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: 531
377
<< 528  529  530    532  533  534 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 5 2011 @ 11:31 PM
link   
reply to post by FoosM
 


Those who dont believe it, [NASA moon landings] have provided ample evidence on how it could have been faked.


No they haven't.

As I recall, all you've done is attempted to poke holes at the official story. Jarrah provided a scenario for faking the moon landings, but his theory of the astronauts staying in the polar orbit during the mission was debunked in this thread.

Care to present us with a scenario on how they could have faked the missions?

BTW, the Capricorn One scenario would not work either, since people were tracking Apollo from Earth.

edit on 5/8/11 by ConspiracyNut23 because: (no reason given)




posted on Aug, 6 2011 @ 03:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by ConspiracyNut23

As I recall, all you've done is attempted to poke holes at the official story. Jarrah provided a scenario for faking the moon landings, but his theory of the astronauts staying in the polar orbit during the mission was debunked in this thread.


Why couldnt astronauts stay in Polar orbit??



posted on Aug, 6 2011 @ 05:38 PM
link   
reply to post by ConspiracyNut23
 



BTW, the Capricorn One scenario would not work either, since people were tracking Apollo from Earth.


Well I wish those people could tell us the "actual" trajectory..

All I've seen so far is ones made up based on a few details..



posted on Aug, 6 2011 @ 05:39 PM
link   
reply to post by nataylor
 


Thanks Nat,

nicely done.



posted on Aug, 6 2011 @ 06:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by backinblack
reply to post by ConspiracyNut23
 



BTW, the Capricorn One scenario would not work either, since people were tracking Apollo from Earth.


Well I wish those people could tell us the "actual" trajectory..

All I've seen so far is ones made up based on a few details..


You will also have a hard time getting one clear answer how long the
astronauts spend traveling through the belts.

Prior to Apollo 8, scientists were saying the only way through would be via the Poles, or spending only minutes in the belts.



posted on Aug, 6 2011 @ 07:47 PM
link   
reply to post by FoosM
 



Why couldnt astronauts stay in Polar orbit??


They could have, but the Saturn V would have needed to be launched due north or due south. It wasn't, and there are millions of witnesses to this fact. If it had skulked behind in LEO, it would have been extremely visible to everyone on Earth. It would have ruined hundreds of astrophotographs, remember? By the way, how is your search for those astrophotographs going? If you can find a single one that is properly documented, I will concede the debate and proselytize for you.

As you recall, one of the reasons we know Jarrah White is a liar is because at one point he suggested that the Apollo craft remained in "polar orbit." He expressed the belief that this meant that they performed a tight circle above one of the poles. When it was pointed out that this would be physically impossible, he claimed that he was trying to trick his opponents. Either way, he was being dishonest.

The last few pages have given me a severe case of deja vu.



posted on Aug, 6 2011 @ 07:50 PM
link   
reply to post by FoosM
 



Prior to Apollo 8, scientists were saying the only way through would be via the Poles, or spending only minutes in the belts.


No, they weren't. The infallible Jarrah White Himself provided a document that proves otherwise. Pay attention, please.



posted on Aug, 6 2011 @ 07:58 PM
link   
reply to post by backinblack
 



Well I wish those people could tell us the "actual" trajectory..

All I've seen so far is ones made up based on a few details..


"A few details" is all that is necessary to calculate the trajectory of a vehicle in space. There is no point drawing a picture if you are unable to understand why the picture looks the way it does. Learn something about orbital mechanics and do the plot yourself. No-one is going to waste their time doing a 3-D CGI of the trajectory if they know it will be rejected out of hand by people who do not understand why it cannot be any other way, given the data and laws of physics. I hereby challenge FoosM to educate himself sufficiently to prove the provided data wrong. Not jump on semantics, arguing that two different people used the same phrase in different contexts thus creating a "contradiction," but actually engaging the material in an informed way.



posted on Aug, 6 2011 @ 08:45 PM
link   
Yes DJW, that is correct but there are also alteration done during flight..

As you and others have stated, they MUST have occurred to alter the attitude of the craft to protect the astronauts from radiation.

These were NOT taken into account..



posted on Aug, 6 2011 @ 11:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by DJW001
reply to post by FoosM
 



Prior to Apollo 8, scientists were saying the only way through would be via the Poles, or spending only minutes in the belts.


No, they weren't. The infallible Jarrah White Himself provided a document that proves otherwise. Pay attention, please.


Oh yes they did.



posted on Aug, 6 2011 @ 11:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by DJW001
reply to post by FoosM
 



Why couldnt astronauts stay in Polar orbit??


They could have, but the Saturn V would have needed to be launched due north or due south.

The last few pages have given me a severe case of deja vu.


So what you are saying is that they couldn't change orbits once in orbit?


Achieving a polar orbit from a Florida launch site is possible,

en.wikipedia.org...

edit on 6-8-2011 by FoosM because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 7 2011 @ 02:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by ConspiracyNut23
Care to present us with a scenario on how they could have faked the missions?


I can handle this.

1) NASA lies
2) NASA controls the flow of information from the missions
3) everyone is fooled



posted on Aug, 7 2011 @ 02:51 AM
link   
The Apollo missions had nothing to do with manned exploration of the moon, they were ICBM tests. Instead of announcing to the entire world that they were testing ICBM's, they concocted this story that they were sending men to the moon.



posted on Aug, 7 2011 @ 02:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by MacTheKnife
Faking (in this context) connotes a degree of deception. What was the inended deception in the simulations you've mentioned ? Kinda hard to deceive people when you're "not shy about admitting" it.


Ever hear the phrase "hiding in plain sight"? This is exactly the sort of thing to which that term applies. The manned lunar missions were just a cover story, the Apollo missions were ICBM tests, which explains why the rockets used were virtually identical to later ICBM's. DUH! Grow up.



posted on Aug, 7 2011 @ 02:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by MacTheKnife
What ICBM system resembles, in any way other than they are rockets, the Saturn V ?


"As I understand it, the issue is that the Saturn V rocket would apparently make a really neat ICBM, and there is concerns that a terrorist organisation might find these plans, copy them, and build their own."

zaf.geek.nz...



posted on Aug, 7 2011 @ 03:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by MacTheKnife
What ICBM system resembles, in any way other than they are rockets, the Saturn V ?


from Stages to Saturn: A Technological History of the Apollo/Saturn Launch Vehicle by Roger E. Bilstein

"The large vehicle boosters of the Saturn program borrowed liberally from the accumulated engine technology of the ICBM's..."



posted on Aug, 7 2011 @ 03:03 AM
link   
post removed for serious violation of ATS Terms & Conditions



posted on Aug, 7 2011 @ 03:05 AM
link   
reply to post by WWu777
 


It was a rush job with old tech. Things change very quickly lately. It is easy to have things to be lost in translation of a sorts. just because we wouldn't couldn't/wouldn't use current tech doesn't mean there aren't others way to do it. Meh...



posted on Aug, 7 2011 @ 03:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by MacTheKnife
Last general theory I can recall is that the inner Earth is not just 1 big dynamo but rather a collection of lesser ones that added up and (mostly) look like one big dynamo...Rocks have shown this reversal has happened many times in the past so the theory of multiple dynamos seems on solid footing.


This "dynamo" hypothesis has been almost universally discredited by virtually all of known physics, it relies on hitherto undiscovered processes and phenomena. The Earth's magnetic field is a result of electric fields in space. All magnetic fields are a result of electric fields. There is no other known way to generate magnetic fields. This kind of cartoonish pop science turns my stomach, it's just another indication of the force-fed ignorance so many people suffer.



posted on Aug, 7 2011 @ 03:06 AM
link   
reply to post by StalkingGoogle
 


I know how that is. This site can be a little crazy sometimes when a mod doesn't like you. Meh. Glad to see you back. This site needs to set a demerit limit or something...banning isn't productive.



new topics

top topics



 
377
<< 528  529  530    532  533  534 >>

log in

join