china to expose americas moon walk

Originally posted by mullet35 the dust falls quicker than the astranuats how does that work

Very keen observation my friend!!! I was wondering the very same thing. I believe newtons law experiments prove that two items of different mass free falling from the same heights would fall at the same rate of speed. In this case if accurate the astronaut would land at the same time!!! so whats the deal? i don't claim to know every thing but something not right.

Oh and i remember hearing that there would be no wind on the planet, but i have seen vids of the walk in which the flag was waving? odd...

I AM ENDING THIS THREAD RIGHT HERE!



LOOK AT THE FACTS!

Before 1969, and since 1969 the farthest a human has ever travelled into the space was within a few hundred Kilometers from earth.

In 1969, the United States travelled (the average distance) of 382500 km to the moon.

Even as an easy simplification, the moon missions went 1000 times farther than humans had before then, and since then. All with a fraction of the technology the iPhone in your pocket possesses.

Logic, the king of debunking.

If the moon landing was faked, they sure had a big set back then...

i86.photobucket.com...\\

Originally posted by king9072
I AM ENDING THIS THREAD RIGHT HERE!



LOOK AT THE FACTS!

Before 1969, and since 1969 the farthest a human has ever travelled into the space was within a few hundred Kilometers from earth.

If you're going to "end the thread", you should at least get your facts right. Between Dec 68 and Dec 72 the U.S. landed on the moon 6 times (Apollo 11, 12, 14, 15, 16, 17), orbited the moon without landing twice (Apollo 8 and 10) and did a flyby/return once due to a malfunction (Apollo 13). That's a four year period.

Originally posted by coastlinekid
If the moon landing was faked, they sure had a big set back then...

i86.photobucket.com...\\

You know, I really do not care much for the 'pictures are sets' argument but since you brought it up...there is a pretty clear line along which a backdrop fits nicely. Given any good hangar, there is plenty of room for the set you just showed us. Perhaps you do not know much about forced perspective and um...well backdrops.

Originally posted by Phatcat
Adding the links to 'What Really Happened on the Moon' because it is not easy to find..

video.google.com...

video.google.com...

Amazing how these 'believers' are not just tearing this movie apart yet. Not watching it or cannot rebut it?

Let me know when you get to the part where they are faking their distance from earth. Explain why they would do that, and if they really went to the moon, how they got there that afternoon after faking footage in earth's orbit. It is not an afternoon drive.

Perhaps one of you cares to address the Van Allen belts as well. 1/8th inch of aluminum? Seriously, why would they not let an astronaut go that far with that little shielding now?

solarscience.msfc.nasa.gov...reply to post by Mintwithahole.


I have been somewhat educated by this thread which is a good thing. But it still puzzles me how the moon with such thin atmoaphere could possibly repel solar winds from the sun that pass the moon and planet earth with the volicty that can create thunder storms on earth by buffering the magnet feild of earth but it is unable to penetrate the thin atmosphere of the moon.

www.physorg.com...

Check this link and tell me your thoughts here is the evidence that some solar winds do in fact reach the moon surface. If this is the case should'nt of been some evidence of this when the astranuats where on the moon.
Particles what not just be suspended through the charging of the atomsphere if there was the presence of wind, and yes the flag should of been moving and the dust particles should have been swept away as opposed to just returning to the surface of the moon.

the escape volicety is very low so what is stopping this wind from removing the fine dust particles from the surface of the moon after all we are talking about how many millions of years.

[edit on 10/6/2008 by mullet35]

Originally posted by mullet35
what about solar winds with the gravity 1/6 of earth that dust would virtually be weightless and how is it that it settles as quick as what it does all appologies for the no gravity thing I do beleive that the moon walk did not happen and just exploring options

Wow you are really confused 1st moon has no gravity then you want to say the solar wind would blow it away. Solar wind is just energized particles its not actually a breeze,It has no effect on dust on the moon. My suggestion would be to learn about science before you jump to wild accusations.

Originally posted by MorningStar8741

Amazing how these 'believers' are not just tearing this movie apart yet. Not watching it or cannot rebut it?

I wish I could watch it; I've only got a dial-up connection so large videos are unrealistic for me. Although, I'm sure I've probably seen similar material before over the years.

As I mentioned in my previous post, as a child, the unlikelihood of going to the moon merely gave everything a bigger sense of adventure and amazement. As I got older, those unlikelihoods just gave way to suspicion.

Regarding your comment about the van Allen belts, even the sceptic in me wonders whether this is similar (NB: I didn't say the same ) to having your x-ray taken. A few relatively brief exposures and it's not going to kill you, but prolonged or repeat exposure would be a problem.

Originally posted by mullet35
solarscience.msfc.nasa.gov...reply to post by Mintwithahole.

 

I have been somewhat educated by this thread which is a good thing. But it still puzzles me how the moon with such thin atmoaphere could possibly repel solar winds from the sun that pass the moon and planet earth with the volicty that can create thunder storms on earth by buffering the magnet feild of earth but it is unable to penetrate the thin atmosphere of the moon.

It does not repel. It bombards the moon and what you get after billions of years is helium-3. Which is probably why there is a new age space race happening.

• Supporters call helium-3 the perfect fuel, with enormous commercial and national defense potential.

• Harrison Schmitt estimates that a single space shuttle load of helium-3 (approximately 25 tons) could supply the entire energy needs of the United States for a year.

• Scientists estimate the moon has about 1 million tons of helium-3, enough to power the world for 1,000 years!

• Just the Sea of Tranquility (site of Apollo 17's landing) holds enough helium-3 to power the world for hundreds of years.

• The nuclear reaction involved with turning helium-3 into electrical power is so clean a process that a helium-3 plant could theoretically be built in the middle of a big city.

• Helium-3 is worth approximately $40,000 per ounce.

• Compared with the energy from oil, helium-3's potential value is $4 billion a ton (Julie Wakefield, "Researchers and Space Enthusiasts See Helium-3 as the Perfect Fuel Source," SPACE.com, June 30, 2000).

reply to post by dragonridrNot wild accusations just an opinion. And no I dont know alot about science.Posting this here has given me the ability to learn a little bit ecspecially from your post as to the fact that is not an actual breeeze as such. 

1. I thoght there was no gravity I learned there was

2. I wasnt saying the solar wind would'nt blow the gravity away but the fine dust particles

3. I was under the impression that the solar wind was a breeze as such and you have corrected me and now I have learned a bit more so thankyou.

4. All I am doing is challenging with the intention of learning all hats off to those that respect that


[edit on 10/6/2008 by mullet35]

[edit on 10/6/2008 by mullet35]

[edit on 10/6/2008 by mullet35]

reply to post by MorningStar8741


Radiation doses on the Apollo mission ranged from a minimum on Apollo 7 of about 0.40 rem to a maximum on Apollo 14 of about 2.85 rem. At first it would seem that since Apollo astronauts went through the Val Allen Belts twice and stayed under the legal limit for radiation workers that we could. However, it turns out that Apollo went through the very edge of the Van Allen Belts and that is why they got very little radiation. Apollo missions left LEO heading for the moon when radiation belts were 11 degrees South and they were about 28.5 degrees North, thus missing most of the radiation

This is well within non lethal dosages of radiation acceptable radiation levels

dosages in rem
age female male
25 25 40
35 50 70
45 60 100
55 80 150

So i guess that means we can get by the van allen belts huh?

Originally posted by mullet35

1. I thoght there was no gravity I learned there was

I think it's great that you're honest enough to admit to all this. I wish more people, generally, would own-up to admit things like this on the internet.

However, I'm confused as to how you believed that there was no gravity at all, or at least find it a bit odd. I don't mean this as a criticism just honestly wondering how you came to 'miss' this very common piece of information. I'm not sure I've ever read an article or seen anything on the screen regarding the moon that hasn't mentioned the moon having a relatively weak gravity compared to the Earth; therefore some gravity.

Here is some other things we learned from our visit to the moon.And yes, we did go there, and why we decided that it probably wasn't worth the effort to continue long term excursions there. The Chinese will find it out too,if they can get their people there and back alive.

The moon is very dusty!

Originally posted by erwalker

Originally posted by king9072
I AM ENDING THIS THREAD RIGHT HERE!



LOOK AT THE FACTS!

Before 1969, and since 1969 the farthest a human has ever travelled into the space was within a few hundred Kilometers from earth.

If you're going to "end the thread", you should at least get your facts right. Between Dec 68 and Dec 72 the U.S. landed on the moon 6 times (Apollo 11, 12, 14, 15, 16, 17), orbited the moon without landing twice (Apollo 8 and 10) and did a flyby/return once due to a malfunction (Apollo 13). That's a four year period.

Hahaha, good job at debunking my claim by pointing out that I missed the dates... who cares? What part of ONE THOUSAND TIMES THE DISTANCE THAT ANYONE BEFORE OR SINCE (the apollo missions) HAS TRAVELED FROM EARTH doesn't make sense?

Originally posted by king9072

Originally posted by erwalker

Originally posted by king9072
I AM ENDING THIS THREAD RIGHT HERE!



LOOK AT THE FACTS!

Before 1969, and since 1969 the farthest a human has ever travelled into the space was within a few hundred Kilometers from earth.

If you're going to "end the thread", you should at least get your facts right. Between Dec 68 and Dec 72 the U.S. landed on the moon 6 times (Apollo 11, 12, 14, 15, 16, 17), orbited the moon without landing twice (Apollo 8 and 10) and did a flyby/return once due to a malfunction (Apollo 13). That's a four year period.

Hahaha, good job at debunking my claim by pointing out that I missed the dates... who cares? What part of ONE THOUSAND TIMES THE DISTANCE THAT ANYONE BEFORE OR SINCE (the apollo missions) HAS TRAVELED FROM EARTH doesn't make sense?

all of it, as anyone with a half a brain can see your point makes no sense. They went to the moon between 68 and 72. THEY DIDNT GO THAT BEFORE AS THEY DIDNT GO THE MOON BEFORE. THEY HAVENT BEEN THAT FAR SINCE AS THEY HAVENT BEEN BACK There, now perhaps if i shout as well you will be able to grasp the very simple concept that your point is invalid and makes no sense. And the previous poster was simply pointing that out to you in a polite way, which obviously you were unable to grasp. Hopefully my approach will help it sink in

And morningstar, you wont get too much of a debunk response on here , simply due to the fact that its been done ad nauseam on this site. If you use the search option there are some really good threads that have already been done on this subject with some brilliantly simplified explanations from posters such as weedwacker

reply to post by Merriman Weir


This is what I like about ATS so much, Ive lived a very violent childhood and simply have been overwhelmed with flashbacks and anxieties to even pay attention to such things.
Now as a 36 year old father of 5 I have had to address a number of my issues for my childrens sake and just going into forums such as this are very informative and the information I do pick again will go to benifiting my own children as the more I know and understand the more again I can help my children as they grow and ask.

Dont get me wrong not everything here is award winning stuff and I wont be retaining alot of it but its things like this are helpful. Everything I post here are just things that I have picked up as an adult as I dont remember much of what I was tought at school.

So the idea of challanging ideas of the moon are facinating to me because I know very little about it.

Sorry for going off topic

Originally posted by somedood
China should be careful calling people out for "lies".

Fake olympic fireworks, fake reports from space, fake documents for 13yr old gymnasts. I could go on...

Does China really want to open this can of worms?

China hasn't called anyone a liar. it was some australian kid that started this thread.

[edit on 6-10-2008 by Fathom]

As to radiation exposure throught the Van Allen belts....... I'm wondering when this photo was taken.... Russian Cosmonaut in a see-through sputnik module holding a 60's telephone receiver.