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: 637
377
<< 634  635  636    638  639  640 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 1 2011 @ 03:20 AM
link   
reply to post by SayonaraJupiter
 


I hope that many will take the time to check out this post, and follow the highlighted links within.

Because, once the *audience* make the effort to actually review the posts of member SayonaraJupiter, then the audience will begin to detect the contradictions present, in the variety of posts that encompass this member's "body of work" here on ATS.

Really, as I post this right now....I am reminded of a few recent posts that stand on record. . . as I scull up...^ ^ ^




posted on Nov, 1 2011 @ 03:23 AM
link   
reply to post by ProudBird
 



Because, once the *audience* make the effort to actually review the posts of member SayonaraJupiter, then the audience will begin to detect the contradictions present, in the variety of posts that encompass this member's "body of work" here on ATS.


Mate this isn't a Broadway Show..

It's "us" members debating a topic..

What's with this "audience" crap trap??

You pushing for an Academy Award or something?



posted on Nov, 1 2011 @ 03:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by SayonaraJupiter

Originally posted by JohnnySasaki
reply to post by FoosM
 


Dude, obvious troll is obvious. You're embarrassing yourself, and that's pretty hard to do online. Just give it a break and admit we went to the moon already.


The problem is (and you are going to slap yourself when you figure this out) but here it is:

FoosM didn't go to the Moon. Neither did you. Therefore neither Foosm nor yourself can ever know for certain about this question except for gathering information about it. Think about it.

There were only 12 Apostles and one of them believes that Roswell was a government cover-up.



The same guy brought a camera back from the Moon (the same exact camera that filmed the last 5 minutes of the A14 lunar landing.) and NASA went after him like he was a criminal because that exact camera was meant to be destroyed in the LEM when it crashed back to the surface of the moon.

After some negotiations Ed Mitchell has decided to surrender the DAC 16-mm camera to NASA.
www.cbsnews.com...


(Space.com) Apollo astronaut Edgar Mitchell has decided to give up the camera he kept as a memento of his 1971 moon mission rather than face a federal lawsuit over its ownership.
In a settlement he reached with the U.S. government filed with the District Court in southern Florida on Thursday (Oct. 27), the sixth man to walk on the moon agreed to "relinquish all claims of ownership, legal title, or dominion" over the data acquisition camera that flew with him aboard NASA's Apollo 14 mission.



The camera will be handed over to the NASM (National Air and Space Museum) and we will probably ... never see it again and this camera will never take another picture again.

NASA seems to be going to extra-ordinary lengths to seize anything related to Apollo project. Just the other day we heard about NASA attacking an old granny for a few micrograms of moon rocks. And don't forget NASA fired 4 astronauts for trading in postal covers to stamp collectors!

Why has NASA gone to such great lengths to control the Apollo artifacts? Why has NASA gone to such great lengths to control the mythology? Why has NASA created this m y t h o l o g y ?
edit on 11/1/2011 by SayonaraJupiter because: add a little text from the cbs article


I believe in the possibility of an alien cover up, and I believe NASA probably has something to hide (maybe something they saw on the moon, who knows), but I don't need to have gone to the moon to realize faking the moon landing would be a hell of a lot harder than actually going there, especially since we can see the landing site from earth.

Keep in mind, there's a sh*t load of people that are involved in the mission other than the 12 astronauts that walked on the moon. There's literally everyone at NASA that helps prepare for the mission, all the people at mission control during the mission, all the personnel in the Navy that recovered the capsule, etc. Also keep in mind, you need to multiply that by all the Apollo missions (17), even the one's that just circled the moon and didn't land, or the ones that caught fire on the launch pad (apollo 1) etc.

Now take into consideration all the people that would have needed to develop a fake landing site, fake all the pictures, co-ordinate all the fake hustle and bustle to make everything seem real, fake disasters like Apollo 1 and 13, etc etc.

That's a lot of people that are in the loop that need to be kept quiet, and seemingly have, don't you think? It's hard enough keeping the usual top secret material under wraps without people's morals getting in the way. Also think of all the Russian spies inside NASA they would have to fool as well.

And on top of all that, where did all those moon rocks come from?



posted on Nov, 1 2011 @ 03:36 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Nov, 1 2011 @ 03:40 AM
link   
reply to post by Komodo
 


yes LOX [ liquid oxygen ] simply needs to be allowed to boil - voila - instant gaseous O2



posted on Nov, 1 2011 @ 03:43 AM
link   
OK, let's cut it out.

The thread may be "a big thread". That doesn't mean we need to make this personal.

On topic or nothing at all.

Thank you.



posted on Nov, 1 2011 @ 03:51 AM
link   
It's sad to say that what we once thought was our greatest achievement (mankind) turned out to be a gigantic lie. The Van Allen Belt, The flag waving, the multiple shadows etc. etc.. Too much fact and evidence to dismiss.
The US establishment was desperate to beat the Russians to space. So desperate they faked it. And just think about all that money that NASA received only to return a wooden nickel. Lots of people profited from the phony space program.

SNAFUBAR

Peace



posted on Nov, 1 2011 @ 03:52 AM
link   
NASA cheerleaders are supporting a CIA mythology!



Farouk El-Baz www.jsc.nasa.gov...


and Dick [Richard W.] Underwood was the photo man at NASA. He was from the CIA [Central Intelligence Agency] but joined NASA.





posted on Nov, 1 2011 @ 03:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by MasseyFerguson49
It's sad to say that what we once thought was our greatest achievement (mankind) turned out to be a gigantic lie. The Van Allen Belt, The flag waving, the multiple shadows etc. etc.. Too much fact and evidence to dismiss.
The US establishment was desperate to beat the Russians to space. So desperate they faked it. And just think about all that money that NASA received only to return a wooden nickel. Lots of people profited from the phony space program.

SNAFUBAR

Peace


How about you go back and read some of this thread before you make such claims after we were just done debunking these. The Van Allen Belt and the flag waving have been explained in depth, and I have personally debunked the multiple shadows theory just a couple pages ago.

So please don't come in here screaming up is down after we just got done explaining the contrary. It will save you a lot of embarrassment.

Thanks.



posted on Nov, 1 2011 @ 04:02 AM
link   
reply to post by JohnnySasaki
 



How about you go back and read some of this thread before you make such claims after we were just done debunking these. The Van Allen Belt and the flag waving have been explained in depth, and I have personally debunked the multiple shadows theory just a couple pages ago.

So please don't come in here screaming up is down after we just got done explaining the contrary. It will save you a lot of embarrassment.


I'll give you the shadow debunking but the rest of the time it's mostly just others giving a different opinion..

That does NOT equate to the subject being debunked IMO...



posted on Nov, 1 2011 @ 04:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by SayonaraJupiter
NASA cheerleaders are supporting a CIA mythology!



Farouk El-Baz www.jsc.nasa.gov...


and Dick [Richard W.] Underwood was the photo man at NASA. He was from the CIA [Central Intelligence Agency] but joined NASA.




I support the possibility of an airbrushed photo, or the lack of releasing a photo, here and there. Yes.

Oh, and don't bother responding to the other, meaningful, part of my post btw. Just like everyone else. As soon as I say something that makes sense, people steer clear and respond to the first thing they can find that weasels their way around the truth.



posted on Nov, 1 2011 @ 04:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by JohnnySasaki

Originally posted by MasseyFerguson49
It's sad to say that what we once thought was our greatest achievement (mankind) turned out to be a gigantic lie. The Van Allen Belt, The flag waving, the multiple shadows etc. etc.. Too much fact and evidence to dismiss.
The US establishment was desperate to beat the Russians to space. So desperate they faked it. And just think about all that money that NASA received only to return a wooden nickel. Lots of people profited from the phony space program.

SNAFUBAR

Peace


How about you go back and read some of this thread before you make such claims after we were just done debunking these. The Van Allen Belt and the flag waving have been explained in depth, and I have personally debunked the multiple shadows theory just a couple pages ago.

So please don't come in here screaming up is down after we just got done explaining the contrary. It will save you a lot of embarrassment.

Thanks.



Who are you? And where did you do all this debunking?
Im curious how you debunked the flag waving bit.

And this recent video:

Where supposedly the astronaut made 18 photos while doing this pan.



posted on Nov, 1 2011 @ 04:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by SayonaraJupiter

Originally posted by Aloysius the Gaul
reply to post by Komodo
 


Apollo didn't use "air" - the astronauts breathed a pure oxygen atmosphere at 5 psi.


It depends what phase of the mission and which mission you are talking about. Right DJ?

100% oxygen not during the launch phase. It was a nitrogen/oxygen mixture during launch phase. A consideration made after the Apollo 1 accident.


Yes they went to 60% O2 and 40% N2 - it vented to atmosphere on ascent, and the vent closed at 5psi - then the atmosphere was purged over the next day so the amount of N2 fell "asymptotically" to zero - see command module redesign after Apollo 1


After LEO is attained everything changes to 100% oxygen - including the trans-lunar and lunar landing phases. All 100% oxygen. All the way back to Earth....


Yep - glad you agree then went to the moon and landed



posted on Nov, 1 2011 @ 04:15 AM
link   
reply to post by JohnnySasaki
 



especially since we can see the landing site from earth.


Really???

you have a link to that info??



posted on Nov, 1 2011 @ 04:25 AM
link   
reply to post by MasseyFerguson49
 



The Van Allen Belt....


Already addressed in this thread....NEXT?!


The flag waving....


Oh dear......really? Back in the 1980s are you? NEXT?!



.... the multiple shadows etc. etc..




Please see above ^ ^ ^....NEXT?!
edit on Tue 1 November 2011 by ProudBird because: STET



posted on Nov, 1 2011 @ 04:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by ProudBird
reply to post by MasseyFerguson49
 


The Van Allen Belt....

Already addressed in this thread....NEXT?!

The flag waving....

Oh dear......really? Back int he 1980s are you? NEXT?!

.... the multiple shadows etc. etc..

Please see above ^ ^ ^....NEXT?!
edit on Tue 1 November 2011 by ProudBird because: very bad BB code skills......better next time, just as the Apollo deniers need to bring their better game....fail, so far....


Yes they have been "addressed" but only a fool would say they have been debunked..

Opinions have been given and that's about all..

Fact is there really isn't enough information available, especially from back then..

Next.........



posted on Nov, 1 2011 @ 04:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by backinblack
reply to post by JohnnySasaki
 



especially since we can see the landing site from earth.


Really???

you have a link to that info??






posted on Nov, 1 2011 @ 04:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by JohnnySasaki

Originally posted by backinblack
reply to post by JohnnySasaki
 



especially since we can see the landing site from earth.

Really???
you have a link to that info??



Man you really need to read up a little before pretending to know what you are talking about..
Those pics were taken in lunar orbit, NOT from Earth...


Edit: And even then they had to be "heavily enhanced" to actually see the detail...
edit on 1-11-2011 by backinblack because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 1 2011 @ 05:01 AM
link   
ok - my oxygen calculations

assumptions - SAC [ respiratory rate ] = 20 litre per minuite [ this is a aggregate value - to cover the realities of the apollo mission profile , where actual SAC will vary from < 6 [ sleeping ] to > 50 [ arduous EVA tasks ]]

oxygen consumption equals

20 [ SAC ] *
0.05 [ oxygen metabolism ] *
1440 [ minuites / day ]
3 [ number of astronauts ] *
12 [ days of mission [ max ]] =

51840 litres total consumption for a apollo mission

now the " interesting bit " - which i am unsure of , the above equation further assumes 101 kpa atmosphere , BUT the apollo mission had a pressure of :

CM / LEM = 35
EVA SUIT = 26

now due to the peculiarites of ideal gas laws and the reality of gases under different pressures - it requires more than just a simple multiplication to calculate the exact value ]

but using the simple calc [ a multiplier of 3.31 ] , gives a total consumption of

171590 litres . for the entire mission

simples

PS - lithium hydroxide " scrubbers " removed the metabolised CO2 , so oxygen ould ony need to be added to maintain pressure

Aloysius the gaul has already given us the LOX capacity of the apollo missions - and if you account for the necessity to purge nitrogen post luanch , plus an emergency reserve

the figures are compatible



posted on Nov, 1 2011 @ 05:04 AM
link   
reply to post by backinblack
 



Edit: And even then they had to be "heavily enhanced" to actually see the detail...


PLEASE support that assertion, in that particular case.....

BTW...good luck!




new topics

top topics



 
377
<< 634  635  636    638  639  640 >>

log in

join