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.

 

Apollo Moon Landings a Hoax? Then Read This

page: 16
109
<< 13  14  15    17  18  19 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 6 2011 @ 09:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by Ex_CT2

Originally posted by Trelane
reply to post by Ex_CT2
 


Hi,
There are high definition images of the landing areas, resolution is like 60cm or something close to that they are at:
www.lroc.asu.edu...
The problem is the images are between 5 and 36gb to download. I've downloaded a few of the big onces but am completly unable to open them even with the correct software, guess my computer isnt good enough!

I believe IrfanView will open them. You can find it at download.cnet.com. I think someone recently told me that they had opened them with a Corel (WordPerfect) application--Corel Presenter, I think.

In any event, you should easily find something at download.cnet.com that will open them.



photoshop will open them




posted on Sep, 6 2011 @ 09:56 PM
link   
I'll post what I believe happened. I have heard that we went to the moon but were told not to go back. Now if this is the case and is true, then it is possible that we are being lied to. Now I believe that we DID go to the moon as they said we did. But what they show us on the videos and such of the moon landing IS NOT the moon landing. That part is the hoax. I mean what better way to cover up what really went on up there than to mix the truth with a lie? By mixing the truth with a lie you divide people into two groups and manipulate them so they assume that it is just either the whole truth or a whole lie when in reality its both. Pretty smart if I say so myself.



posted on Sep, 6 2011 @ 10:01 PM
link   
reply to post by LifeIsPeculiar
 

Thank you, sir. But I'm actually not a youngster, and I can (fairly) easily convert hex to decimal and binary (and vice-versa) in my head. Since about 1977. I used to be able to read ASCII with my fingers, when I was in the Navy (TWX communications, you know).

I was the early poster who explained that I was 19 years old when men first set foot on the moon. I knew there was some reason having to do with '60s tech that the broadcasters couldn't use the signal directly. I just hadn't done the actual research. But I knew that there was something wrong with that argument.

Thanks again....



posted on Sep, 6 2011 @ 10:14 PM
link   
I'm not sold on the Moon Landing being a Hoax.

Just wanted to point out to the OP that AFAIK no-one is claiming the entire NASA space program was a hoax, just the actual moon landing. Its entirely possible that they did everything but get to the moon. If that was the case then everything you've described could have still happened, there just would have been an "inner circle" involved with faking that one mission. No-one outside of that inner circle (i.e. your dad) would be privy to that information and for all they would know it was real.

While it was a good story and a good post I don't think it proves the issue one way or another, sorry.



posted on Sep, 6 2011 @ 10:15 PM
link   
reply to post by LifeIsPeculiar
 


Original Apollo 11 TV images were at a 10 frame per second capture, they were transmitted to receiving stations in California, Spain, and Australia and I believe (Maryland?), they had to be encoded to a transmittable language for airing on TV then and the frame rate was changed up to 24 to 30 frames per second to hit live TV in less than a 6 second delay ultimately from Houston. Westinghouse made great improvements to the TV transmissions and by Apollo 15 all of the bugs were greatly improved and they considered solved, (along with the lessons learned). Every tech company follows up new efforts with a post lessons learned. Apollo 12 suffered by an inadvertent exposure to direct solar light to the imaging plate of the TV camera, Apollo 14 suffered from another kind of mishandling mishap I can't recall right now, (the links are in this thread, takes some digging), and we know what happened to Apollo 13.



posted on Sep, 6 2011 @ 10:16 PM
link   
reply to post by Cecilofs
 


Um...5 missions landed men that walked on the moon. What do you mean one mission?



posted on Sep, 6 2011 @ 10:24 PM
link   
Look...about all the hoopla about the VA belts...and what the force is or is not. some posters have said ignorantly that there is no frequency...LOL...if you do a little kinder-garden research you will find it is driven by our own electromagnetic force lines...called flux to the layman, it is what guides the solar wind around us so we don't get fried. Good for us. Bad for the conspiracy theorists...because it is calculable. A direct correlation between a given solar wind event and the natural occurring magnetic image of the constantly changing magnetic flux lines of the spinning mass of the Earth. There are calculable weaknesses in these lines, and their effects on biological lifeforms. Easily trans-versed with the math of 1969-1972....even using slide rulers....oh I am sorry to those who have never used one, and are stuck with the inferior, though often thought superior calculators of the "future"..who's error rate is .003% depending on model and floating point precision...that ain't good enough for the calculations necessary to time these events...sometimes the past has a better view. And a better way to get there, is often a reality. that we must come to grips with. Do some simple math on different calculators and you will get different answers. maybe it may not mean much to you ...A .ooo1 to .02 difference in results...might not mean much but is in astronomical terms thousands of miles or millions of angstroms or 10,000 Gaussian units ...means everything in terms of influence.

now I ask you...what is the driving force...your conspiracy theory or the truth.

Are you really that stupid to think that we didn't have the math to accomplish this feat or that you just think we are just that stupid to fool the powers that be at the time ...the Russians...and all the others that would wish us to fail....give me a break

By the way the error of a slide rule... 2 significant digits...Modern Calculator from 3 to 5 significant digits.
you do the "math"



posted on Sep, 6 2011 @ 10:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by Andronian
Look...about all the hoopla about the VA belts...and what the force is or is not. some posters have said ignorantly that there is no frequency...LOL...if you do a little kinder-garden research you will find it is driven by our own electromagnetic force lines...called flux to the layman, it is what guides the solar wind around us so we don't get fried. Good for us. Bad for the conspiracy theorists...because it is calculable. A direct correlation between a given solar wind event and the natural occurring magnetic image of the constantly changing magnetic flux lines of the spinning mass of the Earth. There are calculable weaknesses in these lines, and their effects on biological lifeforms. Easily trans-versed with the math of 1969-1972....even using slide rulers....oh I am sorry to those who have never used one, and are stuck with the inferior, though often thought superior calculators of the "future"..who's error rate is .003% depending on model and floating point precision...that ain't good enough for the calculations necessary to time these events...sometimes the past has a better view. And a better way to get there, is often a reality. that we must come to grips with. Do some simple math on different calculators and you will get different answers. maybe it may not mean much to you ...A .ooo1 to .02 difference in results...might not mean much but is in astronomical terms thousands of miles or millions of angstroms or 10,000 Gaussian units ...means everything in terms of influence.

now I ask you...what is the driving force...your conspiracy theory or the truth.

Are you really that stupid to think that we didn't have the math to accomplish this feat or that you just think we are just that stupid to fool the powers that be at the time ...the Russians...and all the others that would wish us to fail....give me a break

By the way the error of a slide rule... 2 significant digits...Modern Calculator from 3 to 5 significant digits.
you do the "math"



hmmm, A good loudspeaker coil magnet flux density is around 10,000 gauss



posted on Sep, 6 2011 @ 10:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by WeRpeons
reply to post by Frira
 


The only thing that I found puzzling is why they abruptly stopped going to the moon. Did your Dad ever talk to you about that?


Yeah, he did. I would like to hear others' thoughts, but will tell you his-- and thanks for your own comments.

Have seen Apollo 13? The scene where they talk about how the network television-- all of them-- had decided not to televise the astronauts planned broadcast? There is a sense that no body cared anymore. Many did not care anymore-- but a bunch of us did.

For everyone who was thinking, "This is great! Now, what are we going to be able to do now that we are there?" there were many more who thought, "Okay, we made it. Now let's do something else." My Dad saw it as the public in general. I blamed the television news. Either way, public interest waned and with public interest, so went the budget.

To this day, I do not know what Apollo 19 and 20 would have accomplished had they not been cut. There is a good article on Wikipedia: en.wikipedia.org...

Anyway, we did not seem to have a plan for staying anyway, and if a realistic one existed, the money was not going to materialize. Television news reports on NASA at that time were more about "What a waste of funds" simply because few understood what science means to, and what technology does for, humanity. I remember NASA fought back with much about "spin-off" technologies, but science for science sake was a hard sale to a mostly business-oriented public flooding into and out of Liberal Arts colleges.

I find learning what science experiments took place on the shuttle and on the ISS hard to come by. I must have read twenty short articles about growing crystals in micro-gravity and not one ever hinted as to why that was important. And all of my liberal arts friends, when I have asked, stare at me like deer in headlights.

Oops, sorry, soapbox formed under me. I'm tired.



posted on Sep, 6 2011 @ 10:44 PM
link   
was just a comparison...crank up the volume and let's party.



posted on Sep, 6 2011 @ 11:19 PM
link   
reply to post by Frira
 





My Dad saw it as the public in general. I blamed the television news. Either way, public interest waned and with public interest, so went the budget.


I do recall the more Apollo flights, the more the public started to take the space program for granted. I remember people saying there were more important things to spend money on. Which probably is why NASA looked into designing a reusable space craft to help change public opinion about our space program and help reduce its budget.

Strong public opinion can change the political and social climate. It sure put pressure on our government and got us out of Vietnam.

Now that you mentioned it I can see why.



posted on Sep, 6 2011 @ 11:32 PM
link   
My brother worked for NASA a number of years back as an engineer for a few years. He told me that no one really talked about the Apollo stuff when he was there. It was all about the shuttle then. So, he would agree with the been there done that kind of mentality at NASA. Oddly enough, he was actually the guy who first brought to my attention some of the problems with the moonlanding OS. All the usual stuff about the flag, the radiation, etc. All the stuff that has been discussed here. He brought up a few things that I haven't seen mentioned here, but nothing really earth shattering, especially if you have a strong opinion one way or the other. His opinion is that we probably did land on the moon but that there remain a lot of oddities; most notably for him, the radiation issue. I basically share his opinion, we probably did but there is some weird stuff that easily invites conspiracy theories. I enjoy the debate. Both sides have really interesting points. I wasn't there, so there is no way I will ever know with absolute certainty.

The one thing that I would add is the moon shot(s) was an incredible feet. I can see how the probabilities of the Apollo projects to be too much for some. But you know, sometimes we humans do incredible (meaning incapable of being believed) things. Some are good, some are awful, some fall somewhere in between.



posted on Sep, 6 2011 @ 11:41 PM
link   
reply to post by Frira
 


Excellent post! Some youngsters don't realize how the public complacency effects the national budget. Or how much of the national budget was used in the Apollo endeavors compared to today.

I also like the interjection of complacency of public single-mindedness in thinking about the entire space program after the moon landings. What did launches to the moon DO to benefit mankind? "We can land a man on the moon but can't cure the common cold" mindset so prevalent in the day. The science discoveries and technologies that were ramped up in like a WW II pace of implementation was unprecedented. Apollo didn't just invent Tang, that's ridiculous! The Space Shuttle went to LEO with over a hundred microgravity experiments the crew monitored each and every of the 134 missions, prepared by State Universities, private R&D firms, (like where I work and know about), and the ISS is the testbed for further research in manned hazards in space and microgravity travel endurance, as well as testing protective radiation shielding among other more pressing challenges.

It is really the complacency of internet knowledge access today? (and misinformation to the laymen), as opposed to taking out a slide rule, or pencil and paper in a public library to work out what they are telling you (or you are actually reading through finding the right books to reference) yourself, that has deteriorated people to disbelieve anything documented in books (and the progressive knowledge compilation) not available on Youtube or passive audio instruction aids. Especially when it takes a Youtuber 15 minutes to present 2 seconds of STEREO footage he obviously doesn't understand).

Conspiracy is lazy input/regurgitation, simple stimulus/response, like the Pavlov dog. And we are to believe these folks know something Einstein can't by 'thinking out of the box'. Well the box let your cognitive thinking out and Pandora is in your little dark room with her box open too.



posted on Sep, 7 2011 @ 12:08 AM
link   
reply to post by Frira
 


You just joined the site. Save your bull stein unless you have proof.



posted on Sep, 7 2011 @ 12:14 AM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 


Wouldn't they have to worry about condensation with having the cameras freeze and then heat up to room temps?



posted on Sep, 7 2011 @ 01:00 AM
link   
Yep, more evidence available today showing we went from the moon. Three of the sites photographed from an even lower orbit:

www.nasa.gov...

Of course that is NASA, which no doubt isn't admissible evidence for skeptics.



posted on Sep, 7 2011 @ 01:17 AM
link   
And even the Japanese are in on the conspiracy.
Although their SELENE spacecraft is not able to directly observe the objects left on the ground, they state they can observe the human influence on the ground as proof of the landings.

link

Conspiracy theorists will say "its just a blur", of course..



posted on Sep, 7 2011 @ 01:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by alfa1
And even the Japanese are in on the conspiracy.



And more evidence which I dont think gets enough airtime here.

When the astronauts landed on the moon, they took photos from the ground.
Now, decades later, the Japanese team has mapped that terrain at higher resolution than ever before, and they find the terrain is EXACTLY the same as the photos taken all those decades ago.

Conspiracy theorists have to explain why the terrain of the "movie set" would be more stunningly accurate than anyone knew about at the time.
link
link



posted on Sep, 7 2011 @ 01:47 AM
link   
reply to post by Frira
 


My Dad and his buddy, a very famous man,


May I ask who is this 'very famous man'?



posted on Sep, 7 2011 @ 01:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by alfa1

Originally posted by alfa1
And even the Japanese are in on the conspiracy.



And more evidence which I dont think gets enough airtime here.

When the astronauts landed on the moon, they took photos from the ground.
Now, decades later, the Japanese team has mapped that terrain at higher resolution than ever before, and they find the terrain is EXACTLY the same as the photos taken all those decades ago.

Conspiracy theorists have to explain why the terrain of the "movie set" would be more stunningly accurate than anyone knew about at the time.
link
link



it's called photoshop.....



new topics

top topics



 
109
<< 13  14  15    17  18  19 >>

log in

join