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.

 

How NASA has staged Apollo Moon Mission

page: 4
17
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 5 2010 @ 12:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by krystalice

Originally posted by Soylent Green Is People
...Firstly and primarily I will state that NASA has falsely taken credit for the water on the moon findings, and it is a fact that Indian research team have been the official one's to disclose this theory to the public in the first place....

Actually, no --

It was NASA's Clementine Spacecraft back in 1994 the first discovered the water-ice in the Moon's South Pole crater. The presence of water-ice on the Moon has been attempted to be confirmed by NASA several times since then, but the India probe and the NASA instrument is what ultimately made the confirmation.

So NASA's Clementine made the initial discovery of water being on the Moon and the equipment on Chandrayaan confirmed it.

Obviously NASA felt confident since 1994 that the water-ice existed at the Moon's South Pole because they have since spent money to send three other NASA probes (Lunar Prospector, LRO, and LCROSS) to confirm it.


[edit on 1/5/2010 by Soylent Green Is People]




posted on Jan, 5 2010 @ 03:21 PM
link   
reply to post by Soylent Green Is People
 


Actually you could go back as far as the Apollo missions to see that they suspected water on the moon, water molecules were belived to be in some samples but it wasn't until recently that they confirmed this to be the case.

www.rsc.org...


...but the rocks and soil collected don't mean anything!


[edit on 5/1/10 by Chadwickus]



posted on Jan, 5 2010 @ 03:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by social worker
OK, I do not believe that the US or any other country has landed on the moon. Why? The expense of the whole project. Remember, the Vietnam War was in full swing. The Cold War was at its peak in 1969.


It WAS a part of Cold War.

Is this news to you?


[edit on 5-1-2010 by buddhasystem]



posted on Jan, 5 2010 @ 03:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by Chadwickus
Actually you could go back as far as the Apollo missions to see that they suspected water on the moon, water molecules were belived to be in some samples but it wasn't until recently that they confirmed this to be the case...

True.

I see that your link is about the water found in the glass beads by researchers in 2008, but I remember NASA said back in the 1970s that some rocks gathered by Apollo astronauts showed some evidence of water, but at the time they could not confirm that the samples were not contaminated.

I suppose the recent confirmations show they may not have been contaminated and the water NASA found back in the 1970s was really from the Moon.

The point here is that NASA had suspected there was water-ice on the moon since the Apollo days. Good scientists did not "ridicule" anyone for believing that water-ice possibly existed on the Moon.


[edit on 1/5/2010 by Soylent Green Is People]


jra

posted on Jan, 5 2010 @ 09:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by Mythtified
'Moon rock' given to Holland by Neil Armstrong is fake

There is no further info on the investigation into this affair.


Firstly, this petrified rock was not given to Holland by Neil Armstrong. The US ambassador to the Netherlands, J. William Middendorf, gave the rock to the former Prime Minister Willem Drees as a private gift back in 1969, while the three Astronauts from Apollo 11 were also on a goodwill tour. It was never claimed to be a rock from the Moon. I'm not sure if the former PM just misunderstood something or what, but real Lunar rocks would not be given as private gifts through ambassadors to former leaders of other countries. And not in 1969 so soon after the first Moon landing.

NASA did give out Lunar rocks to over 100 countries, but that wasn't until the 70's after the Apollo program had ended. The Netherlands does have a real rock from the Moon and it's in the Boerhaave Museum in Leiden.

[edit on 5-1-2010 by jra]



posted on Jan, 5 2010 @ 10:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by Soylent Green Is People
reply to post by Lillydale
 

But that would mean that NASA had robots with the ability to carry 1000 times more weight back to Earth than Russia did, and with the ability to pick up large rocks that Russia could not.

If NASA's robotic technology was that far ahead of the Russians, you would think they would be able to send humans to the Moon.


How do you possibly figure that???? We could make all kinds of crazy robots that do all kinds of crazy things and none of that would mean we have the technology to send humans to those same places. Humans need certain things to survive that robots do not. Even if we could somehow manage to build a machine to go and tear off a huge chunk of the moon and bring it back, that does not equal being able to send humans to the same place.



posted on Jan, 5 2010 @ 10:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by Soylent Green Is People


There could be several reasons for the confusion over this rock:
-- The Prime Minister misunderstood the gift he was being presented with.
-- The Prime Minister accidentally or purposefully embellished the story of the rock sometime after it was present to him.
-- Aldrin mistakenly told him it was a Moon rock.
-- The rock was switched sometime after Aldrin presented it.

There was some sort of misunderstanding or hoax involved -- but it is not the "Moon Hoax".

This is the most ridiculous rubbish ive ever heard !

WHAT ELSE would they give them as a 'PREZZIE' for gods sake ! A T-Shirt with 'MY FRIEND NEIL WENT TO THE MOON AND ALL HE BROUGHT ME BACK WAS THIS LOUSY T-SHIRT !'

HOW could they possibly have meant this rock as anything else ?
PMSL !







[edit on 1/5/2010 by Soylent Green Is People]



posted on Jan, 5 2010 @ 10:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by jra
Firstly, this petrified rock was not given to Holland by Neil Armstrong. The US ambassador to the Netherlands, J. William Middendorf, gave the rock to the former Prime Minister Willem Drees as a private gift back in 1969, while the three Astronauts from Apollo 11 were also on a goodwill tour.


So...what was it claimed to be? Petrified wood? Is that what we hand out as gifts to world leaders?



posted on Jan, 6 2010 @ 01:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by Chadwickus
reply to post by Lillydale
 

Russia returned soil samples.
These soil samples were almost identical to the samples returned by Apollo 12.
[edit on 5/1/10 by Chadwickus]


They were not.


Originally posted by Chadwickus
reply to post by Lillydale
 

Deal with it.
[edit on 5/1/10 by Chadwickus]



posted on Jan, 6 2010 @ 01:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by cushycrux
I thought it's all fake until this came:

www.universetoday.com...

Now, it's clear, Apollo 15 was on the moon


on the left: selene simulation of Hight Data - right: nasa photo



[edit on 4-1-2010 by cushycrux]


Read this:
msp.warwick.ac.uk...

and then entertain us further.



posted on Jan, 6 2010 @ 01:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by cushycrux

Originally posted by cushycrux
And at least real photos of the landers:





Please try to stay open brained - they was there.
[edit on 4-1-2010 by cushycrux]


[edit on 5-1-2010 by cushycrux]


How come that those white arrows withstood temperature gradients on the moon for 40 years? What kind of paint has been used?


jra

posted on Jan, 6 2010 @ 03:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by Lillydale
We could make all kinds of crazy robots that do all kinds of crazy things and none of that would mean we have the technology to send humans to those same places.


It's the same technology involved. If you believe that we can land robots on the Moon then why not Humans? Sending people isn't that much of a difference. Sure you need to design the vehicle to accommodate them and have air, water and room for supplies, but that's not really a big deal.



posted on Jan, 6 2010 @ 03:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by jra

Originally posted by Lillydale
We could make all kinds of crazy robots that do all kinds of crazy things and none of that would mean we have the technology to send humans to those same places.


It's the same technology involved. If you believe that we can land robots on the Moon then why not Humans? Sending people isn't that much of a difference. Sure you need to design the vehicle to accommodate them and have air, water and room for supplies, but that's not really a big deal.



Oh well ....if its THAT easy come on we'll all go for a picnic !

You ARE kidding i hope ?

What about protection from radiation in the VA belt for one ? Please I know your not that naive ?



posted on Jan, 6 2010 @ 03:33 AM
link   
I know all about the moon data, that makes no sense. I know the disney story, the stage story. the movies with illogical movements (crafts). I known the radiation problem and the cold war issue. I know all that - But you sound like you can stay in front of the eagle on the moon and still deny its existence.

Some of you are talking about ignorance every day - maybe its time to see you are also a part the truth about ignoring facts.

It's 100% impossible that the Jaxa DEM Data will fit to a "staged" mountain in a studio in (I don't know - A51?).


If the mountains of Jaxa would not fit with the Photo - you have a proof of fakery - if it fits, its a proof of "man on moon".

I also know they doctored the pictures and i don't know why. maybe it's really a perspective distortion.

I made this montage years ago to show something is wrong. Look:


I'm not ignorant, you know.


Better picture Edit

[edit on 6-1-2010 by cushycrux]



posted on Jan, 6 2010 @ 03:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by jra
It's the same technology involved. If you believe that we can land robots on the Moon then why not Humans? Sending people isn't that much of a difference. Sure you need to design the vehicle to accommodate them and have air, water and room for supplies, but that's not really a big deal.



I am really sorry. I thought I was talking with someone that knew a little something about this. I had no idea how little. It takes far far far far far far far more to send a person as opposed to a machine. We need a little more than air and a nice chair to get to the moon. It is not even remotely the same technology, so I really hope you are joking or that your next reply comes from someone else.

p.s. Cat got your tongue on that rock things? So did we go around presented petrified wood as gifts or not?

[edit on 1/6/10 by Lillydale]



posted on Jan, 6 2010 @ 03:45 AM
link   
reply to post by bokonon2010
 


And now this warwick PDF:
NOT THE SAME PERSPECTIVE!


And that you mock me, says all - then stay dumb, - if this is you wish.

[edit on 6-1-2010 by cushycrux]



posted on Jan, 6 2010 @ 04:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by cushycrux
reply to post by bokonon2010
 

And that you mock me, says all - then stay dumb, - if this is you wish.


I don't have to, you are funny already by saying that:

Originally posted by cushycrux
And at least real photos of the landers:
[edit on 4-1-2010 by cushycrux]


Go on please, entertain us more with those flags still standing in NASA cartoons. This one seems still travelling back and forth with the help of drycleaners:
spaceflight.nasa.gov...



posted on Jan, 6 2010 @ 04:13 AM
link   
reply to post by jra
 


The astronauts in the footage do not jump as high as they should be able too.

The astronauts appear to be moving slower when in fact they should be moving faster because there is no air resistance.

The only "modification" to the Hasselblad cameras was painting them silver.

Sorry but that's the funniest one of them all . . .

Now i'm not saying these things prove Apollo 11 didn't go to the moon. But it does prove the footage is not genuine unless they were disingenuous about the conditions on the moon or the equipment used.

[edit on 1/6/2010 by JPhish]



posted on Jan, 6 2010 @ 04:18 AM
link   
reply to post by bokonon2010
 


- I tried to give you more input - you refused that - byebye

[edit on 6-1-2010 by cushycrux]



posted on Jan, 6 2010 @ 04:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by cushycrux
reply to post by bokonon2010
 

And now this warwick PDF:
NOT THE SAME PERSPECTIVE!


[edit on 6-1-2010 by cushycrux]


Congratulations! Just by drawing two orange circlers you disproved the professor of math (geometry):
www2.warwick.ac.uk...


Originally posted by cushycrux
I know all about the moon data, that makes no sense. I know the disney story, the stage story. the movies with illogical movements (crafts). I known the radiation problem and the cold war issue. I know all that[edit on 6-1-2010 by cushycrux]


Go on, show us your talents and almost infinte knowledge.


[edit on 6.1.2010 by bokonon2010]



new topics

top topics



 
17
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join