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: 312
377
<< 309  310  311    313  314  315 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 13 2011 @ 09:31 PM
link   
reply to post by backinblack
 


In the late 1960s was quite a bit less space "junk"....

Hey! "Don't touch my junk, man!!"

But, have nothing else to add, except that it IS a lot of area, in three dimensions.....and, (nowadays) NORAD is keeping tabs on most of it. The beauty of better and better tech, in the intervening 40+ years since Apollo.

You may wish to read about our "junk" (don't touch it!!) HERE.




posted on Jan, 13 2011 @ 09:39 PM
link   
reply to post by weedwhacker
 


lol, yes Nat explaind your "junk" in detail..
What I said was I'd hate to fly through it TODAY..
Meaning there was much less in the 60's...



posted on Jan, 14 2011 @ 01:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by DJW001
reply to post by SayonaraJupiter
 



According to Frank Borman's recollection in this video, the originally planned 3rd Apollo mission would have been long duration, orbiting in space, approximently 13km apogee, somewhere inside the 2-3km gap between the inner and outer VAB's.


13 kilometer apogee? I think you must have made a mistake. In any event, what is your point? All you've done is emphasize that the Soviets were really trying to beat the US to the Moon.


DJW001, sorry, my mistake there
8000 miles = 13,000 km.

Courtesy quote


Frank Borman “We were assigned to the third Apollo mission was supposed to have been a long duration, relatively long durations, exercising the lunar module and command module in Earth orbit out to eight thousand miles. And then in December while we were out at Downey, California going through the systems with the spacecraft I got a call from Deke Slayton, our boss, who said “Come back, we’ve had a change in plans” and he informed me that the CIA had informed NASA there would probably be a Soviet attempt to go around the moon before the end of the year, and they wanted to know if we could, this was in August, they wanted to know if we could change our mission, train and then be able to go. I immediately said “yes” because I knew that Bill and Jim were dying for the chance to do this.” Source (video) www.nasm.si.edu...


According to Frank Borman's recollection in this video, the originally planned 3rd Apollo mission would have been long duration, orbiting in space, approximently 13,000 km apogee, exercising the lunar and command modules, somewhere inside the 2-3km gap between the inner and outer VAB's.

How does that sound?



posted on Jan, 14 2011 @ 01:44 AM
link   
Offtopic, but I need some help!


First, I noticed that here was a section in the Wikipedia for Apollo 8 which reads:

"Borman, on the other hand, jumped at the chance:[citation needed] his original mission would have largely been a repeat of the previous flight, albeit in a higher orbit. "

I know that Wikipedia says to "be bold" when updating pages, yet,,,,, I'm afraid that I will screw up the Wikipedia!
The webpage I cited in my previous post could be used to provide the citation needed for the Wikipedia page.

But when I went to re-check that link www.nasm.si.edu...

and my link is now 404'd.


This was my original post on page 310 of this thread
www.abovetopsecret.com...

I personally transcribed those 3 quotes which were taken from the video. It was a link to a page with a video on it which was from 2008 celebrating the 40th anniversary of Apollo 8, with all 3 astronauts. The situation was that the 3 astronauts were on stage with a presenter, who occasionally asked questions. This was for an annual John Glenn Lecture. Each of the 3 astronauts were asked basic type questions regarding the Apollo 8 experience. At most times the video camera was capturing all 3 astronauts at the same time. I am sad that this link no longer works. I am strongly looking for another copy right now. Sorry this was off-topic.

edit: no sooner did I post this plea when the page returned! Yippee! But the link to the video doesn't work

mms://media1.smithsonian.museum/nasm/2008_GE/2008_11_13_Glenn_Lecture.wmv


edit on 1/14/2011 by SayonaraJupiter because: edit to add

edit on 1/14/2011 by SayonaraJupiter because: nasa 404'd the page and now the link doesn't work



posted on Jan, 14 2011 @ 02:16 AM
link   
Here is another example.

This page

Annual John H. Glenn Lecture
An Evening with the Apollo 8 Astronauts
Thursday, November 13, 2008
8:00 pm
National Mall Building
Sold Out
In late December 1968, the Apollo 8 crew of Frank Borman, Jim Lovell, and Bill Anders became the first humans to leave Earth and journey to another world. They spent 20 hours orbiting the Moon, and then made the flight back home.

In lunar orbit on Christmas Eve, the crew delivered to a world audience a moving TV broadcast in which they read from the Book of Genesis. During the mission, the three astronauts witnessed something no other human had ever seen--Earth rising over the lunar surface. Captured on camera, this image has become one of the most well-known of the last forty years.

Apollo 8's success paved the way for Apollo 11, the first human landing on the Moon.

All three astronauts will be on hand to share stories of their careers and their momentous mission.

The astronauts will not be signing autographs at the lecture.

This event is made possible by the generous support of The Boeing Company. Source www.nasm.si.edu...



this page has a link to a video

mms://media1.smithsonian.museum/nasm/2008_GE/2008_11_13_Glenn_Lecture.wmv

and that link does not exist. It was the video I quoted Frank Borman and Bill Anders.
edit on 1/14/2011 by SayonaraJupiter because: add this page



posted on Jan, 14 2011 @ 02:27 AM
link   
To whomever is toying with these links to these pages and these videos by changing the url's to "mms" ... please contact me. I am willing to make an honest deal with you.



posted on Jan, 14 2011 @ 02:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by SayonaraJupiter
To whomever is toying with these links to these pages and these videos by changing the url's to "mms" ... please contact me. I am willing to make an honest deal with you.


It'll cost ya plenty..

j/k



posted on Jan, 14 2011 @ 02:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by backinblack

Originally posted by SayonaraJupiter
To whomever is toying with these links to these pages and these videos by changing the url's to "mms" ... please contact me. I am willing to make an honest deal with you.


It'll cost ya plenty..

j/k


this is really f*d up dude. i quoted that video on page 310 of this thread. and now page 312 that link has been totally vaporized. what is that "mms" stuff? it's almost like a movie script or something.
i'm thinnking william gibson, pattern recognition and internet viral marketing?

suffice to say - that video has been vaporized by "mms"


does "mms" mean "matrix movie script"?
edit on 1/14/2011 by SayonaraJupiter because: point the finger at mms

edit on 1/14/2011 by SayonaraJupiter because: inserting the prime program



posted on Jan, 14 2011 @ 06:08 AM
link   
reply to post by SayonaraJupiter
 


Wikipedia requires proper documentation. In addition to Borman's octogenarian memory, you would need to cite other sources:


1966 January 13-20 - .
Apollo AS-503 to reduce LEM crewed altitudes - . Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. Flight: Apollo 8. Spacecraft: Apollo LM; LM Crew Station. Mission requirements for AS-503 were reviewed to determine if the LEM test objectives which caused the crew to be in the LEM at high altitudes (3,704 to 12,964 km (2,000 to 7,000 nm)) could be deleted. The reason for keeping the crew out of the LEM at those altitudes was the possibility they might be exposed to a total radiation dose which might prevent them from flying a later lunar mission.

Astronautix.com

Even then, other editors would wonder if this were relevant to the articles, as it is about what actually happened, not what might have happened. In any event, read Wikipedia's rules and requirements thoroughly. If your contribution is judged to be in pursuit of an agenda, it will be deemed "vandalism" and you could get banned.


edit on 14-1-2011 by DJW001 because: Edit to correct typo.



posted on Jan, 14 2011 @ 07:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by SayonaraJupiter

suffice to say - that video has been vaporized by "mms"


does "mms" mean "matrix movie script"?
edit on 1/14/2011 by SayonaraJupiter because: point the finger at mms

edit on 1/14/2011 by SayonaraJupiter because: inserting the prime program


close: microsoft multimedia stream
Its a protocol for streaming movies.
Let me guess: you tried to copy the movies in here, by copying the links?
Works perfectly well anyway.
I am fairly certain that nobody is messing with your links to open with windows media player instead of a regular browser. Why would anybody want to?



posted on Jan, 14 2011 @ 01:33 PM
link   
This video shows why no one wants to debate Jarrah. He's an obnoxious child. Not an ounce of tact. Not to mention that he has absolutely no qualifications whatsoever to debate anything to do with astrophysics or space.
But Phil Plait? He's got a PHD in astrophysics. Why the hell would he want to debate a child who doesn't know what he's talking about and takes things out of context?

And a pen camera? wow.
www.youtube.com...

Then he calls out Plait's integrity in a long winded video again on some remarks Plait made about Kaysing claiming the Challenger was intentionally destroyed to keep the astronauts quiet about space flight being fake.
www.youtube.com...
It took me about 5 minutes of searching to find an interview with Kaysing making that very claim:
nardwuar.com...
Here are some quotes if you are pressed for time:
www.thekeyboard.org.uk...







edit on 14-1-2011 by Facefirst because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 14 2011 @ 02:05 PM
link   
reply to post by Facefirst
 


Thank your for compiling those videos together, into your post.

Personally, I am in no position to criticize someone else, such as "Jarrah White" for being somewhat "privileged" (which is becoming more and more apparent....I mean, he has the resources to travel FROM his home in Australia to Las Vegas....in order to "confront" people. AND, as noted in 'one' of his videos, spent AUS$300+ for some "regolith simulant"....come on, people!!! THIS KID HAS SOME MONEY!!!!).

I benefited quite a bit from "privilege", in order to attain my life's goals......

....however.....I still think it's appropriate, and RIGHT to point out that "Jarrah White" is horribly, horribly WRONG in every assertion he's made, in his appallingly BAD roster of videos. It only takes a modicum of RESEARCH (and a dis-connect from any "idol worship" that he might have acquired) to see his videos for the CRAP that they truly are......



posted on Jan, 14 2011 @ 02:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by SayonaraJupiter

Courtesy quote


Frank Borman “We were assigned to the third Apollo mission was supposed to have been a long duration, relatively long durations, exercising the lunar module and command module in Earth orbit out to eight thousand miles. And then in December while we were out at Downey, California going through the systems with the spacecraft I got a call from Deke Slayton, our boss, who said “Come back, we’ve had a change in plans” and he informed me that the CIA had informed NASA there would probably be a Soviet attempt to go around the moon before the end of the year, and they wanted to know if we could, this was in August, they wanted to know if we could change our mission, train and then be able to go. I immediately said “yes” because I knew that Bill and Jim were dying for the chance to do this.” Source (video) www.nasm.si.edu...


According to Frank Borman's recollection in this video, the originally planned 3rd Apollo mission would have been long duration, orbiting in space, approximently 13,000 km apogee, exercising the lunar and command modules, somewhere inside the 2-3km gap between the inner and outer VAB's.

How does that sound?


Lets take a look at NASA's long term plans prior to Kennedy's political play.
Remember, the US was in a "race" with the USSR prior to Kennedy's pronouncement.


The IGY, the eighteen-month scientific program that spawned the space race and NASA, drew to a successful close on December 31. On January 2, 1959, Luna 1 (also known as Mechta, meaning "dream") perform the first lunar flyby. It soared past the Moon's ancient, battered craterscape at a distance of about 5,000 kilometers (3,000 miles). The just over 361-kilogram (795-pound) probe left Earth on an R-7 with an upper stage. Luna 1, intended to impact the lunar surface, instead became the first artificial object in solar orbit.




NASA MISSION TARGET DATES

1960
First launching of a Meteorological Satellite
First launching of a Passive Reflector Communications Satellite.
First launching of a Scout vehicle.
First launching of a Thor-Delta vehicle.
First launching of an Altas-Agena-B vehicle (by the Department of Defense).
First suborbital flight of an astronaut.

1961
First launching of a lunar impact vehicle.
First launching of a lunar impact vehicle.

1961-1962
Attainment of manned space flight, Project Mercury.

1962
First launching to the vicinity of Venus and/or Mars.

1963
First launching of two stage Saturn vehicle.

1963-1964
First launching of unmanned vehicle for controlled landing on the moon.
First launching Orbiting Astronomical and Radio Astronomy Observatory.

1964
First launching of unmanned lunar circumnavigation and return to earth vehicle.
First reconnaissance of Mars and/or Venus by an unmanned vehicle.

1965-1967
First launching in a program leading to manned circumlunar flight and to permanent near- earth space station.

Beyond 1970
Manned flight to the moon. . . .


These objectives seem more realistic for the time.
They still had to contend with radiation, etc.
But the concept of a landing and taking off from another planet
with men needed a lot more time to prepare for.


The Plan is presented at a level of effort which corresponds to an efficient and steadily growing capability. The rate of progress could be improved by an increased funding level, primarily by improving the certainty of the timely completion of the many essential engineering developments. On the other hand, a significantly lower scale of funding could be accommodated only by arbitrarily limiting the activities to a narrow line and by greatly reducing the rate of approach to the long term goals. . . .



on July 29, NASA issued a request for proposal for studies leading to the construction of the next generation of piloted spacecraft, called Apollo. The spacecraft was envisioned as an Earth-orbital vehicle with eventual circumlunar application.


Kennedy wanted to force the Russian's to work with NASA to achieve a moon landing.
Except he was assassinated and Apollo, like Vietnam, became a money making scheme for many companies.


THE VIETNAM WAR: A CHANGE OF PHILOSOPHY
In Vietnam, there was a significant and basic change in the way the military treated civilian contractors. Business Week, in March 1965, called it a “war by contract.”

polosbastards.com...



Current criticism over Halliburton's lucrative Iraq contracts has some historians drawing parallels to a similar controversy involving the company during Lyndon B. Johnson's administration.

Nearly 40 years ago, Halliburton faced almost identical charges over its work for the U.S. government in Vietnam — allegations of overcharging, sweetheart contracts from the White House and war profiteering. Back then, the company's close ties to President Johnson became a liability.

After Johnson took over the Oval Office, Brown & Root won contracts for huge construction projects for the federal government. By the mid-1960s, newspaper columnists and the Republican minority in Congress began to suggest that the company's good luck was tied to its sizable contributions to Johnson's political campaign.

www.npr.org...


Brown & Root continued to grow as the primary contractor for building military bases. When Johnson got America into the Vietnam War, Brown & Root made a fortune constructing military bases in Southeast Asia. They built the Tan Son Nhut Air Base and reportedly built many of the infamous tiger cages used to brutalize and torture suspected enemies of the Saigon regime.60 Tiger Cages were cells constructed below ground with just enough room to fit one person. Prisoners were put in these as punishment for various infractions of the rules.


&

Brown & Root followed up this ambitious foray into marine engineering technology by being selected by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) as architect-engineer for the Manned Spacecraft Center in Houston.
Read more: www.answers.com...



On 19 September 1961, NASA announced that a new Manned SpacecraftCenter would be located “in Houston, Texas, on a thousand acres to be madeavailable to the government by Rice University.”10This decision may well havebeen preordained. Even before President Kennedy announced his decision togo to the Moon, on 23 May, James Webb had written a memorandum to LyndonJohnson on his return from his inspection trip to Southeast Asia to bring theVice President up to date on what had happened in the two weeks he had beenaway from Washington. Webb noted that he had had several interactions withRepresentative Albert Thomas of Houston, who chaired the House appropriationssubcommittee controlling NASA’s budget, and that “Thomas has made it veryclear that he and George Brown were extremely interested in having RiceUniversity make a real contribution” to the accelerated space effort.



Lets look at the players:


Albert Richard Thomas (April 12, 1898–February 15, 1966) was a Democratic Congressman from Houston, Texas for 29 years and was responsible for bringing the Johnson Space Center to Houston.



In Congress, Thomas was a protégé of Texas Senator (later President) Lyndon B. Johnson but maintained a generally conservative voting record. In 1949, he became chairman of the House subcommittee on independent office appropriations. He also served on the subcommittee on defense appropriations and on the joint committee on Texas House delegation. He was a typical Southern Democrat who through seniority rose to be the Chairman of the House Appropriations Committee's, subcommittee on defense. In that capacity, he was able to steer projects to Texas including supporting Johnson's proposal to build the Corpus Christi Naval Air Station. Thomas also served on the Joint Committee on Atomic Energy and was instrumental in securing the location of the United States National Aeronautics & Space Administration's Manned Spacecraft Center (later named after Lyndon Johnson) in Houston in 1961. Since its inception, Johnson Space Center has served as mission control for every U.S. manned space flight including Apollo 11, the first lunar landing. "Houston" became the first word addressed to earth from the moon, in reference to the Johnson Space Center mission control.[4]



Thomas was one of the members of the Suite 8F Group, which included his college roommate at Rice University, George R. Brown. Brown's company Brown and Root donated the land on which the Johnson Space Center would be located to Rice University. Then-Vice-President Lyndon Johnson was chairman of the Space Council, and Thomas, a member of the NASA board, played leading roles in the eventual acceptance of Rice University's offer.



Thomas accompanied the Presidential party as it traveled to Dallas, where the next day President Kennedy was assassinated. He witnessed the swearing in of President Lyndon Baines Johnson on Air Force One which included the 'infamous wink' to LBJ.



Am I saying the same people who could assassinate a President could be the same people who could fake Apollo?


At Kennedy's death, there were 16,000 American military advisors in Vietnam. As President, Lyndon Johnson immediately reversed his predecessor's order to withdraw 1,000 military personnel by the end of 1963 with his own NSAM #273 on November 26, 1963. Johnson expanded the numbers and roles of the American military following the Gulf of Tonkin Incident (less than three weeks after the Republican Convention of 1964, which had nominated Barry Goldwater for President). The Gulf of Tonkin Resolution, which gave the President the exclusive right to use military force without consulting the Senate, was based on a false pretext, as Johnson later admitted. It was Johnson who began America's direct involvement in the ground war in Vietnam. By 1968, over 550,000 American soldiers were inside Vietnam; in 1967 and 1968 they were being killed at the rate of over 1,000 a month.


Kennedy was not serious about landing men on the moon alone. It was a political move.
He wanted an international effort, ending the cold war. He was getting out of Vietnam.

Both ventures meant $$$ money lost to powerful contractors like KBR.

Why did LBJ retire? Why did he not want to be president for the first moon landing?


www.absoluteastronomy.com...
www.jfkmontreal.com...'s_hidden_loyalties.htm
history.nasa.gov...



posted on Jan, 14 2011 @ 03:01 PM
link   
reply to post by debunky
 


debunky, I'll admit, I was totally freaked when this link www.nasm.si.edu... showed up a 404 last night.
We all know what 404 means.


DJW001, is Frank Borman no longer a reliable source because he is an octagenarian? Are you in agreement that originally NASA planned to exercise the CSM/LEM mission at an altitude of 8000 miles / 13,000 km, which would have put the astronauts at close to a maximum lifetime radiation dose? This altitude is in between the inner and outer Van Allen belts? Borman's mission was changed, according to his recollection, after the CIA informed Deke Slayton that the Russians were to go to the moon by the end of the year. This places the decision for changing the mission in mid-1968?



posted on Jan, 14 2011 @ 03:20 PM
link   
reply to post by SayonaraJupiter
 


The decision not to operate at that altitude seems to have been made in 1966. Presumably, the astronauts were training to test the LM in LEO as was done by Apollo 9. Grumman was not able to deliver an operational LM in time, so it appears that someone made the decision to "go for it" in 1968, presumably for a combination of political reasons. Borman's recollections are fine, considering that they are those of an old man speaking informally forty years after the events in question. Contemporary documentation would probably be more accurate, as Borman may have conflated the sequence of events and the timeline in his head. He probably has a very vivid set of images of talking to Deke Slayton, but its unlikely he remembers the exact details.The question is: why do you think this would be important to include in a general interest article in Wikipedia?



posted on Jan, 14 2011 @ 03:24 PM
link   
reply to post by SayonaraJupiter
 


IF I REMEMBER CORRECTLY (IIRC)....the Apollo 8 mission parameters wer modified for various reasons....

....PARTLY due to Grumman's delays in delivering a flyable LM.

....AND, PARTLY due to the "rumblings" out of the USSR....about yet "another" so-called 'first'....that being a circumlunar MANNED mission.

Check on the history or Apollo 8, to get ALL of the details.....from the ORIGINAL mission plan, all the way to the alternate that was decided BECAUSE OF CHANGNG CIRCUMSTANCES, and the ever-present and heated on-going "race" to the Moon....WITH the Soviets.

(At the time, NASA had little to no information as to their [the USSR's] status, in terms of their own space achievements). Only what could be gleaned from CIA spying....which was SPOTTY at best.......



posted on Jan, 14 2011 @ 03:28 PM
link   
reply to post by FoosM
 


Your long, rambling cut and paste extravaganza explains why the US was able to beat the Soviets to the Moon. By focusing on a specific goal, NASA was able to prioritize all of its research and development in a co-ordinated fashion. The Soviets compensated for their lack of free market competition by dividing their space efforts up between competing development teams. (They did this in their aircraft sector as well MiG vs. YAK,) They were able to achieve sporadic breakthroughs, but bureaucratic in-fighting, personal empire building and the lack of an over-arching plan doomed them to failure.

Are you so desperate now that you have to wave the Halliburton flag to get attention?



posted on Jan, 14 2011 @ 05:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by DJW001
reply to post by FoosM
 


Your long, rambling cut and paste extravaganza explains why the US was able to beat the Soviets to the Moon. By focusing on a specific goal, NASA was able to prioritize all of its research and development in a co-ordinated fashion.


Wrong. The soviets were not in a race to the moon.
They were duped by NASA to look into landing men on the moon sooner than planned though.
But their mission was to establish a permanent space base (accomplished) and remote controlled rovers on the moon (accomplished). Here they were leagues ahead of the US.

Contractors were simply milking US taxpayers via NASA and the Vietnam wars.


Webb’s Giant





The Soviet N-1 was in fact Webb’s ultimate insurance policy against canceling Apollo, and a useful weapon to fight cuts in NASA’s budget. As long as the Soviets continued to roll that massive rocket out onto the pad and American satellites photographed it, the threat was real. Nobody was going to cancel the Moon program, or even slow it down significantly. That kind of powerful shield against program cancellation has never existed for any other NASA administrator.



...BOOM...

Keep 'em scared, keep 'em paying.

Hyping Terror
For Fun, Profit - And Power




According to this carefully researched and well-vetted BBC documentary, Richard Nixon, following in the steps of his mentor and former boss Dwight D. Eisenhower, believed it was possible to end the Cold War and eliminate fear from the national psyche. The nation need no longer be afraid of communism or the Soviet Union. Nixon worked out a truce with the Soviets, meeting their demands for safety as well as the US needs for security, and then announced to Americans that they need no longer be afraid.




But Nixon left amid scandal and Ford came in, and Ford's Secretary of Defense (Donald Rumsfeld) and Chief of Staff (Dick Cheney) believed it was intolerable that Americans might no longer be bound by fear. Without fear, how could Americans be manipulated?

Rumsfeld and Cheney began a concerted effort - first secretly and then openly - to undermine Nixon's treaty for peace and to rebuild the state of fear and, thus, reinstate the Cold War.

And these two men - 1974 Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and Ford Chief of Staff Dick Cheney - did this by claiming that the Soviets had secret weapons of mass destruction that the president didn't know about, that the CIA didn't know about, that nobody but them knew about. And, they said, because of those weapons, the US must redirect billions of dollars away from domestic programs and instead give the money to defense contractors for whom these two men would one day work.



The CIA strongly disagreed, calling Rumsfeld's position a "complete fiction" and pointing out that the Soviet Union was disintegrating from within, could barely afford to feed their own people, and would collapse within a decade or two if simply left alone.

But Rumsfeld and Cheney wanted Americans to believe there was something nefarious going on, something we should be very afraid of. To this end, they convinced President Ford to appoint a commission including their old friend Paul Wolfowitz to prove that the Soviets were up to no good.

According to Curtis' BBC documentary, Wolfowitz's group, known as "Team B," came to the conclusion that the Soviets had developed several terrifying new weapons of mass destruction, featuring a nuclear-armed submarine fleet that used a sonar system that didn't depend on sound and was, thus, undetectable with our current technology.


That does sound familiar?
Oh my oh my when will the citizens learn.
Its so easy to repeat history when you have a short term memory.

They took out Nixon, they took out Kennedy when they planned to take money out of their fat pockets.




The Suite 8F Group was a network of politically active businessman in Texas and other southern states in the early 1960s. The name comes from the room in the Lamar Hotel in Houston, Texas where they held their meetings.



Suite 8F helped to coordinate the political activities of other right-wing politicians and businessmen based in the South; these included Robert Anderson, president of the Texas Mid-Continent Oil and Gas Association, Secretary of the Navy and Secretary of the Treasury; Robert Kerr of Kerr-McGee Oil Industries; Billie Sol Estes, an entrepreneur in the cotton industry; Glenn McCarthy of McCarthy Oil and Gas Company; Earl E. T. Smith, of U.S. Sugar Corporation; Fred Korth, Continental National Bank and Navy Secretary; Ross Sterling of Humble Oil; Texas oil magnates Sid Richardson and Clint Murchison, Sr., H. L. Hunt of Placid Oil; Eugene B. Germany (Mustang Oil Company), David Harold Byrd, chairmain of Byrd Oil Corporation; Lawrence D. Bell, of Bell Helicopter; William D. Pawley (business interests in Cuba), Gordon McLendon of KLIF; Senators George Smathers, Richard Russell, James Eastland, Benjamin Everett Jordan; and lobbyists Fred Black and Bobby Baker, also affiliated with the Serve-U Corporation.


KENNEDY:

"...Finally, in a field where the United States and the Soviet Union have a special capacity -- in the field of space -- there is room for new cooperation, for further joint efforts in the regulation and exploration of space. I include among these possibilities a joint expedition to the moon."

"Space offers no problem of sovereignty; by resolution of this assembly, the members of the United Nations have forsworn any claims to territorial rights in outer space or on celestial bodies, and declared that international law and the United Nations Charter will apply."

"Why, therefore, should man's first flight to the moon be a matter of natural competion? Why should the United States and the Soviet Union, in preparing for such expeditions, become involved in immense duplications of research construction and expenditure? Surely we should explore whether the scientists and astronauts of our two countries -- indeed of all the world -- cannot work together in the conquest of space, sending some day in this decade to the moon, not the representatives of a single nations, but the representatives of all of our countries."


NSAM 271:
www.fas.org...


NASA's REACTION:

But almost immediately after the UN speech, it was NASA which became uncooperative. There was serious foot-dragging within their upper ranks. For example, Dr. Robert C. Seamans(Associate NASA Administrator) had (privately) threatened to resign rather than cooperate in a joint US-USSR lunar flight. Moreover, a former head of NASA's moon flight program, Dr. B. Holmes, publically stated in an ABC television interview in Sept. 1963 that a Soviet-American mission to the moon would be, "a very costly, very inefficient, probably a very dangerous way to execute the program."

On the other hand, on Sept. 29, 1963, the Soviet responses to his speech were all quite favorable. See the NY Times article(included as file NYT1.TXT). Later on Oct. 25, 1963, at a Kremlin press conference in another positive response to Kennedy's joint space initiative, Premier Krushchev emphasized that there would not be any kind of 'moon race' against the Americans. And really from that point on, the Soviet govenment no longer made any sort of plans for a lunar landing on its own.



By early 1963, the US and the Soviet Union were becoming more friendly in matters of space cooperation. Thus, there was no great change in US space policy when Pres. Kennedy outlined a joint mission to the moon with the USSR in Sept., 1963.


No part of any appropriation made available to the National Aeronautics and Space Administration by this Act shall be used for expenses of participating in a manned lunar landing to be carried out jointly by the United States and any other country without consent of the Congress.


But it must be noted that there was in fact serious debate about whether NASA should continue to receive funding at all, especially for the 'moon-doggle' as it was being referred to, and this made NASA's future to be very uncertain indeed prior to LBJ taking office.

For an example of the typical sentiment of the day, read "The Moon-Doggle", by Amitai Etzioni, 1964, Doubleday & Co., NY (LC number TL 789.8 U5 E8). (Mr. Etzioni is an organizational sociologist by profession. Incidentally, his son co-designed with Erin Selberg the 'MetaCrawler' search engine found on the World Wide Web today). In Amitai Etzioni's book, he proposed that NASA be completely abolished and replaced with the Science for Development Agency(SDA) which would concentrate on real-life problems that plague America, from the civilian use of nuclear energy, air pollution, unemployment, ect. All NASA personnel would be given the option of transferring into SDA or going out to work in private industry.

But it was in fact LBJ who signed, with some hesitiation, the NASA appropriations bill that December, 1963 and committed the country to a purely national space effort as opposed to Kennedy's international program. Just as he committed American ground troops to SE Asia, which was never Pres. Kennedy's intent.



In conclusion
What have we been able to establish with this thread is the following:

Motivation for the Apollo program was: Money & Power.
Two terms synonymous with corruption.

Public opinion of the moon landing: The same then as now.
Meaning that public opinion is not a factor in sending people to the moon now or back then.






history.nasa.gov...
www.thespacereview.com...
www.hiddenmysteries.org...
www.prouty.org...



posted on Jan, 14 2011 @ 05:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by nataylor

Originally posted by FoosM
So are you claiming that paper can shield against beta and gamma radiation?
How thick would it have to be?

Yes, paper can shield radiation. Heck, even air can shield against radiation. *ANYTHING* with mass provides a shield. Now since the effectiveness of the shield is related to the density of the material, paper and air wouldn't make very good shields, but they would be shields none-the-less.


I wanted to get back this.
Why do they call it radiation shielding if anything can shield against radiation?

If I had a shotgun, and fired it at a net.
Would you define the net as a shield?



posted on Jan, 14 2011 @ 05:25 PM
link   

On Apollo 8, Hasselblad EL electric cameras were used for the first time. The electric motor in these Hasselblads largely automated the picture taking process. The astronauts needed only to set the distance, lens aperture, and shutter speed, but once the release button was pressed, the camera exposed and wound the film and tensioned the shutter. Two Hasselblad EL cameras, each with a Planar f 2.8/80mm [normal] plus a single Sonnar f5.6/250mm [telephoto] lens and seven magazines of 70mm film, were carried. The cameras, film magazines, and lenses used on Apollo 8 had black anodized surfaces to eliminate reflections. Modifications to the cameras included special large locks for the film magazines and levers on the f-stop and distance settings on the lenses. These modifications facilitated the camera's use by the crew operating with pressurized suits and gloves. Additionally, the cameras had no reflex mirror viewfinder and instead a simple sighting ring assisted the astronaut in pointing the camera.



Each film magazine would typically yield 160 color and 200 black and white pictures on special film. Kodak was asked by NASA to develop thin new films with special emulsions. On Apollo 8, three magazines were loaded with 70 mm wide, perforated Kodak Panatomic-X fine-grained, 80 ASA, b/w film, two with Kodak Ektachrome SO-68, one with Kodak Ektachrome SO-121, and one with super light-sensitive Kodak 2485, 16,000 ASA film. There were 1100 color, black and white, and filtered photographs returned from the Apollo 8 mission.

In addition to the Hasselblad cameras, Apollo 8 carried a black and white television camera, a 16mm motion picture camera, exposure meters, several types of filters, and other camera accessories.

history.nasa.gov...

Can anyone point us to where a complete collection of all this photo and video material?
I would love to see what they took pictures of with 16,000 ASA/ISO



new topics

top topics



 
377
<< 309  310  311    313  314  315 >>

log in

join