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.

 

25% believe moon landings were hoax

page: 7
10
<< 4  5  6    8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 21 2009 @ 03:34 PM
link   
reply to post by weedwhacker
 


Thank you for your reply weedwacker - I am so used to earth physics that I didn't consider what you said about air displacement. This is precisely why I have come to love ATS - Intelligent people who are courteous as well - a rarity in any webdomain. Good on ya!

Acutally, all my questions came from looking at the photos on the NASA website; not from any videos or post I had read.

Got any ideas about where all the stars went in the pictures?




posted on Jul, 21 2009 @ 03:35 PM
link   
reply to post by orby1976
 


OK so 1 in 4 or 25% of people are thick or uneducated. Sounds about right to me!


Of course discounting those who haven't seen the over-whelming evidence, or unable to understand the evidence. The former being ignorant, and the latter either too young or may have a disability.

The key pieces of evidence being:

a). The many hours of excellent quality archived video footage of the whole mission(s) - from the take-off, separations and entire flight to the Moon, landing, taking-off and returning to the Earth.

b). The Moon rocks (duh!)


c). The Photographs.

d). The mirror put on the Moon by Apollo 11, which has been used by a group of scientists to fire a laser at it, to determine the distance between Moon & Earth.

e). The LROC images showing the landers, tracks left behind etc.

f). Since radio signals could be triangulated by anyone on Earth with the right equipment during the Apollo missions, then the Russian's would have known the radio signals weren't coming from the Moon. Why keep silent? Nothing to gain by doing so.

g). The resources & effort required to provide a cover-up involving 400,000 people who worked on the Apollo project would have been greater than actually going to the Moon itself. Therefore would have been easier just to go there!

[edit on 21-7-2009 by john124]

[edit on 21-7-2009 by john124]



posted on Jul, 21 2009 @ 03:43 PM
link   
reply to post by Asktheanimals
 



Got any ideas about where all the stars went in the pictures?


That one's easy! It's all about the photography, and exposure in the bright sunlight.

THIS site helps with answers:
www.clavius.org...

(and thanks...I try to be nice, but some --- NOT you
--- can really try my patience, sometimes....)



posted on Jul, 21 2009 @ 03:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by mf_luder
We went to the moon. Start focusing on conspiracies that actually matter.... like what the hell is happening to our economy?


Who cares about the economy? Nothing we can do about that... nor can we stop THEM from blowing the Middle East into the stone age...

At least the Moon... we only have radiation and gravity issues to deal with



posted on Jul, 21 2009 @ 03:52 PM
link   
reply to post by zorgon
 


LOL



posted on Jul, 21 2009 @ 03:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by Asktheanimals
 



Got any ideas about where all the stars went in the pictures?


That one's easy! It's all about the photography, and exposure in the bright sunlight.

THIS site helps with answers:
www.clavius.org...

(and thanks...I try to be nice, but some --- NOT you
--- can really try my patience, sometimes....)


I wish people would stop listening to the bad science used by moon hoax believers on their websites. They can't provide one accurate argument for anything. Quite frankly they are pathetic, and dupe people with their false logic.

All of the points they attempt to put across have been countered completely by sceptics such as Phil Plait - the Bad Astronomer.

When you ask the moon hoax believers questions - such as explain the points I made in my previous post to this one. They just disappear and go back to their own little world. They ignore all the evidence to support the moon landings. Instead they try and convince themselves a photo looks fraudelent using crap logic and forget the rest of the evidence.

The true moon hoax believers wouldn't believe it if they saw the landers with their own eyes, an approximate quote from Plait: "If they went to the Moon themselves and saw it with their own eyes, they would claim NASA had drugged them, rather than just accepting the truth. They haven't accepted evidence so far, so they're not going to start accepting evidence now. They only go on faith and belief alone."



posted on Jul, 21 2009 @ 04:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by john124
All of the points they attempt to put across have been countered completely by sceptics such as Phil Plait - the Bad Astronomer.



PFFTT His only interest is in making money at lecture tours and selling books debunking things. If it wasn't for conspiracy theories he would have to go out and work for a living like the rest of us



posted on Jul, 21 2009 @ 04:42 PM
link   
I am an American, I'm 55 and watched it live on tv back in 69. However over the years I've seen too much reliable evidence to ignore. I don't believe we went to the moon. They would have needed lead shielding 3 feet thick to go through the Van Allen Radiation Belt without dieing from radiation poisoning. Also the radiation from solar flares in space. They had no shielding. Think about it. The space station and all the shuttle missions happen below the belt. The Apollo missions were the only manned flights to supposedly ever go through it. Without shielding!? Not possible! There are other things I've seen that add to my skepticism but this is the clincher.
Shamus

[edit on 21-7-2009 by shamusfionne]



posted on Jul, 21 2009 @ 05:01 PM
link   
reply to post by shamusfionne
 
Just as a post script I'm neither thick headed or uneducated as you referenced in your generalization. I hold one Bachelors and 2 Associates Degrees. I also worked for the government for 20 years and take my word for it, they can orchestrate any hoax they choose to no matter how many people are involved. They kept the war in Laos and Operation White Star a secret the entire time Nam was going on and for 20 years after that and it was actually a bigger war that Nam was. How many people do you suppose were involved in that? More than all the troops and support personnel in Nam. That's more than the people employed at NASA at the time. Think about it!
Shamus



posted on Jul, 21 2009 @ 05:17 PM
link   
reply to post by shamusfionne
 



They would have needed lead shielding 3 feet thick to go through the Van Allen Radiation Belt without dieing from radiation poisoning.


No sir.

Already been mentioned, scroll through the thread (and others) at your leisure, you'll find that the radiation was not intantly deadly.

Flares? yes...a concern, certainly. it was a gamble,a coalculated risk. They had contingencies in mind, just in case. Such as using the bulk of the Service Module (and thus also the Heat Shield on the CM) for added protection, if it were to occur during the trans-Lunar flight portions.

On the Moon's surface? All they'd have is the LM.

Instantly lethal? Nope. Radiation poisoning is a progressive affliction. Certainly, if exposed to flares, would have shortened their lives horribly.

Edit: Hate to bring up extreme examples, but look at Japan. Or Chernobyl.

Japan, instant death was the result of hte blast --- the heat and pressure waves. Lingering, after-effects presented in days or weeks or months later, depending on proximity of survivors to initial blast.

Chernobyl? Lower dosages, again based on proximity. Soviet-era data may be lacking, though.

In the USA? TMI, only nuclear power plant accident of note. We don't hear much about it, I don't think there were any deaths directly attributed...causal factors such as cancers and tumors, possibly....but there are so many other environmental factors related to cancers.

[edit on 21 July 2009 by weedwhacker]



posted on Jul, 21 2009 @ 05:28 PM
link   
reply to post by weedwhacker
 


Short exposure time! duh :smack's head:, it's true - sometimes I need others to do the thinking for me. thanks again weedwhacker. there's too many real conspiracies it's easy to get sidetracked. I'm also on serious pain meds for medical reasons. It gets a trifle cloudy in here sometimes. cheers!



posted on Jul, 21 2009 @ 05:28 PM
link   
reply to post by weedwhacker
 


Short exposure time! duh :smack's head:, it's true - sometimes I need others to do the thinking for me. thanks again weedwhacker. there's too many real conspiracies it's easy to get sidetracked. I'm also on serious pain meds for medical reasons. It gets a trifle cloudy in here sometimes. cheers!



posted on Jul, 21 2009 @ 06:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by Asktheanimals sometimes I need others to do the thinking for me.


Well welcome to ATS (Autonomous Thinkers Supplied) I am sure you will find many here who will be glad to do that for you



I'm also on serious pain meds for medical reasons. It gets a trifle cloudy in here sometimes. cheers!


Tis never wise to post under the influence... now where are my lortabs.....



posted on Jul, 21 2009 @ 07:44 PM
link   
reply to post by thefreepatriot
 


Umm..., yeahh.......

LRO Sees Apollo Landing Sites

I should have looked on youtube first because it's reliable and that's how Donald Trump made his millions.

Forget about NASA and their 100 Billion dollar trip(s) to the moon.
What was I thinking!



posted on Jul, 23 2009 @ 04:11 PM
link   
reply to post by orby1976
 


I honestly expected more out of the English


It's amazing what people will believe without any evidence.

The Brits are great people but apparently 25% of them are just nutters. Damn shame.



posted on Jul, 24 2009 @ 12:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by Udontknowme
The moon landing was faked.

I'd prove it to you, but they erased that tape.


Not every tape was erased... there's plenty of video from each mission, and the quality is excellent. You can't fake this stuff in the late 60's and early 70's!

If the tape which was erased wasn't erased, how exactly could you prove what you are claiming? Use your brain and say more than silly meaningless phrases that can appear unwittingly true to those with lack of real judgement.



posted on Jul, 24 2009 @ 12:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by jfj123
reply to post by orby1976
 


I honestly expected more out of the English


It's amazing what people will believe without any evidence.

The Brits are great people but apparently 25% of them are just nutters. Damn shame.


Well 25% of them haven't looked at the evidence and so are ignorant, too young or too stupid to understand the evidence, just don't care, or are nutters who refuse to accept anything evidence based about the Moon landings. So many people have opinions without considering evidence or the facts, it's just getting silly, and they don't even realise. Not just with Moon landings, but also with politics and almost other subject area.

[edit on 24-7-2009 by john124]



posted on Jul, 24 2009 @ 12:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by zorgon

Originally posted by john124
All of the points they attempt to put across have been countered completely by sceptics such as Phil Plait - the Bad Astronomer.



PFFTT His only interest is in making money at lecture tours and selling books debunking things. If it wasn't for conspiracy theories he would have to go out and work for a living like the rest of us


That's the most ridiculous excuse for believing in this Moon hoax rubbish that I've ever heard. Don't you think the Moon hoax believers make money out of their lies.

Phil Plait provides a perfectly logical argument against every pro moon hoax argument, and so do many other sceptics and scientists - somebody has to filter out the rubbish, because people are so easily drawn into beliefs that are driven by false logic.

I agree with him not because he has the same view as me, but because he's right. If anyone were to put forward the same views I would agree with them as well.

And lastly your argument is so weak, as it's quite obvious that these sceptics have other jobs as well, and are educated people with degrees and doctorates. And unless you can provide some meaningful argument for your moon hoax beliefs, and something more than attacks on somebody who has logically countered all of your weak arguments, then you haven't progressed any further than your current level of a joke.

[edit on 24-7-2009 by john124]



posted on Jul, 26 2009 @ 09:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by shamusfionne
I am an American, I'm 55 and watched it live on tv back in 69. However over the years I've seen too much reliable evidence to ignore. I don't believe we went to the moon. They would have needed lead shielding 3 feet thick to go through the Van Allen Radiation Belt without dieing from radiation poisoning. Also the radiation from solar flares in space. They had no shielding. Think about it. The space station and all the shuttle missions happen below the belt. The Apollo missions were the only manned flights to supposedly ever go through it. Without shielding!? Not possible! There are other things I've seen that add to my skepticism but this is the clincher.
Shamus

[edit on 21-7-2009 by shamusfionne]


Sorry to say but all this has already been debunked a thousand times.
Please read up on it and you'll see for yourself.



posted on Jul, 31 2009 @ 05:59 AM
link   
The one common trait I see throught these threads is the GOVIES are so crass and disrespectful of other citizens no matter what country they live in.
They use words like nutter, supid, idiot, and the like. Very un- PC
On the other hand hoaxers use terminology for GOVIES like
HUGGERS and loyalists.
Cudos for the NASA hugger tag Zorgon.
The recent activity here on ATS alone is proof of an over whelming increase in people that just don't believe the US goverment tells the truth.



new topics

top topics



 
10
<< 4  5  6    8 >>

log in

join