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.

 

Secret Manned NASA Mission to Mars 1973 ?

page: 2
9
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 26 2017 @ 03:42 PM
link   
It's amazing how the ice caps as seen in 1973 look exactly the same as they did in images from the Mars Global Surveyor taken 33 years later in 2006, even though the polar ice caps are a relatively dynamic place that changes due to seasonal influences and other climatic changes.

Alleged image from alleged 1973 mission:


Mars Global Surveyor image taken in 2006:


Image overlay:



edit on 26/7/2017 by Soylent Green Is People because: (no reason given)




posted on Jul, 26 2017 @ 03:50 PM
link   
a reply to: and14263

Awesome series!!

A little put off by Kim's overuse of elderly sexual encounters.



posted on Jul, 26 2017 @ 03:57 PM
link   
Elliot See was killed, along with Charlie Basset, in 1966 . He was attempting to land at McDonnell Corp in St. Louis under some low overcast, when his T-38 actually struck the top of the assembly building where the Gemini spacecraft was being assembled.

At the time, See and Basset were the Prime crew for the Gemini 9 mission. As a result, The backup crew (Tom Stafford and Gene Cernan) were bumped up from backup to Prime crew and flew the mission that See and Basset were originally selected for.

So, I think it's pretty unlikely that See was a part of any mission later in the 70s.



posted on Jul, 26 2017 @ 04:05 PM
link   

originally posted by: MteWamp
Elliot See was killed, along with Charlie Basset, in 1966...

Or so "They" say.



edit on 26/7/2017 by Soylent Green Is People because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 26 2017 @ 04:10 PM
link   
a reply to: DanteGaland

oh great another astr0 wannabe



posted on Jul, 26 2017 @ 04:16 PM
link   

originally posted by: Soylent Green Is People
It's amazing how the ice caps as seen in 1973 look exactly the same as they did in images from the Mars Global Surveyor taken 33 years later in 2006, even though the polar ice caps are a relatively dynamic place that changes due to seasonal influences and other climatic changes.


Crumbs. Did you find that match yourself? Some impressive sleuthing there!



posted on Jul, 26 2017 @ 04:35 PM
link   
a reply to: Butterfinger

Not too graphic though so for me ... OK.



posted on Jul, 26 2017 @ 04:42 PM
link   
a reply to: Spacespider

We cant even make it to the moon, with the technology we have today, so how would that even be possible back then???

So they faked the moon landing because they needed people to believe we where able to get there, but they keep the mars landing secret, cause that is a little to much information for us to know??

And yes, they faked the moon landing. No stars! are visible on any of the videos/pictures from the moon, the "Astronauts" themself, are caught on video, saying they where NO STARS! visible on the journey.
But of course, they still got all the data to prove they went to the moon, right? oh.. that is right, they lost it...




posted on Jul, 26 2017 @ 04:52 PM
link   

originally posted by: IAMNOTYOU
And yes, they faked the moon landing. No stars! are visible on any of the videos/pictures from the moon, the "Astronauts" themself, are caught on video, saying they where NO STARS! visible on the journey.


Have you noticed that the film of the moon-landings is lit by sunlight? That means that it was 'daytime' on the lunar surface.

I invite you to go outside during 'daytime' on planet Earth, and tell me how many stars you can see. Clue: It is not less and not more than one.



posted on Jul, 26 2017 @ 05:02 PM
link   

originally posted by: audubon

originally posted by: IAMNOTYOU
And yes, they faked the moon landing. No stars! are visible on any of the videos/pictures from the moon, the "Astronauts" themself, are caught on video, saying they where NO STARS! visible on the journey.


Have you noticed that the film of the moon-landings is lit by sunlight? That means that it was 'daytime' on the lunar surface.

I invite you to go outside during 'daytime' on planet Earth, and tell me how many stars you can see. Clue: It is not less and not more than one.


Lol

You are aware that planet earth has an atmosphere, rigth? I invite you to do some research, on how that effects our ability to see stars doing the day

Here is a clue:


ETA: How come the only thing they saw, on the journey between the earth and the moon, is blackness??
edit on 26-7-2017 by IAMNOTYOU because: (no reason given)

edit on 26-7-2017 by IAMNOTYOU because: Spelling

edit on 26-7-2017 by IAMNOTYOU because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 26 2017 @ 09:06 PM
link   

originally posted by: IAMNOTYOU
You are aware that planet earth has an atmosphere, rigth? I invite you to do some research, on how that effects our ability to see stars doing the day


Well, OK then why is the planet Saturn visible during the day?

If it were due to atmospherics Saturn wouldn't be visible at all during daylight. The reason that Saturn is visible during daylight is because it is very bright (about the same magnitude as the moon, according to the photographer - and the moon is also visible in daylight).

Now look again at that picture. There are no stars. That is because they are too faint compared to nearby objects, and are drowned out by the light of the sun. Scattering does come into it, but it's not the whole story (or obviously, Saturn wouldn't be visible, and it clearly is).

Same thing applies on the moon. You have a huge and brilliant light-source blasting down on the lunar surface and a huge planet shining at you nearby, and it drowns out the stars in the background, because they are very faint compared to the nearby lights. There's no scattering, because no atmosphere, but the scattering isn't that important anyway.

At the press conference after returning to Earth Neil Armstrong said: "We were never able to see stars from the lunar surface or on the daylight side of the Moon by eye without looking through the optics." (Emphasis added).

Here is an ultraviolet image of the Earth, taken during the Apollo 16 mission of 1972. It picked up the stars in the background, even though they weren't visible to the astronauts themselves. Worth noting: the stars are so faint from the daylight side of the Moon that the exposure for this image was ten minutes.



posted on Jul, 27 2017 @ 05:58 AM
link   
Why would the camera be so unsteady in Zero-G???
Although i do believe our capabilities are far beyond what we know, I cant believe this video.
At a time when 'anomolies' cause the ISS feed to be cut, i dont know how this footage would, or could get out.



posted on Jul, 27 2017 @ 07:38 AM
link   
a reply to: humanoidlord

Wouldn't be a bad thing.

He who must not be named actually knew stuff.



posted on Jul, 27 2017 @ 07:40 AM
link   
a reply to: DanteGaland

Ok.

I wouldn't be surprised.

Not at all.



posted on Jul, 27 2017 @ 08:18 AM
link   
a reply to: IAMNOTYOU

Some of it depends on where exactly you are, and what direction you are looking.

Let's look at the case of an astronaut orbiting the Moon (such as Michael Collins, the CM pilot for Apollo 11). When he was on the lit side of the moon, the brightness of the moon filled his field of view so much that his eyes would have adjusted to the brightness, and the stars would virtually not be visible at all.

However, when he circled to the night-time side of the Moon, and after his eyes were no longer adjusted to the brightness of the moon, he saw stars.


In his autobiography "Carrying the Fire: An Astronaut's Journeys," Collins wrote about his experience as the command module passed behind to the night side of the Moon, and left him in complete isolation (not even able to communicate with Earth for some of that time, due to the Moon being in the way):


"I feel this powerfully -- not as fear or loneliness -- but as awareness, anticipation, satisfaction, confidence, almost exultation.

I like the feeling. Outside my window I can see stars -- and that is all. Where I know the moon to be, there is simply a black void, the moon's presence is defined solely by the absence of stars."
[color emphasis added by me]

So Apollo astronauts did see stars under certain circumstances. However, for most of their mission, they almost always had a sunlit scene in front of them (even in transit, they had the bright sunlit Earth, bright sunlit moon, or the sun itself almost always as part of their view), and the pupils in their eyes would be adjusted to that sunlit scene their eyes were seeing.



edit on 27/7/2017 by Soylent Green Is People because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 27 2017 @ 03:03 PM
link   

originally posted by: Soylent Green Is People


So Apollo astronauts did see stars under certain circumstances. However, for most of their mission, they almost always had a sunlit scene in front of them (even in transit, they had the bright sunlit Earth, bright sunlit moon, or the sun itself almost always as part of their view), and the pupils in their eyes would be adjusted to that sunlit scene their eyes were seeing.


Not to mention the interior of the craft was lit as well. It would be like trying to look out your window at night with the light on and see stars.



posted on Jul, 27 2017 @ 03:06 PM
link   

originally posted by: IAMNOTYOU


And yes, they faked the moon landing. No stars! are visible on any of the videos/pictures from the moon,

Not understanding basic photography isn't proof of anything but your ignorance of basic photography.


the "Astronauts" themself, are caught on video, saying they where NO STARS! visible on the journey.

That's a lie


But of course, they still got all the data to prove they went to the moon, right? oh.. that is right, they lost it...


That is also a lie, why do you hoax theologinas have such an issue with telling the truth, is it because you don't have any real evidence so you have to invent some?



posted on Jul, 27 2017 @ 04:25 PM
link   
Upthread, I said there was no light scattering on the Moon due to the lack of atmosphere. I don't think that was quite right, because the lunar surface itself will create scatter due to its reflective properties. The Moon isn't all that reflective what with being about the same colour as asphalt, but it will cause some scatter for an observer on the lunar surface.

This is complicated by the facts that

1) Sunshine will be much more intense on the lunar surface (that lack of atmosphere again); and
2) The Earth, viewed from the Moon, is apparently about 100 times brighter than the Moon appears from Earth.

I don't have a clue about how one could work out the maths involved in all this, but yeah the lunar surface definitely creates some scatter.




top topics



 
9
<< 1   >>

log in

join