Disclosure of the moon landing hoax.

SayonaraJupiter

It's hardly a 'pointless diversionary tactic' when it stops your argument dead in the tracks.

What you have with AS12-50-7362 is a "space photo" allegedly taken by an "unknown astronaut".

I'd also wager that there is a one in three chance that the photographer was either Dick Gordon, Pete Conrad or Alan Bean.

There is no pay out for a bet like that, it's 1-1, it's a wash. If you tried to make a bet like that in Las Vegas the casino manager might have you thrown out for making a 'pointless diversionary bet'.

Who was the photographer who snapped AS12-50-7362? It remains a mystery in this thread. This 7362 photo (the entire Magazine Q) could have been taken with a robotic arm, with a camera attachment, mounted inside an unmanned command module.

Yes, what we have is a space photo taken by one of 3 people. At the time it was taken, roughly 03:00 on November 15th 1969 as determined by the position of the terminator and the weather patterns visible, Conrad and Bean were in and out of the Lunar Module and it is conceivable that it was taken by one of the two from the LM.

It doesn't really matter, it's just another example of you seizing on something that you know people can't answer as a way of avoiding answering questions yourself.

Your suggestion that the photographs in magazine Q were taken by a robotic arm is nonsensical, given that someone is visible in AS12-50-7373.

It is also nonsensical given that the crew were featured in TV broadcasts that feature views also found in magazine 50. You might want to compare these screenshots from the TV broadcast:



with



there are magazines showing the far side of the moon, Earthrise images and astronauts on the surface. We have landing videos and surface photographs that show details not previously known about and not seen again until the LRO as well as the astronauts.

Robots? No.

Desperate armwaving and diversions? Yes.

Is it not true that the Indian unmanned Moon Mission, Chandrayaan-1 confirmed that NASA did managed to land it's people on the Moon? Check the following link

Indian satellite confirmed US moon landing: scientist
phys.org...


There are other 3rd party evidence available that proves Apollo moon landing did happened. Please check the link below. I understand it is a wiki page

en.wikipedia.org...

Thanks

Blackholesun
Is it not true that the Indian unmanned Moon Mission, Chandrayaan-1 confirmed that NASA did managed to land it's people on the Moon? Check the following link

Indian satellite confirmed US moon landing: scientist
phys.org...


There are other 3rd party evidence available that proves Apollo moon landing did happened. Please check the link below. I understand it is a wiki page

en.wikipedia.org...

Thanks

Look also at the NASA espionage connections which occurred with Chandrayaan-1 in the name of "Stewart Nozette",

Nozette worked as a technical consultant for Israel Aerospace Industries between 1998 and 2008. After he left the government job, Nozette was heavily involved in India's extraterrestrial Moon probe, Chandrayaan-1. He was a principal investigator of the Mini-RF instrument on the Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter and a co-investigator on Chandrayaan-1.

Nozette reached a plea bargain with prosecutors and pleaded guilty to a single count of espionage, as well as pleading guilty earlier to the charges of fraud and tax evasion.[13][15] He was sentenced to thirteen years of prison. Held in custody since his arrest in [2009], Nozette received credit for the time he has already served. Source en.wikipedia.org...

reply to post by SayonaraJupiter

Look also at the NASA espionage connections which occurred with Chandrayaan-1 in the name of "Stewart Nozette",

Please explain what that has to do with Apollo.

132 pages and y'all still talking about this? Good lord...

Yes humans went to the real moon. That is fact!








www.space.com...

The right question you should be asking is WHY haven't we gone back? And what was really found there.
The hoax moon landing saga is wool over your eyes to keep you going in circles and not debate the facts that something or someone was on the moon long before we got there in the 60's.....

Just saying, take it or leave it.

DJW001
reply to post by SayonaraJupiter

 

Look also at the NASA espionage connections which occurred with Chandrayaan-1 in the name of "Stewart Nozette",

Please explain what that has to do with Apollo.

Because hes under the impression it had something to do with NASA when it didnt. The information the FBI sting was trying to get involving spy satellites and more specifically the nuclear power plants they have. He worked with the department of energy with a high security clearance which gave him access to sensitive nuclear data.But because he worked with NASA some how that implicates NASA as being involved even though when he never actually worked with NASA but he was a contractor.His company provided support to NASA on probes. His company Alliance for Competitive Technology was stealing money from NASA by altering bills for his work on Clementine. Im sure you would find he did the same to India helping with there moon probe as well.

So what does this have to do with apollo you asked? Absolutely nothing he once again is misleading people with irrelevant facts trying to give the impression theres something going on. But sadly id say by this point everyone can see hes got nothing but misdirection and mis quoting to back up his theory.

Now my challenge S J if you believe NASA is covering up an alien presence on the moon like you claim show us some proof. Lets start with something simple where are the aliens we have countries all over the world that now have mapped the moon. So between india russia china Japan and the European space agency why has no country mentioned aliens on the moon?

reply to post by Agent008

Just saying, take it or leave it.

Those LRO images are CGI and they come from ASU. NASA has special contracts with ASU. When ASU presents NASA CGI images as authenticating the Apollo program this is a conflict of interest.

Case closed on the LRO images of Apollo "moon" landing sites.

The Apollo "moon" landing sites are covered by NASA's Keep Out Zones.

Let's see what else the Apollo deniers can ignore. How about some previously rarely seen photographs that I've just found?

You won't find them on the ALSJ or the Apollo Image Atlas, but a sharp eyed soul at Collectspace.com asked where Magazine 63 from Apollo 13 had got to.

I had a hunt around and I found half a dozen from that magazine at the Gateway to Astronaut Photography.

Here's one of them, AS13-63-9045, reduced in quality for this board:



here's thi link to the high quality version [url=http://eol.jsc.nasa.gov/sseop/images/ISD/highres/AS13/AS13-63-9045.JPG]http://eol.jsc.nasa.gov/sseop/images/ISD/highres/AS13/AS13-63-9045.JPG[/ur l]

Close examination of all 6 photos shows that they are all of the same scene of Earth taken at different exposures.

When were they taken? Well, the shape of the visible Earth crescent points to it being from towards the end of the mission, so I started looking at satellite photographs dated the 15th and 16th.

The satellite data from the 16th provide the best match, and once you spot the key weather systems on it it's easy to identify that we are looking at a termiantor line running down from Alaska, with Australia's east coast just coming into virw. This would put the time at around 06:30 on the 17th (satellite coverage of the Pacific was after midnight so the actual date is the one after that marked on the image). Here's a cleaned up version of the one of the images compared with the satellite photographs.



Do we have any confirmation from the transcripts? Not exactly, but communications at this point were minimal and largely restricted to technical stuff relating to saving their skins.

However, about an hour after my suggested time for the photographs we have capcom informing the crew that they will be handing over to Honeysuckle Creek shortly, confirming that eastern Australia was indeed coming in to view at the time I suggest for the photograph.

So, photographs few people knew existed from Apollo 13 turn out to have weather patterns that are completely consistent with the meteorological satellite record and were taken at a time consistent with the transcript's record of what should be visible underneath the returning Astronauts.

SayonaraJupiter

Those LRO images are CGI

and the evidence you have of this is.... where? no one wants your opinion we want evidence that it is CGI.

not to mention your transfer techniques again in your post but really.. is that all you got? trying to spread propaganda?

reply to post by SayonaraJupiter

Those LRO images are CGI and they come from ASU. NASA has special contracts with ASU. When ASU presents NASA CGI images as authenticating the Apollo program this is a conflict of interest.

ASU does not, nor ever has, presented NASA images of any type as "authenticating" the Apollo program. They simply curate the material. To claim that ASU is tasked with authenticating anything is another fabrication on your part. Another lie aimed at the ignorant. Fortunately, no-one is buying it. Why do you persist?

reply to post by SayonaraJupiter


So because someone was prosecuted by the FBI you can discount a space programme he worked on? You mean that NASA has the power to fake the findings of a whole foreign space flight but can't stop someone who was involved getting busted?

You'll have to run that one by me again.

Humans went to the moon, and to think otherwise, in the face of massive evidence, is to lose out on one of the race's great achievements. Twelve white men walked on the moon, and the best reason to go back is to put a woman up there - one small step for a woman, one giant leap for feminism.

DJW001
reply to post by SayonaraJupiter

 

Those LRO images are CGI and they come from ASU. NASA has special contracts with ASU. When ASU presents NASA CGI images as authenticating the Apollo program this is a conflict of interest.

ASU does not, nor ever has, presented NASA images of any type as "authenticating" the Apollo program. They simply curate the material. To claim that ASU is tasked with authenticating anything is another fabrication on your part. Another lie aimed at the ignorant. Fortunately, no-one is buying it. Why do you persist?

Are you saying that the ASU/LRO images of Apollo program era "moon" landing sites have never been used to authenticate the Apollo program? Thanks for tha laughs!!

How does ASU "curate" the material?? They are erasing the cross-hairs from Apollo images! That's CGI.
See my thread. NASA is removing the reseau marks from Apollo images
www.abovetopsecret.com...

It's not ethical to remove the cross-hairs from Apollo era images - It's Propaganda

SayonaraJupiter

DJW001
reply to post by SayonaraJupiter

 

Those LRO images are CGI and they come from ASU. NASA has special contracts with ASU. When ASU presents NASA CGI images as authenticating the Apollo program this is a conflict of interest.

ASU does not, nor ever has, presented NASA images of any type as "authenticating" the Apollo program. They simply curate the material. To claim that ASU is tasked with authenticating anything is another fabrication on your part. Another lie aimed at the ignorant. Fortunately, no-one is buying it. Why do you persist?

Are you saying that the ASU/LRO images of Apollo program era "moon" landing sites have never been used to authenticate the Apollo program?

Thanks for tha laughs!!

How does ASU "curate" the material?? They are erasing the cross-hairs from Apollo images! That's CGI.
See my thread. NASA is removing the reseau marks from Apollo images
www.abovetopsecret.com...

It's not ethical to remove the cross-hairs from Apollo era images - It's Propaganda

You're the one guilty of propaganda by repeatedly ignoring every comment that points out to you that the original scans are all available at multiple sites and in original hard copy. The photograph I posted above from Apollo 13 has the reseau marks on them - how come they haven't been airbrushed out of history as you seem to be implying is occurring to every one of them?

Apollo deniers and supporters alike make a habit of focusing on the landing sites and hardware photographed by the LRO, but there are plenty of photographs taken by Apollo that are also validated by the LRO images - has every single image taken of the moon taken by every probe been doctored in your fantasy world? If you believe that, prove it.

Now, about the questions I asked....

onebigmonkey

You're the one guilty of propaganda by repeatedly ignoring every comment that points out to you that the original scans are all available at multiple sites and in original hard copy. The photograph I posted above from Apollo 13 has the reseau marks on them - how come they haven't been airbrushed out of history as you seem to be implying is occurring to every one of them?

First, hat's off to you, OBMonkey. I want to say 'thank you' for bringing something original to the thread. My answer to your question, 'how come they haven't been airbrushed out of history?' is very simple: ASU is far behind schedule with releasing the propaganda images... they are still working on the project... as far as I know... I have not seen any NASA releases that would indicate that this NASA/ASU project has been cancelled.

At some point, NASA and ASU Board of Regents got together, they had a meeting (probably 5,000 meetings) and they made a new contract. The contract says that ASU will remove the cross hairs from NASA's Apollo images. Do you deny this?

Apollo deniers and supporters alike make a habit of focusing on the landing sites and hardware photographed by the LRO, but there are plenty of photographs taken by Apollo that are also validated by the LRO images - has every single image taken of the moon taken by every probe been doctored in your fantasy world? If you believe that, prove it.

Now, about the questions I asked....

Now, you are being sensible quite sensible here OBMonkey! Surely you are the most sensible Apollo Defender in this thread, by far.

I don't claim that every single image taken of the moon taken by every probe has been doctored in my fantasy world. That's absurd, really absurd.

Is it bad behavior if I made you defend your source materials? Of course it's not. That's how the game is played, on source materials, on images, on testimony, on moon rocks, etc.

You noted that Apollo deniers and supporters often get tangled up in habits. It's true!

One of my motivations to work in these threads here is to dig deeper into history, to scratch the surface, to gouge the veneer, so to speak, come up with new angles on the historical narrative.

When I am called a liar and forger in this thread it says a lot about the quality of ATS and I do appreciate your pleasant attitude in this thread.

JuniorDisco
reply to post by SayonaraJupiter

 

So because someone was prosecuted by the FBI you can discount a space programme he worked on? You mean that NASA has the power to fake the findings of a whole foreign space flight but can't stop someone who was involved getting busted?

You'll have to run that one by me again.

You'll have to do your own research and look at the timelines of the Indian mission Chandrayaan-1, look at the equipment on that spacecraft, look at the MiniSar, look at the Naval Warfare department that helped develop it, and look again at the timelines of interaction of LRO and Chandrayann-1. I have looked at all that.

My conclusion is that Chandrayann-1 was attacked by lasers weapons on the LRO during the space rendevous encounter in August of 2009, effectively silencing the Indian spacecraft, because NASA has those Keep Out Zones on the moon to protect Nixon's Apollo.

SayonaraJupiter

It's not ethical to remove the cross-hairs from Apollo era images - It's Propaganda

the sheer hypocrisy..

you yourself have been spreading nothing but propaganda on this site.. you bring no evidence that man cannot reach the moon nor how they were able to fake something that could not be faked with the available technology, you have brought nothing but propaganda to lure in the gullible for your bandwagon..

nixon watched some movies so this is evidence that man cannot reach the moon
ASU is removing the reseau marks so this is evidence that man cannot reach the moon
super advanced transforming mobots is evidence that man cannot reach the moon

distraction after distraction, while ignoring any evidence that man has been to the moon.. why dont you do some proper sleuthing.. work out how they overcame the technology deficiency in filming the fake landings, weather patterns, visor reflections, slow motion, lunar gravity, free falling free rotating objects on the lunar surface..

you are just believing in something with no evidence to back it up, some end of the world lunatics (2012 hysteria) have gone trying to spread their word with more evidence than you have.

SayonaraJupiter

You'll have to do your own research and look at the timelines of the Indian mission Chandrayaan-1, look at the equipment on that spacecraft, look at the MiniSar, look at the Naval Warfare department that helped develop it, and look again at the timelines of interaction of LRO and Chandrayann-1. I have looked at all that.

My conclusion is that Chandrayann-1 was attacked by lasers weapons on the LRO during the space rendevous encounter in August of 2009, effectively silencing the Indian spacecraft, because NASA has those Keep Out Zones on the moon to protect Nixon's Apollo.

ah yes the timeline..

lets see:

ISRO announced in January 2009 the completion of the mapping of the Apollo Moon missions landing sites by the orbiter, using multiple payloads.

My conclusion is that Chandrayann-1 was attacked by lasers weapons on the LRO during the space rendevous encounter in August of 2009,

january 2009 they map the lunar landing sites.. and august 2009 NASA fries it to stop them from mapping the landing sites..

NASA's time machine strikes again!!

reply to post by SayonaraJupiter


So your answer to my question is

"Yes - but SPACE LASERS".

Good luck with that.

reply to post by choos

distraction after distraction, while ignoring any evidence that man has been to the moon..

Denial after denial, the Apollo Defenders have denied the importance and implications of the 700+ boxes of missing Apollo telemetry tapes. Those tapes could be used to find the missing modules.

Denial after denial, the Apollo Defenders have denied and underestimated the importance and implications of the 4 missing Apollo modules. But the missing modules are not relevant to Apollo? Do you see where your denialistic attitude is leading you, choos?

You are living in a fantasy world, choos! Richard Nixon has pulled the wool over your eyes and blinded you with science.

For 40 years NASA has covered up Nixon's Apollo. The Keep Out Zones are only the latest proof and confirmation of the ongoing cover-up.