reply to post by LifeIsPeculiar
If you agreed that 400,000 didn't walk on the moon why are you continuously using 400,000 in your arguments?
Same goes for the 86 figure. Here is the list of 12 astronauts who can testify that they walked on the Moon:
Neil Armstrong - Apollo 11 - July 1969
Edwin "Buzz" Aldrin - Apollo 11 - July 1969
Charles "Pete" Conrad - Apollo 12 - November 1969
Alan Bean - Apollo 12 - November 1969
Alan Shepard - Apollo 14 - February 1971
Edgar Mitchell - Apollo 14 - February 1971
David Scott - Apollo 15 - July 1971
James Irwin - Apollo 15 - July 1971
John Young - Apollo 16 - April 1972
Charles Duke - Apollo 16 - April 1972
Eugene Cernan - Apollo 17 - December 1972
Harrison Schmitt - Apollo 17 - December 1972
Please Debunk The Moon Landing Hoax For Me..., page 32
reply posted on 1-10-2011 @ 05:36 AM by DJW001
reply to post by SayonaraJupiter
Only the crews of the American and Viet Namese ships involved in the Gulf of Tonkin incident really know what happened there, so why are you constantly using it to make some kind of propaganda point?
If you agreed that 400,000 didn't walk on the moon why are you continuously using 400,000 in your arguments?
Only the crews of the American and Viet Namese ships involved in the Gulf of Tonkin incident really know what happened there, so why are you constantly using it to make some kind of propaganda point?
reply posted on 1-10-2011 @ 04:36 PM by SayonaraJupiter
Originally posted by DJW001
reply to post by SayonaraJupiter
If you agreed that 400,000 didn't walk on the moon why are you continuously using 400,000 in your arguments?
Only the crews of the American and Viet Namese ships involved in the Gulf of Tonkin incident really know what happened there, so why are you constantly using it to make some kind of propaganda point?
Sorry you don't understand how simple this is. LBJ went on TV to sell the Gulf of Tonkin to America. Nixon went on TV to sell Apollo to America. It's simplistic as it gets. Exaggerated threats, exaggerated claims.
reply posted on 1-10-2011 @ 05:11 PM by DJW001
reply to post by SayonaraJupiter
That doesn't address the issue. Apollo had 400,000 people working on the project and millions more watching every aspect of it every moment. There are countless detailed records and museums full of evidence. You persist in waving this away and claim that only twelve people know if they really walked on the Moon, and they may have been drugged or coerced into lying. On the other hand, all we really know about the Gulf of Tonkin incident is that LBJ made an announcement on TV. This was later contradicted by "secret papers" allegedly leaked during the Nixon Administration. I feel much more confident waving these questionable sources away. The only people who truly know what happened in the Gulf of Tonkin are 330 American sailors and a few dozen Viet Namese, all of whom may have been drugged or coerced into lying. Poof!
Sorry you don't understand how simple this is. LBJ went on TV to sell the Gulf of Tonkin to America. Nixon went on TV to sell Apollo to America. It's simplistic as it gets. Exaggerated threats, exaggerated claims.
That doesn't address the issue. Apollo had 400,000 people working on the project and millions more watching every aspect of it every moment. There are countless detailed records and museums full of evidence. You persist in waving this away and claim that only twelve people know if they really walked on the Moon, and they may have been drugged or coerced into lying. On the other hand, all we really know about the Gulf of Tonkin incident is that LBJ made an announcement on TV. This was later contradicted by "secret papers" allegedly leaked during the Nixon Administration. I feel much more confident waving these questionable sources away. The only people who truly know what happened in the Gulf of Tonkin are 330 American sailors and a few dozen Viet Namese, all of whom may have been drugged or coerced into lying. Poof!
reply posted on 1-10-2011 @ 05:29 PM by syrinx high priest
Originally posted by SayonaraJupiter
reply to post by LifeIsPeculiar
If you agreed that 400,000 didn't walk on the moon why are you continuously using 400,000 in your arguments?
Same goes for the 86 figure. Here is the list of 12 astronauts who can testify that they walked on the Moon:
Neil Armstrong - Apollo 11 - July 1969
Edwin "Buzz" Aldrin - Apollo 11 - July 1969
Charles "Pete" Conrad - Apollo 12 - November 1969
Alan Bean - Apollo 12 - November 1969
Alan Shepard - Apollo 14 - February 1971
Edgar Mitchell - Apollo 14 - February 1971
David Scott - Apollo 15 - July 1971
James Irwin - Apollo 15 - July 1971
John Young - Apollo 16 - April 1972
Charles Duke - Apollo 16 - April 1972
Eugene Cernan - Apollo 17 - December 1972
Harrison Schmitt - Apollo 17 - December 1972
there are independent sources that can verify the manned apollo misisons went to the moon.
wiki link
here is one example from the link
Apollo 11
The Bochum Observatory director (Professor Heinz Kaminski) was able to provide confirmation of events and data independent of both the Russian and U.S. space agencies.[30]
A compilation of sightings appeared in "Observations of Apollo 11" in Sky and Telescope magazine, November 1969, pp. 358–359.
The Madrid Apollo Station, part of the Deep Space Network, built in Fresnedillas, near Madrid, Spain tracked Apollo 11.[31]
reply posted on 1-10-2011 @ 05:43 PM by LifeIsPeculiar
reply to post by SayonaraJupiter
You probably think Custer killed all of his own men and then committed suicide. I know it is a one-liner, but it accomplished its mission.
You probably think Custer killed all of his own men and then committed suicide. I know it is a one-liner, but it accomplished its mission.
reply posted on 1-10-2011 @ 06:31 PM by SayonaraJupiter
Originally posted by DJW001
reply to post by SayonaraJupiter
Sorry you don't understand how simple this is. LBJ went on TV to sell the Gulf of Tonkin to America. Nixon went on TV to sell Apollo to America. It's simplistic as it gets. Exaggerated threats, exaggerated claims.
That doesn't address the issue. Apollo had 400,000 people [snipped] Poof!
You are still dragging out the 400,000... you know this is an informal fallacy... and you know NASA destroyed the telemetry tapes ... and you know that NASA closely with worked with Hollywood and TV networks in 1969 ... and you know all the photos and films were screened by NPIC/CIA ... and you know that DoD/NASA were basically the same beast with 2 different heads ... and you know why James Webb quit before Apollo 8 which is the crucial mission because it was the first mission to be faked beyond low earth orbit ... and you know Nixon was a crook ... and you know that only 12 people walked on the moon.
Your belief system is incredible!
reply posted on 1-10-2011 @ 06:34 PM by SayonaraJupiter
Originally posted by LifeIsPeculiar
reply to post by SayonaraJupiter
You probably think Custer killed all of his own men and then committed suicide. I know it is a one-liner, but it accomplished its mission.
If that's the best you got then you might want to take a break. I know it is a one-liner, but it accomplished its mission.*
*I'm using DJ's patented mirror technique.
reply posted on 1-10-2011 @ 06:49 PM by DJW001
reply to post by SayonaraJupiter
You still haven't provided the same sort of evidence for the Gulf of Tonkin as you demand for the Moon landings!
Your belief system is incredible!
You still haven't provided the same sort of evidence for the Gulf of Tonkin as you demand for the Moon landings!
reply posted on 1-10-2011 @ 09:12 PM by SayonaraJupiter
reply to post by syrinx high priest
If the independent verification made by Bochum Observatory was so important then why is this event not mentioned as part of the Bochum Observatory wiki page? There is no mention of Apollo.
en.wikipedia.org...
What about this guy? Have you heard these tapes? I'm sure somebody on this thread has heard the Honeysuckle tapes.
According to the Honeysuckle website
If the independent verification made by Bochum Observatory was so important then why is this event not mentioned as part of the Bochum Observatory wiki page? There is no mention of Apollo.
en.wikipedia.org...
What about this guy? Have you heard these tapes? I'm sure somebody on this thread has heard the Honeysuckle tapes.
Bernard Scrivener at Honeysuckle Creek recorded 45–50 hours of radio conversation between Houston and Apollo 8. These are recordings of the raw audio, not what was released to the public through NASA.
According to the Honeysuckle website
The ‘most authentic’ surviving recordings of the communications between Houston and Apollo 8 on the historic first voyage from the Earth to the Moon.
reply posted on 1-10-2011 @ 09:37 PM by LifeIsPeculiar
reply to post by SayonaraJupiter
Well, the best "you got" is to stay inside that little tiny box of yours where daylight never shines. I tried to engage you in meaningful conversation; however, it is obvious that you really don't do any "research" one way or another nor will you carry on an intellegent conversation. You just parrot what you have posted time and again changing only the format but never the content. I guess that comes from the limitations on the contents of your nano-box.
I really did want to directly discuss any misgivings you might have about the Apollo program. In order for a hoax to be necessary to "prevent embarassment", there would have to be a technical reason that prevented an actual landing. If you cannot address that issue, then you really have no grounds for the need of a hoax. It seems to me that such an elaborate hoax would be a lot more difficult to pull off than a moon landing. Just think of what they would have had to faked: Specifiactions from NASA, proposals from prime contractors, orbital computations, test results from hundreds of subsystems, tracking data, and so on. That would have to have been so well done that all of the scientists and engineers employed by the contractors would have to been either fooled or party to the hoax. (I personnal know a number of those contributers, right into Von Braun's office. They were not the sort who would hoax.) That hoax would have to have been so well done that even the KGB would have had to been fooled. They would have had to send SOMETHING to the moon in order to give the Russians something to track. Worse still, that SOMETHING would have to have landed on the moon and then transmit audio and video signals because they would have to fool the Russians from somewhere ON THE MOON. (You have heard of radio direction finding", haven't you? Do you also propose that direction couldn't be done. Hint: it was used quite a lot in WWII.) The Russians have been able to ferret out most everything we have, so how would "stupid NASA" have been so cleaver to prevent that, yet be unable to go to the moon?
Maybe your own ethics and morals are so corrupt that you are unable to imagine a large group of honest and hardworking individuals.
Come on now. Reply to this and other specific things I have posted. See if you can actually venture out side of that tiny little parrot cage ... I mean box.
If that's the best you got....
Well, the best "you got" is to stay inside that little tiny box of yours where daylight never shines. I tried to engage you in meaningful conversation; however, it is obvious that you really don't do any "research" one way or another nor will you carry on an intellegent conversation. You just parrot what you have posted time and again changing only the format but never the content. I guess that comes from the limitations on the contents of your nano-box.
I really did want to directly discuss any misgivings you might have about the Apollo program. In order for a hoax to be necessary to "prevent embarassment", there would have to be a technical reason that prevented an actual landing. If you cannot address that issue, then you really have no grounds for the need of a hoax. It seems to me that such an elaborate hoax would be a lot more difficult to pull off than a moon landing. Just think of what they would have had to faked: Specifiactions from NASA, proposals from prime contractors, orbital computations, test results from hundreds of subsystems, tracking data, and so on. That would have to have been so well done that all of the scientists and engineers employed by the contractors would have to been either fooled or party to the hoax. (I personnal know a number of those contributers, right into Von Braun's office. They were not the sort who would hoax.) That hoax would have to have been so well done that even the KGB would have had to been fooled. They would have had to send SOMETHING to the moon in order to give the Russians something to track. Worse still, that SOMETHING would have to have landed on the moon and then transmit audio and video signals because they would have to fool the Russians from somewhere ON THE MOON. (You have heard of radio direction finding", haven't you? Do you also propose that direction couldn't be done. Hint: it was used quite a lot in WWII.) The Russians have been able to ferret out most everything we have, so how would "stupid NASA" have been so cleaver to prevent that, yet be unable to go to the moon?
Maybe your own ethics and morals are so corrupt that you are unable to imagine a large group of honest and hardworking individuals.
Come on now. Reply to this and other specific things I have posted. See if you can actually venture out side of that tiny little parrot cage ... I mean box.
reply posted on 1-10-2011 @ 10:02 PM by LifeIsPeculiar
reply to post by SayonaraJupiter
I worked in the Skylab program; and, my job involved processing the downlink data and providing it to the interested laboratories. In those days there was no high speed Internet, fiber optic lines under the oceans, or any other means of data delivery. The raw telemetry tapes were flown by airplane from the tracking stations to Huntsville. The first step was to extract the digital farmes from the analog recordings. Next, 9-track tapes were created with frame/carousel dictionary headers, followed by the data. Those masters had to be processed again in order to extract readings for interested parties.
Tracking data was sent realtime since that information could be packaged in small frames and sent at low baud rates. For Mercury/Gemini/Apollo, near real-time tracking data was absolutely necessary. Radar did not work well enough in those days to perform ranging on objects that size so far away and the spacecraft would be difficult to resolve from the surface of the moon once the craft go close to the moon. The return signal from the moon would be a great deal stronger that the return from the craft simply because the moon is pretty big compared to the craft. Ranging was, therefore, accomplished through the use of a transponder on the craft. The craft would answer the "interrogation", but the moon would not.
According to the Honeysuckle website...
After the conclusion of the Apollo Moon missions in 1972, Honeysuckle Creek began supporting regular Skylab passes, the Apollo scientific stations left on the Moon by astronauts, and assisting the Deep Space Network with interplanetary tracking commitments...
I worked in the Skylab program; and, my job involved processing the downlink data and providing it to the interested laboratories. In those days there was no high speed Internet, fiber optic lines under the oceans, or any other means of data delivery. The raw telemetry tapes were flown by airplane from the tracking stations to Huntsville. The first step was to extract the digital farmes from the analog recordings. Next, 9-track tapes were created with frame/carousel dictionary headers, followed by the data. Those masters had to be processed again in order to extract readings for interested parties.
Tracking data was sent realtime since that information could be packaged in small frames and sent at low baud rates. For Mercury/Gemini/Apollo, near real-time tracking data was absolutely necessary. Radar did not work well enough in those days to perform ranging on objects that size so far away and the spacecraft would be difficult to resolve from the surface of the moon once the craft go close to the moon. The return signal from the moon would be a great deal stronger that the return from the craft simply because the moon is pretty big compared to the craft. Ranging was, therefore, accomplished through the use of a transponder on the craft. The craft would answer the "interrogation", but the moon would not.
reply posted on 1-10-2011 @ 10:08 PM by syrinx high priest
Originally posted by SayonaraJupiter
reply to post by syrinx high priest
If the independent verification made by Bochum Observatory was so important then why is this event not mentioned as part of the Bochum Observatory wiki page? There is no mention of Apollo.
en.wikipedia.org...
What about this guy? Have you heard these tapes? I'm sure somebody on this thread has heard the Honeysuckle tapes.
Bernard Scrivener at Honeysuckle Creek recorded 45–50 hours of radio conversation between Houston and Apollo 8. These are recordings of the raw audio, not what was released to the public through NASA.
According to the Honeysuckle websiteThe ‘most authentic’ surviving recordings of the communications between Houston and Apollo 8 on the historic first voyage from the Earth to the Moon.
just click on the link, and then click on the footnote.
footnote link
did you click on the link ? there are a ton of examples of independent verification that the apollo missions went to the moon
edit on 1-10-2011 by syrinx high priest because: (no reason given)
reply posted on 1-10-2011 @ 10:16 PM by LifeIsPeculiar
reply to post by SayonaraJupiter
Sure they did. They used the same tapes to record the next set of telemetry. The 9-track tapes that were made from the analog telemetery data accumulated at the rate of a tractor-trailor truck a month. (Skylab). The data was used for study and compiling the reports. Tapes were generally recycled. There was never any mandate to save information recorded on tape since the scientific findings were an embodiment of the data.
When these programs were cancelled quite a lot of material was destroyed. Again, there were no mandates to preserve the raw data. Storage space and office space was always at a premium, so old stuff gave way to the clutter created by new projects. NASA is driven strongly by public interest. No interest, no keepie. How many 9-track tape drives do you suppose are available these days?
[The fire control center at the KSC uses PDP-8s and PDP-11s to this day. You wouldn't believe how difficult it is to keep those babies running.]
It was the same for Apollo. Shoot, they even destroyed the tooling for those big engines ... and right now NASA would love to have some brand new F-1 engines. Apparently, the Air Force kept information regarding the F-1s, but all of the engineering changes that made it actually work have been discarded.
... and you know NASA destroyed the telemetry tapes ...
Sure they did. They used the same tapes to record the next set of telemetry. The 9-track tapes that were made from the analog telemetery data accumulated at the rate of a tractor-trailor truck a month. (Skylab). The data was used for study and compiling the reports. Tapes were generally recycled. There was never any mandate to save information recorded on tape since the scientific findings were an embodiment of the data.
When these programs were cancelled quite a lot of material was destroyed. Again, there were no mandates to preserve the raw data. Storage space and office space was always at a premium, so old stuff gave way to the clutter created by new projects. NASA is driven strongly by public interest. No interest, no keepie. How many 9-track tape drives do you suppose are available these days?
[The fire control center at the KSC uses PDP-8s and PDP-11s to this day. You wouldn't believe how difficult it is to keep those babies running.]
It was the same for Apollo. Shoot, they even destroyed the tooling for those big engines ... and right now NASA would love to have some brand new F-1 engines. Apparently, the Air Force kept information regarding the F-1s, but all of the engineering changes that made it actually work have been discarded.
reply posted on 1-10-2011 @ 10:28 PM by LifeIsPeculiar
reply to post by DaveNorris
Russia had fairly reliable BIG rockets that were really mostly bloated V-2 technology. Once they had reliable boosters they just stuck with them. Theirs used "brute strength", but ours were "mission optimized". We paid a great deal more attention to crew safety.
We beat the Russians to the moon largely because our electronics was considerably better than theirs. We could "finese the controls" delicately rather than "pounding out" a trajectory. Our progress was faster because we used old fashioned capitalism to produce the stack. They used largely unmotivated people.
...russia had the best tech and rockets but some how they didnt quite make it...
Russia had fairly reliable BIG rockets that were really mostly bloated V-2 technology. Once they had reliable boosters they just stuck with them. Theirs used "brute strength", but ours were "mission optimized". We paid a great deal more attention to crew safety.
We beat the Russians to the moon largely because our electronics was considerably better than theirs. We could "finese the controls" delicately rather than "pounding out" a trajectory. Our progress was faster because we used old fashioned capitalism to produce the stack. They used largely unmotivated people.
reply posted on 1-10-2011 @ 10:59 PM by LifeIsPeculiar
reply to post by SayonaraJupiter
How would the existance and participation of those people be irrevalent? As I said before, all of those people surely did tuck those twelve men into that machinery with the full intention of sending them to the moon. Explain how all of those people labored so long and hard, performed tests all along the way, thinking that the equipment would make it to the moon ... and be fooled by anyone? How would NASA change out all of that working hardware in order to substitute non-working hardware? You are aware that NASA didn't actually build all of that equipment, aren't you? When could NASA personnel have made this switch? Don't you think someone would notice a few guys coming in with a Saturn V stack, pulling the switch, and leaving with the original?
If you agreed that 400,000 didn't walk on the moon why are you continuously using 400,000 in your arguments?
How would the existance and participation of those people be irrevalent? As I said before, all of those people surely did tuck those twelve men into that machinery with the full intention of sending them to the moon. Explain how all of those people labored so long and hard, performed tests all along the way, thinking that the equipment would make it to the moon ... and be fooled by anyone? How would NASA change out all of that working hardware in order to substitute non-working hardware? You are aware that NASA didn't actually build all of that equipment, aren't you? When could NASA personnel have made this switch? Don't you think someone would notice a few guys coming in with a Saturn V stack, pulling the switch, and leaving with the original?
reply posted on 2-10-2011 @ 01:04 AM by SayonaraJupiter
Originally posted by LifeIsPeculiar
reply to post by SayonaraJupiter
... and you know NASA destroyed the telemetry tapes ...
Sure they did. They used the same tapes to record the next set of telemetry.
So how did all these lunar orbiter data tapes get saved but the Apollo tapes were erased?
vimeo.com...
By your argument these lunar orbiter tapes would have been recycled by normal procedures.
Organic food hit piece to coincide with California proposition 37.
Posted 2 days ago with 67 member flags
Posted 2 days ago with 67 member flags
The catch all mental health disorder... Oppositional Defiant Disorder (ODD)
Posted 15 days ago with 42 member flags
Posted 15 days ago with 42 member flags
Newest topics, updated in real-time:
Foreign troops and armored vehicles spotted in America’s New Hampshire, Florida, and West Virginia
Social Issues and Civil Unrest: 1 hours ago
Social Issues and Civil Unrest: 1 hours ago
Newest topics getting flags, in real-time:
California wants to treat 'E Cigarettes' like normal cigarettes.
General Conspiracies: 8 hours ago, 17 flags
General Conspiracies: 8 hours ago, 17 flags
AFTER MIDNIGHT: 107: Ridin' Into Town... *** Thanks For Tuning In !!! ***
ATS Live: 13 hours ago, 15 flags
ATS Live: 13 hours ago, 15 flags
Revealed: Obama Donor Sat in on IG Interviews with IRS Employees
Breaking Political News: 16 hours ago, 14 flags
Breaking Political News: 16 hours ago, 14 flags
Newest topics getting replies, in real-time:
The Above Top Secret Web sites are a
wholly owned social content community of
The Above Network, LLC.
This content community relies on
user-generated content from our member contributors.
The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership
who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides
a collaborative venue for free expression.
ATS Server: www2.theabovenetwork.com
Header data: 0.003 seconds
Page processed in: 0.433 seconds
wholly owned social content community of
The Above Network, LLC.
This content community relies on
user-generated content from our member contributors.
The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership
who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides
a collaborative venue for free expression.
ATS Server: www2.theabovenetwork.com
Header data: 0.003 seconds
Page processed in: 0.433 seconds
