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: 381
377
<< 378  379  380    382  383  384 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 9 2011 @ 06:08 AM
link   
reply to post by FoosM
 


You alter pictures more than NASA I mean look at you shadow picture with all the arrows,you didn't even have the brains to see there was nothing wrong with the shadows apart from in your warped mind you are just so desprate to prove it didn't happen you make yourself look stupid at times.

JW is a twat suggest you google that because thats how your starting to look.

You will never admit to anything as proof, everything JW has claimed has ben debunked YOU just wont accept it.

Shadows,no stars,footprints etc etc have all been explained many times on this thread and on ats on many threads even the enhanced LRO have been shown, its starting to look like you are JW or related to him.




posted on Mar, 9 2011 @ 06:16 AM
link   
reply to post by wmd_2008
 


even the enhanced LRO have been shown


Which means doctored to show details that aren't really there...



posted on Mar, 9 2011 @ 08:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by backinblack
reply to post by wmd_2008
 


even the enhanced LRO have been shown


Which means doctored to show details that aren't really there...


Well going on your track record on photgraphy are you sure about that and it wasn't NASA so you cant use the never trust nasa cliche!



posted on Mar, 9 2011 @ 08:34 AM
link   
reply to post by backinblack
 


>sigh



posted on Mar, 9 2011 @ 08:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by wmd_2008
JW is a twat suggest you google that because thats how your starting to look.


I'd watch your language man, no need to say the T word in a debate/discussion.

Otherwise I fully agree with you and Weedwhacker



posted on Mar, 9 2011 @ 02:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by curious7

Originally posted by wmd_2008
JW is a twat suggest you google that because thats how your starting to look.


I'd watch your language man, no need to say the T word in a debate/discussion.

Otherwise I fully agree with you and Weedwhacker



Well I would say it describes JW to a T and that was the point of it!
edit on 9-3-2011 by wmd_2008 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 9 2011 @ 02:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by wmd_2008
reply to post by FoosM
 


You alter pictures more than NASA I mean look at you shadow picture with all the arrows,you didn't even have the brains to see there was nothing wrong with the shadows apart from in your warped mind you are just so desprate to prove it didn't happen you make yourself look stupid at times.

JW is a twat suggest you google that because thats how your starting to look.
.


Where did the sampler go wmd?




posted on Mar, 9 2011 @ 03:17 PM
link   
reply to post by FoosM
 


Whats the time between pictures Foosm!!!



posted on Mar, 9 2011 @ 04:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by wmd_2008
reply to post by FoosM
 


Whats the time between pictures Foosm!!!


One thing at a time:

Where did the SAMPLER go wmd!!!



posted on Mar, 9 2011 @ 04:20 PM
link   
Awesome!! I have been trying for a while to convince people of this one...what a waste of time...

But now I have the perfect man fighting this battle for me! Thank you for this post!



posted on Mar, 9 2011 @ 04:23 PM
link   
reply to post by weedwhacker
 



Image enhncing IMPROVES what is already there...cleans up the digital "noise". I suspect you know this, and I see a lot of faux psturing....for what reason, I cannot fathom. Because, you are NOT stupid (nor "dense"...). YOU know this, and I know this.

SO, your play-acting here has another term we use online...you know.....


I know what enhancing is weed and you must admit them photos were HEAVILY enhanced..
Claimed resolution of more than double the originals is a little more than cleaning up and removing noise..

For the tenth time, if similar photos were in the UFO forum you skeptics would be on them in an instant..
I didn't bring them back up so it isn't me "play-acting" or the other term some like to use..

Every time someone mentions them or displays them I will say the same thing, which is nothing but FACT...



posted on Mar, 9 2011 @ 04:58 PM
link   
First time poster here.

Could someone please explain why 321 flags, 380 pages and more than 7600 replies have been devoted to a "Young Aussie genius whipping NASA in Moon Hoax Debate!"

I've heard of "thou doth protest too much", but this is ridiculous!


edit on 3/9/2011 by GoldenFleece because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 9 2011 @ 05:03 PM
link   
reply to post by GoldenFleece
 


lol, it's a similar scenario to that other thread.
just longer..



posted on Mar, 9 2011 @ 05:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by GoldenFleece
First time poster here.

Could someone please explain why 321 flags, 380 pages and more than 7600 replies have been devoted to a "Young Aussie genius whipping NASA in Moon Hoax Debate!"

I've heard of "thou doth protest too much", but this is ridiculous!


edit on 3/9/2011 by GoldenFleece because: (no reason given)


1. Because regardless where you stand on the issue, a lot of information is being presented.
2. JW's series is ongoing.



posted on Mar, 9 2011 @ 05:32 PM
link   
reply to post by FoosM
 



One thing at a time:
Where did the SAMPLER go wmd!!!


Since when did you ever focus on one thing at a time? Do you really expect us to believe that you have now lost your comprehension of "object continuity?" As you yourself showed, the three photographs were taken over a span of four seconds. I demonstrated that this would mean there was approximately 1 1/4 second between exposures, ample time for the astronaut to turn and place the tool in the tool carrier behind him! Try it yourself: see how long it takes you to turn in your seat, drop something behind you and then turn to face forward again. If it takes longer than one hip-po-pot-a-mus you may have a serious neurological condition.
edit on 9-3-2011 by DJW001 because: Edit to correct typo.



posted on Mar, 9 2011 @ 05:34 PM
link   
reply to post by EchoM
 



Awesome!! I have been trying for a while to convince people of this one...what a waste of time...


Agreed.


But now I have the perfect man fighting this battle for me! Thank you for this post!


Have you actually read any of this thread?



posted on Mar, 9 2011 @ 05:36 PM
link   
reply to post by FoosM
 



1. Because regardless where you stand on the issue, a lot of information is being presented.


Fair enough, have a star.


2. JW's series is ongoing.


More's the pity.



posted on Mar, 9 2011 @ 05:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by backinblack
reply to post by weedwhacker
 



Image enhncing IMPROVES what is already there...cleans up the digital "noise". I suspect you know this, and I see a lot of faux psturing....for what reason, I cannot fathom. Because, you are NOT stupid (nor "dense"...). YOU know this, and I know this.

SO, your play-acting here has another term we use online...you know.....


I know what enhancing is weed and you must admit them photos were HEAVILY enhanced..
Claimed resolution of more than double the originals is a little more than cleaning up and removing noise..

For the tenth time, if similar photos were in the UFO forum you skeptics would be on them in an instant..
I didn't bring them back up so it isn't me "play-acting" or the other term some like to use..

Every time someone mentions them or displays them I will say the same thing, which is nothing but FACT...



For the thousandth time it seems UNLIKE UFO pictures we KNOW objects should be there
we have records of positions relative to other objects and features on the surface DONT WE!



posted on Mar, 9 2011 @ 06:01 PM
link   
reply to post by DJW001
 



As you yourself showed, the three photographs were taken over a span of four seconds. I demonstrated that this would mean there was approximately 1 1/4 second between exposures, ample time for the astronaut to turn and place the tool in the tool carrier behind him! Try it yourself: see how long it takes you to turn in your seat, drop something behind you and then turn to face forward again. If it takes longer than one hip-po-pot-a-mus you may have a serious neurological condition.


But if the posted pics are in correct sequence then we only see the wand in the middle pic..
So between 1+2 he picked it up and between 2+3 he put it down.?
Bit odd but not impossible I guess...
I will note that in the 3rd pic I can't tell if he actually has it in his other hand.
he may have simply passed it from one hand to the other..



posted on Mar, 9 2011 @ 06:05 PM
link   
reply to post by wmd_2008
 



For the thousandth time it seems UNLIKE UFO pictures we KNOW objects should be there we have records of positions relative to other objects and features on the surface DONT WE!


For the thousandths time, it does NOT alter the fact that the pics are HEAVILY ENHANCED.....
Well beyond what is considered mere cleaning up...

Odd how not long ago it was YOU arguing continually that satellite pics can NOT make out accurate details..
Now here you are arguing the exact opposite..



new topics

top topics



 
377
<< 378  379  380    382  383  384 >>

log in

join