Disclosure of the moon landing hoax.

Originally posted by turbonium1

You think the Apollo footage was 'too long' to be slowed down? Not a chance.

well, show us how they done it.. im not into film so im not aware of it, but as far as i know instant replay can only record upto 30 seconds.. find me something that can do more.

I've already explained this to you, many times.

In these particular documents, the Apollo data should be held up as the benchmark standard, the most valued reference material. Why? It's very obvious, I think.

The experts are studying how to protect astronauts in deep space. They know radiation is hazardous in that environment. They want to understand what the hazards are, so they can overcome them.

How about all that Apollo data, then? It is a superb foundation!

It is not. They ignore it, or barely mention it in passing.

That's why it is garbage - because all the recent experts treat it that way.

the apollo lunar data are used as reference you can reference the accumulated radiation with actual figures and see that they are very much in line with each other.. go look at your reports and compare them to the accumulated data from the apollo flights and you will see they do show similarities much more so then showing what you claim.

so according to you, since apollo's acculumated radiation data is similar to the reports (which is advocated by every scientist and engineer) it means that it is garbage and that you have the authority to make up your own figures?

you still have not given me a reason why anyone should believe you over the reports though.. your claims that anyone will get very sick or even die within 6 days has no proof at all,

what gives you the authority to make such a claim with no evidence what so ever?

I'm not making wild claims. I'm simply connecting the dots.

is it or is it not true that you made the wild claim that they will get very sick or even die within 6 days? that is a wild claim, the reports that you are trying to connect dont even suggest that 30 days approaches the limits.

The experts say aluminum is a poor shield in deep space. They don't point out any exceptions to that rule. There is no exception for '12 days or less' spoken about. No 'safe time limits' are cited.

safe limits cited


actual data from 1977 solar minimum.. non apollo lunar flight.

lets make it easy for you. 132cSv/yr is 0.362cSv/day which is roughly 4.34cSv for 12 days assuming. so thats the roughly the maximum..

the limit for 30 days is 0.25Sv or 25 cSv.. a 12 day mission is 5.7 times under the limit.. you cant argue that.

so what gives you the authority to say that they are not only over this limit but they will get sick or even die within 6 days?

You say it. None of them did..

The experts don't say what would happen to you if you went into deep space with an aluminum craft. Nor did I. You assumed I said what would happen - 'instant death, etc. I didn't say that - you put words in my mouth. Don't, okay?

These experts are obviously saying it's poor for a good reason, yes?

you did say that they will get very sick or even die within 6 days.. what have you split personality???

Originally posted by turbonium1
To venture into deep space without any radiation shielding would cause severe illness, even death...probably within a few days. A human can't go into deep space) without adequate shielding, for just that reason.
So what would happen if you had no shield? Within a week, you'd likely be sick or dead.
What would happen if the radiation was intensified? The heath effects would be even more severe, obviously.
Aluminum intensifies radiation in deep space.
Apollo was primarily made of aluminum.
These basic facts show why Apollo was a hoax...
www.abovetopsecret.com...

they say its poor because the limits imposed for one year is 0.5Sv or 50 cSv.. the data from 1977 solar minimum (a non apollo lunar mission) gives us 91cSv/year at the BFO levels.. thats about 1.8 times over the limit for a thin aluminium sheet they need more than 30g/cm2 inorder to be under the limit, which is uneconomical.. seriously its not difficult to understand..

reply to post by turbonium1


Do you have any idea how long it took to film the weightless scenes for that movie on the plane? They'd still be filming missions to this day if they tried to film the moon missions on it.

Again you show you don't comprehend what you read. Astronauts would spend between seven and fourteen days on the moon before coming back to earth. Apollo 17 spent 22 hours in EVA. So how exactly is that "only two days longer"?

Originally posted by choos
reply to post by SayonaraJupiter

 

front screen projection is a lie..

you have been lied to:

What you probably really meant to say was - "front screen projection is probably a lie."
and - "you have probably been lied to."

There, I fixed that for you.

Originally posted by SayonaraJupiter

What you probably really meant to say was - "front screen projection is probably a lie."
and - "you have probably been lied to."

There, I fixed that for you.

werent you just telling me they were using front screen projection method to do the wide pans during the apollo missions?

Originally posted by choos

[the apollo lunar data are used as reference you can reference the accumulated radiation with actual figures and see that they are very much in line with each other.. go look at your reports and compare them to the accumulated data from the apollo flights and you will see they do show similarities much more so then showing what you claim.

Why do you think they "show similarities"?

Because they use the SAME numbers!!

If it's based on Apollo data, what do you expect?

Don't you realize what you're saying?

Originally posted by choos

so according to you, since apollo's acculumated radiation data is similar to the reports (which is advocated by every scientist and engineer) it means that it is garbage and that you have the authority to make up your own figures?

I've told you many times - as I just did again - a report cannot validly corroborate Apollo's data by using the very same Apollo data!

You actually think it is "advocated by every scientist and engineer"??!!

Most reports barely mention Apollo at all, or ignore it completely.

What about this report? Do you know where they got these numbers? Tell me about it...

Originally posted by choos

is it or is it not true that you made the wild claim that they will get very sick or even die within 6 days?

You don't even know if it's true?

Why don't you show the post(s) where I said it?

If it's true, you can easily prove it, right?

So let's see it...

Originally posted by choos

you did say that they will get very sick or even die within 6 days.. what have you split personality???

Originally posted by turbonium1
To venture into deep space without any radiation shielding would cause severe illness, even death...probably within a few days. A human can't go into deep space) without adequate shielding, for just that reason.
So what would happen if you had no shield? Within a week, you'd likely be sick or dead.
What would happen if the radiation was intensified? The heath effects would be even more severe, obviously.
Aluminum intensifies radiation in deep space.
Apollo was primarily made of aluminum.
These basic facts show why Apollo was a hoax...
www.abovetopsecret.com...

This is your evidence ? Are you serious?


Do you think you'd be perfectly safe and healthy in deep space without any shielding for up to six days?

Answer that, then I'll continue...

Originally posted by turbonium1
This is your evidence ? Are you serious?


Do you think you'd be perfectly safe and healthy in deep space without any shielding for up to six days?

Answer that, then I'll continue...

seriously?? evidence?? are you crazy or what?? this is what you said:

The experts don't say what would happen to you if you went into deep space with an aluminum craft. Nor did I. You assumed I said what would happen - 'instant death, etc. I didn't say that - you put words in my mouth. Don't, okay?
www.abovetopsecret.com...

i was directly replying to the part where you say i am putting words in your mouth.. this is exactly what you said in the past:

Originally posted by turbonium1
To venture into deep space without any radiation shielding would cause severe illness, even death...probably within a few days. A human can't go into deep space) without adequate shielding, for just that reason.
So what would happen if you had no shield? Within a week, you'd likely be sick or dead.
What would happen if the radiation was intensified? The heath effects would be even more severe, obviously.
Aluminum intensifies radiation in deep space.
Apollo was primarily made of aluminum.
These basic facts show why Apollo was a hoax...
www.abovetopsecret.com...

word for word.. you said they will get gravely sick or even die within a week.. and according to you using aluminium is worse than having no shield at all.

and yes regarding GCR's, 6 days in deep space you do not need a shield.

provide me with your magical numbers and not wild claims that GCR's are higher than what the experts say and publish, because frankly i believe an experts claims over a lunatic making wild claims. counter what the experts have published with your magical levels of GCR's that are so astronomically high they will make someone seriously ill or even die within a week.

that is your wild claim with no proof what so ever, so if you want anyone to believe your wild claim then you have to show some proof and not mere speculation because people will believe an expert more than a raving lunatic.

Originally posted by turbonium1

Originally posted by choos

is it or is it not true that you made the wild claim that they will get very sick or even die within 6 days?

You don't even know if it's true?

Why don't you show the post(s) where I said it?

If it's true, you can easily prove it, right?

So let's see it...

edit on 28-7-2013 by turbonium1 because: (no reason given)

wow you make things easy for me:

Originally posted by turbonium1
To venture into deep space without any radiation shielding would cause severe illness, even death...probably within a few days. A human can't go into deep space) without adequate shielding, for just that reason.
So what would happen if you had no shield? Within a week, you'd likely be sick or dead.
What would happen if the radiation was intensified? The heath effects would be even more severe, obviously.
Aluminum intensifies radiation in deep space.
Apollo was primarily made of aluminum.
These basic facts show why Apollo was a hoax...
www.abovetopsecret.com...

straight from your own post. you stated that they will get seriously ill, even die within a week. or do you want to deny reality yet again?

Originally posted by turbonium1

Why do you think they "show similarities"?

Because they use the SAME numbers!!

If it's based on Apollo data, what do you expect?

Don't you realize what you're saying?

luny.. they are not based on apollo data.. which apollo lunar mission occured in 1977?? that should be proof enough they are not using apollo data.

and i dont expect you to be able to compare them, you have a serious lacking in primary school maths it seems.

I've told you many times - as I just did again - a report cannot validly corroborate Apollo's data by using the very same Apollo data!

You actually think it is "advocated by every scientist and engineer"??!!

the people who wrote the bloody report are scientists.. they are the ones who have published the data.. therefore they are advocating the data, therefore they are corroborating the data from the reports.. im positive you dont know this, but reports that are published are generally peer reviewed before publishing.. so its not only the scientists that have written the report but also the peers who have reviewed the report who are also advocating the report which has the data in it.

now you are directly saying that the data is faulty.. what gives you the authority to say such things?? where is your data?? prove that the data in the report is wrong.. otherwise you are just another raving lunatic.

Most reports barely mention Apollo at all, or ignore it completely.
What about this report? Do you know where they got these numbers? Tell me about it...

they have received the data from the multiple satellites and probes that were designed to measure the radiation in deep space.

Originally posted by choos

werent you just telling me they were using front screen projection method to do the wide pans during the apollo missions?

Didn't you just try to explain the Eagle/Orion locations by quoting a NASA site that makes it clear that NASA doesn't know where these modules are located?

So it looks like 2 out of 6 manned ascent modules can't be accounted for -- a whopping total of 33% missing modules.

That means NASA's claims for scientific precision and engineering accuracy are true B*S* X 33% = FRAUD.

Originally posted by SayonaraJupiter

Didn't you just try to explain the Eagle/Orion locations by quoting a NASA site that makes it clear that NASA doesn't know where these modules are located?

So it looks like 2 out of 6 manned ascent modules can't be accounted for -- a whopping total of 33% missing modules.

That means NASA's claims for scientific precision and engineering accuracy are true B*S* X 33% = FRAUD.

you seem to have NASA confused with GOD.. NASA is a human run organisation.. as much as you want NASA to be perfect, they are not.

reply to post by choos


Eagle, remained in lunar orbit "indefinitely".
Orion, crash landed on the moon "approximately" a year later.

That's the final score. What that means is they can go get the Eagle bring it back for the museums! Right?

Originally posted by SayonaraJupiter
reply to post by choos

 

Eagle, remained in lunar orbit "indefinitely".
Orion, crash landed on the moon "approximately" a year later.

That's the final score. What that means is they can go get the Eagle bring it back for the museums!

Right?

probably.. if they wanted to and had the funding.. and assuming its orbit did not decay in 40+ years.. but we already have lunar modules on display..

Originally posted by choos
probably.. if they wanted to and had the funding.. and assuming its orbit did not decay in 40+ years.. but we already have lunar modules on display..

Would you rather change the subject to the Nazis? Or to NASA/ASU removing the cross-hairs from Apollo images?

Originally posted by SayonaraJupiter

Would you rather change the subject to the Nazis? Or to NASA/ASU removing the cross-hairs from Apollo images?

you can if you want, but non of it really matters as its only wild speculation.. facts remain that they didnt really have the technology to film it all.

Originally posted by SayonaraJupiter

Originally posted by choos

werent you just telling me they were using front screen projection method to do the wide pans during the apollo missions?

Didn't you just try to explain the Eagle/Orion locations by quoting a NASA site that makes it clear that NASA doesn't know where these modules are located?

That means NASA's claims for scientific precision and engineering accuracy are true B*S* X 33% = FRAUD.

I don't understand why you would draw that conclusion. Surely they only apply their rigour to things they care about knowing? It's like you saying I can't do maths because I haven't added up my exact expenditure on fruit in the year 2006. I could do it, I just don't want or need to.

Originally posted by JuniorDisco
I don't understand why you would draw that conclusion. Surely they only apply their rigour to things they care about knowing? It's like you saying I can't do maths because I haven't added up my exact expenditure on fruit in the year 2006. I could do it, I just don't want or need to.

I find it fairly interesting that I've been debating Apollo Defenders for two years here on ATS and there are so many smart and clever people among your numbers but this question seems to stump all of you.

It's like you all hang your heads in shame in unison because you don't know where the Eagle and Orion are located... then trying to push it off like nobody is interested.

Well I know for a fact that people are interested in every single last detail of Apollo and I know that because those people come here to defend Apollo. But the Eagle 11 and Orion 16 ascent modules is like black ops territory for you. Don't ask, don't tell seems to apply in this situation.

What kind of science is that? Pseudo-science or propaganda science?