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.

 

Did nasa really send astronauts to the moon?

page: 10
12
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 28 2012 @ 11:05 PM
link   
OP asked: Did NASA really send astronauts to the moon?

Answer: NASA produced simulations of 6 moon landings that were broadcast on live network television. Howard Hughes and Richard Nixon were involved. The CIA was involved. The military industrial complex had conspired against an entire nation of gullible Americans. The Gulf of Tonkin (1964) proved that an entire nation could be duped by television.

The Saturn project and Apollo are perfect examples of state central control of the industrial economy and therefore represent an insidious vein of communism within the military industrial complex.

Face facts. Apollo was successful because Big Government spent Big Dollars in a Spending Spree not based based on national priorities but paranoid political priorities.


Even Frank Borman agrees with me.


Frank Borman “The whole concept of changing our mission and getting ready in four months was done because we were in the “Can Do” program… “Beat the Soviets to the Moon”. NASA likes to talk about scientific exploration and our lunar expert here… Bill Anders… he can pick up all the rocks in the world… that’s just wonderful… the reason we went to the moon on Apollo 8 was to beat the Russians… I want to give you a clue!”




edit on 8/28/2012 by SayonaraJupiter because: add paranoia




posted on Aug, 28 2012 @ 11:07 PM
link   
Are we really back on this again? Wasn't there like an 800-page thread on "Did we land on the moon?".

Sigh..

Ok.. lets for one minute ASSUME that the moon landing was a hoax. I guess that means that all the people employed by Grumman out by me in Bethpage and Calverton were all in on it. Every scientist, astronaut, engineer, secretary, news reporter, etc. They were all in on the big hoax. Sigh.

I've heard every excuse in the book for why man couldn't have possibly been to the moon.

"The Van Allen belts.. radiation too high... bleh bleh bleh". Research the belt. Understand that there were people WAY smarter than you, or anyone on the internet proclaiming to be an expert. I'm sure they found a way around the problem.

"How come we can see other galaxies but we can't see a clear picture of the landing site?". Because that's not how telescopes work? The Hubble telescope is not like your back yard model. And all these gigantic scopes around earth? Their lenses are made to see FAR AWAY. No one in their right mind would invest tens of millions of dollars to create a telescope that could see foot prints and a flag on the moon. I believe the Japanese (or someone) had managed to take a pretty decent shot of the site. But that wasn't good enough I guess.

I'm not belittling you OP. I am just still so confused how this can be a topic that is so heavily debated, even today. There are so many better "hoaxes" to uncover.



posted on Aug, 28 2012 @ 11:15 PM
link   
reply to post by DerekJR321
 


What I have always wanted to know is: Why haven't they made a telescope that can see the moon clearly?

What a great marketing idea!


See the landing spots for yourselves!!

Disclaimer: Yes i know there are telescopes that can see the Moon, but I havent come across one that can see it clearly i.e. landing sites
edit on 28-8-2012 by CaptainBeno because: extra



posted on Aug, 28 2012 @ 11:27 PM
link   
reply to post by DerekJR321
 


It always seems everyone thinks that if it were a hoax everyone right down to the guy mopping the hallways over at nasa had to be in on it. Lets be real about it. It could easily be done with only a handful of insiders.. For starters the men said to actualy go to the moon. Thats 3. Than the guys at the top that planed it. This could be as few as one but to be fair we will just guess 5. Thats now 8. Than you need some guys to build the set. They had four month atleast. Id say 5 guys could do that in four months. Thats 13. There is no real need for anyone else to know. Not even mission control. For all they had to know they were seeing the real thing just as the rest of america thought. So why does everyon assume half the country would have been in on it?



posted on Aug, 28 2012 @ 11:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by BennyTheBlade
reply to post by DerekJR321
 


It always seems everyone thinks that if it were a hoax everyone right down to the guy mopping the hallways over at nasa had to be in on it. Lets be real about it. It could easily be done with only a handful of insiders.. For starters the men said to actualy go to the moon. Thats 3. Than the guys at the top that planed it. This could be as few as one but to be fair we will just guess 5. Thats now 8. Than you need some guys to build the set. They had four month atleast. Id say 5 guys could do that in four months. Thats 13. There is no real need for anyone else to know. Not even mission control. For all they had to know they were seeing the real thing just as the rest of america thought. So why does everyon assume half the country would have been in on it?


And what about the launches? They just threw up the rockets for the hell of it? To make it look good? There were several Apollo missions. That means that all of those had to be faked too.



posted on Aug, 29 2012 @ 12:02 AM
link   
reply to post by DerekJR321
 


well ofcourse its not for the hell of it. Thats part of making it look real. If no rockets left than obviously its fake. Other countrys namly russia tracked the flight. The crew gets on, than jetisons with what seems to be a fuel tank or however thats done. The unmaned ship than goes to the moon as to seem real. They guys in that footage could have been anyone under the suit. So add two more to the list. 15 had to know. Neil andd glenn play out the voices from another location. Easy as pie is how it works..


jra

posted on Aug, 29 2012 @ 12:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by BennyTheBlade
It could easily be done with only a handful of insiders.. For starters the men said to actualy go to the moon. Thats 3.


There were a total of 9 missions to the Moon. 6 of those landed with 2 people, so that's 12 people who walked on the Moons surface, plus the 15 astronauts who stayed in Lunar orbit. That makes a total of 27 people that have been to the Moon not 3.


Than the guys at the top that planed it. This could be as few as one but to be fair we will just guess 5.


Why 5? How did you arrive at that number? And what about all the scientists and the engineers involved in the planning? What about the heads of all the contracted companies that were tasked to make it happen? Building vehicles that they designed to really work. Either they were in on it or the brightest minds were some how fooled / tricked into believing it was real...


Than you need some guys to build the set. They had four month atleast. Id say 5 guys could do that in four months.


What do you base your figures on? How were these set builders kept quiet? Why no deathbed confessions from anyone in the last 4 decades?



posted on Aug, 29 2012 @ 01:06 AM
link   
reply to post by jra
 


were talking moon landing here so scrap all the orbit stuff. Im also referancing the first landing. So yes three onboard. The 5 to plan was a guess, its all a guess. I said its not needed to have more than just one to plan it but decided 5 sounded more fair. There is simply no need to invove tons of ppl was my point. The 5 builders was baised on my many years of construction experiance. Honestly that number could even be less but to be fair i said 5. And keeping them quiet is easy enough, we dont know who they are so they could have been killed the day they finished. It was all estimates to say that there is no reason everyone and their mom needed to know as many of you seem to think. Oh and the companys making the vehicals and such, no need to trick them. The gov goes to them and says hey we need this built and they say sir yes sir and its done.
edit on 29-8-2012 by BennyTheBlade because: forgot part



posted on Aug, 29 2012 @ 01:24 AM
link   
reply to post by jra
 


ah yes and deathbed confessions, well idk maybe because those that died have familys. Familys that could be harmed if their loved one speaks. Just maybe..



posted on Aug, 29 2012 @ 01:25 AM
link   
dual post
edit on 29-8-2012 by BennyTheBlade because: sorry



posted on Aug, 29 2012 @ 03:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by BennyTheBlade
reply to post by krs678
 


I dont know enough about how possible it is to survive the radiation, but i also find it hard to understaind how its so easy.

I just never understood why, if they went and really did get that far, why tell such a clear lie.


Ill explain then to you.



This is a claim the hoax advocates often make, but it is a gross exaggeration and simply not supported by the data. Radiation was a definite concern for NASA before the first space flights, but they invested a great deal of research into it and determined the hazard was minimal. It took Apollo only about an hour to pass through the worst part of the radiation belts - once on the outbound trip and once again on the return trip. The total radiation dose received by the astronauts was about one rem. A person will experience radiation sickness with a dose of 100-200 rem, and death with a dose of 300+ rem. Clearly the doses received fall well below anything that could be considered a significant risk. Despite claims that "lead shielding meters thick would have been needed", NASA found it unnecessary to provide any special radiation shielding.

The hoax advocates also make the mistake of limiting themselves to two-dimensional thinking. The Van Allen Radiation Belts consist of a doughnut-shaped region centered on Earth's magnetic equator. The translunar trajectories followed by the Apollo spacecraft were typically inclined about 30 degrees to Earth's equator, therefore Apollo bypassed all but the edges of the radiation belts, greatly reducing the exposure.

Do you understand now benny about radiation? if you do not, then please tell me or us ?.
edit on 29-8-2012 by denver22 because: CAPITAL D



posted on Aug, 29 2012 @ 03:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by BennyTheBlade
Thats 13.


Perhaps in a modern day indie film set you could manage that. Looking at it a bit more critically though ...

Staff skilled in wire work or some other technique for the astronaut's movement. Staff skilled in projection techniques for the backgrounds, plus artists to produce the content for those projections. Delivery of realistic regolith and aquistion of the proper rocks and similar materials. Construction of the lander. Compositing of the in space shots. Editor to run over the hours of footage to check for issues. Pyro technician for launches etc ... Technical advisors for the astronauts themselves and the staff involved to make sure it all sounds legitimate. Survey data from the actual landing sites (include the bit where they landed off target) to ensure the 'set' and projections match the moon. I imagine this would also include some kind of method of producing that survey data. Factor in prop construction and zero gravity work ...

Then there's the question of who trained the 'thirteen' in all of those skills, and then the question of where those thirteen people went afterwards.

The training to produce all of this work alone would be quite the investment in people and man hours pre-internet.



posted on Aug, 29 2012 @ 03:48 AM
link   
Once again, there is this debate going on ... the moonlandings. You got one half claiming they've debunked, and the other half they've debunked the debunking.

Nobody debunked anything ...

But you can't tell that to the general American ... the general public, wether they are in the US, or elsewhere have absolutely zero critical thinking.

Look at the kind of movies, they look at ...

Battleship
Independence day

Big movies at the box office ... well, they were OK to a point. But there is absolutely zero logic in them, and they all represent the general publics thought process. And whats that?

It can be represented by how the movies end ...

Independence day, the Aliens were running Microsoft Windows 95, beta version. A virus, turned off their defences and we NUKED*EM.

Battleship, old timers and an old ship ... beats the shet outta the aliens, and we blow them outta here!


The bottom line here, is that the above movies and almost any other movie made for the General public and where the public actually loves to pay tickets to. Is totally bereft of any logic. It's not merely fantasy, it's just basic crap, plainly speaking. But the public isn't critical in it's thoughts, doesn't have any ... and just say "WE WON" ... and it goes on like that, like a broken record. These are childs fantasy movies, which only have emotional content, and no logic whatsoever. But whereas HC Andersen was actually trying to teach something, these stories are just capitalizing on the idea, and emotions, that are already planeted within the mind of every human being on the planet, more or less.

The general public, the 99% of the human race ... doesn't have a clue, doesn't want a clue ... and has absolutely zero ability to have any grain of critical thinking. This isn't just something that applies to Americans, it's a universal thing, that applies to the entire Human race.

Sure, the US went to the moon ... yeah, maybe they even landed people there ... eventually. But in the 60's, with the scrap tinfoil hats ... give me a break. It was a great TV show, and the general public believes in it, just like religious fanatics. plain and simple. Well, let's not exclude the possiblity that they actually went to the moon at the time, with "drastic" results ... and that they made the TV show, to make it look good. A scenetic variation of reality, so to speak ... but this scrap iron, with tinfoil wrappings on the moon? yeah, right. Well, lets not say it's IMPOSSIBLE, as it's not ... but it's highly UNLIKELY.

And nobody wants to hear anything else, because it's their basic child fantasy ... so, it's always true, irrespective.

Throughout the ages, people have been argueing many concepts and we've always come down to the same point ... you have the gullable, and you have those with critical thinking, the disbelievers. Critical thinking is required for science, but it is an extra weight for those who want to believe. And the majority of the people believe, not because something is right, but because it's the general concesus. They want to belong to a group and don't want to stand out ... well, it's not about what they want or don't want. Their brain function, doesn't have it in their brain stem.

We're educated from our youth, to obey our parents. We grow up, with the thought that what our parents tell us, is correct ... and what our teachers tell us, is right. If we do not obey, or decide to question the system, we're sick ... need help. Given a couple of pills, therapy, so we'll relax and start to listen, and obey.

That's why, when your president says you went to the moon, you believe. And when he puts the name of people he wants dead on a deck of cards, it's like a western in your brains where the bad guys are wanted. It never occurred to you, that what your president is telling you, is probably the same thing Hitler told the Germans. But you aren't intelligent enough, to make that parallell ... it's not within your genes.

You don't make parallels, you do not consider that there is another motivation for the activity. That there is a goal, beyond what you see ... you don't look, because you grew up, with the idea to listen, not to question and obey.

People who question everything, are nerds ... really, really boring people. They always come up with the other side of the coin, when discussing something. Met him, guy like me ... whose always there with an alternative idea? whatever you come up with, he's looking at another side of it. And it's never the side you want to hear ... and I ask you, have you ever listened and wondered wether true or not ... or weighed the arguements?


edit on 29/8/2012 by bjarneorn because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 29 2012 @ 04:08 AM
link   
reply to post by BennyTheBlade
 



The 5 builders was baised on my many years of construction experiance. Honestly that number could even be less but to be fair i said 5. And keeping them quiet is easy enough, we dont know who they are so they could have been killed the day they finished.


Do you honestly find it conceivable that this thing right here was knocked up by 5 people? You can't make a mountain bike with 5 people.

Did they personally manufacture all the wiring, glass, circuitry and metal panels? Did they do the same to produce the rocket fuel? Are you thinking that while one guy's bolting and welding panels, the other's doing the wiring and another's building the launchpad and gantries? Yet another's brewing up 1000s and 1000s of gallons of fuel all by himself? Number 4 was probably painting it all nice and white! Number 5 must have been smelting all the special alloys and banging them into shape with his hammer.

Kill them at the end? If 5 men could do all this, they'd be leaders of the world, Olympic gold medallists and probably on a world rock tour with groupies screaming their names. I don't want to sound harsh, but have you really thought this through?



posted on Aug, 29 2012 @ 04:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by BennyTheBlade
reply to post by jra
 


were talking moon landing here


Something that you clearly don't understand benny .

The 5 to plan was a guess, its all a guess


Bad guess benny.


The 5 builders was baised on my many years of construction experiance.

Benny sorry but whoever employed you needs shooting if you honestly think it only takes 5



Landing men on the Moon by the end of 1969 required the most sudden burst of technological creativity, and the largest commitment of resources ($24 billion), ever made by any nation in peacetime. At its peak, the Apollo program employed 400,000 people and required the support of over 20,000 industrial firms and universities
edit on 29-8-2012 by denver22 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 29 2012 @ 04:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by BennyTheBlade
reply to post by DerekJR321
 


It always seems everyone thinks that if it were a hoax everyone right down to the guy mopping the hallways over at nasa had to be in on it. Lets be real about it. It could easily be done with only a handful of insiders.. For starters the men said to actualy go to the moon. Thats 3. Than the guys at the top that planed it. This could be as few as one but to be fair we will just guess 5. Thats now 8. Than you need some guys to build the set. They had four month atleast. Id say 5 guys could do that in four months. Thats 13. There is no real need for anyone else to know. Not even mission control. For all they had to know they were seeing the real thing just as the rest of america thought. So why does everyon assume half the country would have been in on it?


Benny i think you need to think this theory through again my lad..



posted on Aug, 29 2012 @ 05:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by BennyTheBlade
reply to post by DerekJR321
 


well ofcourse its not for the hell of it. Thats part of making it look real. If no rockets left than obviously its fake.

Benny is this a jest im being serious?



Other countrys namly russia tracked the flight.


Correct.



They guys in that footage could have been anyone under the suit. So add two more to the list. 15 had to know.


Benny you forgot the people in mission control lol

Benny mate i think your gonna need a calculator soon pal



posted on Aug, 29 2012 @ 07:01 AM
link   
reply to post by Pinke
 


And that's just for the visual effects. Someone had to write the script. At one page for every minute and a half of running time, each mission would need a script over 11,000 pages thick. These would need to be typed up and photocopied by somebody. Also, the writers would need technical advisers who could make it convincing enough to fool engineers. Then you would need another team of engineers to create the fake telemetry that would be fed through the computers at Mission Control. This telemetry would need to "synch up" with the audio feed, so you would need more technicians to monitor the false telemetry that was being fed to the dupes at Mission Control in real time.

Getting back to the script writer's problems, the script would need to be revised daily to keep it topical. People would get suspicious if, say, the Houston Astros won the pennant during the flight and nobody commented on it. This means that everybody would need to have the revised script in their hands, which would require a "script girl" (sorry Pinke, that's what they were called back in the 60s) to pass out the revisions and make sure everyone was using the same colored pages, and then... Are you starting to get the picture? Anyone who says that "it would be easy to fake" has no grasp of the real world.



posted on Aug, 29 2012 @ 07:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by CaptainBeno
ell.

Just because you "THINK" you are right does not give you the right to be smug and start mouthing off to other members. Everybody has there thoughts on this matter whether right or wrong.

Wake up people, this is a conspiracy website, not a lectern for you to berate the masses.

Let people have there say. If you have Evidence and photographic proof that proves them wrong, post it as a counter argument, just don't say "No no no your wrong, because I watched it on t.v) That defeats the whole point of this website.

Thank you.


NO hoax believers think they are right BUT ignore every FACTUAL reply given the photographic problems are the easy ones to explain but even when shown the answer they ignore sort of like you have done with the example below!

I posted this picture to counter your claim about the cross hairs



So any comment on it I mean this was done on good old mother earth to prove a point that due to exposure settings and relative brightness of objects things might not appear as you think they should.

As your claimed expertise is with flying why don't you and others like you leave the photographic problems to people with that expertise.

Why don't you make a thread with your claimed pictures say your best five and let us give you the reason you are WRONG!
edit on 29-8-2012 by wmd_2008 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 29 2012 @ 08:16 AM
link   
This is getting to sound like a bunch of cry babies, yielling ...

Mama, he's mean ... he says we didn't go to the moon ...

And the childs arguements ...

We went to the moon, we really did ... we did! we did! ... I'll hit you in the face!



Yeah, you went to the moon ... and then what?

The problem with all of this, is that all that matters to you "moonlanders" is that you landed on the moon ... it's the only thing that counts. Just an exhibition .... showing off that you got a big willy ...

WOW GUYS, LOOK THEY GOT A BIG WILLIE.

The space program, was more a military thing, than anything else. These big rockets, were to launch satellites into space ... secure communications, and get instruments up there, to help with guidence, navigation, identification and mobility across the planet. Whatever lunar adventure there was, it was von Brauns vision that was driving it, and that the US had a couple of guys go to the moon, in billion dollar babies ... to collect two space rocks, plant a flag and hit a golf ball.

I mean seriously ... that's daft.

The problem with all of this, that there is no scientific exploration ... this, "Giant step for mankind". Isn't even a baby step ... there are "zillions" of things to do, and not one of them has been done ... this isn't about just going out into space and looking at mars, sending some pictures. And Niel Armstrong out there showing off his face, on TV, waving ... collecting two space rocks, or three.

Which is why, most of us say ... no you didn't. It doesn't mean, that you "ABSOLUTELY DID NOT". It means, we doubt you did, and we'll look and voice our doubts. Believe what you want ...

But what I see, is to put it mildly ... I see NASA, in the field of exploration and science, as a small baby. That, with the lunar landing is supposed to have grown into being a teenager. But this teenager, is still pooping in his pants ... just like a baby. So, either this baby is mentally retarded ... or he's still just a big baby. And I'm saying, it's still a baby ... it didn't really take that "giant step for mankind". It merely took that "small step for man".

Seriously, is the only thing about the moon you can see ... is for planting a flag, shooting a golf ball and colling a few rocks. thats it? if that is it, then I really think NASA should step down, and some other agency follow up on it.

Because, that's definately not it...

And, we have no place in going to mars ... until we've explored the moon properly.

Here is one of my favorits on the subject

Mars colors

Yeah, is NASA really altering the colors of mars photos to make it look marsian? The evidence certainly points in that direction, doesn't it. So, altering things for the public, sure isn't something that seems to be hard for NASA, now does it.

edit on 29/8/2012 by bjarneorn because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
12
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join