Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Fake Earth illusion - footage from Apollo 11, 1969

page: 10
105
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 11 2012 @ 01:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by IamAbeliever
reply to post by PapagiorgioCZ
 


Bingo! I have often wondered how it is that the Earth, as photographed from the Moon, could appear the same size as the Moon, as viewed/photographed from the Earth. Doesn't make sense.



I take it you have the evidence to prove that because it has been done on another thread iirc early last year and the proportions of the earth and moon in the pictures were correct so back to you!




posted on Jan, 11 2012 @ 01:25 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Jan, 11 2012 @ 01:27 PM
link   
reply to post by wmd_2008
 


He has no metric to compare the size one should see the moon in photographs from the moon compared with ones taken from earth with no camera data, its a silly deflection fallacy argument, meant to cast doubt in non critical thinkers. Ask him if he knows the focal length of the cameras he sites first. See if you get an answer, if not just ignore, he offers only babble.



posted on Jan, 11 2012 @ 01:29 PM
link   
reply to post by Illustronic
 


Much as I suspected - so the VHBs do not appear to be the obstacle the video claims them to be.
Space Debri is probably more of a danger see link below

blog.al.com...



posted on Jan, 11 2012 @ 01:32 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Jan, 11 2012 @ 01:40 PM
link   
As the mysterious voice, that so many trust, stated; The crescent in the "window" was moved. In my view it was the same size. I am ashamed that so many people will trust some outside entities voice, with an agenda unknown then trust an Americans testimony.

NO FLY ZONE ON MOON


The reason: avoiding any spraying of rocket exhaust or dust onto certain historical sites and artifacts on the moon.

Do you all also believe that the no fly zone on the moon was a fake to coverup a hoax. Everybody is so quick to denounce American history. To the people that are this way I give you the finger and you better hope I never meet anyone of you in person because I might have to set you straight, the good old American way!



posted on Jan, 11 2012 @ 01:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by Adyta
reply to post by smurfy
 


You have no clue what my posts are about, so do not reply to them.

Nice touch quoting my "blank" post, and then writing in a way not even remotely related to my original post.


Your wasn't blank at the time I was writing, Now maybe you could look at the Apollo video link I have provided, it says it all in nice pictures.

www.youtube.com...
edit on 11-1-2012 by smurfy because: Link.



posted on Jan, 11 2012 @ 01:41 PM
link   
reply to post by artistpoet
 


Partly, but the radiation levels they site in the video are equivalent to 6 years of exposure, bating a layman lazyness to crosscheck radiation exposures, with little understanding of recuperative aspects of not being exposed to higher levels of radiation consecutively through the duration. Research into radiation effects on humans not even involved in any space program is a metric of comparison one can start with, though real life exposure is conjecture at best, even though the astronauts had dosimeters to measure with, its still a guess and a risk that efforts were taken to minimize. The video (I suppose) calculated with a naked man spending two weeks in the worst area of the VABs and we all know that didn't occur. That's one reason I have to show up when proof of belief lies only in a Youtube vid, and nothing else.



posted on Jan, 11 2012 @ 01:45 PM
link   
I do feel that this might have much to do as to why Neal Amstrong "The first man on the Moon" has lead such a life of obscurity and secrecy ever since his supposed "Moon Mission".

And also as to why Buzz Aldrin the second man on the moon actually punched a journalist for having questioned him on the validity of the missions.

Why punch someone ? Unless you are trying to shut someone up and/or hide something ?

What always got me about all of these space shots is that because mapping every star in existence would have been too difficult and easily identified so they completely blanked out ALL stars in the photographs and blamed it on the exposures of the cameras and the film used...

Which sounds all too much like the work of the Coverstory Incorporation Agency....aka the CIA.


The CIA who created via operation Paperclip.... ...NASA.....Never A Straight Answer...

edit on 11-1-2012 by nh_ee because: Live Free or Die



posted on Jan, 11 2012 @ 01:46 PM
link   
reply to post by blangger
 


Hi, the voice on the Apollo documentary is Anne Tonelson, a british actress.



posted on Jan, 11 2012 @ 01:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by WeekendWarrior
reply to post by humphreysjim
 
He is a god fearing man. Thats what they say..he cant lie with hes hand on a bible. Otherwise it would have been piece of cake to put a hand on it and say:- Yes, I was there at the time. You can twist the simpliest thing in your mind all you want but it doesnt change the most obvious thing.. He could not tell a lie with hes hand on the bible!

edit on 11-1-2012 by WeekendWarrior because: changed "was" to "is" because guy is still kicking



If we use your premise that Buzz Aldrin is a "god fearing man," then his word alone should be enough. The ten commandments say, Thou shalt not lie. Also as to putting his hand on the Bible and swearing, Matthew 5:33-37 says this about swearing:

Mat 5:33-37 Again you have heard that it was said to those of old, “You shall not swear falsely, but shall perform your oaths to the Lord. But I say to you, do not swear at all: neither by heaven, for it is God's throne; nor by the earth, for it is His footstool; nor by Jerusalem, for it is the city of the great King. Nor shall you swear by your head, because you cannot make one hair white or black. But let your 'Yes' be 'Yes,' and your 'No,' 'No.' For whatever is more than these is from the evil one.”


So, in essence, Buzz Aldrin as a "god fearing man", which you seem to be using in the context of someone who follows the doctrines of Christianity, should not swear by anything, by anyone, or by any method. His yes is yes and his no is no. Sibrel was asking him to do something that would go against his doctrinal beliefs and which many Christians refuse to do even in a court of law.

Buzz had repeatedly before told Sibrel that he had walked on the moon. YES, he had walked on the moon. No swearing necessary. This was not the first time Sibrel had blind sided Buzz, but this time he pushed it too far.

As to this being relative to the OP:


Originally posted by onewithall

So what do you guys think? This is the first video I've ever seen that makes me believe some of the moon landing hoax conspiracies.


As a "god fearing man," Buzz Aldrin's confession to walking on the moon negates the allegations made in the OP video. Now if you want to say Buzz is a liar, then he cannot be a "god fearing man" and we can discuss that in relevance to the OP.



posted on Jan, 11 2012 @ 01:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by nh_ee

I do feel that this might have much to do as to why Neal Amstrong "The first man on the Moon" has lead such a life of obscurity and secrecy ever since his supposed "Moon Mission".

And also as to why Buzz Aldrin the second man on the moon actually punched a journalist for having questioned him on the validity of the missions.

Why punch someone ? Unless you are trying to shut someone up and/or hide something ?

What always got me about all of these space shots is that because mapping every star in existence would have been too difficult and easily identified so they completely blanked out ALL stars in the photographs and blamed it on the exposures of the cameras and the film used...

Which sounds all too much like the work of the Coverstory Incorporation Agency....aka the CIA.


The CIA who created via operation Paperclip.... ...NASA.....Never A Straight Answer...

edit on 11-1-2012 by nh_ee because: Live Free or Die


Hi I actually watched the Apollo 11 mission and listened to all the transmissions that were broadcast.
One thing that really struck me was one of the crew exclaiming "There are no stars where have all the stars gone"
The transmission was immediately cut.
I can not prove that as it was probably buried but I know what I heard - I was a teenager at the time.
It still haunts and mystifys me and I would love any explanation or info from any on this.



posted on Jan, 11 2012 @ 01:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by Illustronic
The ISS has had occupants for durations of up to 9 months consecutive, radiation is an exposure accumulative issue, and ISS occupants (though with better shielding) are exposed to more than any Apollo astronaut was. They seem fine and some Apollo astronauts are in their 80's today, so they didn't die of cancer yet.
The ISS astronauts didn't pass through the van Allen belts. According to Bart Sibrel neither did the Apollo astronauts - they stayed in orbit and then just splashed back down....



posted on Jan, 11 2012 @ 01:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by Illustronic
reply to post by artistpoet
 


Partly, but the radiation levels they site in the video are equivalent to 6 years of exposure, bating a layman lazyness to crosscheck radiation exposures, with little understanding of recuperative aspects of not being exposed to higher levels of radiation consecutively through the duration. Research into radiation effects on humans not even involved in any space program is a metric of comparison one can start with, though real life exposure is conjecture at best, even though the astronauts had dosimeters to measure with, its still a guess and a risk that efforts were taken to minimize. The video (I suppose) calculated with a naked man spending two weeks in the worst area of the VABs and we all know that didn't occur. That's one reason I have to show up when proof of belief lies only in a Youtube vid, and nothing else.


Thanks for doing your homework on this - Much appreciated as it leaves me with a better understanding by the way have you any thoughts on my post above re no stars
edit on 11-1-2012 by artistpoet because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 11 2012 @ 01:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by Illustronic

Originally posted by apodictic
reply to post by onewithall
 


Did you even watch his? Obviously not since it goes against how idiotic this thread is. The Command Module didn't even have circular windows. They were square which is apparent from the last video Phage posted at 6:20. Stop spreading retarded misinfo.


No round windows in the Command Module?




Your door was missing, giving a false representation, likely purposeful disinformation.
edit on 10-1-2012 by Illustronic because: (no reason given)


Well i must say that that post at least puts that 'de-bunk' in its place.



posted on Jan, 11 2012 @ 02:00 PM
link   
reply to post by artistpoet
 


Space debris is out there, illustrations do make it look scary.

Do an experiment, gather up 50,000 marbles and take a flight over a country, drop them from the plane at random. Take an excursion on the ground to try and locate any of them. Realize you are working on a plane, (the surface where they landed), then realize that plane is not 3 dimensional space with a vastly larger circumference, and no depth. Its not really that crowded out there. But point taken and understood. The VAB exposure was at most 90 minutes, in the weakest fields, even less coming home. Radiation is like smoking in the fact that before damage is done, recuperation begins when exposure has ceased. Extended exposure would be like scratching a cut, it takes longer to heal than if you just let it alone, not to mention using Neosporin.



posted on Jan, 11 2012 @ 02:03 PM
link   
reply to post by artistpoet
 


Hi I actually watched the Apollo 11 mission and listened to all the transmissions that were broadcast.
One thing that really struck me was one of the crew exclaiming "There are no stars where have all the stars gone"
The transmission was immediately cut.
I can not prove that as it was probably buried but I know what I heard - I was a teenager at the time.
It still haunts and mystifys me and I would love any explanation or info from any on this.

 


Could you be a bit more specific? Where were they at the time? What were they doing? etc. While they were on the surface of the moon, the astronauts could not see the stars because of the day light affect of the sun reflection off the surface of the moon.
edit on 1/11/2012 by Gibborium because: hit wrong button



posted on Jan, 11 2012 @ 02:04 PM
link   
reply to post by Rafe_
 


Yes, and in case you missed it before, I think this video pretty much debunks the rest,

www.youtube.com...


 
Mod Note: Excessive Quoting – Please Review This Link
edit on Wed Jan 11 2012 by Jbird because: replaced large quote with reply to:



posted on Jan, 11 2012 @ 02:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by Rafe_Well i must say that that post at least puts that 'de-bunk' in its place.


No it doesn't.

LOOK AT THE PICTURE: The second photo clearly shows that the outer frame of the hatch window (which is also visible if you were looking throught it from the inside) is square with rounded corners (as shown in the original Apollo video) and not circular.



posted on Jan, 11 2012 @ 02:07 PM
link   
reply to post by Pimander
 




The inner Van Allen Belt extends from an altitude of 100–10,000 km

A hundred km is 62 miles, the ISS orbits at 220 to 240 miles, well within the most hazardous zones, being 40º each way from the equator. The orbit of the ISS crosses those 40º zones.

Wiki loves you.





new topics

top topics



 
105
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join