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.

 

I thought we went to the moon....until I viewed these videos

page: 9
22
<< 6  7  8    10  11 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 20 2015 @ 08:30 AM
link   
a reply to: WakeUpBeer

What I did there was use my words as an example of making a claim over the internet - which, in turn - went completely over your head.




posted on May, 20 2015 @ 08:30 AM
link   

originally posted by: bobbypurify
a reply to: choos

Those films of the little gem were re-released by Spacecraft films, correct?

Well, use that little noggin' of yours and think -


footage has been in existance since the Apollo missions.. technology enthusiasts would have recorded it.. what would they amount to?


Could they have retouched the Earth in those CUT SCENENS to match weather data and satellite stills of 1969? Hmmm...

Yes!


no they couldnt.. because you are talking about natural phenomena such as a hurricane.. you cant just make up a hurricane in satellite imagery and have no hurricane during that time.. weather will be witnessed by millions..


Now, please, allow me to navigate my own opinions of how Apollo was all done from Earth, in the years of 1969-1972 as well as the damage control afterwards. Because you seriously lack imagination and know how if we are to examine your constructs of a possible hoax. I hope you're not that daft and trying to mislead because WOW


you are definitely not lacking imagination.. you are however lacking a serious amount of logic and reality..

faking hurricanes??
edit on 20-5-2015 by choos because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 20 2015 @ 08:37 AM
link   
a reply to: choos

sigh...

So special effects can't create weather patterns to match the satellite data?

pic.yify-torrent.org...

Plus, you're being deliberately obtuse. KNOWING the weather data then recreating it in flim to match the actual data isn't "making/faking a hurricane" right on the spot that never happened. Good lord.

You tactics of arguing are just to confuse. Straighten them up or I'll resign from responding.
edit on 20-5-2015 by bobbypurify because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 20 2015 @ 08:41 AM
link   

originally posted by: bobbypurify
You've already proven to me that you're willing to accept that 3-D rock formations, when passed completely by from the left side to the right, DO NOT have perspective change when only meters away.

Are you now seriously claiming that the 'house rock' in the video you posted is only meters away?



posted on May, 20 2015 @ 08:43 AM
link   
a reply to: MissVocalcord

Relatively speaking. Yes. We know it's dimensions. It's about the size of a large "House". So, would you claim it is miles away???



posted on May, 20 2015 @ 08:58 AM
link   
a reply to: bobbypurify

it was pre-filmed was it not??

so that means all that had to have been filmed at the very earliest when the hurricane had formed..

so they would have had a few days maximum to film everything and edit everything is basically your claim..

what im saying is they could not have edited what was seen on TV.. it was shown live.. it matches the cloud patterns from satellite imagery..

the live tv footage matches the satellite imagery, it has and always has, skeptics such as bill kaysing would have picked up on this if it was changed in the spacecraft films..



posted on May, 20 2015 @ 09:04 AM
link   
a reply to: choos

Even OBM agreed that nobody studied the weather patterns of the Apollo footage from the orginal telecast. Now, do you have an original recorded telecast of the little gem footage? I don't. There isn't much that even exists. WE HAVE TO RELY ON NASA - and if I'm correct in my assumptions of how this was all done - they control all constraints.

So, my question to you is: How do you know what you're seeing is an original?

The Spacecraft DVDs didn't come out till much later. What I'm wondering is if the window cut scenes were retouched to match weather patterns from July of 1969. The Spacecraft DVDs are not live. Are they? And the footage that was shown live was of such poor resolution that the Earth showed up as a bright white light on TV screens, hardly something you could study on the old picture tubes.



posted on May, 20 2015 @ 09:17 AM
link   

originally posted by: bobbypurify
a reply to: choos

Even OBM agreed that nobody studied the weather patterns of the Apollo footage from the orginal telecast. Now, do you have an original recorded telecast of the little gem footage? I don't. There isn't much that even exists. WE HAVE TO RELY ON NASA - and if I'm correct in my assumptions of how this was all done - they control all constraints.


there were people around such as bill kaysing..how do you know he didnt study it and found nothing??


So, my question to you is: How do you know what you're seeing is an original?


spacecraft films video matches newspaper images from 1969..

how do you know that it isnt??


The Spacecraft DVDs didn't come out till much later. What I'm wondering is if the window cut scenes were retouched to match weather patterns from July of 1969. The Spacecraft DVDs are not live. Are they? And the footage that was shown live was of such poor resolution that the Earth showed up as a bright white light on TV screens, hardly something you could study on the old picture tubes.


newpaper articles took images from mission control and released papers with those images to the world as soon as they could.. those images matches every single known video footage from that day, including the spacecraft films footage..
edit on 20-5-2015 by choos because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 20 2015 @ 09:21 AM
link   
a reply to: choos

- I can't speak for Kaysing

- The newspaper footage could be a satellite photo/composite and most likely was

- The updated Spacecraft films of the little gem only has to match that newspaper photo

- Because of poor resolution of the TV quality in 1969, we will never get to see what matched what on the television sets back then.



posted on May, 20 2015 @ 09:25 AM
link   

originally posted by: bobbypurify
a reply to: choos
- The newspaper footage could be a satellite photo/composite and most likely was


just that it wasnt.. i did mention that they took the image from mission control when it was projected on the screen right??


- The updated Spacecraft films of the little gem only has to match that newspaper photo


the newspaper photo which was taken during the live broadcast of the event, yes which it does nicely..


- Because of poor resolution of the TV quality in 1969, we will never get to see what matched what on the television sets back then.


but it matches does it not?? you cant fake a hurricane..


(post by bobbypurify removed for a manners violation)

posted on May, 20 2015 @ 09:29 AM
link   

originally posted by: bobbypurify

originally posted by: choos

originally posted by: bobbypurify
a reply to: choos
television sets back then.


but it matches does it not?? you cant fake a hurricane..


Here we go again. You're being deliberately obtuse. Have a nice day, Choos.


and you are choosing to be ignorant..

newspaper images from that day matches all known video footage.. deny it all you want, it doesnt change this fact.

and since you cant take the hint. cloud patterns on a specific day would only be known about on that day.. how did they predict such an accurate representation of a hurricane which is largely unpredictable?? even to this day they are hard to predict.
edit on 20-5-2015 by choos because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 20 2015 @ 12:19 PM
link   

originally posted by: bobbypurify
I just re-read his post 3 times and didn't see how any of it made what I stated impossible. Please, instead of just saying "watch his video", "did you see his gif", or "read his post" tell me what about it that makes it impossible.


What he said was that there are plenty of images of earth available that are verifiably from the time of the missions and they all perfectly match the reported weather and match the internet images available now. So that debunks your claim that these matching images were digitally created since the advent of the internet.



posted on May, 20 2015 @ 12:30 PM
link   
a reply to: DelMarvel

I meant that the new images matched the original still pictures and were formatted to the updated film. I thought I explained this in full. I never stated what you claim I did. This is becoming too commonplace in this discussion. It's really not that hard to comprehend. Oh well



posted on May, 20 2015 @ 12:46 PM
link   
POST REMOVED BY STAFF
edit on Wed May 20 2015 by DontTreadOnMe because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 20 2015 @ 01:45 PM
link   
a reply to: bobbypurify

That's great.

So do you have the footage that differs or did you lie?


originally posted by: bobbypurify
Now, do you have an original recorded telecast of the little gem footage? I don't.


Oh ok, you lied..
edit on 5-20-2015 by WakeUpBeer because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 20 2015 @ 02:27 PM
link   

originally posted by: bobbypurify
Relatively speaking. Yes. We know it's dimensions. It's about the size of a large "House". So, would you claim it is miles away???

Relative to what? Is it 2 or 900 meters? "Only meters away" sounds like less then 10. (I wouldn't use miles anyhow
)

Plus all the other factors which can influence the perspective (shape of object, camera movement, used lens etc etc).
I think this is a longer video of the house rock:


It comes into sight at around 10s, but at around 39s I think you see it coming into sight again.
edit on 20-5-2015 by MissVocalcord because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 20 2015 @ 02:32 PM
link   
a reply to: WakeUpBeer

"Oh ok, you lied.."

I don't understand the attitude of people who believe we landed on the moon. Posts like this litter the thread and ruin a conversation. I didn't lie. I'm questioning Apollo. I didn't make any declaritive statements announcing 100% confirmation. So keep your accusations to yourself please. This type of discourse should not be allowed and is borderline trolling/derailing.



posted on May, 20 2015 @ 02:48 PM
link   

originally posted by: bobbypurify
a reply to: WakeUpBeer

"Oh ok, you lied.."

I don't understand the attitude of people who believe we landed on the moon. Posts like this litter the thread and ruin a conversation. I didn't lie. I'm questioning Apollo. I didn't make any declaritive statements announcing 100% confirmation. So keep your accusations to yourself please.

Perhaps you could clear this up:

originally posted by: bobbypurify
I have the original broadcasts that my parents bought in 1975 and they differ.

When asked for the evidence:

originally posted by: bobbypurify
What I did there was use my words as an example of making a claim over the internet - which, in turn - went completely over your head.

Then in another post:

originally posted by: bobbypurify
Now, do you have an original recorded telecast of the little gem footage? I don't.


You can understand why I believe you lied?

You also said maps from Readers Digest don't match.

Can you supply that evidence as well please?



This type of discourse should not be allowed and is borderline trolling/derailing.

So why are you making false claims or not willing to back them up?


edit on 5-20-2015 by WakeUpBeer because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 20 2015 @ 02:57 PM
link   

originally posted by: WakeUpBeer

originally posted by: bobbypurify
a reply to: WakeUpBeer

"Oh ok, you lied.."

I don't understand the attitude of people who believe we landed on the moon. Posts like this litter the thread and ruin a conversation. I didn't lie. I'm questioning Apollo. I didn't make any declaritive statements announcing 100% confirmation. So keep your accusations to yourself please.

Perhaps you could clear this up:

originally posted by: bobbypurify
I have the original broadcasts that my parents bought in 1975 and they differ.

Then in another post:

originally posted by: bobbypurify
Now, do you have an original recorded telecast of the little gem footage? I don't.


You can understand why I believe you lied?

You also said maps from Readers Digest don't match.

Can you supply that evidence as well please?



This type of discourse should not be allowed and is borderline trolling/derailing.


I was using those as an example of making claims on the internet. Like what others have done without evidence. Jeez, man. Notice how I said "see how easy that was" as in; see how easy it is just to make stuff up. Context is important. Now, continue to be nasty to me and garner stars. I'll just ignore you from here on out




top topics



 
22
<< 6  7  8    10  11 >>

log in

join