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: 648
377
<< 645  646  647    649  650  651 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 8 2011 @ 07:07 AM
link   
one more thing to add, i would love to see a poll attached to this thread. People like myself who have been following this from page one could vote to say whether they agreed with either side and options could be added to state if their position had been swayed at all by the posts pro and against the landings.

Myself, i would answer that i sort of accepted it as true from the start (never thought about it being faked really) but this thread has convinced me even more that there is NO cover up. And thats not meant as any disrespect to foosm or others on the fake landing side, it just means they havent convinced me to alter my beliefs. In my very humble opinion. this thread has succeeded in acheiving the boards motto, deny ignorance.




posted on Nov, 8 2011 @ 07:44 AM
link   
reply to post by SayonaraJupiter
 



DJW001 is trying to make the argument that Apollo 13 temperature sensors were turned off to save power but looking at the newspaper articles and the tables seems to dispute that to, cough , to certain degree.


On the contrary, the article is full confirmation! We know from this chart that that instruments were turned on five times, and that the temperature fell consistently each time a measurement was taken:



history.nasa.gov...

Apollo 13 was launched at 19.13 UT on April 11, 1970. Your article was published on April 16, 1970, five days into the mission. Since we don't know whether it was a morning or an evening newspaper (back in the day, some newspapers put out as many as three editions!) we cannot say for certain which of the readings the NASA engineers are sharing with the press, but most likely it was measurement 3, taken at Ground Elapsed Time 102:00, or four days and six hours into the mission, in other words on April 16, 2:13 UT. The measurement in the table agrees with the figure cited in the newspaper article. (52 degrees F)

Further, if you had read the entire article, you would he seen this:


While the cabin grew frosty, equipment and electronics gear between between the cabin wall and the outside spacecraft skin was subjected to bitter cold.


www.abovetopsecret.com...

Due to radiative heat loss to outer space, of course. Now, where were those hot dogs of yours kept again?
edit on 8-11-2011 by DJW001 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 8 2011 @ 09:44 AM
link   
AGAIN.... I ask (and digress)... Why is this thread STILL even active??

Do any of you that are STILL going on and on and ON, about this nonsense, have ANY sense of pride or accomplishment of your own country (that is, if you're not some foreigner, who's butt-sore that the United States was the first to step foot on the Moon, and your country hasn't...).


People, grow up - Take off your tin-foil hat, step out of your mothers basement, and visit a museum, for the love of God.










.
edit on 11/8/2011 by weavty1 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 8 2011 @ 11:00 AM
link   
reply to post by FoosM
 


?????


How did they record the sound?




Be specific, I cannot read your mind.

How did who record what sound?



posted on Nov, 8 2011 @ 11:24 AM
link   
reply to post by FoosM
 


Utter fail. And, how arrogantly smug.....but, completely wrong!!


I think we have shown that the science that supports Apollo is pretty much shoddy and unvalidated.


"....shown that the science that supports .... is *pretty much* "shoddy...."?!

"...unvalidated..."??!!

"Pretty much"? Is that in any way related to "pretty please"?

Most of you lot wouldn't know science if it walked up and shook your hand.......


But, no....what 'you' (the collective..... not specifically the person being addressed) only know is, like the laughingly inane and foolish Jarrah White, how to spin and twist and cherry-pick and ultimately lie to yourselves, in the delusions that are held, in order to feel "satisfied" that a long-held *belief* is not wrong.

Because, ego cannot accept that the actual evidence, and yes backed up by solid, demonstrable science, proves beyond any shadow of doubt that those loony beliefs are wrong. Therefore, the mind has to find any way it can to manipulate what it reads, in order to lie to itself and protect the id.

I've been searching for the proper psychological description of this malady....I saw it mentioned on ATS once, but have forgotten where It was posted........






edit on Tue 8 November 2011 by ProudBird because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 8 2011 @ 02:27 PM
link   
reply to post by ProudBird
 


Cognitive dissonance????



posted on Nov, 8 2011 @ 02:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by FoosM

Originally posted by expatwhite

Love this thread, as a neutral its really informative, but Foos etc, ive gotta be honest, every single thing you guys come up with with gets shot down with science. I admire your determination and the fact you stick to your guns, but sooner or later you have to learn to admit you were wrong on something and move on in life.



I will of course have to disagree with you. I think we have shown that the science that supports Apollo is pretty much shoddy and unvalidated. And that the people behind the science are suspect. I do admit there have been some occasions were we have barked up the wrong tree, but then again, in many other areas we have found anomalies and contradictions that simply can not be explained away conclusively by science. I will provide a few more those in the near future.


"Shoddy." "Unvalidated." That's two.
And I'll add a third descriptor. "Bought and Paid for."
And the little detail of $41,000,000 in NASA grants that NASA paid out in grant money for scientists to examine the "moon rocks" between 1969-1979.



posted on Nov, 8 2011 @ 02:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by ProudBird
reply to post by FoosM
 


?????


How did they record the sound?




Be specific, I cannot read your mind.

How did who record what sound?



How should I know who?
The video you posted was of film (16mm) footage during the LM ascent.
On the video you can hear what is occurring during the launch.
Since the material is on film. How did they record the sound?



posted on Nov, 8 2011 @ 03:00 PM
link   
reply to post by FoosM
 



The video you posted was of film (16mm) footage during the LM ascent.
On the video you can hear what is occurring during the launch.
Since the material is on film. How did they record the sound?


This has been explained before. In fact, wasn't you (or SJ?) who once (or multiple times?) posted a video or two by YouTuber "LunaCognita"? He ("Luna") mentions how he synced the silent DAC film footage to match them to the sound recordings of the radio communications from the missions....recordings that are archived.

Doesn't it occur to you that the person who uploaded that other YouTube video (or any of the others) could do the same thing???



posted on Nov, 8 2011 @ 03:21 PM
link   
reply to post by SayonaraJupiter
 



And I'll add a third descriptor. "Bought and Paid for."
And the little detail of $41,000,000 in NASA grants that NASA paid out in grant money for scientists to examine the "moon rocks" between 1969-1979.


So now you're claiming that lunar research scientists were bribed to lie about their research. Excellent, since they are so corrupt, you should be able to bribe one to spill the beans. Maybe Jarrah can put out some of that money he's been soliciting for his private "Moon flight!"



posted on Nov, 8 2011 @ 05:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by SayonaraJupiter
Jarrah is discussing the lack of plume on the ascent module during lunar liftoff. Uploaded by WhiteJarrah on Oct
And Jarrah's response to questions about it.



Well Im glad JW covered some of the questions raised.
I also wanted to point out that the tests done were done on Earth were done in a vacuum chamber.
So the vacuum could not be the sole reason for not seeing the plume during the ascent, since we can basically see the plume during the tests.




posted on Nov, 8 2011 @ 06:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by FoosM I think we have shown that the science that supports Apollo is pretty much shoddy and unvalidated.




This would be more accurate:

"I think we have shown that the non science that supports Jarrah White is pretty much shoddy and invalidated".

edit on 8-11-2011 by Logical one because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 9 2011 @ 01:40 AM
link   
reply to post by DJW001
 


Do the math DJW. The grant money paid by NASA and given to scientists during the1969-1979 time period represents a significant investment toward the outcome of publishing scienctific reports that validate the "moon rock" claims of the funding agency, NASA.

That is the first 10 years of "moon rock" research in a nutshell. $41,000,000 is not an insignificant sum of money during the 1970's. The argument that "moon rock" scientists are objective has been busted.

You can't do science for NASA, be paid by NASA, and submit your reports to NASA, and be objective in any way.

$41,000,000.00 in 1970 had the same buying power as $238,364,429.71 in 2011.
Annual inflation over this period was 4.39%.
www.dollartimes.com...



posted on Nov, 9 2011 @ 01:53 AM
link   
reply to post by ProudBird
 


Please stay on topic and avoid psychoanalyzing the ATS members who have made significant contributions to the thread. Have you watched Jarrah White's Where's the Plume video yet?
Did you see the NASA patch with a plume?




posted on Nov, 9 2011 @ 01:54 AM
link   
Where do you get that figure of $41,000,000.00? Did I miss something? Also expecting scientist to work for free is bit odd. Especially when some of their hardware costs more than most people make in their entire lifetime.



posted on Nov, 9 2011 @ 02:14 AM
link   
reply to post by SayonaraJupiter
 


Oh, yes:


Have you watched Jarrah White's Where's the Plume video yet?


As usual, complete rubbish and nonsense. AS HAS BEEN pointed out, many many times already in this thread. Some hundreds of pages ago.....multiple times.

Jarrah White is "renowned" for repeating himself, too. He has made a "career" out of it.....and each time, he allows NO dissent. NO criticism. He allows NO ONE to properly address his lies and misconceptions. He *blithefully* repeats his idiocy, time and again......(*) I think Lewis Caroll had him (prophetically) in mind, when he wrote "Jabberwocky". (Perhaps, Mr. Caroll patterned his character, "The Mad Hatter" after Mr. White??).

(*For those in the audience less informed, here is the link: "Jabberwocky" is a nonsense verse poem written by Lewis Carroll in his 1872 novel Through the Looking-Glass, and What Alice Found There)



Did you see the NASA patch with a plume?


Hah!! Really? So what??

Ever heard of "art"??


Actually, saw when you posted it before....decided it wasn't worth commenting on then, it was so ridiculous an assertion and claim.....thought it was scraping the bottom of the barrel then....

But, by all means, keep scraping.....I hear there may be something of value down there; just keep digging......



posted on Nov, 9 2011 @ 02:24 AM
link   
So Frank Shakespeare, a former high ranking CBS executive, a rabid anti-Communist and 1968 campaign advisor to Richard Nixon ended up being Nixon's political appointee to the head office of the Unites States Information Agency (USIA) , it is America's in-house propaganda agency.

Did you know what day that Frank Shakespeare decided to leave his position at USIA? It just happened to be about the very last day that Apollo 17 was on the Moon. It was right about December 14, 1972.



The propaganda mission to beat the Russians was finally completed. Having won the propaganda victory with 6 lunar landings under his belt Nixon used Apollo to orchestrate his detente. Now there could be Apollo-Soyuz.

Frank Shakespeare had done his job well in the Apollo Propaganda Project and it was time for him to take a break from government and he goes straight over to Westinghouse.... the same company who made the TV cameras for Apollo.

This same Westinghouse company that was making millions of dollars of tax money for producing Black & White video cameras that were never used on Apollo. It was $7.7 Million dollars of b&w cameras.



edit to add large text for context:

Westinghouse Lunar Color Camera

Usage: Apollo 10 (CSM), Apollo 11 (CSM), Apollo 12, Apollo 13, Apollo 14, Apollo 15 (CSM), Apollo 16 (CSM), Apollo 17 (CSM)
Additional planned usage not implemented: Skylab Orbital Test flights prior to 1980. The ASTP cameras were modified to fly on the shuttle had the STS CCTV system not been available for the hoped 1979 maiden launch. by the time STS-1 flew the RCA CCTV system was already in place. (Crew Station Closed Circuit Television CCTV for Operational Flight Tests 08.06.1976)
Resolution: more than 200 TV lines (SEC sensor - 350 TV Lines in vertical dimension)
Scan rate: 59.94+ fields/s monochrome (color filters alternated between each field) / 29.97+ frame/s / 525 lines/fr / 15734.26+ lines/s
Color: Field-sequential color system camera
Bandwidth: Real 4.5 MHz / 2 MHz up to 3 MHz (transmitter limitation)
Sensor: Secondary-Electron-Conduction (SEC) Tube
Optics: 6x zoom, F/4 to F/44
This camera was based on the TV camera used on previous missions inside the CSM, with modifications to adapt it to the lunar environment.
During the early part of the first Apollo 12 EVA, the camera was inadvertently pointed at the Sun while preparing to mount it on the tripod. This action caused an overload in the secondary electron conduction tube (sensitive for low light conditions), rendering the camera useless for the remainder of the mission. The camera worked properly for about forty-two minutes. On later missions, while modifications were made to prevent such accidents, problems were encountered with image brightness and contrast (and sharpness – due to the camera overheating while stored, and operating in the MESA). Source en.wikipedia.org...


edit on 11/9/2011 by SayonaraJupiter because: add context



posted on Nov, 9 2011 @ 02:49 AM
link   
And the astros don't seem too concerned that they just destroyed a $100,000 Westinghouse color camera... what a joke...

edit on 11/9/2011 by SayonaraJupiter because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 9 2011 @ 03:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by PsykoOps
Where do you get that figure of $41,000,000.00? Did I miss something? Also expecting scientist to work for free is bit odd. Especially when some of their hardware costs more than most people make in their entire lifetime.


I was hoping that someone would ask that question so I could re-post this newspaper article AGAIN because I KNOW you people aren't really reading it from a standpoint of objectivity! Look at Paragraph 3.

edit on 11/9/2011 by SayonaraJupiter because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 9 2011 @ 03:17 AM
link   
reply to post by SayonaraJupiter
 



.... what a joke...


Indeed.

Oh? Oh, you meant something else? Sorry, I was focused on your post.....and many of the earlier ones.....


Gee, I guess it would be gauche (meaning, impolite) to mention that Astronaut Alan Bean (the "evil, evil man who was responsible for such a dastardly mistake") was quite embarrassed, and contrite afterwards.

Of course, for the "HOAX" believers.....this fits into their delusional fantasy views, HOW again???

The logic is missing.....or, am I just too stupid to see it?

But of course....let's completely ignore Alan Bean's contribution to (arguably) single-handedly SAVING the Apollo 12 mission, shortly after lift-off??

Here is an admittedly dramatic re-enactment filmed for the HBO series From The Earth To The Moon. ( I HIGHLY recommend this entire 12-part series, for anyone interested in learning the history of Apollo. It is FACT-based, while being written to be entertaining at the same time):



Of course, the video above was re-enacted based on ACTUAL EVENTS....that are readily researched online, oe in many, many books in print, and on the bookstore shelves, or in your local libraries....

Here is the story, a bit less dramatic (perhaps), but a fuller description....ALL a part of the historical record:

AeroSpaceWeb.org: Apollo 12 Lightning Strike


....Over the communication system, Aaron gave the command, "Flight, try SCE [Signal Condition Equipment] to Aux." Neither Pete Conrad aboard Apollo 12, flight director Griffin, nor the capsule communicator (CapCom) had any idea what this obscure command referred to. Luckily, Alan Bean remembered that the SCE switch was located near his seat and followed Aaron's instructions. The flight telemetry was restored in Mission Control moments later, and the ground engineers saw that the vehicle was still operating properly.....



Please try to keep up with the history of the Space Program. There is SO much to learn and absorb.......




top topics



 
377
<< 645  646  647    649  650  651 >>

log in

join