Video compilation of NASA admitting they can't fly past low earth orbit

a reply to: Zaphod58

all i know is that Gene Cernan Once had said that ... while passing through the Van Allen belts

he saw flashes and dots of lights .. and that was the radiation bouncing around his retina

( Space Math.gsfc.nasa.gov )

The Deadly Van Allen Belts? ( PDF )
spacemath.gsfc.nasa.gov...

4. Some people believe that the Apollo moon landings were a hoax because astronauts would have been instantly killed in the radiation belts. According to the US Occupation Safety and Health Agency (OSHA) a lethal radiation dosage is 300 Rads in one hour.

What is your answer to the 'moon landing hoax' believers?

Note: According to radiation dosimeters carried by Apollo astronauts, their total dosage for the entire trip to the moon and return was not more than 2 Rads over 6 days.

originally posted by: khnum
a reply to: Wolfenz

These threads usually go round and round in circles for hundreds of pages and generally dont conclusively proove anything unequivocally one way or another,I must remember to pack a hammer and a feather if ever I go to the moon.

Yes I believe we have been to the moon....but er not as advertised the civilian program I believe bogus,but not the military one.

Right yes they Do ... its entertainment for the new Recruit Members ( Newbies )

Yes I believe we have been to the moon....but er not as advertised the civilian program

Not the Advertised Civilian ( VIEW ) program ... LOL

Well in my research on a Site on something that was called the information bridge

The Documents articles unclassified pages of information that was transferred from microfilm or paper
to a PDF format
They Plans, designs, experiments, Discussions, from N.A.S.A. J.P.L. N.A.C.A. ETC...
since the 1950s and beyond.. some fell in some fell out some just were on standby ..

Well in the Heat of the Space Race in the cold war ... it was anything goes to get to the moon ..

All hands were into the Space Race program Civilian and military ..

How many failed Man made Objects were there ? going to the moon ?
as some dont know there were Major Spy Reconnaissance Satellites being launched into space some made it some failed..
as the size of a Truck ... ( some claim a Bus ) in the Corona Program

KH 9 Hexagon
en.wikipedia.org...#/media/File:KH-9_HEXAGON.jpg

Manned Orbiting Laboratory: Secrets of a US Military Space Station (Infographic)
By Karl Tate, Infographics Artist | January 1, 2016 09:42am ET
www.space.com...


just a possibility of the unthinkable .. of Cargo ...



here what I think .. may have Happen ...

We went to the Moon...
also may of faked some of the film and photos for some Obvious reason..
Im assuming things didn't go well as planned ... in parts of the Apollo Program

as things that should not be seen to the Public ? or Ruined film ? ( how many Splice and Cuts? )
is my wild guess ... Ive Seen The Apollo Mission Films Close to HD Quality... That came from Japan.. aka NASA's 2nd Copy film Amazing Stuff ... that im not sure that the Public had seen ... missions 11 15 16 17 in Hi Res 10 12 13 and 18 ( Russian American Hook up ) little grainy .. All Silent ( no Sound ) ... and no Feed.. just directly from the Astronauts Cameras... nothing out of the Norm ...

Except.... Fly overs when the Astronauts place their Cameras in the L.M. or C.M. Windows

( Note these are from ONE of the Films ive seen )
Captured The Frame from GOM Player

Something with a Shine... claimed to be something metallic hit the surface Ions ago reflecting





some have said its Supposed to be The L.M. Crash ...
funny I snapped the shot of this while the CM was orbiting, coming around to it
not away from it ..

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Reverbs

The astronauts didn't look up at the sky long enough for their eyes to adapt. They were doing other things, looking around at the terrain, which is quite bright. How many stars do you see when you walk out of a brightly lit building at night?

Ya ok.

Too busy to look in/out/at space and the universe.

I can roll with that. NOT!!

God made windows for a reason.

a reply to: Geki09

You're vegan aren't you?

God damned vegans

originally posted by: Geki09

originally posted by: Whatsthisthen
a reply to: Geki09

Let's be honest. My people didn't give your people permission to leave this plane. And you guys won't have permission for a looooong time until your agencies are honest with Earth's residents and have good intentions to begin with. We see and know all.

Them's fighting words . . .

Humanity does not need permission as far as I understand the current situation esotericly.

So, two questions;

Who or what is humanity's jailer?

By what right do they think they can decide humanity's future?

Why? Do you think humanity is entitled to leave this plane? By what right? What religious text granted humanity domain over the Heavens?

Humanity is their own jailer. Your "free will" is the same thing that bonds you. Humanity is still in its infancy. Just look around you. You enslave, kill, and still consume intelligent animals of the Earth. You treat beasts of this plane with little to no dignity. Humanity is hyper xenophobic, even to their own kind. That's the true Lintniss test. If humanity can't be trusted to treat lesser creatures humanely, how can they be trusted in the Cosmic sandbox?

And who do you honestly believe is trying to get initial access to the Stars? Divinely inspired idealists? No it's the killers, mercenaries, and company men of unprincipled psychopaths. Men who are morally bankrupt and of ill disposition. These men look to exploit the stars, not nourish them. This isn't the cast of Star Trek, my friend.

Humanity was given domain over the Earth. Nothing more. Humanity isn't done with rehab yet.

Oh get over it, Spock.

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: ADSE255

The military is, in some ways, years ahead of where the public is, but in other ways is actually behind where the public is. The F-35 is a great example of that. The processors on that aircraft are only just being upgraded into quad core processors, and it's the first military aircraft to use an off the shelf programming language.

Cancel the program and release the fookin' fury!!

Arm the triangles.

originally posted by: Geki09

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: Geki09

They went up near the pole and through the top of the belts. There was no reason to find holes. The location of the moon allows for a trajectory that doesn't go anywhere near the main part of the belts. The location of Mars and other targets doesn't.

You're saying they use the hole at the emission points of the Earth's magnetic field?

The image you uploaded is similar to a torsion field, a torrid. Correct? In a torsion field there is no "hole" from the surface of the Earth. You're inside a bubble. There is a hole in the top of the funnel of the torrid. But that's outside of the field.

Please elaborate.

Torsion barbers.

We need torsion barbers.

Yeah but it's at the north pole.

South pole too.

Doesn't seem too difficult but i'm not a brain rocket.

originally posted by: Greggers
God Bless ATS. LOL.

I know right!?

We could be nailing some denebian slime devil slave girls by now if ATS was designing spacecraft.

Alas the stars are not for me.

originally posted by: DAVID64
a reply to: Geki09

I talk with deities, demigods, extradimensionals, angels, demons, and jinn on a daily basis.

Sure you do, bub. Suuure you do.

They have to hang in the garage, wife's orders.

a reply to: ADSE255

shuttle to the moon?

If you are going to troll at least get 1 or 2 facts or snippets thrown in to keep us wondering.
LOL Shuttle in 69

a reply to: Wolfenz

Pretty much all of the Apollo astronauts had some kind of health issue from being in space. Cataracts are common in them, and several died later of cancer. There are effects from being in and going through the belts, but they're not going to kill you quickly, and they're not impassible.

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: Wolfenz

Pretty much all of the Apollo astronauts had some kind of health issue from being in space. Cataracts are common in them, and several died later of cancer. There are effects from being in and going through the belts, but they're not going to kill you quickly, and they're not impassible.

your sure about that one ?

Died Later of Cancer .... yeah.. Was it from the Van Allen Belts or is it a Assumption?


dont forget the shielding reduced the radiation too ..

anyone able to debunk this footage?

Seems to show the Apollo mission faking being half way to the moon using camera angles and a stencil on a window.

I always found the Earth did not look right when I had seen the shots shown in this video. Clouds and landmass seemed, I dunno, too chunky?
Seems like legit video footage. That they are actually in a low orbit below the radiation belt.



I used to believe we went to the moon, but as I grew older more and more of NASA's own stuff made less and less sense to me. Did we forget how to protect from the radiation and how to build a rocket supposedly as powerful as the Saturn V.
Why was video footage projected on a wall before it was then refilmed for TV broadcast?

Why do we need new tech to make going there now survivable, when we had the tech over 40 years ago?
Shouldn't it be a simple case of taking what worked and using more modern materials and technology to improve it?
Seems something as simple as an android tablet could auto pilot a Lunar lander when you take into account tech now vs then.

Why is there so much from NASA saying how we need to work out how to get past the radiation the U.S flew through repeatedly back at the end of the 60's and early 70's?
Were men just made of sterner stuff back then? So much we could ride through 3 days of killer radiation and be just fine?

Look at the radiation shield modern astronauts need to live on the moon now in this link:
A Force Field for Astronauts?

Also recall seeing on NASA's own site about needing a kind of space suit dock, because of how dangerous dust on the moon is to machines.
Yet look how the astronauts pretty much bathed in the moon's dirt, covered head to toe, did they have a dustbuster to vaccum it all off before re-entering the capsule?

And still to this day I have no decent explaination for why the landers feet were so pristine clean.
And I could list about another hundred examples that make no sense in a legit human based moon landing.

I love science fiction and real science. I long for the day when space travel is as common as catching a plane. (Sadly not in our life times though I feel.)

But yeah the more I wish to prove the moon landings were real, the more faker they seem to be.
Has man been to space? Yes. Has man been to the moon? I very much doubt it.

But if anyone can legitimately debunk the video at the start of the post with hard facts and evidence, I am all eyes and ears.

a reply to: Wolfenz

Some of them did, yes. And they have no way to prove if it was from their flight, or from something else. There were a number of them that were also from the Shuttle program as well, and some of the ones that died of cancer never flew in space. There were also a number that are just listed as "lengthy illness".

a reply to: AtomicKangaroo

WHat footage needed debunking? the thing at 37 mins in this posted vid is a star map that they backlit by using their window and the sun shining behind it. The earlier pictures at the start were GASP telescopic. and as we all know in space telescopes can see a LOT farther and with more clarity. SO they were not in low orbit recording that then.

Its just another bash the US thread because russian and or anyone else cant stand the fact they were the first men on the moon.

Also the Van allen belts didnt extend out far enough to been a nuisance for 3 days. Oh you mean cosmic rads? The shielding out past the belts was sufficient. For s short trip(relatively) see humans can absorb rads to a point. its why the missions were not very long. There was a reason behind the waiver to sue being signed by each astronaut. All exploration is dangerous. If you cant accept the risk stay home.

originally posted by: Geki09
The bottom line is this. The new American administration won't tolerate the half truths and indiscretions from the space agency, nor the intelligence departments, as they were previously.

I forecast lots of people looking for new jobs.

HEy if you want to prove to me you know all then tell me this. What is the name of the Woman I marry in the future and how does our first daughter die? I will give you a hint of course. She was called "Princess" by people who knew her.

originally posted by: Kettu

originally posted by: Geki09
The bottom line is this. The new American administration won't tolerate the half truths and indiscretions from the space agency, nor the intelligence departments, as they were previously.

I forecast lots of people looking for new jobs.

You realize that this "new administration" can easily be blackmailed by the IC, right?

You don't piss off the people who gather information, otherwise they'll gather information on you.

How when you defund them? Defund then recreate from the ground up.

originally posted by: AtomicKangaroo

I always found the Earth did not look right when I had seen the shots shown in this video. Clouds and landmass seemed, I dunno, too chunky?
Seems like legit video footage. That they are actually in a low orbit below the radiation belt.

oh great you made a conclusion based on your own opinion.. cool

I used to believe we went to the moon, but as I grew older more and more of NASA's own stuff made less and less sense to me. Did we forget how to protect from the radiation and how to build a rocket supposedly as powerful as the Saturn V.
Why was video footage projected on a wall before it was then refilmed for TV broadcast?

no you didnt..
and because they did, it still doesnt mean its faked. does watching a projection of a football match means its faked?

Why do we need new tech to make going there now survivable, when we had the tech over 40 years ago?

because technology evolves.. do they still make core rope memory???

Shouldn't it be a simple case of taking what worked and using more modern materials and technology to improve it?

no because computers evolved, we use the microchip now, back then memory was stored in a different manner. but feel free to be ignorant about how technology is different and make conclusions based on wrong information.

Seems something as simple as an android tablet could auto pilot a Lunar lander when you take into account tech now vs then.

an android tablet isnt radiation hardened so it will fail sooner or later. you want to run that risk with human lives?

Why is there so much from NASA saying how we need to work out how to get past the radiation the U.S flew through repeatedly back at the end of the 60's and early 70's?
Were men just made of sterner stuff back then? So much we could ride through 3 days of killer radiation and be just fine?

because back then the technology used was different, core rope memory was pretty much impervious to particle radiation, microchips now are not.. particle radiation can changed memory from 1 to 0 in an instant without us knowing.. do you want to be returning to earth without knowing that a 1 was changed to a 0 in the parachute control system???

Apollo did not have this issue because their hardware was huge in comparison and core rope memory was not affected by particle radiation.

but again, feel free to continue with your ignorance and spouting your misinformation.

Also recall seeing on NASA's own site about needing a kind of space suit dock, because of how dangerous dust on the moon is to machines.
Yet look how the astronauts pretty much bathed in the moon's dirt, covered head to toe, did they have a dustbuster to vaccum it all off before re-entering the capsule?

ofcourse dust is dangerous to a machine that is several hundred thousand miles away.. how does one run physical maintenance on one???

you sure do like deciding things without thinking dont you?

And still to this day I have no decent explaination for why the landers feet were so pristine clean.

why would lunar dust billow about near the lander?? pretty much all of the loose dust was launched far away.

do tell us why it should have lingered about and covered the legs to the point it would be present a clearly visible layer.

I love science fiction and real science. I long for the day when space travel is as common as catching a plane. (Sadly not in our life times though I feel.)

But yeah the more I wish to prove the moon landings were real, the more faker they seem to be.
Has man been to space? Yes. Has man been to the moon? I very much doubt it.

lies, you have already decided it is fake, now you run around looking for anything to support your pre conceived ideas.
confirmation bias to the max.

But if anyone can legitimately debunk the video at the start of the post with hard facts and evidence, I am all eyes and ears.

whats there to debunk?? its a view of the earth from far away.. you cant get that from low earth orbit.. there is nothing wrong apart from your confirmation bias.

a reply to: yuppa

lol bash the U.S thread? Nothing to do with nationality for me. If Mongolia claimed to have gone to moon and I had doubts I'd question it also. Now if I came along and said "U.S.A IS EVIL, IT MUST DIE, LOOKIT THESE LIES" Then yeah I guess it could be considered U.S bashing. But I am asking questions, asking for evidence either way. Something new other than the "Well NASA says it is true so it is."
It's like saying I dislike a particular policy of the Israeli government therefore I must hate all Jews.
Complete logical fallacy approach.
Sorry my world view is much greater than US vs THEM.

Also I am not refering to "star maps" I am refering to it appearing that they are not filming the Earth through the window from halfway to the moon, but appear to be filming the window from the other side of the capsule which gives the impression they are half way to the moon. Or is star maps your explanation for the Astronaut seemingly holding a stencil that looks like it is being used to add shadow to the Earth to make it look more to scale instead of a complete blue disc. That he needs to hold a curved starmap against the window to see it and it just happens to make it appear like a stencil?

I mean why would they be fliming the Earth from the other side of the capsule instead of having the camera hard against the glass as is the way it was presented in previous public releases?
Why was the "map" not removed for a clear shot of the Earth and that released?

lol GASP telescopic, you'd honestly get further and make a better point without being a dick.


This is a subject I am genuinely curious and sceptical about. I am not trolling or being abusive to anyone, just asking questions I consider genuine. By all means I am happy to hear any ones opinions but leave the histrionic dramatics out.

Anyway why would they be filming from the other side of the capsule with a telescopic lens? The astronauts in the footage as the camera pans back don't appear to be magnified.

And yes your opinion on radiation makes some sense. But how much would it take to kill them, how long would they need to be exposed? Either Cosmic or Van Allen. I thought the main issue is the metal components even with the basic shielding they had, convert the radiation to X-Rays which in turn upped the lethality of it?

I had also heard this is why Russia never pursued moon travel as they felt you'd need a 2 meter thick wall of lead around you to survive a trip there, and they seemed to be leaps and bounds in front of the U.S when it came to space travel.

Anyway while I am not convinced by your answers I do appreciate you taking the time to share your views. Thanks

Edit: Oh and what is your explanation for the landers feet being completely dust free? Not seen a good answer for that one anywhere.

a reply to: AtomicKangaroo

As far as the radiation, the denser the material the more dangerous. They also had very light materials, and thinks like computers and hardware between them and at least some of the secondary radiation that was entering the capsule.