The 1962 Secret Mars Trip Video debunked using NASA's own research

In this purported footage of a secret 1962 Manned Mars Mission:
www.youtube.com...

You see the craft piloted and landing on the Martian surface, with a window view of some life form moving away from the landing site.

In the audio, there seems to be a conversation between the pilot and the mission control.

This conversation seems seamless, as if there is no time delay in transmission.

Now, NASA has plans to send an unmanned plane ARES (Aerial Regional-scale Environmental Survey of Mars) to launch from an aeroshell, unfold wings and tail and begin flight about 1 mile above the surface, within the Martian atmosphere, to obtain better imagery and measurements of the surface, atmosphere and climate of mars than orbiting satelites but with a broader scope than a rover or lander could from the ground.

In the video (link above), Dr. Joel Levine, ARES Principal Investigator, explains that this plane would have a pre-programed flight path, stating; "...the time it takes for radio signal to go from earth to mars or mars to earth can be 15 minutes to 30 minutes because of the distance involved..."

So, how, in 1962, could a transmission have seamless report with no delay. let alone 15 to 30 minutes of delay?

This should be ample proof to debunk the 1962 video.


[edit on 13-4-2009 by imd12c4funn]

reply to post by imd12c4funn


The big assumption you are making is that the technology being used was standard for the time. With what we suspect about black-budget operations and technologies they are FAR more advanced than the technologies touted as being 'cutting edge' in today's world.

In essence I am saying that they may have been using communications technology that enables instant communication over vast distances in space.

I thought Mars didn't have an atmosphere...at least not one well established enough to reveal such a blue sky?

But I guess if the video is trying to say that we went to Mars secretly and found life back in 1962...then I guess one would have to assume other information about Mars to be false.

Unfortunatly, the approach looks...off...to me. I don't know, something about it says Avid or Final Cut to me.

Good point.

Although if someone had the technology to send a manned ship to Mars in 1962 it's not entirely improbable that they also had the ability to communicate faster than the speed of light.

I would say that the best proof that this footage is not real is the fact that it's taken from a mock-dokumentary (mockumentary) called "Alternative Three". This programme was obviously completely made up, but there is some evidence that they might have inadvertently come close to the truth.
It's an interesting story and I'm sure there are lots of threads discussing it.

Originally posted by imd12c4funn


So, how, in 1962, could a transmission have seamless report with no delay. let alone 15 to 30 minutes of delay?

This should be ample proof to debunk the 1962 video.

Bravo for finding the good sense to question the little inconsistancies in videos like this one. However, I fear you are forgetting one important thing in your debunking.

You use the time delay as an issue, is it not possible that they removed the delay 'in post' when they were compiling.editing the videos? When you see anything that isn't being broadcasted live, the time delay (which is very apparant even on the moon) has already been taken out through editing.

I understand that this explination may not hold to much water in this specific case (considering the fact that at times the action on screen and the action in voice match up in a way which makes it hard to argue the editing of the time delay.

Just food for thought, should something like this ever come up again.

Originally posted by Kryties
reply to post by imd12c4funn

 

The big assumption you are making is that the technology being used was standard for the time. With what we suspect about black-budget operations and technologies they are FAR more advanced than the technologies touted as being 'cutting edge' in today's world.

In essence I am saying that they may have been using communications technology that enables instant communication over vast distances in space.

If there is advanced tech used, why isn't the audio crystal clear? That would surely be less of a challenge than any other advanced tech involved.

reply to post by spines




Well if they had Avid of Final Cut back in the sixties, then that's a conspiracy all in itself. I'm pretty sure the footage is taken from a helicopter, it also sounds that way.

As for the blue sky, well, that IS what Mars looks like, but NASA tends to "enhance" their photos by making them red. Apparently because that's what people expect Mars to look like...

Here's a link if you want to read more: darkmission.blogspot.com...

Originally posted by spines
I thought Mars didn't have an atmosphere...at least not one well established enough to reveal such a blue sky?

But I guess if the video is trying to say that we went to Mars secretly and found life back in 1962...then I guess one would have to assume other information about Mars to be false.

Unfortunatly, the approach looks...off...to me. I don't know, something about it says Avid or Final Cut to me.

The ARES video tells that the martian atmosphere is 1% of that on earth and the ARES design used wind tunnel technology and high altitude launching to insure the flight would take the atmospheric conditions into account.

This may be another aspect to debunk the 1962 video.

[edit on 13-4-2009 by imd12c4funn]

Fiberoptics was created in the mid 40's. Fiberoptics became available to the public in the year 2001-2003. I'm sure after 22 years, instantaneous transmission would have been possible.

[edit on 13-4-2009 by DEM0N]

Originally posted by DEM0N
Fiberoptics was created in the mid 40's. Fiberoptics became available to the public in the year 2001-2003. I'm sure after 22 years, instantaneous transmission would have been possible.

[edit on 13-4-2009 by DEM0N]

Would fiber optics be tethered to a craft from Earth to Mars?
Highly unlikely

[edit on 13-4-2009 by imd12c4funn]
typos

[edit on 13-4-2009 by imd12c4funn]

reply to post by imd12c4funn


I remember reading a thread here at ats talking about how fiberoptics being discovered in a crashed et craft, or maybe it was something else, ill have to search.

reply to post by MrVertigo


My point with that statement wasn't that it was edited back in the sixties. My point was that if it is a fake trip to Mars, that it could have been made two months ago in my old roomates basement.

It looks, to me, like some really basic editing in something like Final Cut. Especially when they are on that fast approach over the surface.

reply to post by spines


As I stated in my first post, this footage was first aired in the sixties in the mockumentary Alternative three"

So the footage IS from the sixties and they didn't have Avid or Final Cut back then.

reply to post by MrVertigo


Fine, then in the sixties, someone did some old fashion cutting.

Whatever, it looks edited and looks not like something done very non-professionally.

Please read what Mr Vertigo has said above somewhere. This is footage from a spoof documentary called Alternative 3. It was scheduled for broadcast on 1 April 1977 (note the date) but was actually broadcast shortly after that date. See the following link for more info:

Alternative 3

Just trying to be helpful btw!

The Rat

reply to post by DEM0N


Fiber optics allow for communication at near-light speeds, not instantaneous speeds. They were first put to use in the phone system in 1977. My university was doing cutting edge research on fiber optic communications; they didn't have anything close to faster than light, even in 2000-2004.

[edit on 13-4-2009 by ngchunter]

Originally posted by spines
reply to post by MrVertigo

 

Fine, then in the sixties, someone did some old fashion cutting.

Whatever, it looks edited and looks not like something done very non-professionally.

I'm sorry but somebody had to mention this sooner or later.

You do know the movie 2001: A Space Odyssey was made in 1968, right? That movie almost still has one-up on most graphics in movies these days.

Not to mention movies have been being cut and edited since the early 1900s and silent firms..