Man Walked On The Moon????

reply to post by MR BOB


Well if the Apollo missions were faked and if the Luna missions were faked, you do realise what that means don't you?

It would mean the USSR and USA were in on it together.

In the middle of the Cold War.

Does that make sense?

Originally posted by Chadwickus
reply to post by K J Gunderson

 

Same way Luna 16 landed on the moon, took samples and returned them to earth, the Proton rocket!

I bring up the Luna 16 because to me, it is the ultimate proof that man landed on the moon.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Analysis of the dark basalt material indicated a close resemblance to soil recovered by the American Apollo 12 mission.

[edit on 7/3/10 by Chadwickus]

Did Russia use it to send people to the moon?

Instead of worrying about defending the moon landings to me, relax a minute. I am not arguing about landing on the moon. I am simply pointing out that the reflectors are not proof of anything when another country also has reflectors yet no men on the moon yet. See my point?

You brought a rocket that proves man walked on the moon to you to point out that it was used in unmanned moon missions. Might want to think that over for a moment.

Originally posted by Kandinsky
Howdy Chad and Mr. Bob

Tom Murphy plans to spend much of the next five years using the Apache Point telescope in New Mexico as a tape measure 239,000 miles long -- give or take a millimeter. He'll employ the telescope, a laser beam and reflectors left by several lunar missions in a technique known as laser ranging to provide the most exacting measure yet of the Earth's distance from the moon. Scientists have long known the center of the moon is about 238,700 miles from the center of Earth. In the early 1970s, the distance was known to within about 25 centimeters (10 inches) but technological advances since the mid-1980s have sharply reduced that margin to about 2 centimeters (less than an inch).

Measuring Moon Distance To Thickness Of A Paperclip

The unmanned Soviet Lunokhod 1 and Lunokhod 2 rovers carried smaller arrays. Reflected signals were initially received from Lunokhod 1, but no return signals have been detected since 1971, at least in part due to some uncertainty in its location on the Moon. Lunokhod 2's array continues to return signals to Earth.[2]

Lunar Laser Ranging

Yup that confirms two things I already knew to be irrefutable.

1- People actually take mythbusters seriously when it is routinely criticized by experts in the fields of almost every single myth they have conducted.

2- We built better reflector arrays and we placed them better than Russia.

Tell me, do you doubt we could have built the same things Russia has but better? Just answer that for me.

reply to post by MR BOB

Apollo 11 July 20, 1969: 1 Neil Armstrong 2 Buzz Aldrin

But was this one staged or not??

Originally posted by K J Gunderson


Did Russia use it to send people to the moon?

The Proton rocket was going to be the rocket to send Russians to the moon.

en.wikipedia.org...

Instead of worrying about defending the moon landings to me, relax a minute. I am not arguing about landing on the moon. I am simply pointing out that the reflectors are not proof of anything when another country also has reflectors yet no men on the moon yet. See my point?

Which is exactly why I brought up Luna 16 and it's soil samples.

You brought a rocket that proves man walked on the moon to you to point out that it was used in unmanned moon missions. Might want to think that over for a moment.

Don't quite understand you here but here's another link discussing Russia's planned manned moon missions

www.russianspaceweb.com...

reply to post by K J Gunderson

Tell me, do you doubt we could have built the same things Russia has but better? Just answer that for me.

Not sure I understand? Are you asking if the US built better equipment than the Russians? The US space program has been more successful.

As for Myth Busters...I'm not a fan of the show. Linking a video is for the benefit of others that will read this thread. The show is popular regardless of my opinion and does make complicated ideas accessible. The clip I wanted was a BBC schools excerpt.

See the main reason I ask this is, because on ancient Egyptians walls they have picture of people sitting in some sort of flying machine, for me that either say, they have seen one or even possibly made one, and maybe they got to the moon first, and tried to build things on it. It's only a theory, Same as know one really knows how the pyramids were built, there are theories on how they were built, but I still believe they had some pretty advanced gear to build those things, just seem like a lot of man power to me to carve and move those heavy rocks. But I mainly want to know if you people believe the first mission to the moon was a hoax or real? then I guess the reason is why it is a hoax if it was one?
Thanks heaps every one for the info on this though, but do mainly want your opinions if it was hoaxed or not? From what has been written so far, I am slowly putting this puzzle together in my head. AND THAT VIDEO WAS GREAT, the one about MOON RISING being a hoax, I did think there wasn't something quite right about it. Thanks again, peace

..far as I have seen on the web abou the first moon landing was that they never made it to the moon the first time out cause of the radiation belt around the earth was to strong for current tech to handle...New metarials where needed to sheild the astronauts...Which they had to make it through the belt first to get to the moon...But I do believe with the space race to reaching they didn't want to tell us they couldn't get there so they made a very tired vid to show the public we could get there...? But that is why we have been there atleast...once ..if not twice...thrice..hmm..Well once we can overcome the radiation damage to the crew..The vid is was a hope...Hoax moon landing..least the first and atleast they let him ..Neil get back out there for his service...dedicated individuals always seem to earn..some respect...I feel the next few years of the space race to come shall be intertaining at best in the near future getting a crew to mars would be agreat REALTIY SHOW...I think originality is lost when you find that at one point life has its moments where you have a new tech used in the fight of space TV an american icon...We made it there ..SEE?...but with todays tech we have seen that there is something amiss here ..But still atleast we been there done that and now know much more ..I just wnt to know if there is any real evidence of Mars .. for I think we had ancerstors there....I hoping for some breakthrough in thought of the growth of Humankind .. and how we became to be so humble and human.. to not see that man has risen to space once again from the past seems to repeat itself....new tech lost and regained to once again show no pitty on the weak...seems the most common factor is new tech always be the best weapon tactic or strategy.. too weapons ..armors ..and drones and robotics ...genetics ...soon beyond toward alerations ...and dna munipulation...Science a wonder to behold..

reply to post by IntastellaBurst


might want to keep digging my friend.. there's ALOT of evidence but, not alot of proof..

a very quick search on ATS should bring up thousands of links..

/cheers

reply to post by Komodo


What counts as "proof" is a subjective thing, .. its different to everyone.


When there's video footage, dirt samples, testimony's, ... and something is generally regarded as a FACT. .... well that is proof enough for me.

I don't know what some of you want, or are actually getting at, ..... so just come out with it.

Offcourse they landed and went on the moon!
There are megatons of evidence that this happened. Cmon, you all are being so silly to not trust nasa.

Check out this excerpt from the Apollo 16 transcripts. The comment was made whilst the astronauts orbited the moon - It kinda reminds me of that fake newspaper story:

reply to post by Exuberant1


the bit missing there. what he was meant to say. "thats the fudge sticking to the booster. i told you not to bring your own food!"

Warning VERY foul language.



While the actual publicly known audio recordings are questionable, there are rumors that the onion had actually got the original audio and leaked it.

Anythings possible.

reply to post by JPhish


Then you'll just scream and shout about how the photos are faked. There is no reason to think we didn't go to the moon. None. Except paranoia, ignorance of science, and/or an inherent distrust in scientists. It's pathetic, and insulting to those who went and to intelligence in general.

Originally posted by Chadwickus
It would mean the USSR and USA were in on it together.

In the middle of the Cold War.

Does that make sense?

Thanks Chad....

As always people tend to forget that the US and USSR were nearly at each others throats during this time period [Cold War] each trying to put the other in a bad light of the propaganda wars. If the USSR knew about it being a hoax they more than anyone else had the ability to expose it as a HOAX and would have had the ultimate Coup de grâce of propaganda.

It went down differently.

The US landed and the Soviet premier sent a congratulations to the President of the US of A.

Originally posted by Kandinsky

Originally posted by JPhish
when Hubble takes close ups of all the equipment left behind by these alleged missions i might believe they went there.

till then, i'm calling shenanigans.

I guess that's your prerogative. I should let you know that you've set the bar a little too high...

I set the bar very high for anything that someone wants me to believe.

If someone tells me something is possible or real, without any proof that I can readily test and observe, I have no reason to believe their claim.

[Hubble can't image small objects on the Moon. It wasn't designed for such close distances. The LROC has taken images of landing sites, tracks and equipment and been discussed in several long threads...Why are the LROC images so lousy?

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/c3a33f9ce321.jpg[/atsimg]

Can Hubble see the Apollo landing sites on the Moon?

No, Hubble cannot take photos of the Apollo landing sites. An object on the Moon 4 meters (4.37 yards) across, viewed from HST, would be about 0.002 arcsec in size. The highest resolution instrument currently on HST is the Advanced Camera for Surveys at 0.03 arcsec. So anything we left on the Moon cannot be resolved in any HST image. It would just appear as a dot.

Hubble FAQs

Really convenient, also convenient they “lost” the original moon walk footage. Come on. They have satellites that can read the daily newspaper through an atmosphere filled earth. Are you really naive enough to believe they are incapable of taking high resolution pictures of the lunar surface?

Originally posted by IntastellaBurst
reply to post by JPhish

 

They left reflector's up there that you can shine lazers on.

well you won't see the lazer coming back all that distance, but observatory's can detect the beam as it bounces back.

and how did reflector's get on the moon ??? thats right, you guessed it.

You don’t need a manned mission to bring something to the moon. Try again using logic next time.

Originally posted by davesidious
reply to post by JPhish

 

Then you'll just scream and shout about how the photos are faked. There is no reason to think we didn't go to the moon. None. Except paranoia, ignorance of science, and/or an inherent distrust in scientists. It's pathetic, and insulting to those who went and to intelligence in general.

Um, I’m actually well learned in science; Van Allen belt, ever heard of it? Explain to me why all the astronauts never developed any of the diseases that normally manifest as a result of radiation poisoning.

That’s right, NASA likes to make believe the van allen belt isn’t powerful and shrug it off saying “well the astronauts passed through it so fast it didn’t have any affect.”

Keep blindly believing what people tell you though. I’m sure it will work out for you.

[edit on 3/7/2010 by JPhish]

Yes we've been on the moon. However, what was shown on tv as the first moon landing was a hoax.

'They' will say or do just about anything if it helps the agenda. Including events such as the moon landing.

Originally posted by Chadwickus
reply to post by MR BOB

 

Well if the Apollo missions were faked and if the Luna missions were faked, you do realise what that means don't you?

It would mean the USSR and USA were in on it together.

In the middle of the Cold War.

Does that make sense?

Yes, actually it makes perfect sense for the bigger picture and agenda.

Originally posted by Chadwickus
reply to post by Trappedinspace

 

Funny you mention Moon Rising.


www.abovetopsecret.com...

recently noticed Jose Escamilla has posted the whole of his movie Moon Rising on Youtube. I have decided to reopen my Hubpage and Youtube video highlighting the obvious scam in presenting craters as UFOs. He did it with "Rods" now he is doing it with craters. Follow my links to my Hubpage where I give a full explanation to my findings. There is also a link to my Youtube video within the Hub or just use the Youtube link provided below.

"Why should you care about this? Well, if you are a believer, these claims by the filmmaker only hurt the genuine sightings and the general public support of the possibility of extraterrestrials."

hubpages.com...

www.youtube.com...

Enjoy Jose's craters.