Disclosure of the moon landing hoax.

Originally posted by mrwiffler
And sayonarajupiter, can you please explain what the hell you are going on about? Von Braun was a Nazi. We know that. Simply, what is your point?

I'm putting the Nazi's back in the NASA narrative. The facts are facts. von Braun was a talented rocket salesman. The American government brought von Braun, Arthur Rudolph and so many other Nazi's with Operation Paperclip. Don't you think it's strange that the America science establishment was totally lacking in rocket expertise? There were public relations experts available to make von Braun the Nazi more palatable to the public - so he was associated with Walt Disney in order to 'pacify' the war criminal in the perception of the public eye.

Maybe you weren't fully aware of Richard Nixon's role in Operation Paperclip, he was setting up captured Nazi's in the United States by expediting the paperwork through the official channels, making it easier for the OSS/CIA to bring former war criminals into the country. Nixon also did some creative banking for Nazi industrialists so he did by moving their assets and paying out government money to them in the form of "damages" to certain factory owners,, etc and other gangster payback deals.

Last week on March 23, 1912 was Werner von Braun's birthday. So this week was a good time to remember him and review the facts and to discuss the things we understand about his role in the Apollo story, the asteroids, the E.T. story - in due course - the disclosure of the moon landing hoax plus the TV mind control experiments which produced the mass hallucinations in millions of unsuspecting 1960's people.

Originally posted by SayonaraJupiter
Maybe you weren't fully aware of Richard Nixon's role in Operation Paperclip, he was setting up captured Nazi's in the United States by expediting the paperwork through the official channels, making it easier for the OSS/CIA to bring former war criminals into the country. Nixon also did some creative banking for Nazi industrialists so he did by moving their assets and paying out government money to them in the form of "damages" to certain factory owners,, etc and other gangster payback deals.

Just where do you get your rubbish from? Let us see what Nixon actually did....

In January 1945, he was transferred to the Bureau of Aeronautics office in Philadelphia to help negotiate the termination of war contracts, and he received another letter of commendation for his work there.[41] Later, Nixon was transferred to other offices to work on contracts and finally to Baltimore.[42] In October 1945, he was promoted to lieutenant commander.[41] He resigned his commission on New Year's Day 1946.[43]

reply to post by SayonaraJupiter


thats all super fascinating and all.. but you still dont have a point. this is what i hear you trying to say "NASA fake moon landing because von Braun NAZI"

reply to post by choos

thats all super fascinating and all.. but you still dont have a point. this is what i hear you trying to say "NASA fake moon landing because von Braun NAZI"

Yes, that's basically what he's saying. There is a subtle implication to his reasoning, however. The Moon Landing was nothing but a movie, because Walt Disney made movies and von Braun worked with Disney on a movie. Earlier, von Braun showed Hitler a movie of a rocket. Therefore, the V-2 was only a movie and the rain of rockets on London was just an elaborate hoax. Brilliant.

Originally posted by Zaphod58

Originally posted by turbonium1
Why do you think they're spending a fortune to study the VA Belts with probes? Any idea?, , ,

Because they eat satellites for one reason. And to learn how they interact with cosmic rays for another. They need to understand space radiation better for long term stays in space, and on other planets.

Satellites have existed many years now, and few orbit within the VA Belts anyway. Strike One.

To learn the interactions before any manned flight to the moon - that makes sense. No reason if Apollo did it - foul ball makes the count Strike Two.

It isn't about long-term flights - they don't plan on long-term human visits within the VA Belts. Moon or Mars or whatever, they still go through the same Belts. Strike Three, You're OUT

Consider the timing. Satellites already existed for years by that time. So what sparked the project?

A much bigger project.

Just before it.

A plan to send man to the moon. By 2020.

So the VA Belts project - it begins soon after the moon mission is announced. And it will conclude in 2017-18, which is before the first flight in 2020.


Now add it all up...
.

Originally posted by captainpudding

Originally posted by turbonium1


Do you think it's a little odd that scientists and engineers have never expressed any doubts on Apollo, at least in public? For over 40 years, not one of them having a shred of doubt?

By that logic that means everything that has ever happened, never happened. Nobody expresses doubt that the sky is blue, nobody doubts that water is made of hydrogen and oxygen. Maybe the reason they don't express doubt in it having happened, is because it happened?

A blue sky is not doubted because everyone can see that it is, indeed, a blue sky above us.

Water is not doubted as being H2O because ievery analysis shows us that.

A moon mission is very different, can't be tested independently to verify it, etc. It's never been done in 40+ years since then. The LM was never tested on Earth in final form, yet was capable of some amazing,feats.

But of course, nobody doubted it in the least - oh, I'm sure!.

reply to post by turbonium1

Satellites have existed many years now, and few orbit within the VA Belts anyway. Strike One.

Some of the most important satellites are in geostationary orbit, about 36,000 kilometers above sea level. The Van Allen belts extend from about 1,000 to 60,000 kilometers above sea level. In other words, the satellite you get your TV from is smack dab in the middle of the belts. Strike one.

To learn the interactions before any manned flight to the moon - that makes sense. No reason if Apollo did it - foul ball makes the count Strike Two.

But NASA not only studied and mapped the Van Allen belts, they surveyed the entire radiation environment in space to the best of anyone's ability at the time. They also studied the effects of the radiation environment on living cells. Strike two.

It isn't about long-term flights - they don't plan on long-term human visits within the VA Belts. Moon or Mars or whatever, they still go through the same Belts. Strike Three, You're OUT

Correct, they don't plan on spending much time in the belts. The principle concern in long term missions outside of the belts is the lack of protection offered by the Earth's magnetosphere from solar and cosmic radiation. Strike three, YOU'RE out!

reply to post by turbonium1

A blue sky is not doubted because everyone can see that it is, indeed, a blue sky above us.

I can assure you the sky outside my window is not blue at the moment. Your belief that everyone can see that it is blue is not founded on actual observation, it is a projection of your own beliefs.

Water is not doubted as being H2O because ievery analysis shows us that.

Really? Why do you place such blind trust on anything as silly as the Atomic Theory of Matter? Have you ever actually seen an atom with your own eyes?

A moon mission is very different, can't be tested independently to verify it, etc.

A Moon Landing is not some sort of generalized principle that needs to be confirmed by repeated experiment; it is an historical event. As such, it is subject not to scientific standards of evidence, but historical standards of evidence. As it is, both the scientific data collected and the historical documentation support each other.

It's never been done in 40+ years since then.

But it was done every few months over a period of three years! In any event, your premise is completely fallacious. No-one has built the Eiffel Tower in 100+ years, therefore the Eiffel Tower cannot exist.

The LM was never tested on Earth in final form, yet was capable of some amazing,feats.

The LM was not designed to function on Earth. Nevertheless, all of its parts and systems were tested on Earth, and they all worked fine. Why shouldn't they work just as well in the environment they were designed to function in? And yes, the feats were amazing. Is that why you resent the whole idea? That some people are competent? Why do you find that threatening, Doc?

But of course, nobody doubted it in the least - oh, I'm sure!.

Yes, there have always been many information starved people who have doubted it.

reply to post by turbonium1


Almost all satellites pass through the Van Allen Belts at one point or another. It's impossible to orbit the planet constantly and NOT at the altitude most satellites orbit. They actually have to shut them down during transits through them at times because the radiation is so bad.

Solar cells, integrated circuits, and sensors can be damaged by radiation. Geomagnetic storms occasionally damage electronic components on spacecraft. Miniaturization and digitization of electronics and logic circuits have made satellites more vulnerable to radiation, as the total charge in these circuits is now small enough so as to be comparable with the charge of incoming ions. Electronics on satellites must be hardened against radiation to operate reliably. The Hubble Space Telescope, among other satellites, often has its sensors turned off when passing through regions of intense radiation.[22] A satellite shielded by 3 mm of aluminium in an elliptic orbit (200 by 20,000 miles (320 by 32,000 km)) passing the radiation belts will receive about 2,500 rem (25 Sv) per year. Almost all radiation will be received while passing the inner belt.[23]

en.wikipedia.org...

Try again.

Apollo transited quickly through the belts, and spent about a week in space. A future mission will spend years in space. The Van Allen Belts will help understand radiation in space much better, and give a better idea of how to protect astronauts and equipment while in space. If you can protect it from the Belts, you can protect it while in space transiting to Mars, or sitting on the moon.

Originally posted by turbonium1
The LM was never tested on Earth in final form, yet was capable of some amazing,feats.

But of course, nobody doubted it in the least - oh, I'm sure!.

Once again, by your logic, the Titanic never existed because it was never tested by driving it down the highway. I will try to state this in as simple terms as possible: The LM was never designed to, and would never have functioned on Earth so what's the point of testing it when it was 100% guaranteed to fail? That's why they tested it in Earth orbit first, to make sure it would function in space and then tested it in lunar orbit to make sure it would function in a vacuum and under lunar gravity. Why is it, you believe that something that was designed to work in a vacuum at 1/6g would be more believable if they tested it at 1atm and 1g?

Originally posted by mrwiffler
reply to post by turbonium1

 

Van Allen's original data was - and still is - valid, accurate data.

Can you please supply some references for this statement. Without any reference it is just feeble rhetoric.

edit on 29-3-2013 by mrwiffler because: (no reason given)

References? How about Van Allen himself?...

Van Allen's conclusion was delivered in a speech to the Ademy of Science in 1959. He warned future space travelers they would have to race through these two zones on their way to outer planets.

"All manned space flight attempts must steer clear of these two belts of radiation until adequate means of safeguarding the astronauts has been developed" he said. Moreover, Van Allen advised they would have to be shielded with some extra layers of protection beyond that of the spacecraft itself. These findings were also published in Scientific American Magazine, March, 1959.
.......

Professor James A. Van Allen now 83, is Professor Emeritus in Geophysics at the University of Iowa. Our first question was why he did not speak up after NASA's claims and defend his original findings. Astonishingly, he told us that his seminal Scientific American article in 1959 was merely "popular science."

"Are you refuting your findings?" we asked.

"Absolutely not," he answered, "I stand by them."

Although Van Allen tried to defend NASA/Apollo but - most importantly - ALWAYS STOOD BY HIS ORIGINAL FINDINGS .


Do you get it, now?

reply to post by turbonium1


And yet you ignore where he said they would have to race through them, which is exactly what they did.

Originally posted by DJW001
Some of the most important satellites are in geostationary orbit, about 36,000 kilometers above sea level. The Van Allen belts extend from about 1,000 to 60,000 kilometers above sea level. In other words, the satellite you get your TV from is smack dab in the middle of the belts. Strike one.

Let's see...

I said few satellites orbit within the VA Belts.

You said important satellites orbit within the VA Belts. Do you not understand how this supports my point?

I guess not.

Follow along now - There are important satellites in orbit within the VA Belts, right? And, these satellites have worked fairly well, by and large? And they've spent years,within the Belts, right?

This is not a major reason for studying the Belts years later. Strike One goes to you, not me. ,

Originally posted by DJW001

But NASA not only studied and mapped the Van Allen belts, they surveyed the entire radiation environment in space to the best of anyone's ability at the time. They also studied the effects of the radiation environment on living cells. Strike two.

Well, of course they've studied radiation elsewhere. The VA Belts are not the only problem they have to deal with for an actual manned moon mission!

Why you think it helps your case is beyond me. It only makes it worse. Strike Two is clearly yours.

Originally posted by DJW001

Correct, they don't plan on spending much time in the belts. The principle concern in long term missions outside of the belts is the lack of protection offered by the Earth's magnetosphere from solar and cosmic radiation. Strike three, YOU'RE out!

It's just another excuse, as I said. That's Strike Three and Out.


This project has to be done. It is "required". Not for satellites. For humans..

Originally posted by DJW001
reply to post by turbonium1

 

A blue sky is not doubted because everyone can see that it is, indeed, a blue sky above us.

I can assure you the sky outside my window is not blue at the moment. Your belief that everyone can see that it is blue is not founded on actual observation, it is a projection of your own beliefs.

There's always a clear blue sky in my neck of the woods!! I guess we folks are blessed, indeed

Water is not doubted as being H2O because ievery analysis shows us that.

Originally posted by DJW001

Really? Why do you place such blind trust on anything as silly as the Atomic Theory of Matter? Have you ever actually seen an atom with your own eyes?

Actually, that's a good point! Quantum physics, for example.

A moon mission is very different, can't be tested independently to verify it, etc.

Originally posted by DJW001

A Moon Landing is not some sort of generalized principle that needs to be confirmed by repeated experiment; it is an historical event. As such, it is subject not to scientific standards of evidence, but historical standards of evidence. As it is, both the scientific data collected and the historical documentation support each other.

That's so ridiculous. It is subject to the same scientific standards of evidence as anything else. No matter how significant or historic ithe event, it must stand up or else it falls by applying the same standards.

It's never been done in 40+ years since then.

Originally posted by DJW001

But it was done every few months over a period of three years! In any event, your premise is completely fallacious. No-one has built the Eiffel Tower in 100+ years, therefore the Eiffel Tower cannot exist.

But the difference is

We don't want to build another Eiffel Tower, but we can build it.

We want to go to the moon, but we cannot. And every excuse in the book cannot change that fact .

The LM was never tested on Earth in final form, yet was capable of some amazing,feats.

Originally posted by DJW001

The LM was not designed to function on Earth. Nevertheless, all of its parts and systems were tested on Earth, and they all worked fine. Why shouldn't they work just as well in the environment they were designed to function in? And yes, the feats were amazing. Is that why you resent the whole idea? That some people are competent? Why do you find that threatening, Doc?

Originally posted by seabhac-rua
reply to post by MarioOnTheFly

 

Maybe I am.

I've debated and researched this subject in depth on here for the last couple of years or more and you always come up against people who simply want to believe the landings were faked. You can show them where there are errors in their arguments, you can show them data, you can debunk the pseudo-science behind their half baked theories and they will continually ignore and ignore and ignore what you are saying. This subject particularly usually attracts the kind of person to whom 'research' means watching a youtube video.

No moon hoax theories hold any water period.

edit on 26-11-2012 by seabhac-rua because: (no reason given)

Have you seen the documentary 'A funny thing happened on the way to the moon'. It's available on Youtube, and lays out not only a convincing motive, but also some very interesting footage of the astronauts faking the famous earth shot.

It also shows the astronauts communicating to someone other than Huston Control.

This was convincing evidence for me.

Originally posted by SayonaraJupiter
Last week on March 23, 1912 was Werner von Braun's birthday. So this week was a good time to remember him and review the facts and to discuss the things we understand about his role in the Apollo story, the asteroids, the E.T. story - in due course - the disclosure of the moon landing hoax plus the TV mind control experiments which produced the mass hallucinations in millions of unsuspecting 1960's people.

This is the exact way to put it when describing the manner in which a mind controlling hypnotic spell was cast upon the American people (the world) during not only the MOON LANDING HOAX, but the 9/11 debacle, the first World Trade Center bombing, the OKC bombing, and more recently apropos the Sandy Hook deception.
Of course, these are but a few examples, but ones that have the most direct bearing on our lives today.

The so-called 'Apollo landings' were nothing but a series of psy-op tele-hoaxes that laid the groundwork for all of the more recent false flag events.

When thinking of television bear in mind that all technological advances in America are first psychologized by the intelligence operatives and other black-ops agencies; weaponized and/or militarized, then finally they are allowed to be disseminated among the general population for so-called "peaceful purposes." Television was certainly no exception.

Think of the manner of its use in present day America as a propaganda tool used to indoctrinate the general population into the false religion known as Marxist Communism.

Originally posted by DJW001
reply to post by Elvis Hendrix

 

"When Apollo 11 landed on the moon in the summer of 1969, video images streamed to Earth, first to NASA tracking stations in California and Australia, and from there via Houston to an eager television audience. This moon-landing storey is decidedly less flattering to the space agency's image--it turns out that NASA can't find the original tapes of the unprecedented event."oh thats handy.

You miss the point. The TV images were broadcast live. You can find all of the Apollo TV transmissions in a format compatible with your TV. The original slow scan equipment probably doesn't even exist any more.

And what about Clementine? how many million images were taken? and weve seen 700 ish.

That's because you don't have the 88 cd collector's set:

nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov...

Order before midnight tonight!

You do realise that the TV networks at the time kicked up a HUGE fuss, as they were not allowed to plug into NASA's live feed and take a clean crystal clear video feed, but had to setup camera's and film a second generation video broadcast onto a wall.

Perhaps NASA was scared with enough clarity the fraud would be discovered? Why else would they not allow a direct feed, then lose the original footage of what arguably was mankinds most important moment.

Click here for more information.

reply to post by exportgoldman

So your a wanker. Got that so far in your posts. So you will know of the testing of the lunar module, and the very real threat the manufactures made when testing that the module would fall into it's on crater on landing on the moon. But the pictures of the lunar module look like a 70's movie set, with not a spec of dust on the module.

Please provide a citation and link if you are going to make a statement like "the very real threat the manufacturers made when testing that the module would fall into it's on [sic] crater on landing on the moon."

As for your second point, the craft's air frame was principally composed of aluminum. Does dust tend to cling to polished aluminum?

reply to post by exportgoldman

You do realise that the TV networks at the time kicked up a HUGE fuss, as they were not allowed to plug into NASA's live feed and take a clean crystal clear video feed, but had to setup camera's and film a second generation video broadcast onto a wall.

If the networks kicked up a huge fuss, then there must be some documentation of it. Well? Provide the documentation, please.