DID ASTRONAUTS GO TO THE MOON?

Author Topic: DID ASTRONAUTS GO TO THE MOON?  (Read 41282 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Jackson Holly

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12,501
  • It's the TV, stupid!
    • JACKSON HOLLY'S OLD HOME PLACE
DID ASTRONAUTS GO TO THE MOON?
« on: March 14, 2015, 07:39:05 PM »

… Prison Planet Forum has covered this question pretty thoroughly …
but several years ago now. I would like to re-open the
debate. Were the Moon visits REALITY bordering on
a miracle … or a sleight-of-hand 'Space Race' fiction?


Here's the old (closed) epic thread ~~~>http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=47982.msg740241#msg740241


Let's start here:

NASA engineer admits they can't get past the Van Allen Belts

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NlXG0REiVzE#t=333

MARCH 14, 2015 BY 21WIRE 12 COMMENTS
21st Century Wire says…

If this does not get the skeptics going wild on the moon debate, we don’t know what will.

In the video presentation below, NASA engineer Kelly Smith explains about many of the risks and pitfalls surrounding the new Orion Deep Space Mission to the planet Mars.

Surprisingly, chief among Kelly’s concerns is whether or not his spacecraft can successfully pass through the perilous Van Allen Radiation Belts. Such is the prospective danger in fact, that NASA will have to send a dumbie craft first in order to ‘test out’ what the potential radiation effects will be on future human crews, as well as on the ship’s delicate sensors and equipment.

Hold on. Why the guessing game by NASA? Why don’t they just use the same 1969 technology they are said to have used on the first Apollo moon missions?

SuperPerformance72 explains, “This video released by NASA about the upcoming Orion space exploration craft, shows a NASA scientist admitting that they still haven’t worked out how to properly shield the spacecraft from the radiation emitted from the Van Allen belts.”

ARTICLE~~~>http://21stcenturywire.com/2015/03/14/video-nasas-orion-engineer-admits-they-cant-get-past-van-allen-radiation-belts/
St. Augustine: “The truth is like a lion; you don't have to defend it.
Let it loose; it will defend itself."

Offline Dude447

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,073
Re: DID ASTRONAUTS GO TO THE MOON?
« Reply #1 on: March 14, 2015, 07:47:25 PM »
It maybe an old topic here on PP Jackson Holly .But it is one of those topics that never seems to go away . I shall have to dig out my old research dvd archives .

Offline Letsbereal

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 58,615
  • Know Thyself
Re: DID ASTRONAUTS GO TO THE MOON?
« Reply #2 on: March 14, 2015, 08:19:50 PM »
There is overwhelming evidence to suggest that in fact they didn't went to the moon.


A Funny Thing Happened on the Way to the Moon https://youtu.be/xciCJfbTvE4?t=32m3s


How Stanley Kubrick Faked the Apollo Moon Landings http://realitysandwich.com/23226/kubrick_apollo/

Jay Weidner - Kubrick's Faked the Moon Landings - Alchemical Kubrick Great Work On Film pt.1-2 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kdwn9cjli0o


On other example is a guy who counted all the pictures taken (all in focus and good composition mind you) on an alleged moon trip and divided it to the alleged time they were on the moon on a certain trip.

Impossible keeping in mind they had to change the film after so many shots.

Besides you can't preserve film material in moon conditions -387 Fahrenheit (-233 Celsius), at night, to 253 Fahrenheit (123 Celsius) during the day and add up the radiation that would penetrate the film and you'll realize it's complete BS.


Fake Dutch 'moon rock' revealed http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/8226075.stm

Moon landing tapes got erased, NASA admits http://www.reuters.com/article/2009/07/16/us-nasa-tapes-idUSTRE56F5MK20090716

Patrick Moore asks the alleged Apollo 11 crew could you actually see the stars https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xyjppxh2-C0

Stars From Space Station - Brilliant Views | Video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RiGeqsGjhoY

Did somebody just die? Apollo 11 Press Conference FULL https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BI_ZehPOMwI


So what have all these astronauts who traveled to the Moon been doing?

Oh I know, making theater to make us believe as Hollywood as possible that they went to the moon.

Kicking rock downhill on the Moon http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ppvlzyeIkog

Feather & Hammer useless experiment http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5C5_dOEyAfk


And there is much more. Could go on all night about this but these are just a few example of clear fraud.

It's a scam folks, they never went to the moon.
->>>|:-) THE CITY INDIANS (-:|<<<-

Offline Dude447

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,073
Re: DID ASTRONAUTS GO TO THE MOON?
« Reply #3 on: March 14, 2015, 08:52:16 PM »
Well I know alot of people think NASA is an acronym for Never A Straight Answer .Mind you I have seen alot of BS posted on the internet about the whole subject aswell .

Offline Letsbereal

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 58,615
  • Know Thyself
Re: DID ASTRONAUTS GO TO THE MOON?
« Reply #4 on: March 14, 2015, 10:05:23 PM »
Chinese Lunar Rover Finds No Evidence Of American Moon Landings http://worldnewsdailyreport.com/chinese-lunar-rover-finds-no-evidence-of-american-moon-landings/
 
Dave McGowan on the apollo 11 press conference https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wRGaIqmCNtc

RICHPLANET TV - Apollo Conspiracy - Full Movie - Jan 2015 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yNI61LbYHzI

Never Broadcast Bill Kaysing Interview https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IJxHnpa90w4
->>>|:-) THE CITY INDIANS (-:|<<<-

Offline Jackson Holly

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12,501
  • It's the TV, stupid!
    • JACKSON HOLLY'S OLD HOME PLACE
Re: DID ASTRONAUTS GO TO THE MOON?
« Reply #5 on: March 14, 2015, 10:06:28 PM »



… OK MOONIES … give us your best shot …
you got some 'splainin' to do … so have at it! 
;D


DEBUNKING THE MOON LANDING CONSPIRACIES
http://www.vincelewis.net/moon.html

… some explanations are plausible …
but, overall, pretty lame if you ask me.

St. Augustine: “The truth is like a lion; you don't have to defend it.
Let it loose; it will defend itself."

Offline Letsbereal

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 58,615
  • Know Thyself
Re: DID ASTRONAUTS GO TO THE MOON?
« Reply #6 on: March 14, 2015, 10:21:19 PM »


… OK MOONIES … give us your best shot …
you got some 'splainin' to do … so have at it! 
;D


DEBUNKING THE MOON LANDING CONSPIRACIES
http://www.vincelewis.net/moon.html

… some explanations are plausible …
but, overall, pretty lame if you ask me.

The evidence presented by me is already so much more than they are trying to debunk here so that simply doesn't cut it.

Then in their final debunking the debunking they come up with some evidence of the stuff allegedly left behind on the moon which is again debunked here https://youtu.be/yNI61LbYHzI?t=38m3s in a research which is a must watch btw:

RICHPLANET TV - Apollo Conspiracy - Full Movie - Jan 2015 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yNI61LbYHzI

They came up with this alleged Apollo stuff left on the moon picture coincidentally just after the Japanese had send their satellite KAGUYA (SELENE) to the moon which completely scanned it's surface and you could ask them question which I did.

I asked them if they had find any evidence of the Apollo moon landings. The answer on my question was that their equipment didn't have enough resolution to see that.

[Name]  Youri Carma
[Question] I've been studying Moon and Mars issues.

Did or did not the Japanese satelliet find ANY evidence of precense of Apollo landings at all?

Trust in you fellow human.

TnX in advandce,

Sincerely Youri Carma

ANSWER FROM JAXA:

----- Original Message -----
From: Youricarma
To: proffice@jaxa.jp
Sent: Saturday, July 19, 2008 2:14 PM
Subject: Apollo real or hoax?

Dear Youri Carma
 
Thank you for your interest in the KAGUYA mission.
Regarding your question, as you can see in the KAGUYA FAQ
http://www.selene.jaxa.jp/en/communication/com_faq_e.htm ,we estimate that it would be
difficult to distinguish any wreckage of Apollo mission with the accuracy cameras onboard the KAGUYA. :(

We anticipate your continuous interest in KAGUYA project.
 
Best Regards,

Tomomi Niizeki
Public Affairs Department
Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA)
URL: http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html
E-mail: proffice@jaxa.jp
->>>|:-) THE CITY INDIANS (-:|<<<-

Offline Jackson Holly

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12,501
  • It's the TV, stupid!
    • JACKSON HOLLY'S OLD HOME PLACE
Re: DID ASTRONAUTS GO TO THE MOON?
« Reply #7 on: March 14, 2015, 10:34:46 PM »
^ ^ ^ ^

… absolutely, letsbereal. I posted that article to show
just how lame the debunkers are … they always choose
a few of the photo anomalies, the waving flag (OF COURSE!)
and few other weaker arguments … they never attempt
to debunk the hardcore evidence and whistleblowers
like Kaysing. One of your posts, though, may be bogus,
as the 'World News Daily' seems to be hoax news only.
St. Augustine: “The truth is like a lion; you don't have to defend it.
Let it loose; it will defend itself."

Offline Letsbereal

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 58,615
  • Know Thyself
Re: DID ASTRONAUTS GO TO THE MOON?
« Reply #8 on: March 14, 2015, 11:15:08 PM »
Japanese SELENE (Kaguya) Lunar Mission Spots Apollo 15 Landing Site (Images)
by Ian O'Neill on July 16, 2008
http://www.universetoday.com/15579/japanese-selene-kaguya-lunar-mission-spots-apollo-15-landing-site-images/

"... and SELENE’s Terrain Camera (TC) is continuing to reconstruct a 3D view of the region in unprecedented high-resolution."

The TC had a spatial resolution of 10 m/pixel from SELENE’s nominal altitude of 100 km.
The slant angle of the camera is 15.
During the mission period (November 2007 to June 2009), TC successfully mapped over 99% of the lunar surface in stereo.
This paper introduces the global DTM dataset derived from TC stereo observation'

http://www.kaguya.jaxa.jp/en/equipment/tc_e.htm

http://www.lpi.usra.edu/meetings/lpsc2012/pdf/1200.pdf

From the Vid above we learn that the the Apollo vehicle feet are 9,5 meters across diagonal https://youtu.be/yNI61LbYHzI?t=41m11s

Which means that with SELENE's TC camera spatial resolution of 10 m/pixel the vehicle would be just one pixel on an altitude of 100 km.

February 1, 2009, the orbit was lowered to 50 kilometres (31 mi) ± 20 kilometres (12 mi), and impact occurred at 18:25 UTC on June 10, 2009. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SELENE


This evidence is very thin referring to some bright spots on the moon furthermore making comparisons of alleged photo's taken before and after the moon landing with the second photo obviously blurred out as a very childish attempt of convincing us of something tucked away under this link: before and after shots



->>>|:-) THE CITY INDIANS (-:|<<<-

Offline CaptObvious1234

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 115
Re: DID ASTRONAUTS GO TO THE MOON?
« Reply #9 on: March 15, 2015, 01:45:48 AM »
President already had tackled this issue and other few before. See for yourself.

http://m.youtube.com/results?q=dave%20chappelle%20president&sm=1


I catch my self on the thought that USA space program doesn't have to do anything with OUR real problem. Namely get stable enought job so we can support good pussy banging. I hope americans didn't go to moon and didn't wasted more money then they already had.  8)

Offline JT Coyoté

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4,517
  • "REMEMBER THE ALAMO!"
Re: DID ASTRONAUTS GO TO THE MOON?
« Reply #10 on: March 15, 2015, 04:35:42 AM »
… Prison Planet Forum has covered this question pretty thoroughly …
but several years ago now. I would like to re-open the
debate. Were the Moon visits REALITY bordering on
a miracle … or a sleight-of-hand 'Space Race' fiction?


Here's the old (closed) epic thread ~~~>http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=47982.msg740241#msg740241


Let's start here:

NASA engineer admits they can't get past the Van Allen Belts

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NlXG0REiVzE#t=333

MARCH 14, 2015 BY 21WIRE 12 COMMENTS
21st Century Wire says…

If this does not get the skeptics going wild on the moon debate, we don’t know what will.

In the video presentation below, NASA engineer Kelly Smith explains about many of the risks and pitfalls surrounding the new Orion Deep Space Mission to the planet Mars.

Surprisingly, chief among Kelly’s concerns is whether or not his spacecraft can successfully pass through the perilous Van Allen Radiation Belts. Such is the prospective danger in fact, that NASA will have to send a dumbie craft first in order to ‘test out’ what the potential radiation effects will be on future human crews, as well as on the ship’s delicate sensors and equipment.

Hold on. Why the guessing game by NASA? Why don’t they just use the same 1969 technology they are said to have used on the first Apollo moon missions?

SuperPerformance72 explains, “This video released by NASA about the upcoming Orion space exploration craft, shows a NASA scientist admitting that they still haven’t worked out how to properly shield the spacecraft from the radiation emitted from the Van Allen belts.”

ARTICLE~~~>http://21stcenturywire.com/2015/03/14/video-nasas-orion-engineer-admits-they-cant-get-past-van-allen-radiation-belts/

The answer to the question is...YES, They DID...

Oldyoti

"...Once government uses force to mold behavior,
or mold the economy, they have overstepped their
bounds and have violated the whole concept of our
revolution and our Constitution."
~Ron Paul,
Presidential candidate debate, 12/10/11

Offline decemberfellow

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5,036
Re: DID ASTRONAUTS GO TO THE MOON?
« Reply #11 on: March 15, 2015, 08:50:49 AM »
Or as hillary says
Quote
"What difference – at this point, what difference does it make?"
:)
Rev21:4
And God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes; and there shall be no more death, neither sorrow, nor crying, neither shall there be any more pain: for the former things are passed away.


Who am I
 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v7Fk6dt_uHo

Offline Jackson Holly

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12,501
  • It's the TV, stupid!
    • JACKSON HOLLY'S OLD HOME PLACE
Re: DID ASTRONAUTS GO TO THE MOON?
« Reply #12 on: March 15, 2015, 09:33:59 AM »
^ ^ ^ ^

… NASA and other world agencies do say at present
that manned space travel is VERY difficult, even
with today's "advanced" technologies, with all the
dangers of the "Van Allen Belts" and other adverse
forces of which we have very little understanding.
If it IS true that 24 astronauts made it to
the moon in about a one year period back in the
Pleistocene of space travel days …


DAMN! WE WERE LUCKY!

Caught In Act! NASA Van Allen Probes Observe Solar Shockwave For First Time
http://www.techtimes.com/articles/34015/20150219/caught-act-nasa-van-allen-probes-observe-solar-shockwave-first.htm

Quote
The Van Allen probes have been orbiting within Earth's Van Allen radiation belts since August 2012. The purpose of the mission is to explore conditions within the belts, in order to assist researchers in designing satellites and other spacecraft that can withstand the harsh environment.

Some particles, driven by the solar shockwave, can travel at ultrarelativistic velocities, racing around the planet in just five minutes.

When the blast of solar wind hit the Earth on October 8, 2013, one of the pair of satellites recorded conditions in the radiation belts just before the blow, while the other was able to measure the after effects of the event. 

The magnetosonic pulse, a magnetized sound wave, was generated by a rebounding effect from charged particles in the solar wind striking the powerful radiation belts. When this event occurred, a racing electric field generated 10 times the normal number of ultrarelativistic electrons. When these particles travel at velocities matching that of the magnetosonic pulse, they are more likely to gain energy, and speed along at tremendous speeds.

Similar events happen about twice a month, according to researchers. The 2013 occurrence was relatively minor, compared to some other shockwaves.

"This was a relatively small shock. We know they can be much, much bigger. Interactions between solar activity and Earth's magnetosphere can create the radiation belt in a number of ways, some of which can take months, others days. The shock process takes seconds to minutes. This could be the tip of the iceberg in how we understand radiation-belt physics," John Foster of Haystack Observatory said.
 
These events could produce some of the most dangerous radiation that could damage human space travelers, or delicate electronics aboard spacecraft. Researchers hope their investigations of interactions between the Van Allen Belts and solar wind could provide data needed to properly protect these spacecraft.
St. Augustine: “The truth is like a lion; you don't have to defend it.
Let it loose; it will defend itself."

Offline Jackson Holly

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12,501
  • It's the TV, stupid!
    • JACKSON HOLLY'S OLD HOME PLACE
Re: DID ASTRONAUTS GO TO THE MOON?
« Reply #13 on: March 15, 2015, 09:54:15 AM »



…. APOLLO 2.0?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=147tqvu2oc0

…  :)  a bit of happy face wishful thinking, IMHO.

St. Augustine: “The truth is like a lion; you don't have to defend it.
Let it loose; it will defend itself."

Offline Letsbereal

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 58,615
  • Know Thyself
Re: DID ASTRONAUTS GO TO THE MOON?
« Reply #14 on: March 15, 2015, 11:04:56 AM »


…. APOLLO 2.0?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=147tqvu2oc0

…  :)  a bit of happy face wishful thinking, IMHO.

Yeah, 'The Onion' ;)
->>>|:-) THE CITY INDIANS (-:|<<<-

Offline Optimus

  • Globalist Destroyer
  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12,802
    • GlobalGulag.com
Re: DID ASTRONAUTS GO TO THE MOON?
« Reply #15 on: March 15, 2015, 01:20:47 PM »
Of course we went to the Moon
A defense of the Lunar Landings...

http://www.def-logic.com/articles/lunarlanding.html

By BRENT SILBY

Department of Philosophy
University of Canterbury
© Brent Silby 2001

The Question...

Did NASA land people on the moon? To many, the answer is an obvious "yes". But to an increasing number of people the answer is either "probably not" or "no". The Internet is full of sites that suggest the existence of an intricate conspiracy that has been going on since the 1960's. Proponents of the conspiracy theory believe that NASA did not have the technology or the resources to send people to the moon, so in order to keep an anxious public happy, they staged the entire event. This is a pretty big claim. Imagine the entire human population being taken in by a hoax that has persisted since 1969. It seems almost unbelievable, and yet conspiracy theorists say they have evidence to support their claims. The evidence they point to seem to show inconsistencies that can only be explained by suggesting that the Lunar landings were faked--perhaps produced in a studio. These inconsistencies involve such things as the lighting on the Lunar surface, unrealistic behavior of dust, supposed flag movements caused by drafts (there is no air on the moon), and the impossibility of humans surviving in the unfiltered radiation produced by the sun.

The purpose of this article is to look at some of the evidence provided by the conspiracy theorist and decide whether or not the evidence should lead us to conclude that the Lunar landings were hoaxes. For each piece of evidence I will offer an explanation that is in keeping with the idea that humans went to the moon. If the counter explanations are more convincing than the conspiracy theorist's explanations, we will justified in continuing to believe that NASA sent people to the moon.

 

1. Flags that wave in the non-existent wind

One of the first pieces of evidence that the conspiracy theorist puts forward involves the American flag. When you watch the footage of the flag, it seems to be moving as if it is being blown by the wind. Now, since there is no wind on the moon--in fact the moon has no atmosphere--it should be impossible for the flag to be waving in a breeze. So how can it be moving? Is it possible that the Lunar missions were part of a hoax and the producers of the hoax made a mistake this big? Or is there another explanation? Well, nothing's impossible, but given the importance of the Lunar landings it is hard to believe that such a big mistake was made. As rational people, we should not be so quick to accept the waving flag as evidence for Lunar landing fraud.



Let's look at the problem carefully. Hoax theorists claim that the moving flag is evidence that the lunar mission was shot in a studio. Now if the footage was shot in a studio we have to again ask ourselves "why is the flag moving?" It takes a lot of wind to move a flag, and there is usually not much wind in a studio. They would need to bring in large fans to make the flag move as shown in the lunar landing footage, and it is unlikely that they would do this because they know that there is no wind on the moon. Furthermore, how could it be that the case that the dust on the ground is not moving if there is so much wind blowing through the studio? Perhaps the fact that the flag is moving can be explained in a better way. Perhaps it can be explained by looking at how objects move in an environment with no atmosphere.



In order to spread the flag in an environment with no wind, it was necessary to attach it to a thin wire frame. In the picture above you can see that the top of the flag is perfectly straight. That's because it is attached to a horizontal wire frame. Now think about how you put a stick into the ground. You push the stick down while twisting it back and forward. This is exactly what the astronauts did. They twisted the pole into the Lunar dust and in doing so they caused the flag to 'wobble'. Since there is no atmospheric friction on the moon, and since there is a low gravitational field, the wobble of the flag persisted for much longer than it would on Earth. It appears as if it is blowing in the wind but in reality it has retained movement momentum from the action of twisting it into the ground.

This explanation does not, on its own, provide enough reason to shelve the conspiracy theorist's claims. There are several other pieces of evidence that could be used to support the hoax theory.

 

2. The dust blows

One of the most interesting pieces of evidence that the conspiracy theorist offers concerns the motion of dust in the videos. When you look at the footage carefully, you notice that dust (when moved into the air) falls very quickly to the ground. This is especially noticeable when the module takes off. The dust is blown into the sky by the rocket's downward force, and then it falls quickly to the ground. Surely, says the conspiracy theorist, the dust should stay in the sky for much longer on the moon. There is, after all, very little gravity on the moon. And dust is very light.

This line of reasoning betrays a mistake that is frequently made. On Earth, dust falls to the ground more slowly than (say) a brick. Many people assume this is because the dust is lighter. But this is misguided. Dust falls to Earth slower than a brick because of the movement of air, which can push it up and around in many different directions. In reality, weight has nothing to do with how fast objects fall. All objects fall at the same rate when dropped in the same gravitational field. You can establish this for yourself with a little thought experiment. Imagine that it's true that bricks fall faster than coins because they are heavier. Now ask yourself what would happen if you tied a brick to a coin with a piece of string, and then dropped them from a tall building. Would the brick drag the coin down faster than it would normally fall? Or would the coin pull up on the brick thus slowing its descent? If it is true that these objects fall at different rates, there is no way to decide whether the brick will speed up the coin's fall, or if the coin will slow the brick's fall. This is a paradoxical situation that highlights the mistake in thinking that objects fall at different rates depending on their weight.

So, if there happened to be no atmosphere on Earth we would expect a speck of dust to fall to the ground at the same speed as a brick. This is the effect we see in the Lunar video footage. The dust falls to the ground quite quickly because there is no atmosphere to hold it up. It falls to the Lunar surface at the same speed as anything else that was dropped on the moon. The rate at which the dust falls is, of course, a little slower than the rate at which objects fall on Earth. This is because the moon's gravitational field is weaker than Earth's.

The speed of the falling dust in the Lunar video clips actually gives us reason to believe that the footage must have been taken on the moon. We know that dust can't fall at that rate on Earth because of the atmosphere. And even if the engineers of a Lunar hoax managed to created a vacuum in a studio, we would expect the dust to fall much faster than it did in the actual footage. Dust in a vacuum falls as fast as a brick.

So, the movement of dust in the Lunar footage can't be used to support the conspiracy theorist's claims. If the conspiracy theorist continues to assert that the footage is fraudulent, the following question arises: If the footage is fraudulent, how could the special effects producers of the 1960's create footage of dust falling to the ground in a vacuum slower than it would on Earth? The burden is on the conspiracy theorist to answer this question.

 

3. Shady shadows

Many photographs were taken on the moon and most of them have been scrutinized very carefully by conspiracy theorists. Their hope is that they might find some discrepancies in the lighting, shadows, or scenery. Interesting evidence has subsequently emerged that could give us reason to doubt the authenticity of a few of the photos. This evidence centers primarily around inconsistencies in the shadows cast by objects.



Look at the above photograph. It shows two astronauts very close to each other on the Lunar surface. But look at their shadows. Not only are they different sizes, they are cast in different directions. This seems to indicate the existence of two separate sources of light. But we all know that the primary source of light on the moon is the sun (the Earth's brightness provides some light, but that is small in relation to the sun). How can these shadows be explained except by supposing that someone made a mistake when setting up the lighting for the production of hoax footage?

This is a good question, the answer to which might lie in the blurry nature of the photograph. Since it is not a clear picture, we cannot make out the contours of the Lunar surface. Even in the clear photographs it is hard to make out the shapes of small slopes on the moon because everything is so bright and uniformly white. But imagine if the photograph was clear and in focus. We might notice that the astronaut on the right was heading down a slope, while the astronaut on the left was at the foot of an upward slope. If the sun was behind them (to the far right of the picture) then their shadows would be correct.

Consider the same picture again with the slopes highlighted.



You see; it starts to make more sense when you view the picture like this. Similar explanations can be offered to explain lighting discrepancies other photographs.

Another lighting problem that is often pointed to concerns the fact that objects remain brightly lit when hidden by shadows. Consider this picture of an astronaut leaving the landing craft.



Conspiracy theorists make their objection by asking: How is it possible for us to see the astronaut so clearly? The sun is obviously on the other side of the landing craft because it seems to be in shadow. Yet we see the astronaut clearly and brightly as if there is another source of light. Furthermore, the top of the astronaut's oxygen pack is shaded as if there is a source of light on the ground.

This is an important objection, but unfortunately for the conspiracy theorist it rests on the simple oversight that there is another source of light on the moon, namely the moon itself. The moon is a very bright whitish object, which reflects the light from the sun as brightly as snow. Since the astronauts were constantly surrounded by the bright reflecting surface of the moon, they were always brightly lit.

Like much of the evidence presented by the Lunar conspiracy theorist, the evidence from shadows can be put aside when illuminated by a better understanding of the Lunar environment.

 

4. Camera evidence

When I was young, I remember watching archived footage of Neil Armstrong climbing out of the landing craft to take his first step on the moon. Because I was so used to watching television scenes portrayed as real events, it never occurred to me that there must have been a camera-person shooting the footage. As time went by, however, I found myself wondering: if these are Armstrong's first steps on the moon, who's holding the camera? This question has also been asked by the Lunar conspiracy theorist. The low quality picture below is a frame captured from the footage of Armstrong's departure from the landing craft.



A few years ago I had never heard of the Lunar conspiracy debate, so it didn't occur to me that the footage might have been faked. But I needed an answer to the question, so I came up with one of my own. I reasoned that since the world would want to see Armstrong's first step on the moon, he probably left the craft and set up a camera before the live feed took place. Once in place, the camera could be operated remotely and could be used to film Armstrong's "first step". This is a reasonable explanation, but it is not correct. I was right in thinking that NASA would come up with a plan to film Armstrong's first step, but I was wrong in thinking that he set up the camera himself. What NASA actually did was attach a camera to an extended arm on the landing craft. This camera was lined up with the exit port and was operated from within the craft. Hence, Neil Armstrong's famous first step onto the Lunar surface was watched LIVE as it happened.

Another problem that is sometimes put forward concerns a supposed anomaly in the photographs. Take a look at the cross-hairs (the targeting '+' shapes) in the photo below.



You will notice a problem with the cross hair on the left side of the picture. It appears to be behind part of the image in the photograph, when in fact it should be superimposed over the picture. Some people have put this forward as evidence to show that the photographs are fakes (and BAD fakes at that).

The cross-hair anomaly in this picture can be explained by looking at how images from the moon were transmitted to Earth. Pictures taken on the moon were split into data-blocks, which were sent to Earth separately. The cross- hairs contained in the images are reference points, which Nasa used to reassemble the pieces of the photograph. In the above example, one of the image slices was obviously pasted on top of one of the cross-hairs.

There are more interesting images that the conspiracy theorist can focus on. One of those is the footage of the space-craft leaving the moon. The question they ask here is: who filmed the astronauts' departure? The camera pans up to follow the ascent of the craft, which means it must have been operated by someone. Did NASA leave a camera person on the moon, or was the whole thing done in a special effects studio?

This question presupposes the need for a camera operator. But remember that by 1969 NASA had developed the ability to send remote controlled craft into space, and some of those craft had automatic cameras on board. It would have been no problem to set up a timer controlled camera on the surface of the moon and have it designed to pan upwards as the Lunar craft ascended. Everything else about the mission was timed to the second, and NASA knew exactly how fast the Lunar craft would travel off the surface. So the question is better posed as: did NASA arrange for a timer operated camera to be taken to the moon, or was the whole mission fabricated in a studio? Both options are possible, and as such the conspiracy theorist cannot use the film of the space-craft leaving the moon as strong evidence that the entire mission was a hoax.

 

5. The problem of Radiation

One of the more serious problems with the authenticity of the Lunar missions involves the level of radiation produced by the sun. Here on Earth, we are protected from most of the sun's radiation by our atmosphere and the Earth's magnetic field. However, out in space there is no such protection. Some theorists have estimated that a space-craft moving beyond Earth's protective magnetic field (much further than the International Space Station) would need several inches of lead shielding to protect the astronauts on board. Since the missions to the moon had no such shielding, theorists conclude that the astronauts on board should have perished; and since they obviously survived, the whole thing was faked.

The problem with this type of reasoning is that these theorists are estimating what will happen when people aboard space-craft are exposed to such intense radiation. When they conclude that astronauts could not possibly survive, they seem to be closing their theory to the possibility of falsification. When presented with the possibility that the astronauts did survive, these theorists do not reassess their theories--rather, they denounce the evidence as fake. This isn't the way science should work. The idea that nobody can survive the radiation in space is a theory that can only be confirmed or falsified by sending someone up there. Now, since supporters of this theory do not believe that anyone has been that far into space, they have no grounds upon which to assert the truth of their claim and the falsity of the Lunar missions. For all they know, they could be wrong and people did go to the moon and survive.

The thought that radiation would kill the astronauts on their way to the moon rests on a misunderstanding of radiation in space. It is true that the sun can release intense bursts of radiation, but not all radiation is harmful. Radiation from the sun can be measured in terms of solar particle energies. These range in intensity. The low energy particles, which measure in the thousands of electron volts, can easily be stopped by a space-craft's hull or a space suit. At the other end of the scale, the very high energy particles (over 1000 million electron volts) can pass right through a space-craft and the people on board without actually interacting with their body cells. The most dangerous particle energy level sits somewhere in the middle (in the millions of electron volts). During a solar flare, particles at all energy levels are produced and this can be very dangerous for astronauts. Fortunately, solar flares do not occur everyday and they do not send particles out in all directions.

An understanding of radiation in space shows us that an astronaut on a trip to the moon will not necessarily be exposed to dangerous levels of radiation. Of course, this is not to say that there are no risks. A solar flare in the wrong direction could do serious harm to an astronaut. But such flares are not everyday occurrences. Furthermore, being exposed to a high dose of radiation does not guarantee illness, cancer, or death. It merely raises the probability. It is possible for an astronaut to live a long healthy life after being exposed to radiation levels produced during a solar flare.

 

6. Common sense

Imagine the difficulty in fabricating the Lunar missions of the 1960's and then trying to keep the truth a secret. There were thousands of people involved in the missions and millions watched the events live on television. How could so many people be taken in? How could NASA ensure the silence of all those involved? Surely someone would have leaked the secret. It would only take one disgruntled NASA employee to go to the press and the whole thing would have been exposed. And given the amount of planning involved, such a leak could have happened months or years before the missions were supposed to take place. Yet there were no leaks and the missions were carried out as planned. The U.S.S.R (who watched everything in the U.S.) did not cry "FRAUD"--and they would most certainly have said something if they thought the missions were faked. It seems difficult to believe that the entire Lunar program was produced in the studio.

There are many different types of conspiracy theories, ranging from the Lunar hoax theory to the government cover up of UFO's. Such theories offer evidence that looks, on the surface, to be reasonable. However, a little digging can usually reveal holes in the theory and inadequacies in the evidence. It is quite revealing that conspiracy theorists never take an unbiased approach in presenting their theories. They never consider alternatives or entertain objections to their claims. They speak in an authoritative fashion and present their views as accepted scientific research. But as rational human beings, we should not let ourselves be convinced so easily. We should always look for alternative explanations and then weigh the probabilities. If the conspiracy claim is supported well by the evidence, then we have reason to take it seriously. If, on the other hand, it turns out to be more likely that the conspiracy claim is false, we can enjoy strengthened confidence in our current view.

 

Of course we went to the Moon

The conspiracy theorist has put forward evidence to show that the Lunar missions were part of an elaborate hoax. This evidence has included photographic anomalies, and physical phenomena such as radiation levels in space and the movement of objects on the moon. Much of the conspiracy theorist's evidence is compelling when first looked at. However, a little research shows that the evidence relies on a misunderstanding of the Lunar environment.

For each piece of evidence presented in this article, I have offered an alternative explanation that is in keeping with what we know about the Lunar environment. These alternatives do not show that the conspiracy theory is false, but they do show that the evidence is far from convincing.

Considering the fact that the conspiracy theorist's evidence is not convincing, and considering the immense difficulty in staging such an elaborate hoax and keeping it a secret, we are justified in holding the belief that NASA sent people to the moon.

 

References and Further Reading

Bakel, Rogier van, 1993-1997, "The Wrong Stuff", http://members.tripod.co.uk/W3/MoonLandHoax.htm

Bpoppe@sec.noaa.gov (Name not available), 2001, "A Primer on Space Whether", http://www.sel.noaa.gov/primer/primer.html

Dotto, Lydia, 2000, "Radiation in Space: Assessing the risks", http://schools.tdsb.on.ca/spacenet/newstories/rad/radiation.htm

Ludwig, Bob, & Oneil, Megan, 2001, "Radiation and the International Space Station", National Academy of Sciences, http://www4.nationalacademies.org/news.nsf/isbn/0309068851?OpenDocument

Phillips, T., 2001, "The Great Moon Hoax", http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2001/ast23feb_2.htm

Science Net, "How did people go to the Moon without being harmed by the radiation coming from the sun?", http://www.sciencenet.org.uk/database/Physics/9812/p01335d.html

Author unknown, 1998-2001, "Moon Hoax?", http://www.redzero.demon.co.uk/moonhoax/
“The Constitution is not an instrument for the government to restrain the people,
it's an instrument for the people to restrain the government.” – Patrick Henry

>>> Global Gulag Media & Forum <<<

Offline CaptObvious1234

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 115
Re: DID ASTRONAUTS GO TO THE MOON?
« Reply #16 on: March 15, 2015, 01:46:48 PM »
Even if they did were on moon I didn't heard that they bought some fascinating and valuable information or rock and dust samples. Investment was a contest and participating in which is a waste of resources. It would be funny if one country lunches decent moon expedition, but its opponent on earth spend that money on weaponry and when expedition returns they see their country being captured. Whole topic is useless.

Money and pussy matter the most. For real.

Offline Jackson Holly

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12,501
  • It's the TV, stupid!
    • JACKSON HOLLY'S OLD HOME PLACE
Re: DID ASTRONAUTS GO TO THE MOON?
« Reply #17 on: March 15, 2015, 01:57:55 PM »

1.) They faked it all from the security of
the reachable near-space of Earth's orbit,
from movie sets and 'Moonscapes' on Terra

     ~or~

2.) 24 Americans made it to the moon
(not all to the surface) with the flimsiest
of "Model T" equipment and a sorry lack
of solid knowledge of the solar system


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Neil Armstrong and early astronauts
charted course with sextant, slide rules


TOM SPEARS, OTTAWA CITIZEN  08.29.2012

OTTAWA — In July of 1969, Neil Armstrong and two other astronauts were in orbit around Earth, preparing to fire up another engine and accelerate toward the moon.

Ground-based radar showed their orbit was perfect. But they needed a position check.

They pulled out an instrument invented for sailors in the 1700s: a sextant.


Apollo-11 astronauts used a Plath sextant to navigate 389,645 kilometres from the Earth to the Moon in July 1969. The instrument invented for sailors in the 1700s.



To understand the achievement of the first humans to walk on the moon, it’s necessary to understand Armstrong’s time, when astronauts had to calculate and use their ingenuity every step of the way because they didn’t have today’s computers and sensors.

We’ll pick up the story from a NASA transcript 46 minutes after launch, as Apollo-11 flies 103.0 miles above the Earth:

Michael Collins is looking at a star called Menkent through the sextant, which incorporates a telescope and measures the angle between distant objects, such as a star and the horizon: “Okay, again, looking through the telescope. Okay, proceed to Menkent. There she goes. Menkent. Menkent. God, what a star.”

Buzz Aldrin cuts in: “Nobody in their right —”

Collins is speaking at the same time: “Menkent’s good.”

Aldrin again: “Nobody in their right mind would pick that one.” A moment later he adds: “Hey, I sure wish you’d get out that — that star chart.”

Armstrong, the mission commander, joins the discussion: “Can’t see a thing, huh?”

Collins can see, though not well. They plot Menkent, and a star called Nunki — at least Collins is pretty sure it’s Nunki — and Atria for good measure. But Collins has the last word: “God, I’ll tell you, the visibility through that telescope is a big disappointment.”

Space travel is aided by powerful computers today, with laser guidance systems, with hardware and software no one even imagined in Armstrong’s day. NASA would never dream of giving astronauts a second-rate optical instrument to find their way.

But using paper maps of the stars and the moon, carrying slide rules to do calculations, Apollo-11 made it to the moon safely, 389,645 km from Earth, and back.

* * *

Neil Armstrong’s burial on Friday coincides with the second full moon of August, known by some as a blue moon.

For 43 years the world has worshipped him as a hero.

He was one, by any definition. U.S. Navy test pilot, Korean War veteran, aerospace engineer, professor, astronaut. Yet he acquired — unjustly — the reputation of a recluse because he didn’t want to do endless interviews.

The mission transcript of the crew’s own words, once classified, is now public. It shows Armstrong as a quiet individual concerned with the details, not pontificating about the cosmos.

He let Aldrin and Collins make the jokes. The commander of Apollo-12 a few months later cussed a lot, called his crew mates “babe”, made jokes and played Elvis tapes. Not Armstrong.

He did give one major TV interview in 2011 — to the Certified Practising Accountants of Australia. (The connection: His father was an auditor.)

“We were a congenial bunch but really focused on our responsibilities,” he told the CPA interviewer. “We really could not afford the luxury of diverting our attention away from our primary responsibilities because problems usually occur when you least expect them and you can’t get complacent.”

He remained focused on the gauges and alarms (which kept going off at crucial times such as the descent to the moon), and on getting the photos and TV images that NASA desperately wanted.

Still, his few recorded comments show he was stunned by the moon.

Here’s Armstrong, orbiting on the far side the moon: “What a spectacular view!”



Collins, the excitable one: “God, look at that moon! Fantastic. Look back there behind us, sure looks like a gigantic crater; look at the mountains going around it. My gosh, they’re monsters.”

Armstrong: “See that real big —”

Collins: “Yes, there’s a moose down here (meaning a big formation) you just wouldn’t believe. There’s the biggest one yet. God, it’s huge! It is enormous! It’s so big I can’t even get it in the window. You want to look at that? That’s the biggest one you ever seen in your life. Neil? God, look at this central mountain peak.

Armstrong later, as the spacecraft swings from the dark side of the moon into daylight: “Mmm. Here comes the moon.”

Collins: “Really beautiful ... I wonder where we are.”

Armstrong: “We’re going to stop here pretty soon, right?”

* * *

When Apollo-11 reached the moon, the men had spent three days in a tiny cabin. It was dirty; urine leaked out of the disposal system and dried, leaving little brown particles in the landing module. Collins describes the spacecraft as “raunchy.”

For three days, Armstrong had been in charge of reaching the moon, a moving target. He and his crew hit their planned orbit within a fraction of a mile.

But landing was hairy. The computer started issuing warnings on the descent (they turned out to be unimportant, but still scary), and the computer was directing the Eagle lander toward a crater with steep sides and big boulders.

“Not a good place to land at all,” Armstrong told the Aussie TV interviewer. “So I took over manually and flew it like a helicopter ... found a level area and was able to get it down there safely before we ran out of fuel.”

He had just 20 seconds of fuel left.

Then he and Aldrin shook hands. That was all the celebration they had time for.

Modern astronauts credit him with an amazing job of landing.

“Just an incredible pilot,” says former Canadian astronaut Dave Williams, who is also a jet pilot. He met Armstrong in the 1990s and added, “he’s the only person where I’ve seen other astronauts line up to get his autograph.” He recalls the retired astronaut as “very humble.”


This Display and Keyboard unit, or DSKY, was the interface
for the Apollo computers. The 'Verb' and 'Noun' buttons are
on the lower left-hand side of the unit.
(TOTAL MEMORY - 74 kilobytes)


Once on the ground, he was unusually talkative. Out poured all the tension of the landing as he confessed he wasn’t sure where they had landed. It turned out to be four miles past the planned spot.

“We were a little busy worrying about program alarms and things like that in the part of the descent where we would normally be picking out our landing spot; and aside from a good look at several of the craters we came over in the final descent, I haven’t been able to pick out the things on the horizon as a reference as yet,” he told Mission Control.

This was Tranquility Base.

He added: “You might be interested to know that I don’t think we notice any difficulty at all in adapting to one-sixth g (one-sixth of Earth gravity). It seems immediately natural to move in this environment.”

“The area out the left hand window is a relatively level plain cratered with a fairly large number of craters of the five to 50 foot variety, and some ridges — small, 20, 30 feet high, I would guess, and literally thousands of little one- and two-foot craters around the area. We see some angular blocks out several hundred feet in front of us that are probably two feet in size and have angular edges. There is a hill in view, just about on the ground track ahead of us. Difficult to estimate, but might be a half a mile or a mile.”

The landing spot, he said, was “really was rough, Mike. Over the targeted landing area, it was extremely rough, cratered, and large numbers of rocks.”

Finally, a few hours later, Armstrong stepped onto the moon. We all know the next words, one small step, one giant leap, words that just popped into his head, he said. But he went on to tell people what the moon was actually like.

History doesn’t emphasize those words: “And the — the surface is fine and powdery. I can — I can pick it up loosely with my toe. It does adhere in fine layers like powdered charcoal to the sole and sides of my boots. I only go in a small fraction of an inch, maybe an eighth of an inch, but I can see the footprints of my boots and the treads in the fine, sandy particles.”

He later recalled the moonwalk as “pleasant,” adding: “The primary difficulty was just far too little time to do the variety of things we would have liked. We had the problem of the five-year-old boy in a candy store.”

But Armstrong always insisted that landing safely, not the moonwalk, was the main achievement. That achieved Kennedy’s and NASA’s goal. The “one giant leap” was gravy.

After tramping around to gather samples and measure the solar wind, Armstrong slept in a homemade hammock and Aldrin lay on the floor of the Eagle module. Both woke up sore and covered in scratchy moon dust “like chimney sweeps.”

They flew back to orbit and Armstrong almost uttered another quote for the history books.

As they left the moon’s surface, Armstrong’s voice is recorded as saying: “The Eagle is ...” But Aldrin interrupted: “Be advised of the pitchover.” And it was back to the technical language of flying, though Armstrong did have time to wonder why he was sitting on three 3,500-pound rockets and couldn’t hear them.

Liftoff from the moon, he noted, was gentle, like the floor rising up to meet him. There was a “spectacular ride” over features that NASA has nicknamed, such as Mount Marilyn (for the wife of astronaut Jim Lovell, of Apollo-8 and Apollo-13) and U.S. 1 (after the highway.)

In orbit, Armstrong squinted through the little telescope to try to find Collins and the command module shining in the unfiltered sunlight. But he allowed himself a little humour, asking Collins: “You’re not confused on which end to dock with, are you?”

And then they came home safely.

“Neil demonstrated back in Gemini (his first flight, in 1966) that having a human in the loop is critical,” Dave Williams says. Robots like the ones on Mars can’t do it all; Armstrong fixed a thruster on Gemini that was stuck in the On position and was throwing the spaceship off course.

Gordon Shepherd of York University was one of the few Canadians in the space business in the 1960s, when he worked on the satellite Alouette-2.

“I think that the early successes were based on two things: common sense and individual responsibility,” he said.

“People were in a hurry to get things done then, so individuals were given responsibility and they used their common sense, and the available tools, and moved ahead as quickly as they could. This did include thorough hardware testing, but also using simple tools (such as the sextant) where they provided adequate solutions.”

Today’s space community is different. “Agencies now are very sensitive to risk, and this generally means that individuals don’t take the whole responsibility. They are monitored through procedures, and by others, in an attempt to ensure that all flaws are identified and dealt with.”

In his Australian interview last year, Armstrong acknowledged the enormity of being on the moon was “special and memorable — but it was only instantaneous. There was work to do and they (Mission Control) were all over us with checklists.

“We weren’t there to meditate,” he said. “We were there to get things done.”

HERE~~~>http://www.ottawacitizen.com/life/Neil+Armstrong+early+astronauts+charted+course+with+sextant+slide+rules/7169859/story.html
St. Augustine: “The truth is like a lion; you don't have to defend it.
Let it loose; it will defend itself."

Offline Optimus

  • Globalist Destroyer
  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12,802
    • GlobalGulag.com
Re: DID ASTRONAUTS GO TO THE MOON? Here's a Red Herring
« Reply #18 on: March 15, 2015, 02:19:12 PM »
Why it was impossible to fake the 1969 moon landing
http://www.geek.com/news/why-it-was-impossible-to-fake-the-1969-moon-landing-1537386/

By Ryan Whitwam Jan. 26, 2013 1:00 pm

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sGXTF6bs1IU

In 1969, the United States landed two men on the moon while a third waited in orbit to scoop them up after a stroll around the lunar surface for a flag planting ceremony. Or maybe it never happened at all! That’s the position taken by some conspiracy theorists who stubbornly assert that the technology to reach the moon did not exist in 1969. In one 13-minute video, writer/director S G Collins delivers a deadpan refutation of that position and points out that we actually couldn’t have faked the moon landing at all.

The supposed photographic evidence cited by the conspiracy lovers has been debunked dozens of times already, but the video covers that one more time to be safe. To recap, anyone that knows how photography works can explain the apparent anomalies pointed out by the conspiracy. But the reason no one could have faked the moon landing has to do with the state of video technology in 1969. Essentially, the hoaxers claim the video footage was faked by just slowing down people walking in normal Earth gravity. However according to Collins, the camera required to do that didn’t exist at the time.

Slow motion video is done in one of two ways: you can shoot video at normal speed and slow down the playback, or you can film it at high speed and play at normal speed. The second way is called overcranking, and produces a smoother picture. In 1969 this was only possible with film cameras, which the moon landing was definitely not shot with.

So where does that leave the conspiracy? Well, there were some magnetic disc recorders in those days that could capture 30 seconds of normal speed video and play it back slower (that’s the first method from above). So surely that’s how those clever devils did it, right? Nope — the math just doesn’t work out. The Apollo 11 landing was filmed in 10fps, so you could get 90 seconds of corresponding slow motion video from one of these devices. The problem? There are 143 minutes of video from Apollo 11.

At this point, even the most ardent conspiracy theorist has to start doing logical gymnastics to stay on target. What about a super-secret larger magnetic disc recorder that could hold 95 times more video? Not possible. Maybe it was shot on film and overcranked? Only if you don’t mind splicing together thousands of frames completely seamlessly and somehow avoiding the telltale signs of film.

It’s strange to think about. We had the technology to fly to the moon in 1969, but we just didn’t have what it took to fake it. Generating 143 minutes of slow motion video was impossible. Even if you posit some magical kind of secret electronic video technology that NASA had in 1969, you’ve only explained Apollo 11. All subsequent missions filmed standard NTSC video at 29.97fps — three times as many frames would be needed. Would faking this stuff with Apollo-era technology really be any easier than going to the moon anyway?
“The Constitution is not an instrument for the government to restrain the people,
it's an instrument for the people to restrain the government.” – Patrick Henry

>>> Global Gulag Media & Forum <<<

Offline CaptObvious1234

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 115
Re: DID ASTRONAUTS GO TO THE MOON? Here's a Red Herring
« Reply #19 on: March 15, 2015, 02:49:10 PM »
Why it was impossible to fake the 1969 moon landing
http://www.geek.com/news/why-it-was-impossible-to-fake-the-1969-moon-landing-1537386/

By Ryan Whitwam Jan. 26, 2013 1:00 pm

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sGXTF6bs1IU

In 1969, the United States landed two men on the moon while a third waited in orbit to scoop them up after a stroll around the lunar surface for a flag planting ceremony. Or maybe it never happened at all! That’s the position taken by some conspiracy theorists who stubbornly assert that the technology to reach the moon did not exist in 1969. In one 13-minute video, writer/director S G Collins delivers a deadpan refutation of that position and points out that we actually couldn’t have faked the moon landing at all.

The supposed photographic evidence cited by the conspiracy lovers has been debunked dozens of times already, but the video covers that one more time to be safe. To recap, anyone that knows how photography works can explain the apparent anomalies pointed out by the conspiracy. But the reason no one could have faked the moon landing has to do with the state of video technology in 1969. Essentially, the hoaxers claim the video footage was faked by just slowing down people walking in normal Earth gravity. However according to Collins, the camera required to do that didn’t exist at the time.

Slow motion video is done in one of two ways: you can shoot video at normal speed and slow down the playback, or you can film it at high speed and play at normal speed. The second way is called overcranking, and produces a smoother picture. In 1969 this was only possible with film cameras, which the moon landing was definitely not shot with.

So where does that leave the conspiracy? Well, there were some magnetic disc recorders in those days that could capture 30 seconds of normal speed video and play it back slower (that’s the first method from above). So surely that’s how those clever devils did it, right? Nope — the math just doesn’t work out. The Apollo 11 landing was filmed in 10fps, so you could get 90 seconds of corresponding slow motion video from one of these devices. The problem? There are 143 minutes of video from Apollo 11.

At this point, even the most ardent conspiracy theorist has to start doing logical gymnastics to stay on target. What about a super-secret larger magnetic disc recorder that could hold 95 times more video? Not possible. Maybe it was shot on film and overcranked? Only if you don’t mind splicing together thousands of frames completely seamlessly and somehow avoiding the telltale signs of film.

It’s strange to think about. We had the technology to fly to the moon in 1969, but we just didn’t have what it took to fake it. Generating 143 minutes of slow motion video was impossible. Even if you posit some magical kind of secret electronic video technology that NASA had in 1969, you’ve only explained Apollo 11. All subsequent missions filmed standard NTSC video at 29.97fps — three times as many frames would be needed. Would faking this stuff with Apollo-era technology really be any easier than going to the moon anyway?

Illuminati used their sci-fi technology which surely they have for private use and there you go - forged video that is cheaper than attempting to do a real thing.

Offline Jackson Holly

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12,501
  • It's the TV, stupid!
    • JACKSON HOLLY'S OLD HOME PLACE
Re: DID ASTRONAUTS GO TO THE MOON?
« Reply #20 on: March 15, 2015, 02:51:37 PM »



… talk about "seat-of-the-pants" barn-storming!
Try it for a quarter-million miles (& BACK) in the
cold darkness of space … then repeat FIVE times!


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

During the early 1960s the APOLLO slide-rulers
were charged with a mission … create an onboard "computer"
to monitor and guide the manned missions … basically from scratch:


BUILD ONE YOURSELF! HERE'S HOW…

http://klabs.org/history/build_agc/build_agc_5.pdf




The Lunar Module Computer

Here's a challenge...

Develop a system that can control a 13,000 kg spaceship, orbiting at 3,500 kilometres per hour around the moon, land it safely within metres of a specified location and guide it back from the surface to rendezvous with a command ship in lunar orbit. The system has to work the first time, and minimise fuel consumption because the spacecraft only contains enough fuel for one landing attempt.

Do this with a computer that has barely 5,000 primitive integrated circuits, weighs 30 kg and costs over $150,000. In order to store your software, the computer doesn't have a disk drive, only 74 kilobytes of memory that has been literally hard-wired, and all of 4 Kb of something that is sort of like RAM.

Sounds daunting?

That's the task that faced Peter Adler and Don Eyles of the MIT Instrumentation Lab who were responsible for developing the software for the Apollo Lunar Module. Their system worked, but almost caused the first moon landing to be aborted in the final minutes before the touchdown.

The Apollo mission was conceived at the height of the Cold War. Planners were concerned that the Soviet Union might try to jam any navigational information sent from the ground, so the on-board computers had to be capable of having autonomous command of the spacecraft. The responsibility to build computers that were powerful enough to do the job but light enough to carry to the moon went to Stark Draper and his team at the MIT Instrumentation Lab.


Stark Draper ran the MIT Instrumentation Lab that developed the
Apollo Computers - the first to use integrated circuitry.

The computers that formed the basis of the Apollo Guidance and Navigation System (AGS) were at the bleeding edge of technology in the 1960s. They were the first to use the integrated circuit technology that subsequently gave us desktop computers and so many of the consumer electronic products that fill our lives today. One computer sat in the Command Module, another in the Lunar Module, just above the hatch that astronauts used to get onto the lunar surface.

Each computer had two types of memory, erasable and fixed. The fixed memory contained the programs, constants and landmark coordinates using 36,864 terms or words, each of 15 bits length. That came to a grand total of 74 kilobytes of memory. The erasable memory, which was used to store variable data used in calculations or as registers for logic operations, had only 2,048 15-bit terms.

The fixed memory was made from coincident-current ferrite cores woven into a rope with copper wires and sealed in plastic. Software components were encoded into a core according to the 'pattern' of its weave. Each core functioned as a small transformer, with up to 64 wires connected to each core. If a wire passed through a particular core, a '1' would be read. If a particular wire bypassed the core, a '0' would be read. If you wanted to change the software contained in fixed memory, you had to rewire the sealed core to change the bits. The erasable memory was made from similar materials but with a different design. Each core in the erasable memory could be changed using magnets. Turning clockwise to indicate a '1' or anti-clockwise indicating a '0'.

In order to use the computer, astronauts used a display and keyboard unit (DSKY, pronounced "disky"), which weighed another ten kilos. This wasn't a QWERTY keyboard, but a number pad along with some special buttons. In order to input a command or action, the user had to press a button marked "Verb", followed by a number that corresponded to the action. To input data, the user pressed the "Noun" button along with a number. Even though it sounds complicated, the interface was elegant and it worked.

Although the computer was slow, the operating system it used was well designed. Long before Linux, the MIT team developed a real-time multi-tasking operating system. There were interrupt-driven, time-dependent tasks, such as turning on the LM Descent Engine at the correct time, as well as priority-ordered jobs that dealt with less time-critical things. Each scheduled job has some erasable memory to use while it was executing.

As Peter Adler explains, "With so little Erasable memory available, we were forced to use the same memory address for different purposes at different times. Thus, a location whose contents might be altitude-over-the-lunar-surface during the landing stage might have contained the results of a sextant sighting of a navigational star from the alignment program. I think there were some memory locations that were shared seven ways. You can imagine the testing we had to do to ensure that the same memory location was not being used by more than one program at the same time."

CONTINUE HERE~~~>http://www.abc.net.au/science/moon/computer.htm
St. Augustine: “The truth is like a lion; you don't have to defend it.
Let it loose; it will defend itself."

Offline Jacob Law

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3,188
  • Its the Law, face it!
Re: DID ASTRONAUTS GO TO THE MOON?
« Reply #21 on: March 15, 2015, 03:05:22 PM »
LOL

That computer says it all, there is no way they went to the moon, and I can't believe Alex believes they did.
What do you under-stand?

worcesteradam

  • Guest
Re: DID ASTRONAUTS GO TO THE MOON?
« Reply #22 on: March 15, 2015, 03:34:25 PM »
The only thing I doubt is whether people have walked around on the surface of the moon.

The moon landing deniers I have no time for unless they come up with something original. (This thread was opened by the Van Allen Belt stuff, again!)

I believe in aeroplanes.
I believe in rockets
I believe in orbits
I am even willing to believe they have landed machines on the moon and brought them back again, successfully.

But putting human beings out into space,  down to another planet and then bringing them all the way back and doing it so successfully, needs to be questioned.

On top of that there are good reasons to question the Apollo Program, one being it was such a politically driven thing. Politicians and truth normally do not go together.

Offline Jackson Holly

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12,501
  • It's the TV, stupid!
    • JACKSON HOLLY'S OLD HOME PLACE
Re: DID ASTRONAUTS GO TO THE MOON?
« Reply #23 on: March 15, 2015, 03:39:23 PM »


quote worcesteradam:
The moon landing deniers I have no time for unless
they come up with something original.
(This thread was opened by the Van Allen Belt stuff, again!)


You did notice that piece was dated March 15, 2015? It is BRAND NEW
and is about NASAs reported concern about ACTUALLY maneuvering
through the Van Allen Belts and on into 'unknown' territory.

… just sayin'

St. Augustine: “The truth is like a lion; you don't have to defend it.
Let it loose; it will defend itself."

Offline Optimus

  • Globalist Destroyer
  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12,802
    • GlobalGulag.com
Re: DID ASTRONAUTS GO TO THE MOON?
« Reply #24 on: March 15, 2015, 03:58:47 PM »
LOL

That computer says it all, there is no way they went to the moon, and I can't believe Alex believes they did.

Really? Let's try the same logic with this...



LOL

That sextant says it all, there is no way they navigated the oceans in sailing ships and using sextants. The Americas weren't discovered until after GPS was invented.

See how that works?

They relied more on their own brain power than technology. Even with that limited technology they still made the necessary calculations to figure out where they were at, if they was still on coarse and figured out the necessary coarse adjustments to get back on track. It doesn't matter if it was on an ocean or in space. Nowadays, all you have to do is look at a GPS to see where you are at because people rely on tech much more than their own brains because they are turning to mush.
“The Constitution is not an instrument for the government to restrain the people,
it's an instrument for the people to restrain the government.” – Patrick Henry

>>> Global Gulag Media & Forum <<<

Offline PeaceAndFreedom

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 712
Re: DID ASTRONAUTS GO TO THE MOON? Here's a Red Herring
« Reply #25 on: March 15, 2015, 04:00:26 PM »

Slow motion video is done in one of two ways: you can shoot video at normal speed and slow down the playback, or you can film it at high speed and play at normal speed. The second way is called overcranking, and produces a smoother picture. In 1969 this was only possible with film cameras, which the moon landing was definitely not shot with.

Definitely not shot with according to whom? Pretty obviously, since moon skeptics have mentioned Kubrick (and possibly other Hollywood help) being involved, slow motion video not yet available to the public or a transfer process could well have been used to fake the missions.

Quote
Of course we went to the Moon
A defense of the Lunar Landings...
http://www.def-logic.com/articles/lunarlanding.html

By BRENT SILBY

And of course a counter-interpretation of selected evidence for the moon hoax does not refute the view, it's merely an alternative take.

Quote
It is true that the sun can release intense bursts of radiation, but not all radiation is harmful. Radiation from the sun can be measured in terms of solar particle energies. These range in intensity. The low energy particles, which measure in the thousands of electron volts, can easily be stopped by a space-craft's hull or a space suit. At the other end of the scale, the very high energy particles (over 1000 million electron volts) can pass right through a space-craft and the people on board without actually interacting with their body cells. The most dangerous particle energy level sits somewhere in the middle (in the millions of electron volts). During a solar flare, particles at all energy levels are produced and this can be very dangerous for astronauts. Fortunately, solar flares do not occur everyday and they do not send particles out in all directions.

Notice the writer never straightforwardly relates how much lethal radiation would be a problem, and how much of that they were exposed to. The relevant issue is then how much lethal radiation the astronauts would be exposed to (given their thin clothing and ship shielding) over the purported hours and days of the moon trip. This post shows it would have been hundreds of REM (including Van Allen's belief that the astronauts should have been lethally so exposed):

http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=8708.msg1376431#msg1376431

Quote
So, if there happened to be no atmosphere on Earth we would expect a speck of dust to fall to the ground at the same speed as a brick. This is the effect we see in the Lunar video footage. The dust falls to the ground quite quickly because there is no atmosphere to hold it up. It falls to the Lunar surface at the same speed as anything else that was dropped on the moon. The rate at which the dust falls is, of course, a little slower than the rate at which objects fall on Earth. This is because the moon's gravitational field is weaker than Earth's.

Notice the writer addresses secondary or miscellaneous dust and gravity arguments, instead of the main ones, such as the lack of a dust crater issue mentioned by moon skeptics like Morgan Reynolds:

"There was no dust on the LM support legs or leg pads either and no sign the engine nacelle or ground below it was burned, singed or melted. How could that happen? A 10,000 lb. thrust engine, even if throttled back to 3,000 lb. must blow out a crater, down to bedrock for heaven's sake, making a landing treacherous because of virtually zero visibility and unknown terrain exposed. The motor would generate heat of 5,000 degrees Fahrenheit and even if throttled back to, say, 3,000 d.F., only 1,300-2,400 d.F. is required to melt and fuse rock. None of what we expect happened.

Despite a rocket descent engine allegedly working hard a few feet below Armstrong and Aldrin, incredibly, and I do mean incredibly, Apollo 11's moon landing was remarkably quiet beneath the voices of astronauts and Houston control. It should have been loud as all-get-out, around 140 dB. The engine displayed admirable noise-vibration-harshness properties too, setting off no shake, rattle and roll aboard the flimsy craft, no heat problem, in fact, no problems of any kind. Oddly, Armstrong did not hover like a helicopter pilot does during landing, despite the difficulty of controlling an LM in a vacuum versus earth atmosphere. It was the first time anyone had landed a LM yet reverse thrust control went flawlessly, like everything else with Apollo. By contrast, Armstrong was nearly killed when he could not control the LM simulator on earth in May 1968 but for a timely ejection."

https://www.lewrockwell.com/2012/08/morgan-reynolds/moon-dust-rocket-engines-and-nasa/


Quote
We might notice [regarding lighting discrepancies] that the astronaut on the right was heading down a slope, while the astronaut on the left was at the foot of an upward slope. If the sun was behind them (to the far right of the picture) then their shadows would be correct.

Of course, a lot of the suspect photos involve lighting discrepancies involving the same object (e.g., an astronaut giving off two different shadows, when there is only one supposed light source). Different slopes can't explain that, whereas fakery easily can. Occam wins this one.

Finally, let's not forget the last moon hoax thread below, which also summarized the main reasons  (sloppy faked photos, lack of dust impact, the three radiation barriers, etc) making the official story untenable:

http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=235218.0
"I will not be pushed, filed, stamped, indexed, briefed, debriefed, or numbered!... I am not a number, I am a free man!"

Offline JT Coyoté

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4,517
  • "REMEMBER THE ALAMO!"
Re: DID ASTRONAUTS GO TO THE MOON?
« Reply #26 on: March 15, 2015, 04:03:09 PM »
LOL

That computer says it all, there is no way they went to the moon, and I can't believe Alex believes they did.

You may want to read the entire "original thread", Jake... your post here is like judging a book after only looking at the top edge of the cover... and Jack's duct tape experiment is done with the stuff you get at the local hardware store for $2.99, not the high tech titanium coated stuff that was used in the space program... and the computer you laughed at was augmented by many coordinated and well trained 1800cc cranial PCs, both on the ground and in the capsules... to fly in space in the 60s and 70s was a long and arduous training regimen just for a single mission...

Don't measure the men of the past by those of today...

JTCoyoté

"...When a country destroys it's currency, it
transfers wealth from the middle class
to the wealthy; and that is what you
are seeing today, the elimination of
the middle class."
~Dr. Ron Paul,12/10/11

Offline Jackson Holly

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12,501
  • It's the TV, stupid!
    • JACKSON HOLLY'S OLD HOME PLACE
Re: DID ASTRONAUTS GO TO THE MOON?
« Reply #27 on: March 15, 2015, 05:43:27 PM »


… here's another excellent discussion of the
guidance systems for the 1960s missions …
amazing stuff considering the tiny margins
for error … with, literally, not a pint of fuel
to spare!

http://www.ion.org/museum/item_view.cfm?cid=6&scid=5&iid=293

"
… the on-board system remained a critical part of Apollo, and the Apollo 8 mission tested it to its limits. James Lovell, appropriately a navy man, was the primary navigator for the mission, although the other astronauts, Frank Borman and William Anders, were trained to use the system. As the spacecraft left Earth orbit, Lovell found it difficult to get precise readings. It was hard to distinguish stars from pieces of ice and other small particles that surrounded the Command Module. As astronauts traveled toward the Moon, they never were in absolute darkness.

Establishing the Earth’s limb was difficult due to the planet’s atmosphere, although the astronauts went through extensive training at the Instrumentation Lab to learn to recognize a point on the horizon that they could return to consistently. On the positive side, correcting for gyroscopic drift was relatively a straightforward process. The astronaut would key in the code for a star into the computer, and the computer in turn would rotate the spacecraft until that star appeared in the telescope’s cross-hairs. The extent to which a star was off-center indicated the amount of drift. The astronaut would manipulate the optics until the star was centered, then press a button, and the computer would realign the gyros.

By the second day, Lovell was making much more precise readings. Despite having an extremely limited memory compared to modern computers, the Apollo Guidance Computer was able to take Lovell’s readings and translate them into accurate position and velocity data.



Astronaut James Lovell sighting through the sextant, during the Apollo 8 mission,
December 1968. His right hand is operating the controls that indicated to the
computer that the bodies found in the telescope were aligned.
Photo: NASA
St. Augustine: “The truth is like a lion; you don't have to defend it.
Let it loose; it will defend itself."

EvadingGrid

  • Guest
Re: DID ASTRONAUTS GO TO THE MOON?
« Reply #28 on: March 15, 2015, 05:44:02 PM »
LOL

That computer says it all, there is no way they went to the moon, and I can't believe Alex believes they did.

That computer was perfectly adequate, in fact it was deluxe.

The NASA computer would have had a hand coded Assembler program. Modern computers use fat lazy inefficient compilers and interpreters, these are like around 100 times less efficient. besides which your not looking at writing a massive program just to do some math.

I say this because back in the day, I used to write Assembler.

Offline Jacob Law

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3,188
  • Its the Law, face it!
Re: DID ASTRONAUTS GO TO THE MOON?
« Reply #29 on: March 15, 2015, 05:50:51 PM »
Really? Let's try the same logic with this...



LOL

That sextant says it all, there is no way they navigated the oceans in sailing ships and using sextants. The Americas weren't discovered until after GPS was invented.

See how that works?

They relied more on their own brain power than technology. Even with that limited technology they still made the necessary calculations to figure out where they were at, if they was still on coarse and figured out the necessary coarse adjustments to get back on track. It doesn't matter if it was on an ocean or in space. Nowadays, all you have to do is look at a GPS to see where you are at because people rely on tech much more than their own brains because they are turning to mush.

Really; you are going to compare navigating the ocean with going to the moon, landing, then taking off from the moon, hooking up with an orbiting spacecraft and well coming back to earth, well OK, chuckle, .....Ahhh.... I don't know what to tell you........ I guess believe whatever you want...... because obviously you're willing to believe..... well whatever. haa haa haa........ OK...... I really can't fathom why you want to believe this hoax, everything has been a hoax, it's all a hoax, but why with all you know as an infowarriors what keeps on believing these hoaxster? If you really knew the half of it...... you would completely be blown away...... its been a hoax for a long, long time..... but I find it's not really worth putting any redundant information more than what already is available..... in the face of all the evidence that already faces us, well nothing is going to make any difference anyway........ "There's none so blind as those who will not see"
So I respectfully totally disagree with you and anyone else that believes this hoax. 

What do you under-stand?

Offline Jacob Law

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3,188
  • Its the Law, face it!
Re: DID ASTRONAUTS GO TO THE MOON?
« Reply #30 on: March 15, 2015, 05:57:37 PM »
That computer was perfectly adequate, in fact it was deluxe.

The NASA computer would have had a hand coded Assembler program. Modern computers use fat lazy inefficient compilers and interpreters, these are like around 100 times less efficient. besides which your not looking at writing a massive program just to do some math.

I say this because back in the day, I used to write Assembler.

That computer is a joke...... they can't go to moon today..... the joke is on all humanity....... I not sure if that computer could run a Nintendo game.
What do you under-stand?

EvadingGrid

  • Guest
Re: DID ASTRONAUTS GO TO THE MOON?
« Reply #31 on: March 15, 2015, 09:22:48 PM »
That computer is a joke...... they can't go to moon today..... the joke is on all humanity....... I not sure if that computer could run a Nintendo game.

Just because you can not program a computer in assembler, does not mean that other people are not perfectly capable.





Offline Jacob Law

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3,188
  • Its the Law, face it!
Re: DID ASTRONAUTS GO TO THE MOON?
« Reply #32 on: March 15, 2015, 09:48:26 PM »
Just because you can not program a computer in assembler, does not mean that other people are not perfectly capable.

OK, it's little different going to the moon, but I find it interesting you guys are so sure about this not being a hoax.
What do you under-stand?

Offline decemberfellow

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5,036
Re: DID ASTRONAUTS GO TO THE MOON?
« Reply #33 on: March 15, 2015, 11:18:41 PM »
OK, it's little different going to the moon, but I find it interesting you guys are so sure about this not being a hoax.
I agree with ya Jacob, simply because if it was done then,  it seems to me it  would certainly be taking place today.
Rev21:4
And God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes; and there shall be no more death, neither sorrow, nor crying, neither shall there be any more pain: for the former things are passed away.


Who am I
 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v7Fk6dt_uHo

Offline Jackson Holly

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12,501
  • It's the TV, stupid!
    • JACKSON HOLLY'S OLD HOME PLACE
Re: DID ASTRONAUTS GO TO THE MOON?
« Reply #34 on: March 15, 2015, 11:35:48 PM »
I agree with ya Jacob, simply because if it was done then,  it seems to me it  would certainly be taking place today.

… good point. Why spend over three decades going
round and round the Earth running "experiments"
when it's so easy to jump over to the moon for
some REAL adventure (and profit?).


St. Augustine: “The truth is like a lion; you don't have to defend it.
Let it loose; it will defend itself."

Offline JT Coyoté

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4,517
  • "REMEMBER THE ALAMO!"
Re: DID ASTRONAUTS GO TO THE MOON?
« Reply #35 on: March 15, 2015, 11:44:48 PM »
OK, it's little different going to the moon, but I find it interesting you guys are so sure about this not being a hoax.

Absolutely certain beyond doubt... the computer did all computational calculations but the control was in the six hands attached to the 3 well schooled brains on-board, each capable of doing the task of the other 2 as well as his own... they weren't there for a computer controlled joy ride. Coupled with the computers, the brains, bodies, and souls at mission control, the capsule was a completely integrated bio-mechanical wonder.

Just like there are no atheists in foxholes, there are none in space capsules either...

Read this transcript of day 5 from Apollo 8... pay particularly close attention to entries 102:07:58 thru 102:08:59...

The men who took Kennedy's challenge in 1961 and were aboard Apollo's 17 missions were men who loved America and John Kennedy, they were not in league with the LYING bastards who killed him...

JTCoyoté

"For the Defense of the Liberties and
Independence, of the United States,
against the hostile designs of foreign
enemies."
~Continental Army
Recruitment Poster from 1776

Offline JT Coyoté

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4,517
  • "REMEMBER THE ALAMO!"
Re: DID ASTRONAUTS GO TO THE MOON?
« Reply #36 on: March 15, 2015, 11:57:36 PM »
I agree with ya Jacob, simply because if it was done then,  it seems to me it  would certainly be taking place today.

The globalists took over the manned space program and dismantled it then they pulled NASA into controlled secrecy by 2004... you boy's don't seem to understand that America is no longer free... and they are trying to take down the last vestige of American space age genius right now... you're typing on it...any questions.

JTCoyoté

"The enemy has demanded a surrender at discretion,
otherwise, the garrison are to be put to the sword, if
the fort is taken -- I have answered the demand with
a cannon shot, & our flag still waves proudly from the
walls -- I shall never surrender or retreat."

~William Barret Travis,
Lt. Col. Comdt., Alamo-Bejar,
Feby. 24th, 1836

Offline iamc2

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4,818
Re: DID ASTRONAUTS GO TO THE MOON?
« Reply #37 on: March 16, 2015, 12:18:42 AM »
 I personally am indifferent if man went to the Moon or not!

My concern is WHAT is NASA up to---as it is a Satanic Mission with Hellish intent!

...maybe only the Man on the Moon knows, if, Man went to the Moon... :o
"When the Truth was murdered:
Common Sense ran away..."

Offline decemberfellow

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5,036
Re: DID ASTRONAUTS GO TO THE MOON?
« Reply #38 on: March 16, 2015, 12:31:33 AM »
The globalists took over the manned space program and dismantled it then they pulled NASA into controlled secrecy by 2004... you boy's don't seem to understand that America is no longer free... and they are trying to take down the last vestige of American space age genius right now... you're typing on it...any questions.

JTCoyoté

"The enemy has demanded a surrender at discretion,
otherwise, the garrison are to be put to the sword, if
the fort is taken -- I have answered the demand with
a cannon shot, & our flag still waves proudly from the
walls -- I shall never surrender or retreat."

~William Barret Travis,
Lt. Col. Comdt., Alamo-Bejar,
Feb. 24th, 1836

Disagree with ya there  JT they pulled a fast one on ya. I believed it once too.  Agree there were some marvelous inventions from those days, not only what we are typing on but talking on, cooking on,driving and watching, hell most  if not all weapondry(spelling?)today started from those times, and you know with their want for power and control the moon would be colonized or militarized or both today.  What a beautiful spot for fema camps huh.
Rev21:4
And God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes; and there shall be no more death, neither sorrow, nor crying, neither shall there be any more pain: for the former things are passed away.


Who am I
 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v7Fk6dt_uHo

Offline JT Coyoté

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4,517
  • "REMEMBER THE ALAMO!"
Re: DID ASTRONAUTS GO TO THE MOON?
« Reply #39 on: March 16, 2015, 12:53:54 AM »
Disagree with ya there  JT they pulled a fast one on ya. I believed it once too.  Agree there were some marvelous inventions from those days, not only what we are typing on but talking on, cooking on,driving and watching, hell most  if not all weapondry(spelling?)today started from those times, and you know with their want for power and control the moon would be colonized or militarized or both today.  What a beautiful spot for fema camps huh.

I don't "believe" what I said is true... I "KNOW" what I said is true...

It's called the internet, btw.

You can disagree with the truth all you want... but if I was you...I would work very hard on improving my ability at discerning the good guys from the bad guys...

Oldyoti

"It is natural for men, who wish to hasten the adoption of a measure,
to tell us, now is the crisis-now is the critical moment which must be
seized, or all will be lost: and to shut the door against free enquiry,
whenever conscious the thing presented has defects in it, which time
and investigation will probably discover. This has been the custom of
tyrants and their dependents in all ages."

~Federal Farmer, 1787, Anti Federalist Papers