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.
Really? You do not know? Funny because when I first joined ATS you were the first person to tell me exactly why they thought they had received a moon rock. Funny, I thought you had all the answers.
Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by K J Gunderson
Really? You do not know? Funny because when I first joined ATS you were the first person to tell me exactly why they thought they had received a moon rock. Funny, I thought you had all the answers.
Really? I did?
Can you refresh my memory? I don't recall ever doing that.
No, I don't have all the answers. That doesn't mean I don't have any.
[edit on 4/11/2010 by Phage]
If you ask my opinion [few ever do] I first say RADIATION. Radiation is the problem. Such a huge problem that the manned landings are just simply entirely out of the question. The GEMINI astronauts and the MIR and SKYLAB and now the ISS astronauts are in low earth orbit [LEO] and thus relatively shielded. Even thus they suffer burns. Think how much worse it would be further out ? On the moon ? They would in fact be cooked.
Radiation doses measured during Apollo were significantly lower than the yearly average of 5 remset by the U.S. Atomic Energy Commission for workers who use radioactive materials in factories and institutions across the United States. Thus, radiation was not an operational problem during the Apollo Program. Doses received by the crewmen of Apollo missions 7 through 17 were small because no major solar-particle events occurred during those missions. One small event was detected by a radiation sensor outside the Apollo 12 spacecraft, but no increase in radiation dose to the crewmen inside the spacecraft was detected.
lsda.jsc.nasa.gov...
ig·no·rance
–noun
the state or fact of being ignorant; lack of knowledge, learning, information, etc.
Originally posted by CAELENIUM
If you ask my opinion [few ever do] I first say RADIATION. Radiation is the problem. Such a huge problem that the manned landings are just simply entirely out of the question.
If we examine the mathematics and the engineering of the Apollo missions, thus I do believe that the fabric of lies will be made so clearly manifest that we will simply have to laugh at the nievity with which everyone were believing that the USA put men on the moon.
If the ISS were to be in a permanent higher orbit, then it would be possible to save a VERY CONSIDERABLE amount of TAX PAYERS MONEY, by not having to continually refuel the ISS. The point we are making is that, to put the ISS into that permanent higher orbit is not possible, because the astronauts would end up being cooked by the lethal RADIATIONS out there.
Originally posted by K J Gunderson
Everyone knows that US diplomats and politicos used to hand out petrified wood in celebration of the moon landing. That is just common knowledge right? Doesn't every country have an official US MOON LANDING COMMEMORATIVE HUNK OF WOOD?
Originally posted by ReelView
There is so much information showing problems and inconsistencies with the Apollo program it's not funny. There must be literally hundreds of anomalies.
Originally posted by Gustavo Souza Rabello
Of course Moon Landing has never been a hoax !
How can people wave this "flag" at 2010 ?
In this video, original footage of the Apollo 16 lunar mission has been intermixed with digital editing effects to present a third person in the far right portion of the frame. Anyone familiar with the Apollo missions knows that there were never more than two people on the lunar surface at any given time, and certainly never without the protective spacesuit. As one can imagine, imagery showing a person on the moon's surface who did not belong there, would likely cause some controversy and evoke interesting responses from hoax proponents and opponents alike. And it did.
Originally posted by Badge01
Originally posted by JohnnyCanuck
Ok, mea culpa. The iconoclast crack was a little on the glib side. Frankly, I don't over-analyze the science. I've done a little ranting on this site about the nature of belief versus knowledge. Having lived through the glory days of the space programme...having seen Echo 1 as it made its solitary American way through the skies...I don't take this stuff on faith. I know it happened, cuz the good guys told me so.
And when the landing occurred, it didn't matter what your nationality, the little plaque on the lander said "We came in peace for all mankind." For a little while we all believed that.
I find it harder to 'believe' in ufos and other fringe matters because they're outside of my realm of experience...see the difference? So, if I'm proven wrong and the whole thing was a fake...well, that'll be a sad day for America and the rest of the world.
JC,
Very fair comment. Thanks.
What I'm trying to get across is that there are a lot more 'anomalies' than just the alignment of shadows, photography strangeness, thoughts about whether the flag waved on its own, and lack of stars in the background.
When you look at the whole thing you slowly begin to realize that every freakin' thing about the Moon Landing and at least the first Apollo landing is full of 'problems'.
Answer me this. How can you plan on going to the Moon if you can't even orbit a space station in Near Earth Orbit.
What Kennedy SHOULD have said is that 'by the end of the decade we will have an orbiting space station'.
That would have solved several things:
1. a REAL icon that the US could identify with for purposes of PR and nationalism
2. Military High ground
3. An orbiting space telescope
4. A launch pad and test bed for an -actual- flight to the moon.
In 1959 a top NASA scientist analyzed the probability of us being able to go to the Moon and return safely. His estimate? It was not the 30% chance of success that Aldrin says (in video). It was .0014 chance. That's 14 chances in 10,000 (or 1 chance in 1,000). The mission parameters up to that time that NASA allowed was no less than 80% (or no more than 20% chance of catastrophic failure). I saw this very low percentage figure also when it was given in a documentary broadcast in the 1980s from the 1970s on a PBS type channel. So that's two sources (though I can't produce the video, it's been ~20 years since I saw it)
Note that in the attempts to climb Mt Everest, they usually have about seven base camps. Yet they are asking us to believe we went to the Moon with no support base (like an orbiting space station)?
Ludicrous.
Go watch Was It Only a Paper Moon?
video.google.com...
...on google video and then come back and give us your opinion.
Though you still might want to believe NASA, I bet you have some doubts after that. It is not a recap of the FOX video, though there are some photo anomalies, theres much more. (~90min)
Originally posted by Wizard_In_The_Woods
Dear coastlinekid:
I like your pictures. I really do. There is only one small problem. What type of film did our space cowboys use to make those charming snapshots. Fuji or Kodak?
I guess it doesn’t matter. Because solar radiation would have rendered any conventional film outside the Van Allen Belts useless anyways. Chemical film material is way more light/radiation sensitive than we are. We can handle a few ‘rays’, film cannot. So the only pictures we do get from outer-outer space are digital ones. I. e. I’m not talking about footage from the Astronauts closely orbiting the Earth. Which means those (rare) blob-like tini Earth in the background photos are probably phony too.
Greetings,
The Wizard In The Woods
[edit on 4/8/2007 by Wizard_In_The_Woods]
Originally posted by Atlantix
Don't you guys think it's a little odd that Kennedy just decided that we'd go on the moon and 8 years later it happened? I don't think it is humanly possible that we could have developped that technology so quickly. I think the government has plenty of technology to go on the moon whenever they want, they staged the moon landing for a purpose.
Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by Revel
As of this day I have not heard of any other nation making it to the moon, although the Chinese were supposed to make a fly by a few years back taking images of the surface which would have shown if the US did land or not. I have seen no images from this voyage if it even happened.
Well, you have your opinions...unfortunately, you seem to have not done enough research yet.
China already orbited the Moon, so did the Japanese. Was in all the papers!!
AND, no, neither satellite had the resolution necessary to image things as small as the LM descent stage...which is the biggest piece.
Stay tuned for the LRO images. They will image down to just under one meter, if all goes well.
Really....I see you're new here, so you haven't had time to look into all the corners. You'll see how mistaken you are, soon enough.
Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by CAELENIUM
I tried to find such a link. I could not. That is why I asked you for it.
What does the need to boost the ISS periodically have to do with radiation? You said yourself that it is to prevent the station from falling into the atmosphere.
Originally posted by ReelView
There is so much information showing problems and inconsistencies with the Apollo program it's not funny. There must be literally hundreds of anomalies. Some astronauts are well known to go into a programmed shutdown response when questioned. Clearly brainwashing has been applied to them. This doesn't mean we have not been to the moon. But not via the technology and as presented to the public. The faces of the astronauts pretty much says it all.
Originally posted by dragnet53
LOL This is great! I never really thought of that as well!! Yeah if radiation was bad they would of been detected via the cameras.
Back in the 50's cameras were garbage.
LOL only NASA seems to be the one where satellites are allowed to take the close up "photo" of the landing sites. Yet, the japanese spent at no cost on their Kaguya satellite. It even took diagnostics of the moons gravity. I can say they had the technology even to take the pictures on the ground.
I found it. dude, you a slacking as of late.
www.nasa.gov...