Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Apollo's Broken Leg, and Other Moon Hoax Worthy Discussion Points

page: 1
16
<<   2 >>

log in

join

posted on Nov, 29 2012 @ 02:13 PM
link   
Not a topic I expect to get a lot of flags and stars for.
But a topic that I hope will generate a lot of discussion.

Especially after seeing this challenge:

Take Your Best Shot: The Moon Landings Were A HOAX!
www.abovetopsecret.com...

I would like to share these videos I made for ATS to scrutinize.
I hope, for many, these red flags that I have discovered, will
be new for you.

The first video has to do with what appears to be a broken leg on the LM.
www.youtube.com...

The next three are part of a series focusing on video and photo discrepancies.
Part 1
www.youtube.com...

Part 2
www.youtube.com...

Part 3
www.youtube.com...

Part 4
Coming soon... if I ever get the time.

Enjoy!




posted on Nov, 29 2012 @ 02:46 PM
link   
Gave you star!

Basically i am trying to get to 20 posts so i can start a thread


I don't have much to say on the subject other then very interesting. I think its one of those things that no matter how much we dig or try we will never know the truth, even if the truth did come out, a lot of people wouldn't believe it.



posted on Nov, 29 2012 @ 03:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by andy420
Gave you star!

Basically i am trying to get to 20 posts so i can start a thread


I don't have much to say on the subject other then very interesting. I think its one of those things that no matter how much we dig or try we will never know the truth, even if the truth did come out, a lot of people wouldn't believe it.


That works both ways. It doesn't matter which is the truth--hoax or no hoax. One bunch will believe it; the other won't. I have a feeling that even if we sent a manned mission to the moon for the specific purpose of gathering the proof of past landings, there are still some who would yell fake. Or CGI. Or conspiracy of one kind or another.

I've given up arguing about it. I sometimes watch from the sidelines. But I'm too worn out to argue anymore. I'll continue to privately believe what I believe, and to hell with everybody else....

Edit: Oh, by the way: Welcome to ATS, andy420. Be sure your tinfoil hat is tightly screwed on. See you around the forums....
edit on 11/29/2012 by Ex_CT2 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 29 2012 @ 04:50 PM
link   
reply to post by FoosM
 


Nice job putting together the video

No small task getting the footage together like you did.

That said is it not possible that the entire weight of the LM was resting on the other 3 legs due to surface irregularities on the moon leaving the one leg basically floating above the lunar surface by an inch or 2?

That would seem the simplest answer to me, but I'm certainly no expert despite watching every lunar landing as a kid and building models of the Apollo rocket and LEM.



posted on Nov, 29 2012 @ 05:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by Asktheanimals
reply to post by FoosM
 


Nice job putting together the video

No small task getting the footage together like you did.

That said is it not possible that the entire weight of the LM was resting on the other 3 legs due to surface irregularities on the moon leaving the one leg basically floating above the lunar surface by an inch or 2?

That would seem the simplest answer to me, but I'm certainly no expert despite watching every lunar landing as a kid and building models of the Apollo rocket and LEM.


Thanks!

Assuming the LM was supporting most of its weight on three legs.
The astronaut(s) should not be able to lift the loose leg because it was held in place
by two side struts.

Lifting the leg would mean that entire LM was being lifted, or, the struts were broken.
Either way, the LM would topple.



posted on Nov, 29 2012 @ 05:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by andy420
Gave you star!

Basically i am trying to get to 20 posts so i can start a thread


I don't have much to say on the subject other then very interesting. I think its one of those things that no matter how much we dig or try we will never know the truth, even if the truth did come out, a lot of people wouldn't believe it.


Thanks, we will never get 100% of the population to believe in a story.
Which is fine, because sometimes that small percent is actually closer to the truth than the majority.
But who is to judge was is true and what is not true?

Only the persons involved can say.
But, they can lie.

Its a conundrum.



posted on Nov, 29 2012 @ 06:02 PM
link   
Just finished reading your thread and watching the videos, I for one can't wait for part 4 and It sure makes you wonder and then some.

The collapsing knee pocket made me sit up and take notice.

Excellent thread and S&F

Regards, Iwinder



posted on Nov, 29 2012 @ 07:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by FoosM

Assuming the LM was supporting most of its weight on three legs.
The astronaut(s) should not be able to lift the loose leg because it was held in place
by two side struts.


Touche! You had obviously thought through all the common possible explanations before you made your post.
Maybe I should learn to do the same.


Score one for logic.
edit on 29-11-2012 by Asktheanimals because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 30 2012 @ 12:00 AM
link   
Bravo FoosM! Your editing is superb. The ladder moved both times, for Dave Scott and for Jim Irwin. And Irwin's comment seals the deal:



posted on Nov, 30 2012 @ 04:32 PM
link   
Im very surprised you dont have more comments here. I appreciate the fact of all the time you seem to have put into this and you did a great job.

I myself am of two minds about this whole thing with the moon visit. Oddly like ufos, with all the thousands of videos and photos and even project bluebook themselves saying a tiny percentage couldnt be explained, well, to me that just says they cant ALL be BS, and it only takes one to make the fact real. I think the odds of one real one in all that collection of data seems pretty good they are there. Even nasa themselves has some questionable footage from space.

My point though is, with all the things people seem to have found like you have, one does really have to wonder. Like another all different kinds of evidence, it cant ALL be wrong. So, even if one point is correct, then where does that leave us eh?

My flipside thoughts though stand with the men who went there supposedly. Some have actually come out and said yes there are ufos. Why wouldn't they take this next step and admit this as well? Ego? Threats? yada yada...

Anyway, thanks for taking the effort to bring this to the table



posted on Nov, 30 2012 @ 07:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by onehuman
Im very surprised you dont have more comments here. I appreciate the fact of all the time you seem to have put into this and you did a great job.

Anyway, thanks for taking the effort to bring this to the table


Thanks! Maybe I should try to embed the videos to make it easier for people to watch.



posted on Nov, 30 2012 @ 07:26 PM
link   
embedded for convenience

The first video has to do with what appears to be a broken leg on the LM.


The next three are part of a series focusing on video and photo discrepancies.
Part 1 -


Part 2


Part 3



posted on Nov, 30 2012 @ 09:39 PM
link   
Here is the pertinent sections of the Apollo 15 transcript, as supplied by the ALSJ website.

They talk about the footpad, but they did't talk about the movement of the primary landing strut with the ladder welded to it. Dave Scott didn't seem to be bothered by it because he didn't mention it at all in the transcripts.

Even Jim Irwin seemed surprised that Scott didn't mention it.

This is taken from the first EVA.


119:55:45 Scott: Okay, Houston. As I stand out here in the wonders of the unknown at Hadley, I sort of realize there's a fundamental truth to our nature. Man must explore. (Pause) And this is exploration at its greatest. (Long Pause as Dave moves away from the TV camera) Well, I see why we're in a tilt. (Pause) We've got...(Laughs) That's very interesting. There's so much hummocky ground around here (that) we're on a slope of probably about 10 degrees. And the left-rear foot pad is probably about 2 feet lower than the right-rear foot pad. And the left-front's a little low too. But the LM looks like it's in good shape. The Rover's in good shape. (Pause)






120:03:04 Irwin: Boy, that front pad is really loose, isn't it?
120:03:09 Scott: Yeah.

[Jones - "I gather that the footpad was able to gimbal a little bit around the leg."]

[Irwin - "They were designed that way (to accommodate the uneven surface). We'd never manipulated them, we'd never fooled with them (in training or at the factory), because we always thought that, when we got to the (lunar) surface, all four would be soundly, firmly on the surface."]

[Jones - "And this one wasn't. It was dangling in the air..."]

[Irwin - "As I remember, it wasn't on the surface. So, when I came down, I hit on the lip of it - the rim of it - and it rotated. I didn't recall that I'd said anything, but maybe I did. 'That footpad is really loose, isn't it?'"]

[Irwin - "I'm surprised Dave didn't say something as I disappeared there, as I went around the ladder. 'Cause you can see it in the film (and TV). "]


Did you notice how many times the Apollo Lunar Surface Journal adds words into Jim Irwin's mouth here? That's not real journalism. It's historical revisionism.
edit on 11/30/2012 by SayonaraJupiter because: tags



posted on Nov, 30 2012 @ 11:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by SayonaraJupiter

Did you notice how many times the Apollo Lunar Surface Journal adds words into Jim Irwin's mouth here? That's not real journalism. It's historical revisionism.
edit on 11/30/2012 by SayonaraJupiter because: tags


Thats right, this can be construed as a form of damage control.
They want to lead the reader away from the glaring problem at hand.
By either making it sound like a problem was addressed, or make you think
that what you have seen or heard wasn't a problem in the first place.

Youtube user hunbacked made a follow up video on the matter


In my view what we are seeing is a prop ladder.
In film production you simplify the sets based on shots you want to film.
The camera showing the astronauts coming down the ladder does not show the entire LM
it only shows the strut. So the production crew do not need to set up the shot
with an actual full scale LM in a large studio.
As this "fake" scene so effectively illustrates




posted on Dec, 3 2012 @ 09:47 PM
link   
Keeping in line with the subject of Apollo 15 for a minute, there is also another video anomaly on A15: the trans-Earth Tv press conference, which if one observes carefully, there are no floating objects in the video.


Some of us discussed it earlier this year in my thread Apollo 15, Jim Irwin's historical narrative in review
www.abovetopsecret.com...

What we found was that NASA's official timeline does not include any mention of this Tv press conference. And it looks like another case of historical revisionism. It's obvious that NASA is embarrassed by this particular piece of history and they don't want people to know about this Tv press conference because there are no floating objects in it!




posted on Dec, 7 2012 @ 06:34 PM
link   
No challenges to the videos.

Interesting.



posted on Dec, 7 2012 @ 06:53 PM
link   
Great thread S&F

Have you seen the "alligator" rock pictures? There's a thread on ATS. They drove the liner rover to the rim of the crater and the same alligator shaped rock is in the crater picture & the picture the day before at another location???

It was a movie set. I'm on my phone & can't post links at the moment. Check it out!



posted on Dec, 13 2012 @ 11:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by FoosM
No challenges to the videos.

Interesting.



>



"and Other Moon Hoax Worthy Discussion Points"


Let's begin a list of the various discussion points?

Keep Out Zones. What are they hiding? Are the landers for real but the footprints a lie?
No humans beyond LEO for 40 years. Radiation. Can it kill you in space?

CIA control of Apollo images. Automatic Red flag.
All the landings occur during Richard Nixon's first 4 years in office.
Howard Hughes "sensitive" financial arrangement with Nixon.
Hughes built the first communications satellites for phones and Hughes also built Surveyors and then promptly disappeared. Was he "producing" Apollo in the Nevada desert?
Were the nuclear tests in Nevada a way to keep people away from the movie sets?

CGI enhanced landing site images from LRO, courtesy of Arizona State University President Michael Crow, former executive at CIA front In-Q-Tel who stated:

Arizona State University President Michael Crow also sits on the board. “It’s all a little perplexing and overwhelming,” he said. “We’re in the business of trying to recruit more students from China. We’re operating at a total openness mode, while we recognize there are people working beyond the rules to acquire information.” Bloomberg www.bloomberg.com...


Nazis. Nazis. Nazis.

Missing Apollo telemetry tapes. 700+ boxes covering all missions. National Archives Accession #69A4099.

Medical miracles. Alan Shepard's labyrinthitis . Jim Irwin's strange air plane crash full recovery. Michael
Collins back and neck surgery with a 100% full recovery time of 6 months. And why would the Commander of Apollo 8 take a sleeping pill that could have incapacitated himself during a mission?

Moon rock inventories that never had "adequate controls". Missing moon rocks. Ex-NASA detective is currently on the search to locate all of Nixon's gift rocks... are they pieces of asphalt or volcano rocks encased in plastic?

Those two images of Stanley Kubrick together with Deke Slayton and George Mueller AND Arthur C. Clarke.

No floating objects in the Apollo 15 trans Earth coast TV interview.
The Genesis Rock in Sample Bag 196 switcheroo.
Dave Scott's fingertips.

Astronaut testimony in tapes, transcripts, interviews and appearances. When they say things like "it was unreal", "it looked like a Hollywood movie", "plaster of paris", "truth's protective layers", and at least one astronaut believes in a government cover up at Roswell.

It's kind of disorganized. I was just listing a few things off the top of my head.



posted on Dec, 28 2012 @ 05:34 AM
link   
The 30 Billion Dollar Scam

The sheer number of inexplicable anomalies and apparent impossibilities shown in some of the Apollo photos and videos has led me to the firm conclusion that they were not taken under the conditions that NASA has led us to believe.

Using photo and video editing software, it is often possible to detect how a photo or video was put together. Many of the NASA Apollo images and videos allegedly taken on the moon, show tell-tale signs of crude compositing and re-touching, as well as the use of studio lighting, stage backdrops, scale models, Scotchlite screens and even chroma-keying. These photographic and video anomalies alone are enough to cast serious doubt about whether they were taken on the lunar surface, but this represents only a small amount of the large body of evidence proving that Apollo moon landings, as shown in the official NASA archives, are an elaborate work of fiction.

From my observations, I have come to the conclusion that all of the 12 alleged moon walkers presented to us in the Apollo videos and photos, were actually played by the same two actors. From a production perspective, there would be no need for any more than 2 actors, as their faces would be hidden by a visor for all of the moon landing footage. They probably also used some audio and video footage of the real astronauts taken previously during training simulations. Most of the Apollo space program was real, including blast-off and splashdown. But the part about landing on the moon was fabricated.

As with all conspiracies of this magnitude, the only way the truth can ever come out is if the perpetrators openly admit what they did. Unfortunately, this rarely happens. However, if the Apollo landings were faked, there are a number of good reasons why the truth will come out soon. Firstly, there are many more space agencies on the planet than there were a few decades ago, that are all interested in exploring the moon. And some have already made good progress. If any of these space agencies attempts a manned lunar mission in the future, and the photos and videos of the moon differ significantly to those of the Apollo missions, then people will start to ask serious questions. Within another few years, it may even be possible for individuals to send their own probes to the moon’s surface and beam back video straight to their iPods. And if any of this imagery contradicts NASA’s Apollo moon imagery then this would blow the whole scam wide open for all to see. But you don’t need to wait until then to confirm for yourself that the Apollo moon landings were faked. All you need to do is listen to NASA’s excuses as to why they haven’t sent a human being further than 300 miles from Earth since 1972.

If NASA wants us to believe the Apollo moon landings were real, the onus is on them to provide irrefutable evidence to support their claim, and they have failed to do this. The photo and video evidence can be discounted because of the many inexplicable anomalies they contain, and by virtue of the fact that it is possible to create realistic images of the moon using a studio set up. The moon rock evidence can also be discounted because the same rocks can easily be found in Antarctica. Also, a piece of moon rock that NASA gave to the Dutch national museum turned out to be nothing more than petrified wood. In any case, in order to collect rocks from the moon, you do not need to send humans there. The Soviet Union was using robotic landers to collect moon rocks in the 1960s and 70s. As for the laser reflector on the moon, this does not prove that humans landed on the moon. A reflector could be landed on the moon just as easily as a probe. But in any case, in the 1960s the Soviets showed that they could bounce laser beams off parts of the moon’s surface without the need for a laser reflector. So we can’t even be certain that there is a laser reflector on the moon anyway. And as for claims that the Soviet’s were able to track the Apollo craft all the way to the moon and back, well that’s a big red-herring because the Soviet’s were only able to do this from 1972, which incidentally, was just a few weeks before NASA cancelled the Apollo 18 mission and abandoned the rest of the program altogether. None of NASA’s so-called evidence proves they actually sent humans beyond Earth orbit or landed them on the surface of the moon. On top of that, NASA has made itself look even guiltier by attempting to cover up their sloppy mistakes in the photographic record of the Apollo program. They have recently been caught altering and removing the incriminating photos from their website in an attempt to cover their tracks.

As for a conspiracy like this needing thousands of people to keep secret, well that’s a red-herring too, because in reality, the Apollo program was completely compartmentalized so only a handful of senior insiders would have needed to know the big picture.

edit on 28-12-2012 by Faceman because: Corrected a mistake with the video link.



posted on Dec, 28 2012 @ 06:44 AM
link   
S+F.
I love threads on the Moon conspiracy.
Looking forward to see if antone can come up with an explanation with whats in your OP.






top topics



 
16
<<   2 >>

log in

join