Apollo Hardware Spotted!

reply to post by ngchunter


You called me a bad name! NO, just kidding. I KNOW that the LDM is there. I know man landed on the Moon and hung around up there for a while. I know that the technology to put a man on the moon existed back then. I know the guys they sent to the moon had the skills and the wills to do it. So do the Russians!


I just wanted to spoof the hoaxers again, so they could provide more examples of the flawless logic, like the 'flag' waving or the Saturn V launch system not having the nuts to do anything else but put the Trans-Lunar payload stack in orbit, or that you can't see any star's in the Moon photo's or that the 'shadows' don't match up, or ......

I know all this stuff because my wife used to baby-sit for John Young. John Young says man has landed on the Moon multiple times. John Young is like the Chuck Norris of space! Bring it on hoaxers, show me your flawless logic. Moon hoaxers, what you get when actual science confuses you !

reply to post by doctorrosenbaum


your reply should be stickied and have 9000 stars

reply to post by NotAConsumer


Thanks, just call them as I see them.

Originally posted by CarbonBase
reply to post by ngchunter

 

You called me a bad name! NO, just kidding.

Huh? Is "doctorrosenbaum" a sock puppet? I was replying and referring to him, I could tell your post was sarcasm.

I know all this stuff because my wife used to baby-sit for John Young. John Young says man has landed on the Moon multiple times. John Young is like the Chuck Norris of space!

Bring it on hoaxers, show me your flawless logic. Moon hoaxers, what you get when actual science confuses you !

edit on 23/4/2013 by CarbonBase because: Spelling. Content. Laughing to hard to concentrate !

John Young is awesome, I still don't get why he always wears a turtleneck though. But hey, he's a moonwalker, I think he gets to make his own style.

Originally posted by doctorrosenbaum
If they can take photos of our license plates from earth orbit, they sure have the capability to takes some shots with a lunar satellite.

OK, even if they can take photos of our license plates (how can they do it, do you have your license plates on the top of the car? ), think about these two points for a moment:

Why would they want to read a license plate?

Why would they want that resolution for photos of the Moon?

Originally posted by doctorrosenbaum
reply to post by ngchunter

 

I honestly have jumped shipped over this type of thing and now find myself among the ranks of advocates for Apollo as hoax. If they can take photos of our license plates from earth orbit,

License plate from Earth orbit just love that one, read this then please shut up about that MYTH!!!

Here is the resolution required to read a number plate / newspaper headline from low Earth orbit

0.1 CM or 1 mm /pixel resolution



More info here Newspaper from space

LRO is 25/26cm per pixel on low orbit or 50cm/pixel on high orbit.

Google Earth images showing your house/car in the drive are 50cm/pixel.

Resolution of an optical system is limited (by physics) in many ways read up on it.

Optical Resolution

Originally posted by NotAConsumer
reply to post by doctorrosenbaum

 

your reply should be stickied and have 9000 stars

It seems that ignorance is indeed bliss

Originally posted by doctorrosenbaum
reply to post by NotAConsumer

 

Thanks, just call them as I see them.

Here is a link for both of you to look at images from the LRO compared with Apollo pictures taken on the surface looking at rock craters etc may be this will help you understand that they did land on the Moon.

LRO compared to Apollo 17 Images

reply to post by CasaVigilante


That image is the first image of the Apollo 14 landing site taken by the LRO. It was taken while it was still in it's commissioning orbit (+100km altitude). You should try looking at the images that were taken in its standard orbit (~50km give or take).

Apollo landing sites

reply to post by ngchunter


hickies, and lots of them

reply to post by ArMaP


playing with a cliche, my message was that the LM base can easily be well resolved, nothing more, but nothing less

reply to post by wmd_2008


those of us that hit this controversy from a medical perspective tend not to be persuaded, or not persuaded by the videos and photos, right or wrong, we look at the argument made for sending Slayton and we say to ourselves that this is not real, this did not happen, slayton's medical story was made up and so all of it must be made up, then and only then do we look at the pics and point out how they appear fake

now for me, i have looked a the slayton issue pretty hard for two years, i mostly have focused on reading the medical literature from that time, i am convinced it is fake

on the other hand, what got me going was thinking about the imaging issue, were apollo real they would have taken shots out of curiosity, changing the story on the lunar rock hydration status got me thinking also, you can't change the scientific data that way, but ultimately you look to what you know best, they cleared Slayton to fly in 69 or 70 i believe, have to check my numbers, that's got to be fake, no give there, so at the end of the day, the photos are not relevant for someone like me, they are an afterthought

reply to post by jra


to try and make the point one more time, you can show me all the images you like and for my money, it's never been convincing one way or the other bsed on images, but now take shepard's case, he had a problem where there was not an unreasonable chance for him to vomit in his helmet and aspirate, were his story true, even with respect to his alleged cure, so for someone like me that does this work day in and out and has read the contemporaneous medical literature we know the story to be untrue, if the shepard story is untrue, then it all is, and so it goes, apollo has been exposed as fakery, nothing more

anecdotes like Aldrin's being aware of Neil's "one small step" mistake during the flight back are helpful for someone like me, more than photo analysis, but still it's the medical issues that seem bedrock solid and absolutely convincing

reply to post by doctorrosenbaum


Well, it looks like you could start a thread about those medical issues, it's something I haven't seen much (if at all) on ATS.

reply to post by doctorrosenbaum


Hello again, Patrick ("decisively", etc.).
Still can't stay away?
Still can't change your M.O.?
Still can't grasp basic logic?

Originally posted by doctorrosenbaum
if the shepard story is untrue, then it all is...

reply to post by doctorrosenbaum


Hey no comment regarding your license plate BS I see, ALL the landing sites have been pictured, the Astronauts took photographs/measurements were taken around the sites and NOW from the LRO we can compare images taken 40yrs ago and check positions and distances so care to explain the images in this link if you bothered to look.

LRO compared to Apollo 17 Images

Now if you were taken in by the number plate MYTH what else have you got wrong, if you really are a doctor I am glad your not mine!!!

All photographs can be altered. PhotoShop is almost ubiquitous in modern countries and I think this is why a lot of people won't take these pictures as proof of anything. The thing that always puzzled me about the moon landings is that these men were getting massive doeses of radiation wether it be from the Van Allen belt, solar flares, moon shine(the surface of the moon has higher radiation levels than open space due to high energy protons from the sun colliding with atoms on the surface creating xrays and gamma rays) or just traveling through open space. Yet not one of them had any negative heath effect associated with radiation exposure.

Originally posted by BriGuyTM90
All photographs can be altered. PhotoShop is almost ubiquitous in modern countries and I think this is why a lot of people won't take these pictures as proof of anything. The thing that always puzzled me about the moon landings is that these men were getting massive doeses of radiation wether it be from the Van Allen belt, solar flares, moon shine(the surface of the moon has higher radiation levels than open space due to high energy protons from the sun colliding with atoms on the surface creating xrays and gamma rays) or just traveling through open space. Yet not one of them had any negative heath effect associated with radiation exposure.

edit on 25-4-2013 by BriGuyTM90 because: (no reason given)

Even Van Allen himself said they would have no problems with the belts due to the path they took, there were NO major solar flares during missions, moonshine is an illegal drink is it not

Do you have any links to your other comments re surface radiation etc.

reply to post by wmd_2008


science.nasa.gov...

It's from NASA too, I know that means something to some people. Also there were no MAJOR solar flares but there were minor ones and sense radiation damage is accumulated the fact that minor ones occured is not irrelevant. Also Dr. Allen was't aware about the third outer belt that was recently discovered by NASA, so when stating that he didn't have the proper information to make an accurate hypothesis. I'm not saying that these guys should have dropped dead on the moon, but sense none of them have reported radiation related ailments (some got cataracts but all astronauts have higher risk of them) throughout their lives seems kind of fishy. I could be completely wrong but it doesn't make sense to me.

Originally posted by BriGuyTM90
reply to post by wmd_2008

 

science.nasa.gov...

It's from NASA too, I know that means something to some people. Also there were no MAJOR solar flares but there were minor ones and sense radiation damage is accumulated the fact that minor ones occured is not irrelevant. Also Dr. Allen was't aware about the third outer belt that was recently discovered by NASA, so when stating that he didn't have the proper information to make an accurate hypothesis. I'm not saying that these guys should have dropped dead on the moon, but sense none of them have reported radiation related ailments (some got cataracts but all astronauts have higher risk of them) throughout their lives seems kind of fishy. I could be completely wrong but it doesn't make sense to me.

edit on 25-4-2013 by BriGuyTM90 because: (no reason given)

Yes it would be a problem for possible missions in the future if bases are built and Astronauts are there for many days or weeks the Apollo missions were not that long.

Apollo 17 Lunar surface time 3 d 02 h 59 m 40s

EVA ( ie outside lander)

Lunar EVA duration
First 07:11:53
Second 07:36:56
Third 07:15:08
Total 22:03:57

Also from your link

According to the Vision for Space Exploration, NASA plans to send astronauts back to the Moon by 2020 and, eventually, to set up an outpost. For people to live and work on the Moon safely, the radiation problem must be solved.