Disclosure of the moon landing hoax.

Thought these were appropriate for this thread.

reply to post by turbonium1


You do realize that the capsule wouldn't be landing right? The lander for each would be different, and carried with the capsule.

As for propulsion, there's the ion drive, which is slow to accelerate, but fast, as well as several that are in theory and could be in testing within a few years. But an old fashioned chemical rocket would work as well.

Originally posted by HauntWok
reply to post by SayonaraJupiter

 

The point is, there is man made equipment on the moon, therefore we have been to the moon. The moon landings were not a hoax.

There are Soviet Lunokhods on the Moon. Does it prove that Soviet cosmonauts landed on the Moon?

Originally posted by mrkeen

Originally posted by HauntWok
reply to post by SayonaraJupiter

 

The point is, there is man made equipment on the moon, therefore we have been to the moon. The moon landings were not a hoax.

There are Soviet Lunokhods on the Moon. Does it prove that Soviet cosmonauts landed on the Moon?

This exchange of ATS members is a good example of 'not properly understanding the other persons claims' so the debate is confused and people just get frustrated.

Let's take a real look at the Mythbusters LRRR segment. I already typed out the transcript on page 70 of this thread. If you want a real transcript go look for it yourself.

The Apollo Defenders have latched on to the idea that this Mythbusters LRRR segment 'proved Apollo'. I would advise the Apollo Defenders to give it up. Mythbusters is just a TV entertainment show. Mythbusters did NOT prove Apollo.

Originally posted by SayonaraJupiter

Originally posted by mrkeen

Originally posted by HauntWok
reply to post by SayonaraJupiter

 

The point is, there is man made equipment on the moon, therefore we have been to the moon. The moon landings were not a hoax.

There are Soviet Lunokhods on the Moon. Does it prove that Soviet cosmonauts landed on the Moon?

This exchange of ATS members is a good example of 'not properly understanding the other persons claims' so the debate is confused and people just get frustrated.

Let's take a real look at the Mythbusters LRRR segment. I already typed out the transcript on page 70 of this thread. If you want a real transcript go look for it yourself.

The Apollo Defenders have latched on to the idea that this Mythbusters LRRR segment 'proved Apollo'. I would advise the Apollo Defenders to give it up. Mythbusters is just a TV entertainment show. Mythbusters did NOT prove Apollo.

edit on 7/22/2013 by SayonaraJupiter because: (no reason given)

the LRRR doesnt have wheels like the lunokhod's.. how do you suppose the LRRR's were able to be as they are in the photos and videos of all the apollo lunar surface missions?

hopping transforming surveyor probes with arms?

Originally posted by choos

the LRRR doesnt have wheels like the lunokhod's.. how do you suppose the LRRR's were able to be as they are in the photos and videos of all the apollo lunar surface missions?

hopping transforming surveyor probes with arms?

Yes. You know why? Because Hughes Aircraft had a contract for $67 million for Surveyor. It ended up costing $365 million. So yes. The "hidden" Surveyors could have big arms with big payloads that could return to earth like Luna.

And I already schooled you on the hopping surveyors so get with the program choos.

Originally posted by SayonaraJupiter

Yes. You know why? Because Hughes Aircraft had a contract for $67 million for Surveyor. It ended up costing $365 million. So yes. The "hidden" Surveyors could have big arms with big payloads that could return to earth like Luna.

And I already schooled you on the hopping surveyors so get with the program choos.

mighty big claim.. care to provide proof of your speculation?? i mean technologically.

and yea, the probe done one hop.. how many hops will it have to do to plant all the other science equipment.. and how accurately can the controllers control the hop? and how many thousand hops will the surveyors need to do to print the foot prints and rover tracks?

you are speculating but not providing any reasonable explaination.. you are bringing in a surveyor probe which is far more advanced than the mars curiosity rover.

p.s. this also runs into the issue that we didnt really have the technology back in '69 to effectively slow hours of footage down to be realistic.. so where in wonderland are you at the moment?

reply to post by choos

you are speculating but not providing any reasonable explaination..

Well, we can disagree about it, BUT, I think $298 million cost over-run for a $67 million Surveyor budget is a good start. If Hughes could build 7-10 Surveyors for $67 million how many did he build for $365? We can only image what kind of robotics was involved. Probably some small robots that could churn up the regolith to make it look like astronaut footpaths. Remember, choos.... Howard Hughes was very innovative. Werner von Braun was very innovative, too.

Originally posted by SayonaraJupiter

Well, we can disagree about it, BUT, I think $298 million cost over-run for a $67 million Surveyor budget is a good start. If Hughes could build 7-10 Surveyors for $67 million how many did he build for $365? We can only image what kind of robotics was involved. Probably some small robots that could churn up the regolith to make it look like astronaut footpaths. Remember, choos.... Howard Hughes was very innovative. Werner von Braun was very innovative, too.

edit on 7/22/2013 by SayonaraJupiter because: (no reason given)

thats still quite the fuel load.. so these are definitely not small robots.. or do you have walkers now? bi-pedal robots to churn up the lunar regolith? that can transform into wheeled robots to do the rover tracks also??

the amount of technology you are making these guys have is astounding.. ability to slow footage.. transforming bi-pedal robots (close to my theory now, you know the humanoid remote controlled bi-pedal super advanced robots) unlimited fuel (for hopping about and movement and return to earth), all for the budget price of $365 million.

advanced robotics of today would be in envy.. why not give them a time machine also?? they can zap to the distant future bring back technology to fake the moon landing than zap it all back... its much more simple..

reply to post by choos

thats still quite the fuel load.. so these are definitely not small robots.. or do you have walkers now? bi-pedal robots to churn up the lunar regolith? that can transform into wheeled robots to do the rover tracks also??

The fuel loads will not be bad, comparable to Lunokhod. I do not support bi-pedal robots. I support tracked or wheeled robots that were deployed from Surveyor spacecraft.

Originally posted by SayonaraJupiter
reply to post by choos

 

thats still quite the fuel load.. so these are definitely not small robots.. or do you have walkers now? bi-pedal robots to churn up the lunar regolith? that can transform into wheeled robots to do the rover tracks also??

The fuel loads will not be bad, comparable to Lunokhod. I do not support bi-pedal robots. I support tracked or wheeled robots that were deployed from Surveyor spacecraft.

but then apollo 11 and i believe apollo 12?? they dont have any tracks on the lunar regolith.. so by not supporting walking robots you are acknowledging they landed man on the moon in a sense..

lm not too sure about lunokhods fuel system, i think it was batteries.. so i dont know how the efficient they were with using battery power to perform the hops and the launch back to earth,.. but im assuming battery power in your world has that ability?

and we still run into the issue of filming the lunar footage.. we didnt really have the technology to feasibly slow down hours of footage.. and the 360 degree pans.. how did they do that with kubricks frontal projection thingy??

Originally posted by SayonaraJupiter
reply to post by choos

 

thats still quite the fuel load.. so these are definitely not small robots.. or do you have walkers now? bi-pedal robots to churn up the lunar regolith? that can transform into wheeled robots to do the rover tracks also??

The fuel loads will not be bad, comparable to Lunokhod. I do not support bi-pedal robots. I support tracked or wheeled robots that were deployed from Surveyor spacecraft.

So in the sixties, using technology that you get in an electric fan nowadays, they designed vast rockets which they sent to the moon with tiny robots on board that could convincingly fake a landing site, they dropped reflector mirrors and left all kinds of other bits of 'evidence'? Then they filmed a fake landing, an operation probably involving a major director, which they've managed to keep quiet ever since? The Soviets knew all about it but also kept it secret,not just from the world but also from their party apparatus? The perpetrators are still terrified of this being found out, despite Nixon not really being a big noise any more, so hundreds of scientists, technicians, filmmakers and politicians, from America and Russia, have gone to their deaths without breathing a word?

Dude, have you heard of Occam's razor?

reply to post by SayonaraJupiter


So if a program runs over budget, the only excuse is they're building more of whatever? Wow, it must be nice living in that world.

Originally posted by choos

Originally posted by SayonaraJupiter

Well, we can disagree about it, BUT, I think $298 million cost over-run for a $67 million Surveyor budget is a good start. If Hughes could build 7-10 Surveyors for $67 million how many did he build for $365? We can only image what kind of robotics was involved. Probably some small robots that could churn up the regolith to make it look like astronaut footpaths. Remember, choos.... Howard Hughes was very innovative. Werner von Braun was very innovative, too.

edit on 7/22/2013 by SayonaraJupiter because: (no reason given)

thats still quite the fuel load.. so these are definitely not small robots.. or do you have walkers now? bi-pedal robots to churn up the lunar regolith? that can transform into wheeled robots to do the rover tracks also??

the amount of technology you are making these guys have is astounding.. ability to slow footage.. transforming bi-pedal robots (close to my theory now, you know the humanoid remote controlled bi-pedal super advanced robots) unlimited fuel (for hopping about and movement and return to earth), all for the budget price of $365 million.

advanced robotics of today would be in envy.. why not give them a time machine also?? they can zap to the distant future bring back technology to fake the moon landing than zap it all back... its much more simple..

He has no understanding of technology which is probably why he ignores everything contrary to his beliefs. Basically what hes saying is in the 60s we built transformers that could stage the moon landings.Funny part is he doesnt realize thatt would have been harder then actually putting men on the moon.

LRRR is not difficult to install. It even doesn't need to be oriented precisely, because anything within 90 deg range will do. It uses the same principle as the bicycle reflector. What other equipment that absolutely requires installation by hand is there on the Moon?

Originally posted by mrkeen
LRRR is not difficult to install. It even doesn't need to be oriented precisely, because anything within 90 deg range will do. It uses the same principle as the bicycle reflector. What other equipment that absolutely requires installation by hand is there on the Moon?

Precisely!

Ed Fendel the NASA cameraman who controlled the TV pan from mission control in Houston could attest the variety of remote controls he used to demonstrate what he did.

It's one small step for TV, one giant leap for remote controlled rovers on the moon.

The Apollo Defenders have trouble making this connection because they have been brainwashed by NASA to think that it must require a man on the moon to place the LRRR's. The facts of the case do not support their wild scientific claims. They have been debunked in this thread along with the Mythbusters segment on LRRR's.

Originally posted by Zaphod58
reply to post by SayonaraJupiter

 

So if a program runs over budget, the only excuse is they're building more of whatever? Wow, it must be nice living in that world.

It's not my world, it's the real world according to Howard Hughes, Werner von Braun and Richard Nixon.

And here is another thing.

Do you know that North American Aviation was about to go out of business in the 1960's because during that era over 90% of NAA contracts were from the US government? The Apollo contracts saved NAA from bankruptcy.

It's called corporate welfare. It's called corruption. It's called central committee communism, which is the anti-thesis of free market capitalism, isn't it?

In effect, the Apollo was nothing more than corporate welfare for the military industrial complex. von Braun was the rocket salesman, JFK bought the package, LBJ delivered it and Richard Nixon used the pre-packaged deal, Nixon savored the propaganda of Deke Slayton handing over moon rocks to third world military dictators. Howard Hughes was hiding in various places and working, remotely, on the Apollo film evidence.

I hope you realize that it's much easier to make a case when you are on my side of the argument. Your side has NASA 1968-1972 which act as your "script"-ures and by that I mean you are not allowed to deviate from those scriptures, because if you do, if you give up your Apollo belief system, a whole new world of understanding will unfold for you.

Apollo. Just scratch the surface the Apollo phenomenon and anyone will find the war criminal Nazi's, CIA agents everywhere, astronaut training simulations, remote control space vehicles, NASA medical miracles and medical mysteries, film making techniques all these things which can be used deceitfully in a Cold War propaganda film.

And Howard Hughes did make propaganda films in case you didn't know that.

reply to post by SayonaraJupiter


Projects run over budget, without some nefarious cause, or without them building 9000 extra whatever they're building. It happens all the time, and has continued to happen. Especially when you're making a highly specialized piece of equipment, or a highly specialized piece of equipment that is going to be operating in an environment that you haven't been in much prior to that. That's your "real world" for you.

Originally posted by Zaphod58 That's your "real world" for you.

Well the real world of Apollo moon landings only existed between 1968 and 1972. Since then we have all seen the archived network tv tapes, the lunar film footage, the lunar surface pictures, the moon rocks, the radiation summary tables, the two missing ascent modules, the 700+ boxes of missing telemetry tapes and the more recent efforts of the ALSJ and ASU to control the Apollo narratives, and President Obama's reaction to all of this is Keep Out Zones and "preserve and protect" language which will probably get passed into law by the US Congress!

And we have seen that nobody else but Nixon's NASA has been outside of low earth orbit since 1972.

All of these things are red flags for Apollo.

To add fuel to all of this controversy we have the Carol Rosen/Werner von Braun Disclosure theory.

The Soviet Union launched it into an elliptical low Earth orbit on October 4, 1957.

America was very afraid of being enslaved by the Reds. Richard Nixon was vice-president. Von Braun will always be an ex-Nazi who utilized slave labor to serve his state leadership. But von Braun is a key figure in Apollo and his relationship with the dream of a moon trip was made aware to the US public by magazine covers and endorsements by Walt Disney who produced science fiction movies with von Braun.

Apollo was a science fiction movie. So many RED FLAGS.

reply to post by SayonaraJupiter


And what are you going to say when there are other astronauts on the moon, taking pictures of the Apollo landing sites, and the equipment there? Oh that's right, somehow US law has become world law, and no one is allowed near them, or even to go to the moon.