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: 130
29
<< 127  128  129    131  132  133 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 12 2007 @ 02:37 AM
link   
reply to post by NGC2736
 


Interesting analogy, NGC.

A few who did not go, 'Out West', stayed and built the RailRoads and other infrastructures and got rich in the mean time....

Perhaps there is a lesson there, as well?

Thanks,

TJ




posted on Dec, 12 2007 @ 02:50 AM
link   
reply to post by NGC2736
 


umm what are you telling me that some missions were for real and some were not?
I thought of this idea, if so we all win some how
what I think of it in general is if it's left or right all the way, then some one will lose in the end.
If no one takes a picture at close range of that area I guess people on the 2 sides will win and lose regardles of what side they are on, I think tho that this story should have something decisive and shocking that would settle it.
I wish nasa the best of luck on going to the moon for the first time, because I remain to the opinion they never went, what bothers me is that there are some people posting here that don't even care for what was the apollo program and are pro apollo sided.

It would be a surprise to many but I think nasa has a better chance this time to do it for real.
They got a good chance now space suits and space materials for shielding are better now than they were before.





[edit on 12-12-2007 by pepsi78]



posted on Dec, 12 2007 @ 03:02 AM
link   
reply to post by pepsi78
 


I am puzzled, pepsi78

You are so certain, you alone KNOW the truth, although thousands and thousands disagree with you...not just here on ATS, but all over the World. Yet...you, and you alone, know the absolute truth?

Sorry, but it only takes one person to start a religion. I will propose that a belief system begins, and takes on converts...but in the absence of evidence, I fail to see how it will flourish....

[edit to add post]

Good luck, and thanks for your posts!!

[edit on 12-12-2007 by weedwhacker]



posted on Dec, 12 2007 @ 03:24 AM
link   
reply to post by pepsi78
 


Let me propose a totally hypothetical picture. This is just pure fiction, nothing more.

What if the moon landings took place, the astronauts, being the intrepid risk takers they are, really went. BUT, we aren't told the whole story. The trip was a success because of "help" from an outside source, or the mission was cut short because of the danger or sickness of certain members.

Would this not make NASA, pressured by the DoD during the cold war, have to "flesh out" the story with a few fabrications? a few false videos? Lies are best covered in a layer of truth. Think more along the lines of certain details and facts being fudged rather than an outright lie about everything.

I think that when/if everything is known, the truth will lie in this middle ground. We went, but for whatever reason, the whole truth isn't acceptable for public consumption. There's enough truth to keep the story from being totally broken down, but enough lies to where people see some ragged edges showing.

Just my take on what COULD be the way it was. It's the reason I keep looking. But as long as people try to deny everything as fake, the lie remains safely hidden, because there's just enough truth mixed in to keep us from finding that shallow grave where the whole truth is buried. Just like "they" want it.



[edit on 12-12-2007 by NGC2736]



posted on Dec, 12 2007 @ 03:43 AM
link   
reply to post by weedwhacker
 


I asked you to debunk me not that the subject matters, it's the impresion you leave, what did you do instead? in stead of quoting me on the subject of my post you went and said that there is a lunar base, that was your response, it had nothing to do with my post, can you understand that?
You disrigard my post because you think there is a moon base and a secret mission, that is your answer.
I do not want to sound like I'm making fun of anything, how old are you?
I'm just curios.



posted on Dec, 12 2007 @ 03:49 AM
link   
reply to post by NGC2736
 

I don't know about this, if there was some evidence about this, people just take up photos and make of them what they want, like they see a cloud formation and they build from there a figure out of it.

Alot of people think of aliens on the moon, or that the astonauts have seen something there and ran fast off the moon.
I do not even know who is the starter of this religion should I say, because it;'s becoming a fashon.
What evidence would there be to sustain such a claim?



posted on Dec, 12 2007 @ 03:59 AM
link   
Ah, that is what is sought so hard. You see, if all was faked, and not some cobbled together plan meant to salvage reputation, then the planning and budget would have allowed perfection in the many moon videos. But because it is (might be) part truth and part lie, then the "seams" between the two show through.

I use logic, and history. Man has always reached high, and found a lie or an excuse when he failed. Man has always used the truth to mask his lies. (The cop pulls you over and asks if you've been drinking. You don't tell him "Hell no", because it's on your breath, and he'll know that's a lie. But you also don't dare tell him you had a half a case either, so you hide the lie in the truth by acting as sober as you can and swearing you only had two beers.)

Human nature explains so much. Now I look for the proof of how much and what portion is the lie.



posted on Dec, 12 2007 @ 02:46 PM
link   
reply to post by NGC2736
 


NGC, you write the truth, at least you make sense. Yes, we should consider the 'Shades of Grey' that exist between what is told to us, and what the real truth is.

Sorry to respond to 'Pepsi' in this post (just want to save server space)... the User (pepsi78) asked my age...I am 50.

Cheers!



posted on Dec, 12 2007 @ 03:38 PM
link   
ntrs.nasa.gov...

if nasa jokers had a real technology to build a rocket that

can land going backwards, why would they make all the

people to know their incredible technology?

They write, write, write to make people to believe that they have that

technology.

but they have not technology to build a rocket that can also

retrocede.

they would keep secret a real technology.

have you heard about ferrari and mc laren?

Mod Edit: All Caps – Please Review This Link.

[edit on 12-12-2007 by Jbird]



posted on Dec, 12 2007 @ 08:18 PM
link   
reply to post by weedwhacker
 


Thank you. I write these opinions because I truly feel that the evidence supports such a position. There is some evidence for many things, and many things are just shades of the real truth.

I am a member here because I want to explore the many possibilities. I cannot just ignore science and reason, nor like some, fasten on one all consuming aspect of "retocide" abilities(or whatever it is). I consider the while picture, and try to determine what is most logical.

It is in the details that errors are found which point to the seeds of a lie.



posted on Dec, 12 2007 @ 11:10 PM
link   
reply to post by jra-2
 


"jra-2"

Wow! !!!

Where do I even begin to try to respond? Guess the only response, after all of our attempts to explain things to you, is to say...

Thank you for your opinion. It is valued, and its merit will be considered by all who read it.

Again, thanks...



posted on Dec, 12 2007 @ 11:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by weedwhacker
Well, perhaps you have a point...even if a so called 'expert' wants to spout radiation data that makes no sense, they have every right...but doesn't it waste time?


If you use that logic every post on ATS is a waste of time... because no matter what is said, shown, debunked or proved... It will change nothing in the known world


Originally posted by pepsi78
hey man that is funny as hell




I guess nasa is just backing my claims


Ah Yes Good Old NASA... They do have their uses from time to time...

The thing is they have different "layers of truth" as Neil Armstrong put it... and its up to us to uncover them

"There are great ideas undiscovered, breakthroughs available to those who can remove one of the truth's protective layers. There are places to go beyond belief..." - Neil Armstrong White House Speech July 20, 1994

So when NASA tells me they had electromagnetic shielding for space crafts in 1964 Who am I to doubt them?

ACTIVE SHIELDING CONCEPTS FOR THE IONIZING
RADIATION IN SPACE

Contract NASw-502 Final Report Rev. 31 Jan. 1964

See thread here..
www.abovetopsecret.com...


I wish nasa the best of luck on going to the moon for the first time, because I remain to the opinion they never went,


PSSTTT Just so you know... now don't tell anyone this ... but NASA always gets picked on because they are "in the public eye" The Bases on the Moon are not NASA run




www.abovetopsecret.com...

www.abovetopsecret.com...

[edit on 12-12-2007 by zorgon]



posted on Dec, 13 2007 @ 01:08 AM
link   
reply to post by zorgon
 


So....take one letter out of the acronym 'NASA'?

Psssst....isn't it clear that humans can survive in cislunar space?....shhhhhhhhhh!!!!



posted on Dec, 13 2007 @ 02:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by weedwhacker
So....take one letter out of the acronym 'NASA'?


NASA is a puppet like most 'Main Streamers'
I don't pick on them all the time...



Psssst....isn't it clear that humans can survive in cislunar space?....shhhhhhhhhh!!!!


Why yes as clear as the Moon Fountains sunset rays under that Saffron Sky...

you know... all those Dust Clouds?

Speaking about "Puppets"


Google Video Link


video.google.com...


[edit on 13-12-2007 by zorgon]



posted on Dec, 13 2007 @ 06:58 AM
link   
I get ti now, congrats
you guys hijacked this thread.
What was one of most the relevant thread on ats has now turned in to secret misson to the moon, moon bases, aliens and science fiction.



posted on Dec, 13 2007 @ 02:48 PM
link   
ntrs.nasa.gov...

If NASA jokers had a real technology to build a rocket that

can land going backwards, they would keep secret that big technology.

Why did NASA jokers write, write, write to explain their technology?

Since they were not able to go to the Moon, they wrote a lot of pages of

technology fiction to make people think they went there really.

Only imbecile people would explain their big technology.

If USA had really gone to the Moon, they would have kept secret their

technology.

NASA JOKERS HAVE ONLY DEVELOPED A BIG TECHNOLOGY FICTION.






posted on Dec, 13 2007 @ 05:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by pepsi78
I get ti now, congrats
you guys hijacked this thread.


Title of thread... "An End To The Moon Conspiracy!"

So what we were just supposed to agree?


As far as I am concerned the "Moon Conspiracy" is about toe enter Phase Two with the first players up to bat being Japan and China and so far China's first entry is a picture that looks like its taken from Google Earth with the Chinese doing press releases world wide saying "We didn't fake it see the new crater?"

Only to find the "new crater" was an error in overlapping..

So "Moon Conspiracy Phase Two" is well underway




posted on Dec, 13 2007 @ 11:25 PM
link   
reply to post by zorgon
 


Hey, Zorgon,

I'm a little confused, up to this point...

Some here have claimed Apollo to be a total fake. The original point of this thread was to deny the 'Apollo conspiracy'.

The truth, at least the gray area (no pun) might lie somewhere in between...either Apollo was exactly as advertised. OR, Apollo needed to be 'enhanced' in order to meet JFK's deadline. OR, Apollo was a cover for covert spaceflights. OR, it was all faked, since, as one ATS member continues to point out, NASA could not make a spaceship that could land backwards. (I should have put that in quotes, but something told me not to....).

Zorgon, even Capt Lear posted his opinion that Armstrong had to overfly the initial Tranquility landing site because of saucers (though he said 'boulders' on air). What that implies is, Apollo 11 happened. I would hate to have that accomplishment trashed by a conspiracy theory that had no basis in fact.

OK, off my chest...

(Let the arrows fly....savvy?)



posted on Dec, 14 2007 @ 03:08 PM
link   
reply to post by weedwhacker
 


weedwhacker

Do you agree with me that, if NASA jokers had a real technology, they

would keep it secret?

Look at this manual:

www.hq.nasa.gov...

221 pages.

Only imbecile people would explain in details their big technology.

Then this is only technology fiction.







posted on Dec, 14 2007 @ 05:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by weedwhacker

I'm a little confused, up to this point...


I'm not surprised...

So what is your question? I have made my position clear in many threads...

:shk:




top topics



 
29
<< 127  128  129    131  132  133 >>

log in

join