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.

 

Moon Hoax Question

page: 1
2

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 26 2011 @ 01:33 AM
link   
I have not been able to buy into the lunar landing being a hoax. However of all the "evidence" that purports it was faked there is one thing I cannot understand or reconcile in my puny brain cells. The fact that the lift off from the moon's surface was filmed with such accuracy seems too perfect. The official answer is simply that the camera watching the LEM leaving the surface was contolled from Earth.

Isn't that impossible? How in the world (or moon, as it were) would even today's best gamer be able to perfectly time the delay in transmitting directions to the camera in question. Maybe I'm off track or not sufficiently informed or educated in such things, but I scatch my head over it.

Help is always appreciated.




posted on Apr, 26 2011 @ 01:38 AM
link   
reply to post by samstone11
 


When discussing anything Apollo it is always worthwhile to mention which mission you are talking about specifically - please post a reference to the source material you are looking at. The odds are very likely that the mission you are talking about has been discussed to death. Don't worry.... the hordes of the ill informed are coming
I am merely the first of the vanguard of unwashed Apollo hordes that will visit your thread!



posted on Apr, 26 2011 @ 01:48 AM
link   
reply to post by SayonaraJupiter
 

Point taken. I am referring to Apollo 11 and it's liftoff being preserved on film. It isn't hard to find a copy of the film online or YouTube, and specifically what I am discussing is as the module seperates and blasts away from the surface, the camera somehow follows the ascending portion (ascent stage) carrying Armstrong and Aldrin in perfect sync. I question the ability to control that camera with that much accuracy by remote control after considering delays in transmissions.

Thanks for the help.



posted on Apr, 26 2011 @ 01:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by samstone11
I am referring to Apollo 11 and it's liftoff being preserved on film. It isn't hard to find a copy of the film online or YouTube, and specifically what I am discussing is as the module seperates and blasts away from the surface, the camera somehow follows the ascending portion (ascent stage) carrying Armstrong and Aldrin in perfect sync


The Apollo 11 liftoff from the moon was NOT filmed. Care to show us a link where that claim is made?



posted on Apr, 26 2011 @ 01:56 AM
link   
reply to post by dereks
 



The Apollo 11 liftoff from the moon was NOT filmed. Care to show us a link where that claim is made?



yes, he's got the number wrong..
Big deal..I'm guessing you know the ascent they are talking about...

Though it has been discussed to death..
The controller on earth merely estimated the ascent timing.....
I think it was a 2 second delay..Not a bad effort...



posted on Apr, 26 2011 @ 01:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by samstone11
The fact that the lift off from the moon's surface was filmed with such accuracy seems too perfect.




Ed Fendell did a crappy job. Go actually watch the videos. The last one, Apollo 17, was the only one that he actually did a good job with and kept the LEM in frame the whole time.
Apollo 17



posted on Apr, 26 2011 @ 02:07 AM
link   
reply to post by backinblack
 

You are correct. I humbly beg forgiveness for not researching the missions and their number designations before the post. I had just watched a video on another site and have long been aware of the conspiracy theories. This caused me to rush over here where I believe I can best trust the input of everyone involved to ask the question that was nagging at me personally. From what I am reading in the responses, it also seems to be in the realm of acceptance that a good engineer can approximate and time the delay well enough to get it right?

I have no problem with accepting ignorance, This will continue my lifelong education on personal mysteries.

Thanks for the time.



posted on Apr, 26 2011 @ 02:18 AM
link   
reply to post by samstone11
 


I do know this, if you look at the capsule leaving the moons surface, why is there no heat or flame and no dust even flies around at all. And what about the fact that theres no stars in the background of any photos or vid, no dust from the lunar vehicle, they only jump 18 inches off the ground in all footage, the legs of the lunar capsule had no debris on them after it landed on the moon they were perfectly clean, no good shots of earth from moon, even the fact that niel armstrong has only given 1 interview since the one he gave when they just got back. Just do some digging and you will find audio of one astronauts talking about not tripping over the cables, youtube footage where you can see wires or check out Bill Cooper he was a researcher on this



posted on Apr, 26 2011 @ 02:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by backinblack
reply to post by dereks
 



The Apollo 11 liftoff from the moon was NOT filmed. Care to show us a link where that claim is made?



yes, he's got the number wrong..
Big deal..I'm guessing you know the ascent they are talking about...

Though it has been discussed to death..
The controller on earth merely estimated the ascent timing.....
I think it was a 2 second delay..Not a bad effort...


unwashed hordes!!


I mean if people already know the answer it seems pretty cruel to withhold it.


Apollo 11, external view lunar liftoff was not filmed
Apollo 12, external view lunar liftoff was not filmed
Apollo 13, never landed
Apollo 14 external view lunar liftoff was not filmed
Apollo 15

Apollo 16
and

Apollo 17



posted on Apr, 26 2011 @ 04:29 AM
link   
reply to post by SayonaraJupiter
 


A[pollo 11 video: Any ideas about why the gold foil kept flapping around for several seconds after the module had left the scene? That should not be unless you want to say it had been heated by the rocket's exhaust and was reacting, flapping around, during the cooling which seems unlikely.



posted on Apr, 26 2011 @ 04:39 AM
link   
Hey - maybe the whole Moon is a hoax!

Could be a giant hologram projected from cloaked alien motherships that have been orbiting earth for thousands of years!

...Sorry, I usually don't indulge in fiction (intentionally) on this site. But this is too much.

I'm not sure it really matters much now. We never carried through (in public) with the "Moon Race" so it's become a big non-event in my mind (yes I was there to watch it live on TV!) regardless of where it actually happened.



posted on Apr, 30 2011 @ 08:28 AM
link   
reply to post by samstone11
 


watch the documetary called Dark side of the Moon. Stanley Kubricks widow has some intresting things to say along with a number of important people. Has anybody ever wonder why Nixon wasnt present at the actual lift off of appollo 11?


mw

posted on Jan, 31 2012 @ 07:05 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Feb, 25 2012 @ 03:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by canadiancatfoodforcrocadi
reply to post by samstone11
 


watch the documetary called Dark side of the Moon. Stanley Kubricks widow has some intresting things to say along with a number of important people. Has anybody ever wonder why Nixon wasnt present at the actual lift off of appollo 11?


I hate to be the one to break it to you, but "Dark Side of the Moon" is not a documentary, it is a mockumentary. It is a scripted work of fiction that was made to poke fun at people who believe in the moon hoax. If you watch the end credits it features the outtakes of people breaking character and basically laughing at the absurdity of what they're being asked to say. Not nearly as hilarious as a certain cab driver/convicted felon's Fox special, but still pretty funny.



posted on Feb, 25 2012 @ 04:11 PM
link   
I'll give these a shot, in order.


Originally posted by canadiancatfoodforcrocadi
reply to post by samstone11
 


I do know this, if you look at the capsule leaving the moons surface, why is there no heat or flame


Most of the visible plume you see from a launch at Cape Kennedy is steam (from the sound / shock suppression system) and smoke from the solid rocket boosters (this last obviously applies only to missions that *use* solid boosters). The actual exhaust plume from a liquid-fuel engine isn't that distinct even in atmosphere. Watch a video of the Gemini 6 launch, and notice how pale and small the visible plume from a Titan missile is, once it clears the liftoff cloud (see comment about sound suppression, above). The ascent engine on the LEM did have a plume (it's faintly visible on a couple of the flights, IIRC), but most of the time, it's too faint to be easily seen.



and no dust even flies around at all.


I split the 'dust' comment off. Listen to the audio from the Apollo 11 landing, and you'll hear Neil Armstrong's comment shortly before touchdown "Kicking up dust.". Remember, there isn't an atmosphere on the Moon (more correctly, no significant atmosphere). This has two effects where dust is concerned. It means that a dust particle that gets blown away has no air resistance to stop it from going a fair distance, and also means that once the descent engine had 'swept' the area where the LEM landed (remember the "kicking up dust" comment?), no new dust would be blown back into the area for the ascent engine to stir up.



And what about the fact that theres no stars in the background of any photos or vid,


This one's been done to death, and you can even see for yourself why they don't show. Go outside at night with a camera, and take a picture of the night sky on a moonless night. Now, have a friend shine a nice, bright flashlight toward your camera and take the same picture....you'll see the flashlight glare, but no stars. Remember, the surface of the moon is a surprisingly bright reflector (we've *all* seen how bright moonlight can be), and that can play merry hell with photography.



no dust from the lunar vehicle, they only jump 18 inches off the ground in all footage, the legs of the lunar capsule had no debris on them after it landed on the moon they were perfectly clean,


Re dust / debris, see above. Most of the light debris was removed from the landing site by the exhaust plume of the LEM descent engine. As for only jumping 18 inches, I'm surprised they could jump that far. The suits used on the Lunar surface tipped the scales at about 170-180 lbs on earth. Even in 1/6g, that's a pretty hefty load. Add in the fact that the joints were somewhat stiff, and jumping *at all* is quite a trick.



no good shots of earth from moon,


There are several from orbit. The men on the surface had a fair amount to do, and limited time to do it. That might explain the lack of Earth photos.




even the fact that niel armstrong has only given 1 interview since the one he gave when they just got back.


What does his lack of speaking engagements have to do with whether or not the moon landings were real?



Just do some digging and you will find audio of one astronauts talking about not tripping over the cables,


Later Apollo missions placed groups of instruments on the lunar surface, some of which were linked with magical hairs from the manes of unicorns....errr...I mean, cables, if you can imagine such a thing. Given that falling was dangerous to both the astronauts and the equipment, and spare parts were a LONG way away, reminding each other to be careful around the cables seems prudent, not conspiratorial.



youtube footage where you can see wires or check out Bill Cooper he was a researcher on this


Those strange 'wires' at the top of the suit backpack aren't mysterious at all...there's a communications antenna back there. It's visible in a lot of shots....it's also fairly easy to see that it ends less than a foot above the pack. Technically, that's a wire...but it's not a suspension rig. Try looking at still shots in addition to video.
edit on 25-2-2012 by Brother Stormhammer because: fixed ye auld mismatched tagge.




top topics



 
2

log in

join