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.
Originally posted by seabhac-rua
Originally posted by mazzroth
Ok this is what more than likely happened with the moon landing, the Yanks were positive of getting there and back even through the Val Allens Radiation belt but they were not confident with Hasselblads ability to video the event so they had a contingency plan. This plan involved switching over to a remote desert location and uploading the feeds so the event wasn't marred by poor playback or completely whited out images spoiling the event.
The reasoning behind this ? well with an event so important with the Russians so close to landing rovers on the moon within months they had to have top notch footage which could not be guaranteed, so some big nob made the call to just run with the hoax footage and hence the problems with lighting and numbered rocks which are definitely questionable. These errors out weighed having gone on holidays and not having good snaps to prove it.
This would cover just about everything that sums up the "Moon Landing Conspiracy" I would think.
Nope. Firstly there are no "problems with lighting and numbered rocks" all this has been demonstrated beyond any doubt countless times to be errors, misinterpretations and in some cases deliberate lies by hoax theorists.
Secondly if you think the footage was only way it was proven to the Russians that men walked on the moon then you need to do some learning about the Apollo space program.
Larry Baysinger, a technician for WHAS radio in Louisville, Kentucky, independently detected and recorded transmissions between Apollo 11 astronauts on the lunar surface and in the command module.[41] Recordings made by Baysinger share certain characteristics with recordings made at Bochum Observatory by Heinz Kaminski (see above), in that both Kaminski's and Baysinger's recordings do not include the capsule communicator in Houston and the associated Quindar tones heard in NASA audio and seen on NASA Apollo 11 transcripts. Kaminski and Baysinger could only hear the transmissions from the Moon, and not transmissions to the Moon from the earth.[35][42]
I asked Baysinger whether he found anything that NASA edited out – comments about things going wrong, the astronauts being loose with their language, or exclamations about meeting aliens! He said no – absolutely everything was transmitted to the public on TV. In fact he said, “that was kind of disappointing”. Part of the idea of this project was to hear the unedited “real story”, and it turned out there was nothing edited out.[iv] Indeed, Rutherford’s story (click here for hi-resolution version which you can read) makes no mention of hearing anything unusual.
Originally posted by r2d246
Originally posted by buster2010
What's really amazing about us faking the moon landings is how we are able to get the Russians, Chinese and various other nations in on it. What about the moon rocks that were tested in at Curtin University of Technology in Bentley, Australia. Or the photos taken by the Japanese lunar probe SELENE. How did the Retroreflectors get placed there? Those are the mirrors that are used to measure the moon's distance from earth. Please work on your Photoshop because that attempt you made was laughable.
To get them in on it, if we did, we use diplomatic talks. They have real moon rocks that made it to earth from deep impacts happening on the moon sending up moon rock into space that ends up on earth. What photos by Jap probe? Retrorelectors were either not there or photoshopped in. Mirrors could be from lunar rover missions in the past. The attempt was no laughable considering it took 10 minutes on a home PC. Given money and time I could easily do what they produced.
Here's how it works: A laser pulse shoots out of a telescope on Earth, crosses the Earth-moon divide, and hits the array. Because the mirrors are "corner-cube reflectors," they send the pulse straight back where it came from. "It's like hitting a ball into the corner of a squash court," explains Alley. Back on Earth, telescopes intercept the returning pulse--"usually just a single photon," he marvels.
Sign up for EXPRESS SCIENCE NEWS delivery
The round-trip travel time pinpoints the moon's distance with staggering precision: better than a few centimeters out of 385,000 km, typically.
Targeting the mirrors and catching their faint reflections is a challenge, but astronomers have been doing it for 35 years. A key observing site is the McDonald Observatory in Texas where a 0.7 meter telescope regularly pings reflectors in the Sea of Tranquility (Apollo 11), at Fra Mauro (Apollo 14) and Hadley Rille (Apollo 15), and, sometimes, in the Sea of Serenity. There's a set of mirrors there onboard the parked Soviet Lunokhud 2 moon rover--maybe the coolest-looking robot ever built.
In this way, for decades, researchers have carefully traced the moon's orbit, and they've learned some remarkable things, among them:
Originally posted by 46ACE
Will this Insanity ever end?
Your entire case is built on the so called "evidence" that you can conceive of it being a hoax?
Thats it?
Thousands of respected scientists; engineers; and contractors; are perfectly keeping to a perfect lie.
But some yob on youtube's got it all figured out!
Did you catch the Mitchell& Webb comedy sketch video posted above?
If you have to actually build a Vehicle assembly building( A structure so big it has its own weather); an entire launch complex AND and successfully build and launch a Saturn 5 for the public to witness ...
Where's this massive $ savings come in again??????
I trust you've learned something here today..,edit on 30-9-2012 by 46ACE because: (no reason given)edit on 30-9-2012 by 46ACE because: spelling.edit on 30-9-2012 by 46ACE because: (no reason given)edit on 30-9-2012 by 46ACE because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by seabhac-rua
reply to post by snowen20
I know.
As if the Russians would say "Well Boris, what do you think of this business of the Americans landing on the moon?" (Boris) "Sir, I have seen the film and it looks real"
I mean come on.
Originally posted by iamusic
we can't use the same one that we used to go to the moon 40 years ago?
Originally posted by seabhac-rua
reply to post by snowen20
You bet the Russians had very close eyes on the Apollo program.
As for 'naysayers' in the 60's, I would say they never existed, why would anybody question the authenticity of the moon landings back then? They had no reason to. In my opinion, and further proof of the reality of the landings, the whole question mark over the Apollo missions is a relatively modern phenomenon fueled by youtube videos, pseudo science, widespread ignorance, lying charlatans and paranoid fantasy. The 400.000 people who worked on the Apollo program would never have guessed that 40 years after they had made their accomplishments some idiot with more computing power at his fingertips than they ever had would pose the knuckle-headed question "why can't we see stars?"
Originally posted by seabhac-rua
reply to post by snowen20
Well as for there being stuff(not ours) up there? There's actually more anecdotal evidence of that than there is of the landings being faked, there are actual people who have come forward and testified to having seen orbiter photos of artificial structures on the moon, whereas nobody has ever come forward and said the landings didn't happen.
Originally posted by snowen20
Moon structures, anecdotal or otherwise are in my opinion infinity cooler than the idea of a freaking moon hoax.
Originally posted by seabhac-rua
reply to post by RealSpoke
You made the same mistake as r2d246 in his mock up: scale. The distances you have the tracks going are hundreds of miles and the lander in the size of a small town.
Originally posted by StellaByStarLight
reply to post by r2d246
I think you are spot on r2d246. For so long I have wanted to get into the mix. Guess my timidity has hurt in the past. I worked for NASA, roughly 11 years as a project manager.