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: 461
377
<< 458  459  460    462  463  464 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 20 2011 @ 03:23 PM
link   
WHY, is still on here. we know that nasa lied so that we could become first on the moon, come on. We had to be first, a milestone in history, THE BIG LIE.




posted on May, 20 2011 @ 03:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by FoosM
Im trying to understand what you are getting at here NAT.
The numbers I have come from a NASA validated website.
Its NASA's transcripts. These are their numbers:

04:33 Astronaut ends response (doesn't even say "over")
04:34 Houston answers with "Roger"

Lets be conservative and say the delay is two seconds. One second going, one second coming back.
Where do they fit a two second delay between one second?

There isn't any delay when the communication goes that way.

Let's say someone on the earth and someone on the moon have a simple conversation. Each person is capable of only saying one word, "Hello" and, since they are slow talkers, it takes them one second to say the full word. And when they hear "Hello" from the other person, they wait one second and reply. It takes 1.28 seconds for the signal to get to the moon from the earth, and likewise, takes 1.28 seconds for the signal to get to the earth from the moon. The person on the earth has a tape recorder to record the conversation, and he's the first one to speak.

The clock starts at 0 when Earth says "Hello." At the end end of Earth saying Hello, the clock is at 1 second, since it takes him 1 second to say the word. It then takes 1.28 seconds for that signal to travel to the moon. So the person on the moon hears the end of the word at 2.28 seconds. He waits one 1 second, so the clock is now at 3.28 seconds. He replies, and ends his "Hello" at 4.28 seconds, since it takes him 1 second to say the word. It then take 1.28 seconds for that signal to travel from the moon to the earth. So the person on the earth hears the end of the reply at 5.56 seconds. He then waits 1 second, so the clock is at 6.56 seconds. He says "Hello" again, ending at 7.56 seconds. It then takes 1.28 seconds to travel to the moon where the listener hears the end of the word at 8.84 seconds. He waits 1 second to reply, until the clock is at 9.84 seconds. He then replies with "Hello," ending at 10.84 seconds. The signal takes 1.28 seconds to travel back to earth. The clock is at 12.12 seconds when the person on earth hears the end of the reply.

Let's look at the transcript of that conversation, as recorded by the person on the earth:

00:00.00 - 00:01.00 Earth: Hello
00:04.56 - 00:05.56 Moon: Hello
00:06.56 - 00:07.56 Earth: Hello
00:11.12 - 00:12.12 Moon: Hello

See how the longest delay is in the reply FROM the moon, not the reply sent TO the moon? That's because as the listener on Earth hears it, it's being recorded at the same time. Whereas anything the person on the moon says first has to travel for 1.28 seconds before it is recorded.



posted on May, 20 2011 @ 04:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by nataylor


I'm a huge proponent of manned spaceflight, and even *I* don't think it's worth the cost anymore. At least the cost of the Apollo program as a percentage of the total government budget isn't worth it any more. In 1966 NASA's budget topped out at 4.41% of the total US federal budget. Right now, NASA gets a much more reasonable 0.60%.

As for Apollo not being primarily science driven, I totally agree with that. It was always primarily an engineering feat, a way to show off the might of the American industrial complex. It was a way to show Russia and the world that the US could concentrate its power on seemingly impossible tasks and conquer them.


Well I am glad we can agree on that.





Text

Originally posted by FoosM
08:00 One of the astronauts remarks about the brightness of the moon and says he will get a shot of the horizon. It almost appears like either the spacecraft tilted up, or the moon tilted down. Very strange effect.
The astronaut holding camera rotated it.


Originally posted by FoosM
08:58: Then again after some wobbling, the image of the moon dramatically shifts! And we hear an Astronaut saying something about shifting the window??
He moved to look out a different window. The CSM had 5 windows:




Yes, I know the astronauts changed windows.
I believe I mentioned that.






Originally posted by FoosM
All this time you will notice that the moon is wobbling. Its easy to notice when you scroll back and forth the video. What crap special effects.
Wobbling, just like you'd expect when a person is holding it?


That would be the logical explanation, but something about it looked off.




edit on 20-5-2011 by FoosM because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 20 2011 @ 05:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by nataylor

Let's look at the transcript of that conversation, as recorded by the person on the earth:

00:00.00 - 00:01.00 Earth: Hello
00:04.56 - 00:05.56 Moon: Hello
00:06.56 - 00:07.56 Earth: Hello
00:11.12 - 00:12.12 Moon: Hello

See how the longest delay is in the reply FROM the moon, not the reply sent TO the moon? That's because as the listener on Earth hears it, it's being recorded at the same time. Whereas anything the person on the moon says first has to travel for 1.28 seconds before it is recorded.


Oops, I made a mistake with my post.
I quoted the youtube time and not the actual transcript.



posted on May, 20 2011 @ 05:05 PM
link   
reply to post by FoosM
 


my point is you will have a REAL pic lit from multiple angles and you will actually see what happens

composited - you mean its a panorama ? are are you now making another claim ??



posted on May, 20 2011 @ 05:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by ignorant_ape
reply to post by FoosM
 


my point is you will have a REAL pic lit from multiple angles and you will actually see what happens

composited - you mean its a panorama ? are are you now making another claim ??


But we are not dealing with real pictures.
We are dealing with fake photos of a lie called the apollo moon landing.
How else am I suppose to view the photos?
They cant be real. Its like trying to pass of Star Wars stills as actual photos of an event that happened in
a galaxy far far away.
Men didnt land on the moon, so the photos must be fake.



posted on May, 20 2011 @ 06:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by nataylor

Originally posted by FoosM
Im trying to understand what you are getting at here NAT.
The numbers I have come from a NASA validated website.
Its NASA's transcripts. These are their numbers:

04:33 Astronaut ends response (doesn't even say "over")
04:34 Houston answers with "Roger"

Lets be conservative and say the delay is two seconds. One second going, one second coming back.
Where do they fit a two second delay between one second?

There isn't any delay when the communication goes that way.

Let's say someone on the earth and someone on the moon have a simple conversation. Each person is capable of only saying one word, "Hello" and, since they are slow talkers, it takes them one second to say the full word. And when they hear "Hello" from the other person, they wait one second and reply. It takes 1.28 seconds for the signal to get to the moon from the earth, and likewise, takes 1.28 seconds for the signal to get to the earth from the moon. The person on the earth has a tape recorder to record the conversation, and he's the first one to speak.

The clock starts at 0 when Earth says "Hello." At the end end of Earth saying Hello, the clock is at 1 second, since it takes him 1 second to say the word. It then takes 1.28 seconds for that signal to travel to the moon. So the person on the moon hears the end of the word at 2.28 seconds. He waits one 1 second, so the clock is now at 3.28 seconds. He replies, and ends his "Hello" at 4.28 seconds, since it takes him 1 second to say the word. It then take 1.28 seconds for that signal to travel from the moon to the earth. So the person on the earth hears the end of the reply at 5.56 seconds. He then waits 1 second, so the clock is at 6.56 seconds. He says "Hello" again, ending at 7.56 seconds. It then takes 1.28 seconds to travel to the moon where the listener hears the end of the word at 8.84 seconds. He waits 1 second to reply, until the clock is at 9.84 seconds. He then replies with "Hello," ending at 10.84 seconds. The signal takes 1.28 seconds to travel back to earth. The clock is at 12.12 seconds when the person on earth hears the end of the reply.

Let's look at the transcript of that conversation, as recorded by the person on the earth:

00:00.00 - 00:01.00 Earth: Hello
00:04.56 - 00:05.56 Moon: Hello
00:06.56 - 00:07.56 Earth: Hello
00:11.12 - 00:12.12 Moon: Hello

See how the longest delay is in the reply FROM the moon, not the reply sent TO the moon? That's because as the listener on Earth hears it, it's being recorded at the same time. Whereas anything the person on the moon says first has to travel for 1.28 seconds before it is recorded.



Ok lets get this straight.

an example of the apollo 8 transcript:


070:13:38 Anders: Go ahead.
070:13:40 Carr: Roger. Step number 2, attach the filter holder to the lens with tape on the top and bottom. Do this with the slide forward. Over


Now, when we see 070:13:38- is that when "Go ahead" began to be spoken?



posted on May, 20 2011 @ 06:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by FoosM

Originally posted by ignorant_ape
reply to post by FoosM
 


my point is you will have a REAL pic lit from multiple angles and you will actually see what happens

composited - you mean its a panorama ? are are you now making another claim ??


But we are not dealing with real pictures.
We are dealing with fake photos of a lie called the apollo moon landing.
How else am I suppose to view the photos?
They cant be real. Its like trying to pass of Star Wars stills as actual photos of an event that happened in
a galaxy far far away.
Men didnt land on the moon, so the photos must be fake.



appologies for the full post quote

but this has to be addressed - here we see to the heart of a hoax believers " argument "


Men didnt land on the moon, so the photos must be fake.


no science , or logic - but a belief - and the determination to warp all evidence to conform to the belief



posted on May, 20 2011 @ 06:14 PM
link   
reply to post by ignorant_ape
 



no science , or logic - but a belief - and the determination to warp all evidence to conform to the belief


I guess that works both ways..
Especially when 99% of the evidence comes from one source, NASA....



posted on May, 20 2011 @ 06:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by FoosM

Ok lets get this straight.

an example of the apollo 8 transcript:


070:13:38 Anders: Go ahead.
070:13:40 Carr: Roger. Step number 2, attach the filter holder to the lens with tape on the top and bottom. Do this with the slide forward. Over


Now, when we see 070:13:38- is that when "Go ahead" began to be spoken?
No, that's when it was heard and recorded at Mission Control. It was actually said 1.28 seconds earlier.



posted on May, 20 2011 @ 06:42 PM
link   
reply to post by backinblack
 


no it doesnt " work like that "

the ` hoax belief ` paradim starts from the assumption that ` NASA lies `

when in fact all the claims are built on false assumptions and flawed logic



posted on May, 20 2011 @ 06:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by ignorant_ape
reply to post by backinblack
 


no it doesnt " work like that "
the ` hoax belief ` paradim starts from the assumption that ` NASA lies `
when in fact all the claims are built on false assumptions and flawed logic


That's merely your opinion..
NASA does not tell everything..It's in their laws..
Do they lie?? Some say yes..

Never A Straight Answer......



posted on May, 21 2011 @ 08:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by FoosM
That would be the logical explanation, but something about it looked off.


edit on 20-5-2011 by FoosM because: (no reason given)
FoosM relying on gut instinct over actual facts. Quelle surprise.


Originally posted by backinblack

Originally posted by ignorant_ape
reply to post by backinblack
 


no it doesnt " work like that "
the ` hoax belief ` paradim starts from the assumption that ` NASA lies `
when in fact all the claims are built on false assumptions and flawed logic


That's merely your opinion..
NASA does not tell everything..It's in their laws..
Do they lie?? Some say yes..

Never A Straight Answer......
Bib relying on blind doubt instead of actual facts. Quelle suprise.
edit on 2011/5/21 by 000063 because: +



posted on May, 21 2011 @ 10:00 AM
link   
reply to post by 000063
 


000063 posting a post with nothing..Quelle suprise.



posted on May, 21 2011 @ 10:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by backinblack
reply to post by 000063
 


000063 posting a post with nothing..Quelle suprise.
You're going to post facts proving NASA was lying now, right?



posted on May, 22 2011 @ 06:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by backinblack

NASA does not tell everything..It's in their laws..
Do they lie?? Some say yes..


Do you say yes??


Never A Straight Answer......


Plenty of them from NASA - www.nasa.gov...



posted on May, 23 2011 @ 01:51 AM
link   
A recent interview with JW on Binnall Of America (audio).
Discussing Mythbusters, Apollo 1, Columbia, Propagannists, etc













posted on May, 23 2011 @ 02:05 AM
link   
reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul
 



Do you say yes??


I've yet to see a Government body that doesn't lie, so I guess that's a yes from me..



posted on May, 23 2011 @ 02:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by backinblack
reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul
 



Do you say yes??


I've yet to see a Government body that doesn't lie, so I guess that's a yes from me..


Do those opposed to the government /nasa etc never lie!!!!?
edit on 23-5-2011 by wmd_2008 because: (no reason given)

edit on 23-5-2011 by wmd_2008 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 23 2011 @ 02:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by wmd_2008

Originally posted by backinblack
reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul
 



Do you say yes??


I've yet to see a Government body that doesn't lie, so I guess that's a yes from me..


Do those opposed to the government /nasa etc never lie!!!!?


That wasn't the question and is irrelevant to the subject and this thread..
Though I posted earlier that JW lies as does Phil Plait..
edit on 23-5-2011 by backinblack because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
377
<< 458  459  460    462  463  464 >>

log in

join