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.

 

Ultimate evidence on NASA faking Moon landings (VIDEO)

page: 10
47
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 19 2009 @ 12:02 AM
link   
Everything is a lie, man never went to the moon.
Lost documents and arhives, hey we just lost it.
Astronauts looking at the sun from the moon without their secondary protective visors. Faked radiation charts and radiation exposure on the moon. Eqipment exposure and heat. This are just a few that never got answered




posted on Nov, 19 2009 @ 12:20 AM
link   
I didn't see any responses on this : LINK that I posted earlier (sorry if I missed one/some). Point of attention is the bottom left in the first 4 seconds. I'm pretty certain this kind of airborne particle behaviour couldn't occur without an atmosphere however I could be wrong and am open to enlightenment.

The problem I see with this thread at the moment and on a larger scale with the forums in general is that members are fast to turn on one-another. Consider that we're all here for the same reason, and different point of view provide a bigger picture. Emotion and pride are our biggest weaknesses - TPTB exploit them for us enough so let's not do so to fellow members



posted on Nov, 19 2009 @ 12:30 AM
link   
reply to post by ShiningBeneath
 


All I see is dust being kicked up by the astronaut. It quickly falls to the ground as it should in the absence of an atmosphere. You can see the same thing continue to happen as he hops across the frame.



posted on Nov, 19 2009 @ 02:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by Mr Mask
Funny how this clip has been circulating recently.

You would think (if it was real) that some of the debunkers of the moon landing would have started with this clip, instead of it just now gaining attention.

Weird...or just tomfoolery?

Hmmm...I've made my choice.



Apparently, this has been debunked:
www.hawestv.com...



posted on Nov, 19 2009 @ 02:32 PM
link   
This is a little off topic for the current discussion but still holds relevance. I would like to point out that the men flying these space missions were the most superior pilots we had to offer. Prior to flying in space they were flying prototype and test vehicles. In order to fly vehicles like that you have to be very good at your job and very good at thinking on the fly. These men easily could handle anything thrown at them, as they were the best of the best. They were used to flying in uncertain conditions in untested equipment and had the know how and where withall to handle unforseen conditions and events and manage to be succsesfull. My point being do not underestimate the men flying the LEM they were fantastic at what they did.

Not to mention they were way more educated and intelligent they any of us on this board. Imagine getting your doctorate degree while you are training for being an astronaut. Unbelievable.



posted on Nov, 19 2009 @ 02:46 PM
link   
I have a question for all of you.

I see many pictures that people take of the moon. Before the actual bombing of the moon, people had taken pictures of the exact spot that LCROSS was going to hit.

I have yet to see any pictures from anyone that show the impact area? Why is that? Can anyone produce pictures now of that impact area? If so, why are they not posting them?



posted on Nov, 19 2009 @ 06:42 PM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 


It's the spiral-like effect the dust has that I'm drawing attention to. If kicked in one direction it should (if we listen to Newton) rise and then settle all in the direction dictated by the force placed on it. Without an atmosphere there would be no subsequent force acting upon it giving it reason to barrel like this.



posted on Nov, 19 2009 @ 06:53 PM
link   
Moon landings were not fake. We would have known about them by now. It has already been documented that we went there many, many, times. This was all started because the first mission to the moon the camera equipment wasn't working and the U.S. government didn't want egg on their face so they got Stanley Kubrick to do up some photo's from his 2001 movie set in London. It has been documented and the people involved are still alive. Donald Rumsfeld was one of them.....



posted on Nov, 19 2009 @ 07:04 PM
link   
reply to post by ARNOMANNN
 

Your are talking about Dark Side of the Moon. It was a mockumentary made in 2002 by William Karel.

Here's the blooper reel.



[edit on 11/19/2009 by Phage]



posted on Nov, 19 2009 @ 07:08 PM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 


Are you saying it was fake??? Then I don't know who to believe!!!



posted on Nov, 19 2009 @ 07:11 PM
link   
reply to post by ARNOMANNN
 

Yes, it's fake.
video.google.com...#


[edit on 11/19/2009 by Phage]



posted on Nov, 19 2009 @ 08:53 PM
link   
I did not see any explanation on the rising "air bubbles" mentioned and shown in a couple videos I posted earlier. How did or would the debunkers explain that part?

Those videos suggests that some of the Space missions have been faked by filming under water.

Here the videos are again - looking at them it does look like they could be under water when looking at how they move around and the apollo clip specially looks like it has then been speeded up to look as if they are moving faster than what would be possible under water.

In the second clip there is also the strange "underwater" sound at the same time the "bubble" is seen rising.






posted on Nov, 19 2009 @ 10:01 PM
link   
Are you sure that footage is from Apollo 16? As far as I know they didn't do that kind of missions that is being shown.

[Edit to add] Also how you make those into air bubbles? There is a million things those could be.

[edit on 19/11/2009 by PsykoOps]



posted on Nov, 19 2009 @ 11:07 PM
link   
reply to post by PsykoOps
 


The video is of Mattingly retrieving cassettes from the Scientific Instrument Module attached to the Service Module (after the LM had returned from the landing).

[edit on 11/19/2009 by Phage]



posted on Nov, 19 2009 @ 11:35 PM
link   
Oh ok, my bad. Well you still can't say air bubbles with this resolution videos.



posted on Nov, 20 2009 @ 12:07 AM
link   
reply to post by PsykoOps
 

Nope. Open a spaceship and all kinds of crud is likely to float out of it. Especially a tiny one that's been lived in by three guys for 8 or 9 days.



posted on Nov, 20 2009 @ 12:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by IX-777
I did not see any explanation on the rising "air bubbles" mentioned and shown in a couple videos I posted earlier. How did or would the debunkers explain that part?

Those videos suggests that some of the Space missions have been faked by filming under water.



What if it was just some insulation coming away or some other material? Why would NASA need to fake missions when the space station is up there, you can observe it at night and all they have to do is shove a couple of astronauts out of the door to get some videos. Actually building a model in a swimming pool would cost far more, so why do it?

Also the video was from youtube, could you link one from NASA's own website please? I ask that because for all we know that video has been edited.



posted on Nov, 20 2009 @ 01:24 AM
link   
reply to post by sputniksteve
 


I didn't see any posts where someone said that the moon didn't look as they expected it would.

You are claiming someone did.

If there is a post you are referring to reference it.

If you fail to do so your post was a blatant straw-man.

Good day.



posted on Nov, 20 2009 @ 01:37 AM
link   
A spacesuit also has vents for pressure regulation if the astronauts are fatigued they can relieve pressure to make movement easyer. Besides that it's impossible to have that an underwater scene look so "clean". Look at a video of a diver just relasing one breath and you'll see thousands of airbubbles, not a quick fast one like we see in the vid. Makes alot more sense that we're actually seeing an astronaut relieve pressure in his suit, creating a tiny "explosion" of oxygen into the vacuum of space...

Water pool ? Gimme a break.



posted on Nov, 20 2009 @ 05:34 AM
link   
I don't think air released into space would remain as a bubble. You're right that an actual bubbles underwater look totally different.



new topics

top topics



 
47
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join