of data as well as physical evidence was made up a half century ago and no engineer or scientist anywhere in the world has reported any disqualifying discrepancies in all that time?

The Pope said the world was flat, the kings and queens said the world was flat, scientist in those days said the world was flat. Then Someone sails around the world and it was round. A quote of Einstein will rape it all together what TW has to say.

"If I were wrong, then one would have been enough!"




posted on Apr, 25 2015 @ 04:18 AM
link   

originally posted by: TheWhisper
The Pope said the world was flat, the kings and queens said the world was flat, scientist in those days said the world was flat. Then Someone sails around the world and it was round.



have you got any proof of that?? wiki says otherwise..


The myth of the Flat Earth is the modern misconception that the prevailing cosmological view during the Middle Ages saw the Earth as flat, instead of spherical.[1]

During the early Middle Ages, virtually all scholars maintained the spherical viewpoint first expressed by the Ancient Greeks. From at least the 14th century, belief in a flat Earth among the educated was almost nonexistent, despite fanciful depictions in art, such as the exterior of Hieronymus Bosch's famous triptych The Garden of Earthly Delights, in which a disc-shaped Earth is shown floating inside a transparent sphere.
en.wikipedia.org...


i hope you arent trying to pass that off as fact without any evidence..



posted on Apr, 25 2015 @ 04:37 AM
link   

originally posted by: SayonaraJupiter
a reply to: TheWhisper


That will get difficult as the US claimed a no fly zone over Apollo sites.


We did a whole thread on the Apollo No-fly Zones
"MOON: First Keep Out Zones now National Parks for Apollo Sites?"
www.abovetopsecret.com...


Thank you for the information, what you think of the Apollo 14 magazine 80 story? At this point the images are labelled by NASA as made by the Apollo 14 mission. What ever reason NASA had to not publish these image for over 44 years is still a big question to TW. One of the theories TW is investigating is: are the images maybe not made by Apollo 14 but somewhere in the sixties by an unmanned spacecraft, lets say Lunar Orbiter. Much work has still to be done but feel free to join the investigation into magazine 80.



posted on Apr, 25 2015 @ 04:54 AM
link   

originally posted by: TheWhisper

Thank you for the information, what you think of the Apollo 14 magazine 80 story? At this point the images are labelled by NASA as made by the Apollo 14 mission.


That's because they were taken by Apollo 14 astronauts in orbit around the moon.



What ever reason NASA had to not publish these image for over 44 years is still a big question to TW.


They did publish them. Claiming they didn't publish them is a lie, and it is a lie because you know it is not true, and you know it is not true because countless people have told you this every time you spew your spam over the internet.

Images from the Hycon camera were published in the Preliminary Science Report and in various geology reports, and were also available on the web long before you think you discovered them. Even my website had links to those reports before you found them. They were also in a freely available hard copy document, of which the web version is a scan.


One of the theories TW is investigating is: are the images maybe not made by Apollo 14 but somewhere in the sixties by an unmanned spacecraft, lets say Lunar Orbiter.


Let's say which probe then - name it. As you know from my own analysis of the images freely available in the PSR the photographs were taken in a roughly equatorial orbital trajectory - a trajectory that coincides exactly with the orbital paths taken by Apollo 14 (you can check that yourself by downloading the google earth kmz files on my website). Lunar Orbiter, and pretty much every probe ever sent, was in a roughly polar orbital trajectory, and was much higher than Apollo 14.

Again, from my own analysis of the images available the resolution of Lunar Orbiter's images shows nothing of the level of detail given by Apollo's images - images which are verified by both the LRO and Chandrayaan probes.

Al you are doing with your "research" is proving Apollo 14 was at the moon.



posted on Apr, 25 2015 @ 05:16 AM
link   

originally posted by: choos

originally posted by: turbonium1

You can't be serious, right?

The Dutch museum stated they originally got the 'moon rock' from the ex-PM's estate.


the dutch museum got mr drees rock from mr drees children.. mr drees children found the rock and the placard in a draw after mr drees passed.. so no problem there.. dont know why you are repeating so i guess i should also..


The Dutch museum said the ex-PM received the 'moon rock' from the US Ambassador to the Netherlands, Mr. Drees.

You suggest this account first came from Dress' children, and they told it to the Dutch museum, as the same account given to the public.. as we've read it.

That account was even confirmed as valid, later on, by Dress himself.

No confusion.

So, what's your next excuse?


you sound so sure of your story..
yet how can you story be valid when the fake rock was given to the museum after mr drees death??

and also.. no moon rocks was ever given away during the goodwill tour.. not by nasa not by the US gov.. and the US gov nor NASA is obliged to give an EX-PM anything..


The story was confirmed years later, by Drees himself, and shows it is a valid account.

We know Drees presented the fake 'moon rock' to the ex-PM, to commemorate the visit to the Netherlands by the Apollo 11 astronauts , during the Apollo 11 goodwill tour. Drees confirmed it, years later.

You say no moon rocks were ever given out on the goodwill tour. But they DID give out a fake 'moon rock' , on this tour.

This was clearly intentional - they intended to deceive the ex-PM, into the false belief - that it is a genuine Apollo moon rock.

And it worked, since the fake 'moon rock' fooled (at least) two influential people - the ex-PM, and Mr. Drees.


You don't want to know WHY they would do this?

To fool influential people with a fake 'Apollo moon rock', because they wanted to fool them into believing Apollo landed men on the moon.

That's why it is relevant to the hoax. It shows they wanted a fake moon rock to fool people into thinking the Apollo moon landing is real, which shows the Apollo moon landing was NOT real.

A real landing stands as is, and no proof needs to be faked. Only a fake landing would need to create some kind of fake 'evidence' for it, as it has no real evidence.

This is a great example, here.



posted on Apr, 25 2015 @ 05:26 AM
link   
a reply to: turbonium1

You will, of course, be able to show that is was claimed it was a lunar rock.
edit on 25-4-2015 by onebigmonkey because: correcting a name



posted on Apr, 25 2015 @ 05:32 AM
link   

originally posted by: turbonium1

The story was confirmed years later, by Drees himself, and shows it is a valid account.

We know Drees presented the fake 'moon rock' to the ex-PM, to commemorate the visit to the Netherlands by the Apollo 11 astronauts , during the Apollo 11 goodwill tour. Drees confirmed it, years later.


you are mistaken..

go back and re read the news articles..

Mr Drees was the former dutch PM.. he died BEFORE the museum got the rock..

Middendorf was the US ambassador who gave Drees the rock..

and for the nth time, no moon rocks were ever given out during the goodwill tour..


You say no moon rocks were ever given out on the goodwill tour. But they DID give out a fake 'moon rock' , on this tour.


no, Middendorf gave out petrified wood, NASA nor the US gov ever gave out any rocks during the good will tour.. all apollo 11 lunar samples were still in quarantine, apart from the one on display in the smithsonian.


This was clearly intentional - they intended to deceive the ex-PM, into the false belief - that it is a genuine Apollo moon rock.


intended by Middendorf alone.. it was his gift to the EX-PM alone.. you should ask him why he passed petrified wood and tried to pass it off as a real moon rock to an ex-PM.. it has nothing to do with NASA nor the US gov.


And it worked, since the fake 'moon rock' fooled (at least) two influential people - the ex-PM, and Mr. Drees.

You don't want to know WHY they would do this?


i want to know why Middendorf done it.. because NASA and the US gov had nothing to do with it.


To fool influential people with a fake 'Apollo moon rock', because they wanted to fool them into believing Apollo landed men on the moon.


influential?? did you miss the part where it said Mr Drees was an EX PM?? why would the US gov give a gift like a moon rock to an ex PM??

you always ignore this??

also why didnt any other EX PM's get a stone??


That's why it is relevant to the hoax. It shows they wanted a fake moon rock to fool people into thinking the Apollo moon landing is real, which shows the Apollo moon landing was NOT real.


the fake rock is completely irrelevant you holding onto is a desperate attempt to prove something from nothing.. you dont even have the story right and yet you can formulate a completely made up assumption on why it must have been done on purpose..


A real landing stands as is, and no proof needs to be faked. Only a fake landing would need to create some kind of fake 'evidence' for it, as it has no real evidence.

This is a great example, here.



why do they need to create fake evidence when they gave away gifts of real moon rocks?? the netherlands has real moon rocks from Apollo 11 and 17 which were both delivered to the queen.. never to an ex PM..

you are grasping at straws so hard its laughable..



posted on Apr, 25 2015 @ 06:00 AM
link   
It was very remarkable to find this fake 'moon rock', after all.

The ex-PM died, and his estate left to his family.

A prized possession of his, or so they thought to be, a genuine 'moon rock', is generously donated to the Dutch museum.


I think other fake 'moon rocks' were very likely given out around the time, for the exact same reasons as this one was.

But most likely we'll never see another one surface, or know how many were given out.



posted on Apr, 25 2015 @ 06:04 AM
link   
a reply to: turbonium1

Still waiting for your confirmation that anyone responsible for donating the petrified wood ever made any claim that it was from the moon.



posted on Apr, 25 2015 @ 06:18 AM
link   

originally posted by: choos

originally posted by: TheWhisper
The Pope said the world was flat, the kings and queens said the world was flat, scientist in those days said the world was flat. Then Someone sails around the world and it was round.



have you got any proof of that?? wiki says otherwise..


The myth of the Flat Earth is the modern misconception that the prevailing cosmological view during the Middle Ages saw the Earth as flat, instead of spherical.[1]

During the early Middle Ages, virtually all scholars maintained the spherical viewpoint first expressed by the Ancient Greeks. From at least the 14th century, belief in a flat Earth among the educated was almost nonexistent, despite fanciful depictions in art, such as the exterior of Hieronymus Bosch's famous triptych The Garden of Earthly Delights, in which a disc-shaped Earth is shown floating inside a transparent sphere.
en.wikipedia.org...


i hope you arent trying to pass that off as fact without any evidence..


Read what The Whisper wrote please quick reactions are welcome but please read first.

let analyse what TW wrote:
"The Pope said the world was flat, the kings and queens said the world was flat, scientist in those days said the world was flat."

The word said is key: The Pope, Kings, Queens and scientist SAID the world was flat. TW did not say what they were thinking as your reaction implies. So yes TW has proof of what is said in to post. Your reaction is completely out of context what TW wrote. What was said and what people thought are two different thing. Educated people of those day's wouldn't speak out what they thought. The price was high if they would had SAID the world was not flat but round.

Galileo Galilei (1564-1642) almost died on a pyre of flames for telling the world that the earth is not flat.



posted on Apr, 25 2015 @ 06:19 AM
link   

originally posted by: turbonium1
It was very remarkable to find this fake 'moon rock', after all.

The ex-PM died, and his estate left to his family.

A prized possession of his, or so they thought to be, a genuine 'moon rock', is generously donated to the Dutch museum.

I think other fake 'moon rocks' were very likely given out around the time, for the exact same reasons as this one was.

But most likely we'll never see another one surface, or know how many were given out.



you think??
thats pretty much what your entire argument regarding the dutch moon rock is based on, as well as your theories on the moon landing hoax..

got anything better than "i think"

any reason why you have continually ignored the real moon rock gift from Apollo 11 and 17?? officially no moon rocks were gifted during the good will tour.. so why do you make it up as if they did??



posted on Apr, 25 2015 @ 06:23 AM
link   

originally posted by: TheWhisper

Read what The Whisper wrote please quick reactions are welcome but please read first.

let analyse what TW wrote:
"The Pope said the world was flat, the kings and queens said the world was flat, scientist in those days said the world was flat."

The word said is key: The Pope, Kings, Queens and scientist SAID the world was flat. TW did not say what they were thinking as your reaction implies. So yes TW has proof of what is said in to post. Your reaction is completely out of context what TW wrote. What was said and what people thought are two different thing. Educated people of those day's wouldn't speak out what they thought. The price was high if they would had SAID the world was not flat but round.

Galileo Galilei (1564-1642) almost died on a pyre of flames for telling the world that the earth is not flat.



you said there is proof but you havent provided any you have only repeated what you said?? what you say is NOT PROOF OF ANYTHING..

however, i would advise you make another thread about it though.. its offtopic..

p.s. any chance you could stop talking in third person?? i read somewhere that people that argue in third person do so because they consider the topic is too subjective and wish to distance themselves from it..



posted on Apr, 25 2015 @ 06:26 AM
link   

originally posted by: TheWhisper

originally posted by: choos

originally posted by: TheWhisper
The Pope said the world was flat, the kings and queens said the world was flat, scientist in those days said the world was flat. Then Someone sails around the world and it was round.



have you got any proof of that?? wiki says otherwise..


The myth of the Flat Earth is the modern misconception that the prevailing cosmological view during the Middle Ages saw the Earth as flat, instead of spherical.[1]

During the early Middle Ages, virtually all scholars maintained the spherical viewpoint first expressed by the Ancient Greeks. From at least the 14th century, belief in a flat Earth among the educated was almost nonexistent, despite fanciful depictions in art, such as the exterior of Hieronymus Bosch's famous triptych The Garden of Earthly Delights, in which a disc-shaped Earth is shown floating inside a transparent sphere.
en.wikipedia.org...


i hope you arent trying to pass that off as fact without any evidence..


Read what The Whisper wrote please quick reactions are welcome but please read first.

let analyse what TW wrote:
"The Pope said the world was flat, the kings and queens said the world was flat, scientist in those days said the world was flat."

The word said is key: The Pope, Kings, Queens and scientist SAID the world was flat. TW did not say what they were thinking as your reaction implies. So yes TW has proof of what is said in to post. Your reaction is completely out of context what TW wrote. What was said and what people thought are two different thing. Educated people of those day's wouldn't speak out what they thought. The price was high if they would had SAID the world was not flat but round.

Galileo Galilei (1564-1642) almost died on a pyre of flames for telling the world that the earth is not flat.




Is there nothing you can't get completely wrong?

Your hearsay reports of what you believe other people said are not to be interpreted as factual without support.

This is ably demonstrated by your reporting of Galileo, who was charged with heresy for arguing heliocentrism, not that the Earth was flat. His sentence was house arrest. No flames were ever involved or threatened.

The Earth was already well known to be round by the time of Galileo.
edit on 25-4-2015 by onebigmonkey because: typo



posted on Apr, 25 2015 @ 06:38 AM
link   

originally posted by: onebigmonkey
a reply to: turbonium1

Still waiting for your confirmation that anyone responsible for donating the petrified wood ever made any claim that it was from the moon.


Maybe a 74 old lady is what you are looking for. This woman was honest and contacted NASA about some moon rock, in good faith and trust she contacted NASA.



posted on Apr, 25 2015 @ 06:44 AM
link   

originally posted by: TheWhisper

originally posted by: onebigmonkey
a reply to: turbonium1

Still waiting for your confirmation that anyone responsible for donating the petrified wood ever made any claim that it was from the moon.


Maybe a 74 old lady is what you are looking for. This woman was honest and contacted NASA about some moon rock, in good faith and trust she contacted NASA.


Irrelevant to the subject in question, namely the claim that a piece of petrified wood was claimed to be a lunar sample. It never was and no evidence exists that says so.

That news item, which you have been spamming all over the internet as if it proves something, is either about a woman who was trying to defraud someone by selling a fake rock, or trying to sell something she shouldn't have. She sounds more upset that she's lost some money.

You seem to think she is telling the truth, which means you are shooting yourself in the foot again because it means it was a genuine moon rock obtained by an Apollo astronaut when he was on the moon.



posted on Apr, 25 2015 @ 06:46 AM
link   

originally posted by: onebigmonkey
a reply to: turbonium1

You will, of course, be able to show that is was claimed it was a lunar rock.


They deliberately led them to believe it was a moon rock.

It doesn't have to say 'moon rock'. It is not described as a chunk of petrified wood, which it actually is. Why not?

Any idea?

Do you think anyone would have assumed it was something else but the blatantly obvious, as to assume it is not a moon rock?

What would you assume the object was, given the same scenario?

Tell me about it, okay?



posted on Apr, 25 2015 @ 06:50 AM
link   

originally posted by: turbonium1

originally posted by: onebigmonkey
a reply to: turbonium1

You will, of course, be able to show that is was claimed it was a lunar rock.


They deliberately led them to believe it was a moon rock.

It doesn't have to say 'moon rock'. It is not described as a chunk of petrified wood, which it actually is. Why not?

Any idea?

Do you think anyone would have assumed it was something else but the blatantly obvious, as to assume it is not a moon rock?

What would you assume the object was, given the same scenario?

Tell me about it, okay?


You have still not provided any proof whatsoever of your bogus claim: it was never claimed to be a lunar rock, you have absolutely no evidence that anyone deliberately misled anyone into thinking it was a lunar rock.

If you have proof, post it.

The articles linked so far by people, including yourself, are quite clear that no such claim was made and that it was a simple mistake.



posted on Apr, 25 2015 @ 06:58 AM
link   
a reply to: turbonium1

false.. drees children thought it was a genuine moon rock.. they mistakenly attributed petrified wood found in a draw with a placard from the good will tour..

in nearly every news article it says Middendorf gave the petrified wood as a personal gift..

no moon stone was given as a personal gift to former PM's.. real moon rocks were given by the US gov to "head of state", such as a queen..



posted on Apr, 25 2015 @ 07:00 AM
link   

originally posted by: onebigmonkey

originally posted by: TheWhisper

originally posted by: onebigmonkey
a reply to: turbonium1

Still waiting for your confirmation that anyone responsible for donating the petrified wood ever made any claim that it was from the moon.


Maybe a 74 old lady is what you are looking for. This woman was honest and contacted NASA about some moon rock, in good faith and trust she contacted NASA.


Irrelevant to the subject in question, namely the claim that a piece of petrified wood was claimed to be a lunar sample. It never was and no evidence exists that says so.

That news item, which you have been spamming all over the internet as if it proves something, is either about a woman who was trying to defraud someone by selling a fake rock, or trying to sell something she shouldn't have. She sounds more upset that she's lost some money.

You seem to think she is telling the truth, which means you are shooting yourself in the foot again because it means it was a genuine moon rock obtained by an Apollo astronaut when he was on the moon.


You write very personal but TW will ignore that part.
A. do you agree to how the old lady was humiliated?
B. how do you know it was a real moon rock she had?
C. You call the CBS news spam, was it not CBS who covered some moon landings live is that also considered spam by you?



posted on Apr, 25 2015 @ 07:05 AM
link   

originally posted by: choos

originally posted by: turbonium1
It was very remarkable to find this fake 'moon rock', after all.

The ex-PM died, and his estate left to his family.

A prized possession of his, or so they thought to be, a genuine 'moon rock', is generously donated to the Dutch museum.

I think other fake 'moon rocks' were very likely given out around the time, for the exact same reasons as this one was.

But most likely we'll never see another one surface, or know how many were given out.



you think??
thats pretty much what your entire argument regarding the dutch moon rock is based on, as well as your theories on the moon landing hoax..

got anything better than "i think"

any reason why you have continually ignored the real moon rock gift from Apollo 11 and 17?? officially no moon rocks were gifted during the good will tour.. so why do you make it up as if they did??


'I think' is a simple clue for one giving an opinion, and is much better than putting 'foot in mouth', by going off on a tangent.

As you try and avoid the main issue, of course.




top topics



 
17
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join