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.

 

How many times does Neil Armstrong lie to us in this 1970 BBC interview.

page: 8
12
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 1 2012 @ 05:17 AM
link   
reply to post by thesneakiod
 



Haha DJW001 I knew you wouldn't reply to my question on the same terrain when in apparently different locations...


Of course not. I asked you to to provide a picture or a link to one. You did not. Prove that you are not a troll by doing so, then prove you are a photographer by explaining what you think is wrong.




posted on Sep, 1 2012 @ 05:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by magma
I can not wait until someone goes back. Then that should once and for all close this silly conspiracy topic.


You would think so, but I can see it now...

"Those that went back and took a flag, camera (etc), and planted everything there to try and prove we went there 1969, they are lying! Prove me wrong!"

The above is just a joke but it's probably true.

This is an honest question to the members here that believe that the moon landings or whole Apollo missions were faked...

If we went back to the moon this year and the astronauts took pictures and produced evidence that we had in fact landed in 1969, would you believe them or question them?

What kind of proof would you need to convince you?

Would you believe that we went back in the first place?

Gnobody



posted on Sep, 1 2012 @ 05:47 AM
link   
reply to post by de_Genova
 


Your own link sources the image as this.
There you can read

The mosaic, which stretches about 29,000 pixels across by 7,000 pixels high, includes 130 images taken on Aug. 8 and an additional 10 images taken on Aug. 18.


Your lack of most basic photographic knowledge is nothing short of bizarre. Your explanation sounds similar to one we might hear from a hoaxer...............

You are lying about your qualifications. This knowledge is most basic level stuff.



posted on Sep, 1 2012 @ 06:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by DJW001
reply to post by de_Genova
 

My major in undergrad art school was photography.
And yet you have apparently never heard of Hokusai. Really?


Hokusai has nothing to do with any of what is being discussed here.

BTW..........I am quite sure that I know a lot more about him (Hokusai) than anyone here ..........I just taught my 10 year old grandaughter about his greatness as an artist and she decided to reproduce one of his famous works "The Great Wave off Kanagawa" ..................(see below) - SO DON'T TELL ME ABOUT Hokusai or anything else about art and photography. You and your cronies here sound like fools when you attempt to seem more intelligent than you really are. You know nothing about art!

So, what gives you the right to be talking about Hokusai?

Just in case your not aware enough to distinguish one image from another my grandaughter's watercolor is on the LEFT.



PS....for those who might be interested GO HERE for a [PDF] school class on Hokusai's Summit: Thirty-six Views of Mount Complete set of Hokusai's monumental series Thirty-six Views of Mount Fuji, ... can share with your students and worksheets and activities for them to do before and after ..... Until the Meiji Restoration, ______ were not allowed to climb Mount Fuji. 6. .... www.articlesbase.com... easy- ...

edit on 1-9-2012 by de_Genova because: ADD TEXT



posted on Sep, 1 2012 @ 06:44 AM
link   
reply to post by de_Genova
 



Hokusai has nothing to do with any of what is being discussed here.


Oh? Then can you explain how Hokusai was able to do thirty six woodcuts of Mt Fuji, each portraying a scene at a completely different location, wherein Mt. Fuji always appears to have the same shape?



posted on Sep, 1 2012 @ 06:50 AM
link   
reply to post by OmegaLogos
 


interesting..

the bootprint .. is inverted.. otherwise you shouldn't see it.. due to the 'fine grey powder' .. nice catch!




posted on Sep, 1 2012 @ 06:51 AM
link   
reply to post by de_Genova
 


I am sure that in your granddaughters art there is a ufo. Little white blotch of whiteish color to the mid bottom left.

Thanks - am gonna start a thread on that



posted on Sep, 1 2012 @ 06:54 AM
link   
reply to post by Komodo
 



the bootprint .. is inverted.. otherwise you shouldn't see it.. due to the 'fine grey powder' .. nice catch!


Please explain.



posted on Sep, 1 2012 @ 07:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by magma
reply to post by de_Genova
 
I am sure that in your granddaughters art there is a ufo. Little white blotch of whiteish color to the mid bottom left.

Thanks - am gonna start a thread on that


There are three such small craft in the water amongst the waves..........They are seacraft.............not aircraft - alien or otherwise...........and surely not UFO's - she is far too sensible for that.......
edit on 1-9-2012 by de_Genova because: text



posted on Sep, 1 2012 @ 07:21 AM
link   
reply to post by de_Genova
 



There are three such small craft in the water amongst the waves..........They are seacraft.............not aircraft - alien or otherwise...........and surely not UFO's - she is far too sensible for that.......


Why do you respond to an off topic joke, but cannot reply to my on topic questions and requests?



posted on Sep, 1 2012 @ 08:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by Dr ExpiredThanks everyone, I have read through a significant part of this thread and have educated myself on this fascinating subject, also it is good to see someone accusing a dead man of been a liar, actually make the man even more respected ,via the truth that those who are knowledgeable supplied when responding to the OP - So basically Neil Armstrong is not a liar , but only a man who walked on the moon, and perhaps we are all just a little envious of that perhaps OP?


Thanks for reminding us of the weird circumstances surrounding the death of agent Neil Armstrong.
In light of that I think we should proceed thusly:

Complete List of Dead Astronauts

Last updated: 25 August 2012

Since we are here 'celebrating' the rather 'untimely' demise of Neil Armstrong the OP has decided that its time to also take a closer look at the extraordinary number of suspicious and untimely deaths of so many of the other astronauts. Take particular note of the number of 'heart attacks' on the list while a number of the cancer deaths could be due to radiation. All of the accidents are suspicious most especially that of Apollo 13 and not excluding the Columbia mission.

This is a complete list of U.S. career astronauts who are deceased. Private contractors and civilians who flew on the Shuttle under the classification "payload specialist" - sometimes called "payload specialist astronaut" by NASA - are not included.

Mercury through Skylab - Name - Program & Flight - DOD - Cause of Death






LINK

edit on 1-9-2012 by de_Genova because: text/add



posted on Sep, 1 2012 @ 12:23 PM
link   
reply to post by de_Genova
 



All of the accidents are suspicious most especially that of Apollo 13 and not excluding the Columbia mission.


how so? it was a hardware failure some 50hrs into the mission.
and when you say not excluding did you mean excluding or not including or including? you wrote a double negative, and its confusing me..



posted on Sep, 1 2012 @ 01:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by thesneakiod

Originally posted by magma
I can not wait until someone goes back. Then that should once and for all close this silly conspiracy topic.
People just want to believe whAt they want to believe. I enjoy the fact that I believe we went there. Can - prove it?
Not really,
I do look up at the moon on a clear night and I do think it really can't be that hard to go there. It is not that far really.




If its not that hard, why hasn't anyone been back?


Who says it isnt hard? Once you have the hardware in place, it isnt as hard, true, but its still a costly risky mission. To assemble a rockets you must start production all over the country basically, while putting things like the Shuttle on hold.



posted on Sep, 1 2012 @ 01:04 PM
link   
reply to post by AdamOver
 


I don't know about the rest, but they wouldn't be able to see the stars in the sunlight. It would be just like Earth in the sun. The only difference being our atmosphere makes our sky blue and cloudy, no atmoshphere on the moon, but still sunlight that would block out the stars. At least to my knowledge. Though I will admit I do have questsions about THE FIRST moon landing.



posted on Sep, 1 2012 @ 02:34 PM
link   
reply to post by de_Genova
 



Take particular note of the number of 'heart attacks' on the list while a number of the cancer deaths could be due to radiation.


The astronauts who are currently dying of natural causes belong to that cohort of Americans who believed that a thick, fatty steak and deep fried potatoes, washed down with Kentucky bourbon, was the healthiest meal a real man could eat.



posted on Sep, 1 2012 @ 03:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by choos
reply to post by de_Genova
 

All of the accidents are suspicious most especially that of Apollo 13 and not excluding the Columbia mission.


how so? it was a hardware failure some 50hrs into the mission.
and when you say not excluding did you mean excluding or not including or including? you wrote a double negative, and its confusing me..


If I were to say something like "not wishing to not exclude xxx" now that would be a double negative. But "not excluding xxx" is clear grammar - is it not?
edit on 1-9-2012 by de_Genova because: grammar




posted on Sep, 1 2012 @ 05:43 PM
link   
Here you go DJW001.
www.youtube.com...

The rest of the videos are good as well....



posted on Sep, 1 2012 @ 06:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by thesneakiod
Here you go DJW001.
www.youtube.com...

The rest of the videos are good as well....


Here you go DJW001.
THE REST -

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.



edit on 1-9-2012 by de_Genova because: text/add



posted on Sep, 2 2012 @ 12:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by de_Genova

Originally posted by choos
reply to post by de_Genova
 

All of the accidents are suspicious most especially that of Apollo 13 and not excluding the Columbia mission.


how so? it was a hardware failure some 50hrs into the mission.
and when you say not excluding did you mean excluding or not including or including? you wrote a double negative, and its confusing me..


If I were to say something like "not wishing to not exclude xxx" now that would be a double negative. But "not excluding xxx" is clear grammar - is it not?
edit on 1-9-2012 by de_Genova because: grammar



oh, i see so you wanted to include columbia into the suspicious accidents list?



posted on Sep, 2 2012 @ 05:24 AM
link   
reply to post by thesneakiod
 



Here you go DJW001.


What, specifically, do you want me to address?



new topics

top topics



 
12
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join