Take Your Best Shot: The Moon Landings Were A HOAX!

page: 14
21
<< 11  12  13    15  16  17 >>

log in

join

posted on Dec, 16 2012 @ 10:58 PM
link   
The photo I saw early with the LM in one shot and not in the other, it appears the LM was photoshopped out or the angle of the two photos are different. Other images showing shadow irregularities doesn't take into account the topography of the scene. Also, since there is no atmosphere on the moon then objects that appear close and small are actually very large and far away.

Take this video for example of the astronauts walking up to the House Rock survey area:


Here are a couple of detailed images of House Rock and the surrounding rock field. Although the debri looks artificial in some aspects, most geologist say it is nothing more than rocks that have undergone extreme shock fracturing.

Photo one - High Resolution image of House Rock and surrounding debri field:



Photo Two - Same area but more distant with Astronaut, John Young in the foreground:




I strongly believe the US landed astronauts on the Moon spanning the late 60s up to 1975 with the last mission of Apollo 17. There is too much evidence to support it. The reason NASA didn't send anymore manned moon landings is because they were funded to do something else. Also, the reason the camera is moving is because it is being controlled by ground control in Houston.
edit on 16-12-2012 by eManym because: (no reason given)




posted on Dec, 17 2012 @ 06:54 AM
link   
reply to post by SayonaraJupiter
 



So you are admitting that the Apollo program is not based on the scientific method?


No, I'm trying to point out that historical methodology differs from research in the physical sciences. In historical research, the primary tools are archival and archaeological materials. The Apollo program is one of the best documented series of events in human history, and has left some of the most impressive physical traces.



posted on Dec, 17 2012 @ 10:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by DJW001
reply to post by SayonaraJupiter
 



So you are admitting that the Apollo program is not based on the scientific method?


No, I'm trying to point out that historical methodology differs from research in the physical sciences. In historical research, the primary tools are archival and archaeological materials. The Apollo program is one of the best documented series of events in human history, and has left some of the most impressive physical traces.


It's interesting that you would describe Apollo as " one of the best documented series of events in human history".

Would you like to know why I find that interesting? Because that's the same way modern scholars have described the Presidency of Richard M Nixon. According to outside experts:


" President Nixon's administration is the best-documented Presidency in American history, " Professor Weinstein added. "It will be an important destination for anyone interested in the Cold War, in U.S. relations with China and the Soviet Union, the Vietnam War and its impact at home, dramatic changes in the nation's economy, in the history of the Watergate scandal, and in the history of the Presidency. Source www.archives.gov...



Richard Nixon's ultimate legacy will not rest entirely upon the secret, but legal, tapes he made from February 1971 to July 1973. These tapes, however, combined with the 40 million pages of documents which constitute his presidential papers will make Nixon's administration the best documented in U.S. history. Source www.watergate.com...



" Nixon has left perhaps the best-documented presidency because of the tapes, and because he wrote a lot," Naftali said. Source articles.latimes.com...


That's 3 outside sources. Now, here is 1 inside source, one Mr. H.R. Halderman:


Part 5 H. R. Haldeman: Notes of White House Meetings, 1969–1973
As the President’s chief of staff from January 1969 through May 1973—and as Nixon’s most trusted aide—H. R. Haldeman attended innumerable White House meetings and was privy to almost every political decision that Richard Nixon made. Haldeman’s extensive and meticulous handwritten notes of these meetings —from one-on-one discussions with Nixon; to formal policy sessions attended by Nixon, his advisers, and aides; to strategy sessions with other staff members and cabinet officials—provide the quintessential inside view of the administration.


So - where are the sources for your NASA fanboy claim that "The Apollo program is one of the best documented series of events in human history "? Do you have any sources for that?

That's a pretty bold claim for any Apollo believer to make, don't you think so? And yet, you didn't even give any sources to back up it up. It's just your opinion.



posted on Dec, 18 2012 @ 02:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by SayonaraJupiter


So - where are the sources for your NASA fanboy claim that "The Apollo program is one of the best documented series of events in human history "? Do you have any sources for that?

That's a pretty bold claim for any Apollo believer to make, don't you think so? And yet, you didn't even give any sources to back up it up. It's just your opinion.


It's hard to believe that someone who has put a lot of energy into 'proving' something can be so unaware of the existence of everything related to that subject. How is it possible?
That is so intellectually lazy it is staggering.

HERE. Apollo Lunar Surface Journal


Starting with Apollo 11, here's a list of some of the documented material you can expect to peruse at your leisure -

Background Material

Crew & CapComs
Overview
Summary
Photo Index - 7 Mb
Image Library
Photogrammetric Mapping
A11 Anaglyphs
Video and Movies
Mission Audio
Post-flight Press Conference Audio
Technical Debriefing
Mission Report
Preliminary Science Report
Voice Transcript Pertaining to Geology (2 Mb)
Crew Training Summaries
Press Kit
EASEP Handbook for the Crew (11 Mb)
EASEP Press Backgrounder
PSEP Drawing with Dimensions
LM-5 Structures
Flight Plans
Mission Rules
Final Lunar Surface Procedures
LM Checklists
As-Flown CM/LM Stowage
Sample Catalog
Contingency Sample
Neil's Flown Suit - Photos
Buzz's Flown Suit - Photos
Post-flight report Suit/PLSS/etc Performance
Neil Armstrong 2001 Oral History Interview
Congressional Addresses, 16 September 1969
Hasselblad Cameras
Bill Wood - Apollo TV Essay
The Apollo 11 Telemetry Data Recordings: A Final Report (0.6 Mb PDF)
TV and Communications Documentation
Processing and Duplication of Apollo 11 Film, 25 July 1969 memo from Gilruth, 0.8 Mb PDF
Photography Reference
Apollo 11 Trajectory Analysis ( 5 Mb PDF )
LM Descent and Ascent Trajectories
Descent and Ascent Photomaps
Raw Voice Transcripts

The Journal

Apollo Flight Journal: The First Part of the Mission
The First Lunar Landing
Post-landing Activities
EVA Preparations
One Small Step
Mobility and Photography
EASEP Deployment and Closeout
Trying to Rest
The Return to Orbit
Apollo Flight Journal: The Remainder of the Mission

Enjoy. Should only take a few months.
edit on 18-12-2012 by delusion because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 18 2012 @ 06:51 AM
link   
There is an article out there that I will have to go hunting for that upon reading makes one ashamed for ever having believed in such lunacy.

I appreciate the magnitude of this part of history and I believe the lie achieved a lot of good for a whole lot of people, conspiracy or not,

But when faced with the real engineering problems, the things that had to be overcome in order to accomplish even getting near the moom letalone landing, and as a people we seem to have simply forgotten the technology that was used to perform such miracles or thought better of making good use of it in the fifty years since, the idea of the whole thing is completely absurd.

Moon Landing = Hoax. PERIOD.

I'll find the article and come back. Honestly anyone who reads it finds themselves palming not just their own face.



ALREADY FOUND: This links you to a fabulous piece of work and in your own time you will see how we have all been

Wagging The Moon Doggie
edit on 18-12-2012 by kaptabs because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 18 2012 @ 06:55 AM
link   
reply to post by kaptabs
 



Moon Landing = Hoax. PERIOD.


That's your best argument? Do try to exert just a little effort, please.



posted on Dec, 18 2012 @ 07:20 AM
link   
reply to post by kaptabs
 

What will it take for you to accept that we did go to the Moon?
Please give us details.



posted on Dec, 18 2012 @ 10:26 AM
link   
reply to post by DJW001
 


No, my argument is that of another contained within the article I linked to.

I was neither here nor there prior to looking into 9/11 as I was born in 1982 and not in America so I wasn't ever caught up in the Moon hysteria. However looking into it and asking the same questions as everyone else resulted in finding the article linked in my post above. It was surreal as it became clear the moon landing was a definitive hoax. It was sad also as I confirmed, through blind belief in the official story, I had indeed become a simple TV child.

Seriously, read the article, the whole conspiracy is over, and it’s so simple. We concentrate on any number of wacky theories to prove or disprove everything and yet, the moon landing needs none of it. It is blatant. There is no chance it happened because during the late 60's, the technology was simply unable to manage the job. In fact, as of today, now, it still cannot be done or we have been shown no evidence of the required technology anyhow

Issues include

Radiation

Qty of fuel required,

Size of space shuttle required (just for the fuel needed unless a special kind was used that had never been seen before, or mentioned ever thereafter, as to get the astronauts to the moon AND BACK, within the given timeframe, and in the small ship used, was simply not possible with the type of fuel available. Nor would such a mission be possible now if attempting to recreate the Apollo missions exactly how we are told they were done.)

The odds of getting EVERYTHING RIGHT AT THE VERY FIRST TIME OF ASKING EVER were so astronomically improbable that to entertain such a thing would be like legitimately considering suicide in front of a watching world, while of sound mind, with a good marriage, loving and happy kids, a generally happy outlook, and despite nothing to gain. Included in the list of impossible subtasks were things like actually getting to the moon, landing on the moon surface having never practiced the manoeuvre before and in untraveled conditions. If this was achieved, next was enduring the ridiculous temperature extremes on the moon relying on convenient predictability to stave off certain death, and lest we forget, straight after and with absolute perfection, the NEVER BEFORE ATTEMPTED blast off from the moon surface was needed to dock again with the magic shuttle, and, again, AT THE VERY FIRST TIME OF ASKING. If just one thing went wrong during any stage death was a guarantee, yet none of what was required had been even attempted and every single mission variable were the products of mathematical workings based on best guesses while on EARTH, and with no chance of even a single test run.

It is pertinent here to remember all of this needed to be done with equipment that during testing was labelled catastrophic by the astronauts, problems lasting until just a few WEEKS prior to launch

The cameras used could not produce the images posed as real so says the designer. The camera being attached to the astronauts presented real limitations, the first that the viewfinder could not be used so ALL images resulted from luck. Indeed some shots said authentic would have required detail with focus, ratios, depth of field, etc. so can be immediately dismissed. Worse, as the cameras were chest height and unmoveable, it was only possible to take pictures directly in front and at one particular height. Therefore, this needed taking into account for every picture increasing the requirement of luck in getting good images. However not one image bears the hallmark of this issue yet, conservatively, 33% at least, of authentic images should. At no time can we find evidence of the scenery slipping up or down as would have been caused by frequent unexpected movements in the foreign environment. The realistic number of images affected by the limitations would have been closer to 70% yet there are none, it is as if these problems were not catered for. Finally, one particular image, lauded for its majesty, reflects an astronaut taking a picture within the visor of the other. The reflection shows that the camera taking the picture is at a ludicrous angle relative to the end result. It is too low and, as if to compensate, appears to aim slightly upwards. At best we have possible doctoring, however, that the camera is out of position we can only conclude that the spacesuit worn is not as was designed for the moon, because if it were the camera simply would not aim anywhere but directly straight ahead. This is a huge problem.

I have done my best to explain for the benefit of the thread but the article itself paints by numbers and the list of problems goes on and on.

The work is fully sourced and every question posed is worthy of EUREKA postulations.

The article is linked above. If you still believe this nonsense you owe it to yourself to give it a read



posted on Dec, 18 2012 @ 01:29 PM
link   
a very interesting video i have just discovered.

edit on 18-12-2012 by SkuzzleButt because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 18 2012 @ 02:53 PM
link   
reply to post by kaptabs
 


Since I only got to page two by the time I read the blatant lie about how moon rocks can be found on Earth and he's bringing up the "dutch moon rock". A story so absurd that even the hardcore moon hoax crowd stays away from it because even they can't connect a dutch art museum missidentifying a piece of petrified wood with the moon landing being fake.. You mention having originally taken the "official story" on blind faith. Why are you now taken this woefully inaccurate article on blind faith? Since this article is filled with "evidence" that has been debunked for decades, what would you say your top five most convincing point were? It's guaranteed that they've already been proven wrong ad nausem on ATS



posted on Dec, 18 2012 @ 04:13 PM
link   
reply to post by kaptabs
 

I have read the meanderings of David McGowan before and tried to read it again, since you went to the effort to posted the link. I had a to stop after the fifth paragraph and laugh. "The Dutch Moon Rock", what a hilarious and disingenuous artifact that was used to try and support that the Moon landings were a hoax.

I have a challenge for you. If you are really interested in learning and want to see both sides of the argument, this ATS thread is a good one to delve into.

Young Aussie genius whipping NASA in Moon Hoax Debate!

Yes it is 672 pages long and took almost 19 months to compile, but it exhaustively covers almost every aspect of David McGowan's piece called "Wagging the Moondoggie". I have read the entire thread and was able to post a few times myself before it was finally closed. It covers almost every argument presented so far against man landing on the Moon, including "The Dutch Moon Rock". It also strongly proves that man DID land on the Moon in the late 1960's. The compounding evidence is overwhelming in favor of man landing on the Moon.

Also, using your theory of whether man has been to the Moon. TV could not have been invented in 1923, publically demonstrated in 1925, and in public use by 1929 because technology was so primitive in the 1920's. It's unconceivable to think people actually saw a TV picture in 1925.

But, hey, it was all the fore runner of what ever screen device you are using to read this comment. Seems landing on the Moon isn't so far fetched after all.



posted on Dec, 18 2012 @ 09:35 PM
link   
reply to post by delusion
 



It's hard to believe that someone who has put a lot of energy into 'proving' something can be so unaware of the existence of everything related to that subject. How is it possible?
That is so intellectually lazy it is staggering.


You know what's intellectually lazy?? Going over to ALSJ (like you did) and copy/pasting the indexes from ALSJ (like you did)_ into your post. Now that's intellectually lazy.

Maybe you can find 4 sources (3 external, 1 internal) that backs up DJW's claim of "The Apollo program is one of the best documented series of events in human history "?

I did it easily enough for Richard Nixon. It should be easy for you to do the same for Apollo. Right?



posted on Dec, 18 2012 @ 09:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by SayonaraJupiter
It should be easy for you to do the same for Apollo. Right?


He HAS done it for Apollo, but as it totally destroys your silly conspiracy theory you are not interested in the facts.



posted on Dec, 18 2012 @ 10:05 PM
link   
reply to post by SkuzzleButt
 


Well that's an interesting video. I always had my doubts about the Svector video and the story that went along with it. I figured that Svector was just a very clever youtube troll. And I always viewed his video with great suspicion.



In my opinion the Svector video and the video you posted deserve to be analyzed quite closely.



posted on Dec, 18 2012 @ 10:08 PM
link   
reply to post by captainpudding
 


Not on blind faith but because of the things that he wrote actually seeming to have value for me. I could never get on board with all this desperate reaching for the letter C left on rocks, weird shadow effects indicating the toilet light had been left on or whatever, or even, the Flag, my word, its waving very slightly for 2 or 3 seconds, and, in fact, if I just loop it for a further 45 seconds more and throw in the two keywords "No Gravity" at the end of each sentence then we definitely have a need to investigate.

That stuff was so forced and petty I used to just pass over it and carry on. There may be validity there on the surface but it gets to a point when people just use their effort trying to win arguments and forget it is the truth they are after and not righteousness. So, I figured there was no point in arguing and lost interest, until I read McGowan. In fact it’s very similar to the whole 9/11 thing; we all know the official story is nonsense but people have become content to tell themselves they are trying to push things forward when they have, in fact, actually dug themselves a cosy hole slap bang in the middle of the 9/11 entity from where they argue merrily about the small stuff again. The 9/11 movement is screwed when you watch as people continue forgetting what they were trying to do in the first place and have become bogged down in a never-ending argument about the exact diameter of the third cylindrical brick ejected from the pentagon when the bearded man made the small hole, no, a bomb went off in the second levee baluster and caused a lesion, actually, it was 7 1/2 Jewish/Reptilian crossbred humanity missiles that collapsed an entire wing, although, ultimately we all know it was simply a Commercial Jet draped in an invisibility cloak that was so special not because of its magical powers but because it was two for the price of one as if needed the cloak could also shrink the size of any object using its power at the exact moment that it may come into contact with a wall at high speed. Nailed it. Oh, and Lucifer and his son laughed when it happened, they were especially worried earlier as they had forgotten to buy new batteries for their remote controller and weren’t sure they would hold out but they had.

Whatever, the truth movement and conspiracy theorists are easy targets these days as we are so quick to cave in to the frustration of it all and just argue about absolutely nothing of any consequence ultimately. What we have always needed to do is look at what we do have and what we do know and decide when as a people we are going to stand up together and say no more. When are we going to realise that the Big Bad Wolf is only big and bad until someone Bigger and Badder comes along, or lots of tiny pissed off things that won’t quit. Either scenario sees the wolf defeated but everyone is too damn happy arguing. Bush, Cheney, Rice, Powell, and others, and all their financiers, should all have been strung up by now. As Bush Senior wrote in his memoirs, if we woke up to what they have done and continue to do to us we would lynch them and drag them down the street.

But, the Pentagon looks like a good topic for today, any new theories??

Sorry to tangent wildly there but I was trying to make a point. I cannot stand todays Conspiracy Theorist as they are appear as tiny versions of exactly the things they claim to hate. Oppressed, scared to stand up for their rights, worried about MSM created nonsense like 2012, happy behind computers trying to win arguments as a sense of accomplishment, and all while claiming to be clamouring for the truth. Give me a break.

That is what I originally saw in the moon conspiracy but I guess now that it’s just a really tired one, and one that will always have staunch believers but also others with suspicions.

I am more than happy to have my mind expanded, that’s the most I feel it worth hoping for these days, to keep learning. So, if I have failed myself by not doing further research to make sure that these claims from McGowan are substantiated, resonating with me or not, then I owe it to myself to do just that. So, thanks for the advice, I will take it on board, have a read from the article the other chap has recommended below and consider the other side’s to McGowan’s assertions.

Thanks again.



posted on Dec, 18 2012 @ 10:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by hellobruce

Originally posted by SayonaraJupiter
It should be easy for you to do the same for Apollo. Right?


He HAS done it for Apollo, but as it totally destroys your silly conspiracy theory you are not interested in the facts.


I'm looking for 4 sources ( 3 external, 1 internal) that can support DJW001's claim that "The Apollo program is one of the best documented series of events in human history ".

If you can't provide the sources then you should probably refrain from posting about the sources that you don't have. It just makes you look ridiculous.
edit on 12/18/2012 by SayonaraJupiter because: edited for clarity



posted on Dec, 19 2012 @ 12:07 AM
link   
reply to post by Gibborium
 


Hey, thanks for the response, I am going to spend the evening looking at this so thanks again.

As I have said in a reply above I like that others havce lkooked at McGowan and found alternative views. He was very enlightening for me but if alternative ideas exist I would like to hear them. Besides, if nothing else, he asks the right sort of questions imo. Most issues of note seem to get bogged down these days with never ending arguments about inconsequential details that even if an answer could be found, it would not further the cause while the real questions remain neglected by this asinine nonsense.

I think McGowan hit for me because his questions had real answers and final opinions could be made using the data. If the same questions have alternative consideration or even if things like the Dutch Moon Rock not actually having any relevance as you appear to be suggesting then I should know that for sure so I look forward to reading the information in the link you provided.

As for the TV thing you mentioned, just to cover that.....
I am not sure I understand what you are saying or whether you understand me entirely.

The first thing that seems extremely weird is the fuel issue. The first Apollo shuttle clocked over 622,000 miles and it used just ONE TANK OF GAS. How is that possible? If this was some sort of super concentrated, 50 % oil, 50% ammonia, petrol never seen before, it’s a real shame we lost it as were the moon mission not be a hoax whatever they used as fuel could make gas stations obsolete. 622,000 miles worth of gas does not fit into a shuttle the size of that used for Apollo. End of story.

Ok, so not crap at the time; the pocket calculator was first released a short while AFTER the first APOLLO mission, AFTER. You did hear that correctly, yes.

It seems we can create magic space shuttles with fuel that goes a very long way using slithers only and yet we have only just designed a calculator felt small enough to be used as an everyday office item. There has never been any explanation of acknowledgement for these miracles either. Where are they now? The calculator was regarded highly enough it stayed for forty odd years, magic shuttles and effective fuel just didn’t make the cut?

If we consider the TV’s as you outline, they were hideous things at the time, barely holding a black and white picture for some people. Yet we had shuttles and fuel operating to specifications the like we had never seen before, never seen since either though to be fair.

We also had super and magical astronauts too don’t forget. These were amazing beings capable of taking on any challenge always prevailing. These guys were so incredible they often took on new, highly dangerous, challenges, four and five at a time. These guys became so good at one point they were taking on five new challenges in the space of a few days while on the moon, never before and never again.

Maybe a little less acid and we could still have all of this as it is the only excuse I could offer as to why NASA has managed to LOSE EVERY SINGLE APOLLO FILE. All of the plans, designs, analysis, flight data, EVERYTHING, SIMPLY LOST AT SOME POINT DURING THE 1970’s. And, despite thorough searches lasting in excess of a year for the longest, the 700 rolls of data have been officially recorded now as lost files. Do me a break, this is nonsense.

The final important piece of the puzzle regarding the technology question is the lack of evidence that any technology evolution occurred allowing for these special shuttles or a new fuel. In fact patterns and trends suggest that we are actually somehow less capable now than we were then as it is beginning to feel very much like we cannot replicate what we managed in the 1960’s as we seem hugely reluctant, maybe unable, to put man back on the moon, in fact we haven’t since the last Apollo mission about forty years ago now.

There are always probes going left and right, the Rover is on Mars etc, with NASA, Europe, China, and, of course, Russia, all still showing interest in space with active programs. And yet, no one has yet, or even appears to be trying to, put another man on the moon, and make some more headway here. The last Apollo mission, over forty years ago, was the last time man supposedly went to the moon. 40 YEARS AGO. No one, other than the very occasional grumble from the US, is even hinting at trying, it is like the notion is some kind of forbidden fruit. Or, maybe it is just common knowledge among leaders that at the moment, it simply cannot be done?

Anyway, longwinded answer to a straightforward question, did you even ask a question? Oh well.

I, like all of us I am sure, can get quite passionate with this stuff. Hopefully the link you gave me might help me rein that in a little, and with that I am off to start it now. Bring on alternative theories and maybe I can untie some



posted on Dec, 19 2012 @ 07:59 AM
link   
reply to post by SayonaraJupiter
 



I'm looking for 4 sources ( 3 external, 1 internal) that can support DJW001's claim that "The Apollo program is one of the best documented series of events in human history ".

If you can't provide the sources then you should probably refrain from posting about the sources that you don't have. It just makes you look ridiculous.


lmgtfy.com...



posted on Dec, 19 2012 @ 08:08 AM
link   
reply to post by kaptabs
 


Your question about fuel?

You remember the spacecraft "Voyager 1" right? Launched 35 years ago, and has traveled, what? 11.3 billion miles from the sun. How much fuel do you think it was carrying?



posted on Dec, 19 2012 @ 08:16 AM
link   
reply to post by kaptabs
 



The first thing that seems extremely weird is the fuel issue. The first Apollo shuttle clocked over 622,000 miles and it used just ONE TANK OF GAS. How is that possible?




Once the spacecraft (it was not a "shuttle") was hurled away from the Earth towards the Moon, it coasted all the way. In the vacuum of space, its motion was governed entirely by Newton's laws of motion. Please read up on them.

As for pocket calculators, I don't see how that is relevant. They had large mainframe computers on Earth to calculate the trajectory. Even without them, you could work things out with a device called a "slide rule." It requires no external input devices like keyboards, is completely portable and requires no electricity.





new topics
top topics
 
21
<< 11  12  13    15  16  17 >>

log in

join