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 Pinke
A wierd segway for a moment here ... and something I almost fell for yesterday ...
I saw my friend with his son this morning. His son kept asking him repetitive questions over and over again about if he could go to the local arcade. This kept up for sometime. Eventuallly, my friend accidently responded incorrectly to one of the questions and said something he didn't mean to. He was so busy answering the question the same way everytime that he just didn't think.
What ensued was a two hour drama llama session about how the boy's father had lied to him, and why did he lie to him, and how his father had to honor his word.
This story made me think. Keep asking Phil Plait or anyone repetitive questions they're bound to slip up sooner or later. It's just a knee jerk reaction. I saw the video that was posted earlier and looked at it through some scopes. Instantly I saw some issues - I knew it was pointing towards fake, so I wasn't really thinking. If I had posted my full initial thoughts of what I assumed I saw on my scopes I would have got some details wrong and someone would've said ... Pinke why you lie to us? If Pinke says this then everything she say must be brought into question!
[edit on 28-7-2010 by Pinke]
Originally posted by fieryjaguarpaw
How on Earth has this gone on for almost 150 pages? When I first saw this thread I figured it would be a couple of pages before it died out. I havn't read the thread but WTF guys! I've never seen anything that can't be easily explained.
Did I miss anything?
Did I just whip some Australian kids butt?
1. How can you allege that the idea that NASA and the government would murder their own astronauts is "a particularly loathsome accusation", when in fact the CIA's General William H. Craig came up with Operation Dirty Trick: a proposal to blame John Glenn's possible death aboard Friendship 7 on the Cubans and use his death to justify all out war?
2. How can you frequently allege that Bill Kaysing said "any kind of space travel is impossible", when in the exact same interview that you refer to Kaysing explicitly says "I will concede that certain unmanned vehicles might have made it to the moon. The Russians are supposed to have sent some unmanned vehicles to the moon. And possibly our Surveyor did land on the moon."?
3. How can you allege that there were no major solar flares during the Apollo missions when NOAA's Comprehensive Flare Index for Major Flares explicitly logs 30 major x-ray solar flares during the time eight of those missions were supposedly in cislunar space?
Satweavers 2 years ago
Once again, Jarrah. You try so hard to avoid the obvious. Check my evidence. Go to PhotoBucket dot com. Search "satweavers", click "view satweaavers album", select "Moon Hoax" then look at sub albums, "Moon Light", "Moon Shadow" and "Astronaut Shadows". Without any trick photography or plastic buckets, the mystery of the shadows is fully explained.
2 years ago
"My goodness, Jarrah. You try so hard to avoid the obvious. Check my evidence."
I've seen you're feeble excuses a million times, I am tired and have more important things to do than give my time of day to propagandists like you. So please, f**k off.
WhiteJarrah 2 years ago
Originally posted by Pinke
Here is how Jarrah deals with people. I have only censored a swear word.
This is the video link:
He required footage of a so called ‘expert’ to support the story line he wished to persue, and as a teacher (at the coledge at that time) he asked if I would be willing to do the interview for his assignment. I agreed as he did not have access to a ‘real authority’. The reality is that I am not even a professional photographer, the interesting thing is that when a person is portrayed as an expert on film, people tend to believe it (I am a fine arts teacher).
Originally posted by FoosM
I was more looking for this, but thanks
At ignition, the ascent stage rises at about 3 meters/sec2 (about 10 feet/sec2), creating a accelerating force equal to about one-third of Earth's gravity, only twice that what the astronauts were experiencing standing in the cabin. Acceleration increases gradually until cut-off, when it will have built to about two-thirds that of normal Earth gravity. After the ascent stage reaches an altitude of only 50 feet (15 meters), it pitches about 54° face down to build horizontal velocity as it climbs.
....does this sort of behaviour seem responsible ?
...notice the picture breakup .. didn't see any of that from the moon.
...and the other strange thing ... the below video whilst taken in vacuum doesn't appear to be in slow motion ? crazy huh ! check out 1.50
Originally posted by weedwhacker
BTW, when you Google (or other internet search method) the EVA suits, look for HOW they were constructed....I.E., how many layers and what types of materials were used....
How long can a human live unprotected in space?
If you don't try to hold your breath, exposure to space for half a minute or so is unlikely to produce permanent injury. (skip)......but theory predicts -- and animal experiments confirm -- that otherwise, exposure to vacuum causes no immediate injury. You do not explode. Your blood does not boil. You do not freeze. You do not instantly lose consciousness.
Exposure to space without a spacesuit
The human body can briefly survive the hard vacuum of space unprotected, despite contrary depictions in much popular science fiction. Human flesh expands to about twice its size in such conditions, giving the visual effect of a body builder rather than an overfilled balloon. Consciousness is retained for up to 15 seconds as the effects of oxygen starvation set in. No snap freeze effect occurs because all heat must be lost through thermal radiation or the evaporation of liquids, and the blood does not boil because it remains pressurized within the body. The greatest danger is in attempting to hold one's breath before exposure, as the subsequent explosive decompression can damage the lungs. These effects have been confirmed through various accidents (including in very high altitude conditions, outer space and training vacuum chambers). Human skin does not need to be protected from vacuum and is gas-tight by itself. Instead it only needs to be mechanically compressed to retain its normal shape. This can be accomplished with a tight-fitting elastic body suit and a helmet for containing breathing gases, known as a Space activity suit.
At NASA's Manned Spacecraft Center (now renamed Johnson Space Center) we had a test subject accidentally exposed to a near vacuum (less than 1 psi) in an incident involving a leaking space suit in a vacuum chamber back in '65. He remained conscious for about 14 seconds, which is about the time it takes for O2 deprived blood to go from the lungs to the brain. The suit probably did not reach a hard vacuum, and we began repressurizing the chamber within 15 seconds. The subject regained consciousness at around 15,000 feet equivalent altitude. The subject later reported that he could feel and hear the air leaking out, and his last conscious memory was of the water on his tongue beginning to boil.
You kind of have avoided the question of should they have attempted those falling over routines ...
Astronaut Group 4 (The Scientists) was the fourth group of astronauts selected by NASA in June 1965. While the astronauts of the previous three groups were required to have college and some advanced degrees, they were primarily chosen for their test pilot backgrounds. The six members of Group 4, on the other hand, were chosen for their research and academic backgrounds..
Originally posted by FoosM
Originally posted by DJW001
reply to post by FoosM
So you are just going to ignore the hundreds, nay. thousands of people who watched the Apollo missions lift off....
Edit to correct typos...
[edit on 28-7-2010 by DJW001]
Launching a rocket into LEO does not prove they went afterwards to the moon. Dont forget, Apollo went into an orbit around the Earth below the VABs.
I am the LORD your God
Open wide your mouth and I will fill it.
Originally posted by ppk55
reply to post by weedwhacker
You kind of have avoided the question of should they have attempted those falling over routines in the youtube videos above, if they knew their suit would split and they would die within seconds ? blood boiling is not hollywood movies, look it up. try google.
WOW look how these ISS astronauts at 10 seconds and 35 seconds .. are in NORMAL speed, even in a vacuum .. amazing.
[edit on 28-7-2010 by ppk55]
Originally posted by ppk55
I'm sorry, but you don't do this if there's even a 1% chance your suit will break.
To make it simple. suit rupture = instant death
3. How thick is the space suit?
Approximately 3/16" thick, 11 layers of materials.
Suit materials include: ortho-fabric, aluminized mylar, neoprene-coated nylon, dacron, urethane-coated nylon, tricot, nylon/spandex, stainless steel, and high strength composite materials.
And by the way, what you provided as debunking is off base.