the alledged " lies of NASA " please cite the most ergregious one

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: toms54

Apollo passed through the north portion of the belts where they're thinnest, and made a quick transit. Orion can't do that, because it's not just going to the moon.

I am well aware of this and your other post also. I don't wish to be rude but this is not the place to debate this unless the OP specifically requests it.

Even then, I've been around the block on this topic enough times to know it attracts all kinds of fanatics on ATS who are not as pleasant to debate as you seem to be. At the very least it will degenerate into name calling.

Were there any experiments conducted what consequences are for human body transiting through Van Allen belts?

a reply to: zilebeliveunknown

"How are we going to get to the Moon if we cant talk between three buildings?"
-Virgil "Gus" Grissom-

He said that shortly before he died

a reply to: LookingAtMars

Did you know his death was allegedly predicted in 1964 in a weird encounter with two short dudes claiming to come from Mars? Don't Be Alarmed. We're Martians.

a reply to: Kandinsky

No, I didn't know that. Great thread, thanks for the link!

I know this is relevant but not as asked, but on Friday while I was visiting family in Louisiana we went to the Stennis NASA center in Mississippi. There they test a lot of the rocket engines. What I didn’t realize until I went on the tour is that this is where Werner von braun’s office and headquarters were. We even saw his office building, and have pics. It brought up all my memories of reading of operation paper clip and related lore. What I think the most interesting citation from him is (perhaps apocryphal), is that to justify space based weapons external enemies would be churned up: Russians, terrorists, asteroids, then finally aliens.

exonews.org...

Who knows if a real quote.
a reply to: ignorant_ape

a reply to: Quetzalcoatl14

Who knows if a real quote.

Carol Rosin. And she alone.

Response to a Thread titled: the alledged " lies of NASA " please cite the most ergregious one


NASA is too well and tightly disciplined to publish outright fictions or falsehoods. However, NASA historically has admitted to the mishandling of Apollo evidence including e.g. original source material tapes and lunar samples; and admitted to altering Apollo images for cosmetic purposes; and admitted that images of the Earth from space are stitched-together cgi creations; admitted that Alan Shepard had secret, elective, experimental ear surgery to get back his flying/astronaut status;

NASA maintains a strict "Never A Straight Answer" policy which has allowed them for a not insubstantial amount of plausible deniability with regard to anything that gets published.

But NASA's most egregious and consistent distortion of truth is that NASA is a civilian agency.

From the Wiki

"The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA /ˈnæsə/) is an independent agency of the United States Federal Government responsible for the civilian space program, as well as aeronautics and aerospace research."

NASA has been dominated by the CIA/DoD/M-I-C from it's inception; since Operation Paperclip and every US president beginning with Truman. NASA always seems to drill deep into the independent space business of many foreign

Fast forward to 2018.

This decades long distortion of truth by NASA is being played out as we speak. I speak of course about , Trump's new SPACE FORCE, a 6th branch of the US military, that comes with the inevitable (and uneasy) realization that space has been weaponized for decades, and the ultimate public disclosure of an imminent threat to Earth in the form of an ELE asteroid.

Have a nice day.

originally posted by: Quetzalcoatl14
What I think is the most interesting citation from him is (perhaps apocryphal), that to justify space based weapons external enemies would be churned up: Russians, terrorists, asteroids, then finally aliens.

exonews.org...

Who knows if a real quote.
a reply to: ignorant_ape

You forgot Rogue Nations at #3. Then asteroids, then E.T.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Quetzalcoatl14

Who knows if a real quote.

Carol Rosin. And she alone.

So what do you think, legit quote or not? It’s an interesting idea, but I’m aware that quote is possibly falsely attributed.

originally posted by: SayonaraJupiter

originally posted by: Quetzalcoatl14
What I think is the most interesting citation from him is (perhaps apocryphal), that to justify space based weapons external enemies would be churned up: Russians, terrorists, asteroids, then finally aliens.

exonews.org...

Who knows if a real quote.
a reply to: ignorant_ape

You forgot Rogue Nations at #3. Then asteroids, then E.T.

I think the rogue nation can be folded into the “terrorist” category, although they aren’t identical obviously.

i was not expecting any great responses - but damm it - the claims of " NASA lies " - have been to be blunt - utterly pathetic

this was the best people could come up with ? - SMH

originally posted by: Kandinsky
Apparently there are plenty of missing Moon rock pieces. One of which is estimated to have a value of £3 million and is lying in an Irish dump. Nobody's ever going to find a 2g stone in 1000s of tons of waste.

There's one in the Grand Lodge of New Jersey.....somewhere.

Buzz gave Montclair Lodge a rock which they kept until they merged with another lodge and needed to store their material elsewhere. The rock went to Grand Lodge in Trenton, along with everything else, and never returned.

a reply to: SayonaraJupiter

and so has spaceX, robert bigelow's enterprises and others
ESA is a bit more open but i still have my doubts
it's frankly disturbing that there are no 100% civilian space programs

a reply to: SayonaraJupiter

Can you give an example of where NASA has not given a straight answer about anything?

There seem to be plenty of straight answers on their website about lots and lots of things.

a reply to: Kandinsky

i miss your threads, they were my main inspiration on talking about the encounters that ufology wants to forget because ETH is a ruse

a reply to: toms54

there was no mention of van allen belts in video you posted, maybe if that was the issue you could post something related to it, at least i watched your video

originally posted by: oldcarpy
a reply to: SayonaraJupiter

Can you give an example of where NASA has not given a straight answer about anything?

There seem to be plenty of straight answers on their website about lots and lots of things.

All quoting from the
REPORT
No . 956
COMMITTEE ON
AERONAUTICAL AND SPACE SCIENCES
UNITED STATES SENATE January 30, 1968

reticence to supply facts

NASA's curious reticence to supply
these facts and materials relevant to a thorough evaluation of Apollo
program management brought the credibility of NASA and its top
management into sharp question.

lack of candor

This inital lack of candor as to the existence and then the status of
the Phillips report threatened one of the essential assets of the space
program-the confidence of the American public...

Phillips report was hidden

The serious contractor
deficiencies noted by the Phillips task force should certainly have
been reported to the committee at the time of the 1967 budget hearings,
if not before. We are disturbed at the possibility that, had there been no disaster,
important shortcomings in management, scheduling, design, produc- tion, and quality control might never have come to light.

NASA did not make clear

We are also concerned that NASA did not make clear to the con- tractor ~hat inferior performance would lead the Agency to seek
other sources for the hardware

NASA's failure to inform

Thus NASA's failure to inform the Congress of this grave situation
was an unquestionably serious dereliction.

attempted to mislead; evaded giving frank answers

Nonetheless, in response to such questions about the Phillips report, both NASA officials and representatives of the NASA contractor attempted to mislead the committee and evaded giving frank answers.

attempted to mislead

Even when the facts of the Phillips review became known, NASA
and NAA officials attempted to mislead members of the committee
by engaging in a "semantic waltz" as to ·whether there was in fact a
"report" or merely some informal "notes" made by the general and his
associates. (The, Phillips report is entitled "NASA Review Team
Report" and it called' a report no less than 10 times in the text.)

Sneaky Nazi's never give a straight answer.

originally posted by: UpIsNowDown
a reply to: toms54

there was no mention of van allen belts in video you posted, maybe if that was the issue you could post something related to it, at least i watched your video

You are right about that first video. There was a little bit of writing on the side of one picture and nothing at all was said. The OP requested a list of things NASA lied about and not being able to leave low earth orbit seemed to be something I could post. It was immediately challenged so I posted a NASA video to go deeper.

I picked the first one because it was short.

I should have realized this thread was an ambush.

If you even mention this topic on ATS, you immediately get lynched. The first thing someone calls you is flat earther and that's the most civil thing for the remainder of the time.

I've been through it twice here and don't know why I came to this thread. So when the dogs started to circle, I left.

a reply to: toms54

If you look into it though, they're right. We can't leave low earth orbit. It's just not for the reasons that some people claim. After they scrapped the Saturn V, and Apollo capsule system, there hasn't been a rocket and ship combination that's designed to leave LEO.