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: 79
17
<< 76  77  78   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 14 2015 @ 09:13 AM
link   

originally posted by: SayonaraJupiter
Logsdon said that Nixon's space legacy locked NASA to low earth orbit for 40+ years - and he is correct in saying that because it is true.

Why are you ignoring the new Logsdon book which proves that Nixon was in control of the Apollo narratives???



so what would happen if Logsdon believed one decision of Nixon's was to end US human exploration beyond low earth orbit??




posted on Jul, 14 2015 @ 09:54 AM
link   
a reply to: SayonaraJupiter


No, you are of course completely wrong because you haven't read the new book by Logsdon.


You're wrong because I am reading that book, and as far as I can tell you are not.


Logsdon said that Nixon's space legacy locked NASA to low earth orbit for 40+ years - and he is correct in saying that because it is true.


And that is a blatant lie; Nixon's budget allowed for an aggressive interplanetary exploration program using unmanned probes; NASA has never been "locked" into low Earth orbit.


Why are you ignoring the new Logsdon book which proves that Nixon was in control of the Apollo narratives???


Another blatant lie! As I have pointed out before, Logsdon affirms the success of the lunar landings on nearly every page. He also makes it perfectly clear that Nixon had no involvement with the space program even when he was Vice President. The VP was made head of the space committee because Lyndon Johnson was such an enthusiastic supporter. As a result, NASA's staff were mostly liberal Democrats who were not supportive of Nixon. Here is an exact quote from the book you are falsely claiming to have read:


George H. W. Bush [had] noted that "NASA is about the only agency that does not have a pro-Nixon, Administration-oriented contact man," and suggested "correcting this situation... so we can be assured of getting qualified Republicans and Nixon supporters into jobs there.


After Apollo: Richard Nixon and the America Space Program, John M. Logsdon, Palgrave MacMillan, 2015, isbn: 978-1-137-438252-2, page 85.

This completely contradicts your entire premise. No-one at NASA was taking orders from Nixon before he became President. Watch your step from now on, I will call out your lies using the source you claim to be using.
edit on 14-7-2015 by DJW001 because: (no reason given)

edit on 14-7-2015 by DJW001 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 14 2015 @ 09:59 AM
link   

a reply to: Box of Rain
why do you bother?








edit on 14-7-2015 by Misinformation because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 14 2015 @ 10:25 AM
link   
a reply to: Misinformation

it doesnt matter what logsdons actually says - you will lie anyway



posted on Jul, 14 2015 @ 10:02 PM
link   
a reply to: DJW001

For those poor Apollo Defenders who can't afford to buy John Logsdon's book and for those who refused to read it, I'll quote some of it for you from my hard copy.




p.180


"He had been talked out of canceling Apollo 17 at the end of 1970, but in May 1971 returned to that idea, this time including also canceling Apollo 16. Meeting with Ehrlichman on May 13, Nixon said "I personally think (we should) stop at probably five Apollo, no more... The reason for the space program, the best reason, is not going to the moon but is the fact that we are exploring the unknown. I don't know what the hell is up there. We've got to continue to explore just for the sake of it."

"Later the same day, he told Ehrlichman "the one (part of the NASA program) that seems to me to have the least appeal are more Apollo shots. Why in the hell would they have to go up there and take a look around the damn thing again?"

"On May 18, he asked Ehrlichman "did you get those moon shots knocked off?" Ehrlichman replied "we're working on it." Nixon suggested "do your best."

"Finally, on May 26, Nixon told Ehrlichman "we have got to get a way to get off those damn moon shots... There can't be any after July (the date of the Apollo 15 mission). And we all agree, none after July." Referring to the Apollo 13 mission, he said "I don't want to risk any more."



posted on Jul, 14 2015 @ 11:02 PM
link   

originally posted by: ignorant_ape
a reply to: Misinformation

it doesnt matter what logsdons actually says - you will lie anyway


Strawman.



posted on Jul, 15 2015 @ 01:07 AM
link   
a reply to: SayonaraJupiter

ah so you dont know what a straw man is either - thats not surprising



posted on Jul, 15 2015 @ 01:09 AM
link   
a reply to: SayonaraJupiter

again the simple question that you cannot answer :

does any of that falsify the appolo program manned moon landings ?



posted on Jul, 15 2015 @ 04:41 AM
link   
a reply to: SayonaraJupiter

Pay attention. please. Here is what you yourself believe Nixon said:


"Later the same day, he told Ehrlichman "the one (part of the NASA program) that seems to me to have the least appeal are more Apollo shots. Why in the hell would they have to go up there and take a look around the damn thing again?"


They couldn't go back up there again if they hadn't gone back up there before. Congratulations, you just proved the lunar landings were real.



posted on Jul, 15 2015 @ 07:20 AM
link   

a reply to: ignorant_ape
it doesnt matter what logsdons actually says - you will lie anyway


logsdon said its the propagandists that are liars




posted on Jul, 15 2015 @ 07:34 AM
link   
a reply to: Misinformation

Source please, or it's just dishonest quote mining trollery.



posted on Jul, 15 2015 @ 12:57 PM
link   
Well no surprise there, no link forthcoming so it's up to those of us interested in honesty to find it for you.

Here's the source:

news.google.com...,2080799&hl=en

from 1990.

It specifically refers to NASA's budget requests during the shuttle era in the face of reliability problems,.

Nowhere does it say Apollo didn't happen, or that anyone lied about the moon landings.



posted on Jul, 15 2015 @ 01:21 PM
link   
a reply to: onebigmonkey

typical - they [ hoax believers ] seem to have run out of " arguments " that the apollo missions were a hoax - now its just nixon and innuendo



posted on Jul, 15 2015 @ 03:27 PM
link   
a reply to: onebigmonkey

logsdon called NASA liars



posted on Jul, 15 2015 @ 03:33 PM
link   
a reply to: ignorant_ape

the propagandists dont seem to want to accept the fact that logsdon has blown the whistle ...



posted on Jul, 15 2015 @ 03:42 PM
link   

originally posted by: Misinformation
a reply to: onebigmonkey

logsdon called NASA liars


When? What was the context? Was it about Apollo?

Did he say they didn't land on the moon?



posted on Jul, 15 2015 @ 03:42 PM
link   
a reply to: Misinformation

He has blown no whistle. He expressed an opinion.

His latest book is quite unequivocal: they landed on the moon.



posted on Jul, 15 2015 @ 03:49 PM
link   
a reply to: Misinformation

logsdon calls appollo hoax believers liars - as i states that the apollo manned missions happened

PS - is " context " a concept utterly alien to you ?



posted on Jul, 15 2015 @ 03:50 PM
link   
a reply to: Misinformation

on what ?????

come on - what has logsdon actually ` blown the whistle on ` ????????????????????



posted on Jul, 15 2015 @ 11:23 PM
link   

Your Attention Please



This thread is now closed permanently.

After Staff discussion on this thread, we have determined a couple of things:

1) We (Staff) are serious when we ask members to STOP calling each other names or making accusations.

2) The subject of this thread is too general, leading to what becomes a maze of discussion that can become too hard for members to follow.

This means that for all those that wish to continue discussion about the Apollo Moon Landings, and whether or not they were a hoax, to please do so with new threads, that are more subject specific.

That means if someone starts a thread on this subject, outlining say, for example, an engineering problem that would prevent a moon landing, then that thread will remain on that topic.

If someone desires to discuss political figures during that time period, and conspiracy theories regarding the Apollo Program, then that thread will remain on that topic.

This way it will be easier for members to follow and discuss each of the many topics involving the Apollo Moon Landings.

However, be warned: We (Staff), will expect those discussions to remain civilized and follow proper decorum. Else those threads will be shut down too, and action taken against the members not adhering to the ATS Terms and Conditions.




top topics



 
17
<< 76  77  78   >>

log in

join