NASA ADMITS: Moon Landing Tapes Got Erased

reply to post by zorgon


I guess you missed my reply.

reply to post by conar


Amazingly they built it very similar with layers why redesign the wheel.

The Command Module has a double structure, comprised of the cabin and the outer wall. For heat shielding, the outer wall is made of stainless steel brazed honeycomb between steel alloy face sheets. It protects the inside of the ship from the heat of the sun and the heat from atmospheric friction during re-entry. The thickness of this outer wall varies from 0.5-inch (1.27cm) to 2.5-inch (6.35cm). The cabin is built with a honeycomb structure of aluminum mated with an aluminum alloy. The thickness of the wall of this gtin canh varies from 0.25-inch (6.35mm) to 1.5-inch (3.81cm). Insulating fiber is placed between the outer wall and the cabin. Phenolic, a synthetic material made by applying heat and pressure to layers of paper or glass cloth impregnated with synthetic resin, coats the surface of the Command Module. It shields the CM from frictional heat by melting during re-entry. The thickness of this coating is 0.5-inch (1.27cm) all around, except for the bottom, which is 2-inch (5.08cm). This brings the CMfs weight to 3000lb (1362kg). Thermal coating made of silver Mylar is applied on top of this. This gives the CM the appearance of being wrapped in aluminum foil, giving the CM itfs reflective look.

Oh and what is the best thing you can find to stop energetic particles glass is at the top of the list.

Originally posted by tristar
What i would like to draw your attention to is the astronaut to our right, just above the horizon we can see a small white dot.

Has it not been established from experts and non experts that due to the camera equipment at that stage in history that it was impossible to captures stars or planets ?

Or is this image just a random dust particle on the lens or is it another planet ?

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/files/b7718238d783dbef.jpg[/atsimg]

Hi tristar,the screen shot below explains the "phosphorus Spot" also a quote from the audio from Honeysuckle Creek DVDs"The Moonwalks as seen at Honeysuckle Creek Tracking station"
reply to post by Zelong

@6:40 states"that white dot wright above the horizon on the right is a "phosphorus Spot from the TV converter in the Parks Station in Australia""

Which I think means it's in the Tube of the Monitor.

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/e0411ac8fb84.jpg[/atsimg]

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/7bf2cb6b3a2e.jpg[/atsimg]


Zelong.

[edit on 19/7/09 by Zelong]

Originally posted by Helious
I see it this way, and this is fact not speculation. There is a very good argument on each side. From where I sit, there is no absolute proof either way. Im sorry but there is not.

I know all there is to know on this subject and I must admit that the path is cloudy on each side. We must agree to to not be able to share others view points on this topic if we are to remain civil because there is evidence both ways.

Im not quite sure on what side of the fence I land, I am a skeptic at heart about this but I can't deny the things that don't feel right on both sides. I would suggest that we are unable to know the truth at this time and fighting about it is futile.

There is no absolute proof either way, that is fact. No one side can claim fact or absolution, this is the only thing I know for sure.

I refute your post and premise from the outset. Despite the Apollo Programme not having any scope to "prove" it happened (who knew these conspiracy whackjobs would suddenly pop up a few years later?) they have more than done so. The programme is testable and there has been NO substantive evidence of a hoax - despite what the theorists think. You bring me a world leading scientist (not some questionable crackpot) with solid proof and a reasonable explanation then i might start to question this. Until that day I and many others think the sceptics need to get back into class and learn a few basic principles of science and history.

Originally posted by weedwhacker
Your space launch facility in Kodiak, Alaska ain't entirely top-secret, is it? Just off the top of my head, frm such a Northerly location, they are limited to lighter payloads, probably focusing on more Polar orbit inclinations.

NOW...if you want to find some secret launch facilities in the Pacific...away from prying eyes...THEN we'd have some conspiracies to talk about!

Erm, the major nations of the world can spot ICBM launches from anywhere on the planet, I'm sure a Saturn 5 would set off alarms across the world.

And of course, they say nothing due to collusion....

I never give these theories the credibility of replying to their specific points but the suggestion of these "secret bases/launches" by the person earlier in the thread was easily the most "out there" and ludicrous claim i've read in this thread - and believe me, it has strong competition!

Originally posted by phoenix103...I and many others think the sceptics need to get back into class and learn a few basic principles of science and history.

Ah, yes, now that's a classic. When all else fails, brainwashing is always a safe fallback. I mean, schools have never lied to anyone, right? Their versions of history are are in fact true, right? Who can prove otherwise, when the most eminent and learned men of our age say it is so? Where is the challenge? Who dares question authority?

reply to post by Zelong


Okay, thanks for the heads up.

Originally posted by Phage
I guess you missed my reply.

Most likely yes... somewhere in the last 10,000 posts no doubt. I claim the Lortab excuse

You could however just point me to it

reply to post by zorgon

It's the actual exposure levels.
www.abovetopsecret.com...

[edit on 7/19/2009 by Phage]

reply to post by Phage


Thanks filed now i'll read it later tonight. So I guess if the Earth's magnetic field drops we won't be seeing an extinction level event or massive mutations huh?

reply to post by zorgon


No. But we might eventually lose a lot of our atmosphere if we lost the magnetosphere. The solar wind could whisk it away off into space. Once the atmosphere is gone and if we walk around outside unprotected, then the hard radiation would be a problem in the long term.

[edit on 7/19/2009 by Phage]

Originally posted by Matyas

Originally posted by phoenix103...I and many others think the sceptics need to get back into class and learn a few basic principles of science and history.

Ah, yes, now that's a classic. When all else fails, brainwashing is always a safe fallback. I mean, schools have never lied to anyone, right? Their versions of history are are in fact true, right? Who can prove otherwise, when the most eminent and learned men of our age say it is so? Where is the challenge? Who dares question authority?

The issue isn't what but "how". In other words, I'm not saying "take the version [of anything] you were spoonfed at school". I'm saying understand the principles and work it out for yourself.

The hoaxes people are talking about now are so convoluted, elaborate and excessively complicated that the moon landings seem simple by comparrison.

who knows maybe they just wanna modify stuff in it that wasn't supposed to be seed by people .. Tapes of the first moon landing ever in the history of mankind just don't get erased like that you know ..

Originally posted by kinda kurious

Originally posted by weedwhacker
Utter rubbish! We are talking, here, ONLY about Apollo 11 footage. The color camera taken on Apollo 12 was accidentally aimed at the Sun, with the lens cap off, by Alan Bean (and boy did he feel bad about that!). Apollo 13, well never landed. SO, 14, 15, 16 and 17 all have good, color video. AND all of the landings have loads of still photos!!!

WW, you know I adore you, but............................

How was it when you were explaining to WW Jr. that Daddy lost the footage of
his first steps?

Sure you have his 2nd steps and 3rd and so on, but not those very first important ones.

Just not the same in my book.

We are a society (planet) that focuses on first's. (Medical breakthroughs, Sports and Olympics, World Records, Solo journeys etc.)

Like my very first love. Karen Whatshername.

It is a blunder of EPIC proportion. And unfortunately for NASA, not a first.

(BTW, I could go on and on about my views on the 'enhanced' footage.)

www.abovetopsecret.com...

[edit on 18-7-2009 by kinda kurious]

I'll have to step in for a sec and just say....... couldn't have said it better myself.

..KK=

reply to post by kyleplatinum

I'll have to step in for a sec and just say....... couldn't have said it better myself. ..KK=

If Weedwhacker didn't capture WWjr's first steps on film...rational people would still accept that he took his first steps. They wouldn't suggest that WWjr is a black op, hologram or airbrushed child.

Allowing for the tawdry fact that a lot of people aren't very rational...they would still take WW and WWjr's word for it that he actually did take a first step...

Originally posted by Kandinsky
reply to post by kyleplatinum

 

I'll have to step in for a sec and just say....... couldn't have said it better myself. ..KK=

If Weedwhacker didn't capture WWjr's first steps on film...rational people would still accept that he took his first steps. They wouldn't suggest that WWjr is a black op, hologram or airbrushed child.

Allowing for the tawdry fact that a lot of people aren't very rational...they would still take WW and WWjr's word for it that he actually did take a first step...

I was agreeing to the fact that, whats important here is the "FILM" itself not the actual first steps taking, not denying the fact the steps were taken/went there but the importance of preserving the footage.
It just doesn't make sense and this makes nasa look very bad yet again.

reply to post by Kandinsky


Oh I see.

We inadverdently painted over the ORIGINAL Mona Lisa, but here is a fine enhanced copy.

-OR-

-Shredded the Constitution.....

-Melted down Liberty Bell.......

-Used the Wright Brothers first airplane to make toothpicks........

I get it now.

[edit on 22-7-2009 by kinda kurious]

reply to post by kyleplatinum

What was on those tapes was not lost. The live transmission was broadcast all around the world. Many, if not all, of the television stations which covered the event, recorded it as they transmitted it.

What was lost was the recording of the transmission from the moon which was made at the receiving station. We have the exact same stuff, though of lesser quality. The erasing of the tapes was a very bad idea, but it was not a total disaster.

reply to post by kinda kurious


I wouldn't be so harsh, KK.

I'd say NASA did a great jb of saving the still photos, and the 16mm films as well.

What is at issue is the era, and it was 1969...videotape was not as "common" in the minds of people as a storage medium for posterity.

AND...someone already pointed out that the original tapes would likely have deteriorated anyway, by now. The other organizations, such as news groups and media sources, probably thought ahead more (since that's their business) and transferred as much old analog data to digtal forms as they could...both for longevity, and for space-saving reasons, as new forms of technology were developed for storage.

I really see this as a 'non-issue'. It was a case, maybe, of everyone thinking someone else was assigned the task (if they thought of it at all) and nobody actually doing it.

Sorta like the opposite of too many cooks in the kitchen...

edit: How many other "firsts" have been lost, due to no one thinking about it? I'm sure if we looked, we'd find numerous examples....

[edit on 22 July 2009 by weedwhacker]

Originally posted by weedwhacker
How many other "firsts" have been lost, due to no one thinking about it? I'm sure if we looked, we'd find numerous examples....

As far as the balance of your argument, I may have to use that in the on-going Obama Birth Certificate debate.

Regards...KK

[edit on 22-7-2009 by kinda kurious]