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: 175
29
<< 172  173  174    176  177  178 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 14 2008 @ 09:59 AM
link   
reply to post by ngchunter
 





With cables boats also can fly. Your video doesn't prove LMs were able to fly.
I quite agree with Bigbrain about our poor technology. It's impossible we have lost it.









posted on Oct, 25 2008 @ 06:24 PM
link   
Hope I'm not bringing up too old of a thread.

Anyways, there is a good, solid way to prove that the moon landing did happen from one of the moon videos. Or at least, that the video was taken in vacuum.

Basically, accelerate any moon video by 1.825 times so that the apparent acceleration due to gravity would equal that of Earth, then watch the dust. On Earth, the dust would linger in the air due to air resistance from the atmosphere. On the moon, dust falls down at the same speed as a bowling ball, just like feathers.

This is a video that demonstrates this effect, although ironically it was originally intended to "prove" that the moon landing video was a hoax taken on Earth, then decelerated.

www.youtube.com...

I posted a comment on this video a while ago on the mathematical details of apparent gravitational acceleration, I'll just copy it here if anybody really wants to know.



under linear acceleration g, h(t) = (gt^3)/3

An object from h = 1m takes t = [(1m)*3/g]^(1/3) to fall to ground. Earth's g is 9.8m/s^2; moon: 1.6m/s^2. On Earth, object falls after 0.674s; On moon, object falls after 1.233s; 1.233s/0.674s = 1.825

Therefore, earth video decelerated 1.825 times look like it's on moon. A moon video accelerated 1.825 times look like it's on earth. Except for the fast-falling dust in the vacuum, of course



[edit on 25-10-2008 by Taishyou]



posted on Nov, 1 2008 @ 01:48 PM
link   
Here's a universal fact: As long as people tell stories, and take "pictures" of true events, there will always be people trying to disprove them.

Also, people will always try and fake the evidence. For example, I could be a photography expert and take a picture of a real UFO. I may be telling the truth when I took the photo, but this will get shattered from someone with less experience.

A while back in the thread someone mentioned that we have moon rock to prove we went to the moon. Well, I have a bunch of moon rocks in my back yard, all of which were collected on the moon. Right now, you're probably thinking that that my moon rocks are bs, in which case you are right. Now, just because NASA says that they have moon rocks, does it mean that they really do?



posted on Nov, 2 2008 @ 08:57 PM
link   
Totally wrong. Moon has no air. You can't calculate like that. Nice try.


jra

posted on Nov, 3 2008 @ 12:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by greshnik
Totally wrong. Moon has no air. You can't calculate like that. Nice try.


Of course you can. There is no "air" in the equation, so it makes no difference if there's air or not.



posted on Nov, 13 2008 @ 03:32 PM
link   
reply to post by greshnik
 


What a crying shame, 'greshnik'!

Until you can begin to understand the 'lack of air'....which is also known as a 'vacuum'.....you will never understand why things appeared as they did on Apollo videos.

Your 'Earthly' experiences and perceptions DO NOT equate to what happens in different environments.

edit...spelling

[edit on 11/13/0808 by weedwhacker]



posted on Dec, 9 2008 @ 11:45 PM
link   
This is a very nice thread... I just wanted to say thanks to all people who contributed. Some of the links probably don't work any more, but there is still a lot to learn. I have leardned a lot here.

My suggestion to any reader is - read this carefully from the begining. Nobody ever landed on the Moon. But, you will not only learn that, you will also learn how the site like ATS works.

Just go slow...and read. Enjoy!



posted on Dec, 10 2008 @ 09:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by greshnik
My suggestion to any reader is - read this carefully from the begining. Nobody ever landed on the Moon. But, you will not only learn that, you will also learn how the site like ATS works.

What makes you think we didn't land on the moon? I'm not speaking for myself when I say there are some excellent contributors on this thread who addressed every point raised for a hoax. More recently, the japanese even found evidence of the apollo landings.
www.universetoday.com...
www.jaxa.jp...
www.unmannedspaceflight.com...
I see no reason why someone who studies this issue carefully and fully researches every aspect would come to the conclusion that the moon landings were faked. Why do you think they were?



posted on Dec, 11 2008 @ 02:46 PM
link   
reply to post by ngchunter
 


I am on pins and needles, waiting for 'greshnik' to reply!!!

((Oh, of course, most responses will cry 'foul'! As in, it 'was CGI'!!))

Well, THIS is my point --- there is a certain generation of people who have become so immune to reality, that they believe this toxic nonsense.

There ARE examples of 'revisionist history', currently ongoing...(but I do NOT wish to take this discussion into the Political Arena, because it is about Space...)

I am old enough to have actually witnessed, live on the TV, the Apollo landing. I am sure there are many other ATS members who also saw, what I saw.

((IF you're doing the math, this means that I am over 50 years old...since I was born in 1957, you can do the math for yourselves...))

What seems to be cropping up, on the 'Internets', is a common theme, whether it be (in this case) a mis-understanding of what was involved in the NASA Space Program of the 1960's, or just exactly what the 'Human Race' seems to fit into, in the Grand Scheme of things.

Since the 'computers' and such are tending to be run by a 'YOUNGER' generation, it seems to me that this 'viral' conspiracy needs to be nipped in the bud....

Really, people who were not EVEN BORN YET!!! In 1969 are trying to diminish the achievements of hundreds of thousands of people...(OK, I grant that most of them were MEN....it WAS the 60's, after all....but even before the "glass ceiling" was cracked, we must appreciate everyone who contributed to this Nation's greatest triumph!!! (at least, in the Cold War Era).....The Apollo Moon Landing!!!!!



posted on Dec, 11 2008 @ 03:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by weedwhacker
Well, THIS is my point --- there is a certain generation of people who have become so immune to reality, that they believe this toxic nonsense.

What seems to be cropping up, on the 'Internets', is a common theme, whether it be (in this case) a mis-understanding of what was involved in the NASA Space Program of the 1960's, or just exactly what the 'Human Race' seems to fit into, in the Grand Scheme of things.

Since the 'computers' and such are tending to be run by a 'YOUNGER' generation, it seems to me that this 'viral' conspiracy needs to be nipped in the bud....


I think you made some good points. Being someone who was born long after Apollo ended, I think that many in my generation have difficulty accepting that such a huge challenge was overcome "way back then" because they rely so heavily on modern computers that are overkill for basic spaceflight purposes, just so they can do their math homework at night while chatting up their friends. They cannot fathom doing things the old fashioned way with a slide rule, they have a hard enough time getting the right answer with the help of a computer. They have no concept of just what was possible even with technology and a lot of brain power back then.

I had the good fortune of growing up by the kennedy space center and I toured rocket gardens and historic space capsules from an early age. Back when I was young you could tour the visitor center there for free, and even drive down on sunday afternoons to the air force station where Mercury redstone rockets were launched. The volunteers there allowed my brother and I to throw "the" switch that launched some of the first american astronauts. The idea of being cooped up in space inside a tin can with no computer and only basic electronics and life support fascinated me greatly. To go there today you have to pay a heafty price for a bus ticket and the controls you could touch before are now guarded under plastic. I had the fortune of seeing the real apollo, gemini, and mercury capsules up close and personal, you can see the steady progression of engineering with each. I was exposed to the living history of it so much that it was almost as if I grew up in that era. Sadly, it's not as accessible to today's youth, even if they want to access it. Most don't care, but luckily my parents and grandparents worked and lived in this area when those launches occured so it made a huge impression on them that they were able to pass on to me.

[edit on 11-12-2008 by ngchunter]



posted on Dec, 11 2008 @ 03:23 PM
link   
reply to post by ngchunter
 


Thank you, ngc....

You used a (now) obsolete term...the "slide rule"...

I don't, nor can I imagine, a generation of people who grew up with an electronic calculator.

For clarification, of those viewing this thread, a 'slide rule' was something that pre-dated electronics....and, by the way, VERY smart people used these devices...(along, with, of course....early computer technology) to send humans into Space.

This was back in the day when 'drafting' didn't refer to trying to save fuel by tail-gating a 'Big-Rig'....it was a discipline of drawing.....THAT was 'drafting'.

Used to be what Architects did, and Engineers, when they had to do it on paper!!

OK!!! Let's abandon these age-old traditions!!!!

Let's forget how to spell!!!! Let the Internet educate us!!!!

Am I the only one who sees the irony???



posted on Jan, 10 2009 @ 04:23 PM
link   
gone very quiet over there.



posted on Jan, 10 2009 @ 06:06 PM
link   
From the OP:



Why did they never fake a Mars landing!!


Better yet, why didn't Russia go to the Moon and claim the land EVEN
as America was sending Apollos.

Russia was first in space, landed a remote device on the Moon,
and flag. Took pictures of the far side and made a record famous.

Russia was in space long before Kennedy said by the end of the decade
we would be on the Moon.

That is a TEN year advantage, same that the Nazi Atomic bomb had
that they never had.

I think America lies and needs lie control.



posted on Jan, 10 2009 @ 07:00 PM
link   
The 'moon landing' was claimed to have been done in an era of extreme propaganda, when the cold war between the US & Soviets was at its height. NASA is rife with ex-Nazi engineers and scientists. What does that tell you?

Logic and common-sense tells me the moon landings were faked. We just didnt have the technology back then to pull off such a feat and probably still dont now despite our 100-fold increase in knowledge.

Watch 'A funny thing happened on the way to the moon'. This film sealed the answer for me.



posted on Jan, 10 2009 @ 08:22 PM
link   
au.youtube.com...

'nuf said..



posted on Jan, 10 2009 @ 08:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by Nonchalant
au.youtube.com...

'nuf said..



teslaandlyne (3 seconds ago)
A 14 Spoke Sun at 3:39, so the visor speaks.

Unless the Illuminati-government takes away Obama's and all blackberries
and mobile Google access, the visor speaks.
Nowhere can the lying astro nuts hide now.



posted on Jan, 10 2009 @ 09:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by Anonymous ATS
The 'moon landing' was claimed to have been done in an era of extreme propaganda, when the cold war between the US & Soviets was at its height. NASA is rife with ex-Nazi engineers and scientists. What does that tell you?

Nothing. Insinuation is worthless, and in any case, the Soviets got their fair share of ex-Nazi engineers too.


Logic and common-sense tells me the moon landings were faked. We just didnt have the technology back then to pull off such a feat and probably still dont now despite our 100-fold increase in knowledge.

Simple math and simulation tells me we did land on the moon. The equipment was perfectly capable of the feat as can be verified in modern space simulators and apollo computer equipment emulation. Have you ever emulated the apollo guidance computer? Can you tell me whether or not it is capable of circumlunar navigation?


Watch 'A funny thing happened on the way to the moon'. This film sealed the answer for me.

I can debunk every second of that sillyness.

[edit on 10-1-2009 by ngchunter]



posted on Jan, 10 2009 @ 09:13 PM
link   
reply to post by Nonchalant
 


"Spokes" are caused by diffraction from stopping down the camera's aperture, not by the sun itself. Open the camera up and voila, no diffraction, no spokes. Even a decent earth based photographer would know this. Oh, and "non-circular" sun glints? Give me break, it's a spherical visor, of course it's going to be non-circular, not to mention the fact that any hand held shot will be at risk of "trails" from the slightest shaking. Nice try.



posted on Jan, 11 2009 @ 07:11 AM
link   
I honestly used to think that the Moon landings were a big crock of garbage and we never got there. However, I have spent the last couple of weeks examining the Lunar Orbiter mission photographs and there are SO many pictures of strange things there, that I know there is someone on the Moon. What is more, I have found a photograph with a "landing bay sign" with a number '4' on it and I cannot think that aliens would have the same numerals as we do. These were from 1967 - 40 years ago.

I often wondered about the Van Allen Radiation Belts and how the photographs and communication travelled through both of those without fogging of the pictures and bombarding the early electronics with radiation causing chaos.

It is strange how we have not returned there in this long, so anyone care to suggest why Mars is so sexy and the Moon is like a wet fish?

If you want a laugh, have a go at my Moon puzzle question in another thread on this Space Exploration forum. It will be quite revealing I promise you.


jra

posted on Jan, 11 2009 @ 06:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by qmantoo
I often wondered about the Van Allen Radiation Belts and how the photographs and communication travelled through both of those without fogging of the pictures and bombarding the early electronics with radiation causing chaos.


Why would the VA belts fog up pictures? Or mess up with communications? As for causing chaos with electronics, that's what shielding is for. Their are many satellites that pass through the VA belts regularly and they continue to function normally.


It is strange how we have not returned there in this long, so anyone care to suggest why Mars is so sexy and the Moon is like a wet fish?


It's not really that strange. It's simply due to a lack of money. After Apollo, the US Government cut NASA's budget. The last three Apollo missions were cancelled, as were other future plans.



new topics

top topics



 
29
<< 172  173  174    176  177  178 >>

log in

join