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: 229
377
<< 226  227  228    230  231  232 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 20 2010 @ 06:27 PM
link   
reply to post by Pervius
 



I wonder how much we will have to pay them to keep quiet if our agents can't destroy their evidence proving our hoax?


Evidence is were?? I hear and see peoples opinions but other than that, no evidence.



jra

posted on Oct, 20 2010 @ 06:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by Pervius
The biggest piece of evidence man never went to the moon is the fact we don't click on a tiny booster to the ISS and send it on a nice vacation cruise to the moon and back.


Umm, no, that's not evidence at all. The ISS is not designed to be used as a spaceship to fly around to different places. It would likely break apart. The ISS is a space station for LEO, nothing more, nothing less.


Why are the Japanese Kaguya (selene) satellite pictures of the moon you access on their website all look like they were snapped with a $50 digital camera? Poor quality, inability to see anything. I could take better photo's of the moon with a $2500 Meade telescope.


You can get 10m/pixel resolution of the Lunar surface with your telescope from here on Earth? I don't think so...


I have a feeling the United States is forcing them to only publicize "thumbnail" photo's so we can't see the truth.Which is another nail in the coffin proving man's never been there.


You need to provide actual evidence to back up such a claim. Your "feeling" is not evidence.


India hasn't released their photo's yet and have had 'trouble' with people trying to break into their facility. I wonder how much we will have to pay them to keep quiet if our agents can't destroy their evidence proving our hoax?


India plans to release there data from Chandrayaan 1 starting at the end of this year with more following in 2011.



posted on Oct, 21 2010 @ 03:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by DJW001
reply to post by FoosM
 



Thats after the fact
We should have seen that with the Apollo photos.


Does this look enough like a crater for you?

Courtesy of JAXA.

Clearly, the thin layer of regolith was displaced in a very large circular pattern. It would not necessarily be visible from the surface.


Well honestly, thats not clear.
Thats a blurry photo.
And Im not even sure why the displacement is light vs dark.
And, its after the fact. I should be able to see disturbance from Apollo footage.
But this brings up a good opportunity to post JW's lengthy analysis on this very subject:











posted on Oct, 21 2010 @ 10:08 AM
link   
reply to post by FoosM
 


So are you saying that you see no displacement in this photo? Please explain in your own words.



posted on Oct, 21 2010 @ 03:47 PM
link   
reply to post by FoosM
 


Hi FoosM

I will bring you back to this picture first posted by jra

files.abovetopsecret.com...

Side by side picture taken by Astronauts as they left the Moon same site taken by LRO even the tracks left by the Astronauts match.


Lets see how you reply to this because I have my reply ready because I think I know WHAT you will claim!
edit on 21-10-2010 by wmd_2008 because: spelling



posted on Oct, 22 2010 @ 02:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by DJW001
reply to post by FoosM
 


So are you saying that you see no displacement in this photo? Please explain in your own words.


thats what I said.
No proof of displacement.
Whenever I see NASA photos of displacement,
the ground becomes darker:




posted on Oct, 22 2010 @ 02:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by wmd_2008
reply to post by FoosM
 


Hi FoosM

I will bring you back to this picture first posted by jra

files.abovetopsecret.com...

Side by side picture taken by Astronauts as they left the Moon same site taken by LRO even the tracks left by the Astronauts match.


Lets see how you reply to this because I have my reply ready because I think I know WHAT you will claim!
edit on 21-10-2010 by wmd_2008 because: spelling


I has been faked.
What more do you want to know?
Explain to me how this is proof of anything.
Explain to me how it could not be faked?



posted on Oct, 22 2010 @ 02:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by FoosM
I has been faked.


Quoted for posterity.


Originally posted by FoosM
Explain to me how it could not be faked?


If your position is that if something could be faked, then it must have been faked, that explains your endless hunt. Alas, you you never find what you're looking for, because there is some stuff in this world that hasn't be faked.



posted on Oct, 22 2010 @ 03:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by nataylor

Originally posted by FoosM
I has been faked.


Quoted for posterity.


Originally posted by FoosM
Explain to me how it could not be faked?


If your position is that if something could be faked, then it must have been faked, that explains your endless hunt. Alas, you you never find what you're looking for, because there is some stuff in this world that hasn't be faked.


There is no endless hunt.
My position is that its impossible to land men on the moon and bring them back to Earth alive.
Therefore anyone who claims it must be lying and faking their presented evidence.
And this will not change until there is independent third party proof to show otherwise.

But just to add, you have not provided any evidence that the evidence that you have provide cannot be
faked.


edit on 22-10-2010 by FoosM because: added question



posted on Oct, 22 2010 @ 03:16 PM
link   
reply to post by FoosM
 



There is no endless hunt.
Yes it is, this thread is tribute to the ignorance of that statement.


My position is that its impossible to land men on the moon and bring them back to Earth alive.


Finally you have admitted your personal opinion is that they couldn't have done it. Not that it hasn't been accomplished! You have no proof to refute the Apollo Missions other than your personal desire and opinions.

Therefore anyone who claims it must be lying and faking their presented evidence.
Because we know that no matter how excellent the evidence shown to you, all that we see is a child that was told no, kicking and screaming ITS NOT SO!


And this will not change until there is independent third party proof to show otherwise.


Again more ranting about your not going to believe it even if its right! I mean how are you going to continue the Lunar-fly-by fraud if you agree with the facts right?


But just to add, you have not provided any evidence that the evidence that you have provide cannot be faked.


The point is the only evidence you have supplied supports that it hasn't been faked and your committing fraud continually.

Nice rant BTW, when are you actually going to post something worth while?



edit on 22-10-2010 by theability because: typing



posted on Oct, 22 2010 @ 04:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by theability

Nice rant BTW, when are you actually going to post something worth while?




And what exactly was the value of your post?
Did you provide evidence that Apollo occurred?
No.
Have you ever?
No.
Will you be able to
No.
Did you answer my question?
No.

Here is another one,
How is that the ascent stage of Apollo 14 to 17 carried more samples back in weight and number,
yet ended up being lighter than Apollo 11?

history.nasa.gov...



posted on Oct, 22 2010 @ 04:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by FoosM

Originally posted by theability

Nice rant BTW, when are you actually going to post something worth while?




And what exactly was the value of your post?
Did you provide evidence that Apollo occurred?
No.
Have you ever?
No.
Will you be able to
No.
Did you answer my question?
No.

Here is another one,
How is that the ascent stage of Apollo 14 to 17 carried more samples back in weight and number,
yet ended up being lighter than Apollo 11?

history.nasa.gov...


Could you post a link to those numbers? The link you have doesn't show them.



posted on Oct, 22 2010 @ 04:59 PM
link   
reply to post by FoosM
 


"Dry weight" means empty. The J class missions delivered more payload to the lunar surface than the earlier H class missions. Since there was no improvement in the thrust of the descent stage motor, weight economies were taken on the ascent stage, I have been unable to find documentation as to the specific modifications, beyond some changes to the plumbing.



posted on Oct, 22 2010 @ 05:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by DJW001
reply to post by FoosM
 


"Dry weight" means empty. The J class missions delivered more payload to the lunar surface than the earlier H class missions. Since there was no improvement in the thrust of the descent stage motor, weight economies were taken on the ascent stage, I have been unable to find documentation as to the specific modifications, beyond some changes to the plumbing.


Help me out here DJ. I don't see and information on that page that lists the return weight of the ascent stage (would that even be measurable to any accuracy?), so where does he get the info that "Apollo 14 to 17 carried more samples back in weight and number,yet ended up being lighter than Apollo 11".

Or am I reading things wrong?



posted on Oct, 22 2010 @ 05:24 PM
link   
reply to post by FoosM
 


How ironic....

The more and more YOU search and search, trying (in vain) to find anything, anything that will allow you to somehow "declare success" and show your "proof" that Apollo was "faked"...all you find, is yet MORE and MORE evidence of its REALITY!!!

Seems this factoid is being ignored, by you. There is SO MUCH evidence, yet never, ever, ever has any of it been satisfactorily shown to be falsified, in any way. Those who have thought or claimed to have "found" something have, each time, been shown to be completely wrong, and have been found to have used incorrect assumptions in the first place, to arrive at their "momentous discoveries". Jarrah White (noise) is a perfect example of this --- and all he does is follow in the footsteps of the equally inept Hoax Believers (HBs) like Kaysing, Rene', Sibrel...and a host of other fools who post the same pablum on YouTube.

To wit:


Did you provide evidence that Apollo occurred?
No.


WRONG! Many here have repeatedly presented the counters to any "claims", and when the fallacious beliefs are shown to be incorrect, the actual facts are ignored, or dismissed without any logical rebuttal.


Have you ever?
No.


You are being repetitive. See above.


Will you be able to
No.


Again, see above.


Did you answer my question?
No.


Each of your "questions" have (often, dozens of times, for the SAME questions) been answered. You choose to IGNORE them. See above.


Here is another one,


What followed was a link to a source that points out what I was saying at the BEGINNING of this post. Those are the historical records, meticulously kept at the time, and preserved for posterity. That link connects to yet MORE data....and, I guess YOU think that they just made all that up??


Like, they are able to just pull numbers out of their butts? NO, that particular form of providing so-called "information" seems to be the tactic of Jarrah White (noise) and his ilk.



posted on Oct, 22 2010 @ 05:44 PM
link   
reply to post by Tomblvd
 



Help me out here DJ. I don't see and information on that page that lists the return weight of the ascent stage (would that even be measurable to any accuracy?), so where does he get the info that "Apollo 14 to 17 carried more samples back in weight and number,yet ended up being lighter than Apollo 11".

Or am I reading things wrong?


You are correct, there are no figures for the return weight because the LM did not return. I cannot account for FoosM's statement.



posted on Oct, 22 2010 @ 06:07 PM
link   
reply to post by FoosM
 




And what exactly was the value of your post?
Did you provide evidence that Apollo occurred?
No.
Have you ever?
No.
Will you be able to
No.
Did you answer my question?
No.


The point of my post was to highlight that you could careless about evidence[Apollo yes they did] because you are trying to raise money for a fraudulent Lunar-fly-by. [which is beyond insane believing you can go!]

This has nothing to do with Apollo it has to do with you causing havoc and taking money from people in false pretense.

You have been shown HUNDREDS of TIMES you are WRONG! Many times over the SAME SUBJECT!

Yet all you do is move along like it don't matter.

Well it does to me!

And I have stated this many times over[ as have other members], your opinions are not facts, and will never be.

edit on 22-10-2010 by theability because: typing



posted on Oct, 22 2010 @ 06:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by theability

You have been shown HUNDREDS of TIMES you WRONG! Many times over the SAME SUBJECT!

Yet all you do is move along like it don't matter.

Well it does to me!

And I have stated this many times over, your opinions are not facts, and will never be.


It's funny this should be brought up right now because I was searching for information on the exposure recommedations for the Hasselblad while on the moon and ended up on this very thread back where Foos was telling us all that you should see motion blur at 1/125th of a second shutter speed from an astronaut coming down the ladder.

Heh.

So Foos, you still stand by that howler?



posted on Oct, 23 2010 @ 01:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by FoosM
And this will not change until there is independent third party proof to show otherwise.


And yet when you are presented with 3rd party evidence you still keep trying to make lame excuses
:shk:


“Chandrayaan has managed to identify the landing site used by the Apollo 15 shuttle on the basis of the disturbances on the moon’s surface,” Chauhan said.

“Our images also show tracks left behind by the lunar rovers which were used by the astronauts to travel on the moon’s surface,” Chauhan said.
Chandrayaan Sends Images Of Apollo 15 Landing Disproving Conspiracy Theory


They also mapped the rest of the sites apparently, and the entire data set is supposed to be made available to the public over the next couple of years once they have finished organising it on the server. I believe the first batch is 26GB so there's plenty of data to sift through. What are you going to say if their rather modest imager has managed to record some more evidence? Make more lame excuses and brush offs about that too?



posted on Oct, 23 2010 @ 04:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by AgentSmith

Originally posted by FoosM
And this will not change until there is independent third party proof to show otherwise.


And yet when you are presented with 3rd party evidence you still keep trying to make lame excuses
:shk:


“Chandrayaan has managed to identify the landing site used by the Apollo 15 shuttle on the basis of the disturbances on the moon’s surface,” Chauhan said.

“Our images also show tracks left behind by the lunar rovers which were used by the astronauts to travel on the moon’s surface,” Chauhan said.
Chandrayaan Sends Images Of Apollo 15 Landing Disproving Conspiracy Theory


They also mapped the rest of the sites apparently, and the entire data set is supposed to be made available to the public over the next couple of years once they have finished organising it on the server. I believe the first batch is 26GB so there's plenty of data to sift through. What are you going to say if their rather modest imager has managed to record some more evidence? Make more lame excuses and brush offs about that too?



He said that since lunar dust is dark, the disturbances left behind by the spacecraft and the rovers are easily distinguishable.

“The disturbed surface is bright,” he added. The scientist said Chandrayaan’s images are an independent corroboration that can help dispel doubts about the NASA mission.

However, Chandrayaan’s camera could not capture the images of footprint left behind by the first astronaut on moon, Neil Armstrong and Edwin Aldrin, because of its low resolution capability, he said.


Please dont tell me you believe this crap

You take whatever is given to you and accept it as fact.
Why dont you double check their claims, see if they match up, find out politically how " independent " they are from NASA before saying that you are providing proof?
Fact is, you dont want to know if Apollo has been faked, even if it has.
Its more comfortable for you to believe its real, regardless of the lies.

In other words, if you are a truth seeker you should be skeptical about either side's claims.
Keep everyone honest.

I mean this what you have provided raises so many red flags its crazy.



They also mapped the rest of the sites apparently, and the entire data set is supposed to be made available to the public over the next couple of years once they have finished organising it on the server


Years? Think about that, thats crazy.
If they release any evidence for tracks, Apollo craft, who would believe them?
They have plenty of time to manipulate images.

Secondly, think about what they just said:



However, Chandrayaan’s camera could not capture the images of footprint left behind by the first astronaut on moon, Neil Armstrong and Edwin Aldrin,


Well OK, but do they have photos of the flag? LM? scientific experiments? Reflector?




top topics



 
377
<< 226  227  228    230  231  232 >>

log in

join