Young Aussie genius whipping NASA in Moon Hoax Debate!

I started with the technical problems NASA faced in outer space. In fact, I discovered there are two separate zones out there, an inner space and an outer space, and that fact eventually became very significant in my research.

It appears that humans are most likely operating in inner space (the space lab) but outer space, beyond the Van Allen radiation belt, the magnetosphere, 560 miles up, may be too deadly to enter due to solar radiation. If that data proves to be true, Earthmen could not have gone to the moon and returned without some signs of radiation poisoning, cell damage and DNA alteration, and most likely, death from cancer.

The first concern I faced when I started to write the book was my own public credibility. After all, I was the person who told the country (Votescam) that their votes were being rigged by a cartel of powerful elite, including the owners of major media in America.

Now I found myself investigating the possibility that we didn't go to the moon. "You've got to be nuts," said my friends. "First you told them the vote is rigged and now you question whether we went to the moon!? They'll hang you Times Square!"

www.recrea.org...

A giant pedal for mankind?
It is the future, and American astronauts have again landed on the moon. Emerging from their spacecraft, they perform such familiar chores as setting up a TV camera, placing various scientific instruments around their landing site, and collecting rocks and samples of the dusty lunar soil. Then they return to the ship to prepare for more far-ranging exploration. When the spacecraft's big hatch reopens, the astronauts scoot out, pedaling away as if they were on bicycles.
A bike on the moon? Yes, says M.I.T.
Mechanical Engineer David Gordon Wilson, who insists human-powered transportation, as he calls it, is really the only way to go on a moon mission. Adds Wilson: "Such a vehicle offers lunar explorers convenience, reliability, independence of energy supplies and beneficial physiological effects."


Read more: www.time.com...

Wilson, co-author of the book Bicycling Science, is admittedly something of a bike nut. He pedals to class rain or shine. Even before Project Apollo was on the launchpad, he tried vainly to persuade NASA to include a pedal-powered vehicle. But the space agency opted instead for its $38 million, battery-driven lunar rover, a two-man vehicle that took up valuable payload capacity.
Unfazed by NASA's skepticism, Wilson is peddling his idea again. Writing in the magazine Galileo, he calculates that in the lunar environment, with its low gravity (only one-sixth that of earth's) and virtual lack of atmosphere, even an astronaut weighted with life-support equipment could easily achieve speeds in excess of 30 kph (19 m.p.h.) aboard an appropriately designed lunar bike

Hmmm....

In the late 1960′s we were this close to motorcycling on the moon, which might be the most awesome thing you can do on two wheels. Built as an alternate to the Lunar Rover (LRV), NASA wasn’t entirely confident that Boeing would have the LRV ready for the Apollo 15 mission, and explored using a two-wheeled vehicle instead for helping astronauts bound around in the Palus Putredinus. As we know from history, the LRV was built in time for Apollo 15 and its subsequent missions, thus the Lunar Motorbike was never used.

Pictured here in the Vomit Comet,

blacknotblack.net...

a special purpose KC-135 airplane that undulates in the air and simulates zero-g and low-g environments, the Lunar Motorbike looks to be a very simple and to the point two-wheeler. Not much is known about the vehicle as it was scrapped after the Apollo 15 mission.

From what information we can find, the Lunar Motorbike has two pneumatic tires, and was extremely light. There is some speculation that the Lunar Motorbike was planned to be used in the Apollo 20 mission, but since that mission was ultimately cancelled it never came to fruition.

www.asphaltandrubber.com...

reply to post by FoosM

4) Was the 10-foot Rover too long to fit into the 5-foot side of the LM? Collier challenges NASA to disprove the above in a public demonstration to American taxpayers!

The LRV folds. Very thorough research there. Here's some of those missing documents:
Boeing
Grumman

reply to post by FoosM

]This investigation and that of others, including investigator Bill Kaysing,
who is now suing Astronaut James Lovell for slander (jury trial, Santa Cruz, Ca., Oct. 7th), cannot be ignored.

In 1997, Kaysing filed a lawsuit against astronaut Jim Lovell for libel when Lovell called Kaysing's claims "wacky" in the San José Metro News, July 25-31, 1996.[4]

The guy is wacky. His position makes me feel angry. We spent a lot of time getting ready to go to the moon. We spent a lot of money, we took great risks, and it's something everyone in this country should be proud of. — James Lovell

The case was dismissed in 1999 (Plait 2002:173) following the granting of a Motion for Summary Judgment filed by San Francisco attorney John Hardy, representing James Lovell. The judgment was affirmed on appeal on First Amendment grounds.

Source

Pesky First Amendment.

MoonFaker: The Exhibit B Addendum
The Probe and Drogue issue

reply to post by FoosM


Are you going somewhere with this bicycle thing, FoosM, or just trying to throw dust in people's eyes? Everyone go back a couple of pages to catch up, please.

This thread is completely out of hand.

There is too much posting of external sources and way too many quotes of entire posts from this thread.

I suggest that members read these links and get it together on the posting rules of ATS.

This is a very large thread and as it is, it is not easy to moderate.

When the violations reach the magnitude that they have reached here, the thread's viability becomes threatened.

Please use the "Reply to" option at the top of posts to be referred to and keep quotes from external sources to a minimum as outlined in the links provided below.

Posts that consist entirely of external material with no original commentary are likely to be deleted and warnings given to the posters.

Posting work written by others. **ALL MEMBERS READ**

ABOUT ATS: Warnings for excessive quoting, and how to quote

Mod Edit: No Quote/Plagiarism – Please Review This Link.

Mod Edit: External Source Tags Instructions – Please Review This Link.

Here is how NASA faked the CM splashdown:

Project Apollo : Last Five Miles Home


A documentary produced by Northrop Ventura Corporation detailing development and testing of the Apollo Command Module Earth Landing System (ELS) to include the spacecraft's Main Parachutes used to safely recover the crew after returning from the moon. The film includes discussion and footage of parachute production, drop tests, development of the affiliated Earth Landing Sequence Controller, Drogue and Pilot parachutes.

NASA used Cargomasters to drop-test early space capsules and to transport a variety of space products. A comparison of several aircraft (fixed and rotary wing) relative to their use as carriers for command module air-drop tests was made. To meet the test criteria established by the Apollo mechanical systems group, an air-drop vehicle must be capable of achieving a minimum altitude of 20,000 ft (almost 4 miles). In January 1963 a preliminary contract change proposal (CCP) was submitted to NASA for modification, maintenance, operation, and support of a C-133A aircraft for use in parachute subsystem testing on the Apollo earth landing system. In April 1962 NASA was negotiating with Northrop-Ventura (formerly Radioplane) and Douglas Aircraft Comapny for modification of the C-133A Aircraft. Attempts were being made to obtain the aircraft by bailment. Douglas was to provide the C-133A not later than 1 September 1962 in order to modify it and turn it over to Northrop-Ventura by 15 October 1962.

On 30 October 1967 a parachute test (Apollo Drop Test 84-1) failed at EI Centro, Calif. The parachute test vehicle (PTV) was dropped from a C-133A aircraft at an altitude of 9,144 meters to test a new 5-meter drogue chute and to investigate late deployment of one of the three main chutes. Launch and drogue chute deployment occurred as planned, but about 1.5 seconds later both drogue chutes prematurely disconnected from the PTV. A backup emergency drogue chute installed in the test vehicle and designed to be deployed by ground command in the event of drogue chute failure also failed to operate. The PTV fell for about 43 seconds before the main chutes were deployed. Dynamic pressure at the time of chute deployment was estimated at about 1.2 newtons per square centimeter (1.7 pounds per square inch). All parachutes failed at or shortly after main parachute line stretch. The PTV struck the ground in the drop zone and was buried about 1.5 meters.

So what could the cameras really pick up?

ntrs.nasa.gov...

The main red & white chutes.





www.globalsecurity.org...

reply to post by GradyPhilpott


Well said.

reply to post by GradyPhilpott

This thread is completely out of hand.

and beyond...

No longer is the thead about the details, it is about posting youtube links and spaming ATS.

Truthfully this thread should have been closed months ago.

reply to post by FoosM


SO...in a thread ostensibly about the "Young Aussie genius..." (Yeah. Right.)

You found, on YouTube, an assortment of clips from an approximately 90-minute junk video, made by a James M. Collier, back in 1997...and post them for WHAT reason, exactly??

To show that the "great genius" "Jarrah White" (noise) is influenced not only by the likes of Ralph Rene' (crackpot) and Bill Kaysing (whackjob, and/or "whacky")...but that, really ALL HE DID was copy from them?? AND, tossing into the mix, perhaps also saw and copied from this other mental midget, Collier??

It will deserve its own thread.....but, you might possibly have been aware of that, already? When yu spammed here, withthis junk??

Oh, and by "own thread", I mean to properly address the full extent of the "Paper Moon" video, and demolish it point-by-point. BECAUSE, since James M. Collier is NOT the topic and point of this thread, it is not appropriate to do it here.

Instead, a simple link to what others have done.....to whet the appetites, and clear the air about this fraud "Collier":

The Collier Article Critique -- by Jim Scotti.

(NOTE: Since I had never heard of this joker before [Collier] in all the "hoax" literature, I can only surmise that he flamed out, crashed and burned a long time ago. The article above, by Mr. Scotti, that I found, and linked....the one SO FAR....refers it seems, to an "article" that Collier wrote. I assume BEFORE he followed up with the crappy video, which, it can be inferred, was based entirely on that original "article"....).

The leg extends in its usual fashion, from the hip to the foot.





It's just the fabric covering of the top of the boot with dirt on it. Just like you see in:

AS14-64-9089


AS14-66-9230


AS14-66-9231









Looks to me like he's mid-stride, and the ground is uneven, so there's some dirt in front of the toe of the boot blocking some of it.





Looks like his feet aren't much further than shoulder-width apart.

This animation, switching between AS14-68-9404 and AS14-68-9405 might make it a little clearer where his leg is:



Note that the photos weren't taken from the exact same location, but things line up well enough to tell what's going on.





Yes, those are tongs.

Originally posted by nataylor

Originally posted by SayonaraJupiter
For what technical reason was gold foil necessary on the A11 lander foot pad?

Because the descent engine generated a lot of thermal radiation, and damaging the landing gear before touching down would be bad.

Thanks for the straight answer. I appreciate the neutrality in your response. I had always thought it was to protect sensitive instruments from solar or other radiation.

And seriously, I can't be bothered to read past page 99 of this thread. There is simply too much ad hom, too much snarky double-edged questions. Peace.

reply to post by SayonaraJupiter


Thing is...(perhaps this simple fact has been missed?)....

It was not "gold foil".

It is important to be very, very specific, sometimes....with terms. AND, it is possible to use words that conjure up different impressions, in people's minds....

It was not "foil", per se...it was mylar..."aluminized" to be reflective. Actually, VERY innovative, for its day. QUITE commonplace, now. We see it everywhere....in mayonnaise packaging, to colorful helium-filled balloons at Disneyland....

Sometimes, and maybe apologies are in order....it is ASSUMED that people realize this. Since they live in this modern age. Perhaps, some aspects of the science behind m,any of these invention, an d their original purpose have been lost...hence the confusion and need for instruction and clarification, today.

I hate to be contrary to ATS member nataylor, and the point about the descent engine (OH....I mis-read....no mention of that, so good. POINT is, the struts HAD to be insulated, to prevent uneven heating, and the way that they might distort, as a result.....)

....the mylar insulation was merely to reflect the Sun's energy, on the portions of the LM thought to be most susceptible to adverse uneven heating, from Solar infrared radiation. The landing struts, especially....could expand on one side, unevenly, due to the infrared heating in direct Sunlight..all depends on materials used and function expected and engineered.

Same with the aluminized mylar insulation....(TO REFLECT SUNLIGHT) on other portions of the LM. Such as, the equipment bays, and they contained various tanks and components that needed to have a regulated temperature range......A compromise, and a recent invention, actually.....because it was LIGHTWEIGHT, and very effective, for its weight.

This is not a secret....is actually VERY easy to research.....

Originally posted by weedwhacker
It was not "foil", per se...it was mylar..."aluminized" to be reflective. Actually, VERY innovative, for its day. QUITE commonplace, now. We see it everywhere....in mayonnaise packaging, to colorful helium-filled balloons at Disneyland....

Actually, the gold-colored "foil" is most likely Kapton film. The Mylar tended to be used under the Kapton, or, in the case of the lunar module ascent stage, under the thermal panels and above the micrometeorite shielding. They also used nickel-plated KEL-F film in places.

reply to post by weedwhacker


I'll concur on that point. Reasonable and smart people can be experts in one subject yet be completely useless in something else. Interested laymen (like myself) can easily make the mistake of referring to that stuff as "gold foil".

Originally posted by nataylor


Actually, the gold-colored "foil" is most likely Kapton film. The Mylar tended to be used under the Kapton, or, in the case of the lunar module ascent stage, under the thermal panels and above the micrometeorite shielding. They also used nickel-plated KEL-F film in places.

So, if I am stating this correctly, what I referred to as "gold foil" was actually "gold colored" aluminized Kapton used 1) to protect the landing foot pads from the descent thruster and 2) infrared shielding from direct sunlight. That sounds reasonable enough. I always wondered why they didn't cover everything in sheets of "gold foil"! LOL.

Mod Edit: Quoting – Please Review This Link.

reply to post by Tomblvd


wwu is still trotting it out on the David Icke forum.

www.davidicke.com...

www.davidicke.com...

TJ

Originally posted by SayonaraJupiter

So, if I am stating this correctly, what I referred to as "gold foil" was actually "gold colored" aluminized Kapton used 1) to protect the landing foot pads from the descent thruster and 2) infrared shielding from direct sunlight. That sounds reasonable enough. I always wondered why they didn't cover everything in sheets of "gold foil"! LOL.

Ask the question how this kapton wasn't shredded by razor sharp dust and pebbles during the LM descents.

Was It Only A Paper Moon?
rest of the film:


No Bottom rockets
Lack of smoke
Shadow issues of the LM
No soil disturbance
No crater
Lighting issues shadow side of the LM

And many more observations of fakery:







Collier's film in several areas are a bit dated.
That is because much of the information we have now have of Apollo wasn't readily available when he made the film. This is especially thanks to the internet.
That said, many observations he has made are still valid today and not usually brought up by other skeptics.

Unlike White, Collier, like Ranen, actually go to the source to find out the facts regarding Apollo.
And its then we see what a house of cards the Apollo Simulation Program really was. And it becomes clear
how easy it actually was to fake the missions and fool the general public; who were fed just enough information to let their imagination fill in the rest. This is why Collier film compliments White's work so well. We have another approach letting us see the dirt under the Apollo rug.

reply to post by FoosM


ALL BULL!!! You have participated long enough in this thread to know that EACH of these issues have been addressed, are addressed, and are known to be "opinions" of very, very uneducated people:

No Bottom rockets
Lack of smoke
Shadow issues of the LM
No soil disturbance
No crater
Lighting issues shadow side of the LM

Nonsense.

"smoke"? Really nonsense!

"shadows"?? [yawn]

"soil"? Already discussed/explained.

"crater"? Utter nonsense, again....

The last one, "lighting issues"?? Isn't that same as #3?? Gawd, but if it wasn't so obvious that you're trolling, it would be useful to once again explain all these misconceptions. HOWEVER, it seem obvious that you post this garbage every few pages, counting on the fact that this thread is SO long, that most newcomers won't have the opportunity to read through it all.

NOTE TO NEWCOMERS! Please read the thread.

Because, this member "FoosM" posts nothing but the same already dis-proven garbage. Either out of an incredible ignorance, and inability to comprehend even the most basic physics and photography lessons....or, for an agenda all his/her own, as yet undetermined.......


Therefore, like a seagull, you drop your crap, and fly off......thinking that it will make an impression, on impressionable and gullible people.

THERE is an impression you are leaving......but it isn't the one you seem to hope for....