You must be High on the desert, to think your on the moon.

Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by letthereaderunderstand

 

Lecture?

Look, I (and others) come here to offer sound, scientific reasoned explanations.

And, have done so repeatedly.

The continued nonsense, despite all of the evidence to contrary, is frustrating, and frankly, souring. It is one thing to be so married to an idea that no amount of logic and solid information can sway you, but that is NOT a 'conspiracy'. It is willful ignorance.

This (ATS) IS a 'conspiracy' site. However, the "Moon Hoax" baloney has long, long ago been shown for what it really is --- nonsense.

It has no place as a valid "conspiracy".

The only conclusion I can draw, because of its continued repetition here, is that some people enjoy baiting tactics, playing the 'game' just to get a rise out of well-meaning folks who are sincerely trying to educate, and to dispel false ideas and notions --- ideas planted by the pseudo-science that infests the "Moon Hoax" 'movement'....

I want to know what you think "Hoaxers" gain out of dispelling the landings?
Who has made you the defender of the story? Is it all the well-meaning folks you are pretending to protect. Heaven forbid people think for themselves. You'd be out of a job. You're record in this thread alone paints a wonderful picture of your intentions as you answered no questions, ridiculed those opposing you and dispelled nothing. You can't dispel what people see with their own eyes. You can influence them with your put downs, but you can't make people see any differently. I came forward with no wild stories, just a few pictures asking people to make up their own minds, which you have done beautifully.

Why can't you give the same respect to others? Why are you so uncomfortable with people making up their own minds? One final question. Why do you come into threads if what you think is presented will offend you or do you do it for all of those "well meaning" individuals? Are you a super hero saving humanity one person at a time?


This conspiracy is far from over, so you might want to change your attitude, because from your point of view, it's only going to get worse. With every generation, your story fades to black. Happy Trails partner.

Spiegel TV 2001+ German ≈5000 47%[49] †
Sparklit Networks 2002+ English ≈7000 41%[50]
BBC 2003–2004 English ≈20000 41%[51]
Alex Dantart[52] 2007+ Spanish ≈3000 53%[53]
PourOuContre.com 2007+ French ≈1700 62%[54]
20 Minuten daily 2009+ French (to be added) 45%[55]
Aftonbladet daily 2009+ Swedish ≈75000 40%[56]
CNews.ru on-line daily 2009 Russian ≈5500 49%[57]
Twiigs, LLC 2009 English ≈1400 42%[58]
PlanetMars.org 2009+ English ≈2000 37%[59]

Moon Hoax Polls

Now please find another thread to voice your "opinions" because you're non arguments are getting tiresome....yawn.

Peace

[edit on 29-3-2010 by letthereaderunderstand]

Originally posted by bokonon2010
Wrong.
You are supporting the claim that Apollo astronots brought "moon rocks" from the Moon. So, you should show us direct evidence that these rocks are genuine and from the Moon, including proof that they cannot be manufactured from lunar meteorites.

Again, I have posted some links that explain what makes the Lunar samples unique. However, I cannot prove that they can't be manufactured from Lunar meteorites. I can only show evidence.

And as I mentioned earlier, Lunar meteorites experienced extreme heat on there outer surface when they entered Earths atmosphere. This would have removed the microscopic impacts that are found on the surface of samples brought back from the Moon. I haven't seen any evidence of how this could be faked and reproduced on a Lunar meteorite in a convincing way.

There is also the fact that the first Lunar meteorite wasn't found until 1979, by the Japanese and the first meteorite to be recognized as coming from the Moon wasn't until around 1982, ten years after the last Apollo mission. I mentioned this earlier, but it seems that it was ignored. I haven't seen any evidence that Lunar meteorites were found and recognized at an earlier date.

The samples brought back from the Apollo missions are probably the most heavily studied and scrutinized geological samples in history. They've been studied by various scientists and institutions world wide, and yet none of them have questioned their authenticity. I have yet to see any evidence of fakery or tampering from the HB community. I just see wild claims with no supporting evidence what so ever. There is plenty of evidence out there that the samples are genuine.

Sorry if this has been posted. But I found this at Space.com and thought about this thread immediately.

Men on the Moon as a Matter of Fact

"I wasnt surprised when the Fox television network aired a program earlier this year alleging that NASA faked the Apollo Moon missions that took place from 1968 to 1972. This particular conspiracy theory has been around as long as the Apollo program itself, but has had its life breathed anew thanks to this absurd television show."

"The conspiracy theorists say they have proof for their beliefs. But their claims reveal tremendous ignorance of science, from the basic principles of photography to geology and physics."

Originally posted by argentus
reply to post by bokonon2010

 

Calculate what is the gravity force at the altitudes of ISS and tell us why it is not fallen down yet.

I see that your statement has not been addressed as yet, so allow me to do so:

The ISS is continually re-boosted back into a higher orbit, as it orbit degrades over time.

It might be a tough job for them continually fighting the gravity force at such altitudes.

Originally posted by jra

Originally posted by bokonon2010
Wrong.
You are supporting the claim that Apollo astronots brought "moon rocks" from the Moon. So, you should show us direct evidence that these rocks are genuine and from the Moon, including proof that they cannot be manufactured from lunar meteorites.

Again, I have posted some links that explain what makes the Lunar samples unique. However, I cannot prove that they can't be manufactured from Lunar meteorites. I can only show evidence.
Thus you admit the possibility of the lunar samples forgery and your evidence is not direct.


And as I mentioned earlier, Lunar meteorites experienced extreme heat on there outer surface when they entered Earths atmosphere. This would have removed the microscopic impacts that are found on the surface of samples brought back from the Moon. I haven't seen any evidence of how this could be faked and reproduced on a Lunar meteorite in a convincing way.
If a meteorite has resided on Earth for a long time any fusion crust may have been removed by weathering or wind-ablation.
To use micrometeorites impacts as the authenticity criteria, you need to show that this phenomena is not observed in meteorites found on Earth.
Here is the paper The simulation of lunar micrometeorite impacts by laser pulses, 1973:
www.springerlink.com...


There is also the fact that the first Lunar meteorite wasn't found until 1979, by the Japanese and the first meteorite to be recognized as coming from the Moon wasn't until around 1982, ten years after the last Apollo mission. I mentioned this earlier, but it seems that it was ignored. I haven't seen any evidence that Lunar meteorites were found and recognized at an earlier date.
This timing and distribution of lunar meteorites is working strongly against Apollo myth.
The number of lunar meteorites (presently about 65) is similar to the number of Martian meteorites, yet not a single lunar meteorite has been witnessed to fall. In contrast, four Martian meteorites (Chassigny, Shergotty, Nakhla and Zagami) were observed striking this planet, and it is remarkable that these represent three of the major subgroups (Shergotty and Zagami are very similar to each other). The stories of the falls of these special meteorites in 1815, 1865, 1911 and 1962 are well documented elsewhere.:
www.imca.cc...


The samples brought back from the Apollo missions are probably the most heavily studied and scrutinized geological samples in history. They've been studied by various scientists and institutions world wide, and yet none of them have questioned their authenticity. I have yet to see any evidence of fakery or tampering from the HB community. I just see wild claims with no supporting evidence what so ever. There is plenty of evidence out there that the samples are genuine.
There are many scientific studies questioning authenticity Apollo samples, for example by comparison Luna probes samples with Apollo. But you choose to ignore them and resort to all scientists confirm primitive lies.

[edit on 30.3.2010 by bokonon2010]

reply to post by bokonon2010


Lets see some real bs been given here a lot by you and the OP

Google Earth uses sat pics,aicraft pics and now street view so when you see your patio its taken from a plane , when you see your front door its taken from a car! or even a bike know!!

Photographing Apollo sites with a telescope.
Hubble can magnify about 5000x iirc avg distance to moon about 238,800 miles so 238,800/5000 = 47.76 miles so the moon's surface would still look 47.76 miles away the lander is about 15ft across.Telescopes are built first of all to gather as much light as possible not to magnify as much as possible. The smallest object the hubble could resolve on the moon is about 350ft iirc.

Apollo sites: Look at this and comment please on the picture

files.abovetopsecret.com...

This was on a post by jra on another thread.
One half of the picture is from a DAC video taken as the astronauts left the Moon the other Half is from the LRO mission.Now since we cant photograph the lander or the craters from the Earth and the LRO pictures match the area what do you think that shows.

Jodrell Bank: Apollo 11 track explains itself see link below

www.jodrellbank.manchester.ac.uk...

Another thing you post on the same subject in a similar way as another member bochen181 twins

reply to post by jra


IMHO Moon rocks are nothing when it comes to providing evidence that they came back from the moon with men. The possibility that they were collected by the Von Braun's team is factual and timely.
Bottom line is--- you can get moon rocks on earth. Period.
Sure the fantasy of some way out tale of glory and bravery sounds so much better but fails in reality.


Apollo Moon Landing Hoax Accusations: United States
However, the first Antarctic meteorite discovery was made in 1969 by a ... Wade pointed von Braun to Antarctica." Even today, NASA continues to send teams ...

www.lycos.com/info/apollo-moon-landing-hoax-accusatio... - Similar

Hoax proponents argue that Wernher von Braun's trip to Antarctica in 1967 (two years prior to the Apollo missions) was in order to study and/or collect lunar meteorites to be used as fake Moon rocks. Because von Braun was a former SS officer (though one who had been detained by the Gestapo),[72] hoax proponents have suggested[29] that he could have been susceptible to pressure to agree to the conspiracy in order to protect himself from recriminations over the past. Whilst NASA does not provide much information about why the MSFC Director and three others were in Antarctica at that time, it has said that the purpose was "to look into environmental and logistic factors that might relate to the planning of future space missions, and hardware".[73] An article on Sankar Chatterjee at Texas Tech University states that von Braun sent a letter to F. Alton Wade, Chatterjee's predecessor, and that "Von Braun was searching for a secretive locale to help train the United States’ earliest astronauts. Wade pointed von Braun to Antarctica." Even today, NASA continues to send teams to work in parts of Antarctica that are very dry and mimic the conditions on other planets such as Mars and the Moon.

BTW W.v B died with tears in his eyes, not a smile on his face.
He was treated like a dog by the American goverment.


[edit on 30-3-2010 by Donny 4 million]

Originally posted by wmd_2008
reply to post by bokonon2010

 

Apollo sites: Look at this and comment please on the picture


This was on a post by jra on another thread.
One half of the picture is from a DAC video taken as the astronauts left the Moon the other Half is from the LRO mission.Now since we cant photograph the lander or the craters from the Earth and the LRO pictures match the area what do you think that shows.

It shows only that two photoshop pictures are badly composed - colors of the alleged moon surface do not match.

[edit on 30.3.2010 by bokonon2010]

Originally posted by bokonon2010

Originally posted by argentus
reply to post by bokonon2010

 

Calculate what is the gravity force at the altitudes of ISS and tell us why it is not fallen down yet.

I see that your statement has not been addressed as yet, so allow me to do so:

The ISS is continually re-boosted back into a higher orbit, as it orbit degrades over time.

It might be a tough job for them continually fighting the gravity force at such altitudes.

ISS is reboosted because of atmospheric drag. If there was no drag, it would never fall down and would not need reboosts.

You can get moon rocks from remote control.
You can place reflectors from remote control.
You can radio from LEO and make believe you are on the freekin moon.
You can send a rocket to the moon with a tape recording that says
We ain' t here but you sheeple thinks we is.
You can doctor all the video and photographs you want cause you have an unlimited budget to do it.
You can lose the originals.
You can take 40 years to find a drink of water. And then just spit it out.
MikeSinghs told ATS there was water on the moon before NASA would admit it.

Originally posted by Maslo

Originally posted by bokonon2010

Originally posted by argentus
reply to post by bokonon2010

 

Calculate what is the gravity force at the altitudes of ISS and tell us why it is not fallen down yet.

I see that your statement has not been addressed as yet, so allow me to do so:

The ISS is continually re-boosted back into a higher orbit, as it orbit degrades over time.

It might be a tough job for them continually fighting the gravity force at such altitudes.

ISS is reboosted because of atmospheric drag. If there was no drag, it would never fall down and would not need reboosts.

Yes, atmospheric drag is the main cause of ISS orbital decay.
Your second sentence is not correct, because
the body on this orbit is also subjected to perturbations due to non-spherical Earth and other factors:
www.braeunig.us...
en.wikipedia.org...
Though this part is not for IQ of typical Apollo "moon landings" believers.

[edit on 30.3.2010 by bokonon2010]

Originally posted by Maslo

Originally posted by bokonon2010

Originally posted by argentus
reply to post by bokonon2010

 

Calculate what is the gravity force at the altitudes of ISS and tell us why it is not fallen down yet.

I see that your statement has not been addressed as yet, so allow me to do so:

The ISS is continually re-boosted back into a higher orbit, as it orbit degrades over time.

It might be a tough job for them continually fighting the gravity force at such altitudes.

ISS is reboosted because of atmospheric drag. If there was no drag, it would never fall down and would not need reboosts.

So whats the BIG problem with putting the ISS out in SPACE that is it's name isn't IT???? bla bla SPACE STATION.
What the crap is it doing in ATMOSPHERE drag???

reply to post by Donny 4 million


Oh, right....right....uh huh.

Bottom line is--- you can get moon rocks on earth. Period.

842 POUNDS worth??? All found in Antarctica, right? Know what happens to any Lunar meteorite that happnes to fall to Earth? It is OBVIOUS because of the atmospheric heating of entry. The is not ONE scientist on Earth who would have been fooled....only the "Hoax" people are fooled, by the ones who STARTED these 'hoaxes'.

And, "remote control" Lunar rock sample return?? Know how much was collected by that method? Less than ONE kilogram! By the Soviets.

So, you, the OP and the other one with the nonsense posts....have fun remaining ignorant, and continuing to impugn the work and effort that went into the Space Missions. And, thanks for crapping all over the memories of those who have given their lives so that YOU can enjoy a few technological benefits that have come out of these explorations and adventures.



Oh, and OP?

Just keep dumbing down every new generation (according to those bogus polls...). Nah, we don't want people growing up to be intelligent, we want them to believe nonsense from shysters and scam artists who want to separate THEM from their money....

reply to post by letthereaderunderstand

Now please find another thread to voice your "opinions" because you're non arguments are getting tiresome....yawn.

Peace

How do you let the reader understand by sending him away from a TOPIC you started, a venue for voicing opinions?

Isn't that part of the debate to disagree, to share sides and extrapolate information as best as possible for defense of ones opinion?

Now since you don't want to hear tiresome or bothersome [my words] you have nothing less left than to send them else where.

HEY YOU STARTED THIS THREAD!!!!! REMEMBER THAT? I know that comment wasn't directed towards me, yet again I state as I have before IN THIS THREAD, how much of a lynch this really is!

If you can't stand the heat of OPINION in your OWN THREADS, don't create them!!

wether one agrees or not, this is EXACTLY WHAT ATS IS FOR, EVERYONE'S OPINIONS!!!!

For you to DENY one that explicit right here ON ATS is for you to be acting IGNORANT!

You don't want to here what others have to say, then don't login to ATS!

Sorry mods, I have said this about this thread a few times, its lynching party!

[edit on 30-3-2010 by theability]

Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by Donny 4 million

 

Oh, right....right....uh huh.

Bottom line is--- you can get moon rocks on earth. Period.

842 POUNDS worth??? All found in Antarctica, right? Know what happens to any Lunar meteorite that happnes to fall to Earth? It is OBVIOUS because of the atmospheric heating of entry. The is not ONE scientist on Earth who would have been fooled....only the "Hoax" people are fooled, by the ones who STARTED these 'hoaxes'.

And, "remote control" Lunar rock sample return?? Know how much was collected by that method? Less than ONE kilogram! By the Soviets.

So, you, the OP and the other one with the nonsense posts....have fun remaining ignorant, and continuing to impugn the work and effort that went into the Space Missions. And, thanks for crapping all over the memories of those who have given their lives so that YOU can enjoy a few technological benefits that have come out of these explorations and adventures.



Oh, and OP?

Just keep dumbing down every new generation (according to those bogus polls...). Nah, we don't want people growing up to be intelligent, we want them to believe nonsense from shysters and scam artists who want to separate THEM from their money....

Oh boy a knot in your shorts again weedy?
If you can bring back one rock by remote control you can bring back as many as you want. Period
I see no nonsense other than your posts --like this one I quote you on.
We cannot remain ignorant as ---we never were in the first place.
I feel like that is a personal attack anyway.
Enjoy the benefits of what?
Ok on this line fill in the number of dead-------
On this line list those benefits we just can't live without----
Any way the overwhelming majority died in the earth's atmosphere or on the earth itself.
NONE even died in space. Can't be that dangerous out there.
I don't crap on the names of those that died or have made billions doing whatever it is they do.
I crap on what I believe is a hoax perpetrated on the American people.
I want my money back.

reply to post by Donny 4 million


Well....I am DONE. With you. I truly feel sorry for you. Perhaps one day help will be available, and you will be receptive.

The ever-widening inability to understand science and technology is threatening the very fabric of our future society, and our future as a viable, intelligent forward-looking species. It is seems it started as endemic, but seems to be spreading more and more, mostly with newer generations of people who lack the discerning skills, yet, to tell nonsense from real science.

It is more than a little frustrating to those of us who use our brains, and comprehend and can contemplate reasonably and logically.

Also, many of us actually READ real information, from real sciences, and scientists, and other experts in various fields of discipline and research. We also rely on our own level of experieince and expertise, in order to understand.

Those who choose to fail to understand are doomed to ignorance, permanently. UNLESS they decide to actually inverstigate and LEARN --- otherwise, they will remain lost.

A shame, truly. A freakin' shame.

For those on the sidelines, who are just joining/or lurking --- some benefits that trickle out of the Space Programs (worldwide, BTW...NOT just NASA, although lion's share is from US endeavors...):

1. Computer Technology
2. Consumer/Home/Recreation
3. Environmental and Resource Management
4. Health and Medicine
5. Industrial Productivity/Manufacturing Technology
6. Public Safety
7. Transportation

Read the about all of the details here.

Oh, and for those who "...want my (their) money back..."?

Out of a $2.4 trillion budget, less than 0.8% is spent on the entire space program! That's less than 1 penny for every dollar spent.

Well, for our "old-timers" who may be out there, and "worried" about some tax dollars spent in the past (like, during the VIETNAM era? Gee, how about a refund on THAT as well???).

For the oldsters, hope you never need any of these medical devices, more offshoots of NASA technology to make life a littel bit better:

Other spinoffs in this area include: Arteriosclerosis detection, ultrasound scanners, automatic insulin pump, portable x-ray device, invisible braces, dental arch wire, palate surgery technology, clean room apparel, implantable heart aid, MRI, bone analyzer, and cataract surgery tools.

Of course, one could always choose to reject such technology, in favor of ole' "Doc Adams" on 'Gunsmoke'....

"Here. boy....bite down on this here bullet whiles I saws off'n your infected foot. There'll be a shot of whiskey fer ya, afters..."














[edit on 30 March 2010 by weedwhacker]

reply to post by bokonon2010

Yes, atmospheric drag is the main cause of ISS orbital decay. Your second sentence is not correct, because the body on this orbit is also subjected to perturbations due to non-spherical Earth and other factors: www.braeunig.us... en.wikipedia.org... Though this part is not for IQ of typical Apollo "moon landings" believers.

I am aware of these other factors, I left them out for simplicity`s sake. Anyway, thanks for clarification.

So whats the BIG problem with putting the ISS out in SPACE that is it's name isn't IT???? bla bla SPACE STATION. What the crap is it doing in ATMOSPHERE drag???

ISS is in space (300 - 400 km high), however there is not perfect vacuum in low earth orbit. The density of the atmosphere gradually decreases.

en.wikipedia.org...

Wow,

derailed topic again........[as I have posted three times]

NOW we are on the subject of the ISS????

WE have the original poster telling others to "get lost" [my words] but about the same....

Lynching still.....

time to U2U a mod or three

[edit on 30-3-2010 by theability]

Originally posted by Donny 4 million
You can get moon rocks from remote control.
You can place reflectors from remote control.
You can radio from LEO and make believe you are on the freekin moon.
You can send a rocket to the moon with a tape recording that says
We ain' t here but you sheeple thinks we is.
You can doctor all the video and photographs you want cause you have an unlimited budget to do it.
You can lose the originals.
You can take 40 years to find a drink of water. And then just spit it out.
MikeSinghs told ATS there was water on the moon before NASA would admit it.

I agree with you Donny

the Russians er Soviets Have Collected Moon Rocks & Dust ! from the Moon did they not ? and they did not land on the moon as far as we know ?

The Soviet Luna Program fro wiki
en.wikipedia.org...

can someone explain to me why these pic (orbital) are so clear (from luna ) from the Soviet Luna missions American Pics are not >? on this website the first pics are blurry but from Luna 12 and on ! they (Quite A FEW) are almost crystal clear!!!

Source from mentallandscape.com Soviet Luna Missions Pics
www.mentallandscape.com...

here is a catalog from the same site of the soviet space missions to !
Mars and Venus

Source+ www.mentallandscape.com...

time line of artificial satellites and probes en.wikipedia.org...

My belief is BS gets real High for you disbelief you need you may need to look at other countries for a different detail info of the same thing

now really did those Probes Rovers Etc.. ALL Actually crashed ? the one s that are claimed to be ? how can we be so sure on both sides USSR or USA

here is a list of what us humans landed/crashed on the moon

en.wikipedia.org...

oh by the way can moon rock be created on earth in a vacuum how hard would it be >? this got me thinking of Warning conjuncture here Phil Schneider (structural engineer) claimed he had evidance of metal alloys that are Man Made and only can be made in the type of texture and structure of fusion in space or a Vacuum Environment

here is one website that shows this www.muellercorp.com... as there allot more that you can discover

moon rocks through a microscope

www.cas.usf.edu...






[edit on 30-3-2010 by Wolfenz]

reply to post by weedwhacker


Ah, heck weedy don't write me off so soon.
1---- first computer 1938.
Please do tell us about the Apollo computer. The one they invented.
2-----consumers , homes, recourse management----way before the first coming.
Ask any Egyptian
4-- Health and medicine have been studied in the Olmec culture of Central America back a thousand years ago.
5---No one has the Ford Motor Company beat in production techniques since 1912.
6 ---Public safety ON THE MOON now that's a classic. Makes me LOL
Ok now ladies, gentleman and you little rascals--- do not trip over the moon rocks .
6-- The TRANSPORTATION to the moon idea died over thirty five years ago.What UP??

Cost of project Apollo 4 X your number.

NASA Budget - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
NASA's budget peaked in 1966, during the Apollo program. As this chart shows, NASA's budget peaked in 1966, ...

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NASA_Budget



NASA's budget peaked in 1966, during the Apollo program
As this chart shows, NASA's budget peaked in 1966, during the height of construction efforts leading up to the first moon landing under Project Apollo. At its peak, the Apollo program involved more than 34,000 NASA employees and 375,000 employees of industrial and university contractors. Roughly two to four cents out of every U.S. tax dollar or 4% of the total federal budget.

And weedy if NASA invented and patented all the stuff you claim----every American would be getting a 4 percent royalty check for investing in that research.