Photographic evidence that at least one moon mission is fake!!

interesting points. I too would love to see us go there again with modern equipment it would be incredible. Back to the OPs pic and analysis. That did not convince me. Needs to be clearer for me. It just wasn't conclusive and if I can't see it then millions like me won't be able to see it either. We need more. Right now, I'm leaning towards that we did land there. There are some interesting arguements that we didn't and i'm open minded enough to look at everything.

reply to post by evil incarnate


I think both sides are taking their cases to the internet.

Unless each one goes to the Moon like people go to Disneyland
there will be doubters and those that rally in the misfit data.

I know rockets can fly and got my hopes about the Tesla conspiracy
has the UFO but how NASA landed on the Moon seems more
difficult somehow as if we go one put over on us again because
that what the Illuminati do for a living.

These net id names are catchy and one of the net's good
high frequency high voltage experimenters is one of your
henchmen from his id.

Mod Note: General ATS Discussion Etiquette – Please Review This Link.

Please stop the insults...

They are unnecessary and against the Terms & Conditions Of Use we all agreed to on joining..

Thank you

Semper

Originally posted by letthereaderunderstand
Remember that 747 they piggy back it on and can launch it in the air from?

They don't launch it from the 747. That's only for transporting it from one location to another. The Enterprise test shuttle was the only one to separate from it and do approach and landing tests. But it can not fly long distances as it has no fuel.

Launch cape Canaveral and land in Africa, stay at the CGI ISS a few weeks then Piggy flys up in the air and we all make believe we just sent men to space.

So you don't even believe the Shuttle really goes to space either? People can see the ISS and Shuttle with there backyard telescopes. ngchunter is one of those people who has photographed it himself. Many people have done this.

I mean for god sakes, every experiment they need "micro gravity" for could be done in a modeling computer at 1/100th the cost.

I don't think so. Computer simulations have limitations. There are too many unknowns about the effects of microgravity on living organisms and on other materials, that a computer model can't show us. Computers only work off the information we give it and we don't have all the information needed to make an accurate computer simulation.

I also had asked about scientists still doing experiments that made something proven or a law. I believe once a Journal has been released it is put on the shelf, therefore "all of the scientists" are operating off of nothing more then passed on notes, not understanding the actual concepts except for on paper.

So you think all scientists are stupid and have no clue or understanding about their profession? ...Right... That's an extremely wild claim. I don't even get how you can make such a claim. Journals are peer reviewed by other Scientists. Scientists are not mindless drones that agree with one another on everything. They all have there opinions and views, just like everyone else and they help to bring about new knowledge and new technologies. Like the computers we're using to have this discussion.

I'm not saying the 400,000 employees aren't real, but I've heard that before without a shred of fact to back it up, but even if, how many employees does the Government employee currently at NASA...

Not all the 400,000 worked for NASA directly. I believe that number includes the people at various aerospace companies like Boeing, Grumman, North American Aviation, Douglas Aircraft Company. As well as companies like Black & Decker, RCA, Westinghouse, ILC, just to name a few. Plus there were about 10,000 students from about 200 different universities all contributing as well.

...and really, how could anyone actually verify that other then someone saying it or a piece of paper saying it.

Employment records maybe? But if you don't accept the information coming from a person or in a document, then I don't know what's left. It sounds like nothing would be acceptable to you.

No real evidence mainly because you are asking people that already don't believe the moon missions happened to believe figures and calculations, number of employees, distances, volumes of pressure, capsule design, Saturn rockets (I want my EMPTY V), rock samples no average person can test

Figures and calculations can be checked, many of those things you listed can be checked and verified if you're willing to spend time researching and studying the subject.

Movies that are so fake that 2001 and starwars look more real and believable, and astronauts making inside jokes they think no one gets while walking around on the "moon".

Have you seen 2001 or Star Wars? They don't look close to believable. Great movies and the special effects were great for there time, but there are things you see in the Apollo videos that can not be done with special effects for that time. Not even today. But you seem to be ignoring that.

And guys you're grown men, don't tell me the movies where the astronauts fall down flat on there face and then miraculously rebound with out even pushing up from the ground that looks.

It may look odd since it requires less effort to push off the ground (plus if it's the video I'm thinking of, he was holding onto the other astronaut and using him for leverage), but then it's on the MOON! I would expect things to be different due to the 1/6th G environment with no atmosphere. A fully loaded Astronaut is going to weigh about 136kg (300lbs) on Earth, that's a little over 22kg (50lbs) on the Moon. That's nothing.

Plus if the moon is held by earths gravity, then why isn't the gravity on the moon the same?...

I'll second what weedwhacker said and suggest you brush up on some basic science.

[edit on 4-5-2009 by jra]

Originally posted by letthereaderunderstand
In the batters box....Barak Hussin Obama. What's barak going to champion? What do you know....Back to the moon, only this time with Killer sets and believable graphics. CG I just like all the other stuff. Sure a shuttle launches, but it comes right back down. Remember that 747 they piggy back it on and can launch it in the air from?

I've seen the shuttle coming in to land with my own eyes - there's no 747 anywhere to be seen, and 747s can't break the sound barrier (let alone safely release a vehicle at mach 1+); the shuttle's distinctive sonic booms are louder to us on the ground than that produced by any other vehicle at that altitude. And as pointed out by myself and JRA, I've also seen the shuttle on orbit with my telescope, please explain that.

Launch cape Canaveral and land in Africa,

How do you land in africa with a north east launch trajectory? North is to the left in this image:
farm4.static.flickr.com...

stay at the CGI ISS a few weeks then Piggy flys up in the air and we all make believe we just sent men to space. I mean for god sakes, every experiment they need "micro gravity" for could be done in a modeling computer at 1/100th the cost.

I'm amazed you can actually believe this. Are you saying I faked my avatar? It isn't CGI. It's quite real. Computer modeling cannot substitute for real experiments, especially things like cell culture in vitro experiments. Even the best computer models need real world verification. I know for a fact the shuttle and ISS really do orbit the earth, in fact I'm planning to get more pics of the latter later this week.

[edit on 4-5-2009 by ngchunter]

Originally posted by Exuberant1
The probe landed in the area known as Mare Crisium. The mission successfully returned 170 grams of lunar samples to the Earth on 22 August 1976.

Hmm, 170 grams versus 842 pounds... methinks these two are nowhere close to equivalent lol! All the russian unmanned sample returns put together collected about 300 grams of regolith (and that ended well after apollo was done). At an average of 100 grams per mission, it would take 3,814 missions to return the mass equivalent of Apollo's samples, and none would be as large as some of apollo's samples. Robots, even 1970's robots, are no substitute for a human when it comes to collecting rocks.

reply to post by ngchunter


If you had bothered to read my post on the subject, you would note that I have been clear that the soviet probe was cited as a proof of concept - and to show that it could be done (weedwacker denied such a thing was done at all).

*The infamous and oft-cited laser reflector could also have been placed by an unmanned probe. I gave an example of a soviet probe that did just this.

This does not mean the Apollo missions were faked, it just shows that certain objectives on that mission could have been accomplished via unmanned probe.

If you are of the opinion that I believe the Apollo missions were hoaxed, please locate a post wherein I specifically state that it was or that I believe it was. I know for a fact you will not find such a quote.

Why do you dedicate so much of your time to suppressing speculation of the sort I engage in?

Are you here to protect the young fragile minds?


Cheers!!!

[edit on 4-5-2009 by Exuberant1]

Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by Exuberant1

 

Read my post VERY carefully. I spoke of the first FOUR robotic landers on the Moon. THEN I said NONE of those I mentioned returned Lunar samples. This is still a true statement. Reading is fundamental.

THOSE four occured prior to Apollo 11.

Subsequent Soviet return missions, that whopping few ounces of soil (no rocks...core samples) were obtained AFTER the success of Apollo!

EXUBERANT1, THAT is what I wrote. So what if the Soviets succeeded in collecting 3/4 pound total of Lunar soil sample via robotic equipment AFTER the success of Apollo 11?? I was addressing YOUR contention that the mass of evidence currently on Earth, since late 1969, could have been returned by using robots. That was an incorrect opinion. Further, the Soviet robotic lander slated to arrive with a reflector mounted on it was never proved in service, since it was destroyed at launch. AND, we have the photos of the actual relfector put in place by the humans of Apollo.

[edit on 5/4/0909 by weedwhacker]