It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.



page: 5
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in


posted on Aug, 2 2005 @ 11:42 AM
is the nasa number for the bootprint pic. go to
you should be able to find it in lowrez and hirez.
the docking sequence was initially filmed... you're gonna love this... miniatures... models... aka star wars x-wings and ti fighters!
seriously, moon/earthrise was rearscreen projected, shot first from a large constructed model of the moon in the round... the earth was a shot of a modeled earth, rendered flat and hung above moon far enough back to allow the terminator to cross the earth as the crafts and rotation of the lunar surface came closer... confusing without a sketch i grant you. the modeld was mounted on a pole that went straight back into the middle of the screen, therefore, you don't see it or it's shadow due to the backlighting and it was far enough away from the screen so the pole shadow didn't interfere... pure genius actually and the forerunner for so many hollywood effects. difference being, the film quality... made to look jerky and a bit out of focus... there were some backlit screen "anomalies" put into the sequence just for the hell of it.. but i might be thinking of another "fly over" sequence by the command module. in fact many of the surface shots were miniatures as well, especially the distance shots which allowed clear viewing and the sense that no atmosphere kept the line of sight clear. had it been full scale, the presence of an atmosphere would have been noted. it's still noted in many of the solar flaring shots anyway... an obvious giveaway as compared to filmshots of the same quality and angles from the shuttle and iss. hope that helpls. rock on.

posted on Aug, 2 2005 @ 12:24 PM
Couple of questions.

As various nations were monitoring radio transmissions of the entire event, and therefore would have information relating to the physical origins of those radio transmissions, would it not be logical for one or more of these nations to "spill the beans", as it were, if the thing was a hoax?

What would be preventing them from doing so?

My only other question is: does anyone still believe Bill Kaysing? This one is purely my own curiosity.


posted on Aug, 2 2005 @ 12:29 PM
I think what really saddens me about this thread is that there are still people who, despite their amply-demonstrated lack of understanding of basic science and technology (no gravity on the moon, make the shuttle's skin out of the same material used by the [one-time use] ablative Apollo heat-shield) -- as well as all the detailed notes made by real scientists, engineers and technologists who expose their comments for the rubbish they are -- continue to push the idea that the Apollo landing was some sort of hoax.

As a then-employee of IBM Federal Systems Division, the computer contractor to NASA for most of the space program, I was involved (although only peripherally) in the program from Gemini days through to 1974, and the first-hand knowledge I got at the backup center at Greenbelt MD and actually meeting with NASA people means that I know what really happened.

And the fact that I actually managed to complete high school physics and knew the basics of photography means that I can -- and do -- look at the "Apollo-as-a-Hoax" rubbish and laugh at its various inconsistencies.

But why is it that most people today -- even the ones who weren't born during the Gemini and Apollo programs -- are able to accept the truth? Perhaps a better question would be -- why are there still people, supposedly citizens of a country where a decent education is a given and all the historical data is available, who feel a need to believe in a Huge Secret Plot whose various inconsistencies make their case fall apart like a rotten cantaloupe?

My guess is that most of these people are either simply unaware of anything -- or dishonest. First, anyone who propunds such a concept has little or no education in basic science or engineering; why else would they use the same arguments about astronauts frying in the Van Allen Belt or the fact that a camera's aperture set to record objects on the moon will block out the stars, or that the moon actually lacks a gravitational acceleration?

But granted that there are people out there who managed to achieve the age of sixteen years without learning anything about the way the universe works, why is it that anyone propounds such basura without having even looked at the sites and people who have successfully debunked their arguments?

Not only are they ignorant, but they simply don't care to learn anything which goes against what they want to believe!

Finally, if this stuff is finally pointed out to them, why do these same individuals continues to pretend they haven't heard it and spread what by now they know is a lie?

They shame themselves and their parents who were at least partially eresponsible for their education; and they make the rest of us at ATS look like knaves, scoundrels, and illiterate fools.

As someone who considers ATS an important piece of his life and time, and who has made many friends and esteemed colleagues here, I deeply resent that.

[edit on 2-8-2005 by Off_The_Street]


posted on Aug, 2 2005 @ 12:55 PM
You have voted Off_The_Street for the Way Above Top Secret award. You have one more vote left for this month.

Anyway. As for the soil pics. Is this the one you ment gititdun1? AS11-40-5876 if so, you had one to many 7's in the name. Anyway, it looks like dirt and rocks to me. So does this AS11-40-5877 and this, AS11-40-5878 Just too bad the focus isn't the best.

posted on Aug, 2 2005 @ 03:01 PM
Apollo 13, named "Aquarius" (new age) at 1:13 (1313 military time) on April 13, 1970
The current Discovery mission was first set for launch July 13th, the raindate originally was set for the 31rst(a backward 13)
It was launched on July 26, (2 x 13) 13 days later at 10:39am 1 + 0 + 3 + 9 = 13 Is all this coincidental ?

Also Disney who is accused of using it's stage's to perpretrate this Hoax, happens to have in it's logo three 6's, 666, it is a fact just take a look at the current walt disney logo and you will see clearly 666

(william cooper)
Another revelation to those who understand the symbolic language of the Illuminati is the hidden meaning of the names of the Space Shuttles, "A Colombian Enterprise to Endeavor for the Discovery of Atlantis... and all Challengers shall be destroyed."

NASA insists the space suits the astronauts supposedly wore on the lunar surface were air conditioned. An air conditioner cannot, and will not work without a heat exchanger. A heat exchanger simply takes heat gathered in a medium such as freon from one place and transfers it to another place. This requires a medium of molecules which can absorb and transfer the heat such as an atmosphere or water. An air conditioner will not and cannot work in a vacuum. A space suit surrounded by a vacuum cannot transfer heat from the inside of the suit to any other place. The vacuum, remember, is a perfect insulator. A man would roast in his suit in such a circumstance.

NASA claims the spacesuits were cooled by a water system which was piped around the body, then through a system of coils sheltered from the sun in the backpack. NASA claims that water was sprayed on the coils causing a coating of ice to form. The ice then supposedly absorbed the tremendous heat collected in the water and evaporated into space. There are two problems with this that cannot be explained away. 1) The amount of water needed to be carried by the astronauts in order to make this work for even a very small length of time in the direct 55 degrees over the boiling point of water (210 degrees F at sea level on Earth) heat of the sun could not have possibly been carried by the astronauts. 2) NASA has since claimed that they found ice in moon craters. NASA claims that ice sheltered from the direct rays of the sun will NOT evaporate destroying their own bogus "air conditioning" explanation.

Remember this. Think about it the next time you go off in the morning with a "vacuum bottle" filled with hot coffee. Think about it long and hard when you sit down and pour a piping hot cup from your thermos to drink with your lunch four hours later... and then think about it again when you pour the last still very warm cup of coffee at the end of the day.

The same laws of physics apply to any vehicle traveling through space. NASA claims that the spacecraft was slowly rotated causing the shadowed side to be cooled by the intense cold of space... an intense cold that DOES NOT EXIST. In fact the only thing that could have been accomplished by a rotation of the spacecraft is a more even and constant heating such as that obtained by rotating a hot dog on a spit. In reality a dish called Astronaut a la Apollo would have been served. At the very least you would not want to open the hatch upon the crafts return.

NASA knows better than to claim, in addition, that a water cooling apparatus such as that which they claim cooled the astronauts suits cooled the spacecraft. No rocket could ever have been launched with the amount of water needed to work such a system for even a very short period of time. Fresh water weighs a little over 62 lbs. per cubic foot. Space and weight capacity were critical given the lift capability of the rockets used in the Apollo Space Program. No such extra water was carried by any mission whatsoever for suits or for cooling the spacecraft.

On the tapes the Astronauts complained bitterly of the cold during their journey and while on the surface of the moon. They spoke of using heaters that did not give off enough heat to overcome the intense cold of space. It was imperative that NASA use this ruse because to tell the truth would TELL THE TRUTH. It is also proof of the arrogance and contempt in which the Illuminati holds the common man.

What we heard is in reality indicative of an over zealous cooling system in the props used during the filming of the missions at the Atomic Energy Commissions Nevada desert test site, where it is common to see temperatures well over 100 degrees. In the glaring unfiltered direct heat of the sun the Astronauts could never have been cold at any time whatsoever in the perfect insulating vacuum of space.

As proof examine the Lunar Lander on display in the Smithsonian Institute and notice the shrouded and encased cone of the rocket engine INSIDE the Lander which is attached above the rocket nozzle at the bottom center of the Lander. It is this rocket engine which supposedly provided the retro thrust upon landing on the moon and the takeoff thrust during takeoff from the moon. In the actual Lunar Lander this engine is present but in the film and pictures of the inside of the Lunar Lander that was "said" to be on the moon the engine is absent. Then examine the Lunar Lander simulator and you will see exactly where the fake footage was filmed.

It would also be a good idea for you to measure the dimensions of the astronauts in their spacesuits and then measure the actual usable dimensions of the hatch that they had to use to egress and ingress the Lander. Also measure the inside dimensions of the actual Lander and you will see that the astronauts (liars) could not have possibly left or entered in their suits through that hatch. Notice the position of the hinge of the hatch and then examine the Lunar Lander training simulator and measure all the dimensions noted above taking care to note the position of the hinge on the much larger hatch and you may become "illumined"... so to speak.

NASA claims that the space suits worn by the astronauts were pressurized at 5 psi over the ambient pressure (0 psi vacuum) on the moon's surface. We have examined the gloves NASA claims the astronauts wore and find they are made of pliable material containing no mechanical, hydraulic, or electrical devices which would aid the astronauts in the dexterous use of their fingers and hands while wearing the gloves. Experiments prove absolutely that such gloves are impossible to use and that the wearer cannot bend the wrist or fingers to do any dexterous work whatsoever when filled with 5 psi over ambient pressure either in a vacuum or in the earth's atmosphere. NASA actually showed film and television footage of astronauts using their hands and fingers normally during their EVAs on the so-called lunar surface. The films show clearly that there is no pressure whatsoever within the gloves... a condition that would have caused explosive decompression of the astronauts resulting in almost immediate death if they had really been surrounded by the vacuum of space.

If you don't believe it try it yourself... it is a very simple experiment and does not require a rocket scientist to perform. These are just a few of over a hundred very simple and very easy to prove valid scientific reasons why NASA and the Apollo Space Program are two of the biggest lies ever foisted upon the unsuspecting and trusting People of the world.

Taking all this into consideration along with the current failure of the space program says that either NASA is Incompetent or Liars, take your pick, niether is a good thing.
If NASA were a car manufacturer and had the problems with their car building technology that they have with their shuttle technology, they would be out of business and no would buy their cars. They would hardly find any investors to back their troublesome technology.

This is not progress:

To go the the moon in 1969 without a problem
To have a host of problems and failures in their current quest.
You should be glad I don't hold the purse string, they would not get "ONE RED CENT" from me.

What a total waste of money.

To those that would suggest that NASA has given much in the way of new medicines, I would say (HORG-WASH) As a whole, this generation is sicker than we were 40 years ago, the proof is that all our medicine cabinets are full and we are only growing sicker.

Tell me "ONE" medicine that has come from the space program that has provided a "CURE" for anything ?
I don't want a list of medicines that have "HELPED" us to live with a sickness, for it is much more profitable to provide "HELPS" as apposed to "CURES".

[edit on 2-8-2005 by Lastday Prophet]

posted on Aug, 2 2005 @ 03:36 PM
I thought the thread could use a dose of humor.

no offense intended, just a pretty funny clip.


posted on Aug, 2 2005 @ 05:21 PM

Originally posted by Lastday Prophet
Apollo 13, named "Aquarius" (new age) at 1:13 (1313 military time) on April 13, 1970
The current Discovery mission was first set for launch July 13th, the raindate originally was set for the 31rst(a backward 13)
It was launched on July 26, (2 x 13) 13 days later at 10:39am 1 + 0 + 3 + 9 = 13 Is all this coincidental ?

What does all this nonsensical rambling have to do with ANYTHING? I can make ANY date equal 13, or 7 or 11, or 9 or 666, or whatever other number you want to come up with...

Where is your response to the rest of the very clear and informative information I provided you with? Surely you should have been responding with "Oh, I did not know that is how the capusles worked and I did not know the heatshielding on the shuttle is totally different, and I did not know that satellites have no heat shielding." But instead, you ramble on about numbers that mean NOTHING!

There is no value in discussing things with you, you are clearly either unable to comprehend the subject matter, or you are too delusional to accept any single factual item that disagrees with your fantasy.


Pick a number: 1 2 3 4

Seriously, pick a number.

I can read your mind.

Don't think I can?

I can....

No really, I bet this will suprise a lot of people.

Why all the doubt? I mean there's nothing wrong with the fact that you picked the number three.

[edit on 2-8-2005 by CatHerder]

posted on Aug, 2 2005 @ 06:15 PM
This was one of the more intriguing topics I've investigated.

Because of copyright and posting rules, I'm going to provide a link to a website which does indeed seem to thoroughly address the entire issue in much more detail than most hoax-sites (and to be fair, in much more detail than many debunking sites, too).

Please, read the information, and if you so desire, offer evidence to the contrary; the theory presented does seem to be a lot more logical, realistic and likely.

In-depth discussion on the "C-rock".

I'm going to share a little excerpt, just to explain the general gist, relating to the probability of the "C" in question actually being a hair or fiber.

"LPI then scanned the rock from the anomalous 17446 print at highest resolution available with their equipment. A 14MB file was compressed to 1.5MB and a maximum jpg was saved and sent to us. The image is a 4X enlargement of the highest resolution scan of the rock. Although somewhat blurry, it clearly represents what the infamous "C" really is as seen under magnification: a hair or fiber. It is even a different color from the lunar color seen on the developed prints"

Any comments?

[edit on 2-8-2005 by Tinkleflower]

posted on Aug, 3 2005 @ 09:57 AM
Nasa is getting really good at hoaxes. We're now supposed to believe we have a "space station" that orbits the earth, and people can live inside the station !

then we send a reusable vehicle up there to re-supply it like some 18 wheel truck of the future, and then a space walk to repair some tiles !!!

this is good stuff

obviously, this was filmed in some guys basement, you can buy these tiles at walmart for cryin out loud

[edit on 3-8-2005 by syrinx high priest]

posted on Aug, 3 2005 @ 11:57 AM

Originally posted by Umbrax

(4) I agree. NASA money could be well spent on feeding the hungry and other important earthly matters.

I disagree, many of the cooler products that are manufactured and purchased by our society were first created by NASA for Space Exploration.

They include many things like:

Certain Mattresses
Erasable pens
Advances in Crime Fighting

And others even more valuable to society.

Work by NASA has saved lives by the many advances, they create and maintain jobs for people who otherwise may have remained perpetually unemployed. We have gained far more through this discovery than we have spent, it is well worth the investment.

posted on Aug, 3 2005 @ 11:59 AM
Here is a website that explains and debunks much of the "Apollo Hoax" theory. As well as other more mundane scientific myths.

posted on Aug, 3 2005 @ 12:30 PM

Originally posted by No1tovote4
Here is a website that explains and debunks much of the "Apollo Hoax" theory. As well as other more mundane scientific myths.

Beautiful.....please make check payable to Phil Plait.

posted on Aug, 3 2005 @ 12:34 PM
True, Plumbo, true.

But his hawking doesn't negate the point, does it? Seeing as what he's saying is verifiable elsewhere...

posted on Aug, 3 2005 @ 12:43 PM

Originally posted by Plumbo
Why does nasa gets billions of $$$?

People like being lied to, they just don't realize it.

People want to trust the words of other people in higher authority.
There is a denial mechanism embedded in each one of us. We feel insecure. Not sure what the future holds, what catastrophic event may occur. However, there is an ultimate demise to the one trusting in other men/women. Jeremiah 17:5 curses the man who trusts in man.

There also is an evil force in this world. It is governed by the being the bible calls Lucifer. According to Isaiah 14, it is Lucifer's desire to be like his Creator, to take his place. However, His Creator kicked him out of his Presence. So, this Lucifer and his associates influence the minds of the men in power who have sold their souls for this power.

But God is right there, in the heart of the earth, literally speaking. He hides behind the veiled curtain of the celestial sphere. He's covered with dark waters and thick clouds. Lucifer's control on the minds of this world has people everywhere believing the lie that the universe is an infinite realm and ther is no physical, bodily presence of any sort of Creator. He uses the "sciences" to back this claim. And yet, God is right there, no less than 4,000 miles away.

The world will eventually know the truth about this.

One way or another.

Once this happens, nasa and all governing agencies that have supported this global lie will be shamefully defeated.


$$$ talks...
Let's see, 94% of the population want to hear this man's hawking.

Sorry, I won't buy the book, so I guess I'm too stupid to know the difference if we really landed on the moon or not.

But at least I know where God is.

posted on Aug, 3 2005 @ 12:48 PM
we landed on the moon 6 times ? impossible

there is a sphere of glass that surrounds the earth ? definite

posted on Aug, 3 2005 @ 12:59 PM
lol Plumbo did you even read whats on the site? Does wanting to make some money to pay for hosting costs by hosting adverts and trying to sell a book make the BadAstronomy website propoganda? Why did you just focus on the fact that he has a book, that is a huge website with information debunking just about any type of psuedoscientific Bull # you can think off. As for the Glass Sphere surrounding earth
Doesn't even dignify a response

posted on Aug, 3 2005 @ 01:35 PM
There has been a lot of information shared here, but it does not change the fact that either NASA is Incompetent or liars.
We can not get around the fact that "IF" they went to the moon in 1969 how come they are having such difficulity just getting the shuttle to orbit 200 miles above the earth some 35 years later, it does not add up dispite all of the "EXCUSES" offered for and by them.

The reason I used the numbers that are in the dates and times of launches of the shuttles is that I beleive them to have satanic undertones.
Many beleive that the shadow government is run by satanist and thus is why we see the number 13 continually appearing in the dates and times, it is not a coincidence for it appears regularly, a fact which I have shown to be true.

As I have also stated, the rockets that take the satellites into orbit don't seem to have problems and this further makes me question the truth about the space program.

I am sure that if you would take a vote across the country, to decide if the space program should continue, I am sure it would come to an end.
With all the problems down here why waste money on a space progam that is flawed to say the least.

I see no came up with a medical cure that the space program has provided.

posted on Aug, 3 2005 @ 01:49 PM

Originally posted by sardion2000
As for the Glass Sphere surrounding earth
Doesn't even dignify a response

The earth surrounds the glass sphere. Not the other way around.

posted on Aug, 3 2005 @ 02:02 PM

Originally posted by Lastday Prophet
Many beleive that the shadow government is run by satanist and thus is why we see the number 13 continually appearing in the dates and times, it is not a coincidence for it appears regularly, a fact which I have shown to be true.

Alas, triskaidekaphobia gets blamed for an awful lot of things, particularly by Christians. Thirteen at the Last Supper, and all that. Superstition thankfully doesn't mean there's actually any truth to alleged conspiracies. The numbers 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 also appear very often, and as Catherder pointed out, we could take any number, any date, and fudge around until we can get "13" out of it. No proof of anything at all.

I see no came up with a medical cure that the space program has provided.

That's probably because they're not a pharmaceutical or medical company....but besides that, it appears you might be mistaken:

"Kidney dialysis machines were developed as a result of a NASA developed chemical process that could remove toxic waste from used dialysis fluid."

"Water purification technology used on the Apollo spacecraft is now employed in several spinoff applications to kill bacteria, viruses and algae in community water supply systems and cooling towers. Filters mounted on faucets can reduce lead in water supplies"

Sure, the actual idea or patent might not have originated with NASA, in many cases, but the fact remains - without NASA's work in those inventions, they may have never seen the light of day; furthermore, the two examples given are obviously life-savers to many.

Linky linky

posted on Aug, 3 2005 @ 05:00 PM

Originally posted by syrinx high priest
I thought the thread could use a dose of humor.

I agree.

new topics

top topics

<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in