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: 4
20
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 5 2016 @ 07:17 AM
link   
OP, we get it... you think it looks not up to the task...
You r implications that we did not go are clear.

Google a bit and you can find images of all the stuff we left behind.
Soil samples an rocks prove we did. Mythbusters even proved that we were there...




posted on Apr, 5 2016 @ 07:21 AM
link   
You guys are cracking me up. Why is everyone taking is so personal that he doesn't think it went to the moon or wouldn't get in it? Who cares!

I would personally get in it haha, I think the view and the experience would be something you would never forget.



posted on Apr, 5 2016 @ 07:30 AM
link   
A

Ahhh.....the ignorance train just keeps on steaming ahead on ATS.

Of course YOU moon hoaxers wouldn't go in it. Because YOU ARE clearly in the dark with respect to materials, science , physics etc...

Fortunately, NASA didn't have to rely on people like you for the Apollo missions and could call on brave, intelligent and fearless men.

Which is why we all know their names and we will never remember yours.
edit on 5-4-2016 by 3danimator2014 because: (no reason given)

edit on 5-4-2016 by 3danimator2014 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 5 2016 @ 07:33 AM
link   

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: ProfessorPatternfish

Just accept that we went to the Moon because it darn well happened!

You do realize that material characteristics/craft design tolerances differ somewhat regarding a vacuum environment and the fact that our moon has only 5/6 the gravity of Earth as apposed to a craft designed to function in an atmosphere and under Earth gravity?

I don't think he should "just accept it".

On the other hand, what he should do is educate himself about how exactly it worked, and take a critical look (using logic and critical thinking skills) at the evidence for the Apollo missions, as well as the alleged evidence purporting a hoax.

He shouldn't blindly accept that we went to the moon (no one should), because that's just as bad as watching a YouTube video pushing a moon hoax conspiracy and blindly believing that YouTuber. However, I think if he takes a critical look at the evidence and learns the science and technology behind it, he will discover for himself that we did in fact go.

edit on 4/5/2016 by Soylent Green Is People because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 5 2016 @ 07:39 AM
link   

originally posted by: SullivanBlack
You guys are cracking me up. Why is everyone taking is so personal that he doesn't think it went to the moon or wouldn't get in it? Who cares!

I would personally get in it haha, I think the view and the experience would be something you would never forget.


The view would be spectacular.

But this egg box didn't even lift off the ground.

Am I the only one that can see the aluminium foil and wrapping paper it is made of?

Look at the legs of the thing.

It looks like what you put around pipes to lag them.




posted on Apr, 5 2016 @ 07:40 AM
link   

originally posted by: SullivanBlack
You guys are cracking me up. Why is everyone taking is so personal that he doesn't think it went to the moon or wouldn't get in it? Who cares!

I would personally get in it haha, I think the view and the experience would be something you would never forget.


No one is taking it personally.



posted on Apr, 5 2016 @ 07:43 AM
link   

originally posted by: ProfessorPatternfish

originally posted by: SullivanBlack
You guys are cracking me up. Why is everyone taking is so personal that he doesn't think it went to the moon or wouldn't get in it? Who cares!

I would personally get in it haha, I think the view and the experience would be something you would never forget.


The view would be spectacular.

But this egg box didn't even lift off the ground.

Am I the only one that can see the aluminium foil and wrapping paper it is made of?

Look at the legs of the thing.

It looks like what you put around pipes to lag them.




Do you really expect us to explain everything to you again? Spoon feed you the volumes of explanations for every idiotic thing moon hoaxers come up with?

It's all been examined and debunked around 35,291 times.

Do you think your view, what you presented today, is in any way fresh or new or even interesting?



posted on Apr, 5 2016 @ 07:50 AM
link   

originally posted by: ProfessorPatternfish

originally posted by: SullivanBlack
You guys are cracking me up. Why is everyone taking is so personal that he doesn't think it went to the moon or wouldn't get in it? Who cares!

I would personally get in it haha, I think the view and the experience would be something you would never forget.


The view would be spectacular.

But this egg box didn't even lift off the ground.

Am I the only one that can see the aluminium foil and wrapping paper it is made of?

Look at the legs of the thing.

It looks like what you put around pipes to lag them.



If this was a vehicle that needed to operate in Earth's atmosphere, and be subjected to the forces of atmospheric drag, then the insulating material would have an outer skin (i.e., a craft operating in Earth's atmosphere would have the substructure, insulation, then a smooth outer skin).

However, considering this LM only needed to operate in the vacuum of space and no where else, then they could eliminate the outer skin, thus saving quiet a bit of weight -- and every pound and every ounce that they saved was very important because of fuel consumption.

For example, a jet plane with it's outer fuselage skin (with the insulation exposed) could still technically fly, but the atmospheric drag would soon tear that insulation from the sides of the fuselage. However, in space, there is no atmospheric drag, so no need for the outer skin.

edit on 4/5/2016 by Soylent Green Is People because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 5 2016 @ 07:55 AM
link   
a reply to: ProfessorPatternfish
You should for once if you own a car strip your doors down until nothing is left and all inside lining striped away.

Then feel how thin your door is and that all that's between you and your body is just diagonal bar that has to stop a great deal of force ..

And also take in mind that the car has the same age as the lunar module.

I'll bet you are going to think twice of driving your own car.

And I also think places like the moon doesn't have to much gravity to build something massive as here on Earth..


edit on 0b21America/ChicagoTue, 05 Apr 2016 08:02:21 -0500vAmerica/ChicagoTue, 05 Apr 2016 08:02:21 -05001 by 0bserver1 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 5 2016 @ 07:55 AM
link   
a reply to: onequestion

By all means, ask questions. Just make them good ones based on reason and actual science, and not silly ones based on scientific illiteracy, faulty math, and disorganized (faulty) logic.



posted on Apr, 5 2016 @ 07:56 AM
link   
a reply to: 3danimator2014




Do you think your view, what you presented today, is in any way fresh or new or even interesting?



It would seem it has interested you enough to reply?



posted on Apr, 5 2016 @ 07:56 AM
link   
a reply to: ProfessorPatternfish


Would anyone really get in this Apollo 11 Lander if was told it goes to the moon?

I wouldn't. I would laugh and say;


"It looks like it is made of card, left over Christmas wrapping paper and egg cartons".


That is because you are not a trained test pilot with a degree in engineering. Test pilots with degrees in engineering understood it actual construction and vied to pilot it. If you must be spoon fed, there is always this epic thread:

www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on Apr, 5 2016 @ 07:56 AM
link   
A lot of people in the 70's owned an AMC Pacer...

...and survived. If you, or anyone you know was one of those people, you would know why the LM was a Rolls Royce in comparison.

So yes. Yes I would get in it, and land on the moon.
edit on 4/5/2016 by Klassified because: eta: since the point was somehow missed.



posted on Apr, 5 2016 @ 07:56 AM
link   

originally posted by: Soylent Green Is People

originally posted by: ProfessorPatternfish

originally posted by: SullivanBlack
You guys are cracking me up. Why is everyone taking is so personal that he doesn't think it went to the moon or wouldn't get in it? Who cares!

I would personally get in it haha, I think the view and the experience would be something you would never forget.


The view would be spectacular.

But this egg box didn't even lift off the ground.

Am I the only one that can see the aluminium foil and wrapping paper it is made of?

Look at the legs of the thing.

It looks like what you put around pipes to lag them.



If this was a vehicle that needed to operate in Earth's atmosphere, and be subjected to the forces of atmospheric drag, then the insulating material would have an outer skin (i.e., a craft operating in Earth's atmosphere would have the substructure, insulation, then a smooth outer skin).

However, considering this LM only needed to operate in the vacuum of space and no where else, then they could eliminate the outer skin, thus saving quiet a bit of weight -- and every pound and every ounce that they saved was very important because of fuel consumption.



You don't really expect us to believe that sorcery do you?



posted on Apr, 5 2016 @ 08:00 AM
link   
a reply to: 0bserver1



You should for once if you own a car strip your doors down until nothing is left and all inside lining striped away.


I would put everything and more on betting that if you striped this 'thing' down.

It would be an empty box.


Here is a question. NASA 'sent a car to the moon'. A moon buggy.

But on mars they could only put a remote controlled 'car'. The Rover.

That looks nothing like this hunk of junk. Nor does the space shuttle.
edit on 5-4-2016 by ProfessorPatternfish because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 5 2016 @ 08:02 AM
link   

originally posted by: ProfessorPatternfish
a reply to: 3danimator2014




Do you think your view, what you presented today, is in any way fresh or new or even interesting?



It would seem it has interested you enough to reply?


Ahhh. ..you got me. Please regale us with more "new" opinions on the moon landings. I'm all ears.
edit on 5-4-2016 by 3danimator2014 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 5 2016 @ 08:08 AM
link   

originally posted by: ProfessorPatternfish

Here is a question. NASA 'sent a car to the moon'. A moon buggy.

But on mars they could only put a remote controlled 'car'. The Rover.

I don't understand the question.

They had technical know-how to operate the Moon buggy from earth if they decided to set it up that way. The Russians remotely operated a moon buggy in the 1970s, and the U.S. remotely operated other moon landers (although not rovers) prior to the Apollo missions. So the technology existed.

However, the astronaut were available on the moon to drive it, so the Moon Buggy did not need to be remotely operated from earth (although parts of it were, like moving the TV camera).

The Mars rover is remotely operated because there are no astronauts on mars to drive it.



That looks nothing like this hunk of junk. Nor does the space shuttle.

The space shuttle needs to operate in Earth's atmosphere, resist the forces of atmospheric drag, and be aerodynamic. The Lunar Module did not. It's comparing apples and oranges.


edit on 4/5/2016 by Soylent Green Is People because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 5 2016 @ 08:08 AM
link   

originally posted by: ProfessorPatternfish
a reply to: 0bserver1



You should for once if you own a car strip your doors down until nothing is left and all inside lining striped away.


I would put everything and more on betting that if you striped this 'thing' down.

It would be an empty box.


Here is a question. NASA 'sent a car to the moon'. A moon buggy.

But on mars they could only put a remote controlled 'car'. The Rover.

That looks nothing like this hunk of junk. Nor does the space shuttle.


You realise that the rovers on Mars are infinitely more complex than the lunar lander right? And designed to withstand atmosphere, weather, sand storms etc...

Honestly. ..A child would realise this.



posted on Apr, 5 2016 @ 08:09 AM
link   
a reply to: ProfessorPatternfish

The shuttle?

What has that got to do with gong to the moon?

You're either extremely ignorant, or you're trolling.

There is a wealth of knowledge on this forum...you should try using it instead of abusing it



posted on Apr, 5 2016 @ 08:10 AM
link   
a reply to: ProfessorPatternfish

Whoa you're truly one of those people who appose or deny something as biautiful piece of technical achievements mankind ever witnessed.

Well I will not dare to ask an astronaut who walked on the moon that the lunar module was a fake, but that's me , and I still believe that many things man achieved in space is real , and that from this module learned a great deal from spacrafts
, probably more then we ever will know..

And the lunar module has saved the Apollo 13 crew for what I know..

edit on 0b15America/ChicagoTue, 05 Apr 2016 08:18:15 -0500vAmerica/ChicagoTue, 05 Apr 2016 08:18:15 -05001 by 0bserver1 because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
20
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join