Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Disclosure of the moon landing hoax.

page: 22
60
<< 19  20  21    23  24  25 >>

log in

join

posted on Apr, 18 2013 @ 11:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by Zaphod58
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?


Those satellites are not in the belt, b/c they are not designed to stay long term within the belt, the probes that are designed for it hold no living being on it and communicate when the levels of energy in the belt allow for it.

Im gonna end it here, i got my own point of view you guys got NASA's point of view, no point of arguing about it, they did so much for people to doubt their footage

1: Never went back, even some scientists still say it's dangerous to go through the belt, but in the 70's it was a good idea?

2: All we have seen was footage, and some rocks they could have gotten from Antarctica.

3: 3 Rockets are missing in the way that money was spent on building them, but they never got to fly? waste of money and from a scientific stand point a waste of material and labor.

4: We degraded back into low earth orbit which was already established.

5: we were interested in just beating the Russians to the moon? you don't have to send a rocket to the moon for that, you just film the moon, and then use the rockets to fill in the gaps.

and more, but i am done, unless they set up a base on it just like the ISS when the had the technology to do it, IF they set up a frontier and continued to push and inspire people to expand our foot print in space and exploration it self, no one would EVEN doubt for a second they actually did it, just too many excuses coming from them.

DONE peace out!




posted on Apr, 18 2013 @ 11:15 AM
link   
reply to post by XaniMatriX
 


They communicate with Voyager, they were communicating with Magellan, they communicate just fine with the Mars rovers and probes, with Hubble which is usually above the belts, with periods that go through them. All those communications signals go through the Van Allen Belts quite nicely, and they don't have any problems with them.

And what astronauts "passed out" in the Belts? They've reported seeing "streaks" in their vision but that's it.

Hyperbole much?
edit on 4/18/2013 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 18 2013 @ 11:18 AM
link   

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?



You, sir...are asking sensible questions..



posted on Apr, 18 2013 @ 04:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by Zaphod58
reply to post by XaniMatriX
 


They communicate with Voyager, they were communicating with Magellan, they communicate just fine with the Mars rovers and probes, with Hubble which is usually above the belts, with periods that go through them. All those communications signals go through the Van Allen Belts quite nicely, and they don't have any problems with them.

And what astronauts "passed out" in the Belts? They've reported seeing "streaks" in their vision but that's it.

Hyperbole much?
edit on 4/18/2013 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)


This is from WIKI

"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]"

Get it, most satellites shut down, in order not to destroy the electronics on board the satellites, wonder how an aluminum can managed not to destroy it's electronics ,hmmm? and then after leaving earth's protective shield (van allen belt) into cosmic radiation, and they were still okay...... so many questions, that have so many excuses (from officials ofcourse)



posted on Apr, 18 2013 @ 05:20 PM
link   
reply to post by XaniMatriX
 


You've never studied radiation have you? Not one bit, except the people that say "radiation is evil and will kill us all!"

They can't shield in the Van Allen Belts because of the amount of radiation involved. Passing through the belts, quickly, as Apollo, and as most satellites do, won't harm them, unless there is a sudden spike in radiation levels caused by an outside source, such as a CME.

Aluminum was the best shielding at the time, because it's not dense. Once you clear the Van Allen Belts, the radiation levels drop off from what they were in the Belts. But the radiation type in space, is very different than here on earth, which is where your shielding type comes in to play. On earth, with low speed particles, such as those put out by a medical x-ray machine, you want very dense shielding to block the radiation levels. In space, the particles are extremely high speed, and energetic. This means that you want a less dense shield in place.

When a particle, such as a galactic cosmic ray (GCR) particle enters a shielding material, it starts to bounce off the atoms inside that material. This causes those atoms to split off and hit other atoms, which split and hit other atoms, and so forth. This is known as bremsstrahlung, or "breaking radiation". Those particles then proceed into the crew cabin of the space craft, and if you have a dense shield, expose the crew to massive amounts of radiation. That's why the worst thing you could use is lead, or depleted uranium, despite how well they work as a shield on earth. You want things like aluminum, and other very lightweight materials to shield you in space.

If you're going to stay in the Van Allen Belts however, there currently isn't a material that will stop all of that radiation from entering. You can stop SOME of it from entering, but there's currently no way to stop all of it from getting into your electronics, which is why satellites are shut down when they have to be in the Belts for any period of time. If they're just passing into them, and back out again quickly, as many of them do, then it's not a problem.

www.ndt-ed.org...



posted on Apr, 18 2013 @ 06:36 PM
link   
reply to post by XaniMatriX
 


The "van Allen belt"
Here's a link to Van Allen himself debunking the moon landing hoax...

cosmoquest.org...

I suppose he was in on it too?
Your own supposed evidence and seemingly main reason why they supposedly didnt go is working against you my friend.



posted on Apr, 18 2013 @ 07:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by Anonbeleiver77
reply to post by XaniMatriX
 


The "van Allen belt"
Here's a link to Van Allen himself debunking the moon landing hoax...

cosmoquest.org...

I suppose he was in on it too?
Your own supposed evidence and seemingly main reason why they supposedly didnt go is working against you my friend.


Alright, lets play a little game then, lets just say that the aluminum was sufficient enough to protect the astronauts inside the Van Allen Belt, lets just say okay... NOW what protected them against the solar corpuscular radiation which the Van Allen Belt protects earth against? i mean, why would NASA send 24 people into a region of space, where the particles could be charged to an alarming rate without any notice where there is no protection, because solar corpuscular radiation can penetrate aluminum and a space suit for that matter.



posted on Apr, 18 2013 @ 08:08 PM
link   
reply to post by XaniMatriX
 


NOW what protected them against the solar corpuscular radiation which the Van Allen Belt protects earth against?
The Van Allen belts don't really protect Earth from much of anything. They are regions of high energy particles trapped by the Earth's magnetic field

What are you calling "corpuscular radiation"? I'm not really familiar with that term. Do you mean particle radiation? Yes, the magnetosphere does capture that stuff. That's what accounts for the high levels of radiation within the Van Allen belts. Much higher levels than in the regions beyond the belts. But, since the regions of the belts of very high radiation were avoided and since the transit time of those regions was brief, the belts did not pose a significant risk.


i mean, why would NASA send 24 people into a region of space, where the particles could be charged to an alarming rate without any notice where there is no protection, because solar corpuscular radiation can penetrate aluminum and a space suit for that matter.
They wouldn't. Not if extremely high levels of radiation were expected to be encountered. But no such levels were expected, nor encountered. It was studied quite extensively before man ever went there. While there was a certain risk involved with the possibility of a SEP event occurring during a mission the chances were slight and contingency plans were in effect.

www.hq.nasa.gov...
edit on 4/18/2013 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 18 2013 @ 08:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by XaniMatriX
 


NOW what protected them against the solar corpuscular radiation which the Van Allen Belt protects earth against?
The Van Allen belts don't really protect Earth from much of anything. They are regions of high energy particles trapped by the Earth's magnetic field

What are you calling "corpuscular radiation"? I'm not really familiar with that term. Do you mean particle radiation? Yes, the magnetosphere does capture that stuff. That's what accounts for the high levels of radiation within the Van Allen belts. Much higher levels than in the regions beyond the belts. But, since the regions of the belts of very high radiation were avoided and since the transit time of those regions was brief, the belts did not pose a significant risk.


i mean, why would NASA send 24 people into a region of space, where the particles could be charged to an alarming rate without any notice where there is no protection, because solar corpuscular radiation can penetrate aluminum and a space suit for that matter.
They wouldn't. Not if extremely high levels of radiation were expected to be encountered. But no such levels were expected, nor encountered. It was studied quite extensively before man ever went there. While there was a certain risk involved with the possibility of a SEP event occurring during a mission the chances were slight and contingency planes were in effect.

www.hq.nasa.gov...
edit on 4/18/2013 by Phage because: (no reason given)


Hey Phage i haven't seen you in forever dude.

But Apollo missions, from 1969 to 1972, were occurring during a solar maximum where the particles could have been charged instantly, there would have been no time to duck into safety, why risk something so dangerous?

And the Van Allen Belt actually protects us from Solar and Cosmic radiation, it's like the atmosphere protecting this planet from meteors and such, i don't know where you got the idea that it doesn't?

Wait wait, what contingency plans? i never heard of these, especially to do with solar and cosmic radiation spiking to dangerous levels at the speed of light, so almost instantly.



posted on Apr, 18 2013 @ 08:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by XaniMatriX
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.




Oh god here we go....
"you wouldn't have to pay hundreds of thousands they didn't get on the ship... "
Ummm so all the others who worked on the ship, the suits, the computers, the fuel, the trajectorys, the rover and the ridiculous amount of equations etc those hundreds of thousands They knew nothing at all that it was supposedly all a fake mission.
So in other words what your saying is that all these scientists, mathematicians, engineers etc etc the tops of their fields in the world at the time actually worked out how to do this ten built the gear to do it and planned it all out all confident and in full beleif that it will work and the gear they built was going to the moon and then the government just pretended to go?
Seriously that's ridiculous.

"countermeasures" to fool the Russians?
What?huh?
'scratches head'
Hmmm

So what your saying is that the Apollo rockets had a stealth mode and a cloaking device!!!
Wow that's awesome!
And then NASA with none of their staff finding out used their hologram projector to create a solid hologram of a rocket going to the moon that shows up on Russian radar as a solid object and also fools all the astronemers in the world and every tracking station on the planet...

Am I following you right here?
Is this what your saying?

"your logic is flawed"



posted on Apr, 18 2013 @ 08:38 PM
link   
reply to post by Anonbeleiver77
 


You need to watch Capricorn One, not to take into account as fact's but it does show how it can be done, just saying, if you didn't watch it it's a pretty good movie, and in Russia there are conspiracy theories among people that Russians never even went into low earth orbit, b/c they were working on spy satellites also, and that is all they were working on just like NASA.

So for the Russians to say "Americans faked it" would be them admitting that their space program was a staged coo also.

just saying.



posted on Apr, 18 2013 @ 08:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by XaniMatriX

Originally posted by Anonbeleiver77
reply to post by XaniMatriX
 


The "van Allen belt"
Here's a link to Van Allen himself debunking the moon landing hoax...

cosmoquest.org...

I suppose he was in on it too?
Your own supposed evidence and seemingly main reason why they supposedly didnt go is working against you my friend.


Alright, lets play a little game then, lets just say that the aluminum was sufficient enough to protect the astronauts inside the Van Allen Belt, lets just say okay... NOW what protected them against the solar corpuscular radiation which the Van Allen Belt protects earth against? i mean, why would NASA send 24 people into a region of space, where the particles could be charged to an alarming rate without any notice where there is no protection, because solar corpuscular radiation can penetrate aluminum and a space suit for that matter.


So what your saying is that the man who discovered, researched the belt and had it named after him is in fact wrong about the nature of said belt and the space outside of it?
And you personally know more about this belt than said sceintist?



posted on Apr, 18 2013 @ 08:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by Anonbeleiver77

Originally posted by XaniMatriX

Originally posted by Anonbeleiver77
reply to post by XaniMatriX
 


The "van Allen belt"
Here's a link to Van Allen himself debunking the moon landing hoax...

cosmoquest.org...

I suppose he was in on it too?
Your own supposed evidence and seemingly main reason why they supposedly didnt go is working against you my friend.


Alright, lets play a little game then, lets just say that the aluminum was sufficient enough to protect the astronauts inside the Van Allen Belt, lets just say okay... NOW what protected them against the solar corpuscular radiation which the Van Allen Belt protects earth against? i mean, why would NASA send 24 people into a region of space, where the particles could be charged to an alarming rate without any notice where there is no protection, because solar corpuscular radiation can penetrate aluminum and a space suit for that matter.


So what your saying is that the man who discovered, researched the belt and had it named after him is in fact wrong about the nature of said belt and the space outside of it?
And you personally know more about this belt than said sceintist?


You know i don't, neither do you, the only people that would know are the ones that send life into the "shield" lets call it, and past the moon, OH WAIT no one does that anymore for some odd reason, and you do know that they sent 2 probes into the Van Allen Belt last year right?

And they found stuff that even Van himself didn't know about, NASA even said it posses new risks and questions to be answered, so how much did he really know?

I still stand on my opinion, there were too many dangerous that NASA just couldn't have been aware of "not that i am blaming them" but to admit that they just had way to much on the line.
edit on 18-4-2013 by XaniMatriX because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 18 2013 @ 08:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by XaniMatriX
reply to post by Anonbeleiver77
 


You need to watch Capricorn One, not to take into account as fact's but it does show how it can be done, just saying, if you didn't watch it it's a pretty good movie, and in Russia there are conspiracy theories among people that Russians never even went into low earth orbit, b/c they were working on spy satellites also, and that is all they were working on just like NASA.

So for the Russians to say "Americans faked it" would be them admitting that their space program was a staged coo also.

just saying.

So now your saying the Russians faked their space program?
They where not the only country tracking Apollo.
One of the main tracking stations was here in Australia and manned by non military Australians
So they where in on it too?

Look I'm not trying to insult your beliefs etc
I myself for a while believed in the possibility it was a hoax but the more I looked into it the more I realized the scope of pulling off such a hoax and ensuring no one involved ever talked for the rest of their lives...
It's just impossible...
And all the supposed scientific evidence pointing towards it being a hoax has been disproven.



posted on Apr, 18 2013 @ 09:03 PM
link   
reply to post by Anonbeleiver77
 


No the conspiracy isn't that Russians faked their program but that they never sent out a HUMAN into orbit, but just like in the movie Capricorn one the astronaut was pulled out the last second, oh i wish i could find the Russian Doc on it, it had subtitles also but it's been like 2 years now and still no luck


Just saying that the rocket could have been launched empty, it's the only explanation i could think of, and then the rest of it was filmed, low earth orbit, moon landing and the whole shebang (except the launch and construction of it)

Well i my self used to believe the Moon landing, then right after i was told they dropped the program with 3 rockets retired without flight, my first though was instantly "Just doesn't smell right"

Or maybe it's just my childhood and seeing a UFO fly over my neighborhood 60 feet above us the size of a football field, silent, and black as black can get, plus i have seen UFO's multiple times, not saying it's alien, but there is definitely something were not being told you know. (off topic but i have my doubts)

And to be honest i don't mind you taking on other people's claims and i know your not bashing mine, every time i think of it, it's always the thought that one day, these conversations would be lost in time and history and until they repeat what they claim they are capable of, like i said, replace the ISS with the Moon or even put a rover on the moon with a live cam on it, maybe then the air could be cleared on this topic, until then there are just actions they took that make people doubt the program, it's human nature to be skeptic, it's what started the whole program in the first place.
edit on 18-4-2013 by XaniMatriX because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 18 2013 @ 09:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by XaniMatriX
reply to post by Anonbeleiver77
 


No the conspiracy isn't that Russians faked their program but that they never sent out a HUMAN into orbit, but just like in the movie Capricorn one the astronaut was pulled out the last second, oh i wish i could find the Russian Doc on it, it had subtitles also but it's been like 2 years now and still no luck


Just saying that the rocket could have been launched empty, it's the only explanation i could think of, and then the rest of it was filmed, low earth orbit, moon landing and the whole shebang (except the launch and construction of it)

Well i my self used to believe the Moon landing, then right after i was told they dropped the program with 3 rockets retired without flight, my first though was instantly "Just doesn't smell right"

Or maybe it's just my childhood and seeing a UFO fly over my neighborhood 60 feet above us the size of a football field, silent, and black as black can get, plus i have seen UFO's multiple times, not saying it's alien, but there is definitely something were not being told you know. (off topic but i have my doubts)


I'm not a skeptic in the broad sense
I too have seen and experienced some strange things
UFO and paranormal in my time
I have to agree with you that something dosnt ring true about them not going back
I don't want to be put in the tin foil hat brigade but yeh maybe they found something that made them not go back?
Or maybe it was just political or economical
It's starting to look as if the ones who will find out will either be china or private space programs as the US just dosnt seem interested anymore....
Not even a replacement for the shuttle just an unmanned one.

Peace



posted on Apr, 18 2013 @ 09:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by Anonbeleiver77

Originally posted by XaniMatriX
reply to post by Anonbeleiver77
 


No the conspiracy isn't that Russians faked their program but that they never sent out a HUMAN into orbit, but just like in the movie Capricorn one the astronaut was pulled out the last second, oh i wish i could find the Russian Doc on it, it had subtitles also but it's been like 2 years now and still no luck


Just saying that the rocket could have been launched empty, it's the only explanation i could think of, and then the rest of it was filmed, low earth orbit, moon landing and the whole shebang (except the launch and construction of it)

Well i my self used to believe the Moon landing, then right after i was told they dropped the program with 3 rockets retired without flight, my first though was instantly "Just doesn't smell right"

Or maybe it's just my childhood and seeing a UFO fly over my neighborhood 60 feet above us the size of a football field, silent, and black as black can get, plus i have seen UFO's multiple times, not saying it's alien, but there is definitely something were not being told you know. (off topic but i have my doubts)


I'm not a skeptic in the broad sense
I too have seen and experienced some strange things
UFO and paranormal in my time
I have to agree with you that something dosnt ring true about them not going back
I don't want to be put in the tin foil hat brigade but yeh maybe they found something that made them not go back?
Or maybe it was just political or economical
It's starting to look as if the ones who will find out will either be china or private space programs as the US just dosnt seem interested anymore....
Not even a replacement for the shuttle just an unmanned one.

Peace


That was my initial thought, it doesn't have to be life, or something out of this world, but maybe even an energy source to replace oil (just waiting for right time to exploit it) like you said China or a Private program, then they would have another excuse to wage war( or how i like to call it, profits in misery), maybe even what they saw FROM the moon you know.

I mean the official story does sound pretty damn amazing, sometimes, just a little too amazing.



posted on Apr, 18 2013 @ 10:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by Zaphod58
reply to post by turbonium1
 


Explain the difference between radiation on earth and in space. Once you understand that, you'll understand why thinner is better. Until you realize that there's a huge difference between the two, you'll keep arguing that lead and DU are the best shields, which will kill anyone onboard.


I didn't say anything about lead or DU. I requested some sources on aluminum and fibrous insulation being adequate shielding in the VA Belts. I'm still waiting.

So, how about it?



posted on Apr, 18 2013 @ 10:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by JuniorDisco
reply to post by SayonaraJupiter
 


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


Hey, 2013 called. We want our Eagle and Orion back. So get searching!



posted on Apr, 18 2013 @ 11:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by turbonium1

Originally posted by Zaphod58
reply to post by turbonium1
 


Explain the difference between radiation on earth and in space. Once you understand that, you'll understand why thinner is better. Until you realize that there's a huge difference between the two, you'll keep arguing that lead and DU are the best shields, which will kill anyone onboard.


I didn't say anything about lead or DU. I requested some sources on aluminum and fibrous insulation being adequate shielding in the VA Belts. I'm still waiting.

So, how about it?


You can find that information even on the NASA webpage, but even they admit that it is only adequate for lower levels of radiation, if there was a spike like a solar wind raising the energy, yeah those guys would be fried pretty quick, but i am also questioning how they protected them self's against the solar and cosmic radiation outside the Van Allen Belt, aluminum would not protect them, not even the suit's they were wearing, and as previously stated, during the Apollo missions it was the solar maximum.





new topics

top topics



 
60
<< 19  20  21    23  24  25 >>

log in

join