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.


Moon Landings, etc

page: 1

log in


posted on Sep, 25 2003 @ 03:35 AM
Just out of interest, what do you guys think about the moon landings?
Alot of pictures can be half proven to be doctered (I'm sure it's easily found on the internet), such as where the arrow hairs go BEHIND scenery, or where you see both astronauts in the picture but you see a THIRD on one of their visor's reflections, etc...
Alotta stuff to argue it didnt happen, and the US government (I believe) has blocked all attempts to survey the moon to find the parts which would have been left behind..

Also, another thing is the radiation, (E.g. northern lights)... Without 9 feet of lead shielding in every direction, the astronauts would have died in seconds/minutes once they passed a certain distance from the earth...



posted on Sep, 25 2003 @ 03:51 AM
You'll likely be yelled at for this sort of post as I'm sure its been covered multiple times.

It is my opinion that we indeed landed on the moon. Deadly radiation theories are unfounded. The photographic anomalies come from NASA fastidiously editing the images to remove any unwanted UFO or extraterrestrial artifact remnants on the surface of the moon. Oddities are bound to erupt and leak out from continual airbrushing of images. Thats my theory anyway.

Odd shadows on some images come from other light sources. That is a certainty. I however feel that the other light sources were lighted objects (most likely extraterrestrial in origin) on the moon.

[Edited on 25-9-2003 by heelstone]

posted on Sep, 25 2003 @ 05:10 AM
Hrm, that isnt a theory I've heard before...
I tried looking in past postings but unless the name of it was deceptive I didnt spot anything much.
I think we should get a high-res close in probe onto the 'other' side of the moon, and give it serious analysis....
how do you mean Deadly radiation theories are unfounded? Do you mean that radiation doesnt occur, or a different meaning?
Just want to know,

posted on Sep, 25 2003 @ 05:19 AM
From what I've read regarding the "Van Allen belt", there are areas of high, low, and no radiation. Manned trips to the moon avoid travelling near the high radiation areas. At least that is the story given by NASA.

I tend to believe that.

posted on Sep, 25 2003 @ 05:59 AM
Well, I'm of the opinion that the Apollo landing of 1969 did not occur, however we have been to the moon, at least once. The 1969 landing was most likely staged, in order to trick the Soviets into draining several billion into a space program, thus out of missiles. However, we have undoubtedly been there since.

posted on Sep, 25 2003 @ 10:09 AM
Yes I suppose that would be logical
but if the yanks landed on the moon before the russians wouldnt that give them more motive to be the first to do something else, say build an uber nuke?

posted on Sep, 25 2003 @ 11:21 AM
There is one way NASA could put this conspiracy to bed for sure. The equipment and flag that was left behind should be photographed by the high powered satellites and telescopes and shown to the world, couldn't argue with that then.

posted on Sep, 25 2003 @ 02:41 PM
but my main problem with it is that I THINK! that they have blocked past attempts by others to do this.
And obviously, just to satisfy the conspiracy theorists, it'd have to be done independantly by a large non-US corporation

posted on Sep, 25 2003 @ 03:30 PM
I think that NASA just doesent want to waste money on there already underfunded space program on proving things that they have done

posted on Sep, 25 2003 @ 03:39 PM
I agree with you Loki (WOW!!)
The moon already had "bases" on it during the Apollo landing...
We haven't been back yet (publicly). I'm sure we have mission flying to and from the moon out or Edwards, Langley, or Andrews at least once every year or so.

Fltizpatrick, what do you think the Apollo missions were?
Massive waste of money, just like the Space shuttle missions.
They scrappd the X-74 after putting a billion dollars into it.
1,000,000,000 dollars!!!
That's more than the entire Chinese space program! (Yes they have one)

- Tass


posted on Sep, 25 2003 @ 05:27 PM
in reply to the original post:

I believe the landings are real. I don't think anything about them was faked at all.

I haven't see one photo that appears to have been doctered. You use the disappearing crosshairs as an example. The reason they disappear is because of exposure and because of the colour "bleeding" over the crosshairs. the crosshairs were etched onto a plate and they are only about 0.004 inch thick (0.1 mm). it doesn't take much at all for the light bleed over the crosshairs when exposed onto the film.

i have never seen a picture with a 3rd astronaut in a reflection. if you could find an example that would be nice.

could you also find some info where it says the US gov't or NASA has blocked all attempts to survey the moon? cause right now the ESA is sending a probe to the moon. it sure doesn't seem like that supposed block is working to well. that and china plans to go there within this decade i believe.

your argument about the radiation is very flawed. i am also assuming you mean the van allen belts and not the northern lights. firstly there are many kinds of radiation. the kind of radiation where you would want thick lead and or concrete around you would be the gamma and x-ray radiation which comes from nuclear blasts. and when people talk about radiation that is the first thing that comes to mind, but like i said before. there are many differnt kinds of radiation. the type that is in the van alen belts is proton radiation. this stuff isn't as harmful as gamma or x-ray radiation. protons can be blocked by a piece of wood or plastic.

here's a quote from Dr. Van Allen himself: "The recent Fox TV show, which I saw, is an ingenious and entertaining assemblage of nonsense. The claim that radiation exposure during the Apollo missions would have been fatal to the astronauts is only one example of such nonsense." -- Dr. James Van Allen

i really suggest you go to this site and read. all the information is layed out quite well and explained really good and it pretty much covers everything:

posted on Sep, 25 2003 @ 05:32 PM
I seriously wouldn't be very suprised if the EU's space probe just happened to get hit by an "asteroid"...
Bush has made it clear the United States is to own space.

Watch the news, this could get interesting
*that's an idea, not a prophecy; I'm no prophet*
- Tass

*edit, inserted link*

[Edited on 25-9-2003 by Tassadar]

posted on Sep, 26 2003 @ 12:29 PM
This is really annoying
I posted a lot of websites, but the website was down temporarily so the post failed to go through
and bang in 'Moon Landing Hoax Photos'

Apparently pictures of 3 astronaut photos are 'rareish', but I found a couple sites which gave them...


posted on Sep, 26 2003 @ 01:32 PM
check out this link:

Read the Moon Hoax articles on the left. The most cogent rebuttal to the hoax theories I have seen.

posted on Sep, 26 2003 @ 02:00 PM
that's one of the websites I found =)

posted on Sep, 26 2003 @ 02:10 PM
we went to the moon plane and simple. why would we waste billions and billions and have to worry about a soviet spy uncovering the landing as a haox. why cant some people grasp the fact that people can do anything if they have the technology and the will to do stuff?


posted on Sep, 26 2003 @ 03:00 PM
that link is pretty bad. so much of that stuff is so easily explained. i really suggest you take a look at that site i posted before and read this one as well.

posted on Sep, 26 2003 @ 03:15 PM
I'm with jra on this one....

I too saw that tv special a while back, and it set me on doing a lot of research...

In the end, for me, I concluded pretty much what is mentioned in jra's post...

We did actually go there...

posted on Sep, 27 2003 @ 04:11 PM
The only real radiation issue is cosmic radiation. Heavy iron nuclei travelling at almost lightspeed sleeting through your craft High-altitude orbits and interplanetary shots are exposed to these - the damage they can do is quite horrendous, if you look at SEM pics of visor surfaces, etc. Close your eyes and you'll see flashes of white light as they impact your retina...

A 3-year round trip to Mars without shielding is close to the lifetime radiation limit for an astronaut. Our heroes would be looking at a hugely increased risk of cancer when they get back. Possibly, some may not even survive the trip. This is a real problem for a Mars mission but not a Moon shot. I do not believe the Apollo Missions were faked. There's simply too much evidence for it and not much to say otherwise.

As for Moon bases, etc, I think there may be much hidden there.

posted on Sep, 27 2003 @ 09:56 PM
The Soviets made controlled moon landings and returns and used moon cars too - though unmanned. So why shouldn't the U. S. manage it?

new topics

top topics


log in