Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Disclosure of the moon landing hoax.

page: 21
60
<< 18  19  20    22  23  24 >>

log in

join

posted on Apr, 17 2013 @ 01:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by XaniMatriX

we worked our way all the way back from having technology to colonize space easily, to sending military equipment into orbit, sorry but that is an insult to JFK and all the great people who inspired this world to do great things, and not sell it off piece by piece.



Do you not appreciate how priorities change? How in 1960 it can be a matter of urgency to get a man on the moon to make it look like you're not losing to the Evil Empire, but by 2013 your main goal is to win a race involving improved communications and suchlike?

You can feel aggrieved that aspirations you somehow conceive as idealistic are no longer being followed. But this is the real world. And actually those goals often weren't quite so lofty in the first place.




posted on Apr, 17 2013 @ 02:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by JuniorDisco
Do you not appreciate how priorities change? How in 1960 it can be a matter of urgency to get a man on the moon to make it look like you're not losing to the Evil Empire, but by 2013 your main goal is to win a race involving improved communications and suchlike?


That's true. The only goal was to "beat the Russians" using TV mind control techniques and Hollywood special effects houses. Throw in a few dozen captured Nazi rocket scientists, brainwashed and paid-off astronauts, Howard Hughes and Richard Nixon, you got yourself a moon landing TV programme that can beat the Russians to the moon. And that's the ONLY goal?


Frank Borman “The whole concept of changing our mission and getting ready in four months was done because we were in the “Can Do” program… “Beat the Soviets to the Moon”. NASA likes to talk about scientific exploration and our lunar expert here… Bill Anders… he can pick up all the rocks in the world… that’s just wonderful… the reason we went to the moon on Apollo 8 was to beat the Russians… I want to give you a clue!” Source (video) airandspace.si.edu...


As Frank Borman (Nixon's special envoy to Moscow in June of 1969) has indicated his idea that there was no greater purpose for Apollo.

Go back a few months to Christmas of 1968 and NASA is reading bible scriptures to a worldwide audience on Earth. Quoting from the religious text of Genesis while floating around the "moon" was Apollo 8's way of saying "Screw you atheist Commies we did it!"

Did what? Repeated the word "God" over a dozen times in under 2 minutes!! An entire wikipedia page dedicated to the bible reading stunt.
en.wikipedia.org...

I hope to "God" you NASA believers can scrape together some info regarding the missing modules Eagle/Apollo 11 and Orion/Apollo 16, because Nixon's 'silent majority' no longer exists, it's no longer 1968, it's unthinkable that NASA could lose those two ships - especially in light of the fact that they tracked Voyager out of the solar system.

The Disclosure sequence is as follows, according to Carol Rosin/Werner von Braun : 1, Communists,2, terrorists, 3, rogue nations, then 4, ASTEROIDS, and finally 5, ET.



posted on Apr, 17 2013 @ 02:45 PM
link   
reply to post by XaniMatriX
 


We've never had the technology to "colonize space easily". We're still years away from it now. Landing sometime on the moon for a couple days is a lot different from colonizing.

The shuttle did so much more than you claim. A few hundred advances at least came from shuttle missions, and a few dozen useful satellites that we use without even thinking about were launched from it, along with a lot of other missions.



posted on Apr, 17 2013 @ 07:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by Zaphod58
reply to post by XaniMatriX
 


We've never had the technology to "colonize space easily". We're still years away from it now. Landing sometime on the moon for a couple days is a lot different from colonizing.

The shuttle did so much more than you claim. A few hundred advances at least came from shuttle missions, and a few dozen useful satellites that we use without even thinking about were launched from it, along with a lot of other missions.


"The Apollo 17 mission landed on the Moon on December 11, 1972. Of all the Apollo astronauts, Apollo 17 astronauts Gene Cernan and Harrison Schmidt spent the longest time out on the lunar surface (more than 22 hours), traversed the greatest distance from the Lunar Module (over 30 kilometers), and collected the largest number of lunar rocks (more than 120 kilograms)."

But your telling me that the moon, couldn't have replaced the ISS station?

And what do you mean by useful satellites? you mean spy satellites that belong to the military, that have nothing to do with space exploration but the exploitation of human beings.

Its just funny reading your reply's, and not only you but many other's when it touches up on the Apollo missions.
Now all of you are just backing up the military, and blindly also, because you are proud of what? degrading the advances made by brilliant man, right on, sure glad to have people like you around.



posted on Apr, 17 2013 @ 07:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by XaniMatriX


But your telling me that the moon, couldn't have replaced the ISS station?


The moon doesn't have a magnetosphere, Earth does so the radiation concerns are far less for the ISS than they would be for a lunar base. Resupply missions would also be far more difficult and far more expensive for a lunar base, as well as if there was some kind of accident, help is far closer for a space station than a lunar base.



And what do you mean by useful satellites? you mean spy satellites that belong to the military, that have nothing to do with space exploration but the exploitation of human beings.

I'm, going to go out on a limb and assume he's talking about GPS and telecommunications satellites . . . you know, the ones that make posting on ATS a possibility?

I find it very hard to believe you're as ignorant as your posts imply. Why would someone who knows nothing about space exploration bother posting in a space exploration forum? What is your end game in all of this?



posted on Apr, 17 2013 @ 08:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by captainpudding
I'm, going to go out on a limb and assume he's talking about GPS and telecommunications satellites . . . you know, the ones that make posting on ATS a possibility?


Take 5.

Telecom satellites, as well as Hubble, Chandra, Magellan, Ulysses, and others all launched from a shuttle mission. As well as all the medical, and scientific advances we use and take for granted every day. Everything from cell phones, to that super comfortable mattress you sleep on, to the velcro that holds things for you have come from the space program.



posted on Apr, 17 2013 @ 08:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by Zaphod58

Originally posted by captainpudding
I'm, going to go out on a limb and assume he's talking about GPS and telecommunications satellites . . . you know, the ones that make posting on ATS a possibility?


Take 5.

Telecom satellites, as well as Hubble, Chandra, Magellan, Ulysses, and others all launched from a shuttle mission. As well as all the medical, and scientific advances we use and take for granted every day. Everything from cell phones, to that super comfortable mattress you sleep on, to the velcro that holds things for you have come from the space program.


A satellite is launched for military and commercial purposes, only a handful are launched for space exploration, justify the military using scientific equipment and funding for military purposes?

you know what, never mind dude, were both arguing about something we do not know, and the only reason we don't know is because NASA and other corporations have made it questionable.

And let me get this straight, we can send 12 people to successfully walk on the moon, WITH absolutely no rescue (which would be crazy right?), we also let 24 people see the far side of the moon, again, with no rescue, also we sent those men through radiation, thank you for adding that, which is so dangerous we can't do it today?
but 40 years ago that sounded like a great idea? to the point where we were more brave and ambitious then, to actually pull it off in a decade, then completely trash the project, with 3 rockets missing that never even had the chance to fly, i have many reasons do doubt the program, there were even god damn rovers on the moon before any of the footage was ever shown, and when did the people hear of those?
edit on 17-4-2013 by XaniMatriX because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 17 2013 @ 09:11 PM
link   
reply to post by XaniMatriX
 


Military satellites are used by the military. Commercial companies don't ever use them, and the military only uses commercial satellites if it's absolutely necessary. The vast majority of satellites launched are commercial satellites. Out of a list of 105 satellites launched by the shuttle, probably at least 80% are commercial use or exploration.



posted on Apr, 17 2013 @ 09:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by Zaphod58
reply to post by XaniMatriX
 


Military satellites are used by the military. Commercial companies don't ever use them, and the military only uses commercial satellites if it's absolutely necessary. The vast majority of satellites launched are commercial satellites. Out of a list of 105 satellites launched by the shuttle, probably at least 80% are commercial use or exploration.


and? that somehow supposed to answer my question?

Communication satellites are 59% of the rest of the satellites, Astrophysics is at 5%!!!! so you are trying to justify those funds by giving me numbers, your just proving my point.. it's the mentality of "Were just making money", your gonna have to do better then that man.
edit on 17-4-2013 by XaniMatriX because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 17 2013 @ 09:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by XaniMatriX
also we sent those men through radiation, thank you for adding that, which is so dangerous we can't do it today?
but 40 years ago that sounded like a great idea? to the point where we were more brave and ambitious then, to actually pull it off in a decade, then completely trash the project, with 3 rockets missing that never even had the chance to fly, i have many reasons do doubt the program, there were even god damn rovers on the moon before any of the footage was ever shown, and when did the people hear of those?
edit on 17-4-2013 by XaniMatriX because: (no reason given)


Radiation that is too dangerous today? Yeah right. It has nothing to do with being too dangerous, we simply don't have anything purposed to travel through them.

And what rockets missing? There are three Saturn Vs in museums, two of which are comprised of test and flight hardware, and the third comprised of flight hardware. One is at Kennedy Space Center, one is at Huntsville, and the last is at Johnson Space Center (the last one remaining that was comprised of all flight hardware)..

There was only a rover on the moon with Apollo 11, which was videotaped. That was the first landing on the moon, and it was broadcast live. If you're talking about Lunokhod 201 it never made it off earth. The rocket carrying it blew up just after launch. The next Lunokhod, Lunokhod 1 (Luna 17) didn't launch until the end of 1970, long after Apollo was on the moon.



posted on Apr, 17 2013 @ 09:27 PM
link   
reply to post by XaniMatriX
 


Your question isn't a question. The military uses their own equipment, except for launch facilities. They don't use exploration, or data from anywhere but themselves, and their own facilities.

So, the military isn't supposed to use satellites? Only civilians are allowed to?
edit on 4/17/2013 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 17 2013 @ 09:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by Zaphod58
reply to post by XaniMatriX
 


Your question isn't a question. The military uses their own equipment, except for launch facilities. They don't use exploration, or data from anywhere but themselves, and their own facilities.

So, the military isn't supposed to use satellites? Only civilians are allowed to?
edit on 4/17/2013 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)


They can do w/e they want, they kill and poison people everyday and there's not much we can do about it. of course using money that can instead be funded to actually set up a FRONTIER.

i just don't get it, it's not like the people to discover America came to the land, picked up a rock and never came back, set up a permanent boat in the middle of the ocean and said "were good here, yeah were good, going back would be just to dangerous"



posted on Apr, 17 2013 @ 10:02 PM
link   
reply to post by XaniMatriX
 


The people back home also didn't say "Why are you still going there? There's no reason to now that we've been there. We have big enough problems here, so stop spending all that money, and fix our problems here first!" It had nothing to do with being too dangerous, it had everything to do with political and economic pressure.
edit on 4/17/2013 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 17 2013 @ 10:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by Zaphod58
reply to post by XaniMatriX
 


The people back home also didn't say "Why are you still going there? There's no reason to now that we've been there. We have big enough problems here, so stop spending all that money, and fix our problems here first!" It had nothing to do with being too dangerous, it had everything to do with political and economic pressure.
edit on 4/17/2013 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)


THANK YOU!!! FINALLY!!! it had nothing to do with space exploration, or human benefit from the start, NOTHING!!! just propaganda! and all propaganda is a LIE that is orchestrated!!!!



posted on Apr, 17 2013 @ 10:53 PM
link   
reply to post by XaniMatriX
 


Everyone knows that Apollo wanted to beat Russia. That's all the average person cared about. How that "proves" anything is beyond me. The only thing that "proves" is that your opinion is valid in your own eyes. It doesn't prove anything else.



posted on Apr, 18 2013 @ 05:02 AM
link   
I just want to ask this question...
Out of the hundreds of thousands of people that worked on and for the Apollo missions that you say where a hoax why has none of them come forward?
Did the US government pay hundreds of thousands of people enough money to guarantee that not one of them would ever come forward and tell for the rest of their lives or on their death bed?!
Did they threaten them all with violence or death?
Hundreds of thousands of people?
Either way out of all those people there would have to be at least one if not many whose conscience drove them to blurt the truth...drink a little too much one night and out it comes...
It's not just very very improbable I think it's almost impossible to get that many people to keep a secret like that...
Either morally or for financial gain someone would eventually bring this out in the open.
Correct me if I'm wrong I havnt heard of anyone involved in the missions ever intimating a hoax?
I think it's just a ridiculous idea that you could get that many people to lie.

And as I've stated before in this thread earlier.

If the Apollo rockets went somewhere if not the moon where?
How many people watched them launch with their own eyes?
You say they hoaxed it to beat the Russians well the Russians where tracking the Apollo missions too because of the space race they watched them go and come back if they had of just stayed in orbit the Russians would've told the world and humiliated them!
Did they hide behind Sputnik for days?
The mirrors on the moon?
The photos of earth from the moon with no CGI on the 60's?
I could go on and on...

I think actually carrying out the hoax and ensuring everyone involved stayed quite for the rest of their lives and ensuring you weren't busted by other nations would be impossible..
In fact it would be a lot easier just to actually go to the moon!
AS THEY DID!!
The greatest achievement of mankind in the history of our species!
I think it's an insult to all of us to put down such an achievement.
If only our current world leaders and scientists had the guts and determination as JFK and the NASA guys did and pushed like then imagine what we could achieve with current technology.

I roll my eyes at you!
edit on 18-4-2013 by Anonbeleiver77 because: (no reason given)
edit on 18-4-2013 by Anonbeleiver77 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 18 2013 @ 05:40 AM
link   
Ha spooky!
Just as I finished typing what comes on the discovery channel?
Conspiracy Theory:The moon landing hoax!

que twighlight zone music

watching it now so I may have more comments



posted on Apr, 18 2013 @ 07:01 AM
link   
reply to post by SayonaraJupiter
 


Hey, 1997 called. They want their conspiracy theory back.



posted on Apr, 18 2013 @ 10:27 AM
link   
reply to post by Anonbeleiver77
 


Well you wouldn't need to pay hundreds and thousands of people, they didn't get on that ship did they? Nor have they ever seen with their own eyes our planet from space. They literrally would only have to pay like 24 people and maybe 100 to keep their mouths shut, oh wait no they wouldn't b/c they were in on it, and the person that did speak out against it who was Virgil "Gus" Grissom, what happened to him? killed! and in a most terrible way possible too, so yeah after seeing something like that i think it's easy to keep someone shut.

Also if even you witnessed those rockets launch with your own eyes, how in the world do you know where they are going, without someone else telling you where, or broadcasting it on the television? b/c otherwise, you and i have no idea.

So your also telling me U.S has no counter measures for Russians Tracking systems, you people claim they were in a race wouldn't that be so?

And i am gonna say this one time, EVEN today NASA cannot send humans safely through the belt, even for a short period of time, communication becomes impossible, and the astronauts pass out which makes me wonder how in the world they did it in the 60's? their excuse, "some sheet of plastic is enough", and to this day that is the biggest factor it doubting their footage, not doubting if they built the rockets or actually put men into orbit, but them actually sending men to their deaths and then them safely coming back, with no side effects of the radiation.



posted on Apr, 18 2013 @ 10:31 AM
link   
reply to post by XaniMatriX
 


Prove it. They haven't tried to send anyone through the belts since Apollo 17. And we have communications just fine with satellites that went through the belts, or are those fake too?





new topics

top topics



 
60
<< 18  19  20    22  23  24 >>

log in

join