Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Why the Moon Landings Could Have Never EVER Been Faked: The Definitive Proof

page: 8
43
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 20 2013 @ 03:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by horseplay
the moon hoax is what brought me to ats to begin with.
IF we had the technology back then to go to the moon we certainly had the technology to fake it.
IF the usa went there, why stop? what happened to all the moon base ideas? did aliens run us off?
why is there no 'google moon' so we can see the flags, debris, footprints, etc?
Why is it that we can put robots on mars but can't film what is currently on our moon? And if I've been missing something all these years, please enlighten me. I'd love to see something like 'google moon'.
I believed it all as a child, sitting in class, watching, enthralled, on the black and white tv.....


Well if we had the technology to fake it then provide links to the equipment!

Re your google moon comment

LRO MAP

If you are not sure how to use it look here

www.abovetopsecret.com...




posted on Jan, 20 2013 @ 03:39 PM
link   
reply to post by horseplay
 

Here you go,a quick screen grab from Google earth/moon......



posted on Jan, 20 2013 @ 04:25 PM
link   
reply to post by wmd_2008
 

Basically, I don't believe him.

If he wants to be credible he should address questions raised by Jarrah White or in the video The Dark Side of the Moon.

I think the guy is a fraud. The tip off for me was when, at the end of the video, he tried to put people who don't believe the official story onto the psychiatric couch. That is the standard fall back position for the perps nowadays.

edit on 20-1-2013 by ipsedixit because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 20 2013 @ 04:36 PM
link   
Well for one thing - there were 6 manned missions to the moon.

To hoax a moon mission six times would be difficult.

Maybe they took a few fake pictures for one reason or another and because of that people think it's a hoax.
edit on 20-1-2013 by nOraKat because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 20 2013 @ 04:44 PM
link   
reply to post by ipsedixit
 



If he wants to be credible he should address questions raised by Jarrah White or in the video The Dark Side of the Moon.


Is Jarrah claiming he wrote "The Dark Side Of The Moon" now? Typical.



posted on Jan, 20 2013 @ 04:59 PM
link   



posted on Jan, 20 2013 @ 05:03 PM
link   
I think this is a great video. The language is down to earth common sense that anyone should be able to easily understand. I wish he had spend more time addressing the photos and such that skeptics claim show that the moon landing is a hoax.

Regardless, it all comes down to faith. Believers have faith that astronauts landed on the moon. They saw it with their own eyes in real time and the astronauts even brought back moon rocks, so it must be true. Skeptics have faith that a Fairy Godmother came down and sprinkled magic pixie dust on some film and POOF- you have the moon landing hoax. Each side requires faith. Go and believe what you will, in peace and civility.



posted on Jan, 20 2013 @ 05:09 PM
link   
reply to post by FoosM
 


No, Dave's 70+ kilo mass impacted the landing gear with sufficient momentum to transfer the energy to the hinged boom the camera was on. The leg does not move; the camera does. Nice try, though!



posted on Jan, 20 2013 @ 06:05 PM
link   
Mr. Collins is one of my new heroes, mostly for the fact of speaking about an aspect of this supposed hoax of which he is a personal expert. This isn't a college flunk-out discussing the implausibility of travel through the radiation belts, or someone with a degree in journalism proposing that everyone in NASA was lying based on their facial expressions during interviews. This is an experienced filmmaker explaining why it couldn't have been faked using 1960's film and video technology, and he explains it simply and concisely - something else I also appreciate.

Bravo, Mr. Collins! And my thanks to the OP for sharing this.



posted on Jan, 20 2013 @ 07:39 PM
link   
There are too many irregularities with the supposed 'evidence' put forward by NASA.

I'm not yes/no on the "did we go to the moon" question, we simply do not know.

All we can do is scrutinise all the evidence put forward.

Would anybody like to throw a few at me?

Go easy - I'm a new user!



posted on Jan, 20 2013 @ 07:52 PM
link   
The fact people think it's fake, is humbling to the scientists whom did go..
Because in their world, the Moon conspirist cannot fathom the capability in the 60's to do this.

even people who say we couldnt even go today.



posted on Jan, 20 2013 @ 08:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by CALGARIAN
The fact people think it's fake, is humbling to the scientists whom did go..
Because in their world, the Moon conspirist cannot fathom the capability in the 60's to do this.

even people who say we couldnt even go today.



But, to be frank why did Obama then cancel the latest constellation program (manned lunar) under his assertion that it would (paraphrased) "take decades", it is implied that we don't have the current capability, no?


"Mankind cannot venture beyond Earth orbit, 250 miles into space, until they can find a way to overcome the dangers of cosmic radiation." NASA Chief Dan Goldin circa 1994.
edit on 20-1-2013 by 1nquisitive because: misspellings
edit on 20-1-2013 by 1nquisitive because: elaboration


jra

posted on Jan, 20 2013 @ 08:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by 1nquisitive
But, to be frank why did Obama then cancel the latest constellation program (manned lunar) under his assertion that it would (paraphrased) "take decades", it is implied that we don't have the current capability, no?


It was mostly for political reasons. The Constellation program was something started by Bush's Gov't and it hadn't progressed very far. Obama likely didn't want to fund a program that he had no part in to begin with. This is the unfortunate side of Gov't funded space programs. Lots of pork barrel politics.

We don't have a vehicle that's currently operating that can get us to the Moon, but we have the technology and the know how. It's just a matter of getting the funding to go ahead and do it.


"Mankind cannot venture beyond Earth orbit, 250 miles into space, until they can find a way to overcome the dangers of cosmic radiation." NASA Chief Dan Goldin circa 1994.


This would likely be a reference to long term space flight. As in, a trip to Mars or a Lunar base where one would stay for many months at a time. The Apollo missions were short term missions, thus cosmic radiation was not a concern.



posted on Jan, 20 2013 @ 08:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by Arken
reply to post by ckno1
 




the technology to fake it didn't exist


This is totally false.

With the Optical Fibers you can do it.

But I belive that we were going to the Moon with Apollo missions.
But many of Video/footage/images are clearly faked.
NASA Astronauts actually did land on the Moon, but they fear of what they could find at their arrival.

Then the BIG question is "Why": why they faked images of a real event?

edit on 19-1-2013 by Arken because: (no reason given)


Neil Armstrong: "We were warned off".

Man isn't supposed to leave this quarantine area until man reconciles ego with truth. That hasn't happened yet for most. Maybe it never will (before we extinct ourselves).



posted on Jan, 20 2013 @ 08:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by jra

Originally posted by 1nquisitive
But, to be frank why did Obama then cancel the latest constellation program (manned lunar) under his assertion that it would (paraphrased) "take decades", it is implied that we don't have the current capability, no?


It was mostly for political reasons. The Constellation program was something started by Bush's Gov't and it hadn't progressed very far. Obama likely didn't want to fund a program that he had no part in to begin with. This is the unfortunate side of Gov't funded space programs. Lots of pork barrel politics.

We don't have a vehicle that's currently operating that can get us to the Moon, but we have the technology and the know how. It's just a matter of getting the funding to go ahead and do it.


"Mankind cannot venture beyond Earth orbit, 250 miles into space, until they can find a way to overcome the dangers of cosmic radiation." NASA Chief Dan Goldin circa 1994.


This would likely be a reference to long term space flight. As in, a trip to Mars or a Lunar base where one would stay for many months at a time. The Apollo missions were short term missions, thus cosmic radiation was not a concern.



1. A.They are not fund restrained, wasting taxpayers money is the last of their concerns, and evem public opinion would always support 'moon landings', and B.space is largely non partisan, can you cite another example of a president cancelling space programs initiated by their predecessor?

2. Cosmic/solar radiation is a MASSIVE cause for concern, especially if you lift your face visors up like some astronauts continually did!



PS. Dan Goldin didn't mention long term - you must take him at his word. "...to venture beyond earth's orbit"
edit on 20-1-2013 by 1nquisitive because: clarification



posted on Jan, 20 2013 @ 08:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by Panic2k11
reply to post by LadyGreenEyes
 


Well if you read my post again you will look that I was specifically referring to military personal not civilians, civilians have been in Europe at the bottom of the any considerations, forever that is even why the US as a project was in part an answer to the aspirations of the masses of Europe. If you think that the Africans had a bad time with slavery to the Americas you fail to understand that it first happened in Europe and (even in Africa among different tribes or villages). I was talking about the logic of power and responsibility by nationally bound ruling classes that what makes a nation historically great or respectable is not military power, its behavior the choices it makes, those are the defining features of what is national identity.


My point is that our military men at that time acted with honor and integrity, and treated people in a dignified manner. If you have some specific examples, then offer them, so we can discuss those. An American soldier shooting some Nazi troop, while coming into the area, and securing things, isn't some dishonorable act. Civilians were treated very well, according to people there at the time, such as the person whose experiences I shared. Slavery has nothing to do with the national integrity of our government during the World Wars.


Originally posted by Panic2k11
I'm not comprehending if you are specific referring to the Soviets in regards to the treatment but you have to take in consideration what the Soviets endured at the hands of the Germans and Stalin and that they were generally speaking and in large majority in a completely different educational and social level that the American, UK or French forces in Germany. I also did not put Russia in the same boat as the rest of Europe.


Yes, the Soviets acted differently, but that wasn't the only group that was mentioned. I don't honestly remember what specific ones she mentioned, but it was more than just the Soviets.


Originally posted by Panic2k11
For the moon landing issue I believe that it is even harder for anyone that lived the experience and the, well, propaganda, to think anything beyond the official story. In large part the program was about propaganda. But I fail to see the motivation for stopping the space exploration, the goals then are the same goals as today, I do hope that China gets its lunar base by ~2020.
edit on 20-1-2013 by Panic2k11 because: (no reason given)
edit on 20-1-2013 by Panic2k11 because: (no reason given)


The "experience" was the culmination of long years of trying, and research, and advancements, and even lives, to do something that inspired the entire world. We had the technology to launch the rockets. We had the technology to make the suits to protect the astronauts. We had the technology to handle the communications. We had all we needed to do what we did, which was land men on the moon, and bring them home again. Americans have always been known as people that have guts, and will try the craziest things. We carved a great civilization out of a wilderness. We drove wagons across a huge continent, hoping for a better life at the end. We have people that will try any stunt, just to see if they can, even in the face of danger. Strapping three guys into a small capsule, and launching it on top of a huge rocket into space, is just another example. The moon was just another frontier. You now, as in, "Space, the final frontier..."? Americans wanted to get there, so they made it happen. There was no need to fake anything. Had they been faking, we would not have seen all the failures. Propaganda would mean there were no failures. "Look, we did everything just right! See how special we are?" that isn't how it happened. People that lived through those days believe what we do because we know what was possible, how things were handled, and what simply would not have been done.

I will never understand the tendency some people have to assume that mankind isn't capable of doing anything big. Can't get to the moon, so it would have to be faked. Can't build the pyramids, so aliens must have done it. Can't possibly have lost technology because of disasters, so anything ancient and really cool can't have been built by us. Why this tendency to assume people are incapable? Is that the result of evolution being taught? People think we are just apes, that can't do anything?


jra

posted on Jan, 20 2013 @ 09:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by 1nquisitive
B.space is largely non partisan, can you cite another example of a president cancelling space programs initiated by their predecessor?


Nixon canceled the remaining Apollo missions. They were supposed to go up to Apollo 20, but they canceled the last 3. At one point he even wanted to cancel Apollo 16 and 17. Apollo was JFK's legacy and not his, even though Nixon was President during the Apollo 11 landing.


2. Cosmic/solar radiation is a MASSIVE cause for concern, especially if you lift your face visors up like some astronauts continually did!


Like I said. Cosmic radiation is a concern for long term missions, not short ones like the Apollo missions. Solar radiation is also a concern, but their are ways to deal with it and minimize it, if a solar flare were to erupt and head in your direction.

Also, the gold visor has nothing to do with radiation protection. It's simply to protect the astronauts eyes from the bright sunlight. Just like when you wear ski goggles in the snow or sunglasses during a bright sunny day.

edit on 20-1-2013 by jra because: typo
edit on 20-1-2013 by jra because: add more



posted on Jan, 20 2013 @ 09:11 PM
link   
reply to post by LadyGreenEyes
 


I for one can only speak for myself, and I will admit it isn't conclusive either way.

Perhaps a third way- it is entirely plausible that pre-recordings were taken in the interests of technological secrecy, saving face (should an american astronaut should meet a grissly lunar death in full view of the whole world), and whereby technological limitations (through the telecoms industry it's a widely held criticism that the supposed Houston-lunar communications has a delay of one second, however going off of NASA tech statements the quickest time would be 3 seconds).

There are also, note, gaping holes in the validity of supposed visual footage of the 'Apollo lunar landings'.
edit on 20-1-2013 by 1nquisitive because: misspellings
edit on 20-1-2013 by 1nquisitive because: grammar



posted on Jan, 20 2013 @ 09:14 PM
link   
Ok... Where is the DEFINITIVE proof?

What?

It's this FAT OLD guy with 'knowledge' of the supposed video 'technology' of the 'times'?

I always wondered what happened to the old perv that ran the AV department at my old high school...

No... WHO are we kidding?

His rambling IS the proof?

Come on guys this is ATS!

FAT guy do that part again where you're explaining to us OBVIOUS simpletons that the reel is this big! And the amount of reel that WOULD be needed is TTTTHHHIIIISSSS BIG!!!



In the interests of full disclosure... Take off that crappie beanie!

Yes, the guy is FAT and OLD and BALD!

Now we are getting somewhere!

SLAP!

And back to reality...

This area has already ALL been covered Ad Nauseum...

This is a classic disinformation technique and besides dissing all of the substantial solid as bedrock work that has been done (some actually being members of ATS!
) that makes his points comical at best, is the most tried and true technique to attempt to mock those that dare question the FAT and OLD and BALD...

Did I forget (you've GOT to give me) UGLY too?

Know it all guy!



Besides, NOT ONE SINGLE POINT he makes has ANY real bearing on the subject he is supposedly the final authority.

Seriously, go look at the optical systems that were used by the high altitude and lower orbit spy systems...

Or the software used to control, written by the infamous Margaret Hamilton and her team, critical portions of the spacecraft...

Don't try to tell anyone with any REAL knowledge that people back then were idiots...

Or that the 'technology' was too 'primitive'...

The guys that worked on those projects were freakishly skilled and had just killer imaginations...

Especially this coming from FOBU guy! An obvious TRUE BELIEVER...



No sale!

Now... Who do I see about getting those 13 minutes of my life back?



Speaking of TRUE BELIEVERS... Hi JRA!

edit on 20-1-2013 by golemina because: Missing phrase!

edit on 20-1-2013 by golemina because: Typos.




posted on Jan, 20 2013 @ 09:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by lestweforget
reply to post by ckno1
 


You say the tech didnt exist to fake the moon landings, i say the tech doesnt exist to land on the moon full stop!


Their tech actually goes way beyond that level.

The moon landings were real, those alive in those days and watching some of the apollo live, knew they were real. Whether they faked some of the camera jobs, considering the tubes and things on the moon, don't know.

We're not in the bible days anymore.





new topics

top topics



 
43
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join