Disclosure of the moon landing hoax.

page: 27
54
<< 24  25  26    28  29  30 >>

log in

join

posted on Apr, 28 2013 @ 09:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by choos

Originally posted by XaniMatriX

NASA didn't start tracking, or lets say were not able to track solar flares until 1972, and that technology was improved in 1977, so they wouldn't even know what they are going into, which would be the FIRST priority, ahh but why bother, you guys enjoy your Hollywood story, done with this post. peace.


for real??? who told you this?

look up SPAN (heres a hint: SOLAR PARTICLE ALERT NETWORK)


Honestly, you just gave me information that comes from NASA, saying they could look at the flares, and guess what their about to do?? completely ignoring what i said eh? i mean i did word it wrong, it was really early in the morning
not track, but predict one (which they couldn't), well let alone properly track one, since studies are still ongoing.

Even the recent probes sent into Van Allen Belt discovered new types of radiation.... ahhh why am i even replying, dude, no ongoing studies of humans outside LEO, not even 1000 miles away from this planet have ever been made, or even an attempt to do so, because NASA says it's to risky, and unpredictable, you are all ignoring today's findings, and cling on to inconclusive data from the past.

Honestly, DONE, peace out.




posted on Apr, 29 2013 @ 10:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by SayonaraJupiter
reply to post by Anonbeleiver77
 



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....


The obvious answer to your question is this : The 500,000 people you speak of didn't go into space.

Unfortunately you have latched onto this figure of "500,000 people" and you haven't presented a SINGLE SOURCE for that figure.


And your theory's on where the rockets went if not the moon?


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.


wiki.answers.com...




So what about the Russians tracking the rockets and other countrys they where in on it too? I suppose the telemetry from one of the main tracking stations here in Australia was all destroyed as well? They where civilian trackers at that station there's an Aussie movie about it?
I guess they where CIA sleeper agents from birth yeh?
It's just laughable I'm sorry it's just impossible to fool the whole world community of astronomers and sceintists into not seeing the apollo rockets sitting in orbit and not going to the moon and back. Astronomy is a lot older than the Apollo missions there where a lot of people watching.
Even if it was half that amount or a quarter yes all those people who worked on the project didn't go in the craft but are you saying they where all that stupid that they didn't realise what they where building wouldn't couldn't work? That it couldn't be done?! Seriously?
VAN ALLEN HIMSELF SAID IT COULD BE DONE!
He debunked the hoax himself so please stop using the belts as evidence because that is just plain wrong.
edit on 29-4-2013 by Anonbeleiver77 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 30 2013 @ 08:53 AM
link   
Sometimes you just have to wonder about things.

For instance, if we really did land men on the moon. Wouldn't there be a massive monument somewhere recognizing this incredible feat? Wouldn't it at least be on the scale of the Washington monument?

Yet, there is nothing. Perhaps we weren't that proud.

Think for a second of an alternative timeline where man really did land on the moon. I think we would have constructed the most impressive monument ever with an accompanying museum celebrating such success.

If we really did land men on the moon, wouldn't there be the most accessible, most comprehensive, easily searched, incredibly indexed, highly respected one stop online library in the world. After all wouldn't we all be so proud of what mankind had accomplished that such a research facility would exist?

Yet, there is nothing like this.

It's almost as if on the one hand everyone wants the myth to be fully accepted, but when you look a little deeper, you find none of the facts back it up. It's almost as if on the one hand we say 'wow .. we did it' but on the other 'just don't look too deep'.

If we truly went to the moon, there would be

[a] close up and easily identifiable pictures from a satellite of all 6 modules.
[2] close up and easily identifiable pictures from a robotic rover.
[3] A one stop website providing the highest quality links to all video and audio, rather than the hodge-podge of sites that currently exist.



posted on Apr, 30 2013 @ 08:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by ppk55
For instance, if we really did land men on the moon. Wouldn't there be a massive monument somewhere recognizing this incredible feat? Wouldn't it at least be on the scale of the Washington monument?

Yet, there is nothing.

Yup, "nothing."
www.kennedyspacecenter.com...
Nosiree, nothing to see here, move along, move along.

The rest of your "if I ran the zoo" fallacy, some of which actually does exist, doesn't even warrant a response.
edit on 30-4-2013 by ngchunter because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 30 2013 @ 09:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by XaniMatriX
Even the recent probes sent into Van Allen Belt discovered new types of radiation....


Oh let me guess, you're referring to this?
www.scientificamerican.com...
You didn't dig very deep then. That in no way implies a greater amount of flux in the belts. In reality, there was a lower flux during the period of time in which the new middle belt existed.

Here's the actual data from the probes. Part a. shows the normal, classic distribution of the van allen belts (what NASA would have expected in 1969):
img831.imageshack.us...
Part b. shows a period of time where the outer belt had been depleted by the first shock wave, but at this point the distribution itself is still "classic" with a single inner belt and outer belt. Part c. shows the new distribution of the remaining electrons, which is now more diffuse and lower in flux than the classic distribution, but has a new gap within what used to be a single outer belt, thus there are now three belts instead of two. Part e. shows the annihilation of the outer belt region due to another shock wave. About a week later the distribution returned to the normal classic configuration seen in part a. due to another shock wave.

So no, not a problem for Apollo. If anything had this been the configuration of the belts during their departure for the moon or their return to earth, it would mean that they would have received even less of a dose than would otherwise be expected, and the normally expected dose given their trajectory and the areal density of their spacecraft (7~8 g/cm^2) was anything but dangerous:
i319.photobucket.com...



posted on Apr, 30 2013 @ 09:10 AM
link   
reply to post by ppk55
 


Yeah, and did you notice that Neil Armstrong is dead? Very suspicious. And highly convenient for TPTB.



posted on Apr, 30 2013 @ 09:17 AM
link   
He was 82 years old when he died. A lot of people die in their 80's.

What's your point?

Why take 53 years to silence him if he had anything to hide?



posted on Apr, 30 2013 @ 09:23 AM
link   
reply to post by ppk55
 


There is also such thing as experiencing the unexpected. Human errors and unpredicted moments usually lead to important discoveries. When you first step onto the soil of another planet or moon, so much should be different, you must be overwhelmed with that. All physical devices should work differently, every aspect of the mission should give valuable information. In no event it can be predicted and calculated beforehand. The manned Moon mission should've provided a lot of new discoveries and surprises. But seemingly it went so smooth that it was almost boring, "Okay, we are on the Moon. Nothing interesting here. We are leaving". Is it what you expect from a mission like that?
edit on 30-4-2013 by mrkeen because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 30 2013 @ 09:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by mrkeen
reply to post by ppk55
 


There is also such thing as experiencing the unexpected. Human errors and unpredicted moments usually lead to important discoveries. When you first step onto the soil of another planet or moon, so much should be different, you must be overwhelmed with that. All physical devices should work differently, every aspect of the mission should give valuable information. In no event it can be predicted and calculated beforehand. The manned Moon mission should've provided a lot of new discoveries and surprises. But seemingly it went so smooth that it was almost boring, "Okay, we are on the Moon. Nothing interesting here. We are leaving". Is it what you expect from a mission like that?
edit on 30-4-2013 by mrkeen because: (no reason given)


there were..

two from the top of my head were that craters were confirmed to be meteor impacts and not long dead volcanos and the other was depth perception.



posted on Apr, 30 2013 @ 09:54 AM
link   
reply to post by Junkheap
 


I was joking, dude. And trying to make a point about talking about things when you haven't even done the most basic research. But actually it doesn't really work as an analogy.



posted on Apr, 30 2013 @ 03:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by Anonbeleiver77
wiki.answers.com...


You earlier claimed "500,000" without a source. Now you posted a source that indicates, what?


How many people were involved behind the scenes in the Apollo 11 project?
when you consider not only NASA, but all the different companies and agencies involved in the design, manufacture and testing of every component of the hardware and software involved, the number would have to run into the thousands, if not tens of thousands. Source Your Source Link


wiki.answers is not a good way to convince anyone that your data are credible. Try working on some better source, more credible, source material. I have seen the "400,000" figure sourced (many times, in other threads) but you've gone and upped it by 100,000. That's a 20% margin for error!

If we applied your 20% margin of error to Saturn V launch vehicles... well... ka-boom!



posted on Apr, 30 2013 @ 03:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by ppk55
It's almost as if on the one hand everyone wants the myth to be fully accepted, but when you look a little deeper, you find none of the facts back it up. It's almost as if on the one hand we say 'wow .. we did it' but on the other 'just don't look too deep'.


This is exactly the situation. Take for example (just one, but it's a fine one) of one Richard Underwood, CIA photo expert who was the first person to see all the Apollo images.



1. Richard Underwood, connection to Nazi Werner von Braun.

At that point I got a call one day from a guy with a heavy German accent, that said, "They tell me you know something about cameras that fly high."

I said, "Well, up to 70,000 feet."

He says, "Do you think one could work at half a million feet?"

I says, "Well, that would be in space."

And Dr. [Wernher] von Braun says, "Well, let's give it a try. Come to Alabama. I want to talk to you." Source www.jsc.nasa.gov...


and


But I guess it was ten years before—every time I roll that roll, I'm scratching my head. And we never mentioned it to anybody, you know, at that point, that this thing was in there, and nobody in the outside world caught it at that point. It was sort of like on Apollo 11, nobody wondered why we never released any pictures of Neil Armstrong on the Moon. Because there weren't any. But we were told, "Don't mention it." And nobody in the news media picked this up. .I can't figure that out to save my life, why every picture you released was Buzz Aldrin, because Buzz was mad at Neil, didn't take his picture. Got hundreds of the other eleven guys walked on the Moon, none of number one. Even PAO [Public Affairs Office] for a while thought of, "Why don't we say this picture by the flag is Armstrong? How do you know? You can't see his face or anything."

I said, "Well, there's some nine-year-old kid out there who's a space groupie and he knows every aperture and wire and seam in a spacesuit. The day after you publish it, the New York Times is going to have a letter from a nine-year-old kid saying, 'No, you're wrong. That's Buzz Aldrin.'"

"Well, don't mention it." So that's the way that sort of worked for years. Nobody brought that idea up. A lot of things weren't mentioned and got away with from that standpoint.


Richard Underwood is obviously exaggerating to a wild degree. No nine-year old kid is going to know "every aperture and wire and seam in a spacesuit."

But Underwood, when asked why there are no pictures of Armstrong on the moon, he is firm about it:
"DON'T MENTION IT." This was standard policy during Richard Nixon's Apollo.

edit on 4/30/2013 by SayonaraJupiter because: color tags



posted on Apr, 30 2013 @ 07:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by SayonaraJupiter

Originally posted by Anonbeleiver77
wiki.answers.com...


You earlier claimed "500,000" without a source. Now you posted a source that indicates, what?


How many people were involved behind the scenes in the Apollo 11 project?
when you consider not only NASA, but all the different companies and agencies involved in the design, manufacture and testing of every component of the hardware and software involved, the number would have to run into the thousands, if not tens of thousands. Source Your Source Link


wiki.answers is not a good way to convince anyone that your data are credible. Try working on some better source, more credible, source material. I have seen the "400,000" figure sourced (many times, in other threads) but you've gone and upped it by 100,000. That's a 20% margin for error!

If we applied your 20% margin of error to Saturn V launch vehicles... well... ka-boom!


It would be nice if you read my full post before commenting...
As I said even if it was half or a quarter that amount of people who worked on it my original premise still stands.That approximate amount has been staged on many documentarys and in many books also.
And you still havnt made any comment at all on the rest of the world tracking the missions..we don't exist? Or are that backward we don't understand the technology?
The rockets did not just sit in orbit that's a fact so where did they go if not the moon?
Some kind of solid hologram that shows up on tracking huh?
That's possible and going to the moons not?
The more you delve into it the more ridiculous the idea of a hoax gets.
edit on 30-4-2013 by Anonbeleiver77 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 30 2013 @ 10:17 PM
link   
reply to post by Anonbeleiver77
 



It would be nice if you read my full post before commenting...
As I said even if it was half or a quarter that amount of people who worked on it my original premise still stands.That approximate amount has been staged on many documentarys and in many books also.
And you still havnt made any comment at all on the rest of the world tracking the missions..we don't exist? Or are that backward we don't understand the technology?
The rockets did not just sit in orbit that's a fact so where did they go if not the moon?
Some kind of solid hologram that shows up on tracking huh?
That's possible and going to the moons not?
The more you delve into it the more ridiculous the idea of a hoax gets.


No, your original premise "500,000" doesn't stand. It was found to be a fallacy. Your source was debunked.

Anyway... I had no way of knowing that you were an Aussie and I never made those remarks against Aussies.
Hey... wait a minute!

... if you Aussies are so smart with the tracking data how did you lose the Apollo 11 Eagle and Apollo 16 Orion (lunar ascent) modules? Do you adopt the tricky history about it... or are you like me? Aren't you wondering why and how NASA/Bellcomm/CIA could lose two lunar modules?

It's like these modules just disappeared and NASA has no explanation. Only excuses. Never A Straight Answer.



posted on Apr, 30 2013 @ 11:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by ppk55
Sometimes you just have to wonder about things.

For instance, if we really did land men on the moon. Wouldn't there be a massive monument somewhere recognizing this incredible feat? Wouldn't it at least be on the scale of the Washington monument?. . .

. . wouldn't there be the most accessible, most comprehensive, easily searched, incredibly indexed, highly respected one stop online library in the world. After all wouldn't we all be so proud of what mankind had accomplished that such a research facility would exist?

Yet, there is nothing like this.



Hey buddy, it's been a long time since I've seen you post. You raise a pretty good question concerning how the U.S.A. and the world have commemorated the Moon landing accomplishments. Maybe this short list will help you see just how well it has been celebrated and commemorated. There are even pictures!


Smithsonian National Air and Space Museum
United States Post Office
Kennedy Space Center
Apollo Lunar Surface Journal
Parkes Observatory's Support
LRO
Short Wave Radio “Lunar Eavesdropping"
Moon Rocks



posted on May, 1 2013 @ 01:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by SayonaraJupiter
reply to post by Anonbeleiver77
 



It would be nice if you read my full post before commenting...
As I said even if it was half or a quarter that amount of people who worked on it my original premise still stands.That approximate amount has been staged on many documentarys and in many books also.
And you still havnt made any comment at all on the rest of the world tracking the missions..we don't exist? Or are that backward we don't understand the technology?
The rockets did not just sit in orbit that's a fact so where did they go if not the moon?
Some kind of solid hologram that shows up on tracking huh?
That's possible and going to the moons not?
The more you delve into it the more ridiculous the idea of a hoax gets.


No, your original premise "500,000" doesn't stand. It was found to be a fallacy. Your source was debunked.

Anyway... I had no way of knowing that you were an Aussie and I never made those remarks against Aussies.
Hey... wait a minute!

... if you Aussies are so smart with the tracking data how did you lose the Apollo 11 Eagle and Apollo 16 Orion (lunar ascent) modules? Do you adopt the tricky history about it... or are you like me? Aren't you wondering why and how NASA/Bellcomm/CIA could lose two lunar modules?

It's like these modules just disappeared and NASA has no explanation. Only excuses. Never A Straight Answer.


honestly, think of a way how NASA is going to estimate where the modules will crash land after their orbits have finally decayed, without any visual confirmation/references. if you find out, you should write a thesis on it. it could give you some credentials.

you seem to be of the impression mathematical estimates are dead accurate.



posted on May, 1 2013 @ 02:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by SayonaraJupiter
reply to post by Anonbeleiver77
 



It would be nice if you read my full post before commenting...
As I said even if it was half or a quarter that amount of people who worked on it my original premise still stands.That approximate amount has been staged on many documentarys and in many books also.
And you still havnt made any comment at all on the rest of the world tracking the missions..we don't exist? Or are that backward we don't understand the technology?
The rockets did not just sit in orbit that's a fact so where did they go if not the moon?
Some kind of solid hologram that shows up on tracking huh?
That's possible and going to the moons not?
The more you delve into it the more ridiculous the idea of a hoax gets.


No, your original premise "500,000" doesn't stand. It was found to be a fallacy. Your source was debunked.

Anyway... I had no way of knowing that you were an Aussie and I never made those remarks against Aussies.
Hey... wait a minute!

... if you Aussies are so smart with the tracking data how did you lose the Apollo 11 Eagle and Apollo 16 Orion (lunar ascent) modules? Do you adopt the tricky history about it... or are you like me? Aren't you wondering why and how NASA/Bellcomm/CIA could lose two lunar modules?

It's like these modules just disappeared and NASA has no explanation. Only excuses. Never A Straight Answer.


Either your still not reading my full post or you don't understand what I mean that my original premise still stands.
What I meant was that even if it was half or a quarter of that amount of people lets say a bare minimum of 100,000 who worked on the program that they where scientists, engineers, astronomers, mathematicians etc etc all in the top of their field.... The same premise applies
How where they kept quite for the rest of their lives and on their death beds?Threats, money? 100,000 people?
You really think they where that dumb that they believed the things they where building would work when there was no possibility of that and that they where all wasting their time building stuff that was just going to be hidden away somewhere while the astronauts somehow hid in orbit behind Sputnik for a few days with the whole world watching and every astronomer and government in the world tracking them?
It pushes the boundries of incredulity!
The Russians where tracking them too they wouldve cried foul and humiliated the US government to the world.
And not one single person who worked on the project has ever come forward or hinted at the possibility of a hoax.
Not a single person for fame or financial gain or from moral compunction....
Just ridiculous!
edit on 1-5-2013 by Anonbeleiver77 because: (no reason given)
edit on 1-5-2013 by Anonbeleiver77 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 1 2013 @ 09:18 AM
link   
reply to post by SayonaraJupiter
 


Re Underwood's stuff: why do you believe him? You don't agree with his assertion that they actually went, so why are you prepared to believe what he says about keeping things quiet?

It's slightly ironic to employ something as evidence that they didn't go to the moon that implicitly says they went to the moon.



posted on May, 1 2013 @ 10:17 PM
link   
Why is the pro-Apollo apparently so uninterested in finding these two missing Apollo modules? Why don't you all find this interesting??

Score 2 points for the Apollo investigators.



posted on May, 2 2013 @ 01:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by SayonaraJupiter
Why is the pro-Apollo apparently so uninterested in finding these two missing Apollo modules? Why don't you all find this interesting??

Score 2 points for the Apollo investigators.


why is it so important that you need to find junk?

all other modules crashed into the moon.. OMG conspiracy is at hand!!!! NASA should have kept them in pristine condition for historical reasons.





new topics
top topics
 
54
<< 24  25  26    28  29  30 >>

log in

join