Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

The Apollo 11 Moon Landing Site --Now Seen in Unprecedented Detail

page: 3
14
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join

posted on Mar, 14 2012 @ 04:43 PM
link   
reply to post by Agent_USA_Supporter
 

You wanted an explanation to the "no stars" argument. Don't sway away from that topic. I didn't mention anything about any other theory. Those have been debunked to death here and other places hundreds of times.
edit on 14/3/2012 by PsykoOps because: (no reason given)




posted on Mar, 14 2012 @ 04:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by Swills
Mythbusters did a great job of proving that NASA didn't fake the moon landings.



What cracks me up that apparently people don't realize is that they say they "debunked" the hoax when all they did is prove that it is indeed possible to hoax the still images with a single light source instead of multiple...

Then Captain Red addresses the above and says "thats not the point, the point is were adressing the claim there were multiple light sources needed to make non-parallel shadows"..."we demonstrated that the topography can change the direction of light sources"...

now look at the images between the "real images" and mythbusters and how incredibly similar they are...they may have debunked the claim of multiple light sources but in the same experiement have proven that it is possible to hollywood this with one light source...



posted on Mar, 14 2012 @ 04:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by Agent_USA_Supporter

Very funny but myself i have taken many years of videos,photos and yes i do know photography


It's so funny that you felt the need to add me as a foe, right? Is this 3rd grade?

I'm sorry I proved you wrong and pointed out your ignorance and explained it to you like you told me to. I can't help it if you are going to ignore facts. That is the problem with 'moon hoaxers.' Any facts and logical arguments you get, you completely dismiss without the slightest bit of knowledge. Any person who has taken an amateur high school photography class would know about exposure settings.

Taking pictures and videos with a digital camera does not count as "knowing photography."

I'm sorry to break it to you, but you don't even understand the basics. Not knowing wouldn't be such a big deal if you weren't trying to pass off ignorance as fact. I hope you have learned something here today.





Is that the best explanation you got? because that isn't quite correct, i have been to a studio before so i have seen some of the tricks they have done, its pretty much easy to do it when you have a million dollar business with the government.


Yes, truth and facts are the best I have, sorry that is not what you are looking for here.



posted on Mar, 14 2012 @ 04:47 PM
link   
reply to post by PsykoOps
 


Well i guess if we believe the government story that we landed on the Moon, maybe then we should just believe the government on the fact that terrorists have attacked us just because they hate us for our freedoms.

You see the logical point i am trying to make here?



posted on Mar, 14 2012 @ 04:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by Agent_USA_Supporter
reply to post by PsykoOps
 


Well i guess if we believe the government story that we landed on the Moon, maybe then we should just believe the government on the fact that terrorists have attacked us just because they hate us for our freedoms.

You see the logical point i am trying to make here?


That actually isn't logical at all.

In fact that's a logical fallacy called False dilemma.



Falsum in uno, falsum in omnibus
"False in one thing, false in everything"
edit on 3-14-12 by paradox because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 14 2012 @ 04:52 PM
link   
Well, great. Another topic bites the dust under the seemingly endless weight of the lunar conspiracy lovers' nearly preternatural ability not to get it.



posted on Mar, 14 2012 @ 04:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by Agent_USA_Supporter
...not to mention melt the lunar buggy tires.




You are displaying exactly how much you don't know about this subject. The lunar rover didn't have rubber tires that could melt, it had metal woven mesh tires!



A little more info:
www.collectspace.com...



posted on Mar, 14 2012 @ 04:54 PM
link   
reply to post by Agent_USA_Supporter
 


There is no reason to believe that isnt true. Why do both have to be hoaxes or both have to be truthful? Take a look at all the evidence and try not to label things too quickly. I used to be extremely skeptical about the moon landing ... not anymore. I used to be extremely skeptical about 9/11 ... still am.



posted on Mar, 14 2012 @ 04:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by paradox

Originally posted by Agent_USA_Supporter

Very funny but myself i have taken many years of videos,photos and yes i do know photography


It's so funny that you felt the need to add me as a foe, right? Is this 3rd grade?

I'm sorry I proved you wrong and pointed out your ignorance and explained it to you like you told me to. I can't help it if you are going to ignore facts. That is the problem with 'moon hoaxers.' Any facts and logical arguments you get, you completely dismiss without the slightest bit of knowledge. Any person who has taken an amateur high school photography class would know about exposure settings.

Taking pictures and videos with a digital camera does not count as "knowing photography."

I'm sorry to break it to you, but you don't even understand the basics. Not knowing wouldn't be such a big deal if you weren't trying to pass off ignorance as fact. I hope you have learned something here today.





Is that the best explanation you got? because that isn't quite correct, i have been to a studio before so i have seen some of the tricks they have done, its pretty much easy to do it when you have a million dollar business with the government.


Yes, truth and facts are the best I have, sorry that is not what you are looking for here.







I'm sorry to break it to you, but you don't even understand the basics. Not knowing wouldn't be such a big deal if you weren't trying to pass off ignorance as fact. I hope you have learned something here today.


Well today i have learned that some people on here would agree with the Government on the Moon landing but wont agree with the war on terrorism, which honestly i find that quite funny, and as for the mythbusters do you know whose even paying them to do the show on TV?

They didn't even avoided a EP on about Debunking chemtrails and all of a sudden now we agree with NASA on the moon landing, just because they released this picture.

Yet what some people dont get NASA could released this picture years ago, so why the wait?






Taking pictures and videos with a digital camera does not count as "knowing photography."


I have taken pictures with not just digital cameras, i have grown up with the old 90s cameras.



posted on Mar, 14 2012 @ 04:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by UFOGlobe

Originally posted by Agent_USA_Supporter
...not to mention melt the lunar buggy tires.




You are displaying exactly how much you don't know about this subject. The lunar rover didn't have rubber tires that could melt, it had metal woven mesh tires!



A little more info:
www.collectspace.com...




Yes i know that



posted on Mar, 14 2012 @ 04:57 PM
link   
reply to post by Agent_USA_Supporter
 


That has nothing to do with photography or stars and daylight exposure. So I don't get the logic.



posted on Mar, 14 2012 @ 05:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by Agent_USA_Supporter

Well today i have learned that some people on here would agree with the Government on the Moon landing but wont agree with the war on terrorism, which honestly i find that quite funny, and as for the mythbusters do you know whose even paying them to do the show on TV?

They didn't even avoided a EP on about Debunking chemtrails and all of a sudden now we agree with NASA on the moon landing, just because they released this picture.


Again another example of a logical fallacy.

There is overwhelming proof we went to the moon.
There is also overwhelming proof that 9/11 was not an attack by 'terrorists'

To somehow try to connect the two is just silly. Consider the EVIDENCE.

By your logic, EVERYTHING NASA does is a lie.




Yet what some people dont get NASA could released this picture years ago, so why the wait?




Top half is a DAC image taken from Apollo 17 as they left the moon 40 years ago. The bottom half is the recent image by the LRO. These images have already been released. "Moon hoaxers" just ignore it just like they ignore every other fact.





I have taken pictures with not just digital cameras, i have grown up with the old 90s cameras.


You should do some studying.
edit on 3-14-12 by paradox because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 14 2012 @ 05:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by bicnarok


could this be the proof that we did go to the moon after all? Ive been a sceptic about the landings after seeing various videos and lots of reading, but this and the fact that there is a mirror on the moon prove that it did happen. I didn´t think we could go past the van allen belts yet. Maybe aliens helped us get there. opinions?

www.dailygalaxy. com
(visit the link for the full news article)


I was never a moon landing skeptic, but until the Chinese or another foreign government get the same shots showing the landing sites exist, the skeptics will still be out there.

It's likely that even AFTER third party independant verification, we will always have the moon landing doubters.



posted on Mar, 14 2012 @ 05:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by paradox

Originally posted by Agent_USA_Supporter

Well today i have learned that some people on here would agree with the Government on the Moon landing but wont agree with the war on terrorism, which honestly i find that quite funny, and as for the mythbusters do you know whose even paying them to do the show on TV?

They didn't even avoided a EP on about Debunking chemtrails and all of a sudden now we agree with NASA on the moon landing, just because they released this picture.


Again another example of a logical fallacy.

There is overwhelming proof we went to the moon.
There is also overwhelming proof that 9/11 was not an attack by 'terrorists'

To somehow try to connect the two is just silly. Consider the EVIDENCE, not the source.

By your logic, EVERYTHING NASA does is a lie.




Yet what some people dont get NASA could released this picture years ago, so why the wait?




Top half is a DAC image taken from Apollo 17 as they left the moon 40 years ago. The bottom half is the recent image by the LRO. These images have already been released. "Moon hoaxers" just ignore it just like they ignore every other fact.





I have taken pictures with not just digital cameras, i have grown up with the old 90s cameras.


You should do some studying.
edit on 3-14-12 by paradox because: (no reason given)







These images have already been released. "Moon hoaxers" just ignore it just like they ignore every other fact.

Yes i know and the reason i believe NASA had released this image was nothing more then to try silence the questions relating to the moon.

I mean its 2012 and we still haven't gone back, we could even gone back to the moon with the space shuttle so why haven't we?




You see that image? you see the text where it reads PSEP? that there looks a bit edited.



posted on Mar, 14 2012 @ 05:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by babybunnies

Originally posted by bicnarok


could this be the proof that we did go to the moon after all? Ive been a sceptic about the landings after seeing various videos and lots of reading, but this and the fact that there is a mirror on the moon prove that it did happen. I didn´t think we could go past the van allen belts yet. Maybe aliens helped us get there. opinions?

www.dailygalaxy. com
(visit the link for the full news article)


I was never a moon landing skeptic, but until the Chinese or another foreign government get the same shots showing the landing sites exist, the skeptics will still be out there.

It's likely that even AFTER third party independant verification, we will always have the moon landing doubters.


I agree with you i would rather trust the the Chinese or another space agency that isn't in bed with NASA.



posted on Mar, 14 2012 @ 05:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by Agent_USA_Supporter
Yes i know that


Oh you know that huh... sure...

Then I guess you already know that 33 of the 36 Apollo astronauts involved in the nine Apollo missions to leave Earth orbit have developed early stage cataracts that have been shown to be caused by radiation exposure to cosmic rays during their trip. Right?



posted on Mar, 14 2012 @ 05:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by PsykoOps
reply to post by JustBreathe11
 


The shadows are going to the same direction. The view and perspective make it appear like they are not. If you look at the same scene from directly above you see how they are. Common misconception amongs the lunar hoax theorist. If there were more than 1 light source there would be more than 1 shadow, more than 1 highlights etc.


Your explanation makes sense to me, I guess we did go to the moon 40 years ago.

What I don't understand is why can't we go back? Is it because NASA retired the Saturn V rockets and lost the capability to make them? Or is it because its too expensive and NASA doesn't have the funding? I would think the Moon would be a great place to build a laboratory or a base.



posted on Mar, 14 2012 @ 06:05 PM
link   
reply to post by Agent_USA_Supporter
 


Really.....are you just trolling now? Think you can get a few
s out of people?


I mean its 2012 and we still haven't gone back, we could even gone back to the moon with the space shuttle so why haven't we?


You displayed ignorance with the "radiation will melt the Rover tires" mistake. Then, when it was pointed out to you the actual design of the wheels, you said you "knew it" already?

You claim the "radiation" would have "destroyed" the cameras? Based on what, exactly? Your "gut feelings"?

Then, there is another level of displayed ignorance (f indeed this is a belief being stated), that I quoted up on top.


For all the (how many are left?? Six or seven?) "hoax" believers, and Apollo "deniers" ---- this YouTube video presents some of the DAC film from Apollo 15's second EVA, on the LRV.

("DAC" = Data Acquisition Camera. It is a 16-mm film camera).

("LRV" is the Lunar Rover)


This is proof positive of the reality of Apollo.....it is just a tiny portion of the mountains of other evidence.



Now, for all the so-called "experts".....how was that done in a "studio" on Earth?


Finally, for this thread's OP, more Apollo 11 LROC image examples. This was compiled from multiple images, and deconvolved to enhance the resolution. The video shows multiple images taken at different times of the Lunar "day", to show the various Sun angles of daylight.

The full explanation of the processes used (by someone from the University of Arizona....NOT a NASA' employee) is in the Comments by the YT Uploader GoneToPlaid:











edit on Wed 14 March 2012 by ProudBird because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 14 2012 @ 06:07 PM
link   
you could take a hoaxer to the moon, push his nose onto the apollo artifacts, and he would say

"fake"

just a huge waste of time



posted on Mar, 14 2012 @ 06:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by Agent_USA_Supporter


I mean its 2012 and we still haven't gone back, we could even gone back to the moon with the space shuttle so why haven't we?


Go back for what?

You to say it's just another elaborate hoax?
We have been there, done that, there's no reason to waste money going back until we are ready for a manned mission to another planet.





new topics

top topics



 
14
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join