Moon Landing Hoax - The Space Suit

page: 25
63
<< 22  23  24    26  27  28 >>

log in

join

posted on Apr, 10 2012 @ 08:30 PM
link   
Facts regarding ILC Dover.

There is a great subject. This company is *ripe* for an in-depth investigation.

1. ILC Dover was purchased by Stanley Warner Corporation (a movie theatre holding company) from 1954 and was merged with Glen Alden (also a movie theatre holding company) from 1969 to 1972.*

*remember those dates? Oh yeah, now I remember! That was Richard Nixon's first term as president!



International Latex was purchased by Stanley Warner, the former theater holdings of Warner Bros., in 1954.
Stanley Warner merged with fellow theater company Glen Alden in 1968, which merged with Rapid-American in 1972. Source en.wikipedia.org...


2. ILC Dover worked by feast or famine, they worked exclusively on government (military industrial and NASA) contracts. In 1968, 98% of their business came from making Apollo space suits (15 suits were needed for every mission). They have been making space suits for NASA for 45 years. No other American company has ever made a space suit that was used in a space mission.

3. 1982 Rapid American sold ILC Industries to Mr. Leonard Lane. "The Lane family still owns the company today. "
Source history.nasa.gov...

However, I would admit, that the nasa.gov/spacesuits.pdf is an old document, probably early 1990's? and it is possible that LL doesn't own the company any longer. I don't know yet.

The ILC Dover official website was not much helpful in finding the names of the current owners of the company.
www.ilcdover.com...

I searched (last night) for over an hour and found only one lead for "Mr. Leonard Lane".

It was an EPA Superfund document scanned from "NOV. 21 1990" a government pdf and he was listed as Chairman of the Board for ILC Dover as of the early 1990's. Attachment 1 is a list of all the company CEO's who were legally obliged to respond to the EPA Superfund Site decision on their properties.

See this nice scan of a government EPA letter addressed to land holders who are potentially responsible for environmental clean up costs. pdf amcadminrec.com...

It's very interesting to draw out the history of ILC Dover by a google search and to a) illustrate exactly how that company evolved from the 1940's up until today and b) discover the timing of certain events. This is always a good thing for conspiracy investigations.




posted on Apr, 10 2012 @ 08:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by jra

Originally posted by longjohnbritches
Well then, were they hot enough to fry an egg???


I have no idea, but the surface temperature isn't going to have a strong effect on the Astronauts anyway. A hot summers day here on Earth, the roads can get really hot. Hot enough to burn ones self, if you were to go bare foot, but yet no ones shoes ever seem to melt.


Are you saying they left the moon before lunch??


Yes, remember that one Lunar day is about 29 Earth days.


Just a little recap.
The daytime temperatures are 123c. and the heat is absorbed by any solid object.
It also reflects back into shadows and must warm then too.
Unless you can find something substantial to back up your claim.
The shoes don't melt because the soles are in the shade.
thanks jra



posted on Apr, 10 2012 @ 09:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by longjohnbritches

Originally posted by DerekJR321
Here is my biggest problem with all these "moon landing hoax" posts. And someone mentioned this a few posts back. The USSR at the time was on the brink of nuclear war with us. They had EVERYTHING to gain by reporting the supposedly "fake" moon landing. And they had enough spies in the US to have figured out if it in fact was a hoax.

So im just not buying it. It's not like the Armstrong Apollo 11 landing was the only moon landing to happen. If they "faked" that landing, then that means they faked 12, 14, 15, 16 and 17. And almost faked 13 had it not been for the disaster. Can any of you "moon hoax" believers give me a single logical reason why NASA would feel the need to fake 6 moon landings? I've never seen any clear cut proof. Just silly posts like "oh this shadow is off" or the arm chair rocket scientists claiming radiation was too high.


Hi drec
I see you have put little thought into your request.
It's a little thing like MASKING a BIG war.
When the film reels emptied. Quess what???
The BOYS came home. The US had big stuff in the Ruskies backyard.
Ya know like a gun to their head.
hope that helps
PS didn't Putin recently say something like Clinton did.


I have no real vested interest in this "Moon Hoax" argument to begin with. I don't believe it was faked. My "request" was a simple answer as to why people think NASA faked 6 moon landings? I don't believe that is putting little thought into it. People can find a conspiracy in anything. Sometimes thinking too much isn't a good thing. So I started with the most simple request. Where is the logic in faking a landing? Or 6?

I don't follow your "A gun to the Russians head" argument. Are you attempting to reference the Cuban Missile Crisis? Your typing is a little off so it's hard for me to follow you. The "Boys came home" from where? Putin said what in relation to Clinton?

I'm confused. I still would like a simple straight forward answer to why NASA would fake 6 landings, plus 1 accident on 13 and the 3 deaths from 10? Seems a little extreme to me. What exactly was the big gain in doing that? If they (NASA) did in-fact fake the landings, does that mean things like the Mars rovers are faked? The Viking Project? All the satellites roaming around our solar system? I guess the ISS is fake too? I guess the fact that I'm NOT a big Moon conspiracy person, I don't know all the arguments. I have read plenty of threads on ATS regarding this supposed "hoax" but again, nothing brought up ever hit me as being "true" or "proof". Analysis of fuzzy images do nothing for me. NASA recently released photos of the landing site and the first thing I read from people about it, was that it was faked. Why would NASA bother? To get budget money? I doubt it.



posted on Apr, 10 2012 @ 09:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by SayonaraJupiter
Facts regarding ILC Dover.

There is a great subject. This company is *ripe* for an in-depth investigation.

1. ILC Dover was purchased by Stanley Warner Corporation (a movie theatre holding company) from 1954 and was merged with Glen Alden (also a movie theatre holding company) from 1969 to 1972.*

*remember those dates? Oh yeah, now I remember! That was Richard Nixon's first term as president!



International Latex was purchased by Stanley Warner, the former theater holdings of Warner Bros., in 1954.
Stanley Warner merged with fellow theater company Glen Alden in 1968, which merged with Rapid-American in 1972. Source en.wikipedia.org...


2. ILC Dover worked by feast or famine, they worked exclusively on government (military industrial and NASA) contracts. In 1968, 98% of their business came from making Apollo space suits (15 suits were needed for every mission). They have been making space suits for NASA for 45 years. No other American company has ever made a space suit that was used in a space mission.

3. 1982 Rapid American sold ILC Industries to Mr. Leonard Lane. "The Lane family still owns the company today. "
Source history.nasa.gov...

However, I would admit, that the nasa.gov/spacesuits.pdf is an old document, probably early 1990's? and it is possible that LL doesn't own the company any longer. I don't know yet.

The ILC Dover official website was not much helpful in finding the names of the current owners of the company.
www.ilcdover.com...

I searched (last night) for over an hour and found only one lead for "Mr. Leonard Lane".

It was an EPA Superfund document scanned from "NOV. 21 1990" a government pdf and he was listed as Chairman of the Board for ILC Dover as of the early 1990's. Attachment 1 is a list of all the company CEO's who were legally obliged to respond to the EPA Superfund Site decision on their properties.

See this nice scan of a government EPA letter addressed to land holders who are potentially responsible for environmental clean up costs. pdf amcadminrec.com...

It's very interesting to draw out the history of ILC Dover by a google search and to a) illustrate exactly how that company evolved from the 1940's up until today and b) discover the timing of certain events. This is always a good thing for conspiracy investigations.


Hi sayo
If you are interested and have the time. Look into how and why Mission Command wound up in Johnson's backyard instead of Kennedy's.
Look at how it all connects to things like the Astro Dome and Johnson's cronnies.
Free houses for astronauts in Houston etc.
Follow the little yellow gold brick road,
click click ljb



posted on Apr, 10 2012 @ 09:52 PM
link   
reply to post by longjohnbritches
 


Sunglasses reflect solar array. The astronauts had gold. The suits were 28 layers of many different materials, did you know that?

You know if you paint something white, it reflects more solar array than something black, wow, how progressive!



posted on Apr, 10 2012 @ 09:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by DerekJR321

Originally posted by longjohnbritches

Originally posted by DerekJR321
Here is my biggest problem with all these "moon landing hoax" posts. And someone mentioned this a few posts back. The USSR at the time was on the brink of nuclear war with us. They had EVERYTHING to gain by reporting the supposedly "fake" moon landing. And they had enough spies in the US to have figured out if it in fact was a hoax.




I don't believe that is putting little thought into it. People can find a conspiracy in anything. Sometimes thinking too much isn't a good thing. So I started with the most simple request. Where is the logic in faking a landing? Or 6?

I don't follow your "A gun to the Russians head" argument. Are you attempting to reference the Cuban Missile Crisis? Your typing is a little off so it's hard for me to follow you. The "Boys came home" from where? Putin said what in relation to Clinton?

What exactly was the big gain in doing that? I don't know all the arguments. Analysis of fuzzy images do nothing for me. NASA recently released photos of the landing site and the first thing I read from people about it, was that it was faked. Why would NASA bother? To get budget money?


Hi drec
I see you have put little thought into your request.
It's a little thing like MASKING a BIG war.

(DO YOU SEE MASKING A BIG WAR )---perhaps you are to young to know about (VIETNAM)

When the film reels emptied. Quess what??? (APOLLO FILMS)


The BOYS came home. (THAT WOULD BE THE SOLDIERS FROM THE WAR)
The US had big stuff in the Ruskies backyard.( DURING THAT WAR)(PLANES, BOMBS, MISSILES, HOWITZERS THOUSANDS OF TROOPS. MAYBE SUBS WITH NUKES PLANES AN MISSILES WITH NUKES)Ya know like a gun to their head.
hope that helps
PS didn't Putin recently say something like Clinton did about not beleiving the US landed a man on the moom?????



posted on Apr, 10 2012 @ 10:03 PM
link   
Hi. My name is Ed Mitchell. I was a NASA astronaut and I walked on the moon.
The space suit I am wearing in this picture was made by ILC Dover, wholly owned by a Hollywood theatre company called Stanley Warner Corporation, later merged with Glen Alden, another movie theatre holding company.

I also believe that the government is covering up the facts about the events in Roswell in 1947.


DO YOU BELIEVE ME NOW?
edit on 4/10/2012 by SayonaraJupiter because: (no reason given)
edit on 4/10/2012 by SayonaraJupiter because: typo



posted on Apr, 10 2012 @ 10:03 PM
link   
The intertwined complexity of the moon landing scenarios are becoming a feat that is more impressive than doing the deed itself. Now that makes me even more impressed with the NASA machine if it had all of the concepts figured out as you quacks say. LOL!

Same with 9/11.

Super Genius!

Now lets discern how the Chinese launched the first solid fueled rockets in the 13th century, called gunpowder, or fireworks. Genius I say!

You hoaxers really have it all worked out. In a never ending twine on interconnecting millionths of particulars that you think the government got right first try when you think they are incompetent. Hippo. Hypocrisy? Or just plain shooting darts blindfolded or launching crap to see if it sticks.

You are the geniuses, tell me.

How can you live this way and trust your alarm clock to wake your sleeping ass up every day? It is lying to you, its not time, yet you listen to an ancient discovery because you can't comprehend modern physics. We don't blame you, 50% of stupid people have to be stupider than the average.



posted on Apr, 11 2012 @ 05:57 AM
link   
reply to post by SayonaraJupiter
 



The space suit I am wearing in this picture was made by ILC Dover, wholly owned by a Hollywood theatre company called Stanley Warner Corporation, later merged with Glen Alden, another movie theatre holding company.


Could you please explain "The United States vs. Paramount" and how it affected the Warner Brothers? It might explain why Stanley Warner bought a company that makes brassieres. (There really is a conspiracy there, although it has nothing to do with the Moon landings.)



posted on Apr, 11 2012 @ 06:00 AM
link   
reply to post by longjohnbritches
 



It's a little thing like MASKING a BIG war.

(DO YOU SEE MASKING A BIG WAR )---perhaps you are to young to know about (VIETNAM)


Evidently, you are too young to remember the era. Every nightly news broadcast reported the "body count."If the object of Apollo was to "mask"the Viet Nam war, it failed miserably.
edit on 11-4-2012 by DJW001 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 11 2012 @ 06:02 AM
link   
reply to post by longjohnbritches
 



Hi sayo
If you are interested and have the time. Look into how and why Mission Command wound up in Johnson's backyard instead of Kennedy's.
Look at how it all connects to things like the Astro Dome and Johnson's cronnies.
Free houses for astronauts in Houston etc.
Follow the little yellow gold brick road,
click click ljb


Don't distract him with real conspiracies. If it's not Nixon, he's not interested.



posted on Apr, 11 2012 @ 08:00 AM
link   
reply to post by SayonaraJupiter
 


ILC made the space suits for the shuttle as well. The design followed directly from apollo with modifications to make them more generalized in fit rather than individually tailored. If you were intellectually honest you would also be posting photos of shuttle astronauts and claiming they're hoaxers too.



posted on Apr, 11 2012 @ 08:41 AM
link   
reply to post by SayonaraJupiter
 





DO YOU BELIEVE ME NOW?

Hard to see what you're getting at. Just cut to the chase. Are you saying that Pres. Nixon did or did not go to the Moon?



posted on Apr, 11 2012 @ 09:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by ngchunter
reply to post by SayonaraJupiter
 


ILC made the space suits for the shuttle as well. The design followed directly from apollo with modifications to make them more generalized in fit rather than individually tailored. If you were intellectually honest you would also be posting photos of shuttle astronauts and claiming they're hoaxers too.


Hi ngc.
The dishonesty here may LIE in the fact we are discussing the moon hoax.
Who cares about fokls rolling around in low earth orbit.
Ya know that is a kiddy park ride compared to a moon walk.
glad to be of service. ljb



posted on Apr, 11 2012 @ 09:27 AM
link   
reply to post by longjohnbritches
 





rolling around in low earth orbit.
Ya know that is a kiddy park ride


Judging by the size of the fuel tanks and even the rockets once again exaggerated disinformation is abound comparing the effort involved in reaching orbit to the effort involved in going beyond orbit once there.

I don't know if it's a constant with some people to be so intellectually dishonest that it just becomes a norm, and unrecognized handicap. A fake exchange, in essence, trolling to see what can be reeled in.

It's statements like that which assaults credibility.
edit on 11-4-2012 by Illustronic because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 11 2012 @ 09:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by DerekJR321
Here is my biggest problem with all these "moon landing hoax" posts. And someone mentioned this a few posts back. The USSR at the time was on the brink of nuclear war with us. They had EVERYTHING to gain by reporting the supposedly "fake" moon landing.


I have an answer to your biggest problem. You see, USSR itself did not exist. Nazis laid waste to what used to be USSR, and it was only the advance of the Allies that stopped the carnage, but the country ceased to exist. And so the "USSR" myth was created in order to start the Cold War and keep the West toeing the line. The footage of Nikita Khruschev and subsequent "Soviet Leaders" are just as fake as the Moon Landing itself.

Well, I posit my theory is just as valid as "Moon Hoax" theory.



posted on Apr, 11 2012 @ 09:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by DenyObfuscation
reply to post by SayonaraJupiter
 





DO YOU BELIEVE ME NOW?

Hard to see what you're getting at. Just cut to the chase. Are you saying that Pres. Nixon did or did not go to the Moon?


hi deny
Did someone say Nixon suited up for a cameo in the LEM???
I doubt it. Nixon put an end to all the moon nonsense.
If he did go he should have stayed rather than face WATERGATE.
where did you ever get that idea.
later lbj



posted on Apr, 11 2012 @ 09:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by longjohnbritches

Originally posted by ngchunter
reply to post by SayonaraJupiter
 


ILC made the space suits for the shuttle as well. The design followed directly from apollo with modifications to make them more generalized in fit rather than individually tailored. If you were intellectually honest you would also be posting photos of shuttle astronauts and claiming they're hoaxers too.


Hi ngc.
The dishonesty here may LIE in the fact we are discussing the moon hoax.
Who cares about fokls rolling around in low earth orbit.

ILC made the space suits for the shuttle as well and those suits used the same principles and the same basic systems to get the job done in thermal and pressure conditions that were just as extreme. By arbitrarily constraining the discussion to the "moon hoax" you show yourself to be intellectually dishonest; the claims being made apply equally to the space shuttle.


Ya know that is a kiddy park ride compared to a moon walk.

Pure and utter nonsense. In fact, taken as a whole program, the EVAs accomplished during the shuttle program were arguably more insurmountable in nature. Far more man hours were required in low earth orbit than on the moon. The cumulative program risk of an accident from an astronaut floating off structure (particularly prior to the advent of the SAFER system), or being struck by a micrometeroid, or otherwise damaging their spacesuit and being killed was considerably higher than for Apollo.



posted on Apr, 11 2012 @ 09:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by DJW001
reply to post by longjohnbritches
 



Hi sayo
If you are interested and have the time. Look into how and why Mission Command wound up in Johnson's backyard instead of Kennedy's.
Look at how it all connects to things like the Astro Dome and Johnson's cronnies.
Free houses for astronauts in Houston etc.
Follow the little yellow gold brick road,
click click ljb


Don't distract him with real conspiracies. If it's not Nixon, he's not interested.


Hi DJ,
Glad to to see that you are good and familiar with all that nepotism.
Sad but true. follow the money falling out the pockets of the spacesuits all the way to the moon.
ljb



posted on Apr, 11 2012 @ 09:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by ngchunter

Originally posted by longjohnbritches

Originally posted by ngchunter
reply to post by SayonaraJupiter
 


ILC made the space suits for the shuttle as well. The design followed directly from apollo with modifications to make them more generalized in fit rather than individually tailored. If you were intellectually honest you would also be posting photos of shuttle astronauts and claiming they're hoaxers too.


Hi ngc.
The dishonesty here may LIE in the fact we are discussing the moon hoax.
Who cares about fokls rolling around in low earth orbit.

ILC made the space suits for the shuttle as well and those suits used the same principles and the same basic systems to get the job done in thermal and pressure conditions that were just as extreme. By arbitrarily constraining the discussion to the "moon hoax" you show yourself to be intellectually dishonest; the claims being made apply equally to the space shuttle.


Ya know that is a kiddy park ride compared to a moon walk.

Pure and utter nonsense. In fact, taken as a whole program, the EVAs accomplished during the shuttle program were arguably more insurmountable in nature. Far more man hours were required in low earth orbit than on the moon. The cumulative program risk of an accident from an astronaut floating off structure (particularly prior to the advent of the SAFER system), or being struck by a micrometeroid, or otherwise damaging their spacesuit and being killed was considerably higher than for Apollo.


Well I would like to compare NASA's risk assessment for both programs.
You made the rebuttle now back it up. DATA please!!
You do know where to get the RISK ASSESSEMENTS from don't you???
thanks ljb





new topics

top topics



 
63
<< 22  23  24    26  27  28 >>

log in

join