Apollo Moon Landings a Hoax? Then Read This

page: 37
109
<< 34  35  36    38  39 >>

log in

join

posted on Sep, 21 2012 @ 10:09 AM
link   
reply to post by Ove38
 



All the fake pictures and films of man on the moon.


But no-one has ever proven that those pictures were not taken on the Moon, and even if they weren't taken on the Moon, that doesn't prove that there were no astronauts in the LM, does it?




posted on Sep, 21 2012 @ 10:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by Ove38

Originally posted by DJW001
reply to post by Ove38
 



The part of the rocket that went to the moon (the LM), was empty. All Apollo missions to the moon were unmanned, the astronauts remained in Earth's orbit. It was a trick ! It wasn't possible to get a man safely back from the moon.


And your proof of this is...?

All the fake pictures and films of man on the moon.

Please provide examples of the fake pictures, plus an explanation for each indicating what it is about the picture that makes you say it is fake.



posted on Sep, 21 2012 @ 12:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by DJW001
reply to post by Ove38
 



All the fake pictures and films of man on the moon.


But no-one has ever proven that those pictures were not taken on the Moon, and even if they weren't taken on the Moon, that doesn't prove that there were no astronauts in the LM, does it?

Of course it does, they wouldn't have to make fake pictures and films, if somone had really walked on the moon.



posted on Sep, 21 2012 @ 12:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by Soylent Green Is People

Originally posted by Ove38

Originally posted by DJW001
reply to post by Ove38
 



The part of the rocket that went to the moon (the LM), was empty. All Apollo missions to the moon were unmanned, the astronauts remained in Earth's orbit. It was a trick ! It wasn't possible to get a man safely back from the moon.


And your proof of this is...?

All the fake pictures and films of man on the moon.

Please provide examples of the fake pictures, plus an explanation for each indicating what it is about the picture that makes you say it is fake.


www.youtube.com...



posted on Sep, 21 2012 @ 01:10 PM
link   
reply to post by Ove38
 

I'd rather have you tell me what YOUR ideas are about this video, rather than just showing me what some other person says about it, but I suppose i could just respond to the video...

First of all, this guy says the astronaut's arm is not bouncing around as much as the camera. I think this could be due to the well-known fact the space suits were thick and the arms were a bit stiff. We have all seen film of astronauts walking around on the moon, or astronauts working in spacesuits outside the space station, and it is obvious that the arms of the spacesuit create a certain level of stiffness. This stiffness would probably prevent the astronaut's arm from bouncing around so much while driving the rover.

The second point made in the video was about the texture of the soil, looking different in the foreground than it does in the background. Perhaps I'm not getting this guys point, but it seems from my experience that dirt in near my eyes ALWAYS has a different-looking texture than dirt far away from my eyes -- which is due to being able to see closer things in greater detail than things that are far away.

I mean, it's actually quite obvious that things far away from my eyes will look a bit different than things up close.
Ove38 -- could you please explain to me why YOU don't feel that the texture of soil in the foreground should look different than the texture of the soil in the background? Please explain to me why YOU think this is evidence of a hoax.

His third point was that it looked as if the footage was filmed on Earth, but just slowed down. However, by looking at the way the soil churned up by the rover wheels behaved, that does not seem to be the case. On Earth, dust would not just fall along a parabolic/ballistic path like it does in the video. It would suspend a bit in the atmosphere. We don't ever see any dust ever suspended in the "air" in the Moon videos, because there is no air on the moon. Rather, the dust just falls along its parabolic trajectory.

I suppose you could argue that it could have filmed in a vacuum chamber on Earth, and that's why the dust does not hang in the air, but without any extra evidence supporting that claim, then it could just as well have been filmed on the moon. There is a lot more corroborating evidence this was filmed on the moon than there is corroborating evidence that this was filmed in a vacuum chamber.

The guy in the video really didn't provide a lot of evidence for his speculation -- just a lot speculation. I mean, I wish this guy would have discussed the point of the stiff spacesuits and provided me with detailed evidence telling me that the stiffness would not matter. However, he chose to ignore discussing suit stiffness, which tells me he either didn't think of it, or he intentionally chose to ignore it.

The same goes for the soil texture in the foreground as opposed to the background. Maybe the point about the soil texture had nothing to do with a person/camera being able to see greater detail of things closer to the eyes/camera lens, but considering he did not even bring up that point makes me again wonder why not?



One more thing...
If (according to hoax believers) NASA had a large enough studio in which to film the moon landings, and they had a rover, and they had the astronauts in the studio in space suits, then why bother making the rover RC and putting dummies in the Rover? Why not just film a real astronaut driving the real rover in the studio?

The whole concept behind an RC rover makes no sense, even if they filmed the whole thing in a giant studio.


edit on 9/21/2012 by Soylent Green Is People because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 21 2012 @ 01:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by Soylent Green Is People
One more thing...
If (according to hoax believers) NASA had a large enough studio in which to film the moon landings, and they had a rover, and they had the astronauts in the studio in space suits, then why bother making the rover RC and putting dummies in the Rover? Why not just film a real astronaut driving the real rover in the studio?

The whole concept behind an RC rover makes no sense, even if they filmed the whole thing in a giant studio.

When you place a astronaut in the rover on Earth, this happens
That's why they had to use a dummy for this take

edit on 21-9-2012 by Ove38 because: tex fix


jra

posted on Sep, 21 2012 @ 02:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by Ove38
1/6th gravity vacuum studio ?? What are you talking about ? The special effects were good enough to fool the world at the time.


Please show an example. While 2001 had good special effects for its time. They don't really hold up to today. They never did simulate 1/6th G either. I have yet to see a movie from today with all the latest technology, successfully pull off a convincing Lunar scene with 1/6th G in a vacuum.


Originally posted by Ove38
The part of the rocket that went to the moon (the LM), was empty. All Apollo missions to the moon were unmanned, the astronauts remained in Earth's orbit. It was a trick ! It wasn't possible to get a man safely back from the moon.


That makes no sense. If you can get unmanned vehicles to the Moon, then what's stopping them from taking it one step further and putting people and life support on it?



posted on Sep, 21 2012 @ 02:44 PM
link   
reply to post by Ove38
 


First of all, I don't know if the weight of just the rover in earth's gravity would not cause the wheel to look that way -- even without an astronaut. There is no additional context in that image. Would you please give me more information about that image so I can actually see the context in which the wheel would "flatten" like that?

Secondly, on the Moon itself, the wheel may be able to withstand the additional weight of the astronaut (considering 1/6 gravity), and not flatten out at all. Therefore, a picture of the wheel flattening a bit on Earth is not at all conclusive.


Also, you did not respond to my question to you above.
That question is: could you please explain to me why YOU don't feel that the texture of soil in the foreground should look different than the texture of the soil in the background? Please explain to me why YOU agree with the man in the video who says that the visible difference in the texture of the foreground soil and the background soil is evidence of a hoax.

edit on 9/21/2012 by Soylent Green Is People because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 21 2012 @ 02:44 PM
link   
reply to post by Ove38
 



When you place a astronaut in the rover on Earth, this happens
That's why they had to use a dummy for this take


But the Moon only has 1/6 Earth's gravity, that's why the "tires" don't compress as much!



posted on Sep, 21 2012 @ 02:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by jra

Originally posted by Ove38
The part of the rocket that went to the moon (the LM), was empty. All Apollo missions to the moon were unmanned, the astronauts remained in Earth's orbit. It was a trick ! It wasn't possible to get a man safely back from the moon.


That makes no sense. If you can get unmanned vehicles to the Moon, then what's stopping them from taking it one step further and putting people and life support on it?

It's not possible to return them safely back to the Earth !

JFK: I believe that this nation should commit itself to achieving the goal, before this decade is out, of landing a man on the Moon and returning him safely to the Earth.



posted on Sep, 21 2012 @ 02:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by Ove38
It's not possible to return them safely back to the Earth !

Could you provide a basis for this statement?



posted on Sep, 21 2012 @ 03:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by DJW001
reply to post by Ove38
 



When you place a astronaut in the rover on Earth, this happens
That's why they had to use a dummy for this take


But the Moon only has 1/6 Earth's gravity, that's why the "tires" don't compress as much!

No, it's because it's a dummy fasten to a remote controlled lunar rover on Earth.


jra

posted on Sep, 21 2012 @ 03:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by Ove38
It's not possible to return them safely back to the Earth !


Please explain why it's not possible.



posted on Sep, 21 2012 @ 03:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by Ove38

Originally posted by DJW001
reply to post by Ove38
 



When you place a astronaut in the rover on Earth, this happens
That's why they had to use a dummy for this take


But the Moon only has 1/6 Earth's gravity, that's why the "tires" don't compress as much!

No, it's because it's a dummy fasten to a remote controlled lunar rover on Earth.


Simply because you say so, or do you have other evidence to back up your statement?

If you want us to believe you simply because you say say so, then I'd rather believe that we DID go to the Moon -- at least there is all the Apollo program documentation acting as corroborating evidence supporting that idea. I haven't seen any good evidence supporting your statements yet; just a few unsubstantiated declarations on your part.

edit on 9/21/2012 by Soylent Green Is People because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 21 2012 @ 03:55 PM
link   
Ove38 --

I'm not so gullible as to believe your Moon Hoax theory without you providing good evidence as to why it had to be a hoax, or HOW the hoax could have been pulled off. All I have from you are few statements that are not supported by any evidence.

I'm not so gullible as to believe NASA's version of the story, either, without any evidence supporting their claim (in general, I don't blindly believe anything -- I like to see the evidence before making up my own mind)...

...However, in the case of NASA's claim that they went to the moon, NASA has provided the necessary evidence that would allow me to believe them. NASA has provided enough details on the design and construction of the hardware used that I can get a good understanding as to how that hardware worked for them. Also, we are told who designed and built the hardware, and when and where they did it.

In addition, I have seen the research done on the environments in which astronauts and hardware would be operating, and how the hardware was designed to work in those environments.

On the hoax side, I have yet to see ANY information about the giant vacuum chamber studio that would have been required to even START faking the moon videos. I have never heard any information about where it was, about the details of its design and construction, or information as to who designed and built it.

Like I said, I'm not so gullible as to believe something I'm told, just because someone tells me something. I wouldn't necessarily believe that we really went to the Moon if there wasn't all the details and documentation showing how it was done, and I certainly wouldn't necessarily believe your hoax theory if you are not going to provide me with any details as to how it was done, so I could examine those details.

I don't blindly believe things.

edit on 9/21/2012 by Soylent Green Is People because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 21 2012 @ 04:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by Ove38

Originally posted by jra

Originally posted by Ove38
The part of the rocket that went to the moon (the LM), was empty. All Apollo missions to the moon were unmanned, the astronauts remained in Earth's orbit. It was a trick ! It wasn't possible to get a man safely back from the moon.


That makes no sense. If you can get unmanned vehicles to the Moon, then what's stopping them from taking it one step further and putting people and life support on it?

It's not possible to return them safely back to the Earth !

JFK: I believe that this nation should commit itself to achieving the goal, before this decade is out, of landing a man on the Moon and returning him safely to the Earth.


You are going to have to do a LOT better than that. Please answer the question as to why it's not possible to return them safely?

Your statement of "It's not possible to return them safely back to the Earth!" is not enough.

Please prove this.



posted on Sep, 23 2012 @ 06:52 PM
link   
reply to post by Frira
 


Well we know data lines can be intercepted or just not connected.
I worked for a company the made a part on the Lander.

I can't recall the year but two engineers I assume were walking down the hallway
toward the exit but high walls prevented me from seeing who they were.

They said something like the part the company worked on was not even used.
Now this might have happened years after the landing.
According to posters on ATS the part was used as I mentioned this once before.

So are people actually in the know. Two guys not in the know having fun with
no clue going along with some controversy. Or someone posting official part
information weather or not the part was used.

Most people may not be that in on rocketry or space are just impressed by the deeds
and then there are people who can't accept what the can't see.

Great story especially about your dad.
I just recently figured out my dad knew quite a lot about Tesla after 50 years of
never recalling the early incidents.



posted on Sep, 23 2012 @ 06:56 PM
link   
My dad worked on the Apollo program as well (lunar lander/flying bedstead). It wasn't faked. It was a part of our lives for years leading up to the landing.



posted on Sep, 24 2012 @ 08:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by davjan4
My dad worked on the Apollo program as well (lunar lander/flying bedstead). It wasn't faked. It was a part of our lives for years leading up to the landing.


I was amazed at the Kennedy speech about going to the Moon.
Sure Sir I. Newton and rocket science says its possible but there was still a lot of unknowns.
Before that there was TV build up by Walt Disney and Von Braun about the equipment and the
conditioning to weightlessness.

Some of the projects that were publicized when I was in school I worked on in companies that
had some part to produce. Even the Shuttle was on the drawing boards but some other
company got the contract.



posted on Sep, 28 2012 @ 12:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by TeslaandLyne
I was amazed at the Kennedy speech about going to the Moon.
Sure Sir I. Newton and rocket science says its possible but there was still a lot of unknowns.
Before that there was TV build up by Walt Disney and Von Braun about the equipment and the
conditioning to weightlessness.

Some of the projects that were publicized when I was in school I worked on in companies that
had some part to produce. Even the Shuttle was on the drawing boards but some other
company got the contract.

Walt Disney (1901-1966) points at Apollo 11 landing site in the 50s
how do you explain that ?



A part of the "TV build up by Walt Disney and Von Braun" was structures on the dark side of the moon, what was the point of that ?


Structure image from Walt Disney and Von Brauns Man and the Moon series



edit on 28-9-2012 by Ove38 because: Link fix
edit on 28-9-2012 by Ove38 because: link fix






top topics



 
109
<< 34  35  36    38  39 >>

log in

join