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: 18
377
<< 15  16  17    19  20  21 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 2 2010 @ 11:01 AM
link   
It was hoaxed to scare the soviet union...It was called the cold war...good post...90 something stars means something




posted on May, 2 2010 @ 11:02 AM
link   
LRO Sees Apollo Landing Sites

NASA's Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter, or LRO, has returned its first imagery of the Apollo moon landing sites. The pictures show the Apollo missions' lunar module descent stages sitting on the moon's surface

The Source

www.nasa.gov...

Theres your proof ..Now can we all go watch a movie or something and let this topic rest . thank u . we now have real hard Proof .



posted on May, 2 2010 @ 11:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by RWM88
reply to post by AquaTim84
 


Good post their Tim


However I noticed your camp are avoiding the basics and heading straight in to advanced theories and ideas.

Camp moonfaker have not provided an answer on this thread that I can find as to why and how the laser reflectors got to the surface of the moon?

Why the Soviet Union kept quiet?

What the world was tracking then during Apollo 11's voyage?

You have to tackle these basic elements of the argument first before I or others from our side will listen to and read your postings with greater attention.

No disrespect but I'm only being honest.


Also wouldn't all the pictures from the net have been retouched and edited as they we're scanned and touched up by NASA to provide a better quality for the general public?


Thanks for your time.


Thank you for your reply. The answer to your question of retouching photo's for presentation on the net is true. People do such things. But why make most of a picture gray scale? if there are colors on other photographs, retouch would mean that they make all the colors more vivid. Not make colors disapear. This is edition i'm talking about not retouching.

As for the laser reflectiveness, Don't we do that on earth also to map out ocean floors and mountain areas to get a better look at what it looks like without going there ? OR is that radar technology and not laser technology.

I could go in on the debates about the more advanced sciences and such but if there is a inconsintancy in a photograph, that only proves that the photograph is altered, and only raises the question of WHY? It does not allow someone to go ahead an say that then there must be more that is fake, or that it is proof that the moon landing where a hoax.

I believe that we did go to the moon. I believe that it's a far more believable story that, when we got there, we where not allowed to see the thing they have seen, because it was there discovery and they want to take credit for it. They did not want amateurs or anybody else out of NASA to get to answers faster then they could have.

It's quite simple but it's not stupid to believe that people keep secrets because they want to have all the glory...that's happens all over the world in many different cases...



posted on May, 2 2010 @ 11:05 AM
link   
reply to post by AndersonLee
 
Dude seriously? NASA.GOV...Since when has NASA told the truth about anything significant the answer is a resounding NOT ON YOUR LIFE!...It's called photoshop.



[edit on 2-5-2010 by NWOWILLFALL]



posted on May, 2 2010 @ 11:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by K J Gunderson
Sorry but no. If other countries can obtain samples without sending men there, why does it follow our samples had to be hand collected?


I think JRA explained this, the probe can collect small amounts of soil, whereas the manned missions allowed them to collect larger amounts of soil and rock.

The Apollo astronauts also carried out many experiments whilst on the moon, most of those couldn't be carried out remotely.



Exactly. How did Russia obtain their samples again? When did they send men to the moon?


Erm...?



That makes no sense at all.


It makes perfect sense, moon soil and rock is different to earth soil and rock, so if the Apollo landings were faked then they would have had to use soil and rocks from earth.

this obviously isn't the case because the Luna samples resemble the Apollo samples.

I'll add here too that to suggest otherwise would imply that Russia and the USA were in on it together....during the middle of the Cold War.




I did not even ask you that. Are you sure you read my post before responding?

Usually your posts are pretty on the ball and star worthy even but it seems you have become confused here as much of this response is either a repeat of what I already pointed out the flaws in or something else I did not say.

You simply repeated the exact reason why we did not need men to gather real samples for me. You are backing up the point made by the lack of answers to my question.


So I miss read part of your post, my bad, it happens.

No need to write a monologue about it.

You're right, the Russian probes prove there was no need to send men to the moon, providing the only thing you wanted to collect was 326 grams of soil and a coupe of photos.

Fortunately, NASA wanted to carry out a few more experiments, as I alluded to earlier.

Have a look into the Apollo Lunar Surface Experiments Package

Lot's of experiments with hard data to back it up.


[edit on 2/5/10 by Chadwickus]



posted on May, 2 2010 @ 11:11 AM
link   
reply to post by AquaTim84
 


Thanks for the reply again Tim.

It would be reflector technology because it is a lot accurate for measurements. I use RADAR's to navigate when I'm working for the money. They have so many errors it's unreal


I do totally believe we went to the moon like you mentioned yourself and there is a lot of evidence that images of the moon, from the past and present have been air brushed, also Mars.

It's good to come across someone that does not revert completely to 'IT'S ALL A HOAX' because the pictures are edited


Maybe Armstrong and Buzz found a Monolith


Only time will tell.

Thanks and take it easy Tim.

[edit on 11232009 by RWM88]



posted on May, 2 2010 @ 11:11 AM
link   
reply to post by NWOWILLFALL
 


Apparently you missed this post:



Also wouldn't all the pictures from the net have been retouched and edited as they we're scanned and touched up by NASA to provide a better quality for the general public?



Not only have you made a number of excellent points, you have brought up something that always makes me laugh. The Apollo photographs were not scanned by NASA, they were scanned by an independent organization called "Internet Archive!"

www.archive.org...

I'd have mentioned this ages ago, but I enjoy armchair investigators flogging their red herrings. Internet Archive undoubtedly performs a number of color correcting operations on their scans. Film tends to degrade. The Apollo 11 images probably show a brown white and purple flag flying below a majestic pink and purple earth by now.



posted on May, 2 2010 @ 11:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by Exuberant1
reply to post by fockewulf190
 



You cannot see the Apollo landers in any of that probe's images.

Deal with it.



*Jarrah White also addresses the Chandrayaan issues in his video series.


I'm sure a smart fella like you can find the right videos. Watch them or don't.



So you believe the Indians are in the tank also, giving NASA some extra cover up for the grand cover up in exchange for some scientific scooby snacks or whatever.

Tom Hanks starred in the Illuminati. Maybe he´ll do "Moonfaker" for his next flick. Gotta be a comedy though, but he´s done some of that.

[edit on 2-5-2010 by fockewulf190]



posted on May, 2 2010 @ 11:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by Exuberant1

Originally posted by RWM88

What the world was tracking then during Apollo 11's voyage?


Name the facilities which tracked Apollo 11 to the moon.

Can you?


www.astr.ua.edu...
en.wikipedia.org...
www.honeysucklecreek.net...
www.parkes.atnf.csiro.au...
www.honeysucklecreek.net...
depletedcranium.com...

just a few...


[edit on 2-5-2010 by hateeternal]



posted on May, 2 2010 @ 11:14 AM
link   
reply to post by DJW001
 
Yeah dude that's really proof...There is plenty of evidence that I'm right...Just like they blurred pictures on numerous occasions that may prove there is life on mars but whatever...Believe what you want




posted on May, 2 2010 @ 11:17 AM
link   
reply to post by Devino
 


I am going to repeat this so that the people reading can understand what circular reasoning is.

1) The only thing that we are debating is the moon landings.

2) Saying that the moon landings must be true because the data sent back from the moon landings tells me that they are true is CIRCULAR REASONING.

Circular reasoning.

This is not debatable.



posted on May, 2 2010 @ 11:17 AM
link   
reply to post by DJW001
 


Thanks for the reply DJW001.

I'll check out the link provided with much interest


Take it easy and happy ATS'ing.



posted on May, 2 2010 @ 11:19 AM
link   
reply to post by RWM88
 


laser reflector expiriments

Well if I have to believe this small post I could not see why the lasers could not go as far as to the surface of the moon. The only problem is that also the laser beam spreads, and the can only use the data by calculating in a margin of error. So it can never be really precise.

And as I understand it's only used for orbit data, measuring the increasing orbit of the moon by 3.8 cm each year and so on. This also means it can be used to study earths rotation because you can make measurements from either point of the laser a to b or b to a. Lots of interesting data there if it was examend.



posted on May, 2 2010 @ 11:20 AM
link   
reply to post by NWOWILLFALL
 


Proof of what? All I'm pointing out is that the images you are analyzing are not proving anything about NASA. You would have to obtain the original negatives or slides for your analysis, otherwise you're just wasting your time on n-th generation copies.



posted on May, 2 2010 @ 11:20 AM
link   
reply to post by Exuberant1
 


It looks like our friend hateeternal has done the job for me Exuberant.

Check out his links to your own satisfaction.

Thanks hateeternal, you saved me a bit of surfing time




[edit on 11232009 by RWM88]



posted on May, 2 2010 @ 11:22 AM
link   
Some will never learn how this game works...and that's fine with me, I give up arguing with people about this...



posted on May, 2 2010 @ 11:24 AM
link   
reply to post by Josephus23
 


Try this one: "idee fixe:"

www.merriam-webster.com...


jra

posted on May, 2 2010 @ 11:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by zerbot565
aye but "knock knock" remember that piece of wood that was given as a piece of the moon , that was even displayed at a museum and was guarded as a national treasure..


That petrified wood was a misunderstanding on either the former Netherlands PM or some one at the Museum. It was a private gift from the US Ambassador to the former PM. No one gets Lunar samples as private gifts. Plus this happened in 1969 shortly after the Apollo 11 landing. NASA didn't give out samples until after Apollo 17 in 1972.

The samples they gave out were very small and encased clear plastic. They weighed between 0.05g and 1.1g. The petrified wood was 98g and not encased in plastic. Even the most basic examination by any geologist would easily identify it as being nothing more than petrified wood.

It's clear that it was not meant to have fooled or deceived anyone, it's simply a misunderstanding on some ones part. There is, however, a museum in the Netherlands that does have an actual Lunar sample that was given to them officially by NASA in 1972.



posted on May, 2 2010 @ 11:27 AM
link   
reply to post by RWM88
 


as far as hypothetical theory goes pretty much everything is that untill you have something thats called emperical fact, but lets brain storm ,

the laser panels where put on the moon by unmanned craft / rovers

cccp never said anything because there was no need, besides cccp and usa had pretty good "space relations" just look at where the old tech is now days , things where/is built with the cccp mod option in mind. not to mention that the us is crapping their launch method completly...
there are plenty of reasons as to why not blow the lid on a mindkontrol operation this size , the info you get from that is worth far more in the intel community and think about the opperturnerties you might get if it works and you can duplicate them results ,

as to the pictures , ignorance/naiveness in advertising ones product might be the closet answer to it all , yes they might be based on originals but that is all they are after retouch/editing , nothing more then edited pictures.

if the moonfakery where to be made in to a candy bar it would be brown from foodcoloring not made from real butterbut with soya and with aspatame as sweetner and gluco syrup as thickener and sold as real chocolate.

eating it might taste good but it wont colonize the solarsystem.



posted on May, 2 2010 @ 11:29 AM
link   
reply to post by zerbot565
 
haha don't even get me started on gluco syrup/high frustose corn syrup...........NASA SUCKS!




new topics

top topics



 
377
<< 15  16  17    19  20  21 >>

log in

join