It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
I am yet to read anything in this post as to how the hoax supporters think that all the people who worked on the missions where kept quite? Over half a million people worked on the Apollo missions.
Please explain your theory's on how all the people involved where kept quite for the rest of their days so much do that NOT ONE has ever come forward or even intimated a hoax.
Over 500,000 people....
And your theory's on where the rockets went if not the moon?
Originally posted by SayonaraJupiter
The rockets were lifted into low earth orbit. That much is obvious, thousands of eye witnesses. But the Apollo telemetry tapes would show the ships stayed in Low Earth Orbit. So it was decided (probably by Nixon) the 700+ boxes of tapes, encompassing all manned Apollo missions, were "lost" (hi-jacked by Nixon's Plumbers) during a routine transfer between the National Archives and Goddard Space Flight Center.
FYI- I don't mean to speak for all the Apollo skeptics. There are so many different angles to the Apollo Hoax Hologram, Nixon's Apollo, the angle that I think is the best one, for me.
Go ahead and ask more questions. The Apollo skeptics will help you understand the truth.
In 1970, the tapes were placed in the US National Archives in Accession #69A4099. By 1984, all but two of the over 700 boxes of Apollo era magnetic tapes placed in the Accession, were removed and returned to the GSFC for permanent retention. These tapes are now missing.
These missing data tapes include the raw Apollo 11 SSTV tapes. For the past several years, a search for these tapes has been undertaken by several former Apollo 11 personnel. To date, no Apollo 11 SSTV tapes have been found. SOURCE www.parkes.atnf.csiro.au...
Originally posted by captainpudding
reply to post by SayonaraJupiter
Why do you insist on lying about apollo telemetry data being unavailable? It has been explained to you multiple times that the original Apollo 11 data tapes are available, but they were erased AFTER copies of the data were made. Once again, I'll put the question to you. Since the lack of original telemetry tapes for Apollo 11 seem to invalidate the mission for you and we just ignore the entire mission, how do you explain the other eight apollo missions that went to the moon?
edit on 23-4-2013 by captainpudding because: typo
Originally posted by Soylent Green Is People
reply to post by mrkeen
First of all, it is common knowledge that test pilots (in general) and the Apollo astronauts (specifically) took great risks. I'm not sure why you are suddenly surprised by this.
Secondly, as I said, the risk of a solar flare happening during the Apollo flights and being directed towards the Apollo spacecraft were low -- lower than other dangers posed by the Apollo mission. So it's not that it was at all likely that a solar flare would kill them. Given the relatively poor record of launch failures up to that time, it was more likely the astronauts would die in a launch explosion/launch accident rather than a solar flare.
Thirdly, once the astronauts are in space, the cost of the spacecraft hardware is already consumed. It's not like they would likely reuse any of it if the astronauts died by solar flare (maybe the LM and attached rover could be worth recovering and reusing, but I doubt they would do that, considering that is just adding the the risk of an already risky mission).
edit on 4/22/2013 by Soylent Green Is People because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by SayonaraJupiter
Originally posted by captainpudding
reply to post by SayonaraJupiter
Why do you insist on lying about apollo telemetry data being unavailable? It has been explained to you multiple times that the original Apollo 11 data tapes are available, but they were erased AFTER copies of the data were made. Once again, I'll put the question to you. Since the lack of original telemetry tapes for Apollo 11 seem to invalidate the mission for you and we just ignore the entire mission, how do you explain the other eight apollo missions that went to the moon?
edit on 23-4-2013 by captainpudding because: typo
You say that copies were made? Then why did Sarkissian go searching for the tapes in 2006? Where are the copies and who possesses them today if you say these copies exist? Sources. Please.
Captain, you take this too far. I never said to ignore the entire mission.
As a matter of fact, I'm still waiting for any evidence from the Apollo side with regard to the whereabouts of Apollo 11-EAGLE and Apollo 16-ORION.
Originally posted by SayonaraJupiter
As a matter of fact, I'm still waiting for any evidence from the Apollo side with regard to the whereabouts of Apollo 11-EAGLE and Apollo 16-ORION.
Originally posted by XaniMatriX
They are using the Apollo 16-Orion to go to Mars hehe. Don't know if it's true but NASA showed of their Mars lander and it's name is Orion, and it look's exactly the same.
Originally posted by choos
Originally posted by SayonaraJupiter
As a matter of fact, I'm still waiting for any evidence from the Apollo side with regard to the whereabouts of Apollo 11-EAGLE and Apollo 16-ORION.
apollo 11 eagle was left in lunar orbit and its orbit was presumed to have decayed by now.
apollo 16 orion lost stability after jettison and was unable to perform a de-orbit burn. It is presumed to have remained in lunar orbit for maybe a year.
Originally posted by SayonaraJupiter
Can you post something more than what's in wikipedia?
You know that these two modules could be the key to unlocking the Apollo enigma.
Your indifference to the matter, and the lack of substantive replies, either by you or by the regular Apollo crowd sort of confirms it. This indifference amounts to a collective ignorance.
NASA claims of Apollo engineering precision and scientific exactitude are at stake.
After jettison, the LM lost stability and began tumbling at a rate of about 3° per second. This may have been due to a guidance circuit breaker inadvertently being left open. A maneuver was made at 195:03:13 to separate the CSM from the ascent stage. No deorbit burn maneuver was possible, and the ascent stage remained in lunar orbit for approximately one year.
Originally posted by SayonaraJupiter
You know that these two modules could be the key to unlocking the Apollo enigma.
NASA claims of Apollo engineering precision and scientific exactitude are at stake.
The Apollo 11 seismometer returned data for just three weeks but provided a useful first look at lunar seismology. More advanced seismometers were deployed at the Apollo 12, 14, 15, and 16 landing sites and transmitted data to Earth until September 1977. Each of these seismometers measured all three components of ground displacement (up-down, north-south, and east-west). Source www.lpi.usra.edu...
Originally posted by choos
Originally posted by turbonium1
Another source...
"Clearly, aluminum which was taken as a reasonableshield material a few years ago is now considered a poorcandidate for future spacecraft construction"
webcache.googleusercontent.com...:9OHEEx4jn58J:citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download%3Fdoi%3D10.1.1.37.9353%26rep%3Drep1%26type%3D ps+aluminum+is+a+poor+radiation+shield+material+to+hazardous+outside+of+LEO+applications&cd=5&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=ca
There's a pdf version of the above soyrce, as well.
The two sources I've posted clearly support my argument. You have not shown any sources to support your case, as yet.
If you can't, then it obviously confirms Apollo was a hoax
sorry, both your sources are referring to prolonged stays outside of LEO, not short term which was what the apollo missions were. in other words, your sources are looking for ways to protect astronauts from major solar particle events and/or all galactic cosmic rays.
Originally posted by turbonium1
Now what?
Originally posted by SayonaraJupiter
reply to post by choos
If the missing lunar ascent modules (A11-Eagle, A16-Orion) crashed into the moon then each impact should have been picked up and recorded by the seismometer stations set out by the Bellcomm/NASA hoax plotters.
The Apollo 11 seismometer returned data for just three weeks but provided a useful first look at lunar seismology. More advanced seismometers were deployed at the Apollo 12, 14, 15, and 16 landing sites and transmitted data to Earth until September 1977. Each of these seismometers measured all three components of ground displacement (up-down, north-south, and east-west). Source www.lpi.usra.edu...
Distribution of Lunar Seismic Sources. More than 1700 meteoroid impacts were recorded by the seismometer network, with impactor masses estimated to be between 0.5 and 5000 kilograms.
Originally posted by turbonium1
No, they are referring to ANY mission beyond LEO. Again, here's the quote...
"..aluminum is a poor radiation shield material to hazardous outside of LEO applications."
What does "outside of LEO" refer to, then? Obviously, it refers to ANY mission outside of LEO! Whether it's a short term mission, or a long term mission.
The short-term missions don't fit your argument, of course. So you claim only long-term missions are being referred to, not any short-term missions..
You have no evidence for that claim, of course.
Now what?edit on 26-4-2013 by turbonium1 because: fix typo
Originally posted by choos
[yes then i suppose the spike in interest in the fields were completely pointless, the jobs and oppurtunities were pointless. satellites and GPS all pointless and should be put away. you need to think more broadly, the taxpayer wont benefit directly, but indirectly they will. think of the olympics. gov's fund them, but what does the taxpayer get?? they dont get no handout, what they do get is increased tourism, which they can benefit from.
were you able to identify the difference in radiation types?
were you able to identify which types of radiation would pose the greatest threat to astronauts excluding a major solar event?
Originally posted by turbonium1
Highly-energized particles called "killer electrons" are well-known - what's your point?
You said the so-called 'return' to the moon failed because it lacked money and public support.
As I said, Shuttles didn't need any public support, in 30 years of (seemingly) endless Earth orbits .
Public support for a moon base, or a manned Mars mission would likely be huge in comparison to Shuttles. If it really matters, anyway
And NASA got all the money they requested, as I said earlier. NASA said more money was needed to do it. So they got more money. And NASA still failed.
Who is to blame for its failure, up to this point? NASA or the US Admin? NASA, for sure.
Once again, though, NASA cries for more money - much, much more money.
No money was given this time, however. Why? Because the problem isn't solved by throwing out more and more money. When asked how much money would be required to succeed, NASA had to admit they had no idea!!
NASA failed due to a lack in the required technologies. And that's why couldn't do it over 40 years ago with Apollo, either.
The first (supposed) moon landing was in 1969, only 7 years after JFK announced the 'goal' in 1962..In 1999, Bush set the same goal by 2020. So that's about three times longer than going the first time, and with 40 years of progress!! What a crock.
They set a far-off date of 2020 because they lacked the technology, and hoped it have it within the next 20 years No other reason makes much sense.
Originally posted by choos
Originally posted by turbonium1
No, they are referring to ANY mission beyond LEO. Again, here's the quote...
"..aluminum is a poor radiation shield material to hazardous outside of LEO applications."
What does "outside of LEO" refer to, then? Obviously, it refers to ANY mission outside of LEO! Whether it's a short term mission, or a long term mission.
The short-term missions don't fit your argument, of course. So you claim only long-term missions are being referred to, not any short-term missions..
You have no evidence for that claim, of course.
Now what?edit on 26-4-2013 by turbonium1 because: fix typo
there is a difference between short term LEO and long term LEO.. long term missions needs to take into account survival from and recovery of large solar particle events pointed directly at the astronauts and staying there afterwards and possibly taking more.
short term missions does not neccesarily need to take these into account. its similar to passing through the VA belts.
if they were to put the ISS within the VA belts, then yes they dont have the tech or material to protect an astronaut, but if they were only going to pass through the VA belts for a short period of time then aluminum is good enough protection. this goes for beyond LEO as well, short term they can make procedures to shorten the mission. long term they HAVE to protect them with shielding.edit on 27-4-2013 by choos because: (no reason given)