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.

 

Idiots saying we never landed on the moon

page: 5
0
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join
share:
d1k

posted on Aug, 2 2004 @ 09:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by HowardRoark

Anyone so deliberately obtuse as oxo is either:


  1. An idiot;

  2. A troll, or;

  3. A combination of the above.





Talk about the pot calling the kettle black. You're entitled to your opinion, but frankly thats all you have, you even stated you have not seen the video (actual NASA footage) that is very damning to them. You also seem like you have not read very much on the subject and are relying on the fact that you watched it on TV when you were 8. Sorry but that just does not cut it.

And your comment on being jealous...that has to be the single most moronic statement I have ever read on these boards, congrats.

[edit on 2-8-2004 by d1k]



oxo

posted on Aug, 2 2004 @ 09:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by SkepticOverlord

Originally posted by oxo


By keeping your head firmly in the sand, the facts still exist none the less.


www.fact-index.com...

The first LM flight was on January 22, 1968 when the unmanned LM-1 was launched on a Saturn IB for testing of propulsion systems in orbit. The next LM flight was aboard Apollo 9 using LM-3 on March 3, 1969 as a manned flight (McDivitt, Scott and Schweickart) to test a number of systems in Earth orbit including LM and CSM crew transit, LM propulsion, separation and docking. Apollo 10, which launched on May 18, 1969, was another series of tests, this time in lunar orbit with the LM separating and descending to within 10 km of the surface. From the successful tests the LM successfully descended and ascended from the lunar surface with Apollo 11.


encyclopedia.thefreedictionary.com...

on May 18, 1969, was another series of tests, this time in lunar orbit with the LM separating and descending to within 10 km of the surface. From the successful tests the LM successfully descended and ascended from the lunar surface with Apollo 11



And lots more here: Google search


no lunar launch was attempted

your story confirms this

end of story

I examined the evidence at hand carefully before arriving at these conclusions





[edit on 2-8-2004 by oxo]



posted on Aug, 2 2004 @ 09:55 AM
link   
I don't know about there being no tests, Look at the following links for more info:
www.astronautix.com...
science.ksc.nasa.gov...
So according to this, there were at least 2 tests, one 6 days prior to launch was successful wheras the one in 1968 crashed.




posted on Aug, 2 2004 @ 09:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by oxo what are you like I don't know what I'm saying?
Uhh... well, your chosen method of strange syntax and broken sentences does make it very difficult to understand your point. If you care so little about your position that you can't take the time to express it clearly, why should we care at all about responding? In the end, we did indeed land on the moon, run experiments, and return. Apollo 11 Experiment Still Going Strong After 35 Years

On July 21, about an hour before the end of their final moonwalk, they left an experiment on the lunar surface which, after 35 years, continues to work as well as it did the day it got there. Called the lunar laser ranging experiment, it studies the Earth-Moon system and returns data to scientific centers around the world, including NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory.


oxo

posted on Aug, 2 2004 @ 10:09 AM
link   
sceptic overlord

I am just telling you the way I see it

your failure to understand it takes away nothing from my point

nor does it add an iota of credibility to the rumours NASA and US government got going about landing people on the moon..

the clinically proven fact is

it is a big lie

it's a prank

like when orson welles reads from War of the Worlds on the radio and people go cuckoo

it's a bit like that

but lasts much longer



if you can't understand what I have to say

I don't want to know about it

really


I got problems of my own

so to speak


oxo

posted on Aug, 2 2004 @ 10:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by HowardRoark

Originally posted by oxo
the evidence going for the theory that moonlandings were real

is plenty but fake

against

some but real


I am sorry, but I don't understand this post. Please clarify. (If English is not your native tongue, please try to work on using proper sentence structure. If English is your native tongue, then you should be embarrased for this)


to paraphrase that idea:

there's an abundance of fabricated evidence to support the claims that man did land on the moon

there isn't quite as much (but still plenty) evidence to support the claims that didn't..

and it looks like anything but fabricated

I hope this helps

and yes

english happens to be my second language btw



posted on Aug, 2 2004 @ 10:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by oxo
I got problems of my own


Bingo, I guess.

oxo perhaps you would get a better reception if you actually bothered to look into the background and effort put in to the leadup to the Apollo Missions. At the moment it appears you are saying they are fake 'because we hadn't done if before. The same junk logic can be used to 'prove' that aeroplanes can't fly, or that cars weren't invented. It appears that ridiculous.



posted on Aug, 2 2004 @ 10:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by mwm1331
Idiots saying we never landed on the moon
Wizards first rule - People are stupid


Just an observation here - mwm, aren't you the same person who started a thread about christian basing? You claim to be some sort of victim of bigotry here yet you in turn start another thread calling other ATS posters idiots. Not cool at all and not beneficial to the fight against ignorance.



posted on Aug, 2 2004 @ 10:29 AM
link   
Oxo, you've failed to examine one critical aspect of the evidence; were the images and movies from the moon fake-able?

How for example would you illuminate the whole scene all the way to the horizon with just a single light source? How would you stop the lunar dust billowing around in clouds as it's thrown up from the wheels of the moon-buggy?

How would you simulate low gravity, or lack of atmospheric haze over distant objects? Or the straight line trajectory of dust and debris when the lander takes off using it's rocket? Then there's the feather/brick experiment, or the totally dark shadows untainted by reflected light.

Or how about the the reflections in the astronauts helmets; where would you hide the studio rig? Hell, where would you hide a studio that huge in the first place? Or keep the crew silent? Or keep the the special and visual effects techniques so secret that 30 years later it still can't be done without computers?

Unless there's a way of faking these things, the only possible explanation is that all these images were taken ON THE MOON!



posted on Aug, 2 2004 @ 10:30 AM
link   
Bad kitty read the first page again. The idiots comment was in reference to two specific people I had seen on t.v. Not to everyone who believes this theroy. I have no problems with people passing judgement on my posts exept when they dont bother to read everything and judge what I am saying by one line.



posted on Aug, 2 2004 @ 10:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by Bangin

I think it has a little something to do with confirmation. Could you imagine the difficulty in faking a trip to the moon now? There's no way it can be done. That's why I want to be around for the next trip to the moon.



I was wrong, It is not jealousy, but arrogance.

[sarcasm]Since, the technology that would have been required to fake all of this in 1969 was much more primitive (Pre Photoshop, pre Final Cut Express, Pre-Spielberg), we must 'a been total dolts to have fallen for this fake moon landin stuff.

Gee wiz, you gen-Xers are so smart and computer savvy that you can see right through any fakes and hoaxes.

[/sarcasm]


I don't think so.


[edit on 2-8-2004 by HowardRoark]


oxo

posted on Aug, 2 2004 @ 10:42 AM
link   
a one-size fits all response to people who may dig up some insignificant evidence about Apollo 10 and such "testing out" LM functions on earth orbit, or LMesque vehicles being tested on earth:

it is well documented through historical research that

- no man made object, prior to the LEM modules, was attempted to be launched from the moon by NASA
- there was no immediately pressing circumstances (other than the desire to stick one up to the russians, and the unrealistic deadline set by JFK drawing closer) to bypass this most natural and not to mention necessary stage of the developement process
- also well documented that these very same NASA people, at the same time they were planning and scheduling these apollo missions that involved landing as well as launching people from the moon for a few months into the future, as yet understood little about launching things from their home planet, and were going wrong with every second probe they tried landing on the moon and such..

how can people who have such a shabby record of "launching
things" in general even from their more familiar home planet dare

attempt doing this from the moon time and again

with actual flesh and blood human lives at risk

2 at a time

without even bothering to field-test this amazing LM launching mechanism?

only in the movies.



posted on Aug, 2 2004 @ 10:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by mwm1331
Bad kitty read the first page again. The idiots comment was in reference to two specific people I had seen on t.v. Not to everyone who believes this theroy. I have no problems with people passing judgement on my posts exept when they dont bother to read everything and judge what I am saying by one line.


MWM - I did read your post and actually, I agree with your view on this subject. I merely wanted to point out that I find your thread title and even your little skit a bit condescending and antagonistic (maybe that was your intention) and not very conducive to sparking intelligent discussion but rather causing defensiveness. Maybe I should have just ingored your thread since I did not appreciate your saurcastic title but it just seems lately there has been a great deal of antagonism on ATS in general and I'm starting to grow a bit weary of it. Can't we all play nice?



posted on Aug, 2 2004 @ 10:50 AM
link   


Oxos fake moon launch.


Obviously the thousands of people (including those in the Russian "fishing trawler off the Florida coast) who witnessed the launch were all working for Nixon and the NWO.


oxo

posted on Aug, 2 2004 @ 10:51 AM
link   
Originally posted by muppet
Oxo, you've failed to examine one critical aspect of the evidence; were the images and movies from the moon fake-able?

these films were all made after 2001:A Space Odyssey, mind you.. so if that movie was made as history suggests (and I bear witness) the answer to your query is a definite yes

How for example would you illuminate the whole scene all the way to the horizon with just a single light source? How would you stop the lunar dust billowing around in clouds as it's thrown up from the wheels of the moon-buggy?

this Kubrick, he's a marvelous director, this guy

How would you simulate low gravity, or lack of atmospheric haze over distant objects? Or the straight line trajectory of dust and debris when the lander takes off using it's rocket? Then there's the feather/brick experiment, or the totally dark shadows untainted by reflected light.

Or how about the the reflections in the astronauts helmets; where would you hide the studio rig? Hell, where would you hide a studio that huge in the first place? Or keep the crew silent? Or keep the the special and visual effects techniques so secret that 30 years later it still can't be done without computers?

Unless there's a way of faking these things, the only possible explanation is that all these images were taken ON THE MOON!

there's many suspect images where spotlight-like things are reflected.. many more that suggest artificial lighting.. many that are horribly contrived and sometimes lack continuity.. these images couldn't have been taken on the moon as the technology wasn't there to take people to moon to begin with.. all those things you ask for are easily done. hide a studio that huge? heh heh.. you must be joking me.. you obviously aren't much of a film-maker.



posted on Aug, 2 2004 @ 11:00 AM
link   
Pure Genius.


this Kubrick, he's a marvelous director, this guy


There you have it folks, a water-tight case for the moon landing being faked.

oxo I again strongly suggest you do some research. (You could start by browsing the earlier pages of this very thread) there are irrefutable evidences of the moon landings. (In the form of the Laser Reflector and lunar rock samples). The LEM was extensively tested on Earth, in Earth orbit, and in Lunar orbit before the landing was attempted. It was not designed to land by itself. So to suggest it could be tested on the Lunar surface without someone around to get it there in the first place is just foolish.

[edit on 2-8-2004 by Kano]


oxo

posted on Aug, 2 2004 @ 11:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by Kano

Originally posted by oxo
I got problems of my own


Bingo, I guess.

oxo perhaps you would get a better reception if you actually bothered to look into the background and effort put in to the leadup to the Apollo Missions. At the moment it appears you are saying they are fake 'because we hadn't done if before. The same junk logic can be used to 'prove' that aeroplanes can't fly, or that cars weren't invented. It appears that ridiculous.


what an idiotic simplification of what I've had to say.

we have two people sitting on pounds of explosive helium fuel whatever

the only thing it has going for it is that some scientists in NASA who at the said time and place can't properly land things on the moon nevermind launch, whose calculations have gone wrong time and again.. these scientist reckon it should work.. is that enough assurance for such a task where there's apparently no margin for error (if it's being attempted for real, that is)

and yet they have the audacity to try some more of these calculations on actual people on the moon

about which these scientists only have theoretical knowledge

as it hasn't been properly examined at the time and place

and you have the audacity to compare this to the invention of cars and etc

I ask you

could mankind have invented the plane without first making kites and gliders and such to test out his theories?

well NASA effectively have.. by forging historical evidence to the effect they accomplished something they found too dangerous to try for real.




[edit on 2-8-2004 by oxo]


oxo

posted on Aug, 2 2004 @ 11:10 AM
link   
I don't want to hear about LEM being tested on earth orbit etc

my first post covers all those areas

I won't be dignifying such posts with responses any more

take it from a pro

the moonlandings are an unbelievable and contrived leap of technology in retrospect

for me

but I loved them as a kid

I've seen it all

I was here first

I like how they turned out not to be real tho

for the approaching finale to the human history as we know it

I can't wait..



posted on Aug, 2 2004 @ 11:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by oxo
these films were all made after 2001:A Space Odyssey, mind you.. so if that movie was made as history suggests (and I bear witness) the answer to your query is a definite yes

If you think back, you'll remember the scenes in 2001 on the moons surface were set on the dark side if the moon, and lit with floodlights (in the story, and in reality). Simulating a sun lit moon's surface is a different problem entirely. Floodlights just don't come that big or bright.


this Kubrick, he's a marvelous director, this guy

He certainly was. Years ahead of his time, and still he couldn't create a truly convincing moon surface.



there's many suspect images where spotlight-like things are reflected.. many more that suggest artificial lighting.. many that are horribly contrived and sometimes lack continuity..

Maybe you post some of them.. you can generally direct-link to nasa images. I can probably explain the anomalies you're seeing.


hide a studio that huge? heh heh.. you must be joking me.. you obviously aren't much of a film-maker.


Nope, I'm serious... try me!



[edit on 2-8-2004 by muppet]



posted on Aug, 2 2004 @ 11:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by Kenshiro
I don't know about there being no tests, Look at the following links for more info:
www.astronautix.com...
science.ksc.nasa.gov...
So according to this, there were at least 2 tests, one 6 days prior to launch was successful wheras the one in 1968 crashed.



checked the links and there is no video of a successful testing of the lander-did we not have video then?were we so ignorant as to not video tape it?surely it exists but all it will demonstrate is the lander could not perform-LINK THE VIDEO



Originally posted by SkepticOverlord
In the end, we did indeed land on the moon, run experiments, and return.
Apollo 11 Experiment Still Going Strong After 35 Years

On July 21, about an hour before the end of their final moonwalk, they left an experiment on the lunar surface which, after 35 years, continues to work as well as it did the day it got there. Called the lunar laser ranging experiment, it studies the Earth-Moon system and returns data to scientific centers around the world, including NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory.



---------CHECK ABOVE STATEMENT

alright now i can understand your loyalty to the scientific community-they are indeed a great convergence of minds and should be respected as such-
although we cannot deny the ability of the military to coerce anyone they choose to say anything they want-especialy if its for national security-we cannot deny our inferiority during the space race-the landers never worked sufficiently on earth and and unblemished performance record should ring a bell-although the biggest deception is one that cannot be proved either way-it deals with cosmic radiation-there is a verse in the bible that states"the vault of heaven bespeaks the glory of the lord"only a few astronauts have tested this statement and the fact is only the apollo missions have supposedly ventured beyond the van allen radiation belts-
again the belts are not what is hazardous to the astronauts it is the cosmic radiation-slate.msn.com...
PROOF SECRETS ARE KEPT
the ability of the military and elite to KEEP A SECRET CANNOT be UNDERESTIMATED-here is a link to an interview concerning an 18 yo boy in jail who was able to find a journalist brave enough to publish a journal the boy kept since he was a young boy in an orphanage-the author did not realize the boy was telling the truth until he saw a video from alex jones where he infultrated the bohemian grove-and saw for himself the descriptions of an area the boy had described in his journal -sample of interview transcript with a link to full article

-with all this evidence some people still cant be touched-read the full article -i dare you-and whoever said this is irrelavent is a coward who cannot accept the truth

how many books will be written in order to expose a cospiracy only to be ignored allowing an overt death parade? incredible interview concerning the elite----- www.prisonplanet.com...
complete article in link above--aj-alex jones;jd-john decamp
Alex Jones Interviews John DeCamp, Author of The Franklin Cover-up.

Alex Jones Show | July 21 2004
AJ: Continuing, you actually have the passages in your book out of the diary
JD: Well, I have a , I have right here the diary. Do you want me to read a little? Understand that I didn't know that the thing was Bohemian Grove back then, nor did the kid when he was writing it. All he knew was he was taken to this place. Let me just read it. It'll take three minutes. Is that okay?
AJ: Go ahead.
JD: I went in January, now this is Bonacci, this is Paul Bonacci writing this. This is directly word-for-word from his diary.
"I went in January of 84 on every trip. I was paid by men King knew for sex. The summer of 84 sometime I went to Dallas, Texas and had sex with several men King knew in a hotel. I flew on YNR airlines (by the way thats a private airline or a private charter deal) and Cam airlines (another private charter deal) normally for King. I never had much personally to do with King only went where he told me to go.
In or on July 26th, I went to Sacramento, CA. King flew me out on a private plane from an airfield in Omaha to Denver where we picked up Nicholas. A boy who was about 12 or 13, then we flew to Vegas to a desert strip and drove into Las Vegas to some ranch and got something. Then flew on to Sacramento. We were picked up by a white limo and taken to a hotel. I don't remember the name of it. We, meaning Nicholas and I, were driven to an area that had big, big trees. It took about an hour to get there. There was a cage with a boy in it who was not wearing anything. Nicholas and I were given these Tarzan things to put around us and some stuff like that. They told me to, (I won't use the word) blank the boy and stuff. (In other words have sex with him.) At first I said no and they held a gun to my genitals (I'll use that word) and said do it or else lose them or something like that. I began doing it to the boy and stuff. And Nicholas had anal sex and stuff. We were told to blank him and stuff and beat on him. I didn't try to hurt him.
We were told to put our blanks in his mouth and stuff and sit on the boys blank and stuff and they filmed it. We did this stuff to the boy for about 30 minutes or an hour when a man came in and kicked us and stuff in the genitals. And picked us up and threw us. He grabbed the boy and started blanking him and stuff. The man was about (I'm not sure how to say this) the man was about so many inches long and the boy screamed and stuff. The man was forcing his blank into the boy all the way. The boy was bleeding from his rectum and the men tossed me and him and stuff and put the boy right next to me and grabbed a gun and blew the boy's head off. The boy's blood was all over me and I started yelling and crying and the men grabbed Nicholas and I and forced us to lie down. They put the boy on top of Nicholas who was crying and they were putting Nicholas's hands on the boys blank. They put the boy on top of me and did the same thing. They then forced me to blank the dead boy. (It gets pretty crude.) They put a gun to our heads to make us do it. His blood was all over us. They made us kiss the boys lips. (Anyway, a few other things.) Then they made me do something I don't even want to write so I won't.
After that the men grabbed Nicholas and drug him off screaming. They put me up against a tree and put a gun to my head but fired into the air. I heard another shot from somewhere and then saw the man who killed the boy drag him like a toy. Everything including when the men put the boy in the trunk was filmed. The men took me with them and we went up in a plane. I saw the bag the boy was in. We went over a very thick brush area with a clearing in it. Over the clearing they dropped the boy. One said the men with the hoods would take care of the body for them.
I didn't see Nicholas until that night at the hotel. He and I hugged and held each other for a long while. About 2 hours later the men or Larry King came in and told us to go take a shower since we'd had only been hosed off at some guys house. We took a shower together and then were told to put on the Tarzan things. And after we were cleaned up and dressed in these things we were told to put on shorts, socks and a shirt and shoes and were driven to a house where the men were at some others. They had the film and they played it. As the men watched it they passed Nicholas and I around as if we were toys
AJ: Stay right there. This is the New World Order what they want to do to your kids.




[edit on 2-8-2004 by Sunofone]

[edit on 2-8-2004 by Sunofone]



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join