Moon Hoax: Debunked! by Paolo Attivissimo

page: 2
10
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join

posted on Aug, 17 2012 @ 05:01 PM
link   
the ones that get me are why no tyre tracks under the rover in some pictures




posted on Aug, 17 2012 @ 05:52 PM
link   
the best part of the hoax threads is I usually learn something about the apollo program. like apollo X. what a tease ! can you imagine orbiting the moon without landing ?!?

and I learned about the lunar laser ranging experiments, and the rover, and big muley



posted on Aug, 17 2012 @ 06:01 PM
link   
reply to post by GoodOlDave
 





The one thing that makes this type of conspiracy unique is that, unlike other conspiracies like the JFK assassination or the 9/11 attack, literally everything during the moon landing was documented thoroughly, completely above board, and open to the public, to the point where we even know how astronauts took a dump in space. Yet the conspiracy theorists still push this "we never went to the moon" baloney.


I believe we did go to the moon, however I also believe that a lot of what they showed was fake.
The man who built the only cameras the astronauts had, claims his camera did not take the photos because it had no external light source and (as you can see in photos) with the only light they had in space behind the guy how was his face and body visible? Hey he made the camera so I shall take his word for it.

Now I believe they faked a lot, but not because we didn't go, rather because of we we found.
Now I don't know about a radiation belt, or "wrong facing" shadows , but I do know that if they did see/find alien life or old ruins (who knows maybe human) they sure as shi...um....poop would not tell us.



posted on Aug, 17 2012 @ 06:09 PM
link   
reply to post by Hellhound604
 


Can "those people" not say the same about you?
That statement seems ignorant to me, however I don't believe you meant it to sound so ignorant.
Maybe you are just frustrated by those people on the internet.



posted on Aug, 17 2012 @ 06:13 PM
link   
Every time I try to download it, it's a broken link, or it's asking me to donate money.
Is there a working FREE link?



posted on Aug, 18 2012 @ 01:25 AM
link   
S+F
I know I might get blasted for this--but there is a pretty good de-bunking of some of the major arguments on a Mythbusters episode.I thought they did a pretty good job.



posted on Aug, 18 2012 @ 02:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by n3mesis
i for one would love to know why we worked so hard, spent as much money.... as it took to get there then completely abandoned the moon..
Talk about answering your own question...you just did. Money. The goal was to land a man on the moon and safely return him to Earth.

The goal was met, with 12 men. There was no goal to keep doing it forever, nor was there any financial justification to keep spending so much money.


there's tons of ideas, theories and conspiracies but it seems like something scared them
It doesn't seem that way, you already explained the reason...money.


and helium-3 alone is well worth the effort to go back
Someday it might have value and then I suspect we would go back to get it if it's economical. But there are no reactors today that can use He3, are there? So how is He-3 worth the effort? What use for He-3 do we have today?
edit on 18-8-2012 by Arbitrageur because: clarification



posted on Aug, 18 2012 @ 02:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by GunzCoty
Every time I try to download it, it's a broken link, or it's asking me to donate money.
Is there a working FREE link?
The link in the OP to the Epub format works fine for me when I did "save link as...", but you need a Epub reader as discussed here:

www.web-books.com...

If you just click the link without the reader, all you get is a bunch of odd-looking text.
edit on 18-8-2012 by Arbitrageur because: clarification


jra

posted on Aug, 18 2012 @ 03:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by geobro
the ones that get me are why no tyre tracks under the rover in some pictures


It's due to the astronauts walking around the rover, particularly in the back, where they keep all their equipment. When the astronauts walk on the Moon, their feet tend to kick up a lot of the loose regolith which covers up any tire tracks that they walk over. Example:

Here we have an astronaut (Dave Scott) standing behind the rover. You can see footprints all over the place. You can make out some of the tire tracks just at the left side of the photo where no astronauts have walked yet.
AS15-82-11060



posted on Aug, 18 2012 @ 03:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by GunzCoty
Every time I try to download it, it's a broken link, or it's asking me to donate money.
Is there a working FREE link?


I've downloaded the italian version for Free. Now, i check!


Originally posted by Arbitrageur

Originally posted by GunzCoty
Every time I try to download it, it's a broken link, or it's asking me to donate money.
Is there a working FREE link?
The link in the OP to the Epub format works fine for me when I did "save link as...", but you need a Epub reader as discussed here:

www.web-books.com...

If you just click the link without the reader, all you get is a bunch of odd-looking text.
edit on 18-8-2012 by Arbitrageur because: clarification


Yep!

Try this website, you can convert "epub" to "others format" : www.convertfiles.com...
edit on 18-8-2012 by theitalian because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 18 2012 @ 03:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
reply to post by theitalian
 


So...let me get this straight: we're able to send a rocket all the way to Mars and drop a minivan-sized rover for exploration purposes, and get BEAUTIFUL pictures of the surface of the Red Planet, but we have to fake a visit to an object that's actually orbiting our world?

Right.


Well technology was way different in the 50s and the 60s. They didn't even have a proven rocket to make the trip. They barely got of he ground.



posted on Aug, 18 2012 @ 04:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by spy66
Well technology was way different in the 50s and the 60s. They didn't even have a proven rocket to make the trip. They barely got of he ground.
Are you saying the Saturn V rocket in the 60's wasn't proven?

That was the largest launch vehicle ever produced...we don't have anything today to match it.

The Mars Science Lab including Curiosity had a mass of 3,893 kg which was within the payload capacity of the Atlas V rocket.

The lunar payload of the Saturn V was 44,600 kg, over 10 times as much mass. I don't know of a launch vehicle today with a lunar payload of 44,600 kg.

Both rockets were successful. The Saturn V had 2 partial failures out of 11 launches (though I don't think Apollo 13 was a Saturn V failure, so really just one failure of some fuel lines on Apollo 6 that was still successful enough to boost NASA's confidence in the Saturn V), and the Atlas V had only 1 partial failure out of 31 launches.

You'd probably need 10 (or more) of today's Atlas Vs to launch the same payload as one Saturn V from the 1960s.



posted on Aug, 18 2012 @ 10:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by GunzCoty
I believe we did go to the moon, however I also believe that a lot of what they showed was fake.
The man who built the only cameras the astronauts had, claims his camera did not take the photos because it had no external light source and (as you can see in photos) with the only light they had in space behind the guy how was his face and body visible? Hey he made the camera so I shall take his word for it.


Would you mind terribly posting a link where anyone said that? For one thing, I find it really odd how someone building a camera designed to take pictures while standing on the surface of what is tantamount to being a giant light bulb could say "there's no external light source". There was so much ambient light being reflected off the moon's surface that you could even clearly see astronauts standing in the shadows of the LEM. Are you sure you're quoting the manufacturer's actual words or is this one of those "I heard it from someone else who heard it from someone else" deals?


Now I believe they faked a lot, but not because we didn't go, rather because of we we found.
Now I don't know about a radiation belt, or "wrong facing" shadows , but I do know that if they did see/find alien life or old ruins (who knows maybe human) they sure as shi...um....poop would not tell us.


I myself go by the words of one NASA official who said that if there were any signs of alien life they wouldn't hesitate one second to reveal it, because Congress would instantly give them all the insane Apollo era funding they wanted to investigate it before anyone else could. We're not the only nation sending probes into space, remember.



posted on Aug, 18 2012 @ 10:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by syrinx high priest
the best part of the hoax threads is I usually learn something about the apollo program. like apollo X. what a tease ! can you imagine orbiting the moon without landing ?!?



NASA knew full well the temptation was there. That's why the LEM had a very light fuel load to make sure they didn't try it. If they did they wouldn't have the fuel to take off. They knew trusting astronauts with spacecraft is like trusting children with a box of candy bars. Remember Dave Scott and his stamps?

What I find sad/frustrating/typical of bean counters is that all the crraft for the Apollo 18 mission were all built, tested, configured, and ready to be launched, but the funding to actually launch it was pulled. The most magnificent spacecraft ever built by man was left out in the rain for decades simply because NASA didn't even have a dime to pay for the fuel.
edit on 18-8-2012 by GoodOlDave because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 18 2012 @ 10:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
reply to post by theitalian
 


So...let me get this straight: we're able to send a rocket all the way to Mars and drop a minivan-sized rover for exploration purposes, and get BEAUTIFUL pictures of the surface of the Red Planet, but we have to fake a visit to an object that's actually orbiting our world?

Right.


How about we first send a rocket to the Moon, drop a minivan sized rover for exploration purposes and have it drive up to one or two of the landing sites? Because for some reason, NASA has a hard time sending remote controlled rovers to the moon.



posted on Aug, 18 2012 @ 11:07 AM
link   
the reflection of 2 astronaughts in the visor in apollo 12 or no tyre tracks under the rover love to know how they managed that



posted on Aug, 18 2012 @ 11:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by geobro
the reflection of 2 astronaughts in the visor in apollo 12 or no tyre tracks under the rover love to know how they managed that
If you have a photo with reflections in it you don't understand, then post the photo or at least a link to it.

You could only see footprints where astronauts had walked over the tire tracks, is that what puzzles you? If so, why? If that's not the issue, post your photo/link to the missing tire tracks.



posted on Aug, 18 2012 @ 11:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by FoosM
How about we first send a rocket to the Moon, drop a minivan sized rover for exploration purposes and have it drive up to one or two of the landing sites? Because for some reason, NASA has a hard time sending remote controlled rovers to the moon.
I don't see the point.

If NASA did send a rover to the moon, they'd want to explore a previously unexplored site.

Even if somebody convinced NASA it was worth millions of dollars to send a rover to a previous landing sites just to satisfy some conspiracy theorist, it would be a futile waste of money because the moon landing hoax believers would just claim the rover mission was also faked.

So I totally don't get your point at all.


jra

posted on Aug, 18 2012 @ 04:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by geobro
the reflection of 2 astronaughts in the visor in apollo 12


You mean this photo? Link

If so, it's not the original photo. This one is: AS12-49-7278

The image with the two astronauts has obviously been edited by someone (not NASA), for what ever reason. Some sites that promote the Apollo hoax use it as evidence of Apollo being fake. That should show you the sloppiness of their fact checking and research abilities.


...or no tyre tracks under the rover love to know how they managed that


Already explained it to you 7 posts up.



posted on Aug, 20 2012 @ 10:17 PM
link   
reply to post by GoodOlDave
 


It was on a documentary on (i believe) the history channel. there's no external light source on his camera. And sorry but the moon does not reflect enough light to overpower the sun when the sun is the back light. The moon reflects about the same as a road (black top) .

Yes I'm quoting the manufacturer's words and he said his camera did not take the photos we have been shown.




I myself go by the words of one NASA official who said that if there were any signs of alien life they wouldn't hesitate one second to reveal it, because Congress would instantly give them all the insane Apollo era funding they wanted to investigate it before anyone else could. We're not the only nation sending probes into space, remember.


I'm sorry you believe them.

The way I look at it there is one of a few things going on.

#1 There is a country that has technology far beyond ours (USA) and is a threat to us.
#2 The government is reckless and has put many lives in danger testing our technology over heavy populated cities.
#3 There is a technology that is extraterrestrial.

Why it is one of these things?

Because what I saw was no "light in the sky" and at no point did i ever see any military craft. What I have seen with my own eyes was 1 mile in diameter (that is what i estimate), but non the less it was bigger then anything I have ever seen. No sound no flashing lights and the skin of the craft was unlike anything I have seen, it was like liquid black glass. And the speed was unreal, when I first seen it, it looked like a little red star or planet like Venus. then it came closer and closer until it was over my city and went over my house/area (it was big)

It looked as if it was moving slow but it covered great distances (thousands of miles) in seconds. And yes I know "pics or it didn't happen", but this was when the beeper/pager was just starting to get big and the camcorder we had was the size of a truck and VHS.

If it was ours then the government is risking many lives testing this over a city. btw as far as i know there is no military base near here. And they are letting our troops die when we could end any war with this technology in a matter of hours/days.


If it is not ours but another country's then we are screwed.

If it is extraterrestrial then we are not being told.

No matter how you look at it they are lying to us.

Or you could believe I am lying/crazy its up too you, but I am not lying or crazy I don't know what I saw, but I know what I saw was far more important to man then the Olympics or internet.





new topics
top topics
 
10
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join