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.

 

James Van Allen described moon landings as "the greatest television show"

page: 3
8
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 17 2015 @ 07:47 AM
link   

originally posted by: SayonaraJupiter


news.google.com...

My claim is that this is a direct quote of Dr. James Van Allen published in the New London, Connecticut newspaper "The Day" on December 1, 1970. I have provided proof of my claim.

What do you all think of Van Allen's comments?



What about the obvious part of the statement YOU are ignoring

"but he said manned lunar landings should be terminated to make possible less costly and in his view scientifically more valuable space missions."

The article is dated Dec 1970 by that time 2 missions had landed.

Thanks for the confirmation of them happening and debunking yourself keep up the good work!

edit on 17-7-2015 by wmd_2008 because: (no reason given)

edit on 17-7-2015 by wmd_2008 because: (no reason given)




posted on Jul, 17 2015 @ 08:13 AM
link   
There is nothing, zero, zilch in what he said that even hints at conspiracy. it was televised, it was exciting, it was watched by millions.

Not everything is a conspiracy guys.



posted on Jul, 17 2015 @ 08:34 AM
link   
a reply to: SayonaraJupiter

Please explain how something can be terminated if it is not happening. If the Moon landings should be terminated, they must be happening, right? Van Allen affirms that the Moon landings were happening, and that they made for great television. Do you disagree with him? If so, why?



posted on Jul, 17 2015 @ 08:42 AM
link   

originally posted by: SayonaraJupiter
My claim is that this is a direct quote of Dr. James Van Allen published in the New London, Connecticut newspaper "The Day" on December 1, 1970. I have provided proof of my claim.

What do you all think of Van Allen's comments?


It is good that you finally have some common sense, and admit the moon landings took place. It is good of you to post a article confirming the landings happened.



posted on Jul, 17 2015 @ 01:34 PM
link   
Haha. I don't think the OP was expecting this thread to go the route it has...
I find it comical.



posted on Jul, 17 2015 @ 02:31 PM
link   
a reply to: SayonaraJupiter


Greetings-

Common Passerby: "Did You watch the game last night?"

Cp #2: "I sure did, but I miss 'Seinfeld' that was the greatest television show"

Worlds Best Dad isn't a real prize either...

I could hardly ever agree with Gene Siskel or Roger Ebert and sometimes they would say "this is the best movie..."..

I'd opine by now "the greatest television show" would be 'Games of Thrones'...

namaste



posted on Jul, 17 2015 @ 02:38 PM
link   
a reply to: SayonaraJupiter

What part of he said it are you having such problems understanding??



posted on Jul, 17 2015 @ 07:18 PM
link   
i am just confused about how this somehow proves the moon landings were a hoax. is that your intent with bringing up this quote? because in context, it seems like he's saying that it was a big waste of money to go there and basically it was just a form of entertainment for the american people versus actually being of any real scientific value.



posted on Jul, 17 2015 @ 10:49 PM
link   

Van Allen said the Apollo 11 moon landing "was the best television show that I have ever seen."



Let's break it down.

The target paragraph begins: "Two weeks ago, "


The first question I asked to myself was : Where was James Van Allen speaking "two weeks ago"? Well it turns out that Van Allen was giving a lecture in Durham, North Carolina. That's where he was when he made it - what I will refer to as the Van Allen t.v. statement.

For context, Van Allen made his remarks on a Thursday, November 5th, it was just two days after the 1970 mid-term elections. A lot of newspapers were filled up with election stories that week. Richard Nixon gave his famous "Silent Majority" speech in Phoenix, Arizona that week.

What I learned up to this point is that the target paragraph was a little sloppy with the dates because it wasn't "Two weeks ago," it was a whopping 25 days! Does the target paragraph make any other mistakes? So I continued to dig a little deeper.

I found four more articles in google news archive. ( Some could claim that google news archive is not an academic source, but, then, that would be a different topic deserving it's own thread. I know that a google news search is not a replacement for high quality, peer reviewed, historical articles. ) Here are the articles dated between November 6th and 10th.

1. The Telegraph November 6, 1970
news.google.com...



2. The St. Petersburg Times November 7, 1970
news.google.com...



3. The Sarasota Journal November 9, 1970
news.google.com...



4. The Miami News November 10, 1970
news.google.com...



Now it should be obvious that whoever edited the target paragraph for the December 1st edition of The Day, has shortened the full quote, which was different and longer; the more accurate quote should be :



Van Allen said the Apollo 11 moon landing "was the best television show that I have ever seen." Sources google news


My conclusion is that James Van Allen was trolling NASA. In fact, Van Allen's obituary in the Pittsburgh Press on August 10th, 2006 news.google.com... indicated that he identified himself as "a member of the loyal opposition". Speaking out and criticizing NASA for aggrandizing manned space flight above and beyond scientific goals takes a lot of guts... especially in 1970! This man had the prestige and credibility to say whatever he wanted about space exploration. He compared Apollo 11 to a TV show.
edit on 7/17/2015 by SayonaraJupiter because: edit to add the target paragraph; defenders can go home;



posted on Jul, 17 2015 @ 10:55 PM
link   
a reply to: SayonaraJupiter

Right.

So he felt that the moon landings up to that point had wonderful ratings, made a great TV show, but was not serious enough for science, that it would be cheaper and better science to send unmanned probes, etc.

So what exactly is the point of this thread?



posted on Jul, 17 2015 @ 11:02 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Jul, 17 2015 @ 11:09 PM
link   

originally posted by: SayonaraJupiter

originally posted by: TerminalVelocity
So what exactly is the point of this thread?



Whooooooooooosh.




I'm sorry, could you be a little more clear? I still am trying to understand the subject of your thread.

So far what I'm seeing is that you've found historical reference to Van Allen having an opinion on the first two moon landings. That opinion seems to read:

Great, we got there, it was wonderful television, but in my opinion lousy science. We can do better science for less money if we use unmanned probes.

Okay, I do get that part.

What I do not understand is why this is so important, especially to you.

Are you trying to say that Nixon and NASA should have listened to Allen and stopped the moon landings after just the first two, and switched over to unmanned landings that could do more science? Or that you think Allen was wrong and that continuing to do manned landings was better?



posted on Jul, 17 2015 @ 11:11 PM
link   
You have badly shot yourself in the foot, totally destroying your silly conspiracy theory, posting evidence that man walked on the moon!


This man had the prestige and credibility to say whatever he wanted about space exploration.


So he said man walked on the moon! Where does that leave your silly conspiracy theory now?



posted on Jul, 17 2015 @ 11:25 PM
link   
a reply to: hellobruce

So that's what this is about?

Wow. That seems like taking something really out of context. I believe another saying is "that's quite a stretch".

I'm pretty sure that Van Allen simply thought that they moon landings were very well televised and that the general public enjoyed being able to actually see the landings, but that much better science could have been done.



posted on Jul, 17 2015 @ 11:38 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Jul, 17 2015 @ 11:59 PM
link   
a reply to: TerminalVelocity


What I do not understand is why this is so important, especially to you.


Ok, you are a new ATS member. If you make it personal, you are off-topic.

When you question my motives like "why this is so important, especially to you" you are indeed making it personal.

That is off-topic. I want you to speak about the statements of Van Allen, the newspaper reporting, anything except SJ's motives. Do you have the discipline to talk about the subject? Do you have the discipline to not attack the messenger?

I do appreciate your other comments. You have correctly summarized Van Allen's criticisms,


TerminalVelocity: Great, we got there, it was wonderful television, but in my opinion lousy science. We can do better science for less money if we use unmanned probes.


Did you know that space shuttle launches were claimed to cost only $5 million dollars? Did you know that there was a big unemployment problem in 1970 when Nixon cancelled the Apollo missions and cancelled the production of Saturn V?

What did Nixon do to solve that unemployment problem? He authorized the space shuttle development that would keep NASA in low earth orbit for over 40 years.... Nixon is laughing in mockery, the edge of reality is 300 miles in space altitude.

James Van Allen compared Apollo 11 to a TV show. Van Allen is mocking Apollo 11. Van Allen is trolling NASA/



posted on Jul, 18 2015 @ 12:06 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Jul, 18 2015 @ 12:12 AM
link   
a reply to: SayonaraJupiter

I think Van Allen flat out says the landings are real in the source, and thinks it's the best show to ever hit the TV (you know, because it was actually on TV).

"Manned landings should be terminated" means they had to be occurring.



posted on Jul, 18 2015 @ 12:17 AM
link   
a reply to: SayonaraJupiter

"Van Allen said the US should phase out it's manned space program" ....

So he is saying the program was real, men went to the moon.

Thank you for more proof the moon hoax believers are crazy, as was said earlier ...


originally posted by: awareness10
a reply to: SayonaraJupiter

If anyone knew the moon landing was an impossibility at that time, it would be Van Allen.


And he clearly said it happened. We can put this to bed now.



posted on Jul, 18 2015 @ 12:27 AM
link   
a reply to: OccamsRazor04


So he is saying the program was real, men went to the moon.


This thread is about source material and quotation marks, if you make a claim you have to back it up.



new topics

top topics



 
8
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join