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.

 

Why has NASA never gone back to the moon?

page: 19
32
<< 16  17  18    20 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 24 2011 @ 01:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by lestweforget

Nice post there Delphi, some good points very similar to my own previously.


Great minds think alike I guess, but with 328 previous pages of debate I am bound to regurgitate someones opinions or thoughts...


Originally posted by backinblack
Showing tech on the moon does not mean man has been there..
You are right, showing tech doesn't prove anything. However zooming in on footprints, and the handprints from where they kept falling over in those shady movies, most definately would, in my opinion. And when I state this, I am talking about a live feed that can be verified and viewed by multiple sources worldwide and is then scrutinized publicly by scientist and officials not employed in any way by our Gov't or Nasa.


I'm not 100% sure we went there but I also haven't yet seen the "smoking gun" that proves we haven't..

Really, the fact that no human has completely crossed the VanAllen belts since the supposed landing is my "smoking gun".

For instance, NASA supposedly developed ways to block deep space radiation in the 60's yet here we are having problems setting safe daily radiation amount regulations for hospital XRAY-techs in 2011.

Where is all that miraculous technolgy they developed? How come it hasn't evolved like all other technology has over the last 40 years or so? Why aren't the XRAY techs wearing similar suits so this isn't a problem?

Seriously 40 years ago we could supposedly transverse the VanAllen belts in suits designed to protect the astronauts from this radiation yet our astronauts these days can't even do a spacewalk when the shuttles or space station gets close to the belts because of this radiation.

Logically this makes no sense...




posted on Jan, 24 2011 @ 04:54 AM
link   
Its not utter Crap... NASA is federal office so public support on some thing so open is key to their funding especially for that era. still today it still effects NASA I remember their getting cut backs again due to public backlash due to them losing one of their rovers on mars and with a couple of failed missions.

Its not that far fetched for the Public face of the space program to be effected by public support. NASA is not the D.O.D or the white house. Their not congress they can't just do what ever the hell they want and get away with it.
not only was NASA at the time dealing with the Set back of Apollo 1.

Hint congress was still using it against NASA all the way up till its cancellation in favor of the Space shuttle. The president had also turned against NASA the lack of public support was just the last straw which gave the president and congress the reason they needed to shut down the program. this is history after all hell if NASA had it its way we to this day would have a moon base as well as the ISS ten years sooner.

People forget that NASA just like Army R&D think 10.20.30 years ahead of its time. money was needed and the public wasn't willing to waste their tax money on it any more.

Want a new comparison? look at what President obama did to NASA with the Cancellation of the constellation program. Main Reason given lack of money to fund and a lack of public support. Most people can care less about going to the moon or mars to this day.

To the people who don't think we went to the moon.. Look on the bright side your going to find out one way or the other by 2015-2020 because Russia is planing on going back to the moon.. they will be the 2nd country to ever go to the moon.

The united states with their Crappy president with his screwed Values as well as our current congress just goes to show you. That the people that have taken over to lead us care more about were their paycheck comes from than what is really right for our people.

Last ten years the U.S has taken a back seat on almost every thing. We no longer lead the world in any thing besides Debt. This is also the public's fault because of our lack of education. I know its my fault as well as my parents because every time some one wanted to raise taxes to pay for our education their was a public outcry.

Now as a result our kids are morons compared to the rest of the world. We are even trailing 3rd world country's now. This is the American Legacy a Stupid populous that lets corporations steal money from them and than as repayment for all that money they out source all the jobs to china.



posted on Jan, 24 2011 @ 06:11 AM
link   
reply to post by Reaper2137
 


Thanks for the laugh reaper with all the floods and its effects here believe me when i say i needed one!
Just a little tip for ya, stop reading and listening to the MSM.



posted on Jan, 24 2011 @ 11:54 AM
link   
reply to post by lestweforget
 


I don't its called a history book.. I don't have cable.. its not hard to read for me you know. every thing has a cause and effect all I've got to say is when the Russians go to the moon a lot of people are going to have to eat their words. peace brother.



posted on Jan, 24 2011 @ 12:13 PM
link   
reply to post by OatDelphi
 


Really....try getting an education.....


1.) We have satellites that can image what type of cigarettes a person is holding or the numbers on a lottery ticket....


Got proof, and a source for that? Didn't think so.....



... yet not one of the space imaging devices is able to see with obvious clarity, any of the junk they supposedly left there.


"supposedly"?? Get an education. Try to learn some science....THAT way you may begin to understand one tenth of one percent of the complexity.

And, the multi-billion dollar type of Intel satellites used by agencies such as the NSA and NRO.....they aren't going to spend that much (and more) to satisfy some fringe believers' nonsense claims....when 99.999% of the rest of Humanity know the reality of Apollo.



Nasa and the Gov't have the technology to end this debate once and for all.


See above.



The fact that they don't take one of these satellites or ground based telescopes and do a live show zooming in and out, and clearly showing everything from the stars on the flag to the rover tracks on the surface, just goes to justify skeptics beliefs.


"just to satisfy skeptics"???
See above......



2.) If they really had 800+ lbs of real moon dust/soil/rock samples why did it takes forty years to come up with the notion that there is water in the craters.


Why not do the research....SOME water was found as early on. Other more technical inventions to detect water in the existing samples have only recently BEEN INVENTED!!



3. Again, here we are slamming primitive rockets into the Moon, yet we supposedly have incredible Robots roaming the surface of Mars.


Compare the costs....and Mars is FAR more interesting, and is farther...so more effort exerted. Robots COULD be sent to the Moon, too....likely will, once a good mission idea is formed. Such as more precursors to return Human visits. In preparation for (someday, hopefully) a permanent base of some sort. Ya know, though....a "base" is going to be controversial....because of other countries that might complain about "imperialism"....and "ownership" concerns....



Just saying, logically it makes no sense...


Just saying...."logically" you need to get out and learn some more....your "guessing" and "speculation" is worthless, as you're just stabbing in the dark........


edit on 24 January 2011 by weedwhacker because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 24 2011 @ 02:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by weedwhacker
Really....try getting an education.....
Already got one dude, and $84,000 of FA loans to prove it.


Got proof, and a source for that? Didn't think so.....

Yes actually I do have proof that we have technology capable of identifying man made relics on the moon ... The fact that I can clearly point out my ford ranger, my sidewalk, my mailbox etc., in google maps satellite view, pretty much proves my point.


"supposedly"?? Get an education. Try to learn some science....THAT way you may begin to understand one tenth of one percent of the complexity...
And, the multi-billion dollar type of Intel satellites used by agencies such as the NSA and NRO.....they aren't going to spend that much (and more) to satisfy some fringe believers' nonsense claims....

So wait, now your making my point for me. You just got done asking for proof, yet then you yourself acknowledge that we do have the technology to prove it once and for all. So which is it? The Gov't isn't gonna watse time on skeptics, or is it that we don't have the technology at the present time?

You must have to buy a lot of new shoes, because much like in Nascar racing(which I'm sure you are a fan of), running around in circles tends to destroy the rubber tread much faster....


99.999% of the rest of Humanity know the reality of Apollo.

Speaking about untrue speculation and needing to get an education... Have you ever even left the US before. This is the most ridiculous statement I've probably have ever heard. In fact most civilizations around the rest of the present day world, keep watching our space shuttles blowing up in mid-flight, only to be left scratching their heads going,... "and they claim they did what"!


.

Just saying...."logically" you need to get out and learn some more....your "guessing" and "speculation" is worthless, as you're just stabbing in the dark........

You know what, I do need to learn some more, maybe I should plan a trip down to the Kennedy Space Center. Who knows maybe on the way I could stop into another temple of fabrication, like the Creationist Museum.



posted on Jan, 24 2011 @ 02:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by Reaper2137
You want to know why we didn't go back to the moon? Well that is the easy answer The American people is why we never went back.

The government cut NASA's budget because of a lack of public support. As one news reporter said going to the moon is about as exciting as going to the corner store. So with the lack of public watchers the fed government cut their funding.

was a sad day but NASA couldn't fund the space shuttle and apollo at the same time.


If nasa does not work for the people it might as well not work at all!

Why should the tax-payers be burdened with billions of dollars in space shuttle maintainance and high-orbit missions when the shuttle was capable of going to the moon and beyond regularly? If the PTB want to go to the moon, AND THEY PROBABLY DO, all they have to do is load a tr-3b triangle(such as my avatar) from antartica and in less than one hour they are there.......

The public is more ignorant than a pack of chimpanzees in angola but its not their fault directly.


Originally posted by Reaper2137
Its not utter Crap... NASA is federal office so public support on some thing so open is key to their funding especially for that era. still today it still effects NASA I remember their getting cut backs again due to public backlash due to them losing one of their rovers on mars and with a couple of failed missions


Public support means absolutely nothing when it comes to things that are important FOR THEM, not you or me "einstein"! Someone mentioned the tax-payer bailouts wall street forced down our throats and that is 100% true.....


Originally posted by Reaper2137
Its not that far fetched for the Public face of the space program to be effected by public support. NASA is not the D.O.D or the white house. Their not congress they can't just do what ever the hell they want and get away with it.
not only was NASA at the time dealing with the Set back of Apollo 1.


Nasa belongs to the DOD because it says so in its chapter, which means anythng they damm wish could be CLASSIFIED and people would never know about it, which also proves they could have found another earth on the moon AND NOT TALKED ABOUT IT!

Off the record some astronauts have come clean but its UNOFFICIAL...as in NOT official!


Originally posted by Reaper2137
Hint congress was still using it against NASA all the way up till its cancellation in favor of the Space shuttle. The president had also turned against NASA the lack of public support was just the last straw which gave the president and congress the reason they needed to shut down the program. this is history after all hell if NASA had it its way we to this day would have a moon base as well as the ISS ten years sooner.


The aliens dont want unauthorised people on the moon, mars, venus or any other planet in our solar system. That does not mean illuminati masons don't go there, it means EVERYONE ELSE does not go there. You have to be initiated!!!!




Originally posted by Reaper2137
People forget that NASA just like Army R&D think 10.20.30 years ahead of its time. money was needed and the public wasn't willing to waste their tax money on it any more.


Thats a huge understatement! According to people who work at groom lake...its AT LEAST 50 years more advanced....and according to others maybe even thousands of years more advanced if you consider "we"(the initiated) have grey and reptillian help.
edit on 24-1-2011 by EarthCitizen07 because: add picture



posted on Jan, 24 2011 @ 03:29 PM
link   
reply to post by OatDelphi
 


Oh, my....."$84,000"....? And, you write this??:


Yes actually I do have proof that we have technology capable of identifying man made relics on the moon ... The fact that I can clearly point out my ford ranger, my sidewalk, my mailbox etc., in google maps satellite view, pretty much proves my point.


You are correct....because the Apollo remnants HAVE BEEN IMAGED, and it is undeniable. But, that's not why I highlighted the two sentences.....

....to repeat, for emphasis:


....in google maps satellite view, pretty much proves my point.


You think that when you "zoom in" on Google maps, that it is ALL a satellite image???

Well...sorry to burst your bubble:


Although Google uses the word satellite, most of the high-resolution imagery is aerial photography taken from aircraft flying at 800–1500 feet rather than from satellites...


en.wikipedia.org...


More...again, it's just Wiki, because that's easy to find....you can certainly look deeper, but the info is sourced, and I will let you do that on your own.

The MOST resolution commercially, right now, by satellite only??:


The latest commercial satellite (GeoEye 1) has a GSD of 0.41 m (effectively 0.5 m due to US Govt restrictions on civilian imaging). GSD for intelligence and military purposes, such as the National Reconnaissance Office programs, may have a resolution of less than a centimeter with the potential for real-time (live) imaging...


en.wikipedia.org...

So.....the NRO/NSA/CIA are not going to admit their full capabilities....and CERTAINLY not going to send multi-billion dollar missions to the Moon, just for twenty-three "skeptics" on this planet......


Get it? Airplanes (or "aircraft"...could be helicopters, could by blimps...) do the imaging that lets you see our "Ford Ranger" and "mailbox"! How did you think they get the "Street View", anyhow?? Satellites??

NO, this is an example of how THAT is done (Cop not included, normally):



(Bad day for that Google employee......)


Oh, and the Apollo equipment? LCROSS and the LRO have imaged all six landing sites (as well as some of the Russian sites).

Here, a guy at ASU... [Actually, not sure IF he's associated with the University....but, the images certainly are credited there, as they manage them] ... put together just the Apollo 11 site (so far) using the LRO images. Follow the YouTube link on the video, and see what technology he used to enhance... It's called "de-convolving"....or, Deconvolution.



From same guy, one month before (prompting him to make the one above):



And, a brief look at Apollo 14:






edit on 24 January 2011 by weedwhacker because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 24 2011 @ 03:51 PM
link   
reply to post by OatDelphi
 


alot of the higher res images on google earth are from planes not satellites. reading lottery numbers is fantasy.

recent nasa moon probe LROC got pictures of the apollo equipment and tracks left by astronauts. www.youtube.com...

your right though that isnt the absolute best humans or nasa are capable of. The camera on the mars orbiter is more powerfull than the LROC one. Theres a simple reason for this.

LROCs scientific goals did not include imaging the apollo equipment to the highest resolution possible to satisfy crackpot moon hoax conspiracy theorists. Science goals and cost are the driving force for nasa missions. Higher res means bigger camera = more weight = more cost. Also theres 6 or 7 instruments in total on the orbitor, bigger camera means you lose an instrument. Cost , weight , science goals.

The science goal in terms of imaging was to be able to identify hazards like rocks that are more than 2 feet wide for potential landing sites, the LROC camera achieves this.. The purpose of the camera on the mars orbitor was to do "imaging science" so they wanted the highest res they could afford. This is not necessary for LROCs goals.
edit on 24-1-2011 by yeti101 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 24 2011 @ 06:32 PM
link   
reply to post by weedwhacker
 



You are correct....because the Apollo remnants HAVE BEEN IMAGED, and it is undeniable. But, that's not why I highlighted the two sentences.....


Well I tell you what weed..
Apart from the fact the pics you post are known to be heavily enhanced, you and I both know if them same pics were used in the A&O forum to prove artifacts on the moon, you and many others would scream hoax..

Lets atleast maintain the same standards of PROOF and not go off calling them "undeniable" huh.??



posted on Jan, 24 2011 @ 10:19 PM
link   
reply to post by weedwhacker
 


Taking people words out of context does not serve your argument.

I am very aware of Google's various techniques and never did I claim that the "satellite view" was solely from satellites. The fact that you have to resort to this style of tactics, only shows that you can't argue your point any further, because you have ran out of infomation to plagiarize from someone else's writings and findings.

P.S. posting video's that have admittedly been doctored does not serve your argument either.



posted on Jan, 25 2011 @ 07:59 AM
link   
reply to post by OatDelphi
 


so whats the point in nasa giving you even higher res photos of the apollo sites? you would just say they have been photoshopped.

did you understand my answer above on the reasons why they use certain specification hardware ie for the science goals they want to acheive?



posted on Jan, 25 2011 @ 09:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by OatDelphi
reply to post by weedwhacker
 


Taking people words out of context does not serve your argument.


EXCUSE me???


I am very aware of Google's various techniques and never did I claim that the "satellite view" was solely from satellites.


Wait.....let's have another look at your EXACT quote, then...shall we?
Repeated from above post:


Yes actually I do have proof that we have technology capable of identifying man made relics on the moon ... The fact that I can clearly point out my ford ranger, my sidewalk, my mailbox etc., in google maps satellite view, pretty much proves my point.


DO you see it yet? You equated the "ability" here on Earth to resolve very small objects with the same "ability" on the Moon....yet, you say, now, that I altered its meaning???

You claim, now, that you were "very aware of....various techniques" which, on Earth, include aircraft @ about 500-1500 feet above the surface.

Tell us...how many aircraft are flying About 500-1500 feet above the Moon's surface right now, in order to "map" it?




The fact that you have to resort to this style of tactics...


What tactics?? I would say this is a case of "Pot/Kettle", here.....



P.S. posting video's that have admittedly been doctored does not serve your argument either.


"altered"????

Then, YOUR "argument" is weak, since you intentionally misrepresent the reality of those videos.



posted on Jan, 25 2011 @ 07:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by OatDelphi
"Why has NASA never gone back to the moon?"

It is quite simple really... you can't go back to a destination that you have never visited previously.

Thus, you can assume with this statement, that I do not think that anyone ever has ever been to the surface of the moon.

And here are some reasons as to why...


Let me get this straight....


USA was hoaxing moon landings for three years and they came up with hundreds of pictures(if not more) and you base this because "humans have not gone past the van-halen belt, because doctors are not using special radioactive suits and because of google earth close-ups?

Seriously wtf man? Do you think the russians faked their moon trips as well? And ignorant posters give you stars?

This world is crazy I tell you....



posted on Jan, 25 2011 @ 09:56 PM
link   
reply to post by EarthCitizen07
 



Seriously wtf man? Do you think the russians faked their moon trips as well? And ignorant posters give you stars?
This world is crazy I tell you....


Russia have never landed a manned mission on the moon..
Odd though that sounds...Wonder why.??



posted on Jan, 26 2011 @ 12:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by backinblack
reply to post by EarthCitizen07
 



Seriously wtf man? Do you think the russians faked their moon trips as well? And ignorant posters give you stars?
This world is crazy I tell you....


Russia have never landed a manned mission on the moon..
Odd though that sounds...Wonder why.??


Wonder no more!

Why did the Soviet Union lose the Moon Race?

and

The Real Moon Landing Hoax

Also from Encyclopedia Astronautica, don't miss:

Soyuz 7K-LOK: The Soviet Manned Lunar Orbiter

LK: The Soviet Manned Lunar Lander

and

N1: The rocket that was to launch them to the Moon.

More information (and a lot of photographs) is available at Soviet Manned Lunar Program.

edit on 26-1-2011 by Saint Exupery because: I added additional links.



posted on Jan, 26 2011 @ 02:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by yeti101
so whats the point in nasa giving you even higher res photos of the apollo sites? you would just say they have been photoshopped.
There is a huge difference with announcing to the public and then showing us live actual video of the moons surface etc...than there is flying a mission which has a primary purpose and oh by they way just happened to pull off some crappy photos.

But your right guys, NASA won't waste the money to take the technology you all admit we have, and once and for all solve the debate for us crackpot skeptics. Nope they leave that up to ASU students...


did you understand my answer above on the reasons why they use certain specification hardware ie for the science goals they want to acheive?
Yup... but


The Shepherding Spacecraft and Centaur rocket were launched together with another spacecraft called the Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter (LRO). All three were connected to each other for launch, but then the LRO separates one hour after launch. The Shepherding Spacecraft guided the Centaur rocket through multiple Earth orbits, each taking about 38 days.(lcross.arc.nasa.gov...)
So it seems like the LRO had a lot of time on it's hands to specifically fly by the supposed Apollo sites and photo them, and to not much surprise at all, the images suck even though the onboard equiptment was top notch. Enter ASU boy and his advancements in enhancing.


Originally posted by weedwhacker

Wait.....let's have another look at your EXACT quote, then...shall we?...



Originally posted by OatDelphi
"Yes actually I do have proof that we have technology capable of identifying man made relics on the moon ... The fact that I can clearly point out my ford ranger, my sidewalk, my mailbox etc., in google maps satellite view, pretty much proves my point".




Originally posted by weedwhacker
DO you see it yet? You equated the "ability" here on Earth to resolve very small objects with the same "ability" on the Moon....

No I don't see it yet. What I see is someone pointing out the fact that privately owned companies have the ability take remarkably detailed photos from above, thus NASA/Gov't can take even better ones. Again I am quite aware that "satilitte view" is a application in Google's software that enables you to view Google's own enhanced imagery from various techniques.



Tell us...how many aircraft are flying About 500-1500 feet above the Moon's surface right now, in order to "map" it?
Which moon? The one with flags waving in the air, multiple light sources and earthly gravity, or the one where there is no air for wings to get loft? Being an aviation guru, surely you are asking about the first description, in that case I'm sure there are plenty or aircraft cruising over the Arizona/NewMexico deserts that will suffice.


Originally posted by EarthCitizen07
Let me get this straight....


and you base this because "humans have not gone past the van-halen belt, because doctors are not using special radioactive suits and because of google earth close-ups?

Seriously wtf man?

Hmm, maybe perhaps a little reading material.

(www.ocii.com...)
"How were the Apollo astronauts able to withstand 375 rems per day when the IAEA occupational exposure dose limit is only 5 rems in any single year?"(www-pub.iaea.org...)


or how about this little doozy...(www.space.com...)

Really think about it for a moment...

If NASA was truly able to shield it's astronauts 40 years ago from all kinds of deadly radiation, where is all that technology? How come it hasn't been evolved into everyday uses like freeze drying, shock absorbtion, or alloys have? This is the Age of Nuclear Medicine yet the only thing that Xray-Techs have to protect themselves with, from multiple daily exposures to harmful radiation, is lead shielding and an exposure badge. Gimme a break. NASA's science hasn't regressed some forty years or so. They couldn't do it then, they can't do it now.



posted on Jan, 26 2011 @ 03:50 AM
link   
reply to post by OatDelphi
 



There is a huge difference with announcing to the public and then showing us live actual video of the moons surface etc...than there is flying a mission which has a primary purpose and oh by they way just happened to pull off some crappy photos.

But your right guys, NASA won't waste the money to take the technology you all admit we have, and once and for all solve the debate for us crackpot skeptics. Nope they leave that up to ASU students...


i dont understand your first paragraph, what are you talking about? The video from the apollo missions on the moon? Whats it got to do with their recent LRO orbiter?

As for your second paragraph, your dead right. They wont waste money to satisfy crackpots , it would be like buidling a mission costing hundreds of millions to confirm the sun exists. Waste of money


So it seems like the LRO had a lot of time on it's hands to specifically fly by the supposed Apollo sites and photo them, and to not much surprise at all, the images suck even though the onboard equiptment was top notch. Enter ASU boy and his advancements in enhancing.


wtf are you talking about, you obviously didnt understand. The camera was designed for a purpose , it acheives that purpose therefor the pictures dont suck. You sir are a complete moron
edit on 26-1-2011 by yeti101 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 26 2011 @ 09:36 AM
link   
reply to post by OatDelphi
 


I was going to reply to your post with a point-by-point rebuttal, but your earlier comment about "Space Shuttles exploding" made me realize the fundamental nature of your argument:

You don't really care about answers, or facts, or learning about space travel, or engineering, or history, or understanding how things were done and why.

You have an axe to grind.

You WANT to believe Apollo was hoaxed.

Why is that?

I would really like to know.



posted on Jan, 26 2011 @ 10:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by yeti101
reply to post by OatDelphi
 

i dont understand your first paragraph, what are you talking about?
Obviously you haven't been reading anything I have been saying. No I don't accept photos, because as anyoneknows they can be doctored. I need an actaul live, major announced mission, one whos goal is to get difinitive proof.

The video from the apollo missions on the moon?
No that is not what I am talking about, I want a new one in the time of DVRS, VCRS and various other recording forms. Mainly because there is not one piece of untainted evidence left after 40+ years.

Whats it got to do with their recent LRO orbiter?
Well according to WeedWhacker the LRO has undeniably imaged the Apollo sites(see ASU boy videos), that is what it has to do with this discussion

wtf are you talking about, you obviously didnt understand. The camera was designed for a purpose , it acheives that purpose therefor the pictures dont suck. You sir are a complete moron
I completely understand what the LRO was doing for its LCROSS purposes. But the orbiter itself had 78+ days to photo the moon before the crater impact took place, and the best we get is some film that again some ASU kid has to touchup.



new topics

top topics



 
32
<< 16  17  18    20 >>

log in

join