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: 26
109
<< 23  24  25    27  28  29 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 9 2011 @ 06:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by DerbyCityLights

Originally posted by LightSpeedDriver
reply to post by openminded2011
 


Cool story bro! Anecdotal 'evidence' and a rocket lifting off and disappearing in the sky does not equal a moon landing but good on you for flying the flag of national pride. Does my comment make you angry too? Opinions differ, get over it. Sure they could afford a nice big firework for you all to watch, you ended up paying for it.


You sound like a little kid who is lashing out after getting your feelings hurt. All that amounts to is sanctimonious sarcasm dripping with narcissism. I know those are some big words. Do I need to google them for you?

Why is it that most everyone (not all, but most) who are detractors of the moon landings get bent out of shape when actual proof is given that goes against their beliefs? The Lunar Laser Ranging Experiment, the recent photos that clearly show foot paths and tire tracks, the video, the audio, the first hand witnesses. None of it ever makes a difference. Instead, these facts are distorted by ignorance and a general lack of civility. I have yet to hear a moon landing detractor find a first hand witness that corroborates their beliefs. Its always supposition of incorrect facts and false logic that is relied on to promote the claim that we never went to the moon.


Apologies for my late reply, I only just found out how the reply to messages notification part works. Sanctimonious, narcissistic and sarcasm are all in my vocabulary thank you very much. I think my command of the English language is fair to middling but again, thank you for your concern and offer of help to look up the multi-sylabble words for me.

Quite how you infer all that from my fairly statement is completely beyond me but I see you have plenty of stars so I guess I must be in the minority. I am far from a little kid as you so eloquently put it.

To address your points one by one...

My shape is not bent. What I am slightly sick of is many people posting the same tired old images at least...oh 10-15 times, maybe more and claiming that is proof. On no single of those so called super-new super-sharp images can anything be seen except tracks. Can you see the remains of spacecraft, lunar rovers, etc, or can you, like me just see blobs? If I could see it, I wouldn't need a large arrow and a label telling me what it is.

Proof is also in my vocabulary but what has been presented so far as proof is not that, its bad photos, combined with ridicule, personal attacks and answering questions with questions. That gets a little faded after a while.

The original poster claimed as he had seen the rocket launch, it must have landed on the moon. Major fallacy, hence my humorous reply (Cool story bro!)

Believe me, I would love to believe, in fact I used to believe but I now see little worth believing. Multiple posts by NASA fans do not as yet constitute proof in my eyes. Proof is a clear photo. I mean, the LRO is just 12 miles from the surface I thought I read somewhere, and yet this is the best it can do?

A reflector on the moon is a good point, but I don't remember seeing them put that there. That could have been dropped from a non-manned mission but that is irrelevant to the discussion at hand (namely proof of a manned landing in real time with credible images of some kind)

Ah yes, the good old attack of ignorance. I am ignorant because I still have seen nothing credible apart from lots of bantering by highly regarded 'experts' on this board. Unfortunately these 'experts' are not here in an open-minded fashion, they are here only to debunk. One person imho gave his game away by mentioning that one of his own experiments was carried/performed on a Skylab mission. Now with that information, I can imagine only too well that this is not just a hobby to him, but something personal and possibly even financial. I also detect zero friendliness in some of their answers, which is not conducive to a good discussion. Not to mention poking fun at people's intelligence, cherry picking parts of things to answer and ignoring all the rest. I myself am certainly not sitting here foaming at the mouth, steaming at the ears or raising my heartbeat.

The only first hand witnesses are the astronauts themselves I think.

One more thing, you accuse me of "dripping sarcasm" and then proceed to do the same thing. 2 wrongs make a right?
You don't need to answer that, I know the answer.




posted on Sep, 9 2011 @ 07:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by LightSpeedDriver
On no single of those so called super-new super-sharp images can anything be seen except tracks. Can you see the remains of spacecraft, lunar rovers, etc, or can you, like me just see blobs? If I could see it, I wouldn't need a large arrow and a label telling me what it is.


Well, yes, you can see quite clearly man made equipment. The labels, i am sure, are to tell us what it is we are looking at for identification.

Try zooming in, failing that, shoulda gone to specsavers
lol



posted on Sep, 9 2011 @ 08:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by Frira

Originally posted by LightSpeedDriver
reply to post by Phage
 



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?


Well lets see, point by point again.

Multiple posts by different people all posting the same dubious images. Sharpest ever, newest image processing, ad nauseum

Next point. How about all the known airbrushed images of the lunar surface which have already been posted (I would think) multiple times on this board. The so-called tower I believe, among others. Huge smudges placed deliberately by human hand. No I can't be bothered to search for you, but they are quite well known. Now don't start debunking the tower, just explain why airbrushed images have been made. Then the images where the shadows are all wrong, meaning they run in multiple directions which just does not happen with a single light source. Not forgetting the images where the sun or its reflection in visors does not appear like a sun. Need I continue? I think not.

Next point. Burying. You find no evidence to bury here. Your opinion is everyones? Obviously no. Lets move on...

Next point. "What evidence for a lie have you?" Airbrushed images, and "dodgy" photos. See above.

"What evidence have you that the people on the ground had no idea?" It's the only logical conclusion I could make. National security and all. Are you trying to say the people on the ground were in the know?

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

Can YOU read or hear yourself? Blithely discarding all criticism like it was nothing.

Your next one is just funny or maybe extremely telling... "So.. Wow! With powerful stuff like that, you must be constantly afraid of being eliminated for what you know."

Are you trying to say here that if I did have real hard physical proof I could expect to be murdered?
That does not surprise me at all when that much money and secret organisations are involved.

We are all entitled to our own opinion regardless of how right you or anyone else thinks they or I for that matter, may be. Your OP provided no evidence except for "My Dad worked for NASA and we talked about it much" I did find the fact that you said he came home with tapes strange though. Wouldn't that be NASA property?

PS Apologies for the complete out of sync replies, I only just discovered the message reply thingy.



posted on Sep, 9 2011 @ 08:42 PM
link   
reply to post by woogleuk
 


I can see something, I just can't see what it is, man made, super-imposed or otherwise. Regarding your specsavers quip, I have more respect for my eyes and the people who make my glasses than to go to the walmart of opticians.

PS If it was a good picture it would be taken from a slight angle to help give depth and definition to the object. All I see is a very white shape which needs sharpening and other tricks. Bad evidence at best. Hence the labels again. I still see Jack...
edit on 9/9/11 by LightSpeedDriver because: Added a PS

edit on 9/9/11 by LightSpeedDriver because: Added "and definition"



posted on Sep, 9 2011 @ 08:54 PM
link   
reply to post by LightSpeedDriver
 


So you can grind glasses as well as having insurmountable preconceived beliefs about facts about something that took place before you were even born?

Tell us the next lottery ticket sequence then, like one of those BIG ones.



posted on Sep, 9 2011 @ 08:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by Illustronic
reply to post by LightSpeedDriver
 


So you can grind glasses as well as having insurmountable preconceived beliefs about facts about something that took place before you were even born?

Tell us the next lottery ticket sequence then, like one of those BIG ones.


No, I just go to a proper optician that does not use the equivalent of slave labour. How do I know its the equivalent of slave labour? Because I worked for a short time in one of their factories here.


Lottery? Hell this is ATS, I don't play the lottery. Its a con! No one ever really wins, its a show.
Right after they take a photo of the "Lucky Winner" they disappear forever.
edit on 9/9/11 by LightSpeedDriver because: Added info about specsavers factory



posted on Sep, 9 2011 @ 09:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by playswithmachines
 

Do that.
And be more careful with your "facts" next time.


Like you were careful with your statement of fact that they changed the film canisters in the LEM, and not posting the lead up footage of the LEM departure ( I mean the full thing where they changed from the mock up LEM, to the model on wire ) and the footage went from poor, to colour. I think your fame is turning you RUDE !



posted on Sep, 9 2011 @ 10:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by LightSpeedDriver

Originally posted by Frira

Originally posted by LightSpeedDriver
reply to post by Phage
 



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?


Well lets see, point by point again.

Multiple posts by different people all posting the same dubious images. Sharpest ever, newest image processing, ad nauseum

Dubious images-- a gut feeling unsupported by evidence. Here we go again!



Next point. How about all the known airbrushed images of the lunar surface which have already been posted (I would think) multiple times on this board. The so-called tower I believe, among others. Huge smudges placed deliberately by human hand. No I can't be bothered to search for you, but they are quite well known.

You "can't be bothered" to show an image of a tower which has been airbrushed out by shady NASA spies, but which image has so convinced you that you know it was air brushed out by hand?

Why do you bother to write? I mean really.



Now don't start debunking the tower, just explain why airbrushed images have been made. Then the images where the shadows are all wrong, meaning they run in multiple directions which just does not happen with a single light source. Not forgetting the images where the sun or its reflection in visors does not appear like a sun. Need I continue? I think not.

No, I think you have a dug yourself into a hole of sufficient depth already. You have my permission to stop.



Next point. Burying. You find no evidence to bury here. Your opinion is everyones? Obviously no. Lets move on...

No, let's not move on just yet.

You were the one saying you believed people would "bury" your post. Were you not implying that your post was dangerous, or would be considered dangerous?



Next point. "What evidence for a lie have you?" Airbrushed images, and "dodgy" photos. See above.


And so my question remains unanswered! You said you could not be bothered.



"What evidence have you that the people on the ground had no idea?" It's the only logical conclusion I could make.


If I were you... I would not admit that even if you really believed it.

A logical conclusion includes the one I have drawn-- one based on evidence. Yours has no evidence, requires enormous presumption and fails to take into account technology or even human nature.



posted on Sep, 9 2011 @ 11:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by LightSpeedDriver

Originally posted by Frira

Originally posted by LightSpeedDriver
reply to post by Phage
 




-"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?


Part II




National security and all. Are you trying to say the people on the ground were in the know?


Yes. Of course. As a matter of reason, because it makes sense, matches the evidence, the technology and human nature.



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

Can YOU read or hear yourself? Blithely discarding all criticism like it was nothing.

Uhm... You say "NASA stinks" and I was not to discard that criticism? You wish it was blithe disregard-- but it is intelligent, informed and studied dismissal. Two very different things. I recommend it.



Your next one is just funny or maybe extremely telling... "So.. Wow! With powerful stuff like that, you must be constantly afraid of being eliminated for what you know."

Are you trying to say here that if I did have real hard physical proof I could expect to be murdered?
That does not surprise me at all when that much money and secret organisations are involved.

No, I'm not saying that. I think you are imagining that scenario. That you believe with no research what others have led you to believe, unable to even defend it-- and yet you seem to think that you are "living on the edge."

There is plenty of real danger, drama an intrigue in the real life. I know what it looks like-- and it doesn't look like what you imagine it to be.



We are all entitled to our own opinion regardless of how right you or anyone else thinks they or I for that matter, may be. Your OP provided no evidence except for "My Dad worked for NASA and we talked about it much" I did find the fact that you said he came home with tapes strange though. Wouldn't that be NASA property?


And everyone is also entitled to an informed opinion-- more difficult then other the kind of opinion-- but usually worth it.

The films (not tapes--in those days you put a reel on a projector) were NASA property. NASA is very good at distributing information-- part of the culture of the Agency-- one of the reasons I despise the innuendo. The notebooks, too. Each document having its own identifying catalog number. You may get everything I read simply by asking NASA for it-- and most, if not all, is available online from NASA.

I warn you, it will bore you to tears unless you are interested in reality. And... you are not.

Things like "How do you know that the sun was within 13 and 39 degrees for duration of the Apollo 15 missions?" or "How do you know that photo was taken with a 500mm lens?"

Because I read! I read good verifiable information-- tons of stuff I have downloaded or saved in hard copy over decades; and it has served me well! And NASA will give you all of it on a silver platter.




PS Apologies for the complete out of sync replies, I only just discovered the message reply thingy.

No worries. We've been busy.



posted on Sep, 9 2011 @ 11:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by LightSpeedDriver
reply to post by woogleuk
 


I can see something, I just can't see what it is, man made, super-imposed or otherwise. Regarding your specsavers quip, I have more respect for my eyes and the people who make my glasses than to go to the walmart of opticians.


Are you downloading the thumbnails?

Here is the pertinent cropped version of my Apollo 11 image I got months ago.



The large octagonal "dot" with four legs is the (not surprisingly) octagonal, four-legged descent stage of the Lunar Module.

The foot paths are dark grey with the disturbed dust radiating in a lighter grey. The bright squares and dots are various experiment packages: seismic, solar wind, laser reflector, etc.

The double dot off by itself is, I think, something I inadvertently added when preparing the image to display here.



PS If it was a good picture it would be taken from a slight angle to help give depth and definition to the object. All I see is a very white shape which needs sharpening and other tricks. Bad evidence at best. Hence the labels again. I still see Jack...


Well... That is what I said many would say-- that whatever evidence is provided, the hoaxers will claim it is falsified. But I'm not providing the image for you-- I'm providing it so that those who read you saying you cannot see anything but a dot will know what your "dot" looks like.



posted on Sep, 10 2011 @ 02:28 AM
link   
reply to post by Frira
 


A picture is worth a thousand words.




ZG
edit on 9/10/2011 by ZeroGhost because: Imaging



posted on Sep, 10 2011 @ 03:38 AM
link   
For those who just dismiss the new LRO pictures as a bunch of blurry squiggles that could be anythiung at all, compare the following of the Apollo 12 mission...



The top part is the new LRO image from a few days ago.
The bottom part is from a book published in 1991.
Lunar Sourcebook, G.H. Heiken, D.T. Vaniman and B.M. French, editors, copyright 1991 by Cambridge University Press,

Although I've scaled and cropped the images, I havnt done anything naughty like draw in the lines by hand with a pen tool or anything like that.
The point of this is to show that the LRO has photographed not just a random bunch of blurs on the moon, but the exact site of the Apollo 12 mission.

People who say its all a big conspiracy and everything is faked and photoshopped and hundreds of people are hiding the big secret dont need to reply - I've just done it for you.

Link to site hosting the image from 1991 book.



posted on Sep, 10 2011 @ 03:57 AM
link   
Two minds here..I have no doubt there was a launch into space, many launches even. I have no doubt that NASA put men into near earth orbit. I dont see any technological issue with that at all. For me though, the rest does require more evidenciary substantiation as the counter arguments and evidence that preclude an actual landing and bring to question a manned orbiters capacity to travel to the moon given the lack of knowledge of space not just technology, are significant.

That said. I know human gall. I know the power of sheer ignorance to empower creative capacity. I know the power of effort, hard work good maths and the belief 'you can'. Like the pyramids, I feel it not outside the realm of possibility that human mind and capacity alone, could have acheived the feat. I'd just need more for certainty to say ' yes they did/didnt'.

My biofather was military. Worked on big projects. I'd hear the same kind of stories..felt the same way you do for a while. What he didnt know what was what going on behind the scenes even to his own kids, not just in his outift. Abuses of power and authority - happen. They happen over the heads of 'good men' and men who choose to remain 'ignorant' or are kept that way by 'not so good' men.

It only takes three men to control and contain a conspiracy...the guy who owns all the banks..the one who owns all the media..and the one who owns all the politicans. 3 men. The rest do as they are told. However small or huge, conspiracies happen.

So the jury is out for me. Going back and landing today - using only what they had available then- would put most of my doubts to bed though as they could proove/reproove by the trip itself that it is doable and of course, footprints surrounding the micro sites would proove once and for all if the LLRRA and other debris were dropped from orbit by sattelite or placed by a person.

cheers

Ro

edit on 10-9-2011 by Rosha because: typos



posted on Sep, 10 2011 @ 06:46 AM
link   
One of the best proofs is the simple hammer and feather drop, someone take a shot at how this could be done on earth outside like pictured, without saying something is fake or wired.




posted on Sep, 10 2011 @ 10:51 AM
link   
reply to post by patternfinder
 


A spacecraft presently orbiting the moon has taken pictures of the trails and debris left by the astronauts who landed on the moon. I suppose you are going to say that was also faked. I believe in conspiracies, but there is a limit.



posted on Sep, 10 2011 @ 01:40 PM
link   
After reflection, and in light of certain comments made I think it would be better if I bow out of this thread. If you should have taken offense (I was most careful to remain polite while stating my ments) then for that I apologise completely, wholeheartedly and unreservedly.

I wish you all the best and would also like to thank you for the time you took to reply to me.

Good luck.

PS I shall also refrain from commenting on all past, present and future threads regarding NASA and space travel using conventional/current technologies. Thanks for reading.



posted on Sep, 10 2011 @ 02:45 PM
link   
reply to post by Frira
 


Well, not only is this well said, but the reality is that folks have tried to prove scientifically that the missions were actually taking place somewhere on earth and proved scientifically that the images we saw on TV could not have been faked.

For the teenager who started this thread I suggest you go to youtube and type in, Apollo Moon Landings Hoax.

Mythbusters had the MOST convincing effort to disprove the photography & they cannot. They cannot, even given today's CGI & photographic technology.

The "moonwalks" had to either be filmed in a 747 the size of a gymnasium, something we don't even have today! OR the only other possibility is that the WALKS took place in a 1/6 gravity environment. That was the most significant test they did. The "walks" could not have been guys on bungies or videos which were "photoshoped" in slow motion because they could not have looked the way they appeared in real time on TV, and we simply did not have that technical ability back in those days.

I know the government has done things & then threatened the folks involved & kept secrets. BUT there are always folks who end up talking. Like the folks who say they were involved or not involved in the JFK assassination. I have spent hours talking with one of those folk and he was damned convincing. But nobody has come forward and said: "I was an astronaut or in NASA and the missions were faked." AND do you not understand that a country which had the most to gain, Russia, has NEVER even suggested such a thing. You don't know your history if you do not see clearly that Russia would have been screaming that loudly, BUT THEY NEVER EVEN suggested that. And that is probably the most significant evidence that the landings were real.



posted on Sep, 10 2011 @ 02:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by Illustronic
One of the best proofs is the simple hammer and feather drop, someone take a shot at how this could be done on earth outside like pictured, without saying something is fake or wired.



txs fpr posting, I have never seen that. very cool. my daughters science fair project last year was on this very idea, I'm sure she will love to see it

txs again !



posted on Sep, 10 2011 @ 03:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by Ex_CT2[/i

Now I'm just an old guy wishing someone would *finally* get some high-def photos of the landing sites, so we can at last get some closure on this. And shut these annoying little ---- up!
edit on 7-9-2011 by alien because: ...editted out the censor circumvention..


You should know that today high-def photos or the fysical presence of the lunar lander on the Moon is not water tight proof that the whole event was not a hoax.

Me personally do not know what to think anymore and decided to wait until someone will blow me away with un-deniable evidence. As it is there are too many interesting questions but without satisfying answers. On the other side I would like to belief it is not a hoax because what kind of governement would get involved with such a disgusting lie and betray its own citizens big time.



posted on Sep, 10 2011 @ 04:02 PM
link   
i suppose the hammer could be made of something light weight and filled with hellium?, and maybe the feather is made of something heavier?.....just chuckin em out there!



new topics

top topics



 
109
<< 23  24  25    27  28  29 >>

log in

join