It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by lestweforget
Nice post there Delphi, some good points very similar to my own previously.
You are right, showing tech doesn't prove anything. However zooming in on footprints, and the handprints from where they kept falling over in those shady movies, most definately would, in my opinion. And when I state this, I am talking about a live feed that can be verified and viewed by multiple sources worldwide and is then scrutinized publicly by scientist and officials not employed in any way by our Gov't or Nasa.
Originally posted by backinblack
Showing tech on the moon does not mean man has been there..
I'm not 100% sure we went there but I also haven't yet seen the "smoking gun" that proves we haven't..
1.) We have satellites that can image what type of cigarettes a person is holding or the numbers on a lottery ticket....
... yet not one of the space imaging devices is able to see with obvious clarity, any of the junk they supposedly left there.
Nasa and the Gov't have the technology to end this debate once and for all.
The fact that they don't take one of these satellites or ground based telescopes and do a live show zooming in and out, and clearly showing everything from the stars on the flag to the rover tracks on the surface, just goes to justify skeptics beliefs.
2.) If they really had 800+ lbs of real moon dust/soil/rock samples why did it takes forty years to come up with the notion that there is water in the craters.
3. Again, here we are slamming primitive rockets into the Moon, yet we supposedly have incredible Robots roaming the surface of Mars.
Just saying, logically it makes no sense...
Already got one dude, and $84,000 of FA loans to prove it.
Originally posted by weedwhacker
Really....try getting an education.....
Got proof, and a source for that? Didn't think so.....
"supposedly"?? Get an education. Try to learn some science....THAT way you may begin to understand one tenth of one percent of the complexity...
And, the multi-billion dollar type of Intel satellites used by agencies such as the NSA and NRO.....they aren't going to spend that much (and more) to satisfy some fringe believers' nonsense claims....
99.999% of the rest of Humanity know the reality of Apollo.
Just saying...."logically" you need to get out and learn some more....your "guessing" and "speculation" is worthless, as you're just stabbing in the dark........
Originally posted by Reaper2137
You want to know why we didn't go back to the moon? Well that is the easy answer The American people is why we never went back.
The government cut NASA's budget because of a lack of public support. As one news reporter said going to the moon is about as exciting as going to the corner store. So with the lack of public watchers the fed government cut their funding.
was a sad day but NASA couldn't fund the space shuttle and apollo at the same time.
Originally posted by Reaper2137
Its not utter Crap... NASA is federal office so public support on some thing so open is key to their funding especially for that era. still today it still effects NASA I remember their getting cut backs again due to public backlash due to them losing one of their rovers on mars and with a couple of failed missions
Originally posted by Reaper2137
Its not that far fetched for the Public face of the space program to be effected by public support. NASA is not the D.O.D or the white house. Their not congress they can't just do what ever the hell they want and get away with it.
not only was NASA at the time dealing with the Set back of Apollo 1.
Originally posted by Reaper2137
Hint congress was still using it against NASA all the way up till its cancellation in favor of the Space shuttle. The president had also turned against NASA the lack of public support was just the last straw which gave the president and congress the reason they needed to shut down the program. this is history after all hell if NASA had it its way we to this day would have a moon base as well as the ISS ten years sooner.
Originally posted by Reaper2137
People forget that NASA just like Army R&D think 10.20.30 years ahead of its time. money was needed and the public wasn't willing to waste their tax money on it any more.
Yes actually I do have proof that we have technology capable of identifying man made relics on the moon ... The fact that I can clearly point out my ford ranger, my sidewalk, my mailbox etc., in google maps satellite view, pretty much proves my point.
....in google maps satellite view, pretty much proves my point.
Although Google uses the word satellite, most of the high-resolution imagery is aerial photography taken from aircraft flying at 800–1500 feet rather than from satellites...
The latest commercial satellite (GeoEye 1) has a GSD of 0.41 m (effectively 0.5 m due to US Govt restrictions on civilian imaging). GSD for intelligence and military purposes, such as the National Reconnaissance Office programs, may have a resolution of less than a centimeter with the potential for real-time (live) imaging...
You are correct....because the Apollo remnants HAVE BEEN IMAGED, and it is undeniable. But, that's not why I highlighted the two sentences.....
Originally posted by OatDelphi
reply to post by weedwhacker
Taking people words out of context does not serve your argument.
I am very aware of Google's various techniques and never did I claim that the "satellite view" was solely from satellites.
Yes actually I do have proof that we have technology capable of identifying man made relics on the moon ... The fact that I can clearly point out my ford ranger, my sidewalk, my mailbox etc., in google maps satellite view, pretty much proves my point.
The fact that you have to resort to this style of tactics...
P.S. posting video's that have admittedly been doctored does not serve your argument either.
Originally posted by OatDelphi
"Why has NASA never gone back to the moon?"
It is quite simple really... you can't go back to a destination that you have never visited previously.
Thus, you can assume with this statement, that I do not think that anyone ever has ever been to the surface of the moon.
And here are some reasons as to why...
Seriously wtf man? Do you think the russians faked their moon trips as well? And ignorant posters give you stars?
This world is crazy I tell you....
Originally posted by backinblack
reply to post by EarthCitizen07
Seriously wtf man? Do you think the russians faked their moon trips as well? And ignorant posters give you stars?
This world is crazy I tell you....
Russia have never landed a manned mission on the moon..
Odd though that sounds...Wonder why.??
There is a huge difference with announcing to the public and then showing us live actual video of the moons surface etc...than there is flying a mission which has a primary purpose and oh by they way just happened to pull off some crappy photos.
Originally posted by yeti101
so whats the point in nasa giving you even higher res photos of the apollo sites? you would just say they have been photoshopped.
Yup... but
did you understand my answer above on the reasons why they use certain specification hardware ie for the science goals they want to acheive?
So it seems like the LRO had a lot of time on it's hands to specifically fly by the supposed Apollo sites and photo them, and to not much surprise at all, the images suck even though the onboard equiptment was top notch. Enter ASU boy and his advancements in enhancing.
The Shepherding Spacecraft and Centaur rocket were launched together with another spacecraft called the Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter (LRO). All three were connected to each other for launch, but then the LRO separates one hour after launch. The Shepherding Spacecraft guided the Centaur rocket through multiple Earth orbits, each taking about 38 days.(lcross.arc.nasa.gov...)
Originally posted by weedwhacker
Wait.....let's have another look at your EXACT quote, then...shall we?...
Originally posted by OatDelphi
"Yes actually I do have proof that we have technology capable of identifying man made relics on the moon ... The fact that I can clearly point out my ford ranger, my sidewalk, my mailbox etc., in google maps satellite view, pretty much proves my point".
Originally posted by weedwhacker
DO you see it yet? You equated the "ability" here on Earth to resolve very small objects with the same "ability" on the Moon....
Which moon? The one with flags waving in the air, multiple light sources and earthly gravity, or the one where there is no air for wings to get loft? Being an aviation guru, surely you are asking about the first description, in that case I'm sure there are plenty or aircraft cruising over the Arizona/NewMexico deserts that will suffice.
Tell us...how many aircraft are flying About 500-1500 feet above the Moon's surface right now, in order to "map" it?
Originally posted by EarthCitizen07
Let me get this straight....
and you base this because "humans have not gone past the van-halen belt, because doctors are not using special radioactive suits and because of google earth close-ups?
Seriously wtf man?
(www.ocii.com...)
"How were the Apollo astronauts able to withstand 375 rems per day when the IAEA occupational exposure dose limit is only 5 rems in any single year?"(www-pub.iaea.org...)
There is a huge difference with announcing to the public and then showing us live actual video of the moons surface etc...than there is flying a mission which has a primary purpose and oh by they way just happened to pull off some crappy photos.
But your right guys, NASA won't waste the money to take the technology you all admit we have, and once and for all solve the debate for us crackpot skeptics. Nope they leave that up to ASU students...
So it seems like the LRO had a lot of time on it's hands to specifically fly by the supposed Apollo sites and photo them, and to not much surprise at all, the images suck even though the onboard equiptment was top notch. Enter ASU boy and his advancements in enhancing.
Obviously you haven't been reading anything I have been saying. No I don't accept photos, because as anyoneknows they can be doctored. I need an actaul live, major announced mission, one whos goal is to get difinitive proof.
Originally posted by yeti101
reply to post by OatDelphi
i dont understand your first paragraph, what are you talking about?
No that is not what I am talking about, I want a new one in the time of DVRS, VCRS and various other recording forms. Mainly because there is not one piece of untainted evidence left after 40+ years.
The video from the apollo missions on the moon?
Well according to WeedWhacker the LRO has undeniably imaged the Apollo sites(see ASU boy videos), that is what it has to do with this discussion
Whats it got to do with their recent LRO orbiter?
I completely understand what the LRO was doing for its LCROSS purposes. But the orbiter itself had 78+ days to photo the moon before the crater impact took place, and the best we get is some film that again some ASU kid has to touchup.
wtf are you talking about, you obviously didnt understand. The camera was designed for a purpose , it acheives that purpose therefor the pictures dont suck. You sir are a complete moron