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.

 

Young Aussie genius whipping NASA in Moon Hoax Debate!

page: 117
377
<< 114  115  116    118  119  120 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 22 2010 @ 05:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by wmd_2008
Explain this still waitng for an answer.

None of the objects or craters can be seen from Earth with any telescope.
The crew shot the film as they left the Moon so if this was fake
how can they match the LRO images including the tracks.

after the Apollo 17 mission the Terrain matches the pictures taken by the Astronauts



Any photo backdrops used in the studio/set photos would have been created after they received reference pictures back from the unmanned probes.
Like this one from Lunar Orbiter 2 in 1966.



It took 609 High res, and 208 medium res photos. It even got as low as 49km's from the surface.
So with these pictures, they had ample information to create an accurate backdrop.


In regards to the film footage of them leaving the surface, I suggest they didn't film it on the moon,
rather, they pointed a camera at a model, like they did in star wars and moved it over the surface.

Here's the sort of model I'm talking about.



NASA quote regarding the photo..

"a Langley technician takes great care to make sure that the surface features of the moon are being represented exactly." "The clearest case in point was the intricate LOLA, which started operating in 1965 at an imposing cost of nearly $2 million. This simulator was designed to provide a pilot with a detailed visual encounter with the lunar surface; the machine consisted primarily of a cockpit, a closed-circuit TV system, and four large murals or scale models representing portions of the lunar surface as seen from various altitudes The pilot in the cockpit moved along a track past these murals, which would accustom him to the visual cues for controlling a spacecraft in the vicinity of the moon."
source history.nasa.gov...

These are other actual simulation photos. And yes, they do like the real thing.


"With floodlights shining down to simulate lunar light and the base modeled to resemble the lunar surface, 24 astronauts practiced landings at the Lunar Landing Research Facility between 1965 and 1969." NASA

So in conclusion, you can't really make reference to any footage shot on the moon if it was a simulation shot in a studio / set.

edit spelling: unmaned




[edit on 22-6-2010 by ppk55]




posted on Jun, 22 2010 @ 05:09 AM
link   
reply to post by ppk55
 



Any photo backdrops used in the studio/set photos would have been created after they received reference pictures back from the unmaned probes.


So you admit that NASA was able to send probes to the Moon?



posted on Jun, 22 2010 @ 05:14 AM
link   
reply to post by DJW001
 
Probes wouldn't be fried by radiation...
.
.
.



posted on Jun, 22 2010 @ 07:10 AM
link   
reply to post by ppk55
 



These are other actual simulation photos. And yes, they do like the real thing.


Really? Do any of these pictures look like the ones actually taken on the Moon?



posted on Jun, 22 2010 @ 09:24 AM
link   
reply to post by ppk55
 


Thank you for proving the EFFORT that went into preparations for the Lunar missions, and landings.

What you "questioners" believe, apparently, is that NASA, with Orbiter and Surveyor and telescope photos could recreate exactly every last and minute detail, every rock and bump, in perfect fashion??

NO!!! Astronauts were give the best possible, with the most prominent landmarks re-created, for orientation purposes, to assist them in landing guidance. REMEMBER, the descent trajectories were calculated beforehand...the humans were the set of "eyes" to monitor, and check that the computers were staying accurate to flight plan.

It also helped them to determine, once they transitioned to the final descent, how close to their "target" they were. Apollo 11 actually went "long", for several reasons...the connecting tunnel between the LM and CSM was not completely evacuated, and the last bit of air pressure imparted a slight extra Delta V to the LM -- this slight extra speed was magnified as the descent progressed, since it was unkown and unaccounted for.

Result were the few "1202" computer alarms...merely alerting humans to the fact that the computers were nearing their maximum 'speed' of computation, their memory limits. IF it had NOT been for the extensive Sim training, and the fact that one of the SimSups gave the crew a "1201" alarm (they ABORTED because of it), Apollo 11 might have aborted right there.

In post-flight (Simulator) debrief, it was learned that it was NOT a required abort; so then, the MIT computer programming geeks were tasked with searching the database to find OTHER similar alarm codes, so that they wouldn't be "trigger happy" if encountering them at a tense moment during actual, LIVE descent. "1202" was similar to "1201" code.

SO...the Nav computer was nearing its max capacity, BECAUSE it was 'long' in the flight plan, and was rapidly (to its limit at the time) re-calculating. The crew were also able to see this...result? They can't go backwards, to the "target", so continued forward...but, as we know, the 'new target' zone wasn't suitable, too many large boulders.

This is why Armstrong flew manually, again going forward, because their field of view is limited --- until he saw another open area to land.

Collins, in the CSM, from ~60 miles up, was trying to find them on the surface visually, but he had to guess at how far down-range they had actually traveled, since they were NOT right where the usual training of landmark recognition would have helped him in locating them.


There has been some speculation, right here on ATS Boards, that when Apollo 12 landed, the obscuring dust left them slightly unsure whether they were "accurate" or not, since their mission was to retrieve parts from the Surveyor 3 probe. Turns out they WERE right on target, but the controversy raised here at ATS was whether or not, prior to their public egress and EVA, they conducted a covert "Stand Up EVA" first. To "eyeball", with a 360-degree panorama view, to ascertain their exact placement.

(After the, mostly only internally known, at the time, fact of Apollo 11 being some distance off, they had to know IF they were within range of the Surveyor 3)

Because it woould have been embarrassing to EVA, and then have to spend too much time searching for it, and fail at that mission objective.

SO, the allegation is the "Stand Up" peek was done in secret, to save face and reputation. Turns out they WERE right where supposed to be, but still...it's stayed (mostly) secret ever since. PR was very important, back then...the "GOAL" (First Landing and Return) had been accomplished, and Congress had members chomping to pull the plug on the flow of money.

SO, NASA 'prettified' a few things, to some extent. This is understandable, considering the alternatives, and certainly is defensable. PR was important, as long as it didn't get in the way of safety.



posted on Jun, 22 2010 @ 09:29 AM
link   
reply to post by NWOWILLFALL
 



Probes wouldn't be fried by radiation...


OH, for gawd's sake!! Not that old rubbish, again??

Check yesterday, 21 June 2010's edition of the USAToday, front page (USA domestic edition).

Story is about Obama's desire, in lieu of (now that he intends to cancel manned Lunar missions) a manned mision to an ASTEROID!!

The topic of deep-space radiation, and the exposure hazards for periods of many months is addressed!!!

Earth to Moon and back, total of ~ two weeks is NOTHING in terms of hazard from radiation (barring, of course, an unpredictable Solar Flare eruption, and contingencies were consdered for those, too).

FIVE to EIGHT months is more of a problem...the MOST debilitating effects, though, as a safety to long-mission aspect is NAUSEA...and there are drugs that help to mitigate effects of radiation, and ease nausea too...

Try doing some real research.....



posted on Jun, 22 2010 @ 09:33 AM
link   
TAKING A MOMENT...

PAGING the OP! PAGING the OP! Hellloooooooo? Why have you gone AWOL?

Why not defend your fair-haired boy, the topic of this thread (originally)??

I believe many would like to know if the original opinion still stands, as to "Jarrah White"s 'genius' status??

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

OK, back to regularly scheduled prgramming....



posted on Jun, 22 2010 @ 09:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by ppk55

Originally posted by wmd_2008
Explain this still waitng for an answer.

None of the objects or craters can be seen from Earth with any telescope.
The crew shot the film as they left the Moon so if this was fake
how can they match the LRO images including the tracks.

after the Apollo 17 mission the Terrain matches the pictures taken by the Astronauts



Any photo backdrops used in the studio/set photos would have been created after they received reference pictures back from the unmanned probes.
Like this one from Lunar Orbiter 2 in 1966.



It took 609 High res, and 208 medium res photos. It even got as low as 49km's from the surface.
So with these pictures, they had ample information to create an accurate backdrop.


In regards to the film footage of them leaving the surface, I suggest they didn't film it on the moon,
rather, they pointed a camera at a model, like they did in star wars and moved it over the surface.

Here's the sort of model I'm talking about.



NASA quote regarding the photo..

"a Langley technician takes great care to make sure that the surface features of the moon are being represented exactly." "The clearest case in point was the intricate LOLA, which started operating in 1965 at an imposing cost of nearly $2 million. This simulator was designed to provide a pilot with a detailed visual encounter with the lunar surface; the machine consisted primarily of a cockpit, a closed-circuit TV system, and four large murals or scale models representing portions of the lunar surface as seen from various altitudes The pilot in the cockpit moved along a track past these murals, which would accustom him to the visual cues for controlling a spacecraft in the vicinity of the moon."
source history.nasa.gov...

These are other actual simulation photos. And yes, they do like the real thing.


"With floodlights shining down to simulate lunar light and the base modeled to resemble the lunar surface, 24 astronauts practiced landings at the Lunar Landing Research Facility between 1965 and 1969." NASA

So in conclusion, you can't really make reference to any footage shot on the moon if it was a simulation shot in a studio / set.

edit spelling: unmaned

[edit on 22-6-2010 by ppk55]



Your as bright as FoosM it seems the TRACKS left by the Astronauts even show in this picture

files.abovetopsecret.com...

Can you explain that!



posted on Jun, 22 2010 @ 09:54 AM
link   
reply to post by ppk55
 


Oh, after you finish digesting my other post, and the information presented, one more thing...do you really think the photo below looks REAL?



These are other actual simulation photos. And yes, they do like the real thing.



?? :shk:

IF, when you say

...they do like the real thing.
you are saying that it is a 'real' A-frame simulation gantry, on Earth, and a 'real' LM replica, on Earth --- on a 'real' Lunar surface simulation...then I suppose there's no argument.

However, if you think that image of a LM, on that obviously fake Lunar surface recreation looks like the ACTUAL Lunar surface, then I think there isn't much more to be said...

..except, I've seen really BAD 1950s Science Fiction movies that looked better.

AND, the REAL thing does look exactly like it should...because IT is real!!



posted on Jun, 22 2010 @ 12:06 PM
link   
Let me explain one more time that radiation thingy, because Its really hard for me how one can not understand such a simple concept.

Ok, What is radiation? Particles flying at high speeds.
Now that can be quite a lot. You are surrounded by radiation, down here on earth too: Sunlight, Electromagnetic fields, Natural radioactivity etc...
Now,
To determine what radiation will do to you, you need to know 3 things:

Type of radiaton
Intensity
Time of Exposure

Thats an AND, not an OR.
You need all 3 things.
(actually you also need to know how you were exposed, if you, for example inhaled a cloud a Casium dust, or just walked past a piece of uranium.)

An example:
If you tell me "I have been hit by gamma radiation" Nobody in the world can tell you what that will do to you, without knowing how much and for what time period.

If you tell me on the other hand: 4 Hours of UV radiation, 3 mW/cm²
I can say "Sunburn likely, depending on your skin type"



posted on Jun, 22 2010 @ 03:04 PM
link   
ok.. well.. tell me who is video taping the FIRST man on the moon this video?? Oh .. and they fired a remote controlled movie projector/camera before they landed....




[edit on 22-6-2010 by Komodo]



posted on Jun, 22 2010 @ 03:21 PM
link   
reply to post by Komodo
 

Wow.
You did it. You found the fatal flaw in the plan.
Congratulations. In spite of all the planning, all the secrecy. You found it.



posted on Jun, 22 2010 @ 03:30 PM
link   
reply to post by Komodo
 


I dunno, but whoever it was must have been, like, really tall!



posted on Jun, 22 2010 @ 03:38 PM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 



In spite of all the planning, all the secrecy. You found it.


I'm so sad....
Looks like our work here is done...THEY found out....





posted on Jun, 22 2010 @ 03:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by Komodo
 

Wow.
You did it. You found the fatal flaw in the plan.
Congratulations. In spite of all the planning, all the secrecy. You found it.


thx Phage!!!



posted on Jun, 22 2010 @ 04:41 PM
link   
reply to post by Komodo
 


Well Komodo, now that you are back, we still have the issue of laser existing in the 1960s. Here's the most recent post that you ran away from:


Originally posted by Tomblvd

Originally posted by Komodo


no .. i'm having a problem with you not stepping up to the plate and provide ATS with a picture of the exact laser that co-insides with your alleged data!! Do you have a picture of the EXACT laser, unmodified, first generation laser they had mounted?


as I said before..

can you plz post what the laser lookedlike back in .. ohh.. 1960's


Since Komodo seems to have pulled another disappearing act, I'll spare him the suspense and give him what he wants, but I still want to know why this is so important to the question at hand.

Here is a picture of the Maser developed at MIT in the late 50s and used to first measure the distance from the earth to the moon:



More informaion on the Maser

And here is a description of "Project Luna See" (get it?).

Optical Echoes from the Moon


A ruby optical maser radiating pulses of approximately 50 joules energy, 0.5 msec. duration, at 6943 A was used as the source. The transmitting optical system included a Cassegrain telescope of 12-inch diameter. The echoes were received on a Cassegrain telescope of 48-inch diameter, passed through an interference filter of 7A band-width and were detected with a photomultiplier tube of spectral response type S-20 cooled to liquid nitrogen temperature. The field of view of the receiving telescope was 0.2 milliradians.

The photoelectron count obtained in a 0.5 msec. interval at the expected time-delay was contemplated with the counts obtained in 0.5 msec. intervals where no echoes would be expected and where the only relevant contributions to the count were scattered light (photoelectric dark current was negligible).


Everything is there, spelled out in easy to understand terms, but I doubt it will matter much to Komodo.




Now, do you admit lasers existed in the early 60s?



posted on Jun, 22 2010 @ 05:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by Komodo
ok.. well.. tell me who is video taping the FIRST man on the moon this video?? Oh .. and they fired a remote controlled movie projector/camera before they landed....



Notice all the 'puzzled' icons. Komodo is often puzzled about stuff...

Komodo also likes to mislead the forum, it seems. But, when he actually gets off his lazy backside and researches what the footage was and how it was taken, he will return and apologise.

WON'T YOU, KOMODO...


Really, he should have done that research BEFORE posting it, but there you have the methodology (or is it pure deceit?) of the apollo denier. Do tell, Komodo - are you just a bad researcher, or was that misleading information DELIBERATE?



posted on Jun, 22 2010 @ 05:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by CHRLZ

Really, he should have done that research BEFORE posting it, but there you have the methodology (or is it pure deceit?) of the apollo denier. Do tell, Komodo - are you just a bad researcher, or was that misleading information DELIBERATE?


Anybody who doesn't know how the first steps from Apollo 11 were recorded is just plain lazy. Anybody who can't put the term "laser" in to search engine and read the wiki article is profoundly DIM.

So, Komodo is both.



posted on Jun, 22 2010 @ 05:58 PM
link   
This is a letter I just sent to CIO at Nasa ... change will occur when more complain... Please feel free to modify this to suit your needs in contacting Nasa too :

public-inquiries@hq.nasa.gov


Dear Linda Y. Cureton ,
Chief Information Officer
NASA

It is a travesty that you have spent so much of our tax money
protecting secrets of the few... Shame on all of you.

When a 25 year old Australian Rips holes in 20 years of
disinformation to the citizens who support your salaries..
www.youtube.com...
Videos : Moon Faker...

This is what blogs are saying all over the US :

The whole Moon Hoax Debate, which I thought had died off long ago,
has been revived by this young genius from Australia who has been kicking butt against astronomers appointed by NASA to debate the moon hoaxers such as Phil Plait of www.badastronomy.com, Jay Windley, the Mythbusters program, and other "NASA Propagandists" as he calls them.

=====
Read your own statement from your CIO :
Letter from the CIO and CFO: Open Government at NASA
Aril 7, 2010
Dear Friends and Family of NASA,
In December 2009, the White House issued the Open Government Directive calling on Executive Branch agencies
to become more open, accountable, and centered on the principles of transparency, collaboration, and participation.

I grew up believing in the dreams that you created for all of
us... Just to find out your merely floor sweepers of the DOD
you are there to feed us nonsense.
America is waking up.. Maybe you at Nasa should
as well.
Become leaders.
Tell us the truth.

I am posting this on the blog site and know that we all have
access to :
# USA.gov
# ExpectMore.gov

While we are at it... how about disclosure on TT Brown technology
long in use and the advanced power systems needed for our country.

Sincerely,




--

[edit on 22-6-2010 by R_Clark]



posted on Jun, 22 2010 @ 06:11 PM
link   
reply to post by R_Clark
 




OK, it's official. I have NOW seen everything. AND, I do so, so fear for the future of Humanity, if THIS is the example of what's to come, in future generations.

The motion picture (meant as a tongue-in-cheek romp to amuse) called "Idiocracy" is well on its way, apparently, of becoming a reality.

It is truly, truly disheartening to see......

Idiocracy, the movie...



new topics

top topics



 
377
<< 114  115  116    118  119  120 >>

log in

join