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.

 

Doesn't this kill the conspiracy?...NASA to future moon explorers: Don’t ruin our Apollo landing

page: 2
5
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 29 2012 @ 10:03 PM
link   
reply to post by SayonaraJupiter
 


Sounds legit enough to me.

I'll believe it with my own eyes. When I land on the moon, or someone I know and trust does, then the conspiracy will be over.




posted on May, 29 2012 @ 10:59 PM
link   
To me it only draws more suspicion. I'm not a hoaxer but it almost seems they are trying to hide something by telling everyone to stay away.



posted on May, 30 2012 @ 01:17 AM
link   
reply to post by SayonaraJupiter
 


They abandoned this stuff. It's salvage. It's fair game for anybody who can get there.

Know a lot about property law, do you? Know a lot about the Outer Space Treaty, do you?
I think not. Sounds like you're of the "finder's keeper's" mentality. A looter.
edit on 5/30/2012 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 30 2012 @ 01:44 AM
link   
reply to post by cleverhans
 


I'm not a hoaxer but it almost seems they are trying to hide something by telling everyone to stay away.

"They" aren't telling anyone to stay away.
"They" are providing recommendations about how to protect objects of historical and scientific value.

The guidelines do not represent mandatory U.S. or international requirements. NASA provided them to help lunar mission planners preserve and protect historic lunar artifacts and potential science opportunities for future missions.

www.googlelunarxprize.org...

edit on 5/30/2012 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 30 2012 @ 09:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by BraneDamige
reply to post by SayonaraJupiter
 


Sounds legit enough to me.

I'll believe it with my own eyes. When I land on the moon, or someone I know and trust does, then the conspiracy will be over.



I think you summarized the mentality of the hoax believers nicely

" no proof will be enough"



posted on May, 30 2012 @ 04:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by SayonaraJupiter
 


They abandoned this stuff. It's salvage. It's fair game for anybody who can get there.

Know a lot about property law, do you? Know a lot about the Outer Space Treaty, do you?
I think not. Sounds like you're of the "finder's keeper's" mentality. A looter.
edit on 5/30/2012 by Phage because: (no reason given)


Please go ahead and cite the pertinent sections of space treaty law that deal with salvage on the moon.
Earn your stars!
Show me verbage in the Outer Space Treaty that is enforceable in regard to abandoned, non-operating, space junk.

From the article,
Source www.thespacereview.com...



NASA is careful to point out that the “recommendations are not legal requirements”;



This article will show that while NASA cannot impose the NASA Recommendations as legal requirements on all lunar operators, international space law and traditional property and tort laws do provide limited mechanisms that the United States can use to protect the Apollo artifacts.

My emphasis, 'limited mechanisms.


...the United States cannot unilaterally enact regulations restricting all spacecraft operating near the Apollo landing sites.



No US government agency, however, currently has jurisdiction to regulate the conduct of non-governmental spacecraft on the lunar surface.



Under traditional property law, property is deemed to be abandoned when it is vacated with the intention of not returning. Future lunar operators might claim that the United States has effectively abandoned its Apollo property because the United States does not have any concrete plans to return to the Apollo sites.


Article XII of the Outer Space Treaty says,

All stations, installations, equipment and space vehicles on the moon and other celestial bodies shall be open to representatives of other States Parties to the Treaty on a basis of reciprocity. Such representatives shall give reasonable advance notice of a projected visit, in order that appropriate consultations may be held and that maximum precautions may be taken to assure safety and to avoid interference with normal operations in the facility to be visited.


What does "shall be open" mean to you? Seems pretty clear to me.

Apollo sites "shall be open" and may be visited and salvaged for parts, if "reasonable advance notice" is given and "appropriate consultations are held".
edit on 5/30/2012 by SayonaraJupiter because: fix tags

edit on 5/30/2012 by SayonaraJupiter because: fixed tags



posted on May, 30 2012 @ 05:00 PM
link   
reply to post by SayonaraJupiter
 


Please go ahead and cite the pertinent sections of space treaty law that deal with salvage on the moon.

Article VIII

A State Party to the Treaty on whose registry an object launched into outer space is carried shall retain jurisdiction and control over such object, and over any personnel thereof, while in outer space or on a celestial body. Ownership of objects launched into outer space, including objects landed or constructed on a celestial body, and of their component parts, is not affected by their presence in outer space or on a celestial body or by their return to the Earth. Such objects or component parts found beyond the limits of the State Party to the Treaty on whose registry they are carried shall be returned to that State Party, which shall, upon request, furnish identifying data prior to their return.
www.fas.org...





Apollo sites "shall be open" and may be visited and salvaged for parts, if "reasonable advance notice" is given and "appropriate consultations are held".

I don't see anything about salvage in the Treaty. Did you make that up?

Your source:

However, unlike terrestrial law, current space law does not contain any mechanism by which property left in outer space can be deemed abandoned or subject to salvage.

www.abovetopsecret.com...
It is true that the US cannot regulate activities on the Moon. There is no attempt to do so. Recommendations have been provided to preserve and protect the historical and scientific value of the sites.

It is also true that there are no salvage rights for Apollo artifacts by anyone but the U.S. Government.

edit on 5/30/2012 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 30 2012 @ 07:43 PM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 


That's great. However the Outer Space Treaty of 1966 contains 5 parts. Each section is individually ratified by the states (nations) that are a party to the treaty.

The fifth part is the 1979 "Moon Agreement".

China and Japan have not signed or ratified the fifth part but India is good to go.

you can navigate to it from this page www.oosa.unvienna.org...

This is why NASA is scared poopless by the advances of Japan and China to get to the moon and discover something that has been kept as a secret from the general public for many decades.

It's time to open the moon rocks and give them out to schools and colleges and universities, now, June 2012.
At the transit of Venus on the face of the Moon.

NASA needs to let go all of them. Let collectors collect them. Let students reap the knowledge, now. These are not holy relics and soon, when the Chinese, Japanese and Indians figure this out, they will bring some real moon rocks back home to Earth.... then NASA moon rocks won't be worth anything to science and therefore, valueless, except for the sentimental and religious mythological value.



posted on May, 30 2012 @ 08:01 PM
link   
reply to post by SayonaraJupiter
 

You asked what part of the treaty concerned the Apollo artifacts. I told you.


That's great. However the Outer Space Treaty of 1966 contains 5 parts. Each section is individually ratified by the states (nations) that are a party to the treaty.
No. It has 17 parts (articles). The treaty is ratified as a whole by the signatories.


The fifth part is the 1979 "Moon Agreement".
No, it isn't. Article 5 concerns the safety of astronauts and requires signatories to provide assistance if required. You seem not to be talking about the OST. Do you mean the Agreement Governing the Activities of States on the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies? That's different. Maybe you can find something about "finders keepers" there.


This is why NASA is scared poopless by the advances of Japan and China to get to the moon and discover something that has been kept as a secret from the general public for many decades.
You know that the US and Japan actively collaborate, right?
oiir.hq.nasa.gov...


At the transit of Venus on the face of the Moon.
You know that Venus does not pass between the Moon and the Earth, right?
edit on 5/30/2012 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 30 2012 @ 08:12 PM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 


2nd reply, just on this single point.


I don't see anything about salvage in the Treaty. Did you make that up?


The Apollo landing sites are not holy relics nobody should be treating these sites like they are anything but scientific curiosities.

NASA's has made moves to elaborate on the concept of 'exclusion zones' on the Moon is a giant step backward from open scientific inquiry. Frankly, this crap about these sites being historically significant is of no political use for the Chinese, Japanese or Indians. They don't give a god damn crap about the American Heroes of the 60's and 70's. They really don't care at all.

Salvage, in the sense of a lunar scientific inquiry, an examination of Apollo sites in extreme close detail, by a scientific team of remote controlled rovers, returning objects to Earth for scientific purposes that benefit all mankind, is expressly authorized by the Moon Agreement., which the United States is a party.



posted on May, 30 2012 @ 08:18 PM
link   
I never want to be on the wrong end of phage's phaser, lol



posted on May, 30 2012 @ 08:19 PM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 



No. It has 17 parts (articles). The treaty is ratified as a whole by the signatories.

Wrong. China and Japan are not party to the 1979 "Moon Agreement" section of the Outer Space Treaty.
India has signed and ratified it.

I can give you screen shots if you want to argue about it. It's on the site
www.oosa.unvienna.org...



posted on May, 30 2012 @ 08:27 PM
link   
reply to post by SayonaraJupiter
 


Salvage, in the sense of a lunar scientific inquiry, an examination of Apollo sites in extreme close detail, by a scientific team of remote controlled rovers, returning objects to Earth for scientific purposes that benefit all mankind, is expressly authorized by the Moon Agreement.

Salvage, in any sense, is not addressed. Ownership, on the other hand, is.

Article 12

1. States Parties shall retain jurisdiction and control over their personnel, vehicles, equipment, facilities, stations and installations on the moon. The ownership of space vehicles, equipment, facilities, stations and installations shall not be affected by their presence on the moon.

zvon.org...~13

According the the Agreement, anyone can approach and examine any Apollo artifacts. Any entity other than the US government (or with permission) who takes possession of them would be committing theft. They would be considered looters under the agreement, just as they would under the OST.

edit on 5/30/2012 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 30 2012 @ 08:31 PM
link   
reply to post by SayonaraJupiter
 

There is no "Moon Agreement" section of the Outer Space Treaty.
As I explained, you seem to be talking about a separate Treaty, Agreement Governing the Activities of States on the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies. The point is pretty much moot though since no "space faring" States have ratified it, including the US.

edit on 5/30/2012 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 30 2012 @ 08:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by howmuch4another
reply to post by SayonaraJupiter
 



ah but did you catch this from the article? it is not as you say it is....


NASA acknowledged there is nothing binding about its deal with the foundation or its guidelines for avoiding its old sites.


Seems those google x cats can just drive their rovers right over the footprints if they really want to.



And they should be able to with no pressure from the US Government.



posted on May, 30 2012 @ 08:37 PM
link   
reply to post by SayonaraJupiter
 


And they should be able to with no pressure from the US Government.

Why would they want to? Why not contact them and ask?
www.googlelunarxprize.org...



posted on May, 30 2012 @ 08:55 PM
link   
It really isn't asking that much. How big is the moon compared to the landing sites? Plenty more to explore.



posted on May, 30 2012 @ 08:58 PM
link   
reply to post by JMech
 

There's an X Prize bonus for a landing near an Apollo site, as long as the guidelines are followed.

$4 million in bonus prizes are available for achieving other specific mission objectives, including operation at night; traveling more than 5km over the lunar surface; detection of water; and precision landing near an Apollo site or other lunar sites of interest (such as landing/crash sites of man-made space hardware).

www.googlelunarxprize.org...



posted on May, 30 2012 @ 09:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by SayonaraJupiter
 

There is no "Moon Agreement" section of the Outer Space Treaty.
As I explained, you seem to be talking about a separate Treaty, Agreement Governing the Activities of States on the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies


Wrong again.

There are 5 main parts to the UN space agreements.
Outer Space Treaty
Liability Convention
Moon Agreement



posted on May, 30 2012 @ 09:26 PM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 


Thanks for the info
. Missed that part in the op. Long day.
edit on 30-5-2012 by JMech because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
5
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join