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.

 

An End To The Moon Conspiracy!

page: 126
29
<< 123  124  125    127  128  129 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 8 2007 @ 12:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by syrinx high priest



Nice pic
All that atmosphere... blue sky like John says and water too?

Kinda looks like my Pathfinder that I found a picture of from NASA... this one shows what its really like on Mars...



Keep up the good work...





posted on Dec, 8 2007 @ 01:06 AM
link   
reply to post by zorgon
 




they were made on earth ya know

perhaps you like this one better ?





what's really funny about using these probes as an example is they never came back to earth. They are still up there



posted on Dec, 8 2007 @ 01:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by syrinx high priest

they were made on earth ya know
perhaps you like this one better ?


Yeah that one is pretty cool I think I know which studio that was made in... have it here somewhere....



posted on Dec, 8 2007 @ 01:43 AM
link   
reply to post by zorgon
 


OK

show me your pics of probes that brought back moon rocks, or any evidence they weren't collected by the apollo astronauts.

It's easy to just sait back and say, "nah, that doesn't count, NASA is lying", so dig into your files and show me independently verified evidence of 2,000 unmanned probe launches that brought back moon rocks.



posted on Dec, 8 2007 @ 01:46 AM
link   



whay are you including probes that crashed ? to help me prove my point ?

Intresting analogy, did you know the lem crashed here on earth while testing it by armstong, armstrong ejected in the last instance, and this was right before the first mission.



this probe brought back BM ???



let me take a page out of skeptic friends book




Either way, you still owe me photographic evidence or any kind of evidence these probes brought back moon rocks



I don't think nasa would be dumb enough to say what drones were used,
big muley is not that big, it's not a mountain, it's just a rock.




The 3 Luna missions collected .326 KG of rock, and BM is much bigger than all of the rocks brought back by those 3 missions combined !!! 1 rock !!!

Yes probaly other drones did it, you don't think nasa would be dumb enough to make discosure on it.



Yet you think 1 probe could lift it and bring it back ? Without anyone in NASA even being aware of it ? c'mon

Well with people working in difrent parts of the country in diferent departments, I guess only a few know , not everyone is involeved directly, there are alot of people at nasa doing diferent things, I guess when they open the hatch dor only a few people are around.



it's very simple. The mirrors and rocks are proof man was on the moon. We left something behind, and brought something back.

The mirrors also could be planted by probes, there is no tehnical dificulty in that.

I told you maned mission was imposible because radiation on the moon , and radiation in the belts, you got protons in the van alen belt above 30 mev, aluminium and anstronaut clothing can't stop that, 30 mev with a density of 10 to 20 protons per cubic centimeter meaning that there are 10 to 20 protons per milimiter is enough to puke your liver out.



posted on Dec, 8 2007 @ 01:51 AM
link   
perhaps you like this one better ?

Yeah that one is pretty cool I think I know which studio that was made in... have it here somewhere....
Lol spot on, there is a picture with that drone in the desert.



posted on Dec, 8 2007 @ 03:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by syrinx high priest
so dig into your files and show me independently verified evidence of 2,000 unmanned probe launches that brought back moon rocks.


2,000?
that seems a waste...

Wouldn't it be easier to make one run with the Aquila and return a few tons in one trip?


Well I will have to dig through my files next couple days and pull out some more stuff on 'other' ships... I like the concept of Robot ships... considering a friend of mine 'in high places' told me to 'think automation' Considering his job that was saying a lot to me...

I'll get back to ya on that



posted on Dec, 8 2007 @ 10:46 AM
link   
reply to post by zorgon
 


a single unmanned ship brought back tons of rocks ?


OK

all you have to do is provide the launch date, launch location, and photographic evidence or at least a working and feasible schematic of this ship. I'm not interested in artists renderings or pure speculation, your friend in high places has already muddied the waters with too much of that already



[edit on 8-12-2007 by syrinx high priest]



posted on Dec, 8 2007 @ 11:04 AM
link   
reply to post by pepsi78
 


lol, you claim the surveyor probes were on the moon, then I show you a pic of one with an apollo astronaut on the moon, and all you can say is "probably" other probes were used, but NASA is lying about it ?

you didn't even realize the surveyor probes never came back to earth when you posted your reply. Why should I bother discussing this with you if that's your level of effort ?

Even though professor Van Allen has said the radiation wouldn't have been a problem due to the speed the astronauts went through the belt bearing his name, you desperately cling to that theory like a drowning man clings to a life preserver.

that's weak. I might as well discuss this with my 2 year old.



posted on Dec, 8 2007 @ 01:58 PM
link   



Even though professor Van Allen has said the radiation wouldn't have been a problem due to the speed the astronauts went through the belt bearing his name, you desperately cling to that theory like a drowning man clings to a life preserver.

that's weak. I might as well discuss this with my 2 year old.


The old fashon response, when pro apollo people debating on the mooon issue run out of arguments they just go, ohh they just went very fast and past fast with out any problems, with out looking at tehnical factors, I do not see tehnical information in your post, all I see is "they just passed very fast" with out knowing the radiation hazards, and how exposure VS timing works, the astronauts spent a total of 1 hour per apollo mission in the van alen belts, and that is enough to cause problems, not only to the astronauts but also to electronics in general within the space vehicle it's self, you do not only get the particles that reside in the van alan belt, but you get cosmic rays coming from out of the solar sistem, solar wind with particles(don't confuse them with the ones coming from solar flares), all of this in majority protons and electrons.
You got radiation coming from all direction, man never went to the moon simply because of the radiation hazards, electrons are easyer to shield with aluminium but a proton above 10 mev has no problem penetrating the ship hull since it was made out of aluminium , and has no problem in damaging the ship's sistem, what is above 10 mev can start causing problems for the astronauts.



posted on Dec, 8 2007 @ 02:09 PM
link   
No it wouldn't cause problems, because of the shape of the Van Allen belts. They are thicker and thinner in various parts around the planet.


In practice, Apollo astronauts who travelled to the moon spent very little time in the belts and received a harmless dose. Nevertheless NASA deliberately timed Apollo launches, and used lunar transfer orbits that only skirted the edge of the belt over the equator to minimise the radiation. Astronauts who visited the moon probably have a slightly higher risk of cancer during their lifetimes, but still remain unlikely to become ill because of it.

www.crystalinks.com...

It's a common tactic to pretend that the belts extend uniformly around the planet, when they DON'T. The thickess parts of the belts are in equatorial orbit, and NASA stayed away from that region.


Needless to say this is a very simplistic statement. Yes, there is deadly radiation in the Van Allen belts, but the nature of that radiation was known to the Apollo engineers and they were able to make suitable preparations. The principle danger of the Van Allen belts is high-energy protons, which are not that difficult to shield against. And the Apollo navigators plotted a course through the thinnest parts of the belts and arranged for the spacecraft to pass through them quickly, limiting the exposure.

The Van Allen belts span only about forty degrees of earth's latitude -- twenty degrees above and below the magnetic equator. The diagrams of Apollo's translunar trajectory printed in various press releases are not entirely accurate. They tend to show only a two-dimensional version of the actual trajectory. The actual trajectory was three-dimensional. The highly technical reports of Apollo, accessible to but not generally understood by the public, give the three-dimensional details of the translunar trajectory.

Each mission flew a slightly different trajectory in order to access its landing site, but the orbital inclination of the translunar coast trajectory was always in the neighborhood of 30°. Stated another way, the geometric plane containing the translunar trajectory was inclined to the earth's equator by about 30°. A spacecraft following that trajectory would bypass all but the edges of the Van Allen belts.

This is not to dispute that passage through the Van Allen belts would be dangerous. But NASA conducted a series of experiments designed to investigate the nature of the Van Allen belts, culminating in the repeated traversal of the Southern Atlantic Magnetic Anomaly (an intense, low-hanging patch of Van Allen belt) by the Gemini 10 astronauts.

www.clavius.org...

[edit on 12/8/2007 by Zaphod58]



posted on Dec, 8 2007 @ 03:00 PM
link   
reply to post by jra

Well I guess you must be right... I found this image on NASA history site...



And it seems that they must have picked up one of the previous mission's buggies... Makes sense really why not use two? You know its almost like a used car lot up there... what at least 6 of those buggies lying around?

Andy one want to invest in a trip to go get them? I bet they would fetch a real good price on the open market...

So ummm how do you get salvage rights to the Moon?






You also mention reports by Charlie Duke in his book, Moonwalker...

well not a lot of credibility there I am afraid... seems he is subject to weird dreams... Even NASA is aware of this,,



In his book, Moonwalker, on pages 199-200, Charlie Duke recounts a dream he had prior to Apollo 16. In the dream, he and John Young were driving the Rover and came across some vehicle tracks. After getting permission from Houston to investigate, they came upon a car that "looked very similar to our rover - and it in it were two people...There was no movement from the two astronauts, and we couldn't see their faces because the sun visors were down." In the dream, Charlie then raised the visors and saw himself. The other astronaut looked like John. Houston had no explanation and asked John and Charlie to bring back samples of the vehicle and the suits for analysis, which showed that the vehicle and its occupants had been on the Moon for 100,000 years.


Bob Farell of NASA created this image to humor him...



With all this nonsense from NASA, its a wonder anyone believes anything they say or show you

:shk:



[edit on 8-12-2007 by zorgon]



posted on Dec, 8 2007 @ 03:27 PM
link   
I don't care Moon rocks, Van Allen belt, no stars, wrong shadows and so on.



Originally posted by SpaceMax

Blue Origin first flight

DC-X




These movies are fake.

If someone had technology to build a rocket that can land going

backwards, would win LUNAR LANDER CHALLENGE.

Instead nobody AT THE END OF OCTOBER 2007 have won that challenge.

LUNAR LANDER CHALLENGE has never had a happy ending. This is the

bad ending of 2007 Challenge:

youtube.com...





posted on Dec, 8 2007 @ 03:28 PM
link   

Tahir Rahman has created a large-format image ( 60k ) showing the reflections in Buzz's visor as captured by Neil in the famous photo, AS11-40-5903. Note that, in addition to the LM, Neil, the US flag, and the SWC, we can see the Earth reflected near the top of the visor.


www.hq.nasa.gov...



If that little dot in the visor is the Earth, then how come other NASA images show it THIS large




jra

posted on Dec, 8 2007 @ 04:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by zorgon
You know its almost like a used car lot up there... what at least 6 of those buggies lying around?


There are only three Rovers, not six.


Originally posted by zorgon
www.hq.nasa.gov...

If that little dot in the visor is the Earth, then how come other NASA images show it THIS large


cygnus.colorado.edu...


Ummm perhaps because the reflection is on a round surface?

Have you ever photographed the Moon from Earth using a wide angle lens and then a telephoto lens and noticed the difference in sizes?



posted on Dec, 8 2007 @ 04:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by syrinx high priest

all you have to do is provide the launch date, launch location,


Already did that... 1969 approx two months before Apollo 11
Kwajalein U.S. Army's Reagan Test Site (RTS) Department of Defense Major Range and Test Facility Base

Most likely from the facility at the top (1100 km) which does not appear on Google Earth



and photographic evidence or at least a working and feasible schematic of this ship.

Aquila with upgraded 'heavy lift vehicles... courtesy of NASA and Buzz Aldrin's Starcraft Boosters..



For the Liquid Cargo version .... compliments of NASA via the filed patent in 1992







For any more data you can look it up yourself but I doubt you can get in here... well actually I know you can't... but they do have the answers you seek...

But a word to the wise... don't go there
nic dot mil
www.nic.mil...



I'm not interested in artists renderings or pure speculation, your friend in high places has already muddied the waters with too much of that already


Really?
You actually have no idea....




posted on Dec, 8 2007 @ 04:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by jra
Ummm perhaps because the reflection is on a round surface?


Nope noy good enough to much difference and if that was true the sun reflections would appear the same not like big spotlights kinda like the do on the reflections of Shuttle astronauts helmets... but for some reason on the Moon they look like big run spotlights...

Now how do you suppose that happens?




posted on Dec, 8 2007 @ 10:07 PM
link   

In practice, Apollo astronauts who travelled to the moon spent very little time in the belts and received a harmless dose. Nevertheless NASA deliberately timed Apollo launches, and used lunar transfer orbits that only skirted the edge of the belt over the equator to minimise the radiation. Astronauts who visited the moon probably have a slightly higher risk of cancer during their lifetimes, but still remain unlikely to become ill because of it.

www.crystalinks.com...


It's a common tactic to pretend that the belts extend uniformly around the planet, when they DON'T. The thickess parts of the belts are in equatorial orbit, and NASA stayed away from that region.



Nice but this has no figures provided , there are no numbers , nu tehnical details, it just states that they went.

Apolo astronauts on each mission spent and half an hour on the way to the moon , and half an hour on their return, 1 hour pe mission.
1 hour is alot of time.
There are highly charged protons, from a range of 100 mev in the inerbelt...I know aluminiu, but i'l explain that.




Needless to say this is a very simplistic statement. Yes, there is deadly radiation in the Van Allen belts, but the nature of that radiation was known to the Apollo engineers and they were able to make suitable preparations. The principle danger of the Van Allen belts is high-energy protons, which are not that difficult to shield against. And the Apollo navigators plotted a course through the thinnest parts of the belts and arranged for the spacecraft to pass through them quickly, limiting the exposure.



Now about aluminium, aluminium is a very good shield for protons compared to other materials , the only problem is that those are highly chareged protons at 100 mev, it;s a problem because a proton at 100 mev will penetrate 3,75 centimiters of 100% pure aluminium.
The problems is that nasa's ship walls were made out of havy duty aluminium foil meaning that it's thiknes mejured milimiters and not centimiters, even in the other belt where proton level is at about the range of 20 to 30 mev even there the walls would of not offered protection.

By the way

Did you know apolo 13 after their little problem near earth before entering the belts had a problem and lost free telemetry? and they just had to guess.....nice little stunt for publicity , if it would of been for real they would of had to come and cross the belts directly for a nice 4 hours jurney acros the belts.




This is not to dispute that passage through the Van Allen belts would be dangerous. But NASA conducted a series of experiments designed to investigate the nature of the Van Allen belts, culminating in the repeated traversal of the Southern Atlantic Magnetic Anomaly (an intense, low-hanging patch of Van Allen belt) by the Gemini 10 astronauts.

www.clavius.org...



They went above 1000 kilometers from earth and that is about it.


The first burn of the Agena engine they made was 80 seconds long and put them in a 294 by 763 kilometres orbit. This was the highest a person had ever been (until the next mission when Gemini 11 went to over 1000 km).


But here somthing really excited to rop that



In 1998, the Space Shuttle flew to one of its highest altitudes ever,
three hundred and fifty miles, hundreds of miles below merely the beginning of the Van Allen Radiation Belts. Inside of their shielding, superior to that
which the Apollo astronauts possessed, the shuttle astronauts reported being able to "see" the radiation with their eyes closed penetrating their shielding aswell as the retinas of their closed eyes. For a dental x-ray on Earth which lasts 1/100th of a second we wear a 1/4 inch lead vest. Imagine what it would be like to endure several hours of radiation that you can see with your eyes closed from hundreds of miles away with 1/8 of an inch of aluminium shielding!

www.maar.us...


[edit on 8-12-2007 by pepsi78]



posted on Dec, 8 2007 @ 10:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by jra-2
I don't care Moon rocks, Van Allen belt, no stars, wrong shadows and so on.

These movies are fake.

If someone had technology to build a rocket that can land going

backwards, would win LUNAR LANDER CHALLENGE.



Sorry, jra-2, those vids are not fake. You could investigate them further and figure this out on your own, but you don't seem to interested in that.

No team won the Lunar Regolith Challenge either, does that make it impossible to move dirt?

Please make a small effort in crafting a coherent statement. Carrying on about "landing backward" is quite meaningless.



posted on Dec, 8 2007 @ 11:03 PM
link   


If that little dot in the visor is the Earth, then how come other NASA images show it THIS large


My god...all this time I thought it was the effect of a zoom lens. But maybe it's
SPAAACE MAGIC.....

Shame on you Z...



new topics

top topics



 
29
<< 123  124  125    127  128  129 >>

log in

join