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 DJW001
reply to post by FoosM
Now some very interesting things pops out of that text.
First, I had no idea that Broccoli was behind the production.
Broccoli connected with Diamonds are Forever... but it makes sense
Broccoli was involved because Chitty Chitty Bang Bang is based on an Ian Fleming story.
Cubby Broccoli and his partner had the rights to all of Fleming's books except "Casino Royale," which had been purchased earlier by an American TV company, so no surprise. Remember, we have proven that the LM in the London Science Museum had nothing to do with "Diamonds Are Forever."
It's definitely not the same Lunar Module seen in the Apollo 11 moon photos.
The Lunar Module in Londons Science Museum, matches perfectly with the Apollo 11 moon photos.
Wrong. As shown above, it is the same lunar module before the foil was added in the mating process.
Why would they wait till then?
Even you noticed that technician did not look to be in a safe position..
Seems odd to me with the LM hanging from a crane
Originally posted by DJW001
Yes. The "gold foil" was put on the lander's pads during the final mating process:
Originally posted by DJW001
Again, quite a bit of effort for a hoax, don't you think? Why would they go to so much trouble if the spacecraft were just a dummy, and the real action was taking place at Pinewood Studios. Or was it Area 51? Or Disneyland? The hoax believers need to have some sort of conference to get their story straight.
You have people wanting to explore the south pole or north pole, going through all preparation, spending all that money, the training, the science, and still end up lying about actually making it.
Originally posted by DJW001
reply to post by FoosM
You have people wanting to explore the south pole or north pole, going through all preparation, spending all that money, the training, the science, and still end up lying about actually making it.
Could you provide a documented example of that, please?
Originally posted by DJW001
They probably used plywood for the parts that didn't show. It's just a big Airfix model, not an actual spacecraft. It probably wasn't all that expensive.
Originally posted by fordrew
I know this thread is really old and really drawn out with so many posts, but I just wanted to say one of my professors in my department worked on the space shuttle. He dealt with the thermal systems inside the shuttle itself.
So , if this whole thing was a hoax, then his whole career is a lie. He would not be able to tell his classes the exact things he worked on in the shuttle. But he did. So this whole moon landing hoax really is ludicrous. No I will not relay questions from you to him. This topic really needs to rest...
I did, in this very thread.
When I discussed how scientists, researchers, etc
Have to validate claims of science, and discovery.
It was based on a big fight between two explorers claiming they were the first to reach the south or north (I forget which) pole.
Originally posted by FoosM
Originally posted by fordrew
I know this thread is really old and really drawn out with so many posts, but I just wanted to say one of my professors in my department worked on the space shuttle. He dealt with the thermal systems inside the shuttle itself.
So , if this whole thing was a hoax, then his whole career is a lie. He would not be able to tell his classes the exact things he worked on in the shuttle. But he did. So this whole moon landing hoax really is ludicrous. No I will not relay questions from you to him. This topic really needs to rest...
Your professor worked on the Shuttle.
And somehow this proves Apollo?
Im sorry, I dont get it.
The shuttle that stayed in LEO.
The shuttle that never went past the VABs or landed on the moon.
That shuttle?
Thats your proof?
If somebody told me that some small museum in a foreign country commissioned a local special effects company that specializes in matte paintings to make a life size replica of the Apollo LM back in the early 70's. I would expect something no better than this:
Originally posted by ProudBird
reply to post by Ove38
Again....rubbish nonsense:
It wasn't made for a James Bond movie. It was made for the 1969 Apollo 11 movie
The LM that flew on Apollo 11 was built in New York State, USA...at the Grumman Corporation factory on Long Island.
It was the fifth LM produced at the Grumman factory. LM-5.
www.militaryphotos.net...
web.mac.com...
fi.edu...
www.hq.nasa.gov...
historical.ha.com...
home.earthlink.net...
en.wikipedia.org...
Originally posted by Ove38
The Apollo 11 Lunar Module was made at the Pinewood film Studios for the 1969 Apollo 11 movie.
Later in 1977 it was transferred to the museum.
Originally posted by fordrew
Originally posted by FoosM
Originally posted by fordrew
I know this thread is really old and really drawn out with so many posts, but I just wanted to say one of my professors in my department worked on the space shuttle. He dealt with the thermal systems inside the shuttle itself.
So , if this whole thing was a hoax, then his whole career is a lie. He would not be able to tell his classes the exact things he worked on in the shuttle. But he did. So this whole moon landing hoax really is ludicrous. No I will not relay questions from you to him. This topic really needs to rest...
Your professor worked on the Shuttle.
And somehow this proves Apollo?
Im sorry, I dont get it.
The shuttle that stayed in LEO.
The shuttle that never went past the VABs or landed on the moon.
That shuttle?
Thats your proof?
Yes yes he worked on the thermal systems in Apollo too. Sorry I forgot to mention that.
Originally posted by DJW001
...Why would they go to so much trouble if the spacecraft were just a dummy, and the real action was taking place at Pinewood Studios....