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.
originally posted by: MuonToGluon
a reply to: turbonium1
Instead of babbling words that you keep saying "explain" it all, could you instead present some evidence, or even some graphics with some arrows and how it's done and etc.
Also doesn't the life support system on the suits do some type of venting...?
originally posted by: turbonium1
White assumes the flag was waving due to the astronaut running by it. Secondary sources are not considered, which could be in play, such as air conditioners, fans, etc.
The assumption is that it is caused by the astronaut, because he runs past it during the time the flag waves. But it could be due to a fan, off-camera, etc.
originally posted by: turbonium1
What exactly do you want me to show you?
We have the images from orbit, which show a feature. A feature claimed to be caused by the lunar lander.
We also have Apollo surface images, NONE of which show this feature, claimed to be around the LM.
That is the only evidence you need to have.
originally posted by: choos
originally posted by: turbonium1
White assumes the flag was waving due to the astronaut running by it. Secondary sources are not considered, which could be in play, such as air conditioners, fans, etc.
The assumption is that it is caused by the astronaut, because he runs past it during the time the flag waves. But it could be due to a fan, off-camera, etc.
so what you are suggesting is that the flag could have been made to move by the A/C or a nearby fan..
what do you think is heavier, particles of dust being kicked up or a flag???
if a flag can be made to move why is the dust kicked up not affected??
originally posted by: choos
the whole notion that you have of this being visible on the surface is because you see a reflection from orbit therefore you believe you should see that same reflection on the surface..
your whole idea of what you are seeing from the orbit images is WRONG.. so until you can correct yourself you are not going to get anywhere..
like i said previously, you are claiming its a mistake.. a huge mistake that is simply obvious to you, but this mistake has not just occured once or twice like a regular human being would make mistakes, this has occured in every single surface image and footage in existence, what you are claiming is NOT a mistake..
so think back, since it isnt a mistake it must be deliberate, NASA clearly understood that compressed regolith would be more reflective, proven by this image:
NASA clearly understood what the disturbance from the LM engine would look like since they took this image:
to put it back into perspective so that maybe you might understand you see this image:
see that patch of water in the red circle??
you are basically claiming that if seen from the river bank that area of water will appear white..
originally posted by: captainpudding
a reply to: HammerTime47637
That's the thing though, experts have been looking at it non-stop for nearly 50 years. Much of the technology invented during the apollo program is still in use today, likewise much of the data is also still in use. The hoax crowd love to ignore reality and pretend it was a one and done type of event and then everything was forgotten. It's like the flat earthers, they assume that thousands, if not millions of people have crafted the perfect lie and have carried it on for decades (or millennia to the flat earthers) without a single slip up.
Apollo's data is never used, it is either ignored, or given as a passing footnote, at best. Nothing more, let alone like in your fantasy...
It's a good idea for you to take look at some recent papers, and you'll see the big problem ...
Some papers avoid Apollo by implying the study is only about 'long-stay' missions, in 'future'...
originally posted by: turbonium1
originally posted by: choos
originally posted by: turbonium1
White assumes the flag was waving due to the astronaut running by it. Secondary sources are not considered, which could be in play, such as air conditioners, fans, etc.
The assumption is that it is caused by the astronaut, because he runs past it during the time the flag waves. But it could be due to a fan, off-camera, etc.
so what you are suggesting is that the flag could have been made to move by the A/C or a nearby fan..
what do you think is heavier, particles of dust being kicked up or a flag???
if a flag can be made to move why is the dust kicked up not affected??
Because the air was not directed to the ground, perhaps?
originally posted by: captainpudding
a reply to: turbonium1
In what universe do you live where they only way to apply a force is through direct human contact? "If a flag waved without a touch, that would have proven it is on Earth" is probably one of the dumbest things I've ever seen you say . . . and that's quite the accomplishment. So static charge and/or kicked up dirt just don't exist on the moon or what?
originally posted by: turbonium1
Take a look at all of the problems, to see the entire picture...
A man has never been in space, so we test and test, with more and more advanced life forms, before man goes there...
Because it was very much unknown, at that time...
So, with an even more unknown environment, but regarded as much more hazardous, is somehow NOT? 'Away we go to moon landings'?!?
Utterly absurd story.
And after Apollo, they decide to go back to Earth orbit, for the next 35-40 years?
This is just another absurd story, yet again.
Next, they try to achieve a 'return' to the moon...
They soon failed, miserably.
Must be about not getting enough money, nothing fishy here, right?!
A lot more, but it should now be very obvious.....
originally posted by: turbonium1
Your side always claimed the flags waved because they'd been touched by astronauts.....
Your side claimed that all flags waved because of astronauts touching them, or moving them, in some way...
If a flag waved without a touch, that would have proven it is on Earth, because only air could have caused the untouched flag to wave...
No, you just changed your entire argument, acting as if it's always been your argument!
Guess again..
originally posted by: turbonium1
Comparing two distinct, separate physical areas of the surface, to a lake, or such, which has only the one, very same, area....
You're off to a fine start, yes indeed!!
You mean the soil is disturbed, not seen as disturbed anywhere on the ground, while seen from orbit, as disturbed soil, because this disturbance isn't like any sort of 'real', or 'physical' disturbance, it is a 'reflective' disturbance. This is nothing unusual, of course!
If you disturb soil, which makes it more reflective than the undisturbed soil, all around this area, it would have to be due to some sort of physical change.
If this physical change makes the soil more reflective, it would be seen everywhere, including on the ground...
Soil blown around will land down to surface at random.
It is not landing as one, exact same orientation, everywhere....right?
originally posted by: DJW001
The papers do not "avoid" Apollo, they use exactly the same data set. The fact is that future deep space missions will be of longer duration, which is why radiation exposure is now an issue.