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: 22
19
<< 19  20  21    23  24  25 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 30 2011 @ 11:02 AM
link   
reply to post by weedwhacker
 

Perhaps she believes the Space Station spacewalks are all hoaxes, also.




posted on May, 30 2011 @ 11:39 AM
link   



Glen say's to Buz : Oh look at that rock it soo purdy.. I want to take that one back to earth
Buz rolls his eyes smiles with delightment and says to Glen: Ok here is a zip lock baggie now get some moon dust in there too .. so I can put in a jar an show it off to the whole family ..hahaha


John Glenn never landed on the moon, he was only ever in low Earth orbit.



posted on May, 30 2011 @ 11:56 AM
link   
reply to post by manmental
 


wow manmental ...I heard this too .. so its true he was there.

..Awhile back surfing around this web page, where Buz was in Hawaii and at an area where part of the fake moon landings were Filmed.. lol now I don’t know about all that ,, there sure is a lot of stuff out about the moon hoax,
but I don’t believe everything they claim nether. It's a matter of what seems credible ..

I have never been the type of person to trust the government on everything there is .. and I certainly wouldn’t trust a persons view based just because their grandfather worked or helped build something .. inside NASA those people are sworn to silence

I highly doubt it was shot out in the open but yet area 51 is a possible place it could have been filmed
it's amazing how people out there still don’t understand the possible theory’s. Yet we have to have a library card because we have different views??
Other than the technology part of the mission I seen photos of the splash down which there are so many of them but what’s really weird is once you start looking at them many of them are different on the same photo ??
same photo but different water or the module isn’t the same.
Some of these photos look really fake .. and I never really looked at them until now the last time I looked at the photos of Apollo 11 was years ago .. and I remember them being black an white.



posted on May, 30 2011 @ 12:06 PM
link   


That's been very clear to many people .. that those who have been seeking answers to many legit questions .. regarding space exploration and moon missions..go unanswered.

Why are thre no pictures of the Surveyor?
When In fact they have telescopes and what have you to show images of Mars ??
So if they can do this why not on mars to show where the left behind artifacts?


No telescope on earth or in space has the resolution capacity to resolve clearly any images of the Apollo equipment on the moon, Mars, or Pluto. The best resolution capabilities (I believe I said this about 5 times in this thread) come from the NASA moon orbiting LRO, which has a projected resolution of about 19 inches per pixel but it would have to be directly at a 90º angle for that but in reality so far the best resolution images are over 3 feet per pixel and is not sufficient to clearly see equipment outlines. Over 3 feet per pixel! But this is still 10x to 20x the resolution of the Japanese moon mapper SELENE, at an average of 10 meters per pixel.

Images of Mars comes from rovers on the surface of Mars, not ANY telescopes. The following article can fill you in on the history of all space images of the Apollo landing sites and offers much technical data to explain the images it shows in the article.
apollo-moon-landing-photos-from-space


Is this an image of a NASA Surveyor that you are asking about?
Link to image

Again the post I link to has a machine gun rapid firing of issues and I will only address one at a time if there are any proper technological supported problems, maybe with links to where you get the data from, always helpful, to determine any cross referenced supporting data.


edit on 30-5-2011 by Illustronic because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 30 2011 @ 12:07 PM
link   
reply to post by Illustronic
 


I know that...gawd !!!!! I just didn't want to qoute exact names just a funny snippit I made up ok Neil then or major tom whats the difference?? should of used the jetsons names .. geese ..Moon rocks still have moon germs .. and contain harmfull stuff to the human ..



posted on May, 30 2011 @ 12:11 PM
link   
reply to post by NorthStargal52
 


Lend us your reference to harmful moon rock germs, that would imply life on the moon wouldn't it? This one should be really good!



posted on May, 30 2011 @ 12:36 PM
link   
reply to post by NorthStargal52
 


They had earth training sessions with Apollo equipment before they went to the moon, wouldn't that be a prudent operational stage?



Geologist Jack Schmitt (l) and Commander Gene Cernan training for Apollo 17

I see plants, on the MOON!!



posted on May, 30 2011 @ 01:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by manmental


Well the fact that unmanned USSR Lunar missions have brought back samples from the moon makes me wonder if NASA couldn't do the very same thing. Just with a bigger payload.

Then there is the fact that moon rocks have been discovered on earth no less.


So, those are a few reasons why I don't think the 'moon' rocks are definitive proof that man set foot on the moon.



The Unmanned Soviet Lunar missions only managed to get a few hundred grams of samples.
That's about 1,000 times less than the Apollo rocks!

Today's unmanned probes are only capable of collecting about 1 KG of rock..........the Apollo rocks amount to just under 400 KG.

As for Moon meteorites on Earth they are extremely rare and certainly won't amount to anything near 380 KG!

So it's highly improbable that the Apollo rocks were gather by a unmanned probe or were meteorites found on Earth.
edit on 30-5-2011 by Logical one because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 30 2011 @ 01:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by manmental

If NASA could supposedely get men to the moon and back then it's not a stretch of the imagination that they could get loads of rocks back.


The problem that you don't seem get is that unmanned probes are simply not capable of extracting big payloads of rock.
Why do you think we haven't managed to get any Mars rocks back from Mars?



posted on May, 30 2011 @ 01:17 PM
link   
Wow! Doesn't the backgound in that picture look like the backdrops for Apollo 15. Hadley Rille?



posted on May, 30 2011 @ 01:56 PM
link   
reply to post by TamtammyMacx
 


Not in the slightest, first we don't see a dark sky, second we see atmospheric clouds, and third we see vegetation, and if you are really good at viewing black and white photography, we also see atmospheric haze. None of that is present on the moon.



posted on May, 30 2011 @ 06:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by NorthStargal52
...Moon rocks still have moon germs .. and contain harmfull stuff to the human ..

Could you please elaborate on this?


As far as I know (and as far as anyone knows), there are no moon germs on the moon rocks. That would be HUGE news if there was proof of life beyond the Earth. Trust me, if any of the dozens of intuitions that studied Moon rock found life, it would be difficult to keep that a secret (besides, that argument would be for another thread).

As for other harmful things, I know that Moon dust could be a bit harmful if inhaled in large quantities (because it is like pieces of microscopic glass), but I don't know any reason that a non-dusty rock would pose any practical harm.


edit on 5/30/2011 by Soylent Green Is People because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 30 2011 @ 06:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by TamtammyMacx
Wow! Doesn't the backgound in that picture look like the backdrops for Apollo 15. Hadley Rille?

Well...both have hills and dirt, but the similarities end there.
Heck, Saturn's moon Titan has hills and dirt. Perhaps they staged the Moon landing hoax there?


edit on 5/30/2011 by Soylent Green Is People because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 30 2011 @ 10:48 PM
link   
reply to post by Soylent Green Is People
 


As said before, I also am anxiously waiting verification of life on the moon, like I said, this should be really good. But you know? we will never see any link on those mystical life forms we brought home from the moon.


Seriously I think possibly the author is misinterpreting some meteorites brought back from Antarctica and another siting that microbes were discovered there frozen for a very long time, perhaps millions of years that we cannot verify that they are native of the planet earth. Quite a leap but I cannot think of any other plausible explanation for that claim.

There has never been a single microgram of a rogue moon particle ever found in Antarctica. (clearly demonstrated a page or two back by Weedwhacker)



posted on May, 31 2011 @ 01:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by manmental
reply to post by Illustronic
 





I have seen the photo's from Hubble just a couple of days ago


Which photos? Please, enlighten me... I just checked their official site. Where are they? Link please.


Link please.



posted on May, 31 2011 @ 01:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by manmental
reply to post by weedwhacker
 


Hi Weed. What a surprise... you find my views worthless and accuse me of being dishonest.

If NASA could supposedely get men to the moon and back then it's not a stretch of the imagination that they could get loads of rocks back. I find both ideas as silly as each other.

Moon rocks have been found in Antartica... who cares when and who says they weren't found earlier? If a new species is discovered in 1972 does that mean it didn't exist before then? Silly.

Are your saying Werner didn't go to Antartica in 1967? Because NASA thinks he did. What he was doing is anyone's guess but I guess you'll take NASA's word for it.

history.msfc.nasa.gov...

I'm sorry you didn't like the blog I referenced. The links in the blog, if you had bothered reading it go to reputable sources.



When there is a lack of arguments, the next step is to attack people.
edit on 31-5-2011 by RUSSO because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 31 2011 @ 11:20 AM
link   
reply to post by RUSSO
 


Hi just thought id comment on some issues ..

Actually I find it very funny and amusing how some of these posts are so irrelevant .. constantly answering a question with a question.. ya.. just have to bypass certain information .. and what it all boils down to ..is what you believe in.
research on the topic and backing it up with credible information .. and there is credible information yet some adhere to believing
and yet many or most don’t .. this isn’t the only website on this topic .. and it has been discussed over the 40 sum years.. and it has been going on for years ..

Russo have you spent much time looking through the tons of pictures on the Apollo missions,, I mean really it could fill your whole day and then try deciphering…

Which ones look fake and which ones look real. Then trying to see if others agree .. what a bunch a BS.. there will always be those who insist that the missions were real .. and others insist they are not real.


Just about every picture from NASA . I have serious doubts about many of these images..many of the photos seem that the background is from the moon images they took prior and after they went to the moon they have had many opportunities to change an rearrange and photo chop images and not to mention blur them out

.. Regardless how much the believers say this is all real .. They keep posting stuff (photos)from NASA and I have already seen the stuff from NASA and I have read how these Rocks are harmful ..

If in fact you buy into the fact that they really went to the moon why then on NASA’s site do they show one of the astronauts carrying the samples back in a special concealed box ? And no im not posting it when anyone can go see it for them selves

www.nasa.gov...



posted on May, 31 2011 @ 11:50 AM
link   
reply to post by NorthStargal52
 


Odd....only *you*, and a few dozen others, thing there is anything "wrong" with Apollo photographs.

Millions and millions of the rest, who have seen them, see nothing "wrong" at all, with them.

Of course, those millions and millions are well-educated, knowledgeable and experienced.....(and, "well-educated" in the sense of science, aerospace technology, and photography and its principles).

Maybe, if some of those other dozens (or so) would take some time to LEARN those sciences and gain some expertise in them, then these ridiculous "hoax" nonsense claims will dry up.

BTW.....What About The Photos From Lunar Orbit??

OF the Apollo equipment on the Moon? And, the evident disturbance in the ground, from the Astronauts' movements?? It is clearly evident, for all to see.



posted on May, 31 2011 @ 12:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by weedwhacker
BTW.....What About The Photos From Lunar Orbit??

OF the Apollo equipment on the Moon? And, the evident disturbance in the ground, from the Astronauts' movements?? It is clearly evident, for all to see.


The goal posts keep getting moved by the hoax believers.

It used to be "show me pictures of the equipment on the Moon", but now that those pictures have been presented, it's "those pictures aren't enough -- I need more proof"

I assume no matter what information is presented, hoax believers will continue to move the goal posts, and will continue to disbelieve. Some will NEVER believe information provided by others, even if that information is logically and scientifically sound. I think the only way some will believe that the Apollo Program took humans to the Moon is if they themselves were taken to the Moon and personally shown the equipment.

Even then they may claim it was planted there recently -- well after 1969-1972. We do seem to be headed for that. Considering all the goal post moving exhibited by hoax believers, we hypothetically seem to be heading for a time that a hoax believer who is taken to the Moon and personally sees the Apollo equipment on the Moon would probably say "That's nice -- now prove to me it wasn't just put there recently".


edit on 5/31/2011 by Soylent Green Is People because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 31 2011 @ 12:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by NorthStargal52

If in fact you buy into the fact that they really went to the moon why then on NASA’s site do they show one of the astronauts carrying the samples back in a special concealed box ? And no im not posting it when anyone can go see it for them selves

www.nasa.gov...


NorthStargal........you've just stated how photos can be easily cropped and manipulated and yet you want to see "photographic" proof of the lunar digger!

Unless you have actually been to the Moon yourself, then I somehow doubt that you can truly say with any confidence that the photos aren't genuine.

Yes it's true photographs can be manipulated.......but that in itself shouldn't cast doubt on the Moon Landings.

The physical evidence of 380 KG of Moon Rocks is much harder to cast doubt on as explain in above in my other posts.
How do you account for the Moon Rocks NorthStargal?



new topics

top topics



 
19
<< 19  20  21    23  24  25 >>

log in

join