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 grizzle2
if you buy into LC claims, doesn't it require you to accept the NASA photos as legit? Hard to resolve one aspect and discount the other, no?
Nope. From earlier in this thread:
"I have to believe now, after much looking into it, that we went, but not in that aluminium soup can and linen/aluminum foil suits with no radiation shielding.
I think most or all of the footage and pics we've been shown are fakes or heavily altered. I definitely believe there is life on the moon."
Emphasis on the "heavily altered" part here. There's just no way they could have survived the various types of radiation in those craft made of thin aluminum, nor could they have walked around on the radioactive moon in linen suits with aluminum foil sewed in. That part is definitely BS. I think we went, just not in the way they said. They had to have some other kind of technology to deal with the radiation. What it is, I don't know, but I can say for sure it's not "neutron resistant foil".
Originally posted by cheri2012
reply to post by weedwhacker
all I can say is my dad is an ex-navy seal and he said he has seen the evidence and yes we did go to the moon. he says it is not fake.
Originally posted by ItsEvolutionBaby
Ever hear about Stanley Kubrick and the filming of 2001 A Space Odyssey - the movie was released in 1968... and its likely relationship to some of those Apollo moon shots we saw?
Check this out for a little trip down "memory" lane---
www.kubrick2001.com...
Originally posted by loves a conspiricy
Originally posted by cushycrux
Originally posted by Mister_Bit
Actually, looking at the "C" picture again, isn't that a footprint in the lower right corner? Now scale that "eyelash" to the scale of the footprint....
That's somekind of massive eyelash!
OHHH MAN! IT IS ON THE FILM NOT ON THE STONE!edit on 4-4-2011 by cushycrux because: (no reason given)
How can it be on the film???? How did the film survive the radiation and take perfect pictures?? Look at pics from Chernobyl....all grainy because the radiation messed with the film....yet on the surface of the moon where radiation is many times more extreme the film stayed perfect. The manufactures of the camera said the ONLY modification on the camera was that it had a cartridge fed film. There was nothing added to stop radiation. Even the buttons were standard....yet the pics were perfect...bulllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll&*&%
Its Bull without a doubt. Theres NO way we ever went to the moon.
Think about this.....the shuttle goes 400 miles and requires SRB and 1.7 million KG of fuel.....how far is the moon? 240,000 miles or so.....how did a rocket get there and back with so little fuel??
How did the astronaut's dock the lander with the rocket travelling at 4000mph, with the computing power of a calculator??
How did the space suits cool the astronaut's in the 250c sunlight? And warm them in the -150c shade??
They allegedly used batteries....to power their life support for 3 days along as all the other equipment they took. hmmmm what kind of batteries were available in 69 that could achieve this? How did they get round the fact they were in a vacuum and normal thermal dynamics dont work?
Im a firm believer it was faked because russia had managed to launch a satellite and the US wanted to show that it was more technologically advanced....whereas it was an elaborate hoax that has/had fooled billions of people.
WW, I can just picture him centuries ago arguing that the world is flat.
**ON "education". Vital that what is told to you is the TRUTH, and ACCURATE. "Hoax" pushers skew what they say,
purposely.....in other words, they LIE through their teeth, to keep their charade going....
....here's an example. Imagine an experiment where you (or others reading this) were told, when young, utterly wrong things about history, math and
other sciences information?? Brainwashed, in manner of saying. AND, this false info could be readily found to be incorrect, IF you took the effort
to investigate more on your own. But, it was easier to just "believe" what some told you, based on how it was presented....and the ease with which it
was "acquired", or "imparted" to you.
PROPAGANDA. BAD science. (Heck....lump "religion" into that mix....that is a topic that is wholly based on "faith", and has no empirical evidence to
support it. BUT, look how fervently many will fight, to the death, over conflicting "beliefs".)**
Originally posted by loves a conspiricy
reply to post by cushycrux
What exactly are you trying to prove fro your pics?? Are you saying that because these 2 images match that we went to the moon?
We may have observed the surface of the moon, im not questioning that, im stating that the moon landing (manned) never happened. As for the things on the moon....it wouldnt be unrealistic to assume they were dropped there by unmanned crafts...they bombed the moon a few years back, so dropping off a lunar buggy wouldnt be too hard.
Explain how the pics were unaffected by the huge amounts of radiation?????
Explain how they cooled themselves in 250c heat????
Explain how they traveled 500,000 miles with a little bit more fuel than the shuttle????
Explain how they docked at 4000mph with a computer that is equivalent to a calculator????
Explain how cross hatches appear behind objects when they are part of the lens????
Explain the multiple light sources used...to illuminate the guys coming out of the lander etc????
Theres too many things wrong with the whole moon landing.
Why have we never returned? Aliens...nah.....tight governments....nah.....we know all we need to know....nah....we never went because of radiation etc
Originally posted by cushycrux
There is no air resistance in space and how many times should I post this pics he???!
edit on 4-4-2011 by cushycrux because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by Fedge
Originally posted by cushycrux
There is no air resistance in space and how many times should I post this pics he???!
edit on 4-4-2011 by cushycrux because: (no reason given)
So you are comparing computer generated picture with the older pictures... hmmm
What makes you think that they delivered the right pictures to you ? You know, normally when you lie you tend to provide stuff that goes accordingly to it.
Apollo pictures have been tampered, you just have to open your eyes.
The why is another question.edit on 4-4-2011 by Fedge because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by loves a conspiricy
reply to post by cushycrux
Oh sorry i thought you were some sort of expert or astronaut....my mistake
I dont need to read a load of threads to know it was faked, these are just a few of my questions that cannot be explained.
Originally posted by snewpers
Is the jaxa-selene elevation data really that accurate?
I wanted to install the sw that generates those images but was warned that it could fuggup my system... so I didn't
I assume that you can set the point of view in that app to match any other shot taken on the moon?
Originally posted by loves a conspiricy
Explain how the pics were unaffected by the huge amounts of radiation?????
Explain how they cooled themselves in 250c heat????
Explain how they traveled 500,000 miles with a little bit more fuel than the shuttle????
Explain how they docked at 4000mph with a computer that is equivalent to a calculator????
Explain how cross hatches appear behind objects when they are part of the lens????
Explain the multiple light sources used...to illuminate the guys coming out of the lander etc????