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.

 

Wrench thrown in "No Moon landing Conspiracy"

page: 1
6
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 6 2011 @ 12:34 PM
link   

NASA's Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter (LRO) captured the sharpest images ever taken from space of the Apollo 12, 14 and 17 landing sites. Images show the twists and turns of the paths made when the astronauts explored the lunar surface.


I guess you can clam these photos are a hoax as well but come on... you really think they would be running this "conspiracy" show for this long. What do they have to prove if they never did land on the moon this late in the game.


All three images show distinct trails left in the moon's thin soil when the astronauts exited the lunar modules and explored on foot. In the Apollo 17 image, the foot trails, including the last path made on the moon by humans, are easily distinguished from the dual tracks left by the lunar rover, which remains parked east of the lander.


I would think this is the nail on the Coffin for those "we did not land on the moon" types.

Please see link for pictures

www.nasa.gov...

hope you have a great day!
edit on 6-9-2011 by camaro68ss because: (no reason given)




posted on Sep, 6 2011 @ 12:43 PM
link   
reply to post by camaro68ss
 


Obviously if these have JUST come out then they are definitely well prepared for any scrutiny and judgement. I think the lunar missions happened, just the real mission plans are being kept secret becuase they contain far to sensetive information...UFO's? Moon Bases? Collabative missions with other countries? Who knows!?

I think these photos are REAL yes, but well prepared and will probably not give further insight to the information we want to know.



posted on Sep, 6 2011 @ 12:46 PM
link   




I've never been too concerned about the moon landing one way or the other, although there are neat arguments on both sides (and is simply entertaining to watch as well), but I can see one issue - the usual claim is an argument against MANNED missions to the moon, so I'd say is entirely possible this evidence could also have been left by ROVs, etc.

Additionally, to answer your question of motive - to play devil's advocate, there would be much reason to carry on the lie as otherwise you left the people know exactly how willing you are to lie (extensively) to them, and if you'll go that far over something so honestly silly...how much further would you obviously be willing to go over much more serious matters - and how much should that shake everyone's faith in government and the nation?

Thanks friend, good stuff.
edit on 9/6/2011 by Praetorius because: (no reason given)

edit on 6-9-2011 by SkepticOverlord because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 6 2011 @ 12:52 PM
link   
reply to post by camaro68ss
 


Nice pics! Thanks!


Of course, people will still try and cry foul, but that's certainly the closest view yet of the sites. Nice.



posted on Sep, 6 2011 @ 12:53 PM
link   
Just the first moon landing was a hoax! I believe we have all seen enough evidence on that?



posted on Sep, 6 2011 @ 12:56 PM
link   
Thanks for posting this... I have always wanted to see pictures of the landing sites, seems to seal the deal for me. I am sure someone will claim this proves nothing and we are just sheople for believing anything NASA says. Then someone will claim that these pics show that we didn't land on the moon during the Apollo missions and this proves there the secret U.S. moonbase actually exists.

(I think this site has seriously jaded me.)

Star and Flag to you sir!



posted on Sep, 6 2011 @ 12:58 PM
link   
reply to post by WeekendWarrior
 


Dang Weekend Warrior already proved my point....



posted on Sep, 6 2011 @ 01:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheHistorian
Thanks for posting this... I have always wanted to see pictures of the landing sites, seems to seal the deal for me. I am sure someone will claim this proves nothing and we are just sheople for believing anything NASA says. Then someone will claim that these pics show that we didn't land on the moon during the Apollo missions and this proves there the secret U.S. moonbase actually exists.

(I think this site has seriously jaded me.)

Star and Flag to you sir!


I would love for us to send a rover there and take photos in HD of the old sites. I think it would be so cool!

Maybe one day.



posted on Sep, 6 2011 @ 01:09 PM
link   
the main focus seems to be on photoshopping of pics and so forth...just agreeing that nasa didn't photoshop these pics is like asking the fox to do an investigation on himself.....too easy....look at obama, he provided a birth certificate that is fake and easily proved fake using adobe illustrator, which i've done myself since i have the program...if the president of the united states would use fakery why wouldn't nasa use it?



posted on Sep, 6 2011 @ 01:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by Praetorius
but I can see one issue - the usual claim is an argument against MANNED missions to the moon, so I'd say is entirely possible this evidence could also have been left by ROVs, etc.

Apollo 12 never would have made it to the moon if it had been unmanned. A lightning strike on the rocket scrambled ground controllers' data link with the spacecraft and nearly caused an abort of the launch. Had it not been for the astronauts on board manually activating backup systems, which weren't even designed with lightning strikes in mind, there would have been no way for the spacecraft to reach, let alone land on, the moon. These images, as well as images from amateurs showing the Apollo 12 spacecraft in transit between the earth and moon, proves Apollo to be real.



posted on Sep, 6 2011 @ 01:25 PM
link   
reply to post by ngchunter
 
*grin*

While this in not one of MY conspiracies, the argument for that would be that no one's saying man hasn't been to space, just that he hasn't been to the moon. They could have gone into orbit and just fired off the unmanned equipment for the lunar voyage, or never even worried about any sort of moon landing on that trip.

Not trying to give you a hard time, just thinking of possible arguments. I really think settling this debate one way or the other is eventually going to boil down to a simple technical analysis or all factors and eventually nailing down every possible argument beyond dispute - and I'm not even sure what they all are or if any are still unresolved.

Thanks though.



posted on Sep, 6 2011 @ 01:29 PM
link   
its would have been easy to fake the lunar landing. which gave them plenty of time to land on the moon months or even years later. hence tracks and footprints



posted on Sep, 6 2011 @ 01:29 PM
link   
its would have been easy to fake the lunar landing. which gave them plenty of time to land on the moon months or even years later. hence tracks and footprints



posted on Sep, 6 2011 @ 01:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by Praetorius
reply to post by ngchunter
 
*grin*

While this in not one of MY conspiracies, the argument for that would be that no one's saying man hasn't been to space, just that he hasn't been to the moon. They could have gone into orbit and just fired off the unmanned equipment for the lunar voyage, or never even worried about any sort of moon landing on that trip.

People watched TLI, nothing stayed behind in earth orbit. Even now the government can't keep their spy satellites hidden from amateurs, even with the use of decoy debris amateurs still find out what objects are actually up there.


Not trying to give you a hard time, just thinking of possible arguments.

I've already spent years contemplating the subject.
edit on 6-9-2011 by ngchunter because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 6 2011 @ 01:39 PM
link   
reply to post by ngchunter
 
Ah, fair enough then. I'm not at all versed in this.

Does TLI (trans-lunar injection, if my google works?) take craft through/outside the Van Allen radiation belts? You'd figure than an easy enough argument against it being too dangerous for atronauts right there, if so.

Thanks for the response, much obliged.



posted on Sep, 6 2011 @ 01:45 PM
link   
reply to post by camaro68ss
 


What incredible, inspiring photographs.

And what a monumental piece of Human history.

We cannot see Scott's footsteps in the Artic, or Columbus's in the Americas, nor Cook's in Australia, but now we can see the meandering, courageous path of Men who willingly left their home - and planet - to set foot on what was viewed by earlier generations the ultimate frontier.

Awe inspiring to say the least. The footsteps of Heroes in the truest sense.



posted on Sep, 6 2011 @ 01:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by Praetorius
reply to post by ngchunter
 
Ah, fair enough then. I'm not at all versed in this.

Does TLI (trans-lunar injection, if my google works?) take craft through/outside the Van Allen radiation belts? You'd figure than an easy enough argument against it being too dangerous for atronauts right there, if so.

Thanks for the response, much obliged.

TLI takes them through as little of the van allen belts as possible by avoiding the thickest part of the belts. I've actually run the numbers on the radiation dose expected during times of high solar activity as a maximum case given the actual trajectory data from Apollo. It works out to be quite minor and far below any reasonable level of danger, let alone sickness, let alone death.
i319.photobucket.com...
(The apollo spacecraft was rated at 7-8 gm/cm^2)
edit on 6-9-2011 by ngchunter because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 6 2011 @ 02:40 PM
link   
reply to post by Praetorius
 


The Van Allen belts have thin areas at the poles, this is where the Apollo spacecrafts achieved earth escape velocity. I have a link where this is diagramed and meticulously explained in layman terms.



posted on Sep, 6 2011 @ 03:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by camaro68ss

I guess you can clam these photos are a hoax as well but come on... you really think they would be running this "conspiracy" show for this long. What do they have to prove if they never did land on the moon this late in the game.



Well - it's perfectly reasonable to still be skeptical if all the information is controlled by one source - wether it be Governmental or Corporate.

And since Govt.'s and Corporations have colluded many time in the past to give dis-information - it is hard to even trust rival or competing entities like that.

I, for one, have always felt there was plenty of evidence that the moon landings occurred as publicized - however I also believe there is more going on with those missions than we have been publicly told.

So, until private spaceflight allows for full transparency on these things - I think we have every right to thoroughly vette and question all information given to us from these few and powerful "official" sources.

Something is still quite squirly about our not returning to the moon all these years hence - and I want to know what is really going on.



posted on Sep, 6 2011 @ 03:50 PM
link   
Ahh I was about to post the same thing, but I see you beat me to it


I'm sure there are those that will say these are doctored photos, but this is drives the final nail in the coffin for me.

Thanks, OP!

I never really doubted that we went to the moon. What I doubt is that we STOPPED going to the moon...
edit on 6-9-2011 by ddaniel because: typo




top topics



 
6
<<   2 >>

log in

join