Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Recent Moon Hoax Ideas

page: 3
5
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join

posted on Mar, 25 2009 @ 08:41 PM
link   
reply to post by Zaphod58
 


We have NASA and other 'scientists' saying that just getting out of the orbit of the earth is not possible because of the radiation... Please watch and listen to what they say and then tell me that NASA and all the scientists are wrong and you are right... It's amazing how you expect me and others to believe what you say and then just ignore what science says is possible. I don't know you... who are you... a famous radiation specialist?




posted on Mar, 25 2009 @ 08:45 PM
link   
reply to post by AllTiedTogether
 


I have never seen a SINGLE NASA source that says we can't leave orbit due to radiation, but I have seen a lot of scientists saying how the Apollo astronauts were protected. If they were saying it, then why would they be saying we went to the moon, and have proof that we did?

NASA has said that we can't stay on the moon for long periods of time without studying how the radiation will affect us. That's a hell of a lot different than saying that we can't leave orbit.


Except for the Apollo missions, NASA's manned spaceflight missions have stayed well below the altitude of the Van Allen belts. However, a part of the inner Van Allen belt dips down to about 200 km into the upper region of the atmosphere over the southern Atlantic Ocean off the coast of Brazil. This region is known as the South Atlantic Anomaly. The dip results from the fact that the magnetic axis of the Earth is tilted approximately 11 degrees from the spin axis, and the center of the magnetic field is offset from the geographical center of the Earth by 280 miles. The largest fraction of the radiation exposure received during spaceflight missions has resulted from passage through the South Atlantic Anomaly. Low inclination flights typically traverse a portion of the South Atlantic Anomaly six or seven times a day.

srag-nt.jsc.nasa.gov...

Sure looks like NASA is saying we've left orbit.


An important safety concern for LONG TERM space travel is the health effects from space radiation. Possible health risks include cancer, cataracts, acute radiation sickness, hereditary effects and damage to the central nervous system. NASA has been developing ground based research facilities to simulate the space radiation environment and to analyze biological effects at the molecular and cellular level. These facilities will also be used to understand and mitigate the biological effects of space radiation on astronauts, to ensure proper calibration of the doses received by astronauts on the International Space Station, and to develop advanced material concepts for improved radiation shielding for future exploration missions to Mars.

Emphasis mine
www.nasa.gov...



[edit on 3/25/2009 by Zaphod58]

[edit on 3/25/2009 by Zaphod58]



posted on Mar, 25 2009 @ 08:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by Chadwickus
reply to post by Phage
 


lol that's not a nice thing to say about the lunar landing disbelievers


To those people, I spose the lunar laser ranging retroreflector array placed itself there huh?



Wow, you guys love whipping that one out don't ya? Smells like desperation every time I read it. We are not the only country with reflectors on the moon, yet we are the only country that claims to have been there. Do you believe the others are claiming they got there on their own or have you not heard of remote control?



posted on Mar, 26 2009 @ 03:45 PM
link   
I thought this thread was dead. I've been busy elsewhere on ATS.
What I have to propose is better done on a new thread.
I think there is still alot to explore.



posted on Mar, 27 2009 @ 12:44 AM
link   
reply to post by Donny 4 million
 


No, it is not dead. It is just stuck on my last post. Phage and his minnions cannot refute what I have said so they are waiting for at least a few more posts to distract so they can ignore it and address the other issues, again.



posted on Mar, 27 2009 @ 12:57 AM
link   
reply to post by AnjeluvDeath
 


It's not stuck on here. Of the two Russian reflectors that were placed, one stopped functioning, and they don't know where it is exactly.

While the US reflectors COULD have been placed by remote, the design of them would have had to be completely different. The ones landed with Apollo were aimed by hand, if they were going to be dropped remotely on a probe, they would have had to have a way to be moved by remote. The engineers would have instantly noticed the difference.

This is the Russian robot that had the reflector onboard:
Lunokhod2

This is the Apollo reflector:
Apollo

[edit on 3/27/2009 by Zaphod58]

[edit on 3/27/2009 by Zaphod58]



posted on Mar, 27 2009 @ 06:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by Zaphod58
reply to post by AnjeluvDeath
 


It's not stuck on here. Of the two Russian reflectors that were placed, one stopped functioning, and they don't know where it is exactly.

While the US reflectors COULD have been placed by remote, the design of them would have had to be completely different. The ones landed with Apollo were aimed by hand, if they were going to be dropped remotely on a probe, they would have had to have a way to be moved by remote. The engineers would have instantly noticed the difference.


I am not sure I get what you are trying to say. The engineers that worked for the same group I say are liars, would tell you if they were designed differently? Wow, NASA can't be lying because NASA would have noticed if NASA was faking it and we would all know. That makes so much sense once I remove parts of my brain.

You believe NASA and their pretty pictures all you like, hon. That is some great logic. I really appreciate you coming in here and explaining to all of us that NASA would have told us if NASA was making stuff up. I had never thought of that.



posted on Mar, 27 2009 @ 06:36 PM
link   
reply to post by AnjeluvDeath
 


So you're saying that there has NEVER been a case of a whistleblower working for a government agency coming forward and talking about something? Not ONCE?

Not to mention the fact that NASA DIDN'T build any of the reflectors. The first reflector was built in Russia, and shows what a remote control reflector would have to look like. The second one was the one placed by the astronauts on Apollo. It was much smaller, because it was aimed by the men that were there, and didn't need to move.

The reflectors built for NASA were built by Bendix. You're telling me that NOT ONE of their people would have come forward and said something about them being remote controlled? There were AT LEAST three built.

Do NOT sit there an call me "hon" or talk down to me. You don't know me, and have ZERO right to talk down to me because I think differently than you do.



posted on Mar, 27 2009 @ 06:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by Zaphod58
reply to post by AnjeluvDeath
 


So you're saying that there has NEVER been a case of a whistleblower working for a government agency coming forward and talking about something? Not ONCE?


Where did you get that idea from what I said? Yes there are whistle blowers. The fact that they exist does not mean I will believe Altria when it defends Phillip Morris.


Not to mention the fact that NASA DIDN'T build any of the reflectors. The first reflector was built in Russia, and shows what a remote control reflector would have to look like. The second one was the one placed by the astronauts on Apollo. It was much smaller, because it was aimed by the men that were there, and didn't need to move.


Yeah and the ones from Russia were placed remotely...can you read? Can you read what even you have already said? I do not care, they do not need to prove what I already believe and know.

What I am saying is that you cannot prove the second picture is what is on the moon. You cannot prove that there were not secret remotes sent up there. You cannot prove that the same folks I alreayd called liars can back themselves up.


The reflectors built for NASA were built by Bendix. You're telling me that NOT ONE of their people would have come forward and said something about them being remote controlled? There were AT LEAST three built.


Yes. That is exactly what I am saying. Who at Bendix worked on it? Was there a huge crowd and a veiwing area or was it built like anything else would be? Can you name all the people that worked on the final reflector sent to the moon? Can you prove that having Bendix do the work is not a red herring?


Do NOT sit there an call me "hon" or talk down to me. You don't know me, and have ZERO right to talk down to me because I think differently than you do.



Hon, is talking down to you? Wow, I bet your house was full of sweet nothings growing up huh.

Hon is a term of endearment, like sweety or pumpkin. These are good things. All the NASA defenders ever do is show pictures of stuff and say it is proof we went to the moon. OK. I have pictures of unicorns. Can I start posting them and people have to believe me because I have pix? If not, why not and yet you can do things that way?



posted on Mar, 27 2009 @ 06:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by AnjeluvDeath
Yeah and the ones from Russia were placed remotely...can you read? Can you read what even you have already said? I do not care, they do not need to prove what I already believe and know.


Yes I can read. That was the point I was making. The Russian reflector was placed remotely and is MUCH bigger than the ones that were placed by the Apollo astronauts.



What I am saying is that you cannot prove the second picture is what is on the moon. You cannot prove that there were not secret remotes sent up there. You cannot prove that the same folks I alreayd called liars can back themselves up.


You can't prove that they AREN'T on the moon. You are the one making the extraordinary claim, the burden of proof is on you. All the evidence points to the fact that we really DID go, and really DID place those reflectors on the moon.


Yes. That is exactly what I am saying. Who at Bendix worked on it? Was there a huge crowd and a veiwing area or was it built like anything else would be? Can you name all the people that worked on the final reflector sent to the moon? Can you prove that having Bendix do the work is not a red herring?


With a project for the space program, you have engineers, designers, and people that actually work on the system. Even with something this small you are looking at probably a dozen plus people at Bendix. Plus the people that loaded them onto the LEM, and the people that tested them here on earth. Where did NASA build them, at their super secret manufacturing plants?


Hon, is talking down to you? Wow, I bet your house was full of sweet nothings growing up huh.


I won't even START to talk about my personal life, but when you use it the way you did, then it comes across as condescending. If you aren't dating me, or aren't going to be dating me, then DO NOT call me "hon" or any other term.

[edit on 3/27/2009 by Zaphod58]



posted on Mar, 27 2009 @ 09:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by Zaphod58

Yes I can read. That was the point I was making. The Russian reflector was placed remotely and is MUCH bigger than the ones that were placed by the Apollo astronauts.




Wow! You amaze me. Please tell me again how you would know what size the reflectors we put on the moon are. You cannot. You have never seen the reflectors on the moon. You have no idea what is on the moon. Either get up there with that camera phone and take a few snapshots, come back down and then I might believe you. Until then, you are just telling me what other people have told you. That, does not a truth make.



posted on Mar, 27 2009 @ 09:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by Zaphod58


You can't prove that they AREN'T on the moon.


I cannot prove there is not a group of zebras on the moon either. Neither can you. Does that make it true or is it more likely that noone can prove a negative?


With a project for the space program, you have engineers, designers, and people that actually work on the system. Even with something this small you are looking at probably a dozen plus people at Bendix. Plus the people that loaded them onto the LEM, and the people that tested them here on earth. Where did NASA build them, at their super secret manufacturing plants?


Yup, and with an answer like yours, you have what you think happened. Can you name all the men and women that worked on them? I would love to see a list. I need to know exactly what they did too. If one guy designed a part that goes to something someone else is designing, I do not really want his word on anything. List the huge crowd of people that were working on the reflectors that are on the moon.


I won't even START to talk about my personal life, but when you use it the way you did, then it comes across as condescending. If you aren't dating me, or aren't going to be dating me, then DO NOT call me "hon" or any other term.


I guess if you feel I am being condescending then it is because you know that your argument is fundamentally flawed in that all you can do is tell me what others have told you and you cannot even tell me all that much.



posted on Mar, 27 2009 @ 10:01 PM
link   
reply to post by AnjeluvDeath
 


And yet you know the truth? You have never seen anything that looks like a remote reflector on Apollo, and you have never seen the reflectors up there either. Just because they COULD have done something doesn't mean that they DID do it.

Apollo DID go to the moon, there is too much evidence to show that they went. What would be the point of sending remote reflectors when they were there?


I guess if you feel I am being condescending then it is because you know that your argument is fundamentally flawed in that all you can do is tell me what others have told you and you cannot even tell me all that much.


Well hell, with logic like that, I'm convinced! We never went to the moon and we placed the reflectors remotely!
Since when does feeling that someone is being condescending prove ANYTHING?

[edit on 3/27/2009 by Zaphod58]



posted on Mar, 27 2009 @ 10:22 PM
link   
reply to post by AnjeluvDeath
 


I guess that's that then. It can't be proven to your satisfaction. Oh, well.

Oh, wait. One more thing. Can you prove they were set by a remote vehicle? Got any photos of that mission? Got any technical papers about the vehicle used? Probably not. Dog got your homework, huh?

The reflectors are on the Moon, they were set by hand. The results were so good with the one set on Apollo 11 that two more were set (Apollo 14 & 15).

The Soviets liked the idea so much that they tried setting one with Lunokhod 1 in 1970 but for some reason it didn't work, maybe because the rover couldn't set it accurately enough. They tried again in 1973 and succeeded.

USA: 3 for 3 done the old fashioned way, by hand.
Russia: 1 for two, done remotely.

Not so easy, we were just lucky I guess.

Side note: No one else has reflectors on the Moon.

[edit on 3/27/2009 by Phage]



posted on Mar, 28 2009 @ 12:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by AnjeluvDeath
 


I guess that's that then. It can't be proven to your satisfaction. Oh, well.

Oh, wait. One more thing. Can you prove they were set by a remote vehicle? Got any photos of that mission? Got any technical papers about the vehicle used? Probably not. Dog got your homework, huh?


Nope. I have no more evidence to site my case than you have with yours.


The reflectors are on the Moon, they were set by hand. The results were so good with the one set on Apollo 11 that two more were set (Apollo 14 & 15).

The Soviets liked the idea so much that they tried setting one with Lunokhod 1 in 1970 but for some reason it didn't work, maybe because the rover couldn't set it accurately enough. They tried again in 1973 and succeeded.

USA: 3 for 3 done the old fashioned way, by hand.
Russia: 1 for two, done remotely.

Not so easy, we were just lucky I guess.


That is funny. You want to compare the U.S. to soviet success rate of space exploration overall at that point? They succeeded in many places that we failed so yeah, either we were able to do a better job with our remotes or we can go with stats like you want and then that would prove that....what? They just got lucky where we kept failing? Is it possible two different groups of people were able to achieve vastly different things? I do not even get what your argument is for this case here.



posted on Mar, 28 2009 @ 12:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by AnjeluvDeath


Nope. I have no more evidence to site my case than you have with yours.


I have the evidence of the photographs, the technical papers. As I said, if it's not enough for you, that's about the end of it. Isn't it.



posted on Mar, 28 2009 @ 01:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by Phage

Originally posted by AnjeluvDeath


Nope. I have no more evidence to site my case than you have with yours.


I have the evidence of the photographs, the technical papers. As I said, if it's not enough for you, that's about the end of it. Isn't it.


uh huh. I have pictures of ufos, bigfoot, sea monsters, etc. They are all true now then? Photos have been faked since they were invented.

I even have technical papers on the Starship Enterprise. Sorry that is not evidence to me. If you want to believe it then great. That is why they can get away with lying and controlling people like you. You believe it because you saw photos and technical papers. How much time have you spent in space that you know anything in those technical papers even matters?

Repeat after me - "I believe it because I was told to believe it. I cannot think outside the box or for myself. This must be true because those in authority have shown me stuff that would imply it is most likely true and said it was."

Now, you go ahead and live your life that way.


jra

posted on Mar, 28 2009 @ 09:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by AnjeluvDeath
uh huh. I have pictures of ufos, bigfoot, sea monsters, etc. They are all true now then? Photos have been faked since they were invented.


That depends if you have other supporting evidence to go along with your ufo's/bigfoot/sea monster photos. There's tons of supporting evidence for Apollo. 800lbs of which, is actual samples from the Moon which can't be faked here on Earth and have been studied by scientists all over the world, not just NASA.


Repeat after me - "I believe it because I was told to believe it. I cannot think outside the box or for myself. This must be true because those in authority have shown me stuff that would imply it is most likely true and said it was."

Now, you go ahead and live your life that way.


I just love how you assume that we're closed minded and can't think outside the box, just because we believe Apollo happened as reported. How can you judge some one like that, when you don't know them?

I was never told to believe it happened. I have freewill to believe whatever I want. And when I look at the evidence for Apollo being a hoax, it just doesn't hold up to any scrutiny what so ever.



posted on Mar, 28 2009 @ 09:52 PM
link   
reply to post by jra
 


You know those scientists and have weighed the moon rock? That is pretty cool for you then isn't it. How do you know it came from the moon?


jra

posted on Mar, 29 2009 @ 02:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by AnjeluvDeath
You know those scientists and have weighed the moon rock? That is pretty cool for you then isn't it. How do you know it came from the moon?


No, I do not personally know any scientist who has studied the Lunar samples. Nor do I see a reason why I'd need to.

One can tell the samples came from the Moon due to them being pitted with micro meteorite impacts, having been formed in a 1/6th gravity in the vacuum of space, making them completely devoid of any water, plus they've spent millions, if not, billions of years exposed to various types of radiation due to the lack of an atmosphere.

Plus Geologists are still discovering new things with the Lunar samples. Those would have to be some pretty amazing fakes, if that were the case.






top topics



 
5
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join