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.

 

Neil Armstrong to skip Apollo 11 event

page: 1
6
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 16 2009 @ 05:39 PM
link   

Neil Armstrong to skip Apollo 11 event


www.guardian.co.uk

The world's most famous moon walker is to skip a Nasa event next week commemorating the 40th anniversary of the moon landing. The notoriously shy Neil Armstrong, the first of only a dozen men to set foot on the Earth's nearest neighbour, is counting on Apollo 11 shipmate Buzz Aldrin to relive his "one small step" for a worldwide audience.

Armstrong is said to be deeply suspicious of fans and of the press. Instead, Aldrin will be joined on Monday at Nasa's Washington headquarters by Eugene Cernan, one of the last astronauts to visit the moon, and other Nasa astronauts.
(visit the link for the full news article)

 

mod edit, to reflect title of new article



[edit on 18-7-2009 by DontTreadOnMe]




posted on Jul, 16 2009 @ 05:39 PM
link   
Ugh, I hate to say it... Look Closely at Neil's Eye's. I suspect, if what the latest trend on moon landings is saying, it was all a hollywood styled lie to thwart the russian ego that we landed on the moon.

They had to reduce Neil's inhibitions with recreational substances for him to appear on film as a man who lied about the moon landing. As well to even appear on public photo, if he is the nervous nellie they make him out to be.

In short they got Neil as high as Buzz (lol), in order to be on film representing a lie.

www.guardian.co.uk
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on Jul, 16 2009 @ 05:59 PM
link   
i hope that one day he comes clean and tells the world that it was all a hoax.. the man looks terrified for his and his family's life.... no wonder he refuses to speak about it...to afraid to say a wrong word or too embarrassed to lie.... i hope some of those people who can read body language are watching the charade...



posted on Jul, 16 2009 @ 06:06 PM
link   
Neil once went into a TV interview, was asked what it was like to be the first man to walk on the Moon, and left crying.


I've also seen footage of Buzz Aldrin being presented with footage apparently showing the crew inside the lunar module, until you see a microphone in front of a light and they stop for a few seconds so someone could move it. And when Aldrin was presented with this footage, instead of rationally explaining when the footage was actually taken and what it showed, he just got very angry, and eventually punched the man presenting him with the footage in the face.

What do you think would cause Mr. Aldrin to behave so immaturely? I can't help but think he has some serious emotional issues about the landing lying just under the surface of his mind.....


A more recent space mission led scientists to discover that approaching the Van Allen radiation belt causes closed-eye visuals due to radiation impacting the back of the retina. Apollo was supposed to have passed through this very same radiation belt without problems, why didn't they already know of this phenomena? Aldrin was also asked about this and simply said no, that didn't happen to any of them. No further comment on it. A little more than just bizarre if you ask me.



posted on Jul, 16 2009 @ 06:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by bsbray11I've also seen footage of Buzz Aldrin being presented with footage apparently showing the crew inside the lunar module, until you see a microphone in front of a light and they stop for a few seconds so someone could move it. And when Aldrin was presented with this footage, instead of rationally explaining when the footage was actually taken and what it showed, he just got very angry, and eventually punched the man presenting him with the footage in the face.


That or he is pissed off that he risked his life to land on the moon, and people call him a liar, so he punches them in the face. I certainly would.



posted on Jul, 16 2009 @ 06:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by 2shores
They had to reduce Neil's inhibitions with recreational substances for him to appear on film as a man who lied about the moon landing. As well to even appear on public photo, if he is the nervous nellie they make him out to be.

In short they got Neil as high as Buzz (lol), in order to be on film representing a lie.


Despite my disagreement with your conclusion, this was funny.

He might look high, but blasting off a rocket to be the first man to land on the moon, possibly, might make one more than a little nervous.



posted on Jul, 16 2009 @ 06:19 PM
link   
If the stories are true about Armstrong he has pretty good reason to be avoiding this thing. Apparently he starts sweating, getting sick and has strange bouts of amnesia and fleeing from rooms when people ask him questions.

Some theorize that he's been brainwashed or something. I personally I think that social discomfort at being quizzed about something that never happened is a more likely scenario. These guys were never trained to be liars by Nasa I don't think.



posted on Jul, 16 2009 @ 06:27 PM
link   
reply to post by bsbray11
 


Oh, for Chrissakes!!!

Originally posted by bsbray11

A more recent space mission led scientists to discover that approaching the Van Allen radiation belt causes closed-eye visuals due to radiation impacting the back of the retina. Apollo was supposed to have passed through this very same radiation belt without problems, why didn't they already know of this phenomena? Aldrin was also asked about this and simply said no, that didn't happen to any of them. No further comment on it.


What hack "Hoax" website did THAT come from???

Here:

.....

Since then, astronauts aboard Skylab, the Shuttle, Mir, and the International Space Station have all reported seeing these flashes. No need to call Agents Mulder and Scully of The X Files, though: what the astronauts are experiencing is space radiation zipping through their eyes like subatomic bullets. When a "bullet" strikes the retina, it triggers a false signal that the brain interprets as a flash of light.

Needless to say, this is not good for your eyes. Years after returning to Earth, many of these astronauts developed cataracts - a clouding of the lens, which focuses light onto the retina.

At least 39 former astronauts have suffered some form of cataracts after flying in space, according to a 2001 study by Francis Cucinotta of NASA's Johnson Space Center (see journal references below). Of those 39 astronauts, 36 had flown on high-radiation missions such as the Apollo Moon landings. Some cataracts appeared as soon as 4 or 5 years after the mission, but others took 10 or more years to manifest.
.....
www.spacedaily.com...


[edit on 16 July 2009 by weedwhacker]



posted on Jul, 16 2009 @ 06:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by yellowcard
That or he is pissed off that he risked his life to land on the moon, and people call him a liar, so he punches them in the face. I certainly would.


And when asked what it was like to walk on the Moon, you would leave an interview crying, too, I guess?

Or traveling through a radiation belt, you would also have Superman's retinas?



posted on Jul, 16 2009 @ 06:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by weedwhacker
What hack "Hoax" website did THAT come from???


Once again, I have seen Aldrin deny that he experienced closed-eye visuals from the radiation with my very own eyes and ears.


Edit: I was mistaken! It was astronaut Alan Bean that said it, not Buzz.


This is all on the documentary "Astronauts Gone Wild" but I think the individual clips have been removed from YouTube, as the website for the documentary claims. But there are still ATS posts and the documentary itself:



Originally posted by afklop
I suggest everyone watches the video before commenting, because some of the comments from the astronauts are surprising, to say the least.

"I'm not sure we went far enough out to encounter the van allen radiation belt" -- Alan Bean

the guy then tells him about a 1998 shuttle mission where they went 350ish miles up (650 below begining of radiation belt), and the astronauts reported seeing what they called shooting stars while their eyes were closed. Then he asks alan bean, and he says that yah, if you close your eyes and concentrate you could probably see them, but not on their mission, because they hadnt been discovered yet.


www.abovetopsecret.com...



Carry on.


[edit on 16-7-2009 by bsbray11]



posted on Jul, 16 2009 @ 07:05 PM
link   


All of a sudden I saw a flash, and then another flash. And before I could move my eye to see what it was, it was gone. And then maybe a streak. And I kept seeing these, until I decided I wanted to go to sleep. So when we had one day left coming back and I said to the other two guys, “You guys see anything funny last night, like some flashes of light, or something? Mike, did you see anything?”

“No, I didn’t see anything.”


....
Buzz Aldrin's Freaky Space Travel Story



posted on Jul, 16 2009 @ 07:10 PM
link   
A short video. I see clouds in the dudes visor. I believe they used a dark back drop during the day time and kept the camera angle low so that you would not see the support. That's how they could light a moon surface, while shooting in the desert.

Also is the apollo 11 press conference. Listen to how much Neil hates lying.

Peace


(click to open player in new window)



posted on Jul, 16 2009 @ 07:13 PM
link   
I also forgot that in the 1998 mission used as a reference, they didn't even go through the Van Allen belt, they only came within 650 miles of it, and were already experiencing the radiation impacting their retinas.

It's been a long-standing claim that the shuttle itself would never make it through the radiation belt, at least without killing the astronauts (consider how much insulation the feds recommend for blocking radiation, vs. how thick the shuttle itself was). So this 1998 mission doesn't even enter the belt, and it's astronauts area already experiencing the radiation hit their retinas, while Apollo supposedly went through it, and at least one of their astronauts claims he experienced nothing.

So what made so much difference?

[edit on 16-7-2009 by bsbray11]



posted on Jul, 16 2009 @ 07:21 PM
link   
I have to say I myself investigated the Moon landing as a possible hoax. The reasoning was very sound. BEAT COMMUNISM! Be first to the Moon, Beat the Ruskees, Beat Communism.

What I did was separate my desire to try to attempt to defend the Moon landing or to Discredit it.

I simply looked at the evidence and let it speak for itself.

Mankind most certainly DID in fact land and walk on the Moon. Weather or not we FOUND anything on the Moon and covered up those Discoveries I think would be an entirely different subject.

Yeah Astronauts can be Human.

Just look at that crazy female Astronaut who was driving cross country in Diapers to kidnap her man from some other woman.

It does not mean that because the First Human to walk on the Moon appears shady that he did not indeed walk on the Moon.

What would lay a greater amount of guilt on you?

Hiding the fact that man never walked on the Moon?

Hiding the fact that there is intelligent life from off the Planet Earth or signs of that life from everyone in your entire life.

If anyone has seen crazy stuff regarding Aliens or Other worldly Intelligent life I can probably Imagine it would be Astronauts.

Or Maybe he is just an Older Person from a different generation and is just a crabby old fart?

Maybe he does not like to feel like the top person on the pyramid of contribution where every human achievement in history came together to get those brave few up to the very top?

Either way I strongly believe that Man went to the Moon.



posted on Jul, 16 2009 @ 07:22 PM
link   
I think they've been brainwashed, at their return from the moon. They probably saw some strange things up there and The Power That Be was afraid they would tell the public about it.



posted on Jul, 16 2009 @ 07:27 PM
link   

The Van Allen belts span only about forty degrees of earth's latitude -- twenty degrees above and below the magnetic equator. The diagrams of Apollo's translunar trajectory printed in various press releases are not entirely accurate. They tend to show only a two-dimensional version of the actual trajectory. The actual trajectory was three-dimensional. The highly technical reports of Apollo, accessible to but not generally understood by the public, give the three-dimensional details of the translunar trajectory. Each mission flew a slightly different trajectory in order to access its landing site, but the orbital inclination of the translunar coast trajectory was always in the neighborhood of 30°. Stated another way, the geometric plane containing the translunar trajectory was inclined to the earth's equator by about 30°. A spacecraft following that trajectory would bypass all but the edges of the Van Allen belts. This is not to dispute that passage through the Van Allen belts would be dangerous. But NASA conducted a series of experiments designed to investigate the nature of the Van Allen belts, culminating in the repeated traversal of the Southern Atlantic Magnetic Anomaly (an intense, low-hanging patch of Van Allen belt) by the Gemini 10 astronauts.

www.xmission.com...

and lets not forget what the guy who the belts were named after said in response to a moon hoax show on fox..


"The recent Fox TV show, which I saw, is an ingenious and entertaining assemblage of nonsense. The claim that radiation exposure during the Apollo missions would have been fatal to the astronauts is only one example of such nonsense." -- Dr. James Van Allen
www.clavius.org...



posted on Jul, 16 2009 @ 07:29 PM
link   
reply to post by 2shores
 


Sigh. Yet another attempt to disprove the moon. Where's the evidence this time?

Now that all physical evidence supposedly disproving it has been twarted, you're moving onto psychology?

Why can't you just give up?



posted on Jul, 16 2009 @ 08:04 PM
link   
reply to post by pccat
 


Wow you just answered some questions that I myself had "Assumed"! Ugh! I was ALWAYS under the impression that the Van Allen belt was DANGEROUSLY fatal and the Astronauts had to spend a great deal of time traveling through it. Maybe it is pretty rough but your post put it into my brain in a whole different perspective.

Thank you lots and lots for posting that.



posted on Jul, 16 2009 @ 08:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by Gorman91
reply to post by 2shores
 


Sigh. Yet another attempt to disprove the moon. Where's the evidence this time?

Now that all physical evidence supposedly disproving it has been twarted, you're moving onto psychology?

Why can't you just give up?


I don't think anyone is debating the moon. Fact is, who cares if we went or not because it will only EVER be real to those who went if they did indeed go. To the billions back on earth it was only a t.v. image.

Billions who have no access to prove anything to themselves compared to the Twelve Men that went....do you understand, those who supposedly went number 12 men. Do you think you could buy off 12 men, making their names legends, book deals, speaking circuits, commercials, movie characters named after them....You think it really that hard? How about with a gun in their backs or aimed at their families? You think it would be hard to make them not talk, even as to make them avoid the 40th anniversary when they were the first person to do such a thing?

Because he is shy or because he doesn't want to be put in an awkward position? Men with few words say few words, but they still arrive. Was it not an achievement for Mankind, or was that man?

Every person learns from true science. It is nothing that need be taught you, it is in you and the purpose that drives you. No amount of footage will ever tell a person what is and isn't. They must do that for themselves practicing and learning from cause and effect.

Just my thoughts...peace



posted on Jul, 16 2009 @ 08:33 PM
link   
reply to post by letthereaderunderstand
 


Science says they did go. Too much evidence says they did go. In the other space topic about this, 10 reasons why is didn't happen, I went down a whole list of debunks.

We never went to so many planets, and yet know so much about them. Because you don't have to see something directly to know what it is. That's what machines are for.

Also, if you ever had a veteran relative, that's the way most of them are.

After growing up in an era that did not like show offs, why would he?

Most of the vets that I know are this way. Happy with the private life of nothing and living alone. It's not a sign of any dissent of fear. It's the result of living in poverty for most of your life from the great depression, going off to fight in war, and coming back.

[edit on 16-7-2009 by Gorman91]



new topics

top topics



 
6
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join