The Video that shows 100% Man DID NOT land on the Moon

Originally posted by Novaroc

That is not the greatest angle to see any berms or dust on the pad. Here are some better shots. Lets see what we can discern from these zero atmosphere closeups.

Listen for the love of a higher intelligence:

A large amount of dust was generated during the landings, yet no dust can be seen on the Lunar Module footpads.

This thinking draws on our common experience from Earth but, as we all know, the Moon is not Earth. If wind picks up dust on Earth we get billowing clouds that tend to settle all over everything. This occurs because Earth has an atmosphere. The Moon has no atmosphere so any dust that was blown by engine exhaust would follow a simple ballistic trajectory and fall immediately back to the surface. The dust would be blown outward away from the LM, thus the lack of dust on the footpads is exactly what we would expect to see.

The astronauts make deep footprints around the landing site, yet the Lunar Module exhaust should have blown the area clean of dust.

The downward traveling exhaust stream would impact the ground and rebound mostly outward and away from the surface. Since there is no atmosphere to interact with, the gas molecules would simply fly off and disperse (see note below). The only dust particles that would be displaced would be those directly impacted by the exhaust gas. Since the exhaust stream was concentrated mostly in the area directly beneath the Lunar Module, this zone would experience the greatest disturbance. The area adjacent to the LM would be largely unaffected by the exhaust stream.

NOTE: On Earth, the exhaust gas would impact and displace air molecules that would, in turn, displace other air molecules and so on. This phenomenon would create a large area of disturbance. Since the Moon has no atmosphere this type of widespread disturbance would be nonexistent.

The Lunar Module weighed about 17 tons, yet the astronauts' feet seem to have made a deeper impression in the lunar dust.

The hoax advocates often quote the weight of the Lunar Module as 16 to 18 tons (weights varied mission to mission). This was the LM's Earth weight when fully fueled and included about 9 tons of descent stage propellant. By the time the LM reached the surface, its weight in lunar gravity was only about 2,700 lbs. With four 37-inch diameter footpads, the load on the surface was about 90 lbs/ft2. Neil Armstrong's fully suited weight on the Moon was 58 lbs. His boots covered an area of about one square foot, giving a load of 58 lbs/ft2. In Armstrong's own words "the LM footpads are only depressed in the surface about 1 or 2 inches". On the other hand, the footprints of the astronauts were depressed only a fraction of an inch, although people often exaggerate their depth.

Text Moisture must be present in soil for it to form footprints, yet the Moon is a totally dry world.

The lunar surface is predominately composed of materials that fall under the general category of silicates. Silica has a natural tendency to bond with other silica, forming large molecular chains. When a meteoroid impacts the Moon, much of the energy goes into fracturing the surrounding structure causing breaks in the molecular bonds. On Earth, these "exposed" bonds quickly fill with oxygen in a process called oxidation or weathering. On the Moon, with a total lack of oxygen, these bonds have nothing to attach to until an event occurs that aligns the molecules. When an object, such as an astronaut's boot, disturbs lunar dust new molecular bonds are created. The new bonds enable the dust to hold its shape, forming an impression of the deforming object. Thus, footprints can form despite the absence of water.

Read it carefully, wear glasses if you must concentrate now, read it again..

Kudos Denver; there is absolutely no end in sight; is there?
Perhaps "stamina" (?) will determine the out come of this thread?
You Better grab a powerbar and a sports drink!
Yeah but; yeah but; yeah but....

Not everything is a conspiracy

reply to post by Iron7

o yes it is when there is no tyre tracks under the rover going or coming in some photos

Originally posted by 46ACE
Kudos Denver; there is absolutely no end in sight; is there?

Not if they don't read posts and research the facts.

Perhaps "stamina" (?) will determine the out come of this thread?

Ahh but these guys take thier meds, it will be a long drawn out battle.
Ill have to stick to lucozade and pro plus and enforce some common sense to the thread.

Originally posted by geobro
reply to post by Iron7

 

o yes it is when there is no tyre tracks under the rover going or coming in some photos

What charlatan told you that ?
look/listen/read/

Ground rules:
After13 pages: if you are going to comeback with a sweeping generalizations based on personal speculation :
Please do your own research and present the actual verifiable "proof"

(completely made up figures below for my example)

For example:
"The suits carried 2.5 kg's of water for cooling( Mcdonnel douglas link here) at a rated consumption of 25 grams/hour. hence they had capacity for 100 hours EVA .
versus::
"There's no freekin' way they could've carried enough water".
See the difference?
One is meaningful and verifiable; the other is a handfull of unicorn farts.
Or else we'll summon "The phage"!!!!!!

I haven't seen the video (will do) but I have one question: If they didn't land on the Moon, don't you think the Russians should be the the first to let the world know? And oppose the American claim?...haven't heard anything from them..

Originally posted by geobro
reply to post by Iron7

 

o yes it is when there is no tyre tracks under the rover going or coming in some photos

I'm almost afraid to ask
Okay....uhm"lets see it".

reply to post by geobro


That would be all of the aerospace companies and their workers who built the rockets, spacecraft, rovers, spacesuits, launchpads, etc. as well as those who supplied them with the raw materials they needed. We spent that money on our own people - not one cent was spent in space or on the Moon. It's been said that for every penny invested, we got something like 7 cents back in spinoffs, including jumpstarts on integrated circuit technology (and ultimately therefore, the computer you are using to read this ATS webpage), component miniaturization, materials science and a long list of other items.

Open your eyes ATS can teach you if it wasn't for NASA you wouldn't be surfing your favourite
porn channel with tissues in hand.

Best to give praise to NASA

huh;
It got quiet all of a sudden...

I guess it's true:
("In space no one can hear you scream!")
What? There's porn on the internet? See ya'

reply to post by denver22


digitalphotopix.gm/unexplained/moon-landing/conspiracy/2 has that photo but what about the other ones i am interested in hose those can it not leave tracks ?

Originally posted by geobro
reply to post by denver22

 

digitalphotopix.gm/unexplained/moon-landing/conspiracy/2 has that photo but what about the other ones i am interested in hose .how can it not leave tracks ?

The astronauts actually used to pick up the back end sometimes and turn the moon buggy
remember forget earth for a second as the moon has 1/6 of the earths gravity.

When you imagine it now in your head forget about what it would take to achieve the lift
of the back end with earths gravity.

(remember 1/6 of the earths gravity.)

In lunar gravity the rover is not especially heavy. An astronaut can lift one end of it with little difficulty. And since the rover's turn radius, like that of any four-wheeled vehicle, is limited, the astronauts sometimes found it easier to lift one end of the rover and turn it so it pointed in the direction they wanted to go, rather than maneuvering through a three-point turn. When this occurred, there would obviously be no track leading up to the wheels.

The lunar rover has a mass of 210kg and would therefore weigh about 77 lbs. on the moon i think.
Tell me could you not lift the back end of the moon buggy? if you were on the moon which wouldn't
need to be lifting the whole thing, just the back end and turn like a wheel barrow effect.

Are you getting to see the con artists have been taking you for a ride claiming we have not been on
the moon?.

Still unconvinced? am i -




Here/ just asking?

reply to post by Wonderer2012


I think we landed on the moon - the bigger question is what they found on the moon they aren't telling us - I'd like to know more information about that. I think after a couple of trips there, the aliens said, don't come back - you people are screwed up. So that's why we haven't been there in awhile

Originally posted by ThreeNF
reply to post by Wonderer2012

 

I think we landed on the moon - the bigger question is what they found on the moon they aren't telling us - I'd like to know more information about that. I think after a couple of trips there, the aliens said, don't come back - you people are screwed up. So that's why we haven't been there in awhile

Its a fantasy, a story told on conspiracy theory sites. They found rocks and dust and craters. No ET No machines left by a past civilization, no machines left by aliens, and the moon is not a spaceship hoovering over us watching everything we do. They found the moon, a dead, dusty satellite of the planet Earth.

Originally posted by karen61057

Originally posted by ThreeNF
reply to post by Wonderer2012

 

I think we landed on the moon - the bigger question is what they found on the moon they aren't telling us - I'd like to know more information about that. I think after a couple of trips there, the aliens said, don't come back - you people are screwed up. So that's why we haven't been there in awhile

Its a fantasy, a story told on conspiracy theory sites. They found rocks and dust and craters. No ET No machines left by a past civilization, no machines left by aliens, and the moon is not a spaceship hoovering over us watching everything we do. They found the moon, a dead, dusty satellite of the planet Earth.

Thanks. That's kind of boring - I was hoping they found something cool. Maybe that explains why we haven't gone back. If it's just rocks, dust, and craters, well ... I guess our tax dollars are better spent here

Originally posted by GrinchNoMore

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by karen61057

 

They did it to fool the Russians and to say we got their first.

Which begs the question:
Why didn't the USSR fake a landing?

Because how it turned out, wait for it...... was all scripted all along !!

And it always has been , and will be with such EASY PICKINGS !!

The Hordes of people who need to have hope in impossible things, need to have something over others.

What a fantastic psychological experiment it was, along with the millions of others that have gone on in just the last HUNDRED YEARS.

The believers never ask a tough question, just like all religious people, the funny part is, they will never realize it, because they are programmed to the point they CANNOT ask a tough question.

What excuses can you come up with as too how not ONE GOOD PIC has been released in all of these years, by all of these governments who claim to have evidence.

What is really going on, why always coverups here on Planet Earth...and why the Rabid defense clan of the victims of tomfoolery.

I have actually seen some people change the opinion with some deep romps into meditation, they can open themselves to the fact that they may not know the truth about ANYTHING...but just have partial truths that they have hung ALL THEIR LIFE ON...to the DEATH !!

But now they see, and the blinders start coming off, about EVERYTHING.

Why would you claim that there are no good pictures ? Two months ago it was all over the news about the photos showing how all but one of the flags planted by our astronauts is still standing after all these years. I dont pretend to have a great understanding about everything but I damn well know that I know the truth about many things and the moon landing is one of them. Yes some people will hold on to beliefs that do not make sense like saying we faked the moon landings. And those people will hold those deluded beliefs until DEATH. (You like shouting dont you)

reply to post by ThreeNF


The moon is an extremely hostile environment however one day the technology will be there so that it will be cost beneficial to return.

The moon is rich with gold, silver, platinum, and helium3 which may one day be the answer to abundant clean energy however at this time the cost and risk out way the gains that can be made.

reply to post by denver22

"Doooo-hoood"...
I didn't know that;
Makes perfect sense;
Smokin' reply there.

reply to post by Llama619


apparently there are tiny holes in the moon rocks caused by meteorites hitting them on a planet with no atmosphere to burn them up. It seems that these rocks have been sent all over the world for scientist to examine and study and funny thing, not one of the scientists have any doubts about the origins of the rocks. No one with the proper credentials have made any claims that the landing was faked . In July there were internet and news stories about the flags still standing there after all these years.