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.

 

[New] Soviets Unable to Blow Whistle on Apollo Hoax?

page: 3
13
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 13 2010 @ 11:40 PM
link   


Here is are a couple of videos by the acclaimed Apollo researcher J. White...


I wish I had not been taking a swig of root bear when I read that.





We're whalers on the moon,
We carry a harpoon.
But there ain't no whales
So we tell tall tales
And sing our whaling tune.



Ex luna, scientia




posted on Aug, 14 2010 @ 12:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by Smack

I wish I had not been taking a swig of root bear when I read that.




My bad.



Anyhow, I'd like to thank you for alerting me to your beverage predicament; I'm always after direct feedback.



posted on Aug, 17 2010 @ 02:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by Exuberant1
*And remember: Even if one can accept that Apollo 17 really was tracked by HAMs; That still leaves Apollo 11 though 16 with no independent HAM corroboration whatsoever.


Apollo 11


In July of 1969 a ham radio operator and amateur radio-astronomer by the name of Larry Baysinger, W4EJA, accomplished an amazing feat. He independently detected radio transmissions from the Apollo 11 astronauts on the lunar surface.
www.arrl.org...




For 35 minutes, Larry and his friend, Glenn Rutherford, Science Writer for the Louisville Courier-Journal, were able to receive and tape audio conversations between the three astronauts using equipment cobbled together from a variety of sources, originally pieced together in order to experiment with radio astronomy and the reception of weather satellites.
www.usblsb.com...


Apollo 16



At least two different radio amateurs, W4HHK and K2RIW, reported reception of Apollo 16 signals with home-built equipment.
en.wikipedia.org...-36


Apollo 17


On December 10, 1972 we picked up our first signals on S-band. The main carrier was 45 dB over noise and the voice subcarrier was 25 dB over noise. Apollo 17 passed. over the lunar disc between 1722 and 1819.10 local time (2222-2319 UT), and we measured a total Doppler frequency shift of 43 kHz. The next day the lunar module landed on the Moon and at 1518 local time we picked up main carrier and telemetry from the surface of the moon some 80 minutes after touchdown. Unfortunately the astronauts soon changed to low power which prevented us from getting voice signals because of the too low signal-to-noise ratio. The lunar module transmitted on 2282.5 MHz, but we decided to shift back to the frequency of the command module in lunar orbit, i.e. 2287.5 MHz. The lone astronaut Evans was not very talkative except when he just appeared in front of the Moon or just before he disappeared behind it. At such times he changed to high power and on December 11 we could pick up our first voice signals from the Moon. At 1722.00 local time (2222 UT) Ron Evans said: "'Standby three zero" and at l722.30, i.e. 30 seconds later, we abruptly lost the signal as the spacecraft swung, around the edge of the Moon.
www.svengrahn.pp.se...


You probably won't understand anything in that article unless you are an Amateur Radio operator, or professionally involved in radio communications - but technically it's all correct.

That was just a quick search, serious research would most certainly reveal more.
It's not actually an amazing feat, it's common now for some of us radio hams to monitor current missions, for instance the current Mars missions.
I knocked together a rough and ready setup last week just to 'borrow' a French satellite tracking radar signal to listen to the returns from the ionised air caused by the meteors. It picked up returns from the moon and some satellites too looking back in the logs (you could tell due to the continuous signals that were showing a steady doppler shift across the waterfall display).
All these stories of intercepting space missions may sound fantastic but it's honestly a piece of cake when you know what you're doing. It's quite insulting having a bunch of people without a clue mouthing off what you can and can't do. I don't pretend to know all about American Idol and I wouldn't want to, so keep out of our hobby!



posted on Aug, 17 2010 @ 03:31 PM
link   
I`m not here to argue technology or even if we went there or not. But you say the Russians had a very good reason not to spill the beans, so to say, on the moon landinf hoax. What reason do they have today and what reason have they had for the past 30+ years (im guessing) that they DIDNT rely on our telescopes? I`m sure there are plenty of other things we could`ve held over their head or blackmailed them with over the years, but I`m just wondering if that`s what you think. Because they can`t STILL be relying on our telescopes, can they? So that reason could only have lasted so long, you see what I mean? I agree that the relationship was and is a lot more complicated than was and is known publicly... I know everyone always references books like this but it reminds me of Orwell`s 1984 how there`s a perpetual war between the 3 superpowers and we are always allied with one and at war with the other. And the same situation exists in the other 2 superpowers, which in itself is a contradiction of logic! 3 superpowers can`t all be allied with one and at war with another, you`d end up being in an alliance with the country supposedly at wars with you! (sp: war) Was there ever really a "cold war"? Or did a few people just get filthy rich off all the stuff that got developed and manufactured and the interest from the loans needed to produce so much so quick? Wouldn`t you love to have a client who wants to buy everything you got and wants you to keep on selling more, as much as you can get your hands on? Like a drug fiend who cannot be satisfied, our leaders spent enough on "defense" to kill all life on earth (human life, supposedly) hundreds of times over. And these doomsday devices do not come cheap... My favorite apocalyptic fun fact: The most likely reason that Global Nuclear Annihialation(sp) would occur would be due to a mistake, error, or accident. We`ve got all these things hooked up to computers. Computers have been known to do strange things, ya know what I mean?


 
Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com
 



posted on Aug, 17 2010 @ 09:16 PM
link   
reply to post by AgentSmith
 


You have not argued your points successfully.

But that is probably not possible for you.



posted on Aug, 18 2010 @ 01:32 AM
link   
reply to post by Exuberant1
 


Really?
You said:


Originally posted by Exuberant1
*And remember: Even if one can accept that Apollo 17 really was tracked by HAMs; That still leaves Apollo 11 though 16 with no independent HAM corroboration whatsoever.


And I showed you that there was 'independant ham corroboration' for Apollo 11 and 16.
I also posted an article showing the technical details of how the transmissions from Apollo 17 were intercepted, which is clearly beyond your level of understanding, but you have to remember it is not just for your benefit.



posted on Aug, 18 2010 @ 01:44 AM
link   
reply to post by doctor j and inmate c5779
 


They never relied on anyone's radio telescopes, the Russians had their own.

The OP only showed the part of the article he wanted us to see, the rest was conveniently left out.

I linked to the full article on page 2:


Originally posted by Chadwickus


Here's the rest of the article:

www.time.com...


In the early days of the space race, the Jodrell Bank observatory had the best steerable radio telescope available outside Russia, in a location that permitted tracking Soviet satellites. As a result, Lovell established a reputation as the Western world's foremost interpreter of Soviet space exploits—a reputation that he has maintained by using the skillful public-relations techniques demonstrated at Jodrell Bank last week.




[edit on 18/8/10 by Chadwickus]



posted on Aug, 29 2010 @ 12:07 PM
link   
www.abovetopsecret.com...




One of the cornerstones of the Apollo hoaxers tales:
"Soviets were able to track and watch it" is demolished.
It is nothing but the conspiracy tale spinning;
so "до свидания, пропагадисты" as Jarrah said.



posted on Aug, 29 2010 @ 12:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by bokonon2010
www.abovetopsecret.com...


One of the cornerstones of the Apollo hoaxers tales:
"Soviets were able to track and watch it" is demolished.
It is nothing but the conspiracy tale spinning;
so "до свидания, пропагадисты" as Jarrah said.


Either Jarrah is becoming completely unhinged or is plumbing new depths in lying.

The first video debunks the Soviets claim that the tracked Apollo based on ONE FACT, that is, that Moscow was not in the proper position to receive the Apollo signals when the Apollo 11 landing occurred.

What does Moscow have to do with anything?! Following the "logic" of Jarrah, Houston couldn't track Apollo either for vast periods of time because they weren't always pointed at the moon. Jarrah must not realize that the USSR spanned 9 time zones, so at least one of their tracking stations may have been in position to recieve the signals. He also doesn't realize the USSR have ships fit with radiotelesopes that could have received the signals.

He just keeps repeating Moscow, Moscow, Moscow........duh.

Then he throws out the strawman of the Hams that received signals from Apollo by claiming the said they tracked the entire flight. Not one of them Hams has EVER claimed to have tracked entire flights, it is physically impossible.

He even trots out the "bands available to Hams" again, but doesn't expand on it.

Really, he's completely lost it.



posted on Aug, 29 2010 @ 02:18 PM
link   
reply to post by Tomblvd
 

It is you who lost it.

In the first video analyzed the claim (underwritten by Leonov) that
the stations in or near Moscow have received live TV from the Apollo 11 'moonwalk'.
Since you have failed to understand this argument, can you present the recordings of this live TV session?

As for other deep space Russian stations at Siberia, Far East, ships -
did they have the equipment to receive the Apollo transmissions?
Present the documentation, or continue to believe that in 60s Russians were monitoring everything from under the beds in Area 51.



posted on Aug, 29 2010 @ 02:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by bokonon2010
reply to post by Tomblvd
 



In the first video analyzed the claim (underwritten by Leonov) that
the stations in or near Moscow have received live TV from the Apollo 11 'moonwalk'.


Please give the specific time stamp from that video where that is stated.



posted on Sep, 2 2010 @ 09:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by bokonon2010


In the first video analyzed the claim (underwritten by Leonov) that
the stations in or near Moscow have received live TV from the Apollo 11 'moonwalk'.
Since you have failed to understand this argument, can you present the recordings of this live TV session?


On another thread boko posted the same video and I asked again where that statement was made. He said 0:00.

This is what is found at that timestamp:

"On the morning of 28 July 1969, everyone forgot, for a few moments, that we were all citizens of different countries of Earth. That moment really united the human race. Even in the military centre where I stood, where military men were observing the achievements of our rival superpower, there was loud applause."

As can be plainly seen, it says nothing indicating "the claim (underwritten by Leonov) that the stations in or near Moscow have received live TV from the Apollo 11 'moonwalk'."

I await your response boko......



posted on Sep, 3 2010 @ 01:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by phoenix103
reply to post by Exuberant1
 


Good lord.

Man went to the moon, there was no hoax.

It is not a matter for debate on the intricacies of the arguments people have put forward. They clearly meant well when doing so but have given these morons who believe it didnt happen more credibility than their banal rhetoric warrants.


So why the constellation program got canceled if we are so called experts going to the moon? How come no other country can send a man to the moon, but it seems only the USA can? Russia tried and their two astronauts died on the way there. Also funny how NASA states to this day that space flight is dangerous, but we had no problems going there with the exception of Apollo 13 when they actually tried to go.



posted on Sep, 3 2010 @ 02:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by phoenix103
reply to post by Exuberant1
 


Good lord.

Man went to the moon, there was no hoax.

It is not a matter for debate on the intricacies of the arguments people have put forward. They clearly meant well when doing so but have given these morons who believe it didnt happen more credibility than their banal rhetoric warrants.


I can only assume that due to your quick fired post that you have carried out as much research and informative study as the OP?

There are so many discrepancies in regards to the moon landings it is ignorant to make such a sweeping statement. Just like 9/11 its easy for people to make such sweeping statements but the more you look in to the events the more you actually find.

It made sense for the USSR to let the US do its thing because they knew that they would need their help in the future. This is the whole reason that Japan,China haven't blown the whistle its all about keeping the cards close to the chest and seeing what they can get out of it.

[edit on 3-9-2010 by franspeakfree]



posted on Sep, 3 2010 @ 05:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by dragnet53

So why the constellation program got canceled if we are so called experts going to the moon?


M.O.N.E.Y.

The current administration cancelled the program so they could spend the money elsewhere. Why is that so hard to understand?


How come no other country can send a man to the moon, but it seems only the USA can? Russia tried and their two astronauts died on the way there.


On the way there? When did this happen?.


Also funny how NASA states to this day that space flight is dangerous, but we had no problems going there with the exception of Apollo 13 when they actually tried to go.


Try to understand this. A trip to the moon and back takes around a week. A trip to Mars would take over a year. Do you see that there's a difference in cumulative radiation exposure between the two?



posted on Sep, 3 2010 @ 05:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by franspeakfree

There are so many discrepancies in regards to the moon landings it is ignorant to make such a sweeping statement.


Such as?



It made sense for the USSR to let the US do its thing because they knew that they would need their help in the future. This is the whole reason that Japan,China haven't blown the whistle its all about keeping the cards close to the chest and seeing what they can get out of it.


So every person in the USSR, the US, China and Japan involved in their space programs have kept their mouths shut? How does that happen?



posted on Sep, 3 2010 @ 06:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by Tomblvd
Such as?


Please take a deep look at the OPS threads in his profile, you will see he puts a great deal of effort in to his threads and all his information is backed up by actual evidence, unlike alot of threads on this site. Please pay special attention to many of the videos that the OP posts for us to see.




So every person in the USSR, the US, China and Japan involved in their space programs have kept their mouths shut? How does that happen?


Its simple, the entire projects are compartmentalised please take a good look at this thread here Do You Know What I Did Yesterday it is an analogy of how all of this works.



posted on Sep, 3 2010 @ 06:11 AM
link   
reply to post by Tomblvd
 


BS on the money part. They spent less in the 50's and got it done. DOn't give me that crap. They are experts and they should know how to do things faster and a more timely manner. That is a bunch of hogwash.



posted on Sep, 3 2010 @ 06:13 AM
link   
reply to post by franspeakfree
 


plus karma is now taking place and Russia is now the leader in space flight. Karma doesn't lie.



posted on Sep, 3 2010 @ 09:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by dragnet53
reply to post by Tomblvd
 


BS on the money part. They spent less in the 50's and got it done.

Actually the bulk of the money was spent in the 60's, and it was far more in today's dollars than anything NASA currently gets.



new topics

top topics



 
13
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join