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: 161
377
<< 158  159  160    162  163  164 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 10 2010 @ 07:38 AM
link   
Hello my lovely moon hoax believers / nonbelievers,

I had a thought last night.

It struck me how disorganised and unprofessional the entire NASA catalogue is regarding the moon landings. This was supposedly the greatest of human endeavours, the greatest scientific accomplishment.

So in 2010 why are QUALITY video and images of this monumental feat so hard to obtain?

For instance, the stills.
They were extremely high quality 70mm frames.

So you’d expect to be able to download the very best scans, at the highest resolution possible at one central website. Not so.

Perhaps this imaginary website would be called ‘The Celebration of Apollo.'

Here, there would be ALL the 16mm movies, TV broadcasts, and images in a readily accessible format.

Not only that, they would be of the highest quality possible.

However this is not the case.

The images available now in 2010 are all low resolution. Even the best are a couple of megabytes. And this is if you know where to look.

A good quality scan of a 70mm frame should start at about 20 megabytes.

The videos of the TV recordings are still in the ridiculously outdated real player format and once again, extremely low quality. Where are the high quality uncompressed files for the would be researcher ?

And before you all go off saying look here and look there ... This will just prove my point.

To celebrate an achievement of this magnitude there should be one central repository that offers ALL the images and videos at the HIGHEST quality possible.

To surmise,

I believe the high quality images and videos of the Apollo missions are being deliberately withheld or made hard to obtain to prevent professional analysis.

edit: btw this is a good read

kn.theiet.org...

[edit on 10-8-2010 by ppk55]




posted on Aug, 10 2010 @ 07:45 AM
link   
reply to post by ppk55
 


You yourself have posted scans enlarged so much that the grain is clearly visible Just what degree of resolution would you consider acceptable? If you have devised a scanner that is capable of doing better, perhaps you can provide it to NASA. I agree that it's a pity that most of the films are in "Realplayer" format. Perhaps you could volunteer your time to put them into a Microsoft proprietary format.



posted on Aug, 10 2010 @ 09:46 AM
link   



Originally posted by AgentSmith

Originally posted by FoosM
It makes you wonder... did they use the Apollo astronauts as guinea pigs?
Cause I dont recall any biology going to the moon to test for radiation poisoning.


That's not surprising really, for a start Jarrah won't have mentioned it as it threatens his ideas and you would have to carry out research to find out.



Bzzzz.... wrong answer.

I know the Russians sent biology. And so does Jarrah:


And thats the whole point. The Soviets haven't attempted to even go to the moon with humans.
Tell us, did the US have access to Soviet radiation test results for their Apollo missions? In the heat of the cold war, and the space race... would they trust them? I would think the US would say, no thank you, we'll check it out ourselves and confirm if your data is correct or not.



But it wasn't NASA that sent animals and plants to the Moon I''m afraid, it was the Russians aboard Zond 5 which flew around the Moon and returned to Earth with it's living payload healthy and alive.


Thats right, it wasn't NASA!
And the type of biology the Russians sent, happen to been able to cope much better to radiation than humans.





On September 18, 1968, the spacecraft flew around the Moon. The closest distance was 1,950 km. High quality photographs of the Earth were taken at a distance of 90,000 km. A biological payload of two russian tortoises, wine flies, meal worms, plants, seeds, bacteria, and other living matter was included in the flight. On September 21, 1968, the reentry capsule entered the Earth's atmosphere, braked aerodynamically, and deployed its parachutes at 7 km. The capsule splashed down in the Indian Ocean and was successfully recovered, safely returning the biological payload, first in history animals made Moon-flyby.

en.wikipedia.org...

EDIT TO ADD:

Oh Foos, you might also be interested in this document regarding the radiation doseage experiments on Zond-5 and Zond-7 (by the USSR, not NASA). You probably won't like the conclusion though


Cosmic Radiation Measurements using Nuclear emulsions aboard the Zond-5 and Zond-7 automatic stations



So AgentSmith, why dont you give us readers a quick summary of their findings?



posted on Aug, 10 2010 @ 09:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by AgentSmith
Better than that, he's completely ignored the ACTUAL EXPERIMENT carried out by the USSR after his article was written, in which the RUSSIAN scientists conclude that the trip is perfectly safe.

As for his arguments that it was 'too risky', pathetic! Since when are half the things we do not risky? Last time I checked people still bungee jump, race cars, ride horses, basejump, etc and those are just RECREATIONAL! Not everyone are WIMPS that are held back by risks and frankly if humans had not ever done anything because it was dangerous we wouldn't have got where we are today. Just because radiation seems dangerous and makes you cry because you don't understand it doesn't mean everyone else is affected by this.



Fine, you like to take risks?
Why dont you recreationally go get X-rays?
And tell us all how you feel afterwards.





posted on Aug, 10 2010 @ 10:11 AM
link   
reply to post by FoosM
 



So AgentSmith, why dont you give us readers a quick summary of their findings?


No....the onus is on YOU!

YOU read the bloody thing, and report back with YOUR 'quick summary'.

Consider it to be a homework assignment...seems the only way for you to actually learn something...

... a test of reading comprehension. You may naswer in essay format, no minimu length requirement.

Your score on this assignment will count for 2/3s of your total grade for the semester. I suggest you get to it, for up 'til now, you're doing rather poorly....



posted on Aug, 10 2010 @ 10:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by ppk55
Hello my lovely moon hoax believers / nonbelievers,

I had a thought last night.

It struck me how disorganised and unprofessional the entire NASA catalogue is regarding the moon landings. This was supposedly the greatest of human endeavours, the greatest scientific accomplishment.

So in 2010 why are QUALITY video and images of this monumental feat so hard to obtain?


Was thinking the same thing. There is no excuse for it, after 40 years they could have commissioned a university to do it. Or any capable alphabet organization like the NRO.

This is also interesting, a look at the first remote controlled vehicle on another planet. Another first by the Soviets. a first that took the US 30 years to supposedly match. Witness the trials and accomplishments they had to make it happen. I dont buy into all of the Soviet propaganda either. Some of their "space" feats appear to be faked too, but you get the sense that their progression into space went more logical and appears overall realistic.








Its the little things that make you wonder... why didnt the US have the same issues? Like radiation affecting film.

Did you know that:




Years later, it emerged that the Soviet specialists had not been able to manufacture radiation-hardened film that would survive the journey through the radiation belts and the translunar environment. Instead they used American film retrieved from Gentrix ballons-

Soviet and Russian lunar exploration By Brian Harvey, page 36


Mars-4 and Mars-5 orbiters carried the Mars-3 style phototelevision cameras on their 1973 mission. The operation was essentially the same as the Zond-3 camera, with various technical improvements in the optics of the film scanner, using a newer FEU-103 photomultiplier tube. It held 480 frames on 20 meters of 25.4mm film, stored in a radiation-shielded magazine.


or

The M-69 orbiter, a 1969 Mars attempt, contained three cameras of more advanced design, with lenses of 35, 50 and 250 mm. A wheel of glass filters (red, green, blue, clear) is used by one camera (or perhaps shared by two cameras) to take color photographs. They each held 160 images on a specially designed film. Upon arrival, the film was chemically activated, so it would not be exposed by cosmic radiation during the long flight. Images were scanned at 1024×1024 resolution and transmitted by pulse position modulation on 6 GHz. Unfortunately, the two M-69 probes were destroyed in launch failures of the new Proton rocket.


I just dont recall the US going through all that trouble with their Apollo film.

www.mentallandscape.com...

By the way, in defense of the believers... I must report the following, from the same book 'Soviet and Russian lunar exploration' page 218:



Analysis of biological samples found... some mutations in seeds as a result of radiation. Overall, radiation dosages seemed to be well within acceptable limits, not posting a danger to cosmonauts and not significantly different from conditions in Earth orbit.


I believe this info came from Zond 7 and 8. But I will go look into it deeper because the issue is they still used radiation resistant animals. But either way the statement is there in black and white.



posted on Aug, 10 2010 @ 10:52 AM
link   
reply to post by FoosM
 



Given what we now know, from radiotherapy to the legacy of the attacks on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, it is clear that radiation safety limits are far too conservative. Evidently, our bodies have learned through evolution to repair or eliminate damaged cells, with a low failure rate. I suggest the upper limit might be reset at a lifetime total of 5 sieverts, at no more than 0.1 sievert per month. That would be a fraction of a radiotherapy dose, spread over a lifetime.

Such a revision would relax current regulations by a factor of 1000....

www.newscientist.com...

So long as we're playing the "cut and paste game," I thought I'd throw this out there. Very interesting article.

So still no reaction to Jarrah's admission of being a liar? No refutation?



posted on Aug, 10 2010 @ 11:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by ppk55
So in 2010 why are QUALITY video and images of this monumental feat so hard to obtain?

For instance, the stills.
They were extremely high quality 70mm frames.

So you’d expect to be able to download the very best scans, at the highest resolution possible at one central website. Not so.


Unsurprisingly, wrong again. If you just search there is a vast repository here:

Lunar and Planetary Institute - Apollo Image Atlas

Thousands and thousands of high resolution images, knock yourself out!



posted on Aug, 10 2010 @ 11:19 AM
link   
reply to post by FoosM
 




I just dont recall the US going through all that trouble with their Apollo film.


How long were the Apollo missions?
How long were the Mars missions?

Did you forget that little detail of exposure times?



posted on Aug, 10 2010 @ 12:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by AgentSmith

Originally posted by ppk55
So in 2010 why are QUALITY video and images of this monumental feat so hard to obtain?

For instance, the stills.
They were extremely high quality 70mm frames.

So you’d expect to be able to download the very best scans, at the highest resolution possible at one central website. Not so.


Unsurprisingly, wrong again.

Yes, you are.


Originally posted by AgentSmith
If you just search there is a vast repository here:

Lunar and Planetary Institute - Apollo Image Atlas

Thousands and thousands of high resolution images, knock yourself out!

Background Information on the Production of the Images used in the Apollo (Handheld/Still) Imagery Catalog:
www.lpi.usra.edu...

AgentSmith posts indicate not only education and knowledge of the subject, but also honesty of those who put stars on s/his posts.



posted on Aug, 10 2010 @ 12:17 PM
link   
Yawn, wrong again. You should really, really have looked at the resource before posting.

That is in reference to the medium size images and as it says you should use the high resolution product for research purchases that if you looked is available when you view an image at the bottom of the information section.
The clue is where there is a link saying 'High resolution Image'

Does this look like a small 450x450 low resolution JPG for instance?

www.lpi.usra.edu...

Nope, looks like it's a 3900x3900 high res image to me!

They have been in the process of updating the catalog for some years with high resolution images which is no small task and it's still continuing!

[edit on 10-8-2010 by AgentSmith]



posted on Aug, 10 2010 @ 01:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by AgentSmith
Yawn, wrong again. You should really, really have looked at the resource before posting.

That is in reference to the medium size images and as it says you should use the high resolution product for research purchases that if you looked is available when you view an image at the bottom of the information section.
The clue is where there is a link saying 'High resolution Image'

Does this look like a small 450x450 low resolution JPG for instance?

www.lpi.usra.edu...


Nope, looks like it's a 3900x3900 high res image to me!

They have been in the process of updating the catalog for some years with high resolution images which is no small task and it's still continuing!

[edit on 10-8-2010 by AgentSmith]


The catalogue is not complete however.
There are many cases when you cant get a hi-res image.
Add to that there are no hi-res videos.

So back to the original point:



So you’d expect to be able to download the very best scans, at the highest resolution possible at one central website. Not so.

Perhaps this imaginary website would be called ‘The Celebration of Apollo.'

Here, there would be ALL the 16mm movies, TV broadcasts, and images in a readily accessible format.

Not only that, they would be of the highest quality possible.

However this is not the case.


Not only that, they are cleaning up the images which I think is crazy.
'As is' please. We dont need no photoshopping.

They had a chance to offer this during the 40th anniversary.
Maybe they will have it finished by the 50th.
LOL
Because I bet they will be the last photos we see made by a human allegedly on the moon for a long long time...



posted on Aug, 10 2010 @ 01:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by FoosM
 




I just dont recall the US going through all that trouble with their Apollo film.


How long were the Apollo missions?
How long were the Mars missions?

Did you forget that little detail of exposure times?


No I was more pointing out that the VABs were an issue.
Maybe you missed that.



posted on Aug, 10 2010 @ 01:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by DJW001
reply to post by FoosM
 



Given what we now know, from radiotherapy to the legacy of the attacks on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, it is clear that radiation safety limits are far too conservative. Evidently, our bodies have learned through evolution to repair or eliminate damaged cells, with a low failure rate. I suggest the upper limit might be reset at a lifetime total of 5 sieverts, at no more than 0.1 sievert per month. That would be a fraction of a radiotherapy dose, spread over a lifetime.

Such a revision would relax current regulations by a factor of 1000....

www.newscientist.com...

So long as we're playing the "cut and paste game," I thought I'd throw this out there. Very interesting article.

So still no reaction to Jarrah's admission of being a liar? No refutation?


I believe I have given my observations on your claim that he lied on his video. What more is there to say?

And regarding your article, I dont see the relevance in regards to Apollo.
There is a dose of radiation that you can receive that will simply kill you.
Those types of doses are expelled from our dear sun.
Those doses would go through aluminum shielding like daggers through aluminum foil.

With the unpredictability of such flares during a period when they are very active, NASA and the powers that be, simply sent the astronauts into LEO and probably conducted weightlessness tests as well as took photos of our dear planet in preparation for Skylab.



posted on Aug, 10 2010 @ 01:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by AgentSmith
Yawn, wrong again.

This is good that you have admitted it again.


Originally posted by AgentSmith
You should really, really have looked at the resource before posting.

That is in reference to the medium size images and as it says you should use the high resolution product for research purchases

purchases? - Freudian slip?


Originally posted by AgentSmiththat if you looked is available when you view an image at the bottom of the information section.
The clue is where there is a link saying 'High resolution Image'

The clue is for you to count what is the percentage of those 'high resolution' images available for all images in the catalog;
when you finish counting, let us know the result.

[edit on 10.8.2010 by bokonon2010]



posted on Aug, 10 2010 @ 01:46 PM
link   
reply to post by FoosM
 

Once again, since you seem to have missed it (or something): The command module was well shielded. The astronauts would not have been exposed to damaging levels of radiation even if a major flare had occurred during the mission.

During the missions the Sun was monitored. If there was any likelihood, any likelihood at all, of a major flare the astronauts would not have left the CM. There is an average period of about 15 hours between the time the xrays produced by a flare are detected and the time that the high energy particles arrive. Had a flare occurred while the astronauts were on the surface there would likely have been time for them to return to the CM.

It was a known risk level. The probability of a major flare during any particular one week period is not high (remember, .3%). It was a calculated risk. Space exploration is risky. The astronauts who live on the ISS are risking their lives and they know it and they accept that risk. So did the Apollo astronauts.



[edit on 8/10/2010 by Phage]



posted on Aug, 10 2010 @ 02:23 PM
link   
reply to post by AgentSmith
 


OMG!! In the picture you linked, the hi-res one? Just to the right of the bluish double lens flare, near the top, when you enlarge it ??

I GIANT 'S'!! Must be a "space snake" --- or it might be the stagehands' letter, the 'S' to identify the prop.....

Nah, just pullin' yer legs!! Thought I'd better, before someone comes along and actually thinks it IS something....still, I predict it will happen anyway.

>SIGH



posted on Aug, 10 2010 @ 02:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by FoosM
 

Once again, since you seem to have missed it (or something): The command module was well shielded. The astronauts would not have been exposed to damaging levels of radiation even if a major flare had occurred during the mission.

During the missions the Sun was monitored. If there was any likelihood, any likelihood at all, of a major flare the astronauts would not have left the CM. There is an average period of about 15 hours between the time the xrays produced by a flare are detected and the time that the high energy particles arrive. Had a flare occurred while the astronauts were on the surface there would likely have been time for them to return to the CM.

It was a known risk level. The probability of a major flare during any particular one week period is not high (remember, .3%). It was a calculated risk. Space exploration is risky. The astronauts who live on the ISS are risking their lives and they know it and they accept that risk. So did the Apollo astronauts.

[edit on 8/10/2010 by Phage]


I really cant believe that your comrades are letting you stick your neck out like that. Your going to get your head chopped-off making such statements.

Tell us Phage.

If the CM was so well shielded, what is the stumbling block with a mission to Mars?
What is stopping NASA from putting that mission into play besides funding issues?
What's the show-stopper?



posted on Aug, 10 2010 @ 02:41 PM
link   
reply to post by FoosM
 



I believe I have given my observations on your claim that he lied on his video. What more is there to say?


Perhaps. But you still haven't addressed this one:


I invented a story about an Apollo capsule orbiting around the northern polar region. I never believed that...


letsrollforums.com...

How are we supposed to know what Jarrah really believes, and what he is just making up?



posted on Aug, 10 2010 @ 02:43 PM
link   
reply to post by FoosM
 



I really cant believe that your comrades are letting you stick your neck out like that. Your going to get your head chopped-off making such statements.


Has your mind been wandering the numerous times it has been pointed out that exposure is a function of time? And that a mission to Mars lasts much longer than a sprint to the Moon?



new topics

top topics



 
377
<< 158  159  160    162  163  164 >>

log in

join