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: 336
377
<< 333  334  335    337  338  339 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 29 2011 @ 07:01 AM
link   
reply to post by SayonaraJupiter
 



NASA is also t e c h n o l o g i c a l l y i n c a p a b l e of sending manned missions to the moon right now. They say they don't have the technology. This means that NASA is

t e c h n o l o g i c a l l y i n c a p a b l e.


Absolutely wrong. NASA has never said they lack the technological capacity; they lack the financial capability.

FINANCIALLY INCAPABLE, thanks to anti-science zealots.




posted on Jan, 29 2011 @ 07:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by DJW001
reply to post by SayonaraJupiter
 



NASA is also t e c h n o l o g i c a l l y i n c a p a b l e of sending manned missions to the moon right now. They say they don't have the technology. This means that NASA is

t e c h n o l o g i c a l l y i n c a p a b l e.


Absolutely wrong. NASA has never said they lack the technological capacity; they lack the financial capability.

FINANCIALLY INCAPABLE, thanks to anti-science zealots.


So, given reasonable funding, when could they land another man on the moon in your opinion>



posted on Jan, 29 2011 @ 07:42 AM
link   
reply to post by SayonaraJupiter
 


Lets see looking at your link pictures on site at 60cm or 1mtr per pixel so LRO can produce images of a similar res. Looking at city pics you can make out vehicles on roads but they dont look any better than the LRO pic of the lander.

So the landing sites are well documented with positions of the equipment in relation to each other and various landmarks on the Moon surface. So if the objects on the LRO pics match what is documented and even photographed by the Astronauts what do you say about that.



posted on Jan, 29 2011 @ 07:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by wmd_2008
reply to post by SayonaraJupiter
 


Lets see looking at your link pictures on site at 60cm or 1mtr per pixel so LRO can produce images of a similar res. Looking at city pics you can make out vehicles on roads but they dont look any better than the LRO pic of the lander.

So the landing sites are well documented with positions of the equipment in relation to each other and various landmarks on the Moon surface. So if the objects on the LRO pics match what is documented and even photographed by the Astronauts what do you say about that.


I say we can usually make out what make of car it is..
The LRO pics are mere pixels..
FACT.....
I really don't know why you'd bother useing pics that would be slammed by skeptics in seconds to prove equipment left on the moon..
Other facts are far more credible proof..
Stick to PROVABLE facts, not the LRO crap..



posted on Jan, 29 2011 @ 08:01 AM
link   
reply to post by backinblack
 



I say we can usually make out what make of car it is..
The LRO pics are mere pixels..
FACT.....
I really don't know why you'd bother useing pics that would be slammed by skeptics in seconds to prove equipment left on the moon..
Other facts are far more credible proof..
Stick to PROVABLE facts, not the LRO crap..


The spy satellites that have extremely high resolution are quite large and heavy. It would be very expensive to loft them all the way to the Moon. There is no compelling reason to get that sort of resolution of the lunar surface.

Since you automatically reject any evidence, nothing is provable to you. Why you reject the work of scientists and engineers, while embracing hoaxes and publicity stunts is beyond me.



posted on Jan, 29 2011 @ 08:10 AM
link   
reply to post by backinblack
 


Link to a picture please that you can tell the make of a car I really need to see this so please dont let me down but I think you will.



posted on Jan, 29 2011 @ 08:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by wmd_2008
reply to post by backinblack
 


Link to a picture please that you can tell the make of a car I really need to see this so please dont let me down but I think you will.


Link to a pic that actually shows what is on the moon to be appolo equipment..
Like, even close would be good...



posted on Jan, 29 2011 @ 08:20 AM
link   
reply to post by DJW001
 



Since you automatically reject any evidence, nothing is provable to you. Why you reject the work of scientists and engineers, while embracing hoaxes and publicity stunts is beyond me.


WTF?? I'm not automatically rejecting anything...
Please don't talk stupid...
If the pics from the LRO were high enough resolution to actually see something then I would say so..
As it is, they prove nothing..
As I have said before..If the same pics were posted to prove alien artifacts you same people would be screaming that the resolution didn't show anything but dots..

Fact..???



posted on Jan, 29 2011 @ 08:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by DJW001
reply to post by backinblack
 



I say we can usually make out what make of car it is..
The LRO pics are mere pixels..
FACT.....
I really don't know why you'd bother useing pics that would be slammed by skeptics in seconds to prove equipment left on the moon..
Other facts are far more credible proof..
Stick to PROVABLE facts, not the LRO crap..


The spy satellites that have extremely high resolution are quite large and heavy. It would be very expensive to loft them all the way to the Moon. There is no compelling reason to get that sort of resolution of the lunar surface.

Since you automatically reject any evidence, nothing is provable to you. Why you reject the work of scientists and engineers, while embracing hoaxes and publicity stunts is beyond me.


DJW, did you even look at this line??

Other facts are far more credible proof..

Or did you just decide to attack me for no reason?

I'm tired of being nice if that's how nice gets treated....



posted on Jan, 29 2011 @ 08:27 AM
link   
Whats up bib no pic yet.
Lets see missions tracked from earth listened to by school kids decent to Moon tracked by Jodrell Bank no stars explained by PHOTOGRAPHERS pictures taken by LRO match documented positions and even Astronauts pictures even Russia admits they made it.

YOU Foosm and all like minded people will never except it even if you were taken there you would claim that had been faked.
edit on 29-1-2011 by wmd_2008 because: spelling



posted on Jan, 29 2011 @ 08:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by wmd_2008
Whats up bib no pic yet.
Lets see missions tracked from earth listened to by school kids decent to Moon tracked by Jodrell Bank no stars explained by PHOTOGRAPHERS pictures taken by LRO match documented positions and even Astronauts pictures even Russia admits they made it.

YOU Foosm and all like minded people will never except it even if you were taken there you would claim that had been faked.
edit on 29-1-2011 by wmd_2008 because: spelling


Don't talk crap..
I could post a million pics taken by satellites and clearly showing makes of cars..
Do I really need to???

You on the other hand have not one piece of 100% undeniable proof that MAN set foot on the moon..



posted on Jan, 29 2011 @ 08:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by backinblack
reply to post by DJW001
 



Since you automatically reject any evidence, nothing is provable to you. Why you reject the work of scientists and engineers, while embracing hoaxes and publicity stunts is beyond me.


WTF?? I'm not automatically rejecting anything...
Please don't talk stupid...
If the pics from the LRO were high enough resolution to actually see something then I would say so..
As it is, they prove nothing..
As I have said before..If the same pics were posted to prove alien artifacts you same people would be screaming that the resolution didn't show anything but dots..

Fact..???



Lets see we land on the Moon the positons are recorded and if a photograph is taken an object is there. Do you see how that differs from your alien object artifact claim!!!



posted on Jan, 29 2011 @ 08:41 AM
link   
reply to post by wmd_2008
 



Lets see we land on the Moon the positons are recorded and if a photograph is taken an object is there. Do you see how that differs from your alien object artifact claim!!!


No, the records and the pics are from the same source..
Don't you see the bias in that statement???



posted on Jan, 29 2011 @ 08:43 AM
link   
reply to post by backinblack
 


You only have to post a link NOT the picture it has to be from orbit NOT an aircraft so lets see a link I bet you cant.



posted on Jan, 29 2011 @ 08:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by wmd_2008
reply to post by backinblack
 


You only have to post a link NOT the picture it has to be from orbit NOT an aircraft so lets see a link I bet you cant.


Mate, it would prove nothing..
Discuss the facts, not crap..
The LRO pics show no discernable details..
I really don't care what can be seen from pics on Earth..
That's not the issue we are discussing...Get over it..!!



posted on Jan, 29 2011 @ 08:52 AM
link   
STILL NO LINK YET BECAUSE YOU ARE TALKING BS!!!! is that not right you have saw an aerial photo and thought it was a sat picture thats why you CANT POST a link.

Here is something for your little mind to chew on

First posted by jra on here.

files.abovetopsecret.com...

One half of the picture is a still taken from the flim by the Astronauts as they left the Moon the other half from the LRO FUNNY even the tracks match



posted on Jan, 29 2011 @ 09:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by wmd_2008
STILL NO LINK YET BECAUSE YOU ARE TALKING BS!!!! is that not right you have saw an aerial photo and thought it was a sat picture thats why you CANT POST a link.

Here is something for your little mind to chew on

First posted by jra on here.

files.abovetopsecret.com...

One half of the picture is a still taken from the flim by the Astronauts as they left the Moon the other half from the LRO FUNNY even the tracks match


Mate. grow up..
WTF does it matter to the thread??
The pics we have from the LRO are what they are...
Resolution is a MAXIMUM of one pixel per 50 cm..

I dont care if a pic from the moon can read my credit card details here on Earth..
It DOESN'T change what the LRO resolution was..And that was pretty darn low......



posted on Jan, 29 2011 @ 09:05 AM
link   
reply to post by wmd_2008
 



One half of the picture is a still taken from the flim by the Astronauts as they left the Moon


Really?? How did they do that and what is the pic number?



posted on Jan, 29 2011 @ 09:20 AM
link   
reply to post by backinblack
 



DJW, did you even look at this line??

Other facts are far more credible proof..


Or did you just decide to attack me for no reason?

I'm tired of being nice if that's how nice gets treated....


Sorry, but you keep rejecting any evidence that comes from NASA, JAXA, ISRO and Russia. What exactly would you consider factual evidence? This is particularly intriguing to me as you were 100% convinced that the Chinese had launched a missile off Los Angeles based entirely on a single video of a contrail shown on a local TV station. When a retired general, who now lobbies for the defense industry, took advantage of the video to sell his wares, you unquestioningly accepted his testimony as fact, not opinion. Why have you raised the burden of proof so high for something that happened decades ago, yet were willing to swallow KCBS's hoax hook line and sinker?

If that is too deep of a psychological question for you to answer, just a simple list of acceptable evidence would suffice.



posted on Jan, 29 2011 @ 09:32 AM
link   
reply to post by backinblack
 



Really?? How did they do that and what is the pic number?


I don't think you read wmd's post quite right.

That is an image taken from the film of the LM ascent module on departure, compared to the LRO image. A frame from the FILM...the DAC...data acquisition camera, mounted in the LMP window. Remember? Been talked about a whole bunch, here.

No "pic number".....the ATS member ( jra )was kind enough to go to some effort, and frame-grab at just the right point in the DAC film, when the LM was at the same approximate altitude as the LRO camera, so that it would match up.

This is rather basic and simple to understand, yes?




edit on 29 January 2011 by weedwhacker because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
377
<< 333  334  335    337  338  339 >>

log in

join