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.
Originally posted by jra
Originally posted by SayonaraJupiter
Just wait until the Japanese, Chinese, Indians get their machines on the moon. Then there will be a proper scientific investigation of the moon. NASA's fake moon rocks will no longer hold scientific or monetary value.
You sound pretty sure of that. What will you say when they confirm the authenticity of the Apollo and former Soviet Union samples?
Originally posted by FoosM
Originally posted by SayonaraJupiter
Originally posted by DJW001
In other words, faced with a pressing need for materiel, someone at Goddard did what quartermasters have been doing since the time of the Roman Legions: misappropriate government property to satisfy the immediate need of his unit. The tapes are no doubt in storage somewhere, but they've been written over with Landsat telemetry.
So somebody decided that Landsat tapes were more important than Apollo tapes and who could that be?
Richard Nafzger, Michael Collins or Noel W. Hinners?
They built archives for the Apollo missions and we are to believe the couldn't store these tapes.
We are also to believe that NASA became so broke they had to recycle the tapes.
We are also to believe that the data on these tapes was not considered important for scientists to study?
Its quite frankly a bunch of bologna.
It's true. They did build an archive. John Sarkissian at Parkes, who led the primary investigation says that ALL the Apollo telemetry tapes were sent to Accession #69A4099.
The engineers boxed the one-inch telemetry tapes wound onto 14-inch canister reels-which served no other purpose than to provide backup if the live relay failed-and shipped them to the Goddard Space Flight Center. From there, the tapes were sent to the Washington National Records Center (WRNC) in Suitland, Md.
There is only one way to solve the problem of space radiation and that's to have a probe launched from earth with a dozen radiation instruments on it, and to have that probe simulate the exact trajectories of Apollo 11-17. And then we can all peer review that radiation data.
Are you saying that no-one has collected any radiation data? Seriously?
Have they followed the same flight paths as the Apollo missions ??
Originally posted by DJW001
reply to post by backinblack
Have they followed the same flight paths as the Apollo missions ??
Can you step in the same river twice?
Now you are saying those charts are mere guess work??
Are they a "real" representation or not ??
So to sum up, the charts used in this thread were baloney.
I think we get to measure currents a lot more often than radiation outside earths orbit...
We also don't make a chart that shows Apollo "JUST" skirting the edges of dangerous currents..
The radiation chart was crap and you know it.
Until then, Apollo is a hoax from Low Earth Orbit.
Yet the 'contaminated' moon rocks were still verified by dozens of countries including the USSR. Odd.
Originally posted by FoosM
Originally posted by SayonaraJupiter
I think if the vacuum chamber and vacuum glove were compromised then the lunar samples were probably contaminated. Good Job NASA... went all the way to the moon to bring back potentially lethal untested moon rocks that could have wiped out the human race...
Ok, I got it, up to 20 people were exposed to lunar dust,
but conversely those events meant that they had an excuse to claim the lunar dust/samples were contaminated by our environment.
So making a pop-culture joke by way of (valid) comparison is the lowest standard, while HBs repeatedly sticking their fingers in their ears and going 'la-la' while spamming the threat with pics, videos, and copy-pasted text they don't understand is just fine?
Originally posted by smurfy
reply to post by SayonaraJupiter
I never posted on this thread because I do think that 'the kid' is woefully subjective in parts, (the use of a vomit comet for instance) while other 'no moon landings' ideas have the Apollo 11 in near earth orbit, so makes no sense. Now we have not so subtle Frankie goes to hollywood references from someone I thought might have a better standard. This place is a den, and a thread with 600 pages has now found the lowest common denominator.
Or it could be a piece of government property and a valuable part of history that Mitchell may have taken home without authorization.
Originally posted by SayonaraJupiter
You know that 16-mm DAC that Edgar Mitchell brought back from the moon??
You know that 16-mm DAC that was supposed to be destroyed in the LM after the mission was complete?
NASA want's that camera so bad they are going to jury trial. Could this camera hold secrets?
Unsupported assertion.
Originally posted by SayonaraJupiter
Originally posted by ProudBird
It requires a full set of life experience to properly comprehend the full reality of the space program, and Apollo in particular.
The reality of the Apollo program is that it was full of spooks (CIA).
Who is asking you to believe all of those, exactly?
Originally posted by FoosM
They built archives for the Apollo missions and we are to believe the couldn't store these tapes.
We are also to believe that NASA became so broke they had to recycle the tapes.
We are also to believe that the data on these tapes was not considered important for scientists to study?
Its quite frankly a bunch of bologna.
1. What, no evidence of the Freemasons?
Originally posted by FoosM
THREE HORSES
ew4e9475a7.jpg
[stuff]
Very interesting indeed.
Could one postulate that the Apollo 11 crew, in silent protest, kept their names off due to the fact they knew it was fake? And that the Apollo 13 crew, who actually knew in their storyline that they were not going to officially land, kept their names off in protest?
genedorr.com...
They have, and confirmed NASA's results.
Originally posted by SayonaraJupiter
Just wait until the Japanese, Chinese, Indians get their machines on the moon.
If they don't have the real ones to compare to, how does anyone know it's fake?
Researches have been looking at the same fake moon rocks for 40 years now.
Originally posted by SayonaraJupiter
You know that 16-mm DAC that Edgar Mitchell brought back from the moon??
You know that 16-mm DAC that was supposed to be destroyed in the LM after the mission was complete?
NASA want's that camera so bad they are going to jury trial. Could this camera hold secrets?
Who cares if he kept one of NASA's cameras as a souvenir. He deserved it, and most of us would have done the same thing.
Evidently NASA cares. The space agency discovered that the British auction house Bonhams planned to sell the camera at an upcoming Space History Sale. According to Reuters, the item was labeled "Movie Camera from the Lunar Surface" and billed as one of two cameras from the lunar trip. The lot description also identified the camera as the property of pilot Edgar Mitchell and sported a pre-sale estimate of $60,000 to $80,000.
Apollo 14 carried a number of cameras for collecting data and recording various aspects of the mission. Two 70-millimeter still cameras with multiple lenses, one 16-millimeter camera with four lenses, and the Lunar Topographic camera were carried on the command module. The landing module carried two 70-millimeter cameras with 60-millimeter lenses, two 16-millimeter cameras (one with a 10-millimeter lens and one with a 5-millimeter lens), and the 35-millimeter lunar surface close-up stereoscopic camera.
16-millimeter Maurer Data Acquisition Camera (DAC). Apollo 14 carried [color=gold]three Maurer Data Acquisition Cameras (DAC), [color=gold]one in the CM and two in the LM.
Dismissing the question without answering, I note. The question isn't about what he measured, but about two contradictory claims.
Originally posted by SayonaraJupiter
None of that matters DJ. If Kovalev got his data from Monte Carlo simulations, then, in theory, he hasn't measured anything at all.
SJ, given your behavior here, you couldn't peer review the results. You couldn't peer-review a ham sandwich. NASA's results have been picked over and reviewed for literally decades, but apparently that's not enough for you. What's to stop you from claiming the results are faked, like you claim every single piece of evidence from every single Apollo mission was?
There is only one way to solve the problem of space radiation and that's to have a probe launched from earth with a dozen radiation instruments on it, and to have that probe simulate the exact trajectories of Apollo 11-17. And then we can all peer review that radiation data.
Until then, Apollo is a hoax from Low Earth Orbit.
"Magic" is not an acceptable answer.
Originally posted by Ove38
Originally posted by DJW001
reply to post by Ove38
This is really silly, you know how they did it.
I thought they did it by building the sets on an angle.
Wires, sets on angle, spotlights, dummies, slow motion, scotch tape, models, transparencies, airbrushing, superimposing, you name it, they did it all.