It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

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

page: 9
44
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join
share:
jra

posted on Jan, 20 2013 @ 09:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by 1nquisitive
PS. Dan Goldin didn't mention long term - you must take him at his word. "...to venture beyond earth's orbit"


I didn't see this part when I originally quoted your post, so I'll reply to it separately.

In regards to the Dan Goldin quote. I'm not actually sure if he even actually said that. Apparently that quote has been floating around the net for years with no context, or where it was originally quoted from. I cannot find any citation anywhere for it. Can you? It only seems to show up in Moon hoax related threads and websites, no where else.




posted on Jan, 20 2013 @ 09:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by jra

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


1. Bright sunlight IS radiation, and the unpredictability of localised solar flare fluctuations cannot simply be swept under the rug as if it doesn't exist!

2. re: Nixon, perhaps I should clarify - can you cite an example of a president cancelling a predeccesors space program full stop/from-the-off? (this would not include Nixon)
edit on 20-1-2013 by 1nquisitive because: misspellings

edit on 20-1-2013 by 1nquisitive because: grammar



posted on Jan, 20 2013 @ 10:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by dc4lifeskater
not that i believe either way.. but I will say this. You do realize that the military and gov technology is vastly superior to the tech that we have on our daily lives.. People say anywhere from 40-60 years ahead of us in tech that is not available and some may never be available to us.. To say its not possibly because the tech wasn't there is totally the wrong way to go because more then likely it was and that is something you definitely cannot prove one way or another but there is much evidence that in fact gov tech is way ahead of us.


Hahah.a. You tell good joke! (Must be read with bad fake Russian accent)

But really. Obviously you have not been in the military because they definitely don't have super cool stuff all over the place. Now. This is where you say something about clearances and such. Well. Sure there are super uber sneaky secret squirrel clearances and a few things going on that most ppl dont know about. But. Thousands do know about them. The military couldn't keep manning quiet regarding a few diplomatic cables. Do you really think there wouldn't be a leak from one of the thousands of ppl who would have had to have been involved with a hoax and the magically super technology they used? I mean. If the tech used were ONLY 60 years ahead of their time (ha ha) then that technology would be obsolete now. So why not talk about it?


It doesn't appear that you watched the video based on your resold ones and if you did then you certainly fall into the category the guy mentions at the end. This is the category of people who want so bad to believe in something that they will make things up to justify their delusion. Basically believing in magic.

So. I am sure you will go to your grave believing it is all a fake. Even when kaguYa takes a photo of the lander years ago I am sure that you thought that was a fake as well. Someday soon someone will take even better pictures. I am sure you will find them at fault as well.

I would even hazard a guess that if Richard Branson gave you a ride to the moon and showed you the lander that you would claim he out it there right before you got there JUST TO FOOL YOU.

You and your ilk are delusional. The moon trips were real. He'll. we bounce lasers off of a mirror they set up.

Or perhaps the aliens set it up for us....? (Said with dripping sarcasm and over the top fake quizzical look on face while stroking chin)


ETA. Btw. 40-60 years more advanced? Really? Think about that for a moment. That means they could have used vastly superior technology such as computer navigation systems with dozens of CPU cores and gigabytes of memory to run 3d heads up displays with touch screen controls and then recorded everything to a thumb drive in 1080p high definition and streamed it all down to the earth over an interplanetary version of the Internet.

But. They chose not to because faking a moon landing of the vastly inferior tech made more sense.

edit on 20-1-2013 by Bakatono because: 40-60 years ahead. Now that is funny


jra

posted on Jan, 20 2013 @ 10:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by 1nquisitive
1. Bright sunlight IS radiation, and the unpredictability of localised solar flare fluctuations cannot simply be swept under the rug as if it doesn't exist!


Yes, light is radiation. The gold visors were to protect there eyes from the bright light, but not from any other forms of radiation.

And no one was pretending solar flares don't exist...


2. re: Nixon, perhaps I should clarify - can you cite an example of a president cancelling a predeccesors space program full stop/from-the-off? (this would not include Nixon)


No, but technically Obama didn't cancel the Constellation program completely either. The Orion spacecraft remains in development, as does the Ares V, but now called the Space Launch System. So he didn't exactly completely cancel the program. It's more of a name change along with some modifications.



posted on Jan, 20 2013 @ 10:48 PM
link   
reply to post by dc4lifeskater
 


I was thinking the same thing. I'm not so sure they didn't go to the moon. Simply because of the fact of whom targetted their flight path. They used the Egyptian priest cult, and the 33rd degree line.
JFK was killed when he started to ask about the 'greys'.

So, lets look at that. The greys are called by the Hebrew "El(oeim)" and in Babylon they were the Illumni/Illu. They are the Branch of SET and enter on the 33rd Degree line. The Papal is their Coven. "Al, Il, El" are latin suffixes for god...EL "with whom man is at war with". The Roman Pontiff is the head of the "Illuminati".
The Freemason's belong to Elizabeth who's Coven name is "Lilith" and she is Queen of the Moloch. The sumerian speaking owl in the fourth kind. "Massawa"/Azazel/Baphomet...are all coven names for Alexander. Elizebeth 1 was Selene the "babylonian Slave queen" who was Alexanders first wife.
The 'Annunaki Owl' is Elizabeth
The 'El' was 'Ba-el' King of Hell, Selene's fraternal twin *enlil* who is the EAGLE; and "Archangel Micha-el" was what the Coven renamed 'Massawa' when he was PROMOTED for slaughtering mankind.

The COVENS of AZAZEL are the PAPAL ROYAL & FEDERAL
By this time The El had made it the law for their COVENS that no one was to know about them. But they had already breached the law. But the COVENS had the tech and knew how to open the doors. After all they did build that in every single 'church' they built. Then offered up the 'followers' as a food source. This is the origin of "Sacrifice of the Mass" es of Humanity.

So when you get down to it. All the 'astronauts' were Freemasons. The 'window' which is the 'door' was picked by the High Priest, who knew when and how they opened. There is every possibility that they did in fact have the tech to 'fake' what ever they wanted. And there is some question on some of the first flights. However since the FIRST thing they did was signal the COVEN by saying "The Eagle has landed" and then they proceeded to preform the ritual ON the exact mark of the 33rd degree line. I'd say they got there.

The conflict comes, because they are LYING about where we are, what the 'moon' and 'stars' are, and what the atmospheric conditions are like there. After all if the told that, then they would have to tell about the ruins they found and the advanced tech they found. They would also have to tell about the Sith they encountered. The fact that moon rocks were not 'rocks' and that these same entities are in fact all around us on every planetoid and asteroid. And all the other nasty secrets, like the 'hollow earth' area is the underworld ruled by "Ba-el." whom the Nephli call their god "Tamil".
The Incestuous Twins are the Worst pedophiles on the planet.



posted on Jan, 20 2013 @ 10:52 PM
link   
reply to post by Bakatono
 





You and your ilk are delusional. The moon trips were real. He'll. we bounce lasers off of a mirror they set up.



Yeah... and get a full 2 lumen return!

But apparently it's only available during full moons.

Exactly WHO do you think looks delusional now?


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




posted on Jan, 21 2013 @ 12:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by golemina
reply to post by Bakatono
 





You and your ilk are delusional. The moon trips were real. He'll. we bounce lasers off of a mirror they set up.



Yeah... and get a full 2 lumen return!

But apparently it's only available during full moons.

Exactly WHO do you think looks delusional now?



I think you do. You are correct that less light makes it back due to diffusion and such. However. They could bounce a laser any time they want. Full moons are actually the worst time to bounce a laser. But it can be done then as well. So. In closing. They can bounce a laser at any time including full moons.

Hey. I will even provide a link.

look at that. a source



posted on Jan, 21 2013 @ 12:17 AM
link   
reply to post by YellowRoseTx51
 


The Sith they encountered there? The Sith? With red faces and pointy horns on their heads and light sabers and all? The Sith?



posted on Jan, 21 2013 @ 12:56 AM
link   
reply to post by Bakatono
 




I think you do. You are correct that less light makes it back due to diffusion and such. However. They could bounce a laser any time they want. Full moons are actually the worst time to bounce a laser. But it can be done then as well. So. In closing. They can bounce a laser at any time including full moons.

Hey. I will even provide a link.


This IS rich!

You want to educate ME on the functioning of the 'mirror arrays'?



I'll speak vvvveeerrrryyyyy ssssllloooowwwllllyyyy! So that nothing gets by your OBVIOUSLY SUPERIOR intellect...



A 2 lumen spike against a full moon background (or ANY background
) is what is known in sampling circles as statistically insignificant.

Do you FULLY understand the meaning of this statement?

You ain't got any RIGOR there pal.

The 'sample' picture provided on this 'page' which one can only presume is supposed to provide some type of image of the Observatory 'in action'...

Oh laser! Oh wow dude!

....is faked.

The coherent beam that is supposed to target the mirror arrays is NOT in the visible light spectrum...

Oops!

Are you getting my drift there yet Bakatono?



Some years back when I was served up the same nonsense you are attempting to serve up as some kind of desperate proof...

'See! They did TOO go to the moon!'

I attempted to finagle an invite to the Hawaiian observatory, where I maybe being some type of nuts and bolts kind of guy, you know... could validate this entire methodology...

Curiously NOT forthcoming.

You have anybody that could pinch hit for you Bakatono?

You know... Get someone that actually has any kind of clue what he is talking about?


edit on 21-1-2013 by golemina because: Missing phrase.


edit on 21-1-2013 by golemina because: I speak good Engrish.



posted on Jan, 21 2013 @ 12:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by 1nquisitive
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


I just don't see that being the case at all. We did see some pretty bad accidents, for one, and I think, had something gone wrong, we would have seen that, too. Plus, I have never seen any evidence that looked legitimate, that would cast any real doubt on the official story. I am not one to trust the government in anything, and I have a pretty good nose for deception, but in this case, I have never had any reason to think anything was faked.



posted on Jan, 21 2013 @ 02:33 AM
link   
lol this thing is crap, in the beginning he said they can't do high speed film slow motion back then, 10 seconds later he admits that they did have some sort of technology that could do this but was used for sports casting replays. Well those franchise have money now , they had it then too and if they didn't buy it, the mafia would have bought it for them.

So if a sports franchise can afford a machine that can do high speeds for 90 seconds, what could a 25 million dollar machine do for a government?

Then he goes on to debunk the extra light theory saying there would be 2 shadows.

1 it could be lights from above shooting down to a reflector screen, usually used when you want to use less harsh light in dark areas or shadows to make it look more natural. Light coming from behind an object is not going to reflect light back up on to the target unless there was a flat object or a wall behind where shot was taken. If anything his feet would be lit up from some light escaping out from under the craft but not his entire upper body.

2 even back then and even now you can edit shadows or even add them in in some cases just by taking a piece of paper and fanning it over the area so it blends. It s a pain in the you know what to do, but anyone who takes any kind of 2 3 4th year of photo will learn this technique.

Then goes on to explain if "if" he shot on 35 mm film to minimize grain, there were no canisters that big?

Is he basing all his speculation off what you can buy at walmart, or what you can or could special order then or even now at some specialty sites. Someone with supposed 30 years should know you can pretty much order what eva if you have the $$$. Again, dealing with governments anything can be made for a $$$$ and if its not being shot in real time , they could have just ran a huge spool, filmed the whole thing days, weeks, months in advance. Thinking like this you wouldn't need to recast anything, a one and done. Film breaks, recast whole thing, I know sounds crazy but if someone offered you 100k back then to make the best performance of life, IM sure you would find a way to compensate your chitty acting, heh.

As far as a making sure there are no artifacts in the videos or pictures, is this guy smoking crack? There are artifacts all over the place from scratches to specs in all sets, to whole half's of pictures missing lol. So whether or not they are forged/fake the technicians messed up heh.

Killing 25+ people to silence them , heh IM sure this government beats that number in a month. Suicide, accident, drowning, heart attack etc ect. Specially when 150+ billion is on the line heh. IM sure there are many that would kill for less. Not to mention if you are going to throw something out like that, should at least have the evidence to show they DIDN'T die a mysterious death.

As far as the chances of the film breaking trying to reproduce the same effects in later missions, well heh by then the ball and money was rolling in, they could have a warehouse of film cameras and sets, break them 5 times over and order more and still have cookies left in the jar.

But IM a common sense kind guy, we haven't supposedly built %^&* on the moon, yet this year/next year they are going to start taking names to send people to mars? How un common sense is that? Why keep risking craft blowing up in our atmosphere, when we could launch them from the moon? Use less fuel, cause less pollution, probably make it safer to launch since weak atmosphere, and for billions of years, rich minerals have been slamming into that thing, could probably just scoop and manufacture what u picked up into some kind of metal lol (joke)

so we spent all that time and money (150 billion plus) to get some really good pics(that still really suck) and were just gonna skip over it and try to land living people on the surface of another planet 10 years away with no chance of flight back, but we wont risk if for something a stones throw away. Not even to build for practice? gtfo, lol

regardless, what are we going to do if never. a. straight .answer, comes out tomorrow and says " yup , we faked it ", nothing will happen,

NOTHING

personally IM of the opinion we faked some and made attempts or actually landed at later dates, but the first and 2/3 I think might have been faked.
edit on 21-1-2013 by ~widowmaker~ because: ferrets



posted on Jan, 21 2013 @ 03:50 AM
link   
reply to post by ckno1
 


I don't think the first lunar landing was real. what i mean by this... the televised version is not real. Had they failed or something gone horribly wrong that would have been a huge blow to the USA and it would hurt their rep on the world stage.

the USSR would have loved it.



posted on Jan, 21 2013 @ 04:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by ckno1
Hope this wasn´t posted before. tried to search but didn´t find it:



This video is so good, so incredibly brilliant, solid and simple, that you will want to paste it all over your Facebooks and Twitters just to piss off all the IMBECILES who still claim that the Moon landings were faked.* The reason is simple: the technology to fake it didn't exist.




Source: Gizmodo
edit on 18-1-2013 by ckno1 because: Link


Was hoping for alot more, what I got was a cocky fat guy who's really good at knocking down strawmen.
edit on 21-1-2013 by BrandonD because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 21 2013 @ 08:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by LadyGreenEyes

Originally posted by 1nquisitive
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


I just don't see that being the case at all. We did see some pretty bad accidents, for one, and I think, had something gone wrong, we would have seen that, too. Plus, I have never seen any evidence that looked legitimate, that would cast any real doubt on the official story. I am not one to trust the government in anything, and I have a pretty good nose for deception, but in this case, I have never had any reason to think anything was faked.


Well perhaps this may come as an inconvenient truth, but THERE ARE gaping holes in the so called footage, if you can be bothered too look through it, that is.

The editing of the Apollo 10 inflight footage is a good place to start.



posted on Jan, 21 2013 @ 08:50 AM
link   
reply to post by 1nquisitive
 



Well perhaps this may come as an inconvenient truth, but THERE ARE gaping holes in the so called footage, if you can be bothered too look through it, that is.

The editing of the Apollo 10 inflight footage is a good place to start.


Can you give an example of what you consider to be a gaping hole in the Apollo 10 Footage?



posted on Jan, 21 2013 @ 09:44 AM
link   
reply to post by DJW001
 


Disclaimer - I'm not a moon hoax theorist per-se, and I neither theorise nor hypothesise any specific line of thought.

I will admit that we simply DO NOT KNOW, and we can only TRULY know if we have personally corroborated events.

All we can do is analyse and critique any 'data' put forward, and it has to be an honest and unbiased appraisal.

Here is what I find peculiar with the A10 footage, from a cursory inspection, I'm sure extra observations could be made by the more 'Eagle' eyed amongst us...

1. whenever MC asks crew to switch the inflight camera to another view window it blacks-out for minutes
2. MC (in verbal communication), on several occasions, pre-empt the actions/words of crew, & vice versa
3. when, according to MC & crew they cannot see the sun/moon, the cockpit is flooded with blue light
4. several crew seem to unknowingly repeat what each other has said, same for MC
5. most importantly - the transcripts are totally disjointed and do not corresponding to the MC-A10 audio

In short - it would appear that we have been presented with edited video and live audio.

Why this is, I do not know, but nonetheless this is what it would appear.

PS - I joined ATS yesterday, I cannot for the life of me work out how to add an avatar! Any tips?



edit on 21-1-2013 by 1nquisitive because: clarification

edit on 21-1-2013 by 1nquisitive because: request



posted on Jan, 21 2013 @ 10:15 AM
link   
reply to post by LadyGreenEyes
 





I just don't see that being the case at all


Not a very empirical approach, is it?



posted on Jan, 21 2013 @ 11:20 AM
link   
reply to post by golemina
 


Ooooo weeee! Wowza. Youzens sure is sma-t. The res' o us sho is mo'stupid than youz.

Btw. The problem with a full moon doesn't have anything to do with visible light. I never said that the laser was using the visible light spectrum. The problem appears to be caused by the sun heating the mirrors which causes their shape to change inhibiting proper reflection which makes getting a significant measurable return difficult.

But hey. Thanks for chiming in to let everyone know what a superior intellect you have. And that you are an extreme Jackass.

Sure is entertaining.



posted on Jan, 21 2013 @ 12:21 PM
link   
Once again it's been shown that trying to put moon hoaxers on the correct path is a futile affair.

With all respect to the video and the dude, who provides some valid points in a calm manner, this is not The Definite Proof that would make the hoaxers shut up forever. They have plenty more cards up their sleeves. Even when completely cornered, they stick the fingers in their ears and sing la-la-la, or start moving goal posts so fast you won't keep up with them.

I liked the video, and I have learned something new from it. But I'll say what I said a few times before: it might be better if we just stop trying to prove that the moon landings were real, and let the moon hoax lose its steam. There's just not much point in investing a lot of time and energy into proving the obvious to those who refuse to see it. Like the guy in the video said, there are more important and immediate issues to deal with, such as what the USA are doing to the world (and to its own people).



posted on Jan, 21 2013 @ 12:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by Bakatono
reply to post by golemina
 


Ooooo weeee! Wowza. Youzens sure is sma-t. The res' o us sho is mo'stupid than youz.

Btw. The problem with a full moon doesn't have anything to do with visible light. I never said that the laser was using the visible light spectrum. The problem appears to be caused by the sun heating the mirrors which causes their shape to change inhibiting proper reflection which makes getting a significant measurable return difficult.

But hey. Thanks for chiming in to let everyone know what a superior intellect you have. And that you are an extreme Jackass.

Sure is entertaining.




So let me get this right.

You engage in a blatant ad hominem on my new pal Dc4lifeskater, tell him how in your esteemed opinion that 'You and your ilk are delusional'...

And then for good measure throw in something to the effect there is ACTUAL HARDWARE that got left behind and OH MY is actually being used as we speak.

Obviously you are INCAPABLE of dealing with someone... Who might have just a little MORE horsepower than you apparently seem to be able to deal with...

(That would be me Bakatono
)

So when it's pointed out that this supposedly WORKING ARTIFACT at best generates a 2 lumen return... Count them... 1, 2 LUMENS!

Now surely a guy with you mad SKILLZ can explain to our fellow threadmates EXACTLY why this presents a problem.

You still with me there?



When you're taken to task cuz the 'web site' you offered is using FALSIFIED representations... that what? It's somehow my fault?

Huh?

Dude... these were simple observations I was making.


Finally, you're 'explanation' as to why the 'mirror arrays' are not working...

That is also 100% FAKE.



If you understand the inherent design of the 'array', you would understand that 'fluctuations' in temperature isn't a factor...

At least get the COVER STORY right about the 'why' of the suddenly 'WE CAN'T'!



So... Bottom line is Bakatono...

When the smoke clears... And the sound of your emotional outbreak stops ringing in nice folks ears...

You've got NOTHING.



That is REALLY unfortunate...

Cuz I figured a guy 'in the know'... like yourself... would SURELY be able to make some of the specs available.

Hey! We could team up and make it an upgraded ranging device... make it available on the net, for the benefit of kids everywhere...

Think of the possibilities...

After all... An ARTIFACT of the Apollo Lunar missions... is a terrible thing to waste.



Hey Bakatono, this has been great fun.

Look me up, we could talk physics, AI, Ah... WHO am I kidding... We can talk about ANY of the 'ologies.

Serious.

edit on 21-1-2013 by golemina because: Missing word.





top topics



 
44
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join