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.

 

Nasa killers?

page: 1
2

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 5 2006 @ 12:42 PM
link   
In an earlier thread I mentioned the deaths of the astronauts in Apollo 1, on researching, I realised NASA's involvement in the deaths of the three astronauts Grissom, White, and Chaffee. I think these astronauts may have known something else which would put their lives at risk. Afew 'interesting' facts regarding Apollo1:

- Nasa tested the oxygen and pressure levels of the spacecraft and determined that 2.9 and 6.7psi were ideal levels for usage, using 100% oxygen. During the test run however, 16.7 psi (according to Collins) or 20.2 psi (according to Borman) was used, a timebomb waiting to be blown.

- A new opening door was being tested on that day. It took 3 minutes to open, again slowing down the astronauts. Because the door was inward opening the pressure in the cabin stopped the astronauts getting out.

- Communication was bad. The quote from Grissom "How are we supposed to go to the moon if we can't communicate between buildings". Quite right. The communications were down and revived by the astronauts screaming for help, coincidental or were they dropped so the flight staff would not become aware of any suspicious activities the astronauts may have picked up on.

- Government agents, in rapid action, raided Gus Grissom's and White's homes before anyone knew about the fire. They removed Grissom's personal papers and his diary. They did not bring his diary or any other paper with the word "Apollo" on it back when they returned some of his papers to his home.

- In 1967 Thomas Ronald Baron was allegedly run over by a train, after he went to Washington (to testify before the Apollo 1 Congressional investigating committee). He kept records of Apollo. (Baron was an inspector.) The day after he testified, his car in Florida with his wife and stepdaughter was run over by a train. They took the body away really quickly, and contrary to Florida law, there was no autopsy. The bodies were instantly cremated.

- General Phillips, Frank Borman’s superior, did an investigation which was withheld from the public as “classified.” Why classified?

I am going to try and research this further so bear with me, if anyone has any ideas on the real reason9s0 or any other information it would be much appreciated. Many theories are they didn't believe in the apollo programmes and Nasa killed them to stall time as they weren't ready to match Russia, this may be the case yet a little extreme. Anything would be appreciated.



Links: www.mrcranky.com...
www.alienufo.org...




posted on Jul, 5 2006 @ 12:54 PM
link   
Have you seen the mini-serie "From The Earth To The Moon"...??



posted on Jul, 5 2006 @ 01:04 PM
link   
I can't say I have. I vaguely knew of the astronauts, researched it up and there seemed to be more than meets the eye, hence this post!



posted on Jul, 5 2006 @ 09:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by Figher Master FIN
Have you seen the mini-serie "From The Earth To The Moon"...??


I just picked up the four disc set from the library today, and intend on watching it over the next few days.
Is it any good ?
Is it factual ?


jra

posted on Jul, 6 2006 @ 01:36 AM
link   
Was the fire preventable? I defiantely was. Was it on purpose? Not at all. They had been using pure oxygen on the Gemini and Mercury capsules and I guess some of the people at NASA felt no need to change that. After the accident they switched to 60% oxygen and 40% nitrogen which would then slowly change to pure oxygen (at a lower pressure) once in orbit.

Gus Grissom was NASA's go-to-guy. He always made suggestions on what should or needed to be changed. The door on Apollo 204 (Apollo 1) was one of them. When he landed on the ocean in Liberty Bell 7 (a Mercury capsule), while waiting to be picked up. The explosive bolts on the hatch prematurely blew and water started to splash in and he had to get out. He almost drowned because of that. So he wanted a door that was harder to open.

If there was some kind of conspiracy and If Grissom knew about it. Then why would he bother to continue in the program and not speak out? Why would be get on Apollo 1? And if NASA was wanting to prevent him from spilling the beans on there space program. Why would NASA then blow up there very expensive rocket, and put a huge risk on the program, get some very bad PR and set themselves back a bit, all on purpose? It seems way too extreme and makes no logical sense. There are easier and cheaper ways to kill some one.

It was an accident, pure and simple. NASA also took the suggestions that Grissom had made before the Apollo 204 accident and applied those to the CSM block 2 as well as improving the hatch further.



posted on Jul, 6 2006 @ 01:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by Knights
In an earlier thread I mentioned the deaths of the astronauts in Apollo 1, on researching, I realised NASA's involvement in the deaths of the three astronauts Grissom, White, and Chaffee. I think these astronauts may have known something else which would put their lives at risk. Afew 'interesting' facts regarding Apollo1:




I can see where this would be a really good project to start up in the Research Forum of ATS. It is very interesting and has its very good points. The author left sources towards the information but yet it looked to be a legit piece of writing. Check your U2U.



posted on Jul, 7 2006 @ 09:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by jra
Was the fire preventable? I defiantely was. Was it on purpose? Not at all. They had been using pure oxygen on the Gemini and Mercury capsules and I guess some of the people at NASA felt no need to change that.


Quite true, the use of pure oxygen during a test did seem slightly odd to me initially. However, I do not think this point can be argued as it was a complete test of the launch and thus everything was tested except the lift-off itself.


If there was some kind of conspiracy and If Grissom knew about it. Then why would he bother to continue in the program and not speak out? Why would be get on Apollo 1? And if NASA was wanting to prevent him from spilling the beans on there space program. Why would NASA then blow up there very expensive rocket, and put a huge risk on the program, get some very bad PR and set themselves back a bit, all on purpose? It seems way too extreme and makes no logical sense. There are easier and cheaper ways to kill some one.


I am aware Grissom had received death threats before the launch, as claimed by his son, Scott Grissom:


"Even before Apollo I, Grissom had received death threats which his family believed emanated from within the space program.
The threats were serious enough that he was put under Secret Service protection and had been moved from his home to a secure safe house.
According to his wife, Grissom had warned her that "if there is ever a serious accident in the space program, it's likely to be me."

www.theforbiddenknowledge.com...

Perhaps all three astronauts posed a risk? Simply killing all three in 'accidents' would surely raise more eyebrows, than all three together in a still 'unknown' scenario? Surely applying logic to a situation gives reason for 'unmasking' the situation by others?

I also took time to look through several Nasa documents, one being an internal memorandum from an administrator, a Mr. James E. Webb to his deputy administrator, Dr. Robert C. Seamans Jr. The report is in regard to the damage concurred on Apollo 1. I feel there is significant information present to support my argument, as follows:


The Board noted that the underlying design approach in Apollo was to control the known risk of fire--on the pad or in orbit--by isolating and rendering safe all possible ignition sources. The experience in flight and in tests prior to the accident had suggested that the probability of a spacecraft fire was low. Continued alertness to the possibility of fire had become dulled by previous ground experience and six years of successful manned missions. Ground tests at the pad were classified as especially hazardous only when propellants or pyrotechnics were involved, and different procedures and safety precautions are taken in handling or working under such conditions. Potential ignition sources inside the spacecraft had been treated so as to be considered safe; neither the crews nor the test and development personnel felt the risk of spacecraft fire to be high.

www.hq.nasa.gov...

This article, states that a risk of fire was low, infact 'risk' is the wrong word, instead the craft was considered 'safe'. The only null feature to my argument is the fact that previous successes may have given Nasa a 'big head' and thus a fire may have been overlooked. I do not/ will not deny this. Yet on the whole Nasa appears to declare the craft as safe.


Tests of the combustible materials used in the spacecraft show that at least a 400 degree F temperature would be necessary for spontaneous combustion, and that no such materials could have been subjected to that temperature except by the malfuntions of some other part of the spacecraft systems. An electrical malfunction is therefore regarded as the most likely source of ignition. While not wholly ruled out, electro-static discharge is deemed unlikely in that all reasonable concentrations of flammable vapors that could have been present in the spacecraft were not sensitive to this type of sparking ignition.
By the time it has completed its final report, the Board expects to have significantly narrowed the list of ignition sources that had a relatively high possibility of contributing to the initiation of the fire, but the possibility exists that no single source will ever be pinpointed.

www.hq.nasa.gov...

I realise this point isn't exactly conclusive from my point of view, but still think it holds importance. The fact that ‘no single source’ could be perceived as meaning it could be several sources or not one single source could be identified. Scott Grissom was allowed entrance to the crash and reported:


Grissom said he recently was granted access to the charred capsule and discovered a "fabricated" metal plate located behind a control panel switch. The switch controlled the capsules' electrical power source from an outside source to the ship's batteries. Grissom argues that the placement of the metal plate was an act of sabotage. When the one of the astronauts toggled the switch to transfer power to the ship's batteries, a spark was created igniting a fireball.

Clark Mac Donald, a McDonnell-Douglas engineer hired by NASA to investigate the fire, offered corroborating evidence. Breaking more than three decades of silence, Mac Donald alleges that he determined an electrical short caused by the change over to battery power had caused the fire.

He says that NASA destroyed his report and interview tapes in an effort to stem public criticism of the space program.

"I have agonized for 31 years about revealing the truth but I didn't want to hurt NASA's image or cause trouble," Mac Donald told the paper. "But I can't let one more day go by without the truth being known."

www.theforbiddenknowledge.com...

I am yet to find another source backing this information up though.

Edit: I was going to include research on a Mr. Thomas Baron, who created a damning report on both nasa and the NAA regarding safety issues. Baron presented to NASA officials a 50 page report shopwing failures and mistakes made by the NAA. He wrote a 300 page long document after but this was never released as he was found dead 3 months (i think) after he first went public with his story.

[edit on 7-7-2006 by Knights]

[edit on 7-7-2006 by Knights]



posted on Nov, 13 2007 @ 02:58 AM
link   
Forgive me for reviving a dinosaur, but does anyone have any more information on this? Conspiracies surrounding Apollo 1?



posted on May, 31 2008 @ 02:32 PM
link   
reply to post by Knights
 


Hi. Thank you for posting this thread.

My name is Wil Tracer, and I am a filmmaker, researcher and webmaster of MOONMOVIE.COM and MOONHOAX.US.

I just produced and released a new DVD, with over 4.6 GB of data, photos, articles and video access on the Apollo 1 fire. I spent over a year researching the accident, and it still is mind boggling to me how anyone cannot see -- that these men were murdered.

If you wish to see Scott Grissom's findings, go to archive.org... and type into the wayback machine: apollo1.info. Then you will to find the links that work, some of which show pictures of Scott's findings, with explanations of the photos.

Soon all who purchase the DVD will have access to portions of Thomas Baron's report and the Phillips Report. One thing to note is that Baron and his family died a week after he testified, not a day after. I am working on obtaining the article which details his death, from the Atlanta Constitution.

I don't know of the details regarding the the bodies after death, but his testimony is on the DVD - in volume 1, page 483. The report has over 3,500 pages and is provided with the DVD: A1AR 2.0.

Also check out: youtube.com... to preview the film.

More information will be released on Thomas Baron as it becomes known. For updates, go to our website.

Take care.



new topics

top topics



 
2

log in

join