Disclosure of the moon landing hoax.

reply to post by choos

i wonder how they power the hydraulics?? must be like some super advanced miniturised engine stolen from the year 2200 since howard hughes had a time machine..

thats barely any room left to manoeuvre inside and that leaves 0 chance of fitting through the hatch, which means it needs to be placed inside before the command module is finished, which means in order for howard hughes to hide it from all the engineers, he needed to steal a stealth cloaking device from the year 2300.

he sure put that time machine to good use i must say.

Well you certainly like to exaggerate. What's this about the year 2200? Eh? the year 2300? What?

Try 1972. Meet Shakey. He's from DARPA. Now in 1965-1967 timeframe Howard Hughes might not have had a robot that could avoid objects, but he could have a robot/mobot that obeyed instructions based on feedback from television visuals and radio telemetry sent back to earth.

Take a look at the camera rig on robot Shakey. Take a look at the size of Shakey. Shakey could fit inside a command module, don't you think?

SayonaraJupiter

Well you certainly like to exaggerate. What's this about the year 2200? Eh? the year 2300? What?

Try 1972. Meet Shakey. He's from DARPA. Now in 1965-1967 timeframe Howard Hughes might not have had a robot that could avoid objects, but he could have a robot/mobot that obeyed instructions based on feedback from television visuals and radio telemetry sent back to earth.

Take a look at the camera rig on robot Shakey. Take a look at the size of Shakey. Shakey could fit inside a command module, don't you think?

shakey doesnt have arms.. to manoeuvre shakey requires the movement of two driven wheels and thats it..

so you have that size machine to control only two wheels and a camera..

a mobot needs to control its own orientation since it is in space and therefore the computer needs to know exactly how it is orientated so it needs gyroscopes and thrusters unless it is bolted to part of the CM..

and then it also needs to move its camera arms with full 6 degrees of freedom.. shakeys camera is fixed and only the two driven wheels control its direction..

then you need more arms to change the film in the camera a further 6 degrees of movement freedom..

shakey is childs-play compared to a mobot with arms, shakey is comparable to a small remote controlled toy car, the only thing shakey exceeds the mobot is its "artificial intelligence" which just so happens to be the only thing that video is trying to show off.

something that size ONLY FOR MOVING TWO DRIVING WHEELS.

and lets not forget the mobot within the command module must stay hidden from the engineers and technicians who built the command module.. stealth cloaking device??

p.s. im wrong.. its not only the engineers and technicians who built the CM you have to hide it from, but also the engineers and technicians who assembled the CM into the saturn V..

supporting info

news.discovery.com...

I'm sure there is a thread somewhere about the above link on ATS. I have always wondered why his wife would come out with what she said, knowing the amount of ridicule she would get.

I'm pretty sure there is something more to what she shared about the "moon landings".

I was curious if she ever gave a video interview with anymore details?

choos

and lets not forget the mobot within the command module must stay hidden from the engineers and technicians who built the command module.. stealth cloaking device??

p.s. im wrong.. its not only the engineers and technicians who built the CM you have to hide it from, but also the engineers and technicians who assembled the CM into the saturn V..

edit on 18-11-2013 by choos because: (no reason given)

And the people operating the cameras, and the people who wrote the software and the people who sent the software instructions and the expert astronomers who would always know where the things they needed to photograph were because you wouldn't know until you got back, and the people who staged the sets so they could cleverly insert footage of astronauts into the live tv broadcasts and the 16mm and the still photo magazines that do feature the crew and so on and so on and so on.

All this ingenious endeavour and magical technology and they couldn't just send a person who could see what he was photographing?

reply to post by onebigmonkey


no no no thats too much OBMonkey.. only the mythical richard nixon and howard hughes were behind the hoax, they multi-tasked everything.. because the mythical richard nixon liked to watch movies.

So just how did this supposed vehicle on the moon produce no tracks between the wheels?
I'm still waiting for a valid explanation. If it moved forward there would be tracks. If it moved backwards there would be tracks. Judging by the evidence of no tracks between the wheels this rover was placed into position.
source: www.apolloarchive.com...

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/0efbd3027638.jpg[/atsimg]

reply to post by ppk55

ppk55
So just how did this supposed vehicle on the moon produce no tracks between the wheels?
I'm still waiting for a valid explanation. If it moved forward there would be tracks. If it moved backwards there would be tracks. Judging by the evidence of no tracks between the wheels this rover was placed into position.
source: www.apolloarchive.com...

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/0efbd3027638.jpg[/atsimg]

The vehicle for which there is ample video footage of it moving?

Firstly, the link you gave is good, but the photograph you linked to is different, it's one that's been darkened considerably and cropped.

Had it not been cropped, you' be able to see rover tracks in the middle distance. Those tracks can be seen in LRO views of the Apollo 15 site.

Secondly, you can see all around the LRV the footprints of the astronauts, made while they did their preparatory work for an EVA. Very easy to disturb rover tracks like that.

Thirdly, the tyres are wire mesh. If there's a lot of loose material being thrown up, it will easily deposit back into the tracks and make them less visible.

Finally, you really don't want there to be any. That's the key thing.

setiorion
supporting info

news.discovery.com...

I'm sure there is a thread somewhere about the above link on ATS. I have always wondered why his wife would come out with what she said, knowing the amount of ridicule she would get.

I'm pretty sure there is something more to what she shared about the "moon landings".

I was curious if she ever gave a video interview with anymore details?

edit on 18-11-2013 by setiorion because: (no reason given)

edit on 18-11-2013 by setiorion because: (no reason given)

As far as I know, the only interview she gave was in a spoof documentary. Kubrick had nothing to do with Apollo.

reply to post by SayonaraJupiter


Really shacky are you serious its a go cart with a camera mount. How in the world would it frame pictures much less find the window? Its spacial recognition software was a joke and proved to be a colossal failure big clue they closed there doors because people realized it was a remote control car with a camera. lol

ppk55
So just how did this supposed vehicle on the moon produce no tracks between the wheels?
I'm still waiting for a valid explanation. If it moved forward there would be tracks. If it moved backwards there would be tracks. Judging by the evidence of no tracks between the wheels this rover was placed into position.
source: www.apolloarchive.com...

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/0efbd3027638.jpg[/atsimg]

I think you need to look at the real picture instead of this crop. Look at the back tire youl notice a trench in front of the rear tire made by the front. The wheels on the rover actually sticks out not like a car so just the act of getting in the vehicle or in this case loading it obliterated the tire tracks. Just so you know the tire tracks wouldnt be under the vehicle i suggest you look to where the seats are in relation to the wheels.

onebigmonkey

setiorion
supporting info

news.discovery.com...

I'm sure there is a thread somewhere about the above link on ATS. I have always wondered why his wife would come out with what she said, knowing the amount of ridicule she would get.

I'm pretty sure there is something more to what she shared about the "moon landings".

I was curious if she ever gave a video interview with anymore details?

edit on 18-11-2013 by setiorion because: (no reason given)

edit on 18-11-2013 by setiorion because: (no reason given)

As far as I know, the only interview she gave was in a spoof documentary. Kubrick had nothing to do with Apollo.

Yes the interview was faked in the movie Dark side of the moon they were making fun of conspiracy theories about the moon so they made up there own. Notice in the interview she stated he no longer left the house and went in to a deep depression and was scared to go out in public. Since Kubrick continued to make movies and go to parties and be seen in public this was just making fun of moon hoax nuts.

Soylent Green Is People

Originally posted by TheLieWeLive
It makes me wonder why the moon model had to be so exact in detail? So no one could discern the real moon from a fake one in pictures? Even the lighting was matched? Also was there two different moon models? One picture in the link shows a man measuring the craters and another model seems to be behind him in the distance. I wonder if that one represent the dark side of the moon?

The film from NASA's Lunar Orbit and Let-Down Approach Simulator (LOLA) did not look like the film we saw from the real Moon landing. It may have been a big help to astronauts to get to know the basic layout of the landing sites, but it was not "100% realistic".


Film from a LOLA simulation:

Film from an actual mission:

edit on 11/26/2012 by Soylent Green Is People because: (no reason given)

That is not from Apollo 11. Personally I think they went to the moon just not when they said they did. The fake landing bought time to make the real landing and get real pictures.

The first human-made object to reach the surface of the Moon was the Soviet Union's Luna 2 mission, on 13 September 1959.[3]

The soviets were moving on it fast!

Char-Lee
That is not from Apollo 11. Personally I think they went to the moon just not when they said they did. The fake landing bought time to make the real landing and get real pictures.

Ok. But the LOLA simulation looks nothing like the Apollo 11 landing, either:

Apollo 11 landing:



Film from a LOLA simulation:

Char-Lee

The first human-made object to reach the surface of the Moon was the Soviet Union's Luna 2 mission, on 13 September 1959.[3]

The soviets were moving on it fast!

why is it always faking.. dont people realise how difficult it is to fake?

wouldnt it be easier for the US to assassinate the soviets lead rocket engineer therefore delaying their rocket development?

choos

Char-Lee

The first human-made object to reach the surface of the Moon was the Soviet Union's Luna 2 mission, on 13 September 1959.[3]

The soviets were moving on it fast!

why is it always faking.. dont people realise how difficult it is to fake?

wouldnt it be easier for the US to assassinate the soviets lead rocket engineer therefore delaying their rocket development?

edit on 18-11-2013 by choos because: (no reason given)

do you mean causing a catastrophic failure in a rocket blowing up all there rocket scientists and engineers in the worst disaster in the soviet space program?

dragonridr

do you mean causing a catastrophic failure in a rocket blowing up all there rocket scientists and engineers in the worst disaster in the soviet space program?

or causing compications to lead rocket designers when they go into hospital for simple operations leading to accidental death.

reply to post by Char-Lee


Obviously, NASA has some skeletons in the closet.

Personally I think they went to the moon just not when they said they did. The fake landing bought time to make the real landing and get real pictures.

Gemini XII. November 1966. the last "public" Gemini program missions USA will not put another man in earth orbit for 23 months. A lot can happen in 23 months.

Howard Hughes moves to Las Vegas. November 1966.

Surveyor 7. January 1967. the last of the "public" Surveyor soft landers lands on the real moon
Richard Nixon's birthday. January 1967. Godfather
Apollo 1 fire. January 1967.
Jack Ruby dies in prison. January 1967.

Soviets launch Soyuz 1, aka "Rubin" aka "Ruby". April 1967. Russian cosmonaut Komarov dies on earth re-entry

Hughes & Nixon had 23 months to prepare the simulated lunar missions for public consumption. Using the Howard Hughes formula of : overambitious, fantastic costs and way behind schedule.


There are no "public" manned space flights, by NASA or the Soviets, until earth orbit missions are resumed with the Apollo 7 and Soyuz 3, aka "Argon", both in October 1968.

And the last flight of 1968 is Apollo 8, 10- orbits around the moon and back.

But, importantly, James Webb, quits NASA in late 1968, before the first lunar flight of Apollo 8. This is significant because he had been NASA's top guy for so long but he walked away. Probably because he was given orders to go along with the 'simulated space program' and he was too good of a man to lie about the space program for propaganda needs. 40 years later NASA put his name on the over-budget "James Webb Space Telescope" which still is waiting to be launched.

SayonaraJupiter
reply to post by Char-Lee

 

Obviously, NASA has some skeletons in the closet.

Personally I think they went to the moon just not when they said they did. The fake landing bought time to make the real landing and get real pictures.

Gemini XII. November 1966. the last "public" Gemini program missions USA will not put another man in earth orbit for 23 months. A lot can happen in 23 months.

Howard Hughes moves to Las Vegas. November 1966.

Surveyor 7. January 1967. the last of the "public" Surveyor soft landers lands on the real moon
Richard Nixon's birthday. January 1967. Godfather
Apollo 1 fire. January 1967.
Jack Ruby dies in prison. January 1967.

Soviets launch Soyuz 1, aka "Rubin" aka "Ruby". April 1967. Russian cosmonaut Komarov dies on earth re-entry

Hughes & Nixon had 23 months to prepare the simulated lunar missions for public consumption. Using the Howard Hughes formula of : overambitious, fantastic costs and way behind schedule.

There are no "public" manned space flights, by NASA or the Soviets, until earth orbit missions are resumed with the Apollo 7 and Soyuz 3, aka "Argon", both in October 1968.

And the last flight of 1968 is Apollo 8, 10- orbits around the moon and back.

But, importantly, James Webb, quits NASA in late 1968, before the first lunar flight of Apollo 8. This is significant because he had been NASA's top guy for so long but he walked away. Probably because he was given orders to go along with the 'simulated space program' and he was too good of a man to lie about the space program for propaganda needs. 40 years later NASA put his name on the over-budget "James Webb Space Telescope" which still is waiting to be launched.

edit on 11/18/2013 by SayonaraJupiter because: (no reason given)

Glittering generalities, name calling, card stacking, it's all there in this conspiracy band-wagon.



Still waiting for your evidence.

That House report was critical, and rightly so, but it didn't stop Surveyor probes landing on the moon starting a few months after that newspaper article and it didn't stop Apollo 12 popping over to visit one of them. I have some actual eyewitness testimony of that.

Keep attacking the personalities you think were involved all you like, but you cannae change the laws of physics.

reply to post by SayonaraJupiter


I like how you just snuck in that "Apollo 1 Fire" in the middle of things, as though it doesn't explain why the space program ground to a halt and Jack Webb quit! You even make it sound less important than Jack Ruby dying in prison! You also quote a lengthy article suggesting that Surveyor was not up to its mission, yet continue to imply that it was so successful that it is responsible for the photos attributed to Apollo! Wow, confusion hath wrought another masterwork!