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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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?
Originally posted by Clickfoot
Not being funny, but I always thought that looked like a scene from "Thunderbirds".
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.
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]
Originally posted by Total Package
Whatever drugs you are on.... i want some.
Originally posted by antar
He really needs to do an interview for us,
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.