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: 215
377
<< 212  213  214    216  217  218 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 7 2010 @ 04:38 PM
link   
Seriously, just look at the numbers. 250.000 tapes. Let's say each tape can record two hours of video. That's 500;000 hours of video. Let's assume each mission broadcast video 24 hours a day (they didn't) every day for the length of each mission, which we will assume lasted ten whole days. That's 240 hours of video, times ten missions. That's 2,400 hours of video. What's on the other half million hours of tape, FoosM? Either it's not video (which it certainly isn't), it's not just Apollo telemetry, or NASA secretly landed on the Moon 200 times more than they've admitted. What's your theory?




posted on Oct, 7 2010 @ 04:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by DJW001
By the way, FoosM, if NASA really collected meteorites in Antarctica to play the role of "moon rocks," where did they find 200 pounds of alpha-carborundum rich dust to play the part of "moon dust?" Was there a special vacuum cleaner involved?


So your telling me astronauts shoveled 200 pounds of dust?
Provide a link.
And why couldnt it simply be lunar dust simulant?



posted on Oct, 7 2010 @ 04:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by Tomblvd

Originally posted by theability
reply to post by Tomblvd
 



Foos, now that you are back from your hidey-hole, please answer the Apollo 12 quesiton.


He knows he can't answer that question, because you sure can't flip the SCE switch to AUX by remote!



Especially if the entire mission was prerecorded.....

Come on Foos, answer the question.


If you think the entire mission was pre-recorded then you should answer the question.



posted on Oct, 7 2010 @ 04:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by AgentSmith
You're right there. Every single HB shows intense hatred of the US in general. Most of them are not US citizens which is evident from their posts and posting times, the ones that are clearly hate the US Government with a passion and probably live in a shack somewhere surround by guns slowly rocking back and forth.
That's why you can't make them see sense, they don't even care about Apollo - they only care about one thing and that's destroying the US, or more specifically it's Government.
Like a 9/11 'Truther' said to me once in private, 'It doesn't matter if you're wrong or lie, all that matters is people don't believe the official story'.
I don't think he could see the irony of using deception to topple the Government who he hated due to their deception :s But then these types arn't the sharpest tools in the box....


Completely off topic.



posted on Oct, 7 2010 @ 04:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by theability
OH!!! It is starting to make sense. I see now why Foosm posted the Sptunik material now, since a another failed movie attempt by "white noise" was made regarding that issue.

You have never given any credit to the Amercian space race now have you?


I see now Foosm, Which every one you happen to be. That your not happy that America was the first and only ones to land on the Moon, and that you'll do anything in your power to discredit the achievement so that you may feel better about your position regarding NASA.

It never had anything to do with a Hoax, it has to do with you are prejudice and dislike American achievements.

No wonder you never answer a single question about the subject, you could care less about the science, you just want to defame.



Oh I see, this is all about the US? This is not an achievement of mankind? I recall significant german know-how that contributed to the the fake landing. You dont want to give Germans any credit?



posted on Oct, 7 2010 @ 05:13 PM
link   
reply to post by FoosM
 



Oh I see, this is all about the US? This is not an achievement of mankind? I recall significant german know-how that contributed to the the fake landing. You dont want to give Germans any credit?


As I previously stated, you don't badger the Russians now do you, or call them LIARS and CRIMINALS! So again, yes you seem to be attacking the US.

As for the Germans, if you do a smidgen of research, you'd find at the end of WWII it was either fall to the hands of the USA or the Russians who would have tortured them for god only knows how long.

I am sure in the face of such issues, you'd do exactly the same.

As for your stance I have my proof and this thread that your motives are slander and defamation of the achievement, and monetary gain by publicizing your youtube account.

Truthfully, its obvious that the science was never involved, because none absolutely none of your claims stand to any real assessment or inquiry.

Imagine, the "Grandson of the Apollo moon hoax", the complete fraud like his predecessors.



posted on Oct, 7 2010 @ 05:17 PM
link   

Bootleg




WHEN THE EAGLE LUNAR MODULE TOUCHED DOWN ON JULY 20, 1969, all eyes were on astronaut Neil Armstrong. But Stan Lebar's a** was on the line.



A young electrical engineer at Westinghouse, Lebar had been tasked with developing a camera that could capture the most memorable moment of the 20th century – the Apollo 11 moon landing. The goal of the mission wasn't merely to get a man on the moon. It was to send back a live television feed so that everyone could see it – particularly the Soviets


Getting people hooked on cable

Oops... in what context was that?


Building a camera that could survive the crushing g forces of liftoff and then function in near-weightlessness on the moon was only part of the challenge for Lebar. The portion of the broadcast spectrum traditionally used for video was sending vital ship data to Earth, and there was no room left for the standard black-and-white video format of the era: 525 scan lines of data at 30 frames per second, transmitted at 4.5 MHz. So Lebar helped devise a smaller "oddball format" – 320 scan lines at 10 fps, transmitted at a meager 500 kHz. Tracking stations back on Earth would take this so-called slow-scan footage, convert it for TV broadcast, and beam it to Mission Control, which would send it out for the world to see.

(for you DJ)


Google Video Link

Una Ronald and the Coke Bottle On July 20, 1969, millions of television viewers around the world watched as Neil Armstrong stepped down from a lunar landing module onto the surface of the Moon and intoned the now famous words "That's one small step for man, one giant leap for mankind." In Western Australia a woman named Una Ronald watched the images of the Moon landing in the early hours of the morning. As the camera showed Armstrong's fellow Apollo 11 Astronaut Edwin "Buzz" Aldrin demonstrating his moon walk technique Ronald clearly saw a Coke bottle kicked into the picture from the side. The scene was edited out of later broadcasts, she says.


And that was the easy part. To ensure a direct transmission signal from the moon, NASA had to maintain stations in three continents – two in Australia (the Honeysuckle Creek Tracking Station near Canberra and the Parkes Radio Observatory surrounded by sheep paddocks west of Sydney); one at the Goldstone Deep Space Communications Complex in the Mojave Desert of California; and one at the Madrid Manned Flight Tracking Site in Spain.



Dick Nafzger, the 28-year-old coordinator of the tracking stations' TV operations, was as nervous as Lebar. Nafzger was the guy at Mission Control charged with monitoring ground equipment and the conversion of the slow-scan footage to US broadcast standards.


By the way, where was this camera located?



The world watched in awe as Armstrong took his first steps, and the camera engineers at Mission Control started popping the champagne corks. Amid the celebration, though, Lebar scrutinized the video, and his joy vanished. He had known the converted footage wouldn't be as good as a standard TV signal. But as Armstrong bounded through the Sea of Tranquility, the astronaut looked like a fuzzy gray blob wading through an inkwell. "We knew what that image should look like," Lebar says, "and what I saw was nothing like what I'd simulated. We looked at each other and said, 'What happened?'"





Buzz coming down the ladder:

Notice the distinct hotspot on the ground that Neil walks into

Planting the flag:

Why is one astronaut (closer to the LM) better lit than the other (holding the flagpole)?


Lebar never even saw the raw transmission; only the few tracking-station engineers did. But as they converted the feed for Mission Control and the worldwide audience, they also recorded it onto huge reels of magnetic tape that were promptly sent to NASA to be filed for safekeeping.







Not long ago, Lebar learned why the footage had looked like mush: The transfer and broadcast had degraded the image badly, like a third-generation photocopy. "What the world saw was some bastardized thing," says Lebar, now 81. "Posterity deserves more than that." Good thing the engineers in Australia recorded the raw feed. Now Lebar and a crew of seasoned space cowboys are trying to get that original footage and show it to the world.

There is just one problem: NASA has lost the tapes.



Google Video Link



Lebar and Nafzger were both eager to find the tapes, and they both lived within an hour's drive of Goddard. There was one hitch, though: The space agency itself wasn't being helpful. After a few inquiries into the current whereabouts of the tape, the gang ran into red tape and, more surprisingly, indifference. "NASA had so many budget cuts, when we said we were looking for the Apollo 11 tapes, they said, 'Well, that's nice,'" Wood recalls. "It was difficult to get help."



After schmoozing his way into the stacks and sifting through boxes for months, Lebar found evidence that more than 140,000 tapes from the Apollo era had been checked out of the Records Center between 1979 and 1985 and sent back to the Goddard Space Flight Center. But from there, Lebar fell straight into a black hole. At Goddard, there was no record of where the footage had gone. So the tape hunters hit the phones and the Net, scouring the globe for Goddard retirees who might recall the boxes. It didn't go well. "We're dealing with memories here," Nafzger says, "and those are pretty frail."



Google Video Link



Part of the problem was Cold War secrecy: Many key technological innovations of the space program were purposely destroyed so they would never fall into the wrong hands, but most of the loss can be attributed to more mundane issues, like poor record keeping, outdated storage systems, and mortality.


Secrets? NASA? I thought everything was open to public review?


They show me the analog recorder, the last link to the original data. This device was slated for the scrap heap as well. But thanks to the persistent pestering of the old Apollo vets, the device and the facility will be spared for the duration of the search. Nafzger is holding out hope that the tapes will surface. If and when they do, they'll be looped through the machines – and history, once and for all, will be properly preserved. In the meantime, he'll keep firing up the recorder every couple of weeks to make sure it still functions. "If you don't allow it to work once in a while," Nafzger says, "it will die."


Considering that people buy all kinds of Apollo memorabilia, NASA could have sold the original footage to interested buyers if they had such a storage issue. Though, from reading this article the issue wasn't storage, the issue was keeping track of it. Moving the materials around till somebody could conveniently get them "lost".





www.wired.com...
www.australiangeographic.com.au...



posted on Oct, 7 2010 @ 05:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by theability
reply to post by FoosM
 



Oh I see, this is all about the US? This is not an achievement of mankind? I recall significant german know-how that contributed to the the fake landing. You dont want to give Germans any credit?


As I previously stated, you don't badger the Russians now do you, or call them LIARS and CRIMINALS! So again, yes you seem to be attacking the US.



Awww... do you want a hanky to dry our eyes and clean the snot from your nose?

I have stated several times the Russians have lied about their achievements.
But this is about the manned moon landings, and if your not man enough to defend your country's claimed achievement, then well what good are you?



posted on Oct, 7 2010 @ 05:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by FoosM

Originally posted by Tomblvd

Originally posted by theability
reply to post by Tomblvd
 



Foos, now that you are back from your hidey-hole, please answer the Apollo 12 quesiton.


He knows he can't answer that question, because you sure can't flip the SCE switch to AUX by remote!



Especially if the entire mission was prerecorded.....

Come on Foos, answer the question.


If you think the entire mission was pre-recorded then you should answer the question.


Ah, so Foos once again, when backed into a corner, moves the goalposts.

So tell us, without use of youtube, how did they pull off this hoax? (At least walk us through the first few hours of Apollo 12)



posted on Oct, 7 2010 @ 05:53 PM
link   
reply to post by FoosM
 




Awww... do you want a hanky to dry our eyes and clean the snot from your nose?


Are you kidding me, I laugh at your feeble attempts to mock NASA's greatest achievement. Your video's are a complete joke.

Best of all I like philwebb59s video dismantling your youtube serious and picking it apart, devouring the stuff like it was made by a preschool student.
I mean 99.9879% of the stuff you claim is so outlandish it deserves a good laugh!



I have stated several times the Russians have lied about their achievements.
But this is about the manned moon landings, and if your not man enough to defend your country's claimed achievement, then well what good are you?


I do defend NASA's Missions to the moon and last but not least my final say in this post once again:

Imagine, the "Grandson of the Apollo moon hoax", the complete fraud like his predecessors.!



posted on Oct, 7 2010 @ 05:59 PM
link   
reply to post by FoosM
 



Again this has been covered int his thread, I really think you should pay attention Jarrah!

Apollo DAC Camera Position in Lunar Module

Plus how many times are you going to post the same video's over and over? Ask the same questions?

Without fail you have proven you have nothing better to do that make claims without basis and never answer any questions.

:shk:



posted on Oct, 7 2010 @ 06:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by FoosM

Bootleg



[
Una Ronald and the Coke Bottle On July 20, 1969, millions of television viewers around the world watched as Neil Armstrong stepped down from a lunar landing module onto the surface of the Moon and intoned the now famous words "That's one small step for man, one giant leap for mankind." In Western Australia a woman named Una Ronald watched the images of the Moon landing in the early hours of the morning. As the camera showed Armstrong's fellow Apollo 11 Astronaut Edwin "Buzz" Aldrin demonstrating his moon walk technique Ronald clearly saw a Coke bottle kicked into the picture from the side. The scene was edited out of later broadcasts, she says.



How about "Bonehead"?

You continue to post videos that have absolutely nothing to do with what is being discussed in order to change the subject. But this time it exposed your utter incuriousness. You'll post anything having to do with the hoax, without the least bit of research to make sure you aren't making a complete jackass out of yourself.

The "Una Ronald" story has been debunked over and over. People have gone over newspapers from that area and time frame for the story and none exist. But there is a simpler way to tell that it is a complete lie. Your story says that she saw it "early hours of the morning". That would have been quite an accomplishment considering the EVA that she watched occurred sometime in the late morning or noontime in Western Australia.

And how was she the ONLY person in Australia to see the "coke bottle"? Do you really believe that?

Another "Ooooops" for Foos.
edit on 7-10-2010 by Tomblvd because: added "only person" sentence



posted on Oct, 7 2010 @ 08:36 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Oct, 7 2010 @ 09:27 PM
link   
reply to post by FoosM
 


I'm sorry, I don't "do" YouTube. What, exactly, do you think is on the "missing" 500,000 hours of tape?



posted on Oct, 8 2010 @ 06:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by Tomblvd

The "Una Ronald" story has been debunked over and over. People have gone over newspapers from that area and time frame for the story and none exist. But there is a simpler way to tell that it is a complete lie. Your story says that she saw it "early hours of the morning". That would have been quite an accomplishment considering the EVA that she watched occurred sometime in the late morning or noontime in Western Australia.

And how was she the ONLY person in Australia to see the "coke bottle"? Do you really believe that?


There is also a version where she saw it at night and a few days later.
I think it is a funny story, as funny as Nixon saying he's not a crook.
You want to spend time debunking that too?


By the way is Una Ronald her real name?
And how do you think the story came out in the first place?



posted on Oct, 8 2010 @ 06:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by DJW001
reply to post by FoosM
 


I'm sorry, I don't "do" YouTube. What, exactly, do you think is on the "missing" 500,000 hours of tape?


Do you not do reading either?



posted on Oct, 8 2010 @ 07:57 AM
link   
reply to post by FoosM
 



Do you not do reading either?


Yes. Where do you say what you think is on the "missing" half million hours of tape? Commercials? In any event, I seem to be a better reader than you are:


but most of the loss can be attributed to more mundane issues, like poor record keeping, outdated storage systems, and mortality. They show me the analog recorder, the last link to the original data. This device was slated for the scrap heap as well.

Your own post.

In other words, bureaucracy as usual. Most of the tapes were probably re-used to save money. Funny how when some-one accuses you of hating America you deny it, then immediately post a video of Richard Nixon, accompanied with slander and mockery. Way to prove a point, FoosM.

By the way, you asked about lunar dust:
Everything you need to know is right here.

As for lunar dust simulants:


The severity of the lunar dust problems encountered during the Apollo missions were consistently underestimated by ground tests, illustrating the need to develop significantly better lunar dust simulants and simulation facilities. ORBITEC is proposing to continue developing high-fidelity lunar dust simulants that better match the unique properties of lunar dust than existing regolith simulants (such as JSC-1AF). Current lunar regolith simulants do not have enough of the very fine particles, most lack the agglutinitic glass and complex surface textures that dominate lunar dust, and none of them have nanophase iron (Fe0).

Check it out.

So if the stuff they use to simulate moon dust isn't enough like the samples, what are the samples?



posted on Oct, 8 2010 @ 08:36 AM
link   
reply to post by FoosM
 


As usual, you will grab at any straw you can reach, from an HB web source, without doing the barest modicum of due diligence first, and checking out the veracity....


By the way is Una Ronald her real name?
And how do you think the story came out in the first place?


WHY ask those questions? The answers are readily available, even right ONLINE! (It's very easy to destroy each and every "claim" you present, in this thread):

Try READING this full article for a change, before continuing with the garbage (and false) "stories" you continually post.

Also, THIS long article explains it as well.

"Una Ronald" is a joke, and using that in your 'examples' indicates just how desperate, and how low, the HBs will sink.

Additionally, to cite just one of the MANY spammed YouTube videos), the one by YT user "ArkAngel4Myke" indicates yet more willful ignorance, and desperation. I'm talking about the (mercifully brief) one about "cables". That is weak, weak, weak, and shows a level of ignorance (and attempt to alter context and meaning, in order to fit into a "conspiracy" mindset) that is simply stunning in it's inanity.

I suggest people take some time to actually research, and discover for themselves what the term "cables" was in reference to. I'm tired of posting the info, and having it be ignored.

And, why the side-stepping of your earlier claims about the "pre-recorded" missions? Or, the Astronauts (who, BTW, were military test pilots, and NOT accomplished actors) were given scripts, and read all the lines as part of the "plan"? Why have you not addressed that assertion, in greater detail? Are you backing away from those claims now? Do you now see how utterly STUPID such claims actually are, when the entirety of Apollo is observed and catalogued?

Oh, and I saw your inane mention of "simulations".
I'd suggest, lest you continue to look a fool, you do more research into that topic, and what is and ISN'T possible. You tossed that out as an "explanation", and have absolutely no idea what you're talking about.

Par for the course......because it applies to EVERY HB out there, including Jarrah "white noise" White.



posted on Oct, 8 2010 @ 11:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by theability
reply to post by FoosM
 



Again this has been covered int his thread, I really think you should pay attention Jarrah!

---

Dude, your losing it. I warned you guys long time ago about your brains getting a meltdown by all this info.
Check the mirror and see if any porridge-like substance is dripping from your ears-
Thats not ear wax!




Apollo DAC Camera Position in Lunar Module


Thanks, I was looking for that. So you have been useful after all


But seriously, so this footage was shot on film.


Can anybody tell how many frames per second it was shot on?
24? 12? 6?
Im assuming 12.
The same as this descent video right?



What I cant find, and it seems strange to me, is the magazine number or name for the DAC cameras.
The photo magazines are labelled, so why not for the DAC?



posted on Oct, 8 2010 @ 11:24 AM
link   
reply to post by FoosM
 



On Apollo 11, it was also used to take stop motion photography out the LMP's window of almost the entire EVA at the setting of 1 frame per second (fps).

The Cameras Of Apollo.

It was also shooting at 1 fps during orbital sequences, which is why it looked like they were moving so fast at times. Is this going somewhere?



new topics

top topics



 
377
<< 212  213  214    216  217  218 >>

log in

join