How many ATS members still believe in the Moon landings?

originally posted by: TheConstruKctionofLight
a reply to: lvnlrg

The moon is an artificial hollow satellite - part of a soul capture machine, or so they say

Except the tides say otherwise.

a reply to: TheConstruKctionofLight

Dead man switch at best.

a reply to: TheConstruKctionofLight

I'm fairly sure Lear said something along those lines, too. Or he was playing parrot...that's completely possible.

originally posted by: TheConstruKctionofLight
a reply to: Phage

counter attack

A day late?
Good plan.

originally posted by: seagull
a reply to: namelesss

No earthbound telescope can see any of the sites with resolution enough to make out details of any worth.

Nor can Hubble, it simply wasn't designed to, if my understanding is correct, see things that close by.

Only craft orbiting above the lunar surface can make out the detail necessary to confirm the existence of every one of the sites.

...and I'm old enough to remember the depositing of "said garbage".

Perhaps I was being a bit hyperbolic, but the fact remains that that crap CAN be observed independently.
Yes, I added a bit of dramatic hyperbole for presentation sake.
Yeah, I remember watching that stuff on TV, also.
For it all to be a hoax from then to now would make it the world's greatest conspiracy ever, not to mention beyond human capacity to accomplish!
Cheers! *__-

a reply to: namelesss

Ah.

Nevermind then. I've read words very similar to that previous post from folks claiming hoax.

I may have jumped to an erroneous conclusion. Sorry about that.

For a conspiracy of this magnitude to have survived this long is quite impossible. On that we're agreed.

Sure we went.
Sure they didnt tell us everything about what they found.

Why haven't we been back there?
3 reasons stand out; 1 it's too expensive, 2 someone else is already there & doesn't want visitors, 3 NASA forgot how to build a saturn 5...

But they can program a satellite to smash into it.i guess that was ET's car park.....

a reply to: playswithmachines

3 reasons stand out; 1 it's too expensive,

Right the first time. There is no financial reward in returning.

2 someone else is already there & doesn't want visitors,

Highly unlikely.

3 NASA forgot how to build a saturn 5...

Wrong; Saturn V technology is being used in NASA's Space Launch System, and the basic research made Blue Origin possible.

a reply to: DJW001

That's why they asked the Navy to go fish the spent stages out the water 10 years later.
Seems some drawings were trashed, and the guys that designed it were long since retired or dead.
You think that mistakes like that can't happen?

We DO have antigrav technology, all this playing with rockets is purely window dressing for the sheeple.
ETA That's another reason we aren't 'officially' going back.

a reply to: playswithmachines

We DO have antigrav technology, all this playing with rockets is purely window dressing for the sheeple.

If we have anti-gravity technology why don't we use it to scare the bejeebers out of the Russians and Chinese by flying it over the Super Bowl every year?

a reply to: DJW001

Apparently they are off-world, having to deal with someone much more dangerous than the Russians, i would think.

ETA and who says the russians arent up there working with them?

There are certain radar bands reserved for 'space research/military' use, starting at 10.12Ghz to 10.24GHz
You will find that this requency is used by ALL the developed countries, including India or example.
So it seems that despite our differences we can work together on certain things, and quietly.

a reply to: playswithmachines

Anti-grav technology?

You do have some evidence for this?

I did post some recent telescope pictures of I believe two of the flags. So take it for what it is worth.

Now, unlike most of you, I was around when most of this started.
Not, are the landings fakes, but the original space race, long before the moon landings.
It was all political propaganda, we are better than the Russians, the Russians are better than us, blah blah.
What logical reason was there to fly three days to a big rock with no air ??
Our big rock has air and water !!! And I find that kinda of nice, especially if you want to breath and have a cold drink.
Other than the invention of new technology, what was gained by going there all those times ???

I really don't believe they had the tech do it back then, ( talking about faking ) at least at first.
The talk back then was about all the UFO encounters the Mercury and Gemini guys had.
And ole Gus knew it all, so go figure.

(In the late 70s I did ground transport security, we moved rocket engines and such down the interstate, my badge is bigger than your badge smokie !!)
That was also why I was able to debunk the thing the other day, I just called somebody I knew.

All I can say is keep digging, sooner or later, if something is off, they or their children or grandchildren will give up some film or files or something else credible.

I would hate for it to be proven fake, but telling or finding the truth is more important.
Back in those days, little of it was secret, and there was no scuttle-butt of hoaxes.
You also have to remember, a lot of these guys were WW2 vets, and there was no way would they have been silent
about it. It took hundreds of people to do things, not a few dozen like it is today.

Buck

The interesting thing about the controversy about the truth of what went on during the late 60s is that we know a lot of things we would not have bothered to learn.

We know about 'albedo'. We know about how the Sun should reflect in visors. We know a little about the Van Allen Belts. We know about the initial plan using a multiple stage rocket to land on the Moon and the virtually last minute plan to send an orbiter and lander (which was initially poo-pooed by NASA).

We know about now NASA handles any 'inquiries' or questions (by threats and insults and denials).

We know that people here are still deluded, thinking you can resolve a 30x30 foot image with any telescopes.

We know that people here think that laser reflectors can't be placed on the surface by robotics (like the USSR did)

We know that having any doubts enrages people, incites them to near violence.

We know that Clinton had doubts about it, that one Astronaut 'can't remember it', that one reserve astronaut seriously doubts it.

We know they can talk noted scientists can be threatened into changing their theories (Van Allen).

So, landings, real or not, it hasn't been all bad.

a reply to: Maverick7

We know that Clinton had doubts about it, that one Astronaut 'can't remember it', that one reserve astronaut seriously doubts it.

What?

We know they can talk noted scientists can be threatened into changing their theories (Van Allen).

What?

Gravity waves were first produced as far back as the early 50's following T.T.Brown's experiments, later by Podkletnov et al, and also by me & other inventors. OK all i moved was a 50 gram lump o wax, but it was movement, and it required surprisingly little power. More advanced stuff is in the form of the FluxLiner or "ARV". I have 1000's of documents plus my own results to verify this. If i can do it in a garden shed on a 3 grand a year budget, what do you think the 17 trillion 'black' programs are capable of?

Yes there are still a lot of technical problems with the 1960's programs like battery life, radiation etc etc. One would have expected astronauts like Aldrin to have died of cancer soon after their return, they did in fact live very long after.

Ed Mitchell was the only one who ever hinted at a cover-up, and even then it was about what they saw, not if it was faked. They had tech even back in the 60's which is still highly classified today, and they probably used it on the Apollo missions.

a reply to: Helious

Yep I have no doubts we landed on the moon.

Tides.
The moon is almost 1/3 diameter of Earth, yet only has 1/6 gravity. It is also tide-locked.
When they carried out seismic tests there they say it 'rang like a bell'.
That to me says that it must have big cavities in there.

It's definitely worth going back there, and this time take some hi-res colour camera's, and NOT break it just before the first EVA! (i often wonder if they did that on purpose)

a reply to: DJW001

Some watch the Super Bowl ads like hawks over there on the Aviation Projects forum for the very same reason: clues as to what is coming down the pipe. The triangle shaped shadow on the cloud (Boeing? NG?) only caused a little stir. The one ad mentioning starships generated a pretty good deal of posts. But yeah, it will be cool when 3 triangles from 23rd Arm of the Secret Space fleet float over the LA coliseum before the super bowl!

Speculating sure is fun!



Yeah, we went to the moon, OP. And I still believe it to this day.