Young Aussie genius whipping NASA in Moon Hoax Debate!

Originally posted by PsykoOps
reply to post by syrinx high priest

 

I'll give one more to that list. How was the video and photos faked? How was the 1/6th gravity simulated perfectly on all objects? They cant give up any reasonable answer within reality to that so they go for the "unicorns did it" answer.

I'll take a shot at that one PsykoOps

I thought that the astros on A12 carried a real movie camera with them. If they really filmed the LM separation & descent from the CM with a real movie camera ( like the 16mm on the A12 flight ) and if they bring that film back to Earth and watched it...

Why does Pete Conrad at a press conference say that it looks

[color=LightGreen]" FAKE? "

Unreal? If it looks fake to an astronaut it looks fake to me, too.

Originally posted by SayonaraJupiter
The Apollo 15 astros Scott, Worden and Irwin each brought with them undeclared contraband... these were in the form of hundreds of post covers that were not declared on the flight manifests or the PPK's.

Here is one of Al Worden's postal covers that got him in trouble with NASA and Chris Kraft.

It is unclear to me after listening to Al's story at alworden.com if these post covers remained in the CM for the full duration of the flight or .. possibly ... some of the post covers might have been transferred to the poorly shielded LEM.

In either case, NASA wanted these post covers baaaad and Al Worden handed them over. The post covers remained in the custody of the Nat'l Archives for a time. Worden had to file suit to get them returned. He eventually got them back. Now he's selling them on the internet at alworden.com.

Yeah well I dont get the whole story either.
What proof these were brought into space?
Is there photo or video evidence of this?

And what if the Astronauts wanted to sell their drawers and socks?
Would NASA object? Whats so special about these things?

reply to post by SayonaraJupiter

In either case, NASA wanted these post covers baaaad and Al Worden handed them over. The post covers remained in the custody of the Nat'l Archives for a time. Worden had to file suit to get them returned. He eventually got them back. Now he's selling them on the internet at alworden.com

Excellent! All Jarrah has to do is buy one and have it tested by an independent laboratory!

reply to post by SayonaraJupiter

Why does Pete Conrad at a press conference say that it looks" FAKE? "

No; what he said was:

I think this is one of the best 16-mm pictures I ever seen that Dick took of Intrepid leaving. We've done our separation and were waiting, excuse me, we've done our undocking and waiting for Dick to separate and leave us, so that we get over on the night side and do our first alignment prior to the descent orbit injection burn.

The first time I looked at this movie it looked so unreal to me I thought , if I saw that in a Hollywood movie I'd say that it was a fake...but I was there and so were Dick and Al and we'll all vouch for the real thing here..

reply to post by DJW001


I was thinking the same thing!

The certificate of authenticity doesn't say that these covers were on the surface of the moon. If they were on the surface of the moon I imagine that he would say this explicitely, but he only says "in my possession since the flight in 1971"

Originally posted by DJW001
The first time I looked at this movie it looked so unreal to me I thought , if I saw that in a Hollywood movie I'd say that it was a fake...but I was there and so were Dick and Al and we'll all vouch for the real thing here..

Hear me out. If an astronaut says it looked at a film and says it looked fake and unreal.. but then he backsteps and says he'll vouch for the real thing...

... backsteps .... he and his buddies will vouch for it.

This is why we want to see the complete press conferences DJ.

The Apollo Program (1963 - 1972)

You see, I've been giving the program a couple of extra years.
But in actuality, it took NASA only 5 years to circle men around the moon,
and only six years to have them land!



The whole thing took no more than 9 years!



Think about that.
Think about that and read this:

NASA's space shuttle program is set to retire in 2010, with the first CEV launch targeted for no later than 2014, though an internal deadline is tentatively set for 2012, Griffin said. The 2012 launch and 2018 Moon landing targets should allow NASA to achieve the space vision laid out by President George W. Bush in 2004, which called for a return of humans to the Moon by no later than 2020, Griffin added.

2005 - 2018 = 13 YEARS

For them to send the first men "back" to the moon.
For a program where the lunar stay would only be 4 days extra.






www.space.com...

reply to post by PsykoOps

How was the 1/6th gravity simulated perfectly on all objects?

Ya think???

I didn't see much dust getting thrown any higher than you'd expect here on earth.

Ever seen a dune buggy7 kick up sand in the desert?

I expected much higher from the Rover.
Six times higher is an awful lot and I didn't see it with the Rover OR astronauts..

Got any film to show different??

reply to post by FoosM


That bugs me a lot FoosM. In fact, it pisses me off that NASA is doing new "lander testing" like this when these technical challenges were allegedly "mastered" by NASA and the Russians by the early 1970's.

NASA is lying. DoD is pulling the strings.

Originally posted by DJW001
reply to post by SayonaraJupiter

 

Why does Pete Conrad at a press conference say that it looks" FAKE? "

No; what he said was:

I think this is one of the best 16-mm pictures I ever seen that Dick took of Intrepid leaving. We've done our separation and were waiting, excuse me, we've done our undocking and waiting for Dick to separate and leave us, so that we get over on the night side and do our first alignment prior to the descent orbit injection burn.

The first time I looked at this movie it looked so unreal to me I thought , if I saw that in a Hollywood movie I'd say that it was a fake...but I was there and so were Dick and Al and we'll all vouch for the real thing here..

edit on 27-9-2011 by DJW001 because: (no reason given)

Get ya eyes tested DJW..

if I saw that in a Hollywood movie I'd say that it was a fake..

reply to post by SayonaraJupiter

Hear me out. If an astronaut says it looked at a film and says it looked fake and unreal.. but then he backsteps and says he'll vouch for the real thing...

Hear me out. When a reporter sticks a microphone in the face of someone who survived a tragedy, and the victim says: "I can't believe I'm still alive!" Does that mean the reporter is interviewing a ghost?

Originally posted by DJW001
reply to post by SayonaraJupiter

 

Hear me out. If an astronaut says it looked at a film and says it looked fake and unreal.. but then he backsteps and says he'll vouch for the real thing...

Hear me out. When a reporter sticks a microphone in the face of someone who survived a tragedy, and the victim says: "I can't believe I'm still alive!" Does that mean the reporter is interviewing a ghost?

He was expressing HIS opinion that it looked FAKE..

Now accept it and move on rather than this stupid game..

reply to post by backinblack

Get ya eyes tested DJW..

You're the one that needs your eyes tested:

If I saw that in a Hollywood movie...

So much for your pretense to "objectivity."

Originally posted by DJW001
reply to post by backinblack

 

Get ya eyes tested DJW..

You're the one that needs your eyes tested:

If I saw that in a Hollywood movie...

So much for your pretense to "objectivity."

Get a life DJW..
Your starting to sound like a small beaten child..

Fact is HE thinks it looked fake..
NO other way to call it..

reply to post by DJW001

So much for your pretense to "objectivity."

I think it's YOUR objectivity that needs looking at mate..

You are as biased as they come and just proved it trying to make a stupid,irrelevant point..

NASA was doing tests in 1962. Doing more tests in 2011 is proof that NASA has suffered a huge loss of institutional knowledge. Like the destroyed telemetry tapes...

Preliminary Landing Tests of a 1/6-Scale Lunar Excursion Vehicle

1962 NASA Langley Research Center film showing tests of a model of an early lunar lander concept vehicle. These tests were conducted in the Impacting Structures Facility, later upgraded to the Vortex Research Facility.

Originally posted by DJW001
reply to post by SayonaraJupiter

 

Hear me out. If an astronaut says it looked at a film and says it looked fake and unreal.. but then he backsteps and says he'll vouch for the real thing...

Hear me out. When a reporter sticks a microphone in the face of someone who survived a tragedy, and the victim says: "I can't believe I'm still alive!" Does that mean the reporter is interviewing a ghost?

Billy Meier vouches for his photographs.

reply to post by SayonaraJupiter

Billy Meier vouches for his photographs.

And where does he say: "If I saw these saucers in a Hollywood movie I'd think they looked fake?"

reply to post by SayonaraJupiter

NASA was doing tests in 1962. Doing more tests in 2011 is proof that NASA has suffered a huge loss of institutional knowledge.

Really? Do you understand the difference between "losing" knowledge and "building" on it. Can we assume that because Jarrah keeps making videos about Apollo, that he is losing knowledge every time he makes one?

Like the destroyed telemetry tapes...

You forgot to mention the Gulf of Tonkin.

reply to post by backinblack

I think it's YOUR objectivity that needs looking at mate..

I'm not the one pretending to be unbiased.