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: 6
47
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 17 2009 @ 01:33 AM
link   
reply to post by ShiningBeneath
 


Mythbusters actually did an episode on the moon landings and the footprints were one of the things tested. They tried leaving one in dry sand and it just fell apart. Then they spoke to NASA and got a hold of a moon dust substitute. The boot left a perfect impression.

It's down to the shape of the grains of material. Sand is rounded by water so the grains can slip and slide past each other, imagine sand grains are like marbles. Moon dust however has irregular, sharp grains which can hold a shape.




posted on Nov, 17 2009 @ 01:44 AM
link   
Do you really think that, if the moon landing had been faked, such a damning video would be allowed to exist? Don't you think they'd have destroyed it immediately? And where was this alleged video all these years? This is a hoax.

But if you believe it, that's OK with me. Do you want to buy a bridge?



posted on Nov, 17 2009 @ 02:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by SirPatrickHenry

Not to mention, why wouldn't the Russian's call us out on something like this at the Height of the Cold War???????

[edit on 16-11-2009 by SirPatrickHenry]


To the OP, I'm not trying to derail this thread in any way, just wanted to point something out.. from the above quote and perhaps shed a bit of light on this line of thinking.. I will be brief as possible.

To SirPatrickHenry,

IMO only, I've seriously had the exact same question as well when You Tube started showing the moon landings and what not..

1). Gov. Russian Scientists might have had questioned the whole 'moon mission' and did some calulations of their own and realized it was a hoax.

2). Presenting the facts to the Kremlin, and after much debate and what to do, they came up with a grand plan *blackmail the USA*...

3). JFK got whacked leaving LBJ to deal with the Kremlin, they waited, made the call and made their discoveries known to the USA. Their request was simple, make the USA a socialist country and we won't spill the beans..



posted on Nov, 17 2009 @ 02:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by chiron613
Do you really think that, if the moon landing had been faked, such a damning video would be allowed to exist? Don't you think they'd have destroyed it immediately? And where was this alleged video all these years? This is a hoax.

But if you believe it, that's OK with me. Do you want to buy a bridge?


who's to say that it didn't get sneaked out, much like all the photos that were found in an empty MacDonalds a year ago .. ?



posted on Nov, 17 2009 @ 02:16 AM
link   
reply to post by Komodo
 


There's a couple of things wrong with your theory, the first is Russia tracked, when they could, the lunar missions.

The second is Luna 16 which I linked to earlier, perhaps you missed it?



posted on Nov, 17 2009 @ 02:21 AM
link   
reply to post by IX-777
 


IX-777, thx for the info on all of this, never give up on asking questions, it's the scientific thing to do. !


I wanted to add this post because it's relevant to this thread with the multiple items you've pointed out in your OP.

I posted this like a week ago, and saw something odd..

Why does the dust seem to fall as it would with the same gravity on earth even though there's only 1/6 of the gravity ??

www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on Nov, 17 2009 @ 05:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by spookfish
reply to post by IX-777
 


You sir (that's if you've stopped believing you are an alien) are bringing this subject and this site into disrepute. You are doing no one any favours with your laughable threads, poor research and willingness to ignore reasoned opposition to your position. Please refrain immediately. I believe that the official story of the history between the Moon and man is way off the reality of what has happened and what continues to happen. However, I don't want you fighting for that cause because you only weaken us.

If you insist on participating in such debates perhaps you should bat for the other side because then when your 'proof' or arguments are shown to be fallacy, you will indirectly be helping our cause.


Again yet another poster having a go at a thread and claiming that it brings the site into disrepute. You have been here days, yet you're an expert at the comings and goings of ATS. Amazing really.

The OP was giving his theory on the supposed fake moon landings, and although many are trying rigorously to debunk it, i thought he gave a good argument for it with lots of vids and links (that is what ATS is all about, obviously your can't grasp that yet). So instead of trying to rubbish the OPs character, how about putting forward your own evidence instead of your oh so "valuble" bigoted opinion.



posted on Nov, 17 2009 @ 05:28 AM
link   
You guys still think you went on the moon?

In a thin foil aluminium box, you guys are Hilarius



posted on Nov, 17 2009 @ 06:08 AM
link   
reply to post by ImaginaryReality1984
 


Ah this is interesting thank you


I've taken a look into what you've mentioned and for the reasons you've mentioned it here it certainly fits the bill. What I'm still in the air about however is its relation to the original point I made on my last post about the behaviour of the dropped tool, and the lack of airborne dust. I'll consider a few things:
- the apparent weight of the tool
- the apparent mass of the tool
- the apparent acceleration of the tool
- the apparent deflection and visual "bouncing" on landing.
If the surface of the moon is without atmospheric air, and very little moisture, then the tool bouncing on impact in a vacuum environment on a surface of fine relenting crystals (capable of accommodating a near perfect footprint) wouldn't make too much sense so far as my understanding goes.

I'm very open to hypotheses, raw data and differing opinions, and would like to get to the bottom of this so feel free to contribute where you feel you can please all



posted on Nov, 17 2009 @ 06:19 AM
link   
LOL consiparcy is a never ending story....

im more than sure that the GOV will do anything possible to keep such secret as NASA faking the moonlanding away from the public.

so imagine..they found the youtube poster, eliminated him, grabbed his account and posted that he faked the video bla bla bla...

so my frnd Phage..even having the youtube poster admitting faking the video could be faked

NOTE : Im not saying that this might be the case and that I beleive the man picking up something was true..but lately i just dont care what the truth is anymore..just live by the day



posted on Nov, 17 2009 @ 06:22 AM
link   
How did they then fake the youtube account holders 2 videos that were the original fake composite? He had shot it in his backyard or something and showed it without the moon part.



posted on Nov, 17 2009 @ 06:32 AM
link   
reply to post by PsykoOps
 


hold on...i dont mean they did it

still at least you agree its possible too or at least such a secret justifies such efforts...just to say..that the proof presented here its not enough and that the world can finance a moon landing expedition just to put the story to rest..with live modern digital coverage, everything in high res...and they go and find the flag, the steps etc...for me it is of an immense imnportance for this issue to rest...yes..i hope one day the UN will fund this operation and bring proof that the moon landing occured...because think about it...Men's greatest ever achievment (the one of landing humans on another planet) is still being debated if it is true or not, its a pitty

btw..i beleive they went to the moon but also beleive they might be hiding something



posted on Nov, 17 2009 @ 06:41 AM
link   
You can't change human nature, even if NASA starts free shuttle trips back and forth between the landing site and earth some will still think it's a conspiracy. Some will think santa lives on the moon and some will be sure that it's elves. In essence this issue can't be put to rest



posted on Nov, 17 2009 @ 06:44 AM
link   
its true its true


thanks god we have heineken!!!



posted on Nov, 17 2009 @ 07:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by ShiningBeneath
reply to post by ImaginaryReality1984
 


Ah this is interesting thank you


I've taken a look into what you've mentioned and for the reasons you've mentioned it here it certainly fits the bill. What I'm still in the air about however is its relation to the original point I made on my last post about the behaviour of the dropped tool, and the lack of airborne dust. I'll consider a few things:
- the apparent weight of the tool
- the apparent mass of the tool
- the apparent acceleration of the tool
- the apparent deflection and visual "bouncing" on landing.
If the surface of the moon is without atmospheric air, and very little moisture, then the tool bouncing on impact in a vacuum environment on a surface of fine relenting crystals (capable of accommodating a near perfect footprint) wouldn't make too much sense so far as my understanding goes.

I'm very open to hypotheses, raw data and differing opinions, and would like to get to the bottom of this so feel free to contribute where you feel you can please all


The weight of the tool would be rather negligible on the moon compared to that of an astronaut. Consider a few things. Firstly that moon dust is quite compact, an astronaut standing on the surface, with the reduced gravity makes a rather shallow footprint. How could a tool with so little mass, travelling at such low a low velocity, cause any kind of dust to be ejected on impact?

Next consider there being no atmosphere. Without an atmosphere the dust particles, if they rose would rise briefly, find no air turbulance and settle right back down. Also the tool as it hit the ground would not push any air out from under it and so even less dust would be disturbed. Think about what happens on Earth when dust rises, it gets whipped around by the air, without that air it really would just fall down quickly.

As for the bounce, well again the surface is really quite dense, compacted dust. The gravity is less which means the tool could more easily bounce, just as the astronauts can bounce.

That's the best answer i can give you



posted on Nov, 17 2009 @ 07:22 AM
link   
Maybe I am looking into this too much but at the 1:41 mark, the same guy is seen as at the 2:33 mark picking the samething up. Did I miss something?

Great vid. Not sure how authentic it is as I have seen other videos that have been "tweaked" a little.



posted on Nov, 17 2009 @ 08:32 AM
link   
I also can't imagine that the moon landings were fake.
Why would they fake such an achievement to show that space travel is possible.

Then again, I can imagine that to simulate the mission in a studio to play the role as good as it gets, before you go and do the real thing. Is something thats been done in simulators today.

So for me the moon landings are real...



posted on Nov, 17 2009 @ 10:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by JustAThought
All of this youtube "evidence" if downright laughable. Anyone who truly studied the moonlandings sees nothing but ignorance and obvious lies to fool the viewer/listener in these conspiracy videos.



[edit on 16-11-2009 by JustAThought]


I would think I qualify as anyone.
I think you are correct here in your description of those that are spoon fed by people that can't get out of earth orbit for 40 years. When it was such a piece of cake in 69.
Pathetic. If anything the NASA photographic propaganda is way worse.



posted on Nov, 17 2009 @ 10:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by chiron613
Do you really think that, if the moon landing had been faked, such a damning video would be allowed to exist? Don't you think they'd have destroyed it immediately? And where was this alleged video all these years? This is a hoax.

But if you believe it, that's OK with me. Do you want to buy a bridge?


Are you suggesting NASA would go to extremes to stop a damning tape from being seen by Americans that paid for it?
Where do you get your bridges from. NASA ebay?



posted on Nov, 17 2009 @ 10:57 AM
link   
reply to post by ImaginaryReality1984
 


Thanks Imaginary for your responses. Good to have a flame-free discussion


About the gravity as you mentioned, it doesn't completely sit well with me still. Gravity is supposed to be constant, and without an atmosphere to work upon an object, any and all objects should fall at the exact same rate. Seemingly the tool and the astronaut here however aren't doing that. There's the chance the tool was thrown down and the motion is an obscure wrist throw however but it should be taken to mind IMO.
Next on atmosphere, please if you will, check out THIS LINK. Note even before we get to the waving of the flag (which is another kettle of fish altogether) in the first three seconds there is a puff of dust kicked up in the lower left corner of the shot. Is it just me or does that have a very clear spiral within that cloud. As far as Newtons laws go there should be no reason at all for the particles to behave that way in the supposed conditions of the moon.



new topics

top topics



 
47
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join