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.

 

Buzz Aldrin Book Signing in Atlanta 9/11

page: 2
6
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 10 2009 @ 01:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by JimOberg

Originally posted by Total Package
One thing I have often wondered about that video though that you posted.... don't you find it amazing that we know a radio signal takes what.. 2-3 seconds to reach the moon from Earth.... that they were able to "remotely" in advance tell the video camera to pan up at the exact moment it lifts off the surface of the moon... just so they could get follow it as it goes back to Earth? Such wonderful precision and accuracy..... for absolutely no reason.... yet they couldn't broadcast decent footage of the moon landing.


It's comforting that in all these decades, the Apollotruthers still have only their original moronic excuses for disbelief. If you know the signal takes that long, I'll bet that NASA also knew. That's why on Apollo-15 (the first landing with an independent space-to-earth TV capability, on the moon buggy), Ed Fendell at the INCO console hit the tilt UP toggle several seconds prior to liftoff. He still missed the higher part of the climb out, and refined the timing for Apollo-16 and -17.

If you give me your address, I'll tell Ed where you live so he can come and personally convince you it was real. He's a forceful personality even in his mid-70s.


Of course Ed did... because he said so
no more evidence required... anecdotes are enough here.. move along!

Did he launch the lift off from the moon's surface as well remotely?


[edit on 10-9-2009 by Total Package]




posted on Sep, 10 2009 @ 07:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by Total Package
One thing I have often wondered about that video though that you posted.... don't you find it amazing that we know a radio signal takes what.. 2-3 seconds to reach the moon from Earth.... that they were able to "remotely" in advance tell the video camera to pan up at the exact moment it lifts off the surface of the moon... just so they could get follow it as it goes back to Earth? Such wonderful precision and accuracy..... for absolutely no reason.... yet they couldn't broadcast decent footage of the moon landing.


Maybe it had something to do with the fact that they knew in advance where the ascent stage of the lunar module was going. And of course it wasn't going back to Earth, it was going to a docking with the command/service module orbiting around the moon, but you already knew that . . . right?


There is absolutely no evidence in the moonwalk television footage or photos that indicates a fake and the arguments that they are couldn't convince a moron. Apparently, they have convinced you though. Feel free to back up your claims with something compelling.



posted on Sep, 10 2009 @ 07:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by fls13
There is absolutely no evidence in the moonwalk television footage or photos that indicates a fake and the arguments that they are couldn't convince a moron. Apparently, they have convinced you though. Feel free to back up your claims with something compelling.


Are you seriously for real? Have you done no research at all of the Apollo 11 photos and video footage? I'm not talking about "lack of stars" or "flag waving" which the debunkers love to concentrate on.

I am talking about the real anomolies found in the photos and video that the debunkers come up with flimsy exuses for. You cannot have done any research if your default position is that there is no evidence.

Now I don't know for certain that we went to the moon or not... but I am damn certain the video and photographic evidence is fake.



posted on Sep, 10 2009 @ 07:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by Total Package

Originally posted by TeslaandLyne
Buzz went to the Moon but became a boxer.


Of course that is all just hearsay and anecdotal evidence that he went to the moon... there is no actual proof. On top of that poor old Buzz refuses to swear on a Bible that he has walked on the surface of the moon... because you know... that would put him in jail for life if the truth came out that he didn't and he had sworn on a bible that he did.


Here we go again......



posted on Sep, 10 2009 @ 08:07 AM
link   
reply to post by JimOberg
 


...you think too high of yourself.

Your count is wrong.

There is no need to make any counting... You just need to watch the list on the "Fallen Astronaut". 8 American astronauts and 6 Russian cosmonauts.

David Scott said that there were 2 names missing on the russian side, but if are going to ad up all the names, still more people died on the american side.

The russians had some accidents that killed hundreds of people, but they weren't space related. They were related to missile programs.

And I'm not even going to answer the second point since you didn't make any sense, at all.



posted on Sep, 10 2009 @ 08:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by Total Package
Are you seriously for real? Have you done no research at all of the Apollo 11 photos and video footage? I'm not talking about "lack of stars" or "flag waving" which the debunkers love to concentrate on.

I am talking about the real anomolies found in the photos and video that the debunkers come up with flimsy exuses for. You cannot have done any research if your default position is that there is no evidence.

Now I don't know for certain that we went to the moon or not... but I am damn certain the video and photographic evidence is fake.


Like what? And please explain how in the 1969, they could produce more convincing special effects than can be done today, 40 years later. How high was the ceiling in the studio where they lifted the ascent stage of the lunar module off of the decent stage with a cable during that faked lunar liftoff?



posted on Sep, 10 2009 @ 08:09 AM
link   
reply to post by TeslaandLyne
 


Are you serious?

First you say "it's fake because it was too clean! They needed to have more accidents to show that it was a true research and development!", and now you say that they needed to have accidents to show "what happens when you don't follow plans"?

You need to get your act together, honestly.



posted on Sep, 10 2009 @ 08:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by Tifozi
The russians had some accidents that killed hundreds of people, but they weren't space related. They were related to missile programs.


So I guess the fifty guys killed in the satellite launcher fuelling accident at Plesetsk in 1980 just don't count?

I'm ready for your excuse: "How should I be expected to know anything about that?"



posted on Sep, 10 2009 @ 08:19 AM
link   
reply to post by JimOberg
 


You know you just burried yourself, right?

We are talking about the space program untill the landing on the Moon (1969 in case you don't know) and you refer an example of 1980?

My friend, if you are going to make that kind of push-up of your arguments, I suggest that you read some pilot manuals, because in the category of disasters they included the space programs deaths.

Just for your knowledge (counting to the current day) the fatalities percentage is on 4,1% on the NASA astronauts and 0,9% on Russian cosmonauts...

If you are going that way off, at least give a good example, like the Nedelin disaster. At least in that one 130 people died...But again, not space related.

[edit on 10/9/09 by Tifozi]



posted on Sep, 10 2009 @ 08:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by fls13
And please explain how in the 1969, they could produce more convincing special effects than can be done today, 40 years later. How high was the ceiling in the studio where they lifted the ascent stage of the lunar module off of the decent stage with a cable during that faked lunar liftoff?

Not being funny, but I always thought that looked like a scene from "Thunderbirds". So I dunno about 'better than today'


[edit on 10-9-2009 by Clickfoot]



posted on Sep, 10 2009 @ 08:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by Clickfoot

Not being funny, but I always thought that looked like a scene from "Thunderbirds".


I laughed so hard at this picturing the astronauts like the characters in Team America.



posted on Sep, 10 2009 @ 10:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by Tifozi
reply to post by TeslaandLyne
 


Are you serious?

First you say "it's fake because it was too clean! They needed to have more accidents to show that it was a true research and development!", and now you say that they needed to have accidents to show "what happens when you don't follow plans"?

You need to get your act together, honestly.


Yes I understand you, but you do not understand how the
conspiracy went down:
No hitches because no Moon Landing as the Earth orbit was the
safest.
Either sprung on Buzz while in orbit or before lift off the word
was follow the the plan to never go to the Moon or suffer
similar accidents.

Yes it does sound cruel and idiotic and blame it on the Illuminati
but thats the way conspiracy theories go.

I for one would certainty be happy to stay in orbit while the
Moon Landing played out on TV.

I'm not holding anyone back, do all the space travel you want
but I don't want people to say listen to the Illuminati when they lie.



posted on Sep, 10 2009 @ 10:50 AM
link   
reply to post by Facefirst
 


Now that's believable, teaching Ali G a thing or two.

Perhaps Buzz and the astronauts were men before their time.
There is nothing to compare them with except jet pilots or
experimental aircraft pilots.



posted on Sep, 10 2009 @ 10:56 AM
link   
reply to post by TeslaandLyne
 


How do you explain the objects on the Moon? And the mirrors?

The best people can argue is that they didn't land on the Moon the first time they say they did. But I think it's pretty much impossible to deny something that you can verify. The mirrors are there, and many universities have seen them.

[edit on 10/9/09 by Tifozi]



posted on Sep, 10 2009 @ 12:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by Tifozi
reply to post by TeslaandLyne
 


How do you explain the objects on the Moon? And the mirrors?

The best people can argue is that they didn't land on the Moon the first time they say they did. But I think it's pretty much impossible to deny something that you can verify. The mirrors are there, and many universities have seen them.

[edit on 10/9/09 by Tifozi]


There is a very very big difference between putting some mirrors on the surface of the moon... and 3 human beings.



posted on Sep, 10 2009 @ 12:14 PM
link   
reply to post by Total Package
 


Oh really? Do you care to elaborate on that?



posted on Sep, 10 2009 @ 01:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by Total Package
Whatever drugs you are on.... i want some.


Tesla Ether....


It seems to work miracles



posted on Sep, 10 2009 @ 01:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by antar
He really needs to do an interview for us,



Now THAT is a great idea


Hey JOHNNY Are you getting this?

Imagine the fun he could have teasing us with Martian Monoliths and other stuff... I am sure he would sell a few books too...

Come on JOHNNY make the call... he recently did a Veterinarian convention here in Vegas so I am sure you can talk him into it...



And then YOU can ask him where his Moon Patch is


PS Post forwarded to Johnny



posted on Sep, 10 2009 @ 01:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by Total Package
Are you seriously for real? Have you done no research at all of the Apollo 11 photos and video footage? I'm not talking about "lack of stars" or "flag waving" which the debunkers love to concentrate on.

I am talking about the real anomolies found in the photos and video that the debunkers come up with flimsy exuses for. You cannot have done any research if your default position is that there is no evidence.

Now I don't know for certain that we went to the moon or not... but I am damn certain the video and photographic evidence is fake.


This thread is about the book signing by Buzz, so assuming someone might go to the book signing and suggest to Buzz the moon landing didn't happen...... I'm just curious, what do you think is the one single piece of evidence that convinces you the most that the moon landings were faked? Because honestly I've looked at a lot of evidence presented and almost all of it does absolutely nothing to question the moon landing as much as it does to highlight a lack of understanding of optics, photography, physics, and science in general. But if you have one piece of evidence you want me to look at again to see if it might sway my opinion, I'm willing to look at it again.

Then if you convince me maybe I can go ask Buzz about it and get punched out like the other guy!



posted on Sep, 10 2009 @ 02:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by fls13 How high was the ceiling in the studio where they lifted the ascent stage of the lunar module off of the decent stage with a cable during that faked lunar liftoff?


No ceiling











[edit on 10-9-2009 by zorgon]



new topics

top topics



 
6
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join