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: 99
29
<< 96  97  98    100  101  102 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 23 2007 @ 06:47 PM
link   
Here's a news article from the Drudge Report


Martian soil may contain life
Thu Aug 23 2007 11:30:10 ET

The soil on Mars may contain microbial life!
Joop Houtkooper of the University of Giessen, Germany, will declare on Friday the Viking spacecraft may have found signs of a weird life form based on hydrogen peroxide on the subfreezing, arid Martian surface.
His analysis of one of the experiments carried out by the Viking spacecraft suggests that 0.1 percent of the Martian soil could be of biological origin.
That is roughly comparable to biomass levels found in some Antarctic permafrost, home to a range of hardy bacteria and lichen.

Developing....

Please visit the link provided for the complete story.


I suppose the viking spacecraft never made it to mars either???????


Mod Edit: No Quote/Plagiarism – Please Review This Link.

(link added)

[edit on 2-9-2007 by Jbird]




posted on Aug, 26 2007 @ 03:51 PM
link   
You see, NASA made it so hard to trust them, even if they say "water is wet" - if the information comes from NASA, we better check everything...unfortunatelly.
Nobody enjoys that, but that is a fact of life.



posted on Sep, 2 2007 @ 08:57 AM
link   
Things have gone this way:

Kennedy says USA must go to the moon to get supremacy, prestige above Russians.

NASA jokers think to land on the moon astronauts with Bell Rocket Belt System (BRBS).

Therefore they get in touch with Bell Aerosystems, a company that lives

on today as Bell Helicopter Textron.

en.wikipedia.org...

Go to this site to read about the astonishing, incredible Bell Rocket Belt:

en.wikipedia.org...
...

“Harold Graham, along with an entire command of service personnel, travelled to many cities in the USA. They visited Canada, Mexico, Argentina, Germany, and France, as well as other countries. Each time they achieved enormous success demonstrating the rocket pack in action before the wide public.
But the army was disappointed. The maximum duration of flight of the rocket pack was 21 second with a range of only 120 m. An entire command of service personnel needed to accompany the rocket pack. During flight 5 U.S. gallons (19 liters) of scarce hydrogen peroxide was expended. In the opinion of the military, the "Bell Rocket Belt" was more a spectacular toy than an effective means of transport. The army spent $150,000 on the Bell Aerosystems contract. Bell spent an additional $50,000. The army refused any further expenditure on the SRLD program, and the contract was cancelled”
...
Mod Edit: External Source Tags – Please Review This Link.

To see an amazing flight of that rocketman go to:

en.wikipedia.org...

and click on "here" at the bottom of "History".

Bell administrators say to NASA jokers that they can’t do anything better than Bell Rocket Belt and
that nobody can balance a coke can on their finger and decide to build that carpentry craft named
LLRV, putting it on the big crane we have already seen in order to simulate take off, flight and
landing.

Because they build helicopters, also that strange fake carpentry rocket will be controlled like
helicopters, with STICK AND PEDALS.

But a rocket that moves vertically in all directions and lands going backwards is not a helicopter.

The most incredible thing is that STICK AND PEDALS were driven MANUALLY.

NASA jokers would have had to invent Another More Credible Control System (AMCCS).

However…

I like above all the enthusiasm and excitement of THE 3 HEROES OF THE MOON:

www.youtube.com...

I LOVE SO MUCH ALDRIN'S EUPHORIA.





[edit on 2-9-2007 by skeptic-friend]

[edit on 2-9-2007 by skeptic-friend]



[edit on 2-9-2007 by Jbird]



posted on Sep, 2 2007 @ 03:01 PM
link   
skepticlefriend,
It's amazing how you've been shown video after video of lunar landers being tested on earth but can't figure out it's real???

It's obviously not Photoshop because that wasn't around then.

If you can prove that they were hoisted up by wires, do so. I don't want to hear that we can clearly see wired attached. Just because wires may have been attached doesn't mean they were lifted up by them only as safety measures.

You have shown absolutely no proof that we didn't go to the moon.

Again, just curious but how did the reflective mirrors get on the moon if we never went there?



posted on Sep, 3 2007 @ 03:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by jfj123
skepticlefriend,
It's amazing how you've been shown video after video of lunar landers being tested on earth but can't figure out it's real???
...



Look at this video:

www.youtube.com...

There are plenty of reporters, a lot of cine-cameras in order to show what you are seeing is real, like in the plot of a movie.

Look at this video:

www.youtube.com...

Take off, change of sequence, flight, change of sequence, landing.

That is to say a photomontage of fake sequences.

Look at this video:

www.nasa.gov...
Click on "Phoenix: Blinded With Science"

Now, with Softimage, Maya, 3D Studio Max videos are more spectacular but the substance doesn't change: they are fake too, they are only 3D cartoons.

Have you seen in the video the word SCIENCE, SCIENCE, SCIENCE, repeated, advertised.

NASA jokers are selling science as if it was a perfume, a detergent.

Real scientists have never shown themselves like buffoons.


However…

I like above all the enthusiasm and excitement of THE 3 HEROES OF THE MOON:

www.youtube.com...

I LOVE SO MUCH ALDRIN'S EUPHORIA.



posted on Sep, 3 2007 @ 03:49 PM
link   
scepticalfriend,
I watched the first video. You just helped disprove your own argument. Good job. PROVE THIS IS FAKE. I don't want your word because since I don't know you, your word has no carries no weight.

I watched the second video you posted. You just helped disprove your own argument. Good job. PROVE THIS IS FAKE. I don't want your word because since I don't know you, your word has no carries no weight.

I watched the third video you posted. Yes there are computer generated scenes of a probe landing, etc. Here's the problem- Back in the 1960's, we didn't have the ability to create the third video.


NASA jokers are selling science as if it was a perfume, a detergent.

Of course they're trying to sell the product to the american people and for budgeting reasons. They're not being "jokers" as you so childishly put it, they're being smart.


However…

I like above all the enthusiasm and excitement of THE 3 HEROES OF THE MOON:

So you are saying if they were more enthusiastic, you would believe them. You must be saying that because you're saying they're not believable because of their lack of enthusiasm.



posted on Sep, 4 2007 @ 06:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by jfj123
skepticlefriend,
It's amazing how you've been shown video after video of lunar landers being tested on earth but can't figure out it's real???

It's obviously not Photoshop because that wasn't around then.

If you can prove that they were hoisted up by wires, do so. I don't want to hear that we can clearly see wired attached. Just because wires may have been attached doesn't mean they were lifted up by them only as safety measures.

You have shown absolutely no proof that we didn't go to the moon.

Again, just curious but how did the reflective mirrors get on the moon if we never went there?


@jfj123,

They didn't had Photoshop at that time (1969), but they had other tricks to fake photo's. Digital Tampering in the Media, Politics and Law

So the Apollo photo's could be faked! They had the possibility.

Did you know that Wernher von Braun worked at the Disney Studio's for 3 years before he became the head of NASA's spaceprogram? He made 3 movies about space exploration! So he knew the people with the knowledge!

It's weird that you believe that they had the GREAT technique to go to the moon(!!!), but you can't believe that they had the technique to fake it??



posted on Sep, 4 2007 @ 03:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by jfj123
scepticalfriend,
I watched the first video. You just helped disprove your own argument. Good job. PROVE THIS IS FAKE. I don't want your word because since I don't know you, your word has no carries no weight.

I watched the second video you posted. You just helped disprove your own argument. Good job. PROVE THIS IS FAKE. I don't want your word because since I don't know you, your word has no carries no weight.
...


Before all, thanks to Skeptic from Holland for his brilliant argumentations.

Dear jfj123,
______________my God, reason please.

If Bell Aerosystems was well advanced in its studies in 1960, why AFTER

45 YEARS are we compelled to see these strange and ridiculous SMT

(space mouse-traps) at the LUNAR LANDER CHALLENGE?

Above all, why a LUNAR LANDER CHALLENGE?

















If it was true that Bell Aerosystems had that big technology in 1960, now

this company would have made a big jump in this field.


However…

I like above all the enthusiasm and excitement of THE 3 HEROES OF THE MOON:

www.youtube.com...

I LOVE SO MUCH ALDRIN'S EUPHORIA.



posted on Sep, 5 2007 @ 05:41 AM
link   

Dear jfj123,
______________my God, reason please.
If Bell Aerosystems was well advanced in its studies in 1960, why AFTER
45 YEARS are we compelled to see these strange and ridiculous SMT
(space mouse-traps) at the LUNAR LANDER CHALLENGE?
Above all, why a LUNAR LANDER CHALLENGE?


For the same reason reason they have the 10 million dollar X-Prize. Haven't we already gone over this?



posted on Sep, 5 2007 @ 01:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by jfj123

Dear jfj123,
______________my God, reason please.
If Bell Aerosystems was well advanced in its studies in 1960, why AFTER
45 YEARS are we compelled to see these strange and ridiculous SMT
(space mouse-traps) at the LUNAR LANDER CHALLENGE?
Above all, why a LUNAR LANDER CHALLENGE?


For the same reason reason they have the 10 million dollar X-Prize. Haven't we already gone over this?


What are you saying?

en.wikipedia.org...


Ansari X PRIZE

The first X PRIZE competition, the Ansari X PRIZE for Suborbital Spaceflight, successfully challenged teams to build private spaceships to open the space frontier. Burt Rutan, financed by Microsoft founder Paul Allen, won the Ansari X PRIZE on 4 October 2004. As a result, $10 million was awarded to the winner, but more than $100 million was invested in new technologies in pursuit of the prize. Today, Sir Richard Branson, Jeff Bezos and others are actively creating a personal spaceflight industry.


Ansari X-PRIZE is not a competition regarding Lunar Landers.

Nobody, no company, no corporation, no firm are today able to build a manned or radio controlled rocket that can move in all directions and land going vertically backwards.

Bell Aerosystems didn't ever build LLRV able to do it. LLRVs are fake spacecrafts.

Bell Aerosystems has become today Bell Helicopter Textron, a company that is able to build helicopters and the famous V-44 Future Transport Rotorcraft (FTR).

FTR system: there is a system for all problems.





Always and only artistic images.

Even if it was real, nothing extraordinary: only 4 helicopters linked together.


However…

I like above all the enthusiasm and excitement of THE 3 HEROES OF THE MOON:

www.youtube.com...

I LOVE SO MUCH ALDRIN'S EUPHORIA.



posted on Sep, 5 2007 @ 04:15 PM
link   
you are wondering why if nasa was succesful building a lunar lander before, why are they having a competition to build one now? And why has it been difficult??? CORRECT???

Well nasa has already built space ships correct???
Then why would they have the X-Prize to build new ships and why has that been difficult??

Again, for the same reason.

I'm really not sure why you're not getting this. Am I not being clear??? If so, let me know and I'll try to explain a different way.



posted on Sep, 5 2007 @ 11:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by skeptic-friend
However…
I like above all the enthusiasm and excitement of THE 3 HEROES OF THE MOON:
www.youtube.com...
I LOVE SO MUCH ALDRIN'S EUPHORIA.


skeptic-friend-We get it. Please refrain from adding this to every post.

If you are so enthralled with this quote, stick it in your signature or profile.


jra

posted on Sep, 5 2007 @ 11:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by skeptic-friend
Ansari X-PRIZE is not a competition regarding Lunar Landers.


No, he was just making a comparison. There have been many compititions through out the history of aviation that helped it progress further. That's the point of these things.

The whole point of this Lunar lander challenge is to get private companies involved. Get them to figure out how to make these things better and cheaper to develop. Grumman, the company that built the Apollo Lunar Lander was given a Government contract. They didn't have to worry about making a profit. But in order for private companies to succeed in this industry, the cost has to be a lot lower for them, so that they can make a profit.


Bell Aerosystems didn't ever build LLRV able to do it. LLRVs are fake spacecrafts.


The LLRV's and LLTV's are not spacecrafts. They were merely trainers.



posted on Sep, 6 2007 @ 07:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by jfj123Am I not being clear??? If so, let me know and I'll try to explain a different way.


Maybe you can help me with this?

Stars were missing on the photos. Debunkingsites tried to explain that. One site said this:

This is perhaps the favorite argument of the TMLWF crowd. "There are no stars to be seen in any of the NASA Moon photographs." It is also one of the most easily countered arguments. The lunar photographs show no stars in them because they were exposed for the daylight lit lunar scenes! This badly underexposes any stars in the sky. Try setting up a manual camera (the autoexposure cameras won't easily allow you to do this) for a typical daylight exposure - use the "sunny 16" rule where you set the f-stop of your camera to f/16 and then set the exposure length to the recipricol of the ASA film speed - if you use ASA 100 film, use 1/100 of a second (or 1/125 which is more typically available). Then take a picture of the sky at night. To be sure you're simulating the lunar situation, be sure to light up a foreground object with full daytime lighting so that the printing process will be sure to expose that part of the image properly and not super stretch the dark sky. You won't find a star image there either.

My question: Why didn't Michael Collins see the stars? He didn't see anything!!

Patrick Moore asks the alleged Apollo 11 crew "could you actually see the stars?"



posted on Sep, 6 2007 @ 07:22 AM
link   

Before all, thanks to Skeptic from Holland for his brilliant argumentations.


Thank you.


btw, I'm a girl



posted on Sep, 6 2007 @ 02:58 PM
link   
en.wikipedia.org...


In all, NASA built five LM trainers of this type. During training flights at Ellington AFB near Houston, Texas, three of the five vehicles were destroyed in crashes. Two were an early version called the Lunar Landing Research Vehicle or LLRV. Neil Armstrong was flying LLRV-1 on May 6, 1968 when it went out of control. He ejected safely and the vehicle crashed. A later version was called the Lunar Landing Training Vehicle or LLTV and three were built. Two of these were lost in crashes on December 8, 1968 (piloted by Joe Algranti) and January 29, 1971 (piloted by Stuart Present). The other pilots also ejected safely from the crashing LLTV's.


5 LLRV - 3 destroyed in crashes.

3 LLTV - 2 destroyed in crashes.

But NASA jokers never tested LEM on the Earth and sent men to the Moon

6 times in 3 years with 6 LEMs.


At least 4 LEMs had to crash according to statistics.






However…

I like above all the enthusiasm and excitement of THE 3 HEROES OF THE MOON:

www.youtube.com...

I LOVE SO MUCH ALDRIN'S EUPHORIA.



posted on Sep, 6 2007 @ 04:22 PM
link   
yeah seriously i found someone here who said it very well man....most of you believe in the whole someone met with someone to get technology to do space travel and also the boom of over all technology....well as for that my friends yes there was a moon landing...the reason no other activity has gone on is because it has become secretive and closely hid from all public eye.but regardless it doesn't matter whether or not it did happen all that matters is on day a lot more will be possible and seen by all and used by all.....thanks and have fun friends



posted on Sep, 6 2007 @ 05:43 PM
link   
scepticfriend wrote,

5 LLRV - 3 destroyed in crashes.
3 LLTV - 2 destroyed in crashes.


OK so you are using these facts to argue other facts. But wait, you said they couldn't fly but you're saying you believe they crashed to support another argument. They couldn't crash if they couldn't fly.

OOPS !!!



posted on Sep, 6 2007 @ 08:02 PM
link   
There are no stars in any of the photos. The Apollo 11 astronauts also claimed to have not remembered seeing any of the stars in a press conference after the event.

The sun was shining. Cameras were set for daylight exposure

SOURCE WIKIPEDIA



posted on Sep, 7 2007 @ 01:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by Skeptic from Holland

Before all, thanks to Skeptic from Holland for his brilliant argumentations.


Thank you.


btw, I'm a girl


Hi, skeptic from Holland

Finally another intelligent person.


Originally posted by jfj123
scepticfriend wrote,

5 LLRV - 3 destroyed in crashes.
3 LLTV - 2 destroyed in crashes.


OK so you are using these facts to argue other facts. But wait, you said they couldn't fly but you're saying you believe they crashed to support another argument. They couldn't crash if they couldn't fly.

OOPS !!!


"...you're saying you believe they crashed to support another argument".

We human beings have many intelligences, mathematical, musical, motory, logical, pictorial and so on.

I think you have a lack of logical intelligence.

LEMs don't fly, can't move in all directions and land going backwards MANUALLY controlled with a JOYSTICK, as Armstrong did.

If 6 LEMs had REALLY gone to the moon, at least 4 would have had to crash according to statistics.

REAL MOON LANDING IS NOT A VIDEO GAME PRODUCED BY NASA JOKERS WITH THE HELP OF DISNEY STUDIO.

About stars, NASA jokers excluded them because it's impossible to put realistic stars in bidimensional scenographic backgrounds.




However…

I like above all the enthusiasm and excitement of THE 3 HEROES OF THE MOON:

www.youtube.com...

I LOVE SO MUCH ALDRIN'S EUPHORIA.



new topics

top topics



 
29
<< 96  97  98    100  101  102 >>

log in

join