It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by IX-777
I could care less if you believe a word of what I am saying, but to say that everything I have to say automatically must be false simply because you do not agree with something I have said before, well that is as ignorant as any can get as far I can say.
With all due respect my friend.
Originally posted by AlkyatingAntineoplasm
Originally posted by Donny 4 million
I don't trust any photographic material as it is to corruptible.
I trust common sense. If it were possible to put a man on the moon no one would have stopped going back.
That would be like Europeans never returning to the Americas after the first six visits. Or climbing Mt. Everest after it was conquered the first time.
Man on the moon, BA
Europeans visited America in reusable ships. Climbing Mount Everest doesn't require burning up a giant, expendable rocket every time you attempt the summit. We stopped visiting the moon because the only means we had of getting there (Apollo-Saturn V) was too expensive to maintain. Saturn production was actually ended before Apollo 11.
Originally posted by IX-777
What are you talking about? So you are telling me the guy who created and designed the cameras they used on the moon had no idea about photography? NASA hired a complete fool to design their cameras? Certainly he should know enough about what he was doing to come with statements as he have, and when he finds the photos from the moon suspicious and saying he dont know how they could have taken such photos without artificial light sources, then that certainly doesnt strengthen the credibility of these photos being real moon photos. He was the head of Hasselblads engineering team that actually modified the cameras to be suitable for the very Moon surface - obviously a person assigned such a task should not more than "just alittle" about photography.
Originally posted by northwoods
There is nothing strange that First Moon landing was hoax and the rest as well. Stakes were too high to fail at late 60'. That was politically right strategy and only tactic that can be led USA to win the race to the moon and more in a long shot. Real nature of Mission Apollo was purely political. Apollo had one goal, not Moon but to change world politics and economical balance and polarity and boost economic.
It was too risky to sending man to the moon and fail. They come to obvious conclusion that possibilities to 90% successful moon flight to the Moon and back to the Earth was less than can be tolerated and fail meant catastrophic fail in political field.
The winner is the one who better conceal the truth.
Analysis of the dark basalt material indicated a close resemblance to soil recovered by the American Apollo 12 mission.