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.

 

Please Debunk The Moon Landing Hoax For Me...

page: 27
15
<< 24  25  26    28  29  30 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 8 2011 @ 10:18 AM
link   
reply to post by Valar God
 


I don't even know where to start with this one. Rockets work perfectly well in space; I don't know where you got the idea that they didn't. As for your concerns about fuel and weight, at launch the Saturn V has a mass of 3,039,000 kg ( that's 6,699,000 pounds). When it returned to Earth, the Command Module had a mass of 5,560 kg (12,250 pounds). All of that fuel was necessary to send less than ten percent of it to the Moon and return less than one percent of it back to the Earth.




posted on Sep, 8 2011 @ 10:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by JoshNorton
Well, we've observed other spiral galaxies than our own, so we've got a basis for conjecture to begin with. Likewise, through observation and calculation we can determine motion of our own galaxy and see that it fits the model of others outside our own.


Yes, I should have emphasized i am not suspicious in a conspiracy sense of the word, but rather i feel we still have a lot to learn.
For example, we are told space expands, and motion would be relative to size, but if we are growing in size, then this motion could be subject to change.
Also we are told that light from the sun travels to us within 8 minutes, so, in reality the sun we see, is the sun from 8 minutes ago. Now go to the furthest star in our galaxy, how long has that light taken? According to a quick google search, 60,000 Light years Away. Taking 60,000yrs to reach us, Therefore we are seeing a star from 60,000 years ago.
I dont quite remember where i was going with this...except to say we have a lot to learn still.

I Remember Now...My point was that if we seeing all these stars at all different stages, surely a spiral galaxy could be some sort of effect the light travel gives off, seein as some of the light that makes up said spiral galaxy may not even exist now.
edit on 02/09/2011 by TheSandMansExecutioner because: Memory Lapse



posted on Sep, 8 2011 @ 11:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by FurvusRexCaeli

Originally posted by GrassyKnoll

Originally posted by FurvusRexCaeli

Originally posted by GrassyKnoll
A stride is about 3ft on earth. The moon has 1/6th the gravity of the earth so the strides should be a lot bigger.

Do your legs get longer as gravity decreases?


How silly.

For the astronauts to take 3 ft strides on the moon they would have to have exerted 1/6th their normal leg thrust which I'm sure NASA will claim they did.


Okay, I'll bite. Say you're on the moon. How big is your stride?


It would definitely be bigger than my earth stride of 3 ft. I would enjoy the feeling and experience of 1/6 th earth's gravity so I would try to jump 15 ft in the air and 30 ft across the horizon.

I will now comb youtube for some apollo moon walks and moon jumps.

And a 120 lb spacesuit on the moon would only feel like a 20 lb spacesuit on earth.



posted on Sep, 8 2011 @ 11:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by PsykoOps
Yeah cause all of use go to the beach wearing moon boots, in 1/6th of gravity while wearing tons of gear. That's a valid comparison



120 lbs of "moon gear" would only feel like 20 lbs of gear on the moon.



posted on Sep, 8 2011 @ 11:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by Human_Alien
Anyway OP.......what kind of proof would help you? You know, any kinda proof they'd offer up would be shred apart by debunkers anyway. They'd claim Photoshop the whole way.


Well I was hoping for surveillance drones to fly over the alleged Apollo sites one day but with NASA calling for a no-fly zone over them I feel the moon landing debate will continue for decades if not longer.



posted on Sep, 8 2011 @ 11:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by GrassyKnoll

Originally posted by Human_Alien
Anyway OP.......what kind of proof would help you? You know, any kinda proof they'd offer up would be shred apart by debunkers anyway. They'd claim Photoshop the whole way.


Well I was hoping for surveillance drones to fly over the alleged Apollo sites one day but with NASA calling for a no-fly zone over them I feel the moon landing debate will continue for decades if not longer.


is nasa calling a no fly zone over the moon for real?



posted on Sep, 8 2011 @ 11:56 AM
link   
reply to post by patternfinder
 




is nasa calling a no fly zone over the moon for real?

No, it is not.
There are recommendations about approaching sites on the surface.

Later this month, the agency plans to issue what it calls "recommendations" for spacecraft, or future astronauts, visiting U.S. government property on the moon.

www.sciencemag.org...

The recommendations have not been announced.
edit on 9/8/2011 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 8 2011 @ 11:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by patternfinder
is nasa calling a no fly zone over the moon for real?


According to Here:
No Fly Zone



posted on Sep, 8 2011 @ 12:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by patternfinder
 




is nasa calling a no fly zone over the moon for real?

No, it is not.
There are recommendations about approaching sites on the surface.

Later this month, the agency plans to issue what it calls "recommendations" for spacecraft, or future astronauts, visiting U.S. government property on the moon.

www.sciencemag.org...

The recommendations have not been announced.
edit on 9/8/2011 by Phage because: (no reason given)



This is not directed at you Phage but.........recommendations? They can't even control the immigration influx problem here on Earth how dare they start destroying another planet (albeit, moon) with rules/regulations/laws before they even finish destroying their own rock?

It never ceases to amaze me how little Humanity has grown in the past 1000 years as far as our spiritual growth, maturity, priorities and greed!

So let......Trump own the Sun, Oprah can take over Jupiter and the next president be the proud owner of their very own Uranus!



posted on Sep, 8 2011 @ 12:48 PM
link   
reply to post by Human_Alien
 

The recommendations concern US property, the stuff left on the Moon. The intent is to preserve sites of great historical value.

Whether or not that stuff should have been left there... sorry, I just don't have a problem with it.

edit on 9/8/2011 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 8 2011 @ 04:35 PM
link   
reply to post by bhornbuckle75
 


The levitation technology is called rockets, they work quite well in zero atmosphere. The problems with VTOLs are they are just jet engines, with a fraction of the thrust and have to work from ground, or sea level where the atmosphere is thickest. Besides, the lunar landers didn't make any incredible maneuvers, they just slowed the craft to land, quite simple with 1/6th earth gravity and no atmosphere.



posted on Sep, 8 2011 @ 04:47 PM
link   

This is not directed at you Phage but.........recommendations? They can't even control the immigration influx problem here on Earth how dare they start destroying another planet (albeit, moon) with rules/regulations/laws before they even finish destroying their own rock?


We also heard in the 70's "they can put a man on the moon but they can't cure the common cold". Totally unrelated and sidestepping. How is leaving extra weight behind on a huge surface, (we can barely photograph from 50 km away) destroying a barren planet? Bit of an overreaction? They needed to leave as much as possible to save their lives. Also it's not rules or laws, it's a request. I have no idea why they would make this public, and everybody believes they are so secretive and feed us only lies. Well isn't this an example of transparency?



posted on Sep, 8 2011 @ 04:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by Human_Alien
 

The recommendations concern US property, the stuff left on the Moon. The intent is to preserve sites of great historical value.

Whether or not that stuff should have been left there... sorry, I just don't have a problem with it.

edit on 9/8/2011 by Phage because: (no reason given)


I would have to agree. I would love to see 100 years from now these sites turn to parks where future mankind can visit the first landings on the moon.
edit on 8-9-2011 by camaro68ss because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 8 2011 @ 05:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheSandMansExecutioner
Yes, I have always had my suspicions on the spiral Galaxy theory.
Not to say it is Not a Spiral Galaxy...But to know that, would as you say, have to be determined from outside.




There are various ways to determine how far away stars are.
Do this for thousands of stars, and build up a 3D map.

Like this, but with more stars...



posted on Sep, 8 2011 @ 05:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by PsykoOps
reply to post by Valar God
 

Can you prove any of that against the mountain of data that says otherwise? Even a little?


What "mountain" of what "data" ???!



Originally posted by DJW001
reply to post by Valar God
 

I don't even know where to start with this one. Rockets work perfectly well in space; I don't know where you got the idea that they didn't. As for your concerns about fuel and weight, at launch the Saturn V has a mass of 3,039,000 kg ( that's 6,699,000 pounds). When it returned to Earth, the Command Module had a mass of 5,560 kg (12,250 pounds). All of that fuel was necessary to send less than ten percent of it to the Moon and return less than one percent of it back to the Earth.


I don't even know where to start with this one.

I have seen Superman fly to the Moon without ANY equipment.

And even shoot fire from his eyes.

There !



posted on Sep, 8 2011 @ 06:11 PM
link   
the only thing that leads me to think it was a hoax was that it was filmed. The undertaking of this project was immense. It had so much on the line for the USA infront of the world. It would show our technology to the world and it would leave us open to a huge black eye on our reputation if things had gone wrong.

considering the chance for failure and the showing of USA technology I have a hard time believing they took that risk


either what they filmed was fake, and there was no landing.. or the filming was fake and the real deal did go on...

OR

what i truley believe is that they went into orbit. sat there and then played a pre recorded fake landing. Once that was done they re entered orbit and were picked up.



posted on Sep, 8 2011 @ 06:25 PM
link   
reply to post by Valar God
 


I actually have to point you to it? You make no effort on your own yet make those claims???
Start here:

en.wikipedia.org...
en.wikipedia.org...



posted on Sep, 8 2011 @ 06:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by camaro68ss

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by Human_Alien
 

The recommendations concern US property, the stuff left on the Moon. The intent is to preserve sites of great historical value.

Whether or not that stuff should have been left there... sorry, I just don't have a problem with it.

edit on 9/8/2011 by Phage because: (no reason given)


I would have to agree. I would love to see 100 years from now these sites turn to parks where future mankind can visit the first landings on the moon.
edit on 8-9-2011 by camaro68ss because: (no reason given)


I kinda dislike this. When my financial status sucked I remember thinking that the most likely way I can get a medium format camera was to go and grap one from the moon. As I recall someone somewhere said that if you can get to the hassels you can keep them. Never mind their condition



posted on Sep, 8 2011 @ 06:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by GrassyKnoll
It would definitely be bigger than my earth stride of 3 ft. I would enjoy the feeling and experience of 1/6 th earth's gravity so I would try to jump 15 ft in the air and 30 ft across the horizon.

Now you're conflating jumping with striding. They do kind of bunny-hop, but they're not leaping from point to point like the incredible Hulk. Let's forget about jumping for a second and stick with walking or running, since that's how one's stride is measured. One's stride depends not just on one's weight, but also on the state of one's muscles (have they stretched their legs and groin, or been sitting in a cramped spaceship for days?), and one's clothing (does the space suit have enough give that the astronauts' legs can stretch for a larger than normal stride?).

Now, let's think about jumping around the moon. You're in a rocky desert in hard vacuum, with only a flimsy space suit keeping you alive. If you puncture that space suit, there is no help for you. You will die, and without you, the mission will probably fail and your comrades will die. Are you going to try for a long-distance jump record, and maybe fall down and damage your space suit? Or are you going to make fairly careful, controlled movements? I'm not saying a few jumps would be out of the question, but the idea of jumping "across the horizon" is a non-starter.


And a 120 lb spacesuit on the moon would only feel like a 20 lb spacesuit on earth.

It's more like 180 lbs, but what's 60 lbs between friends? That 180 lbs wasn't pulling down with 180 lbs of force, but it still had inertia, so the astronauts had to work to move around.



posted on Sep, 8 2011 @ 10:08 PM
link   
In related news, NASA wants more money as they don't think they have enough astronauts on their books. I think I know why, they are all here


Stop blinding us with science and give us some CREDIBLE photos, films, etc. Oh, sorry I forgot, you can't! You trundle out the same old images even though they are "the sharpest yet" no one with eyes (and mine are bad) can see anything except badly defined blobs.

NASA. Need Another #loadacash Agency.


Meanwhile, back on planet earth, thousands die needlessly. I wonder how long I will have the last word for. Judging from this page alone, not long. How long is not long?




top topics



 
15
<< 24  25  26    28  29  30 >>

log in

join