It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

NASA ADMITS: Moon Landing Tapes Got Erased

page: 14
24
<< 11  12  13    15 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 24 2009 @ 10:19 PM
link   
No reason for the ground details to disappear

www.hq.nasa.gov...
www.hq.nasa.gov...

here we can see much farther
www.hq.nasa.gov...

Everything should be in focus like this...
www.hq.nasa.gov...

Rover tracks ends

www.hq.nasa.gov...
www.hq.nasa.gov...

Thats's a deep footprint

www.hq.nasa.gov...

Not much landscape to the right
www.hq.nasa.gov...
www.hq.nasa.gov...
www.hq.nasa.gov...

[edit on 25-7-2009 by conar]




posted on Jul, 25 2009 @ 06:45 AM
link   
reply to post by conar
 


I think that there are two things responsible for what you call "disappearing detail".

1 - Distance. There is nothing for us to judge the distances to what we see in those photos, and if you look at some of the photos you posted you can see the the LM looks too small when compared to the astronaut, meaning that it was further away than it looks or that the type of lens used made it look smaller.

If you are looking for small rocks or other detail on the ground you will have more difficulty finding them in far away areas because they become too small to be seen on the photo.

2 - Gravity. Although smaller, the Moon's gravity "works" in the same way as the Earth's, so rocks are more easily found on lower areas than on hill sides, so it is natural that a hill will have less detail.

 

Edit:

I don't understand why you are surprised that the tracks disappear, they were not on a flat area, so if the rover went up a small hill and the photo was taken on the top of that small hill it is only natural that we cannot see the bottom of the hill.

As for things being focused, they are, the lack of detail is not a result of being out of focus, if the hills were out of focus we would see a blurred hill against the black sky.

[edit on 25/7/2009 by ArMaP]



posted on Jul, 25 2009 @ 06:49 AM
link   
www.youtube.com...

Seen this episode about the spacesuit?
They used needle and thread! Suffice to say it leaked air in the vacuum champer, the test pilot almost died.
They have to fuse the parts together by melting the rubber, they cant use needle and thread in a spacesuit
I guess they used something better after the accident, but it didnt say.
They tested the spacesuit in Moon gravity environment by using wires. Astronaut could do the most amazing things in the wires, back flips, somersaults, and walk on a wall.



posted on Jul, 25 2009 @ 06:55 AM
link   
Top 10 reasons moon landing is a hoax
johnmoltz.com...

haha, number 5:



The entire trip supposedly took 8 days yet at no point are the astronauts shown on live TV defecating. And no one outside of NASA employees, some contractors, government inspectors, EPA officials, family and friends of the astronauts and the astronauts themselves has ever even seen any of the mythical poop bags from the supposed flight. WHERE ARE THE POOP BAGS??? Without defecating, they would have exploded after day 4.


this is a joke

[edit on 25-7-2009 by conar]



posted on Jul, 25 2009 @ 07:26 AM
link   
reply to post by conar
 


You should stop, now conar

You're making a fool of yourself.

Or, showing an unpleasant fascination with bodily functions.

If you can't figure out, yet, how spacesuits work, then there is no hope for you. UNLESS you want to think that ALL spaceflight is fake? Even today?



posted on Jul, 25 2009 @ 07:30 AM
link   
The soil under the flag and Lunar module is always thick and dark


Apollo 11
www.hq.nasa.gov...
Apollo 12
www.hq.nasa.gov...
Apollo 14
www.hq.nasa.gov...
Apollo 15
www.hq.nasa.gov...
Apollo 16
www.hq.nasa.gov...
Apollo 17
www.hq.nasa.gov...

The rest of the moon is mostly like this, far less dark and much more thin
www.hq.nasa.gov...

All the Lunar Modules stand on a dark surface, thicker than the surrounds

Am I trolling, or is there something about this?
(english is my 3rd language)


[edit on 25-7-2009 by conar]



posted on Jul, 25 2009 @ 07:41 AM
link   
reply to post by conar
 


I think it's a good time to review THIS thread, started by Majic, in Board Business:

Trolling, And What To Do About It



[edit on 25 July 2009 by weedwhacker]



posted on Jul, 25 2009 @ 09:24 AM
link   
reply to post by weedwhacker
 


Weedwacker, With all due respect.

As someone who is often labeled as a troll, I feel that is a hasty call.

In this case the poster ALWAYS has provided a basis ( links / photos etc.)
to support his claim.

Regardless of his length of tenure, he challenges critical thinking and has not displayed any rudeness or violation of T&C as far as I can tell.

Sorry, probably my 'Mommy Issues' coming out.
I have ALWAYS had a problem with threats and authority.

Sorry, I just think the truth (in this case official story) can withstand harsh scrutiny.

Kind Regards...KK


[edit on 25-7-2009 by kinda kurious]



posted on Jul, 25 2009 @ 10:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by conar
The soil under the flag and Lunar module is always thick and dark

Probably because the soil was disturbed by the landing and by the astronauts.

It was visible on the photos taken from inside the LM posted some posts back that the ground was much disturbed by the astronauts movements, and turned darker.




posted on Jul, 25 2009 @ 11:08 AM
link   
Thanks ArMaP, looks like it explain it.



What about the LM landing pads here, are they deep into the ground?

www.hq.nasa.gov...
www.hq.nasa.gov...
www.hq.nasa.gov...

[edit on 25-7-2009 by conar]



posted on Jul, 25 2009 @ 11:26 AM
link   
reply to post by conar
 


It looks like the LM is behind a small hill, and that is why we do not even see the lower part of the LM.

The following photo shows better how the terrain was at that site. It also shows the disturbed darker soil.




posted on Jul, 25 2009 @ 11:43 AM
link   
Looks like you are right again


edit: Found reverse side of the LM:
www.hq.nasa.gov...


Nothing strange here, its just very cool...
www.hq.nasa.gov...

[edit on 25-7-2009 by conar]



posted on Jul, 25 2009 @ 01:56 PM
link   
1968 classic movie 2001 a space odyssey on the moon
www.recordere.dk...

1972 Apollo 17 on the Moon
www.hq.nasa.gov...
www.hq.nasa.gov...

Pretty close



[edit on 25-7-2009 by conar]



posted on Jul, 25 2009 @ 02:01 PM
link   
reply to post by ArMaP
 



The following photo shows better how the terrain was at that site. It also shows the disturbed darker soil.


You know what's astonishing about that Apollo 15 photo is the angle of the LM. I forget what the maximum was to ensure a safe launch of the Ascent Module.

BUT, the mere fact that it is NOT perfectly level just lends another layer of credibility to the entire Apollo mission, not that it needed any more.

"Hoaxists" will still mumble their rubbish, regardless.



posted on Jul, 25 2009 @ 02:12 PM
link   
reply to post by conar
 



1968 classic movie 2001 a space odyssey on the moon
www.recordere.dk...


From a total geek and nerdy frame of reference, I've always wondered how accurate that depiction from 2001 was.

I looked up the Tycho crater, where the 'Monolith' was found (TMA-1) in the movie. It's roughly 43 degrees South, 11 West. I'm wondering just where the Earth would actually be, on the horizon, when viewed from that location.

Of course, that iconic shot from the film is NOT of Tycho crater, it is the 'base' nearby. BUT, when they travelled there on the 'moonbus' it didn't take all that long, it seemed. Just long enough to have a small snack on the way. SO, the Moon 'base' and the Tycho crater must be relatively near to each other??


EDIT: AND, also, I've always thought Kubrick got it (the Moon's landscape) a bit wrong, in the film. Too rough and pointy. AND (nitpicker alert!) the sequence of the Earth to Moon shuttle landing?? The 'dust' billows, as if there were an atmosphere...way wrong!

[edit on 25 July 2009 by weedwhacker]



posted on Jul, 25 2009 @ 04:33 PM
link   
Now, I'm stumped............



OK. Just kidding, of course.


And one more because the moon is made of cheese, mice love cheese, cats love mice.



Sorry, I'm bored. And we CT'ers DO have a sense of humor.


[edit on 25-7-2009 by kinda kurious]



posted on Jul, 27 2009 @ 01:49 AM
link   
sorry, crosspost


[edit on 27-7-2009 by conar]

[edit on 27-7-2009 by conar]



posted on Jul, 27 2009 @ 02:14 AM
link   
reply to post by conar
 

No need to crosspost
www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on Nov, 11 2009 @ 05:02 AM
link   
Here is a smoking gun.

In this video they are talking about these still photo and video footage anomalies and they show a video clip taken one day.. note the landscape with rocks in the foreground very clear.. then a couple of days later here they are miles away at a different location - and the landscape is the exact same.. in every detail.. so much so they superimpose one on the other and yep.. exact match. This was clearly faked.. no other conclusion can be arrived at even by the most ardent moon landing believer.

www.youtube.com...

If you listen to the NASA guys reasons he always sidesteps the issue and does not answer the hoax points with true science.

The more I learn the more I believe either we did not go to the Moon or at least the photos and video was faked.



posted on Nov, 11 2009 @ 06:51 AM
link   
I actually can’t believe that they would erase something like that "accidentally"?!?

I mean WTF??? It's like one of mankind's greatest achievements and definitely a landmark in NASA history.

The idiots! Why would NASA need to save money by re- using tapes?!?


Now the raw/original footage will never be seen. All we will see is the new and improved Disney version.



new topics

top topics



 
24
<< 11  12  13    15 >>

log in

join