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.

 

Proof We Didn't Go To The Moon?

page: 12
19
<< 9  10  11    13  14  15 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 26 2011 @ 04:58 PM
link   
reply to post by DJW001
 


There you go again, without having question, there can't be any attempt to solve it. Which comes first? Question or the attempt to solve it? Tell me..




posted on May, 26 2011 @ 04:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by ngchunter

Originally posted by Karbofos
Why is everybody wrong??))))

Why are you trying to contradict me?

In an authorized biography, the author typically holds interviews with the subject of the book, the subject's family members and friends, co-workers, etc. The author is privy to information only attainable from the subject of the book.

blog.writersdigest.com...
Armstrong gave 50 hours worth of interviews and access to primary source material for his authorized biography, it wasn't as simple as just "giving permission."


Because you were wrong.and you didn't even question yourself. You came up with you own definition.
That's a bad touch. Makes you liar by default.



posted on May, 26 2011 @ 05:04 PM
link   


You're inability is attaining an education in an institute of higher learning, instead of on internet conspiracy sites. Asking questions isn't intellect, its a lack of gumption to figure things out yourself. 2-year olds ask questions. You present zero sources to analyze therefore you have hollow exchanges. You're simply placing doubt on subjects you are not educated enough in to know if data presented to you is valid or not.
reply to post by Illustronic
 


Funny... you are in the internet conspiracy site yourself. What are you doing here in ATS?



posted on May, 26 2011 @ 05:05 PM
link   
reply to post by Ninth Wave
 


People *star* your post, just because...???

Oh, well...here is the gist of it:


But have you seen the video I posted?
Debunk the video, mate!


Of course, my response will go unnoticed...and, possibly 'un-replied' to.


Some searching of this bloke, "Marcus Allen" (oh, and he is selling his magazine, titled "Nexus", in that first part, in your clip).

And, yes I wasted ten minutes of my time, to watch it. (Wondering how much he stole from...er, charged his audience, in that lecture series??)


Rather than writing rebuttals, here's YOUR turn, to watch one already made, and thoroughly shows Mr. Allen t be full of it:





Marcus Allen is like the lot of them....terribly ill-informed, and really quite an ignorant pest......





edit on Thu 26 May 2011 by weedwhacker because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 26 2011 @ 05:05 PM
link   
reply to post by notsoperfect
 



There you go again, without having question, there can't be any attempt to solve it. Which comes first? Question or the attempt to solve it? Tell me..


A good question can lead to a good answer, and it is the search for the answer that requires intelligence. Why don't you try to answer your own questions, instead of insulting the people who are trying to help you find the answers?



posted on May, 26 2011 @ 05:14 PM
link   
it is 100% certain that apollo 11 faked going halfway to the moon, what makes you think they didn't fake the whole thing?



posted on May, 26 2011 @ 05:17 PM
link   
reply to post by JPhish
 


BULL!! This is laughably ridiculous:


it is 100% certain that apollo 11 faked going halfway to the moon....


Total nonsense.



posted on May, 26 2011 @ 05:17 PM
link   
reply to post by DJW001
 


You never know if a question was good or bad until the answer comes out. So the Newton's question of "why did the apply just fall?" was a good question. Why did Armstrong did not write a book on his personal experience of the Moon Landing? And why does he look always guilty of something in public as if he is hiding something big? It could be a stupid question, but the answer could be alarming and shocking. The simple answer: Because he never went to the moon.

Did you watch all the videos on the subject of moon landing hoax in the youtube? Do you really have an open mind and willing to learn everything on this planet? Just watch a handful of them and come back to rant. You will be very welcome. If you don't want to watch them, then it is your luck. You will be missing half of the fun living on earth.



posted on May, 26 2011 @ 05:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by notsoperfect
reply to post by Ninth Wave
 


The problem is that none of these blind "believers" are bothered to look at those videos. They'd rather enjoy yelling and ranting.


You can't even send astronauts into low earth orbit nearly 40 years later without killing several of them.
But 12 astroNOTs were sent with 1960's technology to the moon, to walk around, play golf and drive lunar rovers up there???!!!



posted on May, 26 2011 @ 05:30 PM
link   
reply to post by notsoperfect
 


You can get into his head? You should present your methods to the James Randi Educational Foundation One Million Dollar Paranormal Challenge



posted on May, 26 2011 @ 05:37 PM
link   
reply to post by Ninth Wave
 


And you can't summarize in your own words where you have a problem. It's not my job to invest nearly two hours of my time to point out problems you have yet to mention. You want everything handed to you with zero effort on your part. You also refer to us as 'you' like suffering from an inferiority complex that you position 'us' as being from the U.S., kind of implies you are not. So far that's the only thing I can gather of substance from your pleas so far. Speaking of personal generalities is not a question, you haven't asked one yet therefore you haven't received any answers yet.



posted on May, 26 2011 @ 05:38 PM
link   
reply to post by Illustronic
 





You can get into his head? You should present your methods to the James Randi Educational Foundation One Million Dollar Paranormal Challenge


Can you just watch some of those videos? I'm sure you never watched any of them. It is not just mind reading my friend, it is based on the vast collection of all the presented evidences and information. Just watch a handful of them and have some fun with it. And come back to argue about it. Why do you have to lock up your mind on things of this importance?



posted on May, 26 2011 @ 05:46 PM
link   
reply to post by consigliere
 


That quote doesn't imply that at all. Does someone saying "We are committed to human exploration in Antarctica and look forward to developing the next generation of systems to take us there" imply that we have never been to Antarctica?



posted on May, 26 2011 @ 05:46 PM
link   
reply to post by Ninth Wave
 


Your analogy is ludicrous.

By the same level of "argument", we can't even build a car that doesn't kill people.

Or, more to the industry specific.....airplane test pilots that have died, over the decades.....

You should look at yourself, it's not a very solid foundation for an "argument".

BTW....what to say about the obvious photos from the LROC, and the LCROSS orbiter?? (And, the Japanese and Indian and Soon Chinese spacecraft, and their images??)

How embarrassed all of these con-artists should feel, since their lies have been exposed, beyond any doubt....future generations will alternately hang their heads in shame, or laugh uncontrollably at the ignorance displayed......



posted on May, 26 2011 @ 05:58 PM
link   
reply to post by notsoperfect
 


Short answer is above this very post.

Longer answer is; It's not important to me, finishing my employment tasks and deadlines are. I don't have any questions about the Apollo missions that haven't been resolved for me, and no matter who Armstrong was, what he is now is of little use to me to finish my obligations. I have even less use to entertain what you think about things. I answered specific questions here and brought up examples to provide real data for what cannot be disputed, I don't go on wild goose chases to figure out the questions I'm supposed to reply to. That's why the content here has deteriorated into simple bickering, because little has been presented to reply to except long vague homework assignments veering off of a scientific and Space Exploration based problem people might have, if they would simply state them with their own words.



posted on May, 26 2011 @ 06:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by js331975
reply to post by consigliere
 


That quote doesn't imply that at all. Does someone saying "We are committed to human exploration in Antarctica and look forward to developing the next generation of systems to take us there" imply that we have never been to Antarctica?


To answer your question,,,no it doesnt.If he said we are committed to going beyond Delphia,,, then yes.Antarctica is the whole continent,,,,low Earth orbit is similar to a city in space. your argument is apples and oranges and wholly inapplicable.He said "we are committed to human exploration BEYOND low Earth orbit
edit on 26-5-2011 by consigliere because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 26 2011 @ 06:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by Karbofos

Originally posted by ngchunter

Originally posted by Karbofos
Why is everybody wrong??))))

Why are you trying to contradict me?

In an authorized biography, the author typically holds interviews with the subject of the book, the subject's family members and friends, co-workers, etc. The author is privy to information only attainable from the subject of the book.

blog.writersdigest.com...
Armstrong gave 50 hours worth of interviews and access to primary source material for his authorized biography, it wasn't as simple as just "giving permission."


Because you were wrong.and you didn't even question yourself. You came up with you own definition.
That's a bad touch. Makes you liar by default.

Excuse me? I just sourced my definition, I didn't make it up. You saw that, you lied about me.



posted on May, 26 2011 @ 06:49 PM
link   

The Lunar Module (LM) (originally known as the Lunar Excursion Module, or LEM), was designed to fly between lunar orbit and the surface, landing two astronauts on the Moon and taking them back to the Command Module. It had no aerodynamic heat shield and was of a construction so lightweight that it would not have been able to fly through the Earth's atmosphere. It consisted of two stages, a descent and an ascent stage. The descent stage contained compartments which carried cargo such as the Apollo Lunar Surface Experiment Package and Lunar Rover.


of a construction so lightweight that it would not have been able to fly through the Earth's atmosphere.



So how did it get back? And if the Moons gravity is 1/10 Earths.That module didnt have nearly enough thrust to get off the Moon

Can someone post a pic of the Lunar Module please

edit on 26-5-2011 by consigliere because: to ask for help



posted on May, 26 2011 @ 06:53 PM
link   
reply to post by consigliere
 


Huh?



So how did it get back?


How did what get back?? The LM is still there. The Descent Module (six of 'em) on the Lunar surface. Most of the Ascent Modules were crashed into the Moon's surface, after rendezvous with the CSM (Command and Service Module).



And if the Moons gravity is 1/10 Earths.That module didnt have nearly enough thrust to get off the Moon


You aren't even making sense!! And, the Moon's gravitation field is about 1/6th (one-sixth) the Earth's.

In LIGHTER gravity things 'weigh' LESS!

Think about it.......



Watch this video...compiled from many pictures taken from Lunar orbit, in just last two years...by the LROC. This is one of my favorites, as the maker put together the photos, all taken at various times of the Lunar "day", so you see the shadows from the sunlight change, as the Sun transits the sky....just like happens on Earth...except, of course, the Moon rotates much, much slower.


(Just Apollo 11, more to come):





And, a sort of bookend....the Apollo 17 LM Ascent Module lift-off. The three final missions, 15, 16 and 17 were only ones with the LRV (Lunar Rover). It had provision for mounting a video camera, and that camera could be remote controlled from Houston, at the JSC.

The lift-offs of 15 and 16 were attempted to be filmed, in same way...but, they didn't get it right....camera didn't work right, on 15...jammed when tilting up to follow....the position of the Rover wasn't right, to get a full view, and the time delay was difficult for the camera operator to judge....sitting there in Houston. (Same guy, all three times) He practiced a great deal, with the first two....and had much, more planning and practice for A17, so was able to get it good, last time:






edit on Thu 26 May 2011 by weedwhacker because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 26 2011 @ 06:59 PM
link   





Ok I'll give you the Lunar Module to Command Module argument.Regarding the Lunar Module,,,,if the Moon has 1/6 the gravity of Earth,,,then it would require 1/6 of the thrust,no? The Lunar Module does not look to have 1/6 the thrust capability of Saturn

Edit:Wait,,,,how did the get from the moon to the command module if the lunar modules are still there

edit on 26-5-2011 by consigliere because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
19
<< 9  10  11    13  14  15 >>

log in

join