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.

 

Whould you get in this if I told you it goes to the moon?

page: 17
20
<< 14  15  16    18  19  20 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 2 2016 @ 01:54 PM
link   

originally posted by: ProfessorPatternfish
I apologise in advanced for this being a short OP.



I am curios, in this day and age. With what we know about space exploration. Would anyone really get in this Apollo 11 Lander if was told it goes to the moon?





Heres another pic of the lander.


the dam thing is held together by friggin cello tape!!! lmao
edit on 2-5-2016 by clevargenuis because: (no reason given)




posted on May, 2 2016 @ 01:57 PM
link   
a reply to: clevargenuis

You do understand that that is just the outside and not the actual framework?

Or are you just trolling this thread like the others you have already?



posted on May, 2 2016 @ 02:01 PM
link   

originally posted by: TerryDon79
a reply to: clevargenuis

You do understand that that is just the outside and not the actual framework?


Do we have the structural blueprint for that thing?



Or are you just trolling this thread like the others you have already?


Aaaand once again I'm being falsely accused of trolling, because thats the best way to silence skeptics right?



posted on May, 2 2016 @ 02:03 PM
link   

originally posted by: clevargenuis

originally posted by: TerryDon79
a reply to: clevargenuis

You do understand that that is just the outside and not the actual framework?


Do we have the structural blueprint for that thing?
Yes. Google is your friend. There is also photos earlier in the thread of the thing getting built.



Or are you just trolling this thread like the others you have already?



Aaaand once again I'm being falsely accused of trolling, because thats the best way to silence skeptics right?
Accused? Yes. Falsely? I doubt it.
edit on 252016 by TerryDon79 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 2 2016 @ 02:09 PM
link   

originally posted by: TerryDon79

originally posted by: clevargenuis

originally posted by: TerryDon79
a reply to: clevargenuis

You do understand that that is just the outside and not the actual framework?


Do we have the structural blueprint for that thing?
Yes. Google is your friend. There is also photos earlier in the threado F the thing getting built.



Or are you just trolling this thread like the others you have already?



Aaaand once again I'm being falsely accused of trolling, because thats the best way to silence skeptics right?
Accused? Yes. Falsely? I doubt it.

photos of that pile of junk getting built is not proof that its real. Its as good as a photo of the death star being built, ie its a PROP. (Still better than photoshop).

And one more example of nasa HOAXES.
edit on 2-5-2016 by clevargenuis because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 2 2016 @ 02:13 PM
link   

originally posted by: clevargenuis

originally posted by: TerryDon79

originally posted by: clevargenuis

originally posted by: TerryDon79
a reply to: clevargenuis

You do understand that that is just the outside and not the actual framework?


Do we have the structural blueprint for that thing?
Yes. Google is your friend. There is also photos earlier in the threado F the thing getting built.



Or are you just trolling this thread like the others you have already?



Aaaand once again I'm being falsely accused of trolling, because thats the best way to silence skeptics right?
Accused? Yes. Falsely? I doubt it.

photos of that pile of junk getting built is not proof that its real. Its as good as a photo of the death star being built, ie its a PROP. (Still better than photoshop).
I guess you don't believe the first car, plane and train were ever built then?

(BTW Photoshop is a pretty new thing. It didn't exist in the 1960s)


And yes desperate nasa fanboys will try to silence anybody calling out nasa HOAXES.
Ah yes. The old "if you believe we went to the moon you're a shill" tactic. I have never seen that used before
/sarcasm


And one more example of nasa HOAXES.
And you have yet to provide evidence of a single one.
edit on 252016 by TerryDon79 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 2 2016 @ 02:17 PM
link   
a reply to: TerryDon79

nice try but this isnt about cars and planes stop deflecting.

That pile of cello taped junk is a FAKE prop that nasa fanboys believe is real.

I never said photoshop existed in the 60s. Deflect some more.



posted on May, 2 2016 @ 02:18 PM
link   

originally posted by: Arbitrageur
In the space suit episode, I had read the story about the testing problem where the space suit test subject was exposed to vacuum, but as you say they really had first hand information and interviewed the test subject about what it felt like to be exposed to vacuum. He's probably one of the only people alive to experience that (maybe the only person? Unless the Russian have a similar story I don't know about with their space suit testing).


(in voice of Yoda)"There...is...a...nother"

Back in the olden days, when vacuum tubes were the common active device in electronics, the way you'd do 'lab work' on tube innards would be to suit up and spend some time in a vacuum work bench enclosure, where you could modify or instrument the insides of tubes with the glass or metal off, to see why they didn't quite work the way you'd expected. One guy was doing that and his suit popped a leak, he was exposed to full vacuum for quite a few seconds until they could repressurize.

Also, and I can't come up with links to prove it, there were a few SEALs that got the vacuum treatment in a sub. They were out doing something untoward and uninvited from a lock-out on a sub. This sub was especially fitted for such things, and could egress a good half dozen guys at a whack at depth. So, they got back, they closed the hatch, and the swabbie in charge of the lockout trunk pumped the water out. Only he forgot to open the inboard vent.

So, the big pump happily sucked the water out, drawing a near perfect vacuum on the guys in a matter of seconds. Of the four, three collapsed to the bottom of the trunk, dropping their regs, and drowned in the foot or two of water the pump left when the guy noticed everyone was on the deck and stopped the pump. The remaining guy had hooked his arm through some pipes on the inside and was dangling from his arm. It took nearly a minute to vent the trunk because the valve wasn't designed to open with a vacuum on the inside, but they got it open. By the time they got in, the three were dead from a helicopter accident, and the one dangling from the piping was "fizzing foam at the eyes and ears". They repressurized him to reduce the bends the vacuum had given him and he ended up with only minor permanent injuries, mostly hearing.



posted on May, 2 2016 @ 02:20 PM
link   

originally posted by: clevargenuis

the dam thing reflective foil that reduces the solar heating is held together by friggin cello tape!!! lmao


There, fixed it for you.

btw, just for general edification, the material used at the time was Kapton film with a vacuum sputtered coating of aluminum. Kapton is transparent with a dark gold/amber color, so depending on the direction the film is applied, it may look silver or gold. It's put on really baggy and loose so that it doesn't touch the enclosure underneath anymore than you have to, so you don't get heating by conduction.

It's about 98% effective at reflecting radiant heat.
edit on 2-5-2016 by Bedlam because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 2 2016 @ 02:20 PM
link   

originally posted by: clevargenuis
a reply to: TerryDon79

nice try but this isnt about cars and planes stop deflecting.
Actually...the same evidence for the first car, plane and train is about the same for Apollo 11


That pile of cello taped junk is a FAKE prop that nasa fanboys believe is real.
I'm sure you're going to provide some proof, right?


I never said photoshop existed in the 60s. Deflect some more.
So how could they have used photoshop in the 1960s if they didn't have it? (You stated it was more photoshop, not me. Try to remember what you type, sport)



posted on May, 2 2016 @ 02:33 PM
link   

originally posted by: TerryDon79

originally posted by: clevargenuis
a reply to: TerryDon79

nice try but this isnt about cars and planes stop deflecting.
Actually...the same evidence for the first car, plane and train is about the same for Apollo 11


That pile of cello taped junk is a FAKE prop that nasa fanboys believe is real.
I'm sure you're going to provide some proof, right?


I never said photoshop existed in the 60s. Deflect some more.
So how could they have used photoshop in the 1960s if they didn't have it? (You stated it was more photoshop, not me. Try to remember what you type, sport)


I posted a photo of that cello taped piece of crap nasa calls a lander. thats all the proof required.

As for the photoshop comment , i never said it was photoshop just that the lander was a cheap prop. kinda matchs the third rate film set supposed to be the "moon" roflmao



posted on May, 2 2016 @ 02:35 PM
link   
a reply to: clevargenuis

A photo doesn't prove its a hoax. A photo proves there's a photo of something.

Come on. You can do better if you really REALLY try.



posted on May, 2 2016 @ 02:36 PM
link   
a reply to: clevargenuis

If nasa convinced people that a pile of taped together junk went to the moon, it explains how they fooled them on everything else.



posted on May, 2 2016 @ 02:38 PM
link   

originally posted by: TerryDon79
a reply to: clevargenuis

A photo doesn't prove its a hoax. A photo proves there's a photo of something.


and a photo of nasa set designers gluing it together doesnt mean it went to the moon.



posted on May, 2 2016 @ 02:38 PM
link   

originally posted by: clevargenuis
a reply to: clevargenuis

If nasa convinced people that a pile of taped together junk went to the moon, it explains how they fooled them on everything else.


I guess you don't understand that this "pile of crap" was enclosed. It was also strapped to some bloody big rockets.

Or do you believe that this is the only thing that left the ground?



posted on May, 2 2016 @ 02:39 PM
link   

originally posted by: clevargenuis

originally posted by: TerryDon79
a reply to: clevargenuis

A photo doesn't prove its a hoax. A photo proves there's a photo of something.


and a photo of nasa set designers gluing it together doesnt mean it went to the moon.


No, but you asked for the blueprint. It's out there, little one.

And stating something in a forum (without any evidence) proves nothing either.



posted on May, 2 2016 @ 02:49 PM
link   

originally posted by: TerryDon79

originally posted by: clevargenuis

originally posted by: TerryDon79
a reply to: clevargenuis

A photo doesn't prove its a hoax. A photo proves there's a photo of something.


and a photo of nasa set designers gluing it together doesnt mean it went to the moon.


No, but you asked for the blueprint. It's out there, little one.

And stating something in a forum (without any evidence) proves nothing either.

youre the one stating that cellotaped piece of trash went to the moon without evidence.

Just look at it. It is LITERALLY held up by curtain rods and cello tape.

No rational person would think it went to the moon. Irrational people would but thats not my prob lmao



posted on May, 2 2016 @ 02:59 PM
link   
a reply to: clevargenuis

Sorry, but this has already been thoroughly explained in the thread. Please read back. People have posted the blue prints and pictures of its construction. You can always just claim those are false, but you have probably done no research at all in regards to the LM and are just judging it by outside appearance, the same mistake the OP made. You gotta do better than, "OMG! That totally looks fake!!!"


If nasa convinced people that a pile of taped together junk went to the moon, it explains how they fooled them on everything else.


LOL. This HAS to be the OP. The LM didn't go to the moon like that, it was inside of a rocket. I get that you want to believe moon hoax, but at least do SOME research and review the rest of the thread first. This has already been discussed and debunked. The LM unit did not go to the moon alone.


No rational person would think it went to the moon. Irrational people would but thats not my prob lmao


No rational person judges an object solely based on outside appearance and nothing else, including the internal structure and the rocket that brought it to the moon.
edit on 5 2 16 by Barcs because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 2 2016 @ 03:06 PM
link   
a reply to: clevargenuis

So we should all believe you because you say so? It doesn't work like that, sport.

There is a mountain of proof that we have been to the moon and the the LM did, in fact, do it's job.

You, however, haven't presented any proof. Instead you point and go "Look! It doesn't look right. Therefore, it couldn't have done what it was supposed to do!!!!"



posted on May, 2 2016 @ 03:34 PM
link   
a reply to: clevargenuis

I'll bet you think this could never fly, either:




new topics

top topics



 
20
<< 14  15  16    18  19  20 >>

log in

join