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: 19
109
<< 16  17  18    20  21  22 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 7 2011 @ 10:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by excelents
reply to post by Frira
 


There was a news item on the 2 am news this morning here in the UK on Radio 4, I'll check out the BBC iplayer and make a recording.

The news announcer stated that several new high res pictures were to be released or had been released showing the landing sites, rover and various tracks etc in pristine condition.

The announcer then made a strange annotation that these had been made several of the Apollo missions that had landed on the moon, he reeled of several of the Apollo numbers including Apollo 13 which I thought exploded etc and they never made it to the Moon.

It may of course been a slip of the tongue or a typo, it amused me though so I'll head off and see if I can find a clip.

Edit : Radio 4 Show not available.
edit on 7-9-2011 by excelents because: (no reason given)


That's alright, several posts already provided the links to the images of 12, 14 and 17 sites.

13 did have an on-board explosion so did not land, but they returned to earth just fine.




posted on Sep, 7 2011 @ 10:19 AM
link   
reply to post by DJW001
 


What is your comment on this picture? Packaged rover but track are already on the ground?





posted on Sep, 7 2011 @ 10:23 AM
link   
reply to post by borutp
 



What are your comments on the movie and participating people commentary?


It's one of the reasons the site is so funny!

en.wikipedia.org...(documentary)

You might want to have a look at this, too:

en.wikipedia.org...



posted on Sep, 7 2011 @ 10:28 AM
link   
reply to post by DJW001
 


Studio lights? Ufo landing?
kidding about this one





posted on Sep, 7 2011 @ 10:28 AM
link   
reply to post by borutp
 



What is your comment on this picture? Packaged rover but track are already on the ground?


That's not the Lunar Rover, that's the MESA. The Lunar Rover had been deployed on an earlier EVA. You can confirm this here:

www.hq.nasa.gov...



posted on Sep, 7 2011 @ 10:34 AM
link   


But the comments above just really steam me. We KNEW that we could lose our heroes in horrible fashion. We LOST some of our heroes in horrible fashion. It was crushing. It was like losing *family* for God's sake. We had grown up from childhood with these guys--AND their wives and kids. Anyway, the point is that, as a nation, we recovered from the tragedy, and we restored our spirit, and we got up and slogged on. You'll never experience this country coming together like they did during Apollo 13. We were--again, as a nation--an absolute basket-case. We just couldn't believe that the worst could happen again; we WOULDN'T believe it. We, this nation--and god only knows how many people in how many countries around the world--were pulling for a miracle. And we got it.


Well if that wasn't a reason to fake the footage ..........................

And of course you had to bring miracles into it. Next you'll be giving jesus or some other deity credit for it. Could you outline the list of procedures involved in "pulling for a miracle"




There WAS NO FAKED FOOTAGE. Goddammit, if there were some way I could take you people and carry you to the moon and rub your faces in their footsteps--HARD!--believe me, I'd do it! And you wouldn't deserve it



First of all, I contented that the footage was faked. I actually do believe we made it to the moon.
Secondly, there is a way you could take me to the moon.You could pull for a miracle and it might happen, or we could go up in a tin can, 60's style.
Thirdly you wouldn't rub my nose hard on anything ,internet tough guy, not here, not on the moon or on any other planet. You require threats of physical violence and miracles to reinforce your argument. Are you a priest?
edit on 7-9-2011 by blah yada because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 7 2011 @ 10:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by Illustronic
reply to post by Frira
 


...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.


Preach it brother!



posted on Sep, 7 2011 @ 10:50 AM
link   
Just found this posted on MSN video player its about nasa moonlandings and L ROC

video.uk.msn.com...
edit on 7-9-2011 by TheNewKid because: (no reason given)


the new photos are supposedly HD and said to put an end to people trying to debunk nasa's moon landings (their words not mine)
edit on 7-9-2011 by TheNewKid because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 7 2011 @ 11:10 AM
link   
reply to post by Ex_CT2
 


www.washingtonpost.com...

These are pretty good photos, No? Whats the difference though. Folks will just say they are faked. Hoax proponents ask for proof, and when it presents itself, they just claim fake. For them, the idea that it COULD be faked is much more important that debunking the hoax.



posted on Sep, 7 2011 @ 11:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by LightSpeedDriver
reply to post by Phage
 


Phage, you disappoint me. The 2nd video in Athin's list, freeze it at 23 seconds. That is NOT the antenna reflecting, we can all see the antenna, no need to point that out as they flash often enough in most NASA films. Its a silvery shiny thing. I would guess that the antenna on the backpack does not extend 1 metre (3 feet) or more into the air. Unfortunately Youtube seems good at pulling all the so-called Hoax vids where credible evidence is presented using NASA videos and images. When they pull them so fast we can barely post them, its pointless.

[snip]

Ionizing radiation does not have a frequency? This little picture:
would seem to disagree with you. If it moves/vibrates, it has frequency, period. Sound, light, radiation of whichever form you would care to mention even though it happens not to be mentioned in some graphs, is probably due more to our inability to construct devices that can measure things that 'high'. And me being useless at Physics and still am. Off-topic, look how close mobile phones and microwave cookers are. Boiled testes anyone?
I am not an expert though and of that I am the first to admit. Back on topic...

[snip]

The whole NASA thing seems so strangely linked to some American people's psyche judging from many of the OS'ers replies here that its just scary, but there is a fine line between pride and nationalism and... I'll let you fill in the dots. (No I won't. Google youtube for "14 signs of fascism" for corroboration. It comes from work done by someone who has studied and earned a title, not some basement dweller like myself who presumably only watches youtube vids all day.
) Back on topic again...

I'd be the first to admit that none of us really "know". But then again, 'They' are good at keeping it nice and covered. It must be sad that people now dare to question (the sheer audacity!) whereas before they just swallowed it if it was on the TV. Internet helps us exchange and truly question ideas and that is a relatively new thing, at least on the scale it is now possible.

"I saw it on TV", "My dad worked for NASA", so it must be true? No disrespect to the OP or his father either (NASA doesn't hire dummies, we all know that) but its hardly proof, except that he was a clever man and worked for NASA in one of the biggest lies ever told. The people on the ground had no idea.

And yes Bart Sibrel was a dick for approaching Buzz Aldrin (?) in the way he did, but who else can such people get access to and ask them a question or two? The answer is probably classified information and I really couldn't give a rats ass as I've seen enough to know there is something very fishy about it all.

NASA stinks, period. The company NASA that is, not the well-meaning people who work for it, just to be clear.

Feel free to ignore my post and/or let others bury it in a hail of pointless posts with NO EVIDENCE apart from the same old grainy images showing a dot and a slight shadow. We can see rover tracks, but not the rover or the various bits of spacecraft or junk left behind? Suuure!

I was walking on the moon one day, in the studio light of ...May...June..er...well, who cares. Mua...ha...ha!
edit on 6/9/11 by masqua because: Off topic/personal attack remarks edited


Bury your post? What evidence did you provide? Let's look, shall we?

-"The whole NASA thing seems so strangely linked to some American people's psyche."
Your gut feel that it is strange is not evidence.

-"I've seen enough to know there is something very fishy about it all."
But what evidence? Some vague feeling?

- " 'They' are good at keeping it nice and covered. It must be sad that people now dare to question (the sheer audacity!) whereas before they just swallowed it if it was on the TV. Internet helps us exchange and truly question ideas and that is a relatively new thing, at least on the scale it is now possible."
Questioning is not sad. Ignoring answers is. Anyway, I find no evidence to "bury" here.

-"...he was a clever man and worked for NASA in one of the biggest lies ever told. The people on the ground had no idea."
What evidence for a lie have you?
What evidence have you that the people on the ground had no idea?

-"NASA stinks, period."
Vague feeling again?


So.. Wow! With powerful stuff like that, you must be constantly afraid of being eliminated for what you know.

I mean, no other humans that I know have a gut feelings about things they do not understand. What an incredible gift, and you must always act on that-- ignore reason if you have to, because a "gut feel" is always accurate.

Goodness! Do you listen to yourself?



posted on Sep, 7 2011 @ 11:41 AM
link   
reply to post by FoosM
 


I did not know they changed magazines outside the LM.Thank you for informing me.
I notice Duke has his back to the Sun. Always a good idea when changing film.



A camera shutter as a shield against space radiation. Are you kidding me? Your throwing that out as a fact? Second, the shutter has to open right?

When you say "space radiation" I can't help but think of this soundtrack.

It wasn't that bad. It wasn't instant death.
edit on 9/7/2011 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 7 2011 @ 11:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by Kitilani
 




To be fair, we have pictures like that from Mars that I am sure will match up exactly when Japan maps that too.

Images like this?

Yes, it's a composite of two pan shots.



edit on 9/7/2011 by Phage because: (no reason given)


Yes. Have you not seen them?



posted on Sep, 7 2011 @ 11:59 AM
link   
reply to post by Kitilani
 




Yes. Have you not seen them?

None with an astronaut in them.

Pardon me if I presume too much but are you suggesting the astronaut was added to an image taken by a remotely operated vehicle? Was that done with all of the Apollo surface images or just that one? The one which shows terrain that would be verified by a Japanese satellite decades afterward.

edit on 9/7/2011 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 7 2011 @ 12:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by borutp
reply to post by DJW001
 


Studio lights? Ufo landing?
kidding about this one




Is this supposed to be a real Moon photo? You can see the lighting rig.
How can anyone believe anything Nasa gives us?
I don't for sure if we sent men to the Moon or not, but I think most of the footage we have been shown is fake.



posted on Sep, 7 2011 @ 12:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by the4thhorseman
I will post this here and on the other thread Moon thread as well. Just as the this whole hoax moon landing question comes up. We find stories in the news with new hi-res photos of the site.

Source 1Source 2

Funny makes you think who is watching who and who is who on this site..LOL


It may help-- I had read a press release on Friday of last week that the images would come out on Tuesday-- many posting here surely read the same-- it was NASA press release-- a site which several of us, no doubt, read regularly.

Also, these images are not the first landing site images from that LRO- I know I downloaded the Apollo 11 landing site images several months ago-- maybe last year..

In other words, I posted, in part, because I was excited about the new images which I knew were about to be posted and remembering those great days when it was happening. Also, my father died two years last month and, I suppose as part of the grieving process, I have spent the last few weeks remembering him-- so I started writing the thread from that private perspective but for a meaningful public one.



posted on Sep, 7 2011 @ 12:19 PM
link   
I can believe what you're saying, i was very sceptic at first. I knew it was possible to 'bounce' signals from sattelites etc, so as to fool everyone listening that the signal was coming from the moon.
I still have doubts about a lot of things, but since then i have reasoned that they must have had a reason to fake some of the evidence, even if the mission was real.
I now believe they DID go there, but what they FOUND there is being kept secret.
I also believe there are 2 separate space programs dating back to the 60's; the public one and the secret one.
I also believe Von Braun knew of the secret program (saucer technology) so he didn't really care where the public program was at, he knew it was outdated already.
So far all the astronauts, & everyone at NASA still denies any of it, except for Ed Mitchell who has hinted at this very scenario.
Thoughts, anyone?



posted on Sep, 7 2011 @ 12:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by borutp
reply to post by PsykoOps
 


Amongst the many different proofs of a nonlanding on the moon this page is one of the best....If you care to look at all that is presented on this page ... guess not because you belive in moon landing

Link
edit on 7-9-2011 by borutp because: (no reason given)


You are not the first person to embarrass themselves by pointing to that video as evidence, and it is painful for me to point out what ought to be obvious:

That video was for fun. There is some great but sophisticated (albeit, silly) humor in it. That humor goes right over the head of many. And you just admitted that you are one such person who had absolutely no idea that it is comedy.

I appreciate the humor of the video, but I find it cruel and not to my liking. Let me give you a not-so-touchy example-- which I may have used in the last post I had when that video was offered as "compelling evidence."

The scenario is about US secret agents running for their lives-- camping somewhere in Vietnam so as not to be assassinated. And the subtitles as the old Vietnamese gentleman is talking are disturbing and funny at the same time. Playing into the "ugly American" cultural bias, the text includes something about what slobs the American spies were, "McDonald's wrappers everywhere!"

You see, you are supposed to think that through. Of course in the 1970's there were no McDonald's in Vietnam, and the idea that that is the only thing one would expect an "ugly American" to eat, even if in the jungle of Vietnam is irony. It is a looooong way to go for a joke-- but that was the method of the film.

In a face-palm sort of way, I have noticed that conspiracy sites which use that film, cut-off the end credits. Want to know why? Because the credits show the players: Actor names, and which parts they played. The character names are part of the joke, but it is not my job to explain a comedy of film to persons either too naive or too young to get the humor.

But for yourself-- please, do yourself a favor and do not present yourself as someone who missed the joke and thought it serious-- it does not serve you.



posted on Sep, 7 2011 @ 12:25 PM
link   
reply to post by DJW001
 


WELL DONE!

Second Line. (used for fishing only)



posted on Sep, 7 2011 @ 12:26 PM
link   
Some new photos.They should be available on NASA's Web site, as well.

news.yahoo.com...



posted on Sep, 7 2011 @ 12:49 PM
link   
reply to post by borutp
 


I looked just to give it a shot. I'm not one to dismiss something so easily. Didn't see any theories that hadn't been said before and debunked. I saw lies on the page. Also a funiest part:


FACT: Rumor has it that...


That made me smile and my soul just cried a little.



new topics

top topics



 
109
<< 16  17  18    20  21  22 >>

log in

join