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.

 

Indian satellite confirmed US moon landing: scientist

page: 1
7
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 6 2009 @ 08:32 PM
link   


"The images captured by a hyper-spectral camera fitted as a part of Chandrayaan-I... has reconfirmed the veracity of the Apollo 15 mission," said Prakash Chauhan, from the Indian Space Research Organisation (ISRO). NASA's 12-day Apollo 15 mission in 1971 was the first designed to explore the surface of the moon in great detail and over a long period. But it and others in the Apollo project, including the Apollo 11 mission in 1969, when astronauts first stepped on the moon, have been the subject of a catalogue of conspiracy theories ever since.

Physorg.com Article

Another piece of evidence points towards a moon landing, i can't seem to find a high res version of the image though. If anyone has one could they post it.

Good news for all the moon hoax debunkers




posted on Sep, 6 2009 @ 08:56 PM
link   
Brilliant, it has always been said it would take photographic evidence to prove the Landings.

However I have a feeling no matter what evidence is provided it will never be enough for some, not unless we grab them by their ears and take them up there themselves.

IMO there is not a single piece of evidence debunking the Landings that hasn't been debunked, with a ton of evidence showing they did land there, yet still never enough.

S&F thank you for posting this.



posted on Sep, 6 2009 @ 09:09 PM
link   
Just wait though... this only would seem to confirm Apollo 15, not the one's before it, including Apollo 11- the one most seem to have issue with.
And now with Armstrong allegedly saying even his mission may have been faked....



posted on Sep, 6 2009 @ 09:12 PM
link   
It would have been interesting if they showed us the image.



posted on Sep, 6 2009 @ 09:35 PM
link   
Related:

Article in OP mentions this briefly in final paragraph.

Here is a little more detail:


India Ends Moon Mission After Losing Contact With Spacecraft


www.bloomberg.com...


A shame the sat crapped out.

I'm with Phage. Over 70,000 pix and they can't share any?


[edit on 6-9-2009 by kinda kurious]



posted on Sep, 6 2009 @ 09:36 PM
link   
double post sorry

[edit on 6-9-2009 by kinda kurious]



posted on Sep, 6 2009 @ 09:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by Phage
It would have been interesting if they showed us the image.


Hi
Phage...

No smack. I'm just following up on this.


[edit on 6-9-2009 by SLAYER69]



posted on Sep, 6 2009 @ 10:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by abecedarian
...And now with Armstrong allegedly saying even his mission may have been faked....

Wait -- I'm confused...

...You're saying that Armstrong said his mission may have been faked? Wouldn't he know if it was faked or not?



posted on Sep, 6 2009 @ 10:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by abecedarian
Just wait though... this only would seem to confirm Apollo 15, not the one's before it, including Apollo 11- the one most seem to have issue with.

You can't have Apollo 15 be real without any of the previous missions which lead up to it and enabled it to occur through a very lengthy optimization process. Furthermore, if you look at all the video footage from the archives it shows consistency even as it improves with the introduction of the rover as a stable remotely controlled video platform.


And now with Armstrong allegedly saying even his mission may have been faked....

You mean you thought the article from the Onion was real? You've got to be kidding...
www.theonion.com...



posted on Sep, 6 2009 @ 10:30 PM
link   
reply to post by ngchunter
 

Ahhhh. So he said that in The Onion.
Well, that explains the confusion I expressed in my post.

(by the way...ya gotta love The Onion. They are definitely the best at what they do.
)



[edit on 9/6/2009 by Soylent Green Is People]



posted on Sep, 6 2009 @ 10:37 PM
link   
Here some pics I found.

www.isro.org...

Confused about when they lost connection. Op's article says last week and this says these pics were taking before it crashed on moon. This artcle was written in 2008.


Yesterday the Indian Space Research Organisation released two images taken by the Chandrayaan-1 Moon Impact Probe (MIP) as it descended toward its impact on the lunar surface. Here they are -- they show a very rocky and dusty lunar surface near Shackleton crater, near the lunar south pole.


www.planetary.org...

[edit on 6-9-2009 by jam321]



posted on Sep, 6 2009 @ 11:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by ngchunter

You can't have Apollo 15 be real without any of the previous missions which lead up to it and enabled it to occur through a very lengthy optimization process.


NASA could fake the landings if they wanted...

Or are you saying that the people who got us to the moon couldn't even fake a moon landing?


Give it a Rest.



posted on Sep, 7 2009 @ 06:35 AM
link   
Does anyone know if the Indian space agency plan on publicly releasing any more of the chandrayaan-1 images later on?

Even some new low res NASA style ones would be nice!



posted on Sep, 7 2009 @ 08:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by Exuberant1
Or are you saying that the people who got us to the moon couldn't even fake a moon landing?


That's exactly what I'm saying; to do so back then would have required flying a giant vacuum chamber the likes of which the world has never seen in 1/6th gravity parabolic arcs in a giant plane the likes of which the world has never seen, and even then it would have limited each shot to a short maximum period of time. It would have also required them to omit the lunar laser retroreflector experiment as automated deployment methods proved to be less reliable and less accurate, which they could have easily omitted if they wanted to fake it. Doing the real thing was much easier than faking it in a way that could have produced the footage that we have of it.



posted on Sep, 7 2009 @ 10:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by ngchunter

Originally posted by Exuberant1
Or are you saying that the people who got us to the moon couldn't even fake a moon landing?


That's exactly what I'm saying;


Well if that is the case; you are not even being honest with yourself.

With the Money & resources that NASA had at their disposal, it would not be hard to convince the American public that the moon landings occurred - even if they did not.







posted on Sep, 7 2009 @ 04:46 PM
link   
I believe 100% in the moon landings, if for only the simple reason is I have never seen any evidence to the contrary
None that stand up to simple reasoning or a even a cursory look anyway.

But I have learned one thing, it is almost impossible to change a moon hoax "truther's" mind. Some of the treat it like some treat Ufology, almost like a religion. Any evidence against their beliefs and it is like your insulting their personal god.



posted on Sep, 7 2009 @ 06:32 PM
link   
reply to post by IgnoreTheFacts
 


With All due respect. To say you believe in the landings 100% is your prerogative.

However some, like myself, who although can accept man walked on the moon, simply not 100% as depicted / portrayed by NASA.

I. for one, believe just the opposite. Not only did we land on the moon, but more times than reported and perhaps PRIOR to Apollo. I believe we maintain bases there.

So you'll need to come up with a new label for me. Not hoaxer or truther, maybe just a lunatic.


Skeptics are so black and white and forever demand "proof." Ironically many believe in GOD with no proof or funnier still, they believe in LOVE. They believe in the emotion
of LOVE just because someone might say to them I love you and accept that without proof.







[edit on 7-9-2009 by kinda kurious]



posted on Sep, 7 2009 @ 08:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by Exuberant1
Well if that is the case; you are not even being honest with yourself.

With the Money & resources that NASA had at their disposal, it would not be hard to convince the American public that the moon landings occurred - even if they did not.

You completely ignored the meat of my argument, and I resent the claim that I'm lying, even to myself. The question is not whether it's possible to fool lay people if given enough money, the question is whether or not it's possible to fake the evidence and footage we have in hand using technology available back then. Frank was referring to telemetry, not to the footage and evidence I'm talking about - simulating telemetry would have also made it impossible for the soviets, other countries, and amateurs to detect it. To a lay person like it may seem possible to fake the footage since some here can't tell the difference between 2001 and the real moon landing footage, but the fact is that the real footage contains attributes that would require the impossible measures I previously mentioned and put limits on the shots that do not exist in reality. The fact that some lay people were duped into believing footage from armageddon is real and shows the fate of shuttle columbia doesn't prove that it's possible to fake the footage from the shuttle program; myself and others immediately realized it could not be real because it lacked certain features that real shuttle images should have.

[edit on 7-9-2009 by ngchunter]



posted on Sep, 7 2009 @ 08:11 PM
link   
Good spot.

Also wrote thread on radiation levels..->Link

Also from ISRO. I think this mission has been a huge success.
Evidence is more on confirmed we did go to the moon for me.

Apollo 11, given the pressure politically and cold war at the time, maybe they just went around the moon and actually landed on a later mission when the pressure was lower. Not saying they did, just it could have happened.

Would be interesting to look at the theories by mission to see if it is consistent across all or just the early ones.



posted on Sep, 7 2009 @ 08:58 PM
link   
I thought somone already had a post with one picture of a lander. The shadow seems much taller than it really should be for something so small. This is about as good as most questionable UFO shots.

I really think we should send a moon explorer rover or better yet, test some type of other flying equipment like a probe.



new topics

top topics



 
7
<<   2 >>

log in

join