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: 582
377
<< 579  580  581    583  584  585 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 25 2011 @ 04:14 PM
link   
footage from the Apollo 13 press conference can be found here:
3.5GB
www.archive.org...
www.archive.org...




posted on Sep, 25 2011 @ 04:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by FoosM
 

Part of the Apollo 12 press conference can be found here. You should watch the whole video but 0:40:00 would be a good place to start.
www.youtube.com...

You might want to listen to what Godwin says beginning around 00:42:00. Just because you can't find it on the internet doesn't mean it doesn't exist.



So we have a piece of Apollo 12.
Still doesn't explain why we cant find the rest.



posted on Sep, 25 2011 @ 04:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by hateeternal
footage from the Apollo 13 press conference can be found here:
3.5GB
www.archive.org...
www.archive.org...


Apollo 11 & 13 press conferences are readily available.
Its the other missions that seem to be eluding us.



posted on Sep, 25 2011 @ 04:36 PM
link   
The USIA

during the last months of President Johnson’s Administration, USIA and its staff around the world began preparing for the informational effort concerning the July 1969 moon landing. When President Kennedy set up the goal of landing a man on the moon in the 1960s, he turned implementation of the effort to then Vice President Johnson. When Johnson became President, he made a strong personal effort to ensure the eventual success of Apollo XI. USIA was a key player in this historic effort, presenting the space program to the world with all its dangers, risks and rewards.



Think about it, would the US allow their astronauts to die infront of the whole world? Failure was not an option.



USIS Wows Iranian Audiences with Men on the Moon
For the landing of Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin on the moon July 20, 1969, USIS Tehran, like other USIS posts, pulled out all the stops to attract Iranian audiences. We had a large binational center, the Iran-American Society, where we taught English, held lectures, seminars, plays and other programs. We gath- ered all the space paraphernalia we could lay our hands on and set up the largest rooms to receive our guests. The Iranian media covered us thoroughly, including television interviews. Over a thousand Iranians were there cheering as Armstrong and Aldrin landed. Soon after, I had a large reception at my house in Tehran. We had lots of materials about the landing and the U.S. space program, but also some foreign policy-oriented materials which were placed
around strategically. I thought, “After all, Ben Franklin was a pamphleteer, perhaps our first Public Affairs Officer, when he was the American Ambassador in Paris.




www.iotacenter.org...
www.visual-memory.co.uk...
www.oscars.org...
dmznyc.com...
www.roberthaller.com...
dosfan.lib.uic.edu...



posted on Sep, 25 2011 @ 04:51 PM
link   
EMSH







Indeed, between 1946 and 1974, even as the CIA conducted its own covert propaganda efforts, the USIA experimented with an array of cultural and educational programs designed to export and celebrate American culture.2 While Voice of America was the agency’s audio emblem, the lesser-known Motion Picture Service incorporated experiments with documentary into its operations, with some notable success. Among the film- makers recruited for this program in creative propaganda were a number of well-known, or soon to be well-known, American auteurs of independent documentary and avant- garde cinema. Comparable to the work of studio directors such as Frank Capra, John Ford, and John Huston on behalf of the U.S. military during World War II (WWII), the participation of filmmakers such as Ed Emshwiller, Charles Guggenheim, Bruce Hirschensohn, and Leo Seltzer in the Cold War work of the USIA has been—like the films themselves—a well-kept secret.





Emshwiller... highly respected video artist, experimenting with synthesizers, computers, and electronic renderings of three-dimensional space; the interplay of illusion and reality. He also manipulated time, movement, and scale.


PROJECT APOLLO (1968)

Using fluid camera work and no narration, experimental filmmaker Ed Emshwiller’s “Project Apollo” was made for the United States Information Agency and gives a fascinating portrait of NASA’s Apollo project a full year before the actual moon landing. In digital projection. 30 mins.


Been looking for this elusive piece of cinema.



Shortly after he made Relativity Stanley Kubrick approached Emshwiller, asking him if he would help to make 2001 [to design the "ultimate trip" sequence for the film 2001: A Space Odyssey ]. Emshwiller declined, because he was making a Project Apollo film for NASA, and Image, Flesh, and Voice for himself.



Ed Emshwiller on 2001

When Ed Ferman phoned and asked if I'd write a short review of Stanley Kubrick's movie 2001: A Space Odyssey, I gladly agreed. I hdd one strong reservation, however. I've maintained ever since I got involved in making films myself that I hated all critics and reviewers, and here I was, agreeing to join the "enemy" ranks. All my complaints about how inadequate and myopic all such reviews are seem to have come home. Now I have the problem of trying, in a few words, to say something about another man's film, something I'm hesistant to do even with my own work...

But it's in the very area of detail where the picture falls short of its potential for me. There don't seem to be any wrinkles or grease spots on either the people or the machines. I mean this mostly in a figurative sense. I realise the film is stylized, but the manner of conveying "human" touches, even when ironic, seems studied and unreal. I've just spent the past six months making an impressionistic film of Project Apollo and have encountered a lot of bureaucrats and spaceman types. Some I liked and some I didn't, but in all cases they were somehow more textured than their counterparts in 2001.





Ed Emshwiller (1925-1990) studied painting both in the U.S. and Paris. In the 1950s, his abstract expressionist canvases received praise at art galleries, while his hyper-realistic cover illustrations for science-fiction magazines such as Galaxy (signed merely EMSH) delineated the surrealistic landscapes of imaginary planets and exotic creatures in fine detail.

These filmic experiments reached their climax in the 1966 Relativity, which, in 40 minutes, meditates on the place of man in the cosmos, using clever photographic effects to suggest vast interstellar distances in parallel to restlessly-moving closeups of a human body.

In the 1970s, Emshwiller began to experiment with videotape and computer graphics





Computer Animation Lab Founder
In early 1979, he produced the ground-breaking three-minute 3-D computer work entitled Sunstone, made at the New York Institute of Technology with the help of Alvy Ray Smith as software programmer. The same year, Emshwiller became dean of CalArts' film/video school. In addition to his duties as dean, he served as provost from 1981 through 1986.





www.iotacenter.org...
www.visual-memory.co.uk...
www.oscars.org...
dmznyc.com...
www.roberthaller.com...
dosfan.lib.uic.edu...



posted on Sep, 25 2011 @ 05:10 PM
link   
reply to post by FoosM
 



Its the other missions that seem to be eluding us.


You can't say they're eluding you if you're not actually looking for them.



posted on Sep, 25 2011 @ 05:18 PM
link   
reply to post by FoosM
 



Think about it, would the US allow their astronauts to die infront of the whole world? Failure was not an option.


Yes, absolutely they would allow their astronauts to die in front of the entire world; that was the whole point. The Soviet Union was a closed society, their early fatalities have only recently become known. They would not announce their launches in advance and were cagey about their spacecraft's missions. The United States wanted to show the world that they were open, and willing to take the risk of failing in full view. Had anything happened to the astronauts, they would have become Martyrs for Truth Justice and The American Way. In fact, the Challenger disaster proves that NASA was willing to take that risk, and "man up" when they fail.
edit on 25-9-2011 by DJW001 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 25 2011 @ 05:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by jra
GRAIL does not have a laser.


GRAIL Wiki
Each spacecraft transmits and receives telemetry from the other spacecraft and Earth-based facilities. By measuring the change in distance between the two spacecraft, the gravity field and geological structure of the Moon can be obtained. The gravitational field of the Moon will be mapped in unprecedented detail.


My bad. My assumption was that GRAIL were measuring distances down to the diameter of a red blood cell with lazers, not microwaves. I watched Maria Zuber's NLSI video again... there is a good slide which shows the scheme of microwave instruments, each spacecraft has :

Ka-band Lunar Gravity Ranging System (LGRS)), (measure the inter-spacecraft range-rate),
X band (beacon antennas will be used for Doppler Ranging Measurements from Earth) and
S band (for communications) microwave radio links required to make the measurements.


The science payload on each spacecraft is the Lunar Gravity Ranging System, which will measure changes in the distance between the two spacecraft down to a few microns — about the diameter of a red blood cell. Each spacecraft will also carry a set of cameras for MoonKAM, marking the first time a NASA planetary mission has carried instruments expressly for an education and public outreach project.


There is a DoD connection for GRAIL, however.

Its [GRAIL's] design is based on an Experimental Satellite built by Lockheed Martin in cooperation with the US Air Force Research Laboratory (XSS-11). The XSS-11 was launched in April 2005 and operated for 1 year before being placed in a disposable orbit in which it remains to this date (August 2011).



The Experimental Satellite System­11 (XSS­11) micro satellite demonstrates a new class of low­cost spacecraft weighing approximately 100 kilograms with the goal to explore a variety of future military applications such as space servicing, diagnostics, maintenance, space support and efficient space operations.


moon.mit.edu...
www.parabolicarc.com...
www.spaceflight101.com...
www.kirtland.af.mil...

DoD has already studied microwave weapons for a long time.

High Power Microwaves: Strategic and Operational Implications for Warfare
By Eileen M. Walling, Colonel, USAF
February 2000 Occasional Paper No. 11 Center for Strategy and Technology Air War College Air University Maxwell Air Force Base, Alabama

Unlike the electronic warfare system, the microwave weapon is designed to “overwhelm a target’s capability to reject, disperse, or withstand the energy.”

www.au.af.mil...


edit on 9/25/2011 by SayonaraJupiter because: tags



posted on Sep, 25 2011 @ 06:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by FoosM
 

Part of the Apollo 12 press conference can be found here. You should watch the whole video but 0:40:00 would be a good place to start.
www.youtube.com...

You might want to listen to what Godwin says beginning around 00:42:00. Just because you can't find it on the internet doesn't mean it doesn't exist.


The title of that video is "ASpacevidcast 2.35 honoring the Apollo 12 40th anniversary with Robert Godwin".

Robert Godwin at 39:00 minutes makes a huge exaggeration by saying "Apollo 12 launched with 3 guys on it in a lightning storm." Oh really? Lightning storm? Or was it 1 stroke of lightning?

I think that Phage deserves a star for pointing out this video because Pete Conrad does most of the talking and there is a comment about the 16-mm films taken on Apollo 12 at 28m:33s in the video.


Pete Conrad:

I think this is one of the best 16-mm pictures I ever seen that Dick took of Intrepid leaving. We've done our separation and were waiting, excuse me, we've done our undocking and waiting for Dick to separate and leave us, so that we get over on the night side and do our first alignment prior to the descent orbit injection burn.

The first time I looked at this movie it looked so unreal to me I thought , if I saw that in a Hollywood movie I'd say that it was a fake... but I was there and so were Dick and Al and we'll all vouch for the real thing here.


So Pete Conrad is saying is that the Apollo 12 film looked fake, it looked unreal, it looked like a Hollywood movie. The only people who can vouch for the veracity of this film are his co-astronauts on the mission.
edit on 9/25/2011 by SayonaraJupiter because: tags

edit on 9/25/2011 by SayonaraJupiter because: to add



posted on Sep, 25 2011 @ 06:23 PM
link   
reply to post by SayonaraJupiter
 

How often does lightning strike when there is no lightning storm?
www.aerospaceweb.org...


The guys in the film lab who processed the film could also vouch for it but so what? You wouldn't believe them either.



edit on 9/25/2011 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 25 2011 @ 07:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by SayonaraJupiter
 

How often does lightning strike when there is no lightning storm?
www.aerospaceweb.org...


The guys in the film lab who processed the film could also vouch for it but so what? You wouldn't believe them either.



edit on 9/25/2011 by Phage because: (no reason given)



You know that Richard Nixon was attended the Apollo 12 launch. (Nixon flew in and witnessed the launch and was headed back to DC in about an hour.) Did Richard Nixon see a lightning storm???

The guys at the film lab. Did you mean the CIA film lab at NPIC?


NASA had an agreement with the US intelligence community that dated from the beginning of the Gemini program. All astronaut photographs of the Earth would first be reviewed by the National Photographic Interpretation Center in Building 213 in the Washington, DC Navy Yard. NPIC (pronounced “en-pick”) was an organization managed by the CIA that interpreted satellite and aerial photography. Source www.thespacereview.com...


This thread page 292.
www.abovetopsecret.com...


www.youtube.com...
56:50


Richard Godwin:

One of the things that really leaps out at me, is that, every successful NASA program up to now, manned program, whether it be Mercury, Gemini, Apollo or the Shuttle was backed by DoD money.

The Atlas booster, the Redstone missile, the Titan, even the Saturn, were all military programs and so was the Shuttle.

They all got huge injections of funds to make them man-safe and capable of doing whatever it is they were doing, from the Department of Defense and NASA kind of rode on the back of that."


Is Richard Godwin just exaggerating again?

edit on 9/25/2011 by SayonaraJupiter because: add some Nixon



posted on Sep, 25 2011 @ 07:17 PM
link   
reply to post by SayonaraJupiter
 


You know that Richard Nixon was attended the Apollo 12 launch. (Nixon flew in and witnessed the launch and was headed back to DC in about an hour.) Did Richard Nixon see a lightning storm???

He may have. What's your point?

Dr. Thomas Paine, NASA Administrator, shields First Lady, Mrs. Richard M. Nixon, from rain while the President and daughter Tricia, foreground, watch Apollo 12 prelaunch activities at the Kennedy Space Center viewing area. Following the successful liftoff, the President congratulated the launch crew from within the control center.

grin.hq.nasa.gov...


The guys at the film lab. Did you mean the CIA film lab at NPIC?
I don't see anything about a film lab in that quote of yours but I do see that it concerns "All astronaut photographs of the Earth", nothing about the Moon. What's your point?


Is Godwin exaggerating what? What's your point?
edit on 9/25/2011 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 25 2011 @ 07:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by syrinx high priest

Originally posted by SayonaraJupiter

Originally posted by syrinx high priest
what do you make of big muley ? what about the zaps ?


Fake and faker?


based on what exactly. can you document the study done on muley specifically that came to that conclusion ? and of course I'm sure it is a peer reviewed study, and not a youtube video.


sayonara ? foos ?

why everybody ignore muley ?

you no like muley ?



posted on Sep, 25 2011 @ 07:29 PM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 


Is Pete Conrad exaggerating?


The first time I looked at this movie it looked so unreal to me I thought , if I saw that in a Hollywood movie I'd say that it was a fake... but I was there and so were Dick and Al and we'll all vouch for the real thing here.



posted on Sep, 25 2011 @ 07:30 PM
link   
reply to post by SayonaraJupiter
 

I don't know.
But I do know that whenever I look at Saturn through a telescope it looks fake.
You already posted that. What's your point?

edit on 9/25/2011 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 25 2011 @ 07:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by SayonaraJupiter
 

I don't know.
But I do know that whenever I look at Saturn through a telescope it looks fake.
You already posted that. What's your point?

edit on 9/25/2011 by Phage because: (no reason given)


My point is when I look at Apollo through the lens of 20/20 history it looks fake.



posted on Sep, 26 2011 @ 06:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by syrinx high priest

Originally posted by syrinx high priest

Originally posted by SayonaraJupiter

Originally posted by syrinx high priest
what do you make of big muley ? what about the zaps ?


Fake and faker?


based on what exactly. can you document the study done on muley specifically that came to that conclusion ? and of course I'm sure it is a peer reviewed study, and not a youtube video.


sayonara ? foos ?

why everybody ignore muley ?

you no like muley ?



Wasnt ignored, was discussed awhile back:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

www.abovetopsecret.com...

www.abovetopsecret.com...

www.abovetopsecret.com...

www.abovetopsecret.com...

www.abovetopsecret.com...

www.abovetopsecret.com...


so has JW:





The samples that contain such ferric iron include not only the rusty rocks 66095 and 67455, but also the famous sample 61016 or "Big Muley". This sample has frequently been cited by propagandists as evidence for Apollo, and yet it contains the copious amounts of ferric iron they claim is absent!


It would be nice if you could at least look at JW's video regarding Big Muley and explain how you think it can be debunked. Or show where JW is wrong.



posted on Sep, 26 2011 @ 06:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by DJW001
reply to post by FoosM
 



Its the other missions that seem to be eluding us.


You can't say they're eluding you if you're not actually looking for them.



Well I guess you found them right? Post 'em if you got 'em.

At any rate, these things after 40 years, and the growth of the internet, should not be difficult to find.
A quick google search or even youtube search should allow any normal tax payer to gain access to these public records. In other words, this should not require, the average citizen, to make special requests to NASA, or time consuming deep searches. They are press conferences videos, for gods sakes, meant to be shared for the public, for what the US claimed is the most significant achievement of man. Especially not finding one for Apollo 17, the last mission, is truly suspect.



posted on Sep, 26 2011 @ 07:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by SayonaraJupiter

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by SayonaraJupiter
 

I don't know.
But I do know that whenever I look at Saturn through a telescope it looks fake.
You already posted that. What's your point?

edit on 9/25/2011 by Phage because: (no reason given)


My point is when I look at Apollo through the lens of 20/20 history it looks fake.


He completely contradicts all those Apollogists, Propagandists, or what have you, that claim that the Apollo footage looks so authentic, more real than modern special effects. LOL.



posted on Sep, 26 2011 @ 09:13 AM
link   
reply to post by SayonaraJupiter
 



My point is when I look at Apollo through the lens of 20/20 history it looks fake.


Perhaps the problem is that you are looking at it entirely through secondary sources. You were not alive at the time so you did not experience it first hand. Incidentally, you are not looking at it through "20/20 history," you are looking at it through the haze of your own preconceived beliefs. There is no genuine historian alive who would consider such an extensively documented and witnessed series of events as anything but genuine.



new topics

top topics



 
377
<< 579  580  581    583  584  585 >>

log in

join