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.

 

Why I believe the Moon landings may have been faked

page: 66
57
<< 63  64  65    67  68  69 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 14 2016 @ 04:38 AM
link   
a reply to: OneBigMonkeyToo
before you said there was no other satellite images available to use to hoax it, now you confirmed there was...

NASA Gets Caught Faking Satellite data -AGAIN!




posted on May, 14 2016 @ 04:41 AM
link   
a reply to: turbonium1

you repeatedly announce that all data is from LEO only. which obviously includes GCR data.

the ISS which is an Aluminium hulled spacecraft is in LEO. which would be exposed to GCR since GCR data was obtained in LEO and the ISS is in LEO.

now this is following YOUR arguments..

the longest anyone has ever been on a spacelfight is about 438 days on the ISS which is aluminium hulled..

so according to your beliefs the ISS which should be exposed to GCR's constantly since GCR data was collected in LEO and the ISS is in LEO, this would all mean that you believe either:
1/ GCR are very low and an astronaut can survive upto 438 days exposed to it inside an aluminium hull which includes other radiation sources ie. VAB.
or
2/ the ISS is fake.

given how far up the creek you have travelled id put my money that you believe number 2.



posted on May, 14 2016 @ 04:43 AM
link   

originally posted by: Misinformation


its actually in reference to global temperatures and you have deliberately changed

Actually it's NASA thats the one thats deliberately changing global temperatures


so you admit to deliberately posting mis-leading quotes. ie. deliberately posting hoax information?



posted on May, 14 2016 @ 04:49 AM
link   

originally posted by: Misinformation
a reply to: OneBigMonkeyToo
before you said there was no other satellite images available to use to hoax it, now you confirmed there was...



Nope, wrong, false. You're completely misrepresenting what I have argued, either deliberately to mislead people or because you never read what is actually on the page properly. Both or those are possible. Find a direct quote if you want to call me a liar.

What I said was, and I stand by it 100%, is that there were no images of the moon available showing the details available in Apollo images before Apollo went. Arguing that there were no other sources of satellite data is obviously not true, because for many of the Apollo images there are three completely different satellites available.

I am always looking out for new sources of meteorological data that confirm the time and date specific images of Earth shown by Apollo.

Do you have any response to what I posted or not?
edit on 14/5/2016 by OneBigMonkeyToo because: typo



posted on May, 14 2016 @ 09:20 AM
link   
If the moon landing was real why has it taken us so long to go back and explore the moon properly?



posted on May, 14 2016 @ 09:29 AM
link   

originally posted by: Bigcid
If the moon landing was real why has it taken us so long to go back and explore the moon properly?


kennedy wanted to beat the russians to the moon more than explore it "properly"

Doing spaceflights in the 1960s and 1970s Before Apollo, there were the Mercury and Gemini programs. Project Mercury spanned five years (1959–1963) and cost $277 million in 1965 dollars, which translate into $1.6 billion in 2010 dollars. Since six Mercury piloted missions were flown, that amounted to $265 million per flight in today’s money.

As for Gemini, the program costs $1.3 billion in 1967 dollars during its six-year lifespan (1962–1967). In today’s money, it would amount to $7.3 billion, or $723 millions for each of its 10 piloted missions. We thus could say that a Gemini mission cost twice as much as a Mercury’s. As reported above, the Apollo program costs $20.4 billion if we simply added yearly spending of its 15 year-lifespan (1959–1973), or $109 billion in today’s money.

Since 11 Apollo piloted missions were flown, that amounts to $9.9 billion per flight. That’s way over Mercury and Gemini mission costs, reflecting the complexity of going to the Moon. And if we consider these $109 billion resulted in six lunar landings, each of these missions costs some $18 billion!


my recollection is kennedy was more interested in being 1st than "properly" exploring anything and the US public lost the collective will to keep spending on it as the 70's rolled in and so did economic problems.



posted on May, 14 2016 @ 10:37 AM
link   

originally posted by: syrinx high priest
originally posted by: Bigcid

my recollection is kennedy was more interested in being 1st than "properly" exploring anything and the US public lost the collective will to keep spending on it as the 70's rolled in and so did economic problems.



True. It wasn't just the government who thought "getting to the Moon first before the Russians" was more important than "exploring the moon afterwards" -- it also seemed the general taxpaying public felt the same way.

By the time NASA got around to doing "real" science with Apollo, the program was already doomed to be cancelled.

Apollo 17, the final Apollo Lunar Mission, was billed as being the "true science" Apollo Mission. One of the two Moon walkers for the first time was a scientist (a geologist). By the time Apollo 17's specific mission profile was being planned, public support for Apollo was already waning, and the general public vocally started complaining about the money being spent to go to the moon, and thought that money could be better spent to solve social problems on earth.

Partly (mostly?) due to this dwindling public support for the lunar missions, Apollo 18 and 19 were cancelled.


edit on 2016-5-14 by Soylent Green Is People because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 14 2016 @ 04:38 PM
link   
Some useful information for people who somehow think Apollo just sort of took off and crossed their fingers without thinking about things like radiation. The magazine is the US's Environmental Science Service (ESSA) in-house journal ESSA World, and there are some interesting articles that relate to their work with NASA on predicting space weather (amongst other things)

hdl.handle.net...

hdl.handle.net...

hdl.handle.net...

hdl.handle.net...

Happy reading.
edit on 14/5/2016 by OneBigMonkeyToo because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 14 2016 @ 11:40 PM
link   
How can anyone who's looked at any of the evidence believe the moon landings were real?

Space is fake

The earth is flat. There are NO Orbits, there is No Gravity. It's all made up non sense to push a Darwinian atheistic society.



posted on May, 14 2016 @ 11:48 PM
link   

originally posted by: RockofTruth
How can anyone who's looked at any of the evidence believe the moon landings were real?

Space is fake

The earth is flat. There are NO Orbits, there is No Gravity. It's all made up non sense to push a Darwinian atheistic society.


You got anything to back that up with, or are you just doing a flying post?
edit on 1452016 by TerryDon79 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 15 2016 @ 02:14 AM
link   

originally posted by: TerryDon79

originally posted by: RockofTruth
How can anyone who's looked at any of the evidence believe the moon landings were real?

Space is fake

The earth is flat. There are NO Orbits, there is No Gravity. It's all made up non sense to push a Darwinian atheistic society.


You got anything to back that up with, or are you just doing a flying post?


The original post on this pretty much covered all the evidence needed to disprove the Apollo moon missions. So if they are disproven there goes the only proof that there is an outer space and that the earth is a sphere. Since Apollo they just put out 1 new picture of the ball earth that's supposed to be from a satellite, anyone can see its cgi.

Here on the ground, we lose signal on our cell phones, GPS, and tv if we go through a tunnel, go up and down hills, it rains outside..... Yet they can remote control robots on Mars and get pictures from probes on the other side of the solar system.... But my tv goes out when it thunderstorms?

If satellites and orbits around a ball earth were real, we wouldn't need 1000's of feet of underwater cables criss crossing all of the earths oceans in order to establish communication across continents.

Go watch some nasa footage and press conference. The people in charge can't answer simple questions about how things work. They don't know what format pictures from Mars are sent back to earth in.

Supposedly the ISS is traveling 17,500 mph!!!! But when an astronaut space walks he is flung behind the craft like a water skier behind a fast moving boat, instead they float around and can move wherever they want with small air jets on their suits. COME ON! That's impossible! Physics don't work that way. There's a reason they can't do a real 24 HR Iive feed from the ISS.

Gravity has no proof of its existence. There is no proof of gravity at work, no one can put a small object next to a larger one and watch the larger one attract the smaller object. It doesn't happen. How can gravity be strong enough to hold the ocean to the earth, but no strong enough to keep an insect from flying off the ground? Which would take more effort?



posted on May, 15 2016 @ 02:51 AM
link   

originally posted by: RockofTruth


The original post on this pretty much covered all the evidence needed to disprove the Apollo moon missions. So if they are disproven there goes the only proof that there is an outer space and that the earth is a sphere. Since Apollo they just put out 1 new picture of the ball earth that's supposed to be from a satellite, anyone can see its cgi.


The OP did not present anything to disprove Apollo, it merely regurgitated the usual easily contradicted claims. Your claim that there has been 1 picture of the Earth as a 'ball' is completely and utterly false. Post the image you claim is the only one around and prove it is false.



Here on the ground, we lose signal on our cell phones, GPS, and tv if we go through a tunnel, go up and down hills, it rains outside..... Yet they can remote control robots on Mars and get pictures from probes on the other side of the solar system.... But my tv goes out when it thunderstorms?


Gee, can you think of any logical reason why you would lose GPS signals under solid rock when signals pointed directly out into space don't have any such issues? Have a look at how much air a terrestrial TV signal has to go through and see if you can compare that with how much air a signal pointing at Mars has to go through.

You also need to look up why 'cell phones' are called that.



If satellites and orbits around a ball earth were real,


They are.



we wouldn't need 1000's of feet of underwater cables criss crossing all of the earths oceans in order to establish communication across continents.


The cables were there first.



Go watch some nasa footage and press conference. The people in charge can't answer simple questions about how things work. They don't know what format pictures from Mars are sent back to earth in.


Go watch some NASA footage and press conferences and prove something is incorrect. Go read up about the other space agencies that exist.



Supposedly the ISS is traveling 17,500 mph!!!!


It is. What's this?




But when an astronaut space walks he is flung behind the craft like a water skier behind a fast moving boat, instead they float around and can move wherever they want with small air jets on their suits. COME ON! That's impossible! Physics don't work that way.


The laws of physics work exactly that way.



There's a reason they can't do a real 24 HR Iive feed from the ISS.


Which is? How do you know they don't do 24 hour live feeds? How do you think they maintain comms with it?



Gravity has no proof of its existence. There is no proof of gravity at work, no one can put a small object next to a larger one and watch the larger one attract the smaller object. It doesn't happen. How can gravity be strong enough to hold the ocean to the earth, but no strong enough to keep an insect from flying off the ground? Which would take more effort?



Prove it wrong then.

Your post was a reply to a request for proof of your claims.

You have provided nothing but unsupported opinion.
edit on 15/5/2016 by OneBigMonkeyToo because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 15 2016 @ 03:44 AM
link   

originally posted by: OneBigMonkeyToo

originally posted by: [post=20726308]RockofTruth[/post
The original post on this pretty much covered all the evidence needed to disprove the Apollo moon missions. So if they are disproven there goes the only proof that there is an outer space and that the earth is a sphere. Since Apollo they just put out 1 new picture of the ball earth that's supposed to be from a satellite, anyone can see its cgi.


The OP did not present anything to disprove Apollo, it merely regurgitated the usual easily contradicted claims. Your claim that there has been 1 picture of the Earth as a 'ball' is completely and utterly false. Post the image you claim is the only one around and prove it is false.



Here on the ground, we lose signal on our cell phones, GPS, and tv if we go through a tunnel, go up and down hills, it rains outside..... Yet they can remote control robots on Mars and get pictures from probes on the other side of the solar system.... But my tv goes out when it thunderstorms?


Gee, can you think of any logical reason why you would lose GPS signals under solid rock when signals pointed directly out into space don't have any such issues? Have a look at how much air a terrestrial TV signal has to go through and see if you can compare that with how much air a signal pointing at Mars has to go through.

You also need to look up why 'cell phones' are called that.



If satellites and orbits around a ball earth were real,


They are.



we wouldn't need 1000's of feet of underwater cables criss crossing all of the earths oceans in order to establish communication across continents.


The cables were there first.



Go watch some nasa footage and press conference. The people in charge can't answer simple questions about how things work. They don't know what format pictures from Mars are sent back to earth in.


Go watch some NASA footage and press conferences and prove something is incorrect. Go read up about the other space agencies that exist.



Supposedly the ISS is traveling 17,500 mph!!!!


It is. What's this?




But when an astronaut space walks he is flung behind the craft like a water skier behind a fast moving boat, instead they float around and can move wherever they want with small air jets on their suits. COME ON! That's impossible! Physics don't work that way.


The laws of physics work exactly that way.



There's a reason they can't do a real 24 HR Iive feed from the ISS.


Which is? How do you know they don't do 24 hour live feeds? How do you think they maintain comms with it?



Gravity has no proof of its existence. There is no proof of gravity at work, no one can put a small object next to a larger one and watch the larger one attract the smaller object. It doesn't happen. How can gravity be strong enough to hold the ocean to the earth, but no strong enough to keep an insect from flying off the ground? Which would take more effort?



Prove it wrong then.

Your post was a reply to a request for proof of your claims.

You have provided nothing but unsupported opinion.


It's not opinion, tie a rope around your waist while inside a car going 60 mph. Tie the other end of that rope to the vehicle. Now jump out of the cars window while it's moving at 60 mph... What happened to you??? You hit the road and got drug behind the car because you as a human being can't fly or fall at 60 mph when going out of something going 60 mph. The ISS isn't even in "outer space" it's in earths atmosphere still and supposedly experiences 90% of earths gravitational pull.. So if you step out of the ISS while it's going 17,000 + mph you aren't going to float next to it. Your going to get dragged behind it. They aren't weightless, they're in atmosphere. Supposedly they're "falling" at those speed but never actually fall down? What you see footage of them doing is impossible and makes no sense. And if you argue against that then your lying to yourself.

There is no measurable curvature there is no argument or other proof needed! Water doesn't curve. The ball can't be proven! That is proof that the earth is flat and not a ball. If we can show any ball evidence to be a sham then that's all the proof needed. It's really simple to shut flat earthers up. Go out into the world and show measurable earth curvature where over a flat area things are covered by the earths curve. ITS THAT SIMPLE!!!! GO DO IT!!!! PLEASE GO DO IT BECAUSE I WANT TO BACK TO BELIEVING OUTER SPACE IS REAL ENJOYING MY STAR WARS AND STAR TREK FICTION!!!! So please go do it!!!

The problem is, you can't. On the other hand flat earthers have proven the curve doesn't hide anything. The case is closed. Use science!



posted on May, 15 2016 @ 04:13 AM
link   
Your lack of understaning of evidence, and refusal to accept what doesn't fit your tinfoil hat fantasy, is not proof that you are correct.

Science takes flat Earth BS and shreds it - take it to another thread, this is about as off topic as you can get for this one. While you're in your flat Earth thread, explain the Arctic and Antarctic ice.

While you do that, here are some pictures taken by Apollo 11 showing the Earth, as a globe, revolving over time.




posted on May, 15 2016 @ 04:14 AM
link   
The blue marble picture was taken by Apollo 17 28,000 miles away from earth according to them. But if you can't actually get that far away, which we can't. Then it has to be fake. Ask yourself why it took the very last mission before they took a snap shot of the earth? Why were all other missions cancelled right afterward? Why hasn't any human being been further out then a few 100 miles up since then? If they actually went there and could do that and all the astronauts survived why the heck wouldn't they have gone back? Why wouldn't we have superior machines to get there easily by now? And if we have sooooooo many satellites and probes then how come there aren't other real pictures? Everything else is a composite. Why would all the other pictures be composites???!? If we really sent other craft that far away surely we would have lots of video and pictures of the ball. But we don't. All we have are composites that have been altered and changed, and that's because we CANT get anything high enough to take a picture of the whole earth. If we can't do that 40 years later how the heck was it done in 1972?



posted on May, 15 2016 @ 04:22 AM
link   

originally posted by: OneBigMonkeyToo
Your lack of understaning of evidence, and refusal to accept what doesn't fit your tinfoil hat fantasy, is not proof that you are correct.

Science takes flat Earth BS and shreds it - take it to another thread, this is about as off topic as you can get for this one. While you're in your flat Earth thread, explain the Arctic and Antarctic ice.

While you do that, here are some pictures taken by Apollo 11 showing the Earth, as a globe, revolving over time.



Haha!! Please!!! How come we don't see the whole
Earth? Why is it shadowed and why does the size of the shadow move and jump around? Once again your seeing snap shot of earth that don't show an entire globe!!!! Go watch a funny thing happened on the way to the moon. It shows them faking earth shots like that.

I know u believe everything on the tv is real.... But most of it is make believe. Don't show me partial pictures of earth.. The math has been done. YOU have never been high enough up to see if it's a globe or not. Most of the crews on Apollo missions were like 3 or 4 people. It's a very small number of people who claim they saw it. And they're lying. I know because the math has been done and all anyone has to do is show the earths curve hiding things behind the horizion. Just go do it if you live on a ball. Go prove it! But no one can because there is no curve. You can't live on a ball spinning 1000 mph.

Do you believe in the correolius effect? Please explain that to me if you can, because I have some questions about it...



posted on May, 15 2016 @ 04:24 AM
link   

originally posted by: RockofTruth
The blue marble picture was taken by Apollo 17 28,000 miles away from earth according to them. But if you can't actually get that far away, which we can't. Then it has to be fake.


No, you hav decided it is fake, this is not the same as it being fake. The meteorological information in the Apollo 17 image can also be seen in 16mm footage taken just after TLI:

onebigmonkey.com...


Ask yourself why it took the very last mission before they took a snap shot of the earth?


I don't have to, because I know that statement is nonsense. Photographs of Earth were taken many times on every mission.



Why were all other missions cancelled right afterward?


They weren't, they were canceled long before it. Arguing from a position of complete ignorance isn't helping your cause.


Why hasn't any human being been further out then a few 100 miles up since then?


Humans in the ISS are higher than that. If you want them to go higher, petition your government for the funds.


If they actually went there and could do that and all the astronauts survived why the heck wouldn't they have gone back?


$$$$$


Why wouldn't we have superior machines to get there easily by now?


'Why haven't I got a hover board' is not a legitimate argument.


And if we have sooooooo many satellites and probes then how come there aren't other real pictures?


We have lots. Your lackof awareness of them is not proof they do not exist.


Everything else is a composite. Why would all the other pictures be composites???!?


Who says they are all composite?


If we really sent other craft that far away surely we would have lots of video and pictures of the ball. But we don't. All we have are composites that have been altered and changed, and that's because we CANT get anything high enough to take a picture of the whole earth. If we can't do that 40 years later how the heck was it done in 1972?


You claim they are altered and changed. Prove they have. We have been taking pictures of a whole Earth since 1966 and there are thousands of them around.

Bald assertion is not an adequate substitute for argument supported by evidence.
edit on 15/5/2016 by OneBigMonkeyToo because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 15 2016 @ 04:28 AM
link   

originally posted by: RockofTruth

Haha!! Please!!! How come we don't see the whole
Earth? Why is it shadowed and why does the size of the shadow move and jump around? Once again your seeing snap shot of earth that don't show an entire globe!!!! Go watch a funny thing happened on the way to the moon. It shows them faking earth shots like that.


Because it's night time in the dark bit. 'A funny thing happened' is a complete fraud, easily provable.

onebigmonkey.com...




I know u believe everything on the tv is real.... But most of it is make believe. Don't show me partial pictures of earth.. The math has been done. YOU have never been high enough up to see if it's a globe or not. Most of the crews on Apollo missions were like 3 or 4 people. It's a very small number of people who claim they saw it. And they're lying. I know because the math has been done and all anyone has to do is show the earths curve hiding things behind the horizion. Just go do it if you live on a ball. Go prove it! But no one can because there is no curve. You can't live on a ball spinning 1000 mph.


You know nothing, you have done no maths. Take your flat Earth stuff to a new thread.



Do you believe in the correolius effect? Please explain that to me if you can, because I have some questions about it...


Would you like me to explain how to spell it?



posted on May, 15 2016 @ 05:02 AM
link   
Lol no just like u to state for the record if you believe in it. And if you do explain how it can effect a bullet but doesn't effect an airplane???

And this is a topic about he moon missions being fake, guess what the earth being flat proves they were faked. Because if we don't live on a planet in outer space then we didn't leave it and take pictures.

Another thing that disproved the blue marble is that I looks like a normal sphere. But now the scientists are saying it's an oblate spheroid and is somewhat pare shaped with the Southern Hemisphere fatter then the northern... Have you ever seen a supposed real picture of earth where it looked like a oblate spheroid or a pair in anyway? I haven't, the blue marble doesn't... So clearly even if you believe them now they prove themselves that Apollo was fake.



posted on May, 15 2016 @ 05:12 AM
link   

originally posted by: OneBigMonkeyToo

originally posted by: RockofTruth

Haha!! Please!!! How come we don't see the whole
Earth? Why is it shadowed and why does the size of the shadow move and jump around? Once again your seeing snap shot of earth that don't show an entire globe!!!! Go watch a funny thing happened on the way to the moon. It shows them faking earth shots like that.


Because it's night time in the dark bit. 'A funny thing happened' is a complete fraud, easily provable.

onebigmonkey.com...




I know u believe everything on the tv is real.... But most of it is make believe. Don't show me partial pictures of earth.. The math has been done. YOU have never been high enough up to see if it's a globe or not. Most of the crews on Apollo missions were like 3 or 4 people. It's a very small number of people who claim they saw it. And they're lying. I know because the math has been done and all anyone has to do is show the earths curve hiding things behind the horizion. Just go do it if you live on a ball. Go prove it! But no one can because there is no curve. You can't live on a ball spinning 1000 mph.


You know nothing, you have done no maths. Take your flat Earth stuff to a new thread.



Do you believe in the correolius effect? Please explain that to me if you can, because I have some questions about it...


Would you like me to explain how to spell it?


Oh it's night time??? So how come the other planets that are much further away from the sun then we are shine so brightly that they look like stars to us, brighter then stars in fact to us on earth... But when we're only a few thousand miles away from our own planet it's soooooo dark at night that we can't even see the outline or darkened features of the rest of the ball earth???? I mean even here on earth when the moon is half covered by earths shadow supposedly I can still see the dark parts of the moon with my naked eye! Explain it for me please, why is the earth soooo dark???




top topics



 
57
<< 63  64  65    67  68  69 >>

log in

join