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.

 

Moon Landing Theories Linked?

page: 1
2

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 31 2009 @ 07:57 AM
link   


Everyone knows that a lot of people think the moon landing was hoaxed. There's many theories and a certain amount of visual evidence for example the wind blowing the flag etc.

Moon Landing Hoax Documentary

Part 2
Part 3
Part 4
Part 5

Some people claim that the US hoaxed it to beat Russia in the space race. There's many theories but this conspiracy clashes with the UFO Moon Bases conspiracy.

Alien Moon Bases


NASA Air Brushing Images


The general consensus is that when the astronauts landed on the moon that they could see aliens and UFO's acting hostile and that there was apparently a moon base. Many people also believe this is the reason that the astronauts of Apollo 11 are reluctant in interviews.

Personally I don't know which to believe, I'm more inclined to believe that it was a hoax and they never landed but I feel something odd happened.

One theory I was thinking about is maybe they did land and the aliens and bases were there. Perhaps this is why they created a hoaxed film to show the public as they couldn't show the real footage? I appreciate it was supposedly streamed live and watch by millions on TV but I wouldn't put it past NASA to have pre-recorded something just in case the moon wasn't all as it seemed.

I'm unsure as to what happened but I feel that we're definitely not being told the whole truth.




[edit on 31-7-2009 by Scope and a Beam]




posted on Jul, 31 2009 @ 09:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by Scope and a Beam
One theory I was thinking about is maybe they did land and the aliens and bases were there. Perhaps this is why they created a hoaxed film to show the public as they couldn't show the real footage? I appreciate it was supposedly streamed live and watch by millions on TV but I wouldn't put it past NASA to have pre-recorded something just in case the moon wasn't all as it seemed.

I'm unsure as to what happened but I feel that we're definitely not being told the whole truth.


Hi Scope and Beam, my thinking is VERY similar to yours EXCEPT I believe it is because "WE" were already there. Not to totally discount Aliens, but please see where I have tied this all together forming a slightly different conclusion. ( S & F for your efforts.)
US Military bases already on moon. Hence the 'secrecy' and lack of rush to return etc.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Also, worthy of mention, as per NASA's original charter in 1958, they ARE NOT obligated to disclose ANYTHING deemed a threat to National Security.
(See my 2nd post in above linked thread for source.)

I LOVE this topic. I agree it is all linked. Thanks for stoking it.


Kind Regards...KK


[edit on 31-7-2009 by kinda kurious]



posted on Jul, 31 2009 @ 09:39 AM
link   
reply to post by kinda kurious
 


I'm glad I'm not the only one who thinks this lol. I'll check out your thread now, your theory makes sense to me also.

I've always felt that maybe Neil Armstrong, Buzz Aldren etc actually had no clue what was going on. I don't know why but their reactions these days are very strange it's as if they were betrayed.



posted on Jul, 31 2009 @ 11:05 AM
link   
The Moon Sham was nothing more than a 40 Billion dollar
waylay of Tesla technology.

As is every Illuminati operation since 1945.



posted on Jul, 31 2009 @ 11:54 AM
link   
reply to post by TeslaandLyne
 


I'm unfamiliar with Tesla Technology



posted on Jul, 31 2009 @ 12:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by Scope and a Beam
reply to post by TeslaandLyne
 


I'm unfamiliar with Tesla Technology


Aren't we all.
Perhaps it is more commonly known as ET technology.
Or anti gravity or non radioactive atomic energy.
Obama has now been requested to evaluate the economic impact
of taking off the Illuminati wraps on Tesla's technology.
So you may soon be aware.
As will the rest of us.



posted on Jul, 31 2009 @ 12:59 PM
link   
reply to post by TeslaandLyne
 


Well I hope so because fuel is becoming increasingly expensive



posted on Jul, 31 2009 @ 01:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by Scope and a Beam
I'm unsure as to what happened but I feel that we're definitely not being told the whole truth.

A very nice example of truthiness. (I learned the word a few days ago and I love it already !)

Time for truthiness !



posted on Jul, 31 2009 @ 01:35 PM
link   
reply to post by nablator
 


Nab man. Where have you been? You need to leap off that lily pad more often.


Here is a great site to keep up with the "hip /urban" lingo of today's youth:

Link to Urban Dictionary

It is "craptastic."




[edit on 31-7-2009 by kinda kurious]



posted on Jul, 31 2009 @ 02:16 PM
link   
Im sorry but anyone who thinks the moon landed was fake is [Insert insult here]
oh darn nasa forgot that theres no wind on the moon
the flag waving was because they were twisting it. Just because its a vacum doesnt mean things dont move when there minipulated.
russia tracked the mission.
the so called moon "fake" photos can be proven real. seriusly. Why is it that people dont think its possible that the moon can have hills.

The put god damn mirrors on the moon and lasers are fired at them everyday.
end of.



posted on Jul, 31 2009 @ 02:27 PM
link   
I am so tired of the moon hoax issue. As a matter of fact I think it is demeaning to the astronauts who went there. They gave them less than a 50/50 chance of returning. You try getting up for work one day and knowing that there is that type of chance you might not come home. I personally loved when Buzz Armstrong punched that dude. Deservedly so.

The flag waving has been put down long ago, some people on here much like Whoopi Goldberg need to go do their homework.

Whenever I see someone on here crying about how people just like proving them wrong . I look at the date they registered at almost every time they are recent member, and the one proving them wrong has been around a while.

This board is not new and there has been numerable topics covered in the past...look them up before you post.

I see so many posts on here than just make me shake my head and say, "where the hell have you been????"



posted on Jul, 31 2009 @ 03:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by van001
I am so tired of the moon hoax issue. As a matter of fact I think it is demeaning to the astronauts who went there.


I have a take on this moon hoax issue that I've never heard anyone else propose, so I'll just throw it out there, whether it's correct or not.

I've seen many of the videos and photos that people use to show that the moon landing was a hoax. To say that the videos and photos of the moon landing from NASA are fake isn't hard to do, but that DOESN'T mean that the moon landing DIDN'T happen.

Recently I read that Pres. Nixon had a news statement prepared regarding the reason that the astronauts couldn't get off the moon. This statement, prepared to be read to the country had all the things that went wrong with the lift-off from the moon. In other words, the hollywood script of what failed was already written. Since the astronauts safely got off the moon, the script was never read but made it into the achives.

The reason I mentioned the script is because it had all the details of a failed lift-off.

It is my theory that the whole mission to the moon was made hollywood style just as many here have stated. Including the photos. One way or another, NASA and the US Government were going to say that we landed on the moon in 1969. The movie was made and shown "live". At the same time, the Apollo 11 was making it's way to the moon. All went well and the astronauts landed on the moon, just like in the movie. The lift off from the moon was successful, just like in the movie. Of course, the "other movie" wasn't needed and the script of the explosion wasn't needed either.

40 years later, we still don't have the "original" tapes and photos that Armstrong and Aldrin took while there.

My take is that the moon landing was successful, but like most here, the videos and photos were faked for propaganda purposes. Again, they were going to land on the moon one way or another. Had they crashed into the moon during the landing, NASA would have had a safe landing movie but with an explosion on taking off as the script that Nixon had said.

Hopefully someone else here has the links because at the time I read those things, I really wasn't paying attention to where I was.



posted on Jul, 31 2009 @ 03:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by superdebz
They put [snip] mirrors on the moon and lasers are fired at them everyday.


Firstly, I do believe man has been to the moon. Perhaps more times than we actually know. So I am not your typical Hoax theorist.

However to suggest that the Lunar Reflecters are proof that man landed on the moon is absurd.

The Soviets successfully landed unmanned craft and rovers capable of deploying such items, As early as 1966 mind you. Reflectors would have been easy to deploy, unmanned.

Sorry, IMO it is a complex and complicated argument to be simply dismissed with that as proof.

Laser Ranging Retroreflector

Soviet Unmanned Craft

Regards...KK

[edit on 31-7-2009 by kinda kurious]



posted on Jul, 31 2009 @ 04:41 PM
link   
reply to post by van001
 


I'll post what I want you're not a mod thanks. And if it's not a hoax then good! I hope it isn't but I'm allowed to post what I want this is a forum, look it up.

Don't simply presume I'm some conspiracy nut just because I haven't been a member here as long as you, that's some kind of playground argument to be honest. Your overt hostility is ridiculous and laughable. I do not care if I'm proved wrong, I'd be happy for it as it would mean something great did happen instead of more lies.


[edit on 31-7-2009 by Scope and a Beam]



posted on Aug, 1 2009 @ 12:36 PM
link   
reply to post by cdesignmaster
 


I don't doubt Nixon had a prepared statement, but as far as the details I could not find what was contained in that speech. I really think it would have just been generalities and not specific details, just enough to let the people know that they would not be returning. I am sure this has always been done so that the President has a prepared statement when the time comes.

I do not think the pictures or a mock landing was filmed. When someone goes to the moon and takes some pictures and then brings them back to compare...then and only then can they say they are fake. I think much editing was done as far as density and brightness in order to make those pictures more brilliant and dramatic.

If NASA censored stuff on there, then it was done for specific reasons. I may not agree with that, but they felt it was necessary at the time.

I never understood why the hoaxers do not address the issue of why we would only go through the trouble of hoaxing the first landing and not the rest. Do they think we faked all of them or just the first?



posted on Aug, 1 2009 @ 04:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by van001
reply to post by cdesignmaster
 


I don't doubt Nixon had a prepared statement, but as far as the details I could not find what was contained in that speech.


Nixons statement in full:


Fate has ordained that the men who went to the moon to explore in peace will stay on the moon to rest in peace.

These brave men, Neil Armstrong and Edwin Aldrin, know that there is no hope for their recovery. But they also know that there is hope for mankind in their sacrifice.

These two men are laying down their lives in mankind's most noble goal: the search for truth and understanding.

They will be mourned by their families and friends; they will be mourned by their nation; they will be mourned by the people of the world; they will be mourned by a Mother Earth that dared send two of her sons into the unknown.

In their exploration, they stirred the people of the world to feel as one; in their sacrifice, they bind more tightly the brotherhood of man.

In ancient days, men looked at stars and saw their heroes in the constellations.

In modern times, we do much the same, but our heroes are epic men of flesh and blood.

Others will follow, and surely find their way home. Man's search will not be denied.

But these men were the first, and they will remain the foremost in our hearts.

For every human being who looks up at the moon in the nights to come will know that there is some corner of another world that is forever mankind.



posted on Aug, 1 2009 @ 04:42 PM
link   
reply to post by kinda kurious
 



The Soviets successfully landed unmanned craft and rovers capable of deploying such items, As early as 1966 mind you. Reflectors would have been easy to deploy, unmanned.


Sorry, KK, not exactly so.

The USSR failed miserably with the Lunokhod program. **Except, one lander exceeded its operating life expectancy, sorta like NASA's Spirit and Opportunity on Mars.** The ONE reflector they did manage to place properly is woefully inadequate compared to the THREE placed and aimed by Humans.


Retroreflectors on the Moon

Main article: Lunar Laser Ranging Experiment

Astronauts on the Apollo 11, 14, and 15 missions left retro-reflectors on the Moon as part of the Lunar Laser Ranging Experiment. They are considered to conclusively prove that man-made equipment is present on the moon and thus disprove some Moon landing hoax accusations. Additionally the Soviet Lunokhod 1 and Lunokhod 2 rovers carried smaller arrays. Reflected signals were initially received from Lunokhod 1, but no return signals have been detected since 1971, at least in part due to some uncertainty in its location on the Moon. Lunokhod 2's array continues to return signals to Earth. Even under good viewing conditions, only a single reflected photon is received every few seconds. This makes the job of filtering laser-generated photons from naturally-occurring photons challenging.


Retroreflector on the Moon

The Luna program:


Launch and lunar orbit

Luna 17 was launched on November 10, 1970 at 14:44:01 UTC. After reaching earth parking orbit, the final stage of Luna 17's launching rocket fired to place it into a trajectory towards the Moon (1970-11-10 at 14:54 UTC). After two course correction maneuvers (on November 12 and 14), it entered lunar orbit on November 15, 1970 at 22:00 UTC.

Landing and surface operations

The spacecraft soft-landed on the Moon in the Sea of Rains on November 17 at 03:47 UTC.....


Lunokhod 1

Note the dates --- the Laser retroreflector Apollo 11 placed was operational first!!! Nearly a year and a half first!!!


Originally posted by kinda kurious
However to suggest that the Lunar Reflecters are proof that man landed on the moon is absurd.


Sorry, kk



[edit on 1 August 2009 by weedwhacker]



posted on Aug, 1 2009 @ 10:19 PM
link   
reply to post by weedwhacker
 


Hmmmmmm. This link to NASA site says:

The Luna 13 spacecraft was launched toward the Moon from an earth-orbiting platform and accomplished a soft landing on December 24, 1966


Luna 13 successfully landed in 1966

(Granted this WAS NOT a Rover, but certainly could have been capable of providing a "Reflective Surface" to bounce back signals just the same.) It transmitted Radio signals 4 minutes after landing. It also had 4 large "petals" that opened facing up once landed. (see photo)

nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov...

Further your data makes my point. That is to say UNMANNED craft could place reflectors on the moon. (The only substance to your claim are the dates when the signals began to be purportedly pinged and returned and WHO can PROVE that?)

My larger point is that it WAS POSSIBLE that UNMANNED craft were CAPABLE of deploying reflectors.

EDIT TO ADD: It no longer matters to me anymore. I have formed my conclusions about the how's and why's recently. Yeah, we've been there, probably more times than anyone cares to admit.

Regards...KK


[edit on 2-8-2009 by kinda kurious]



new topics

top topics



 
2

log in

join