Simple Irrationalities Are The Best Way To Show The World Apollo Was Fake

reply to post by benrl

The only conspiracy I personally think might of occurred here is covering up of findings at most, the best lies contain truths... I believe we went to the moon, and that we aren't being told some things about whats been found.

Yeah, that seems the most logical conclusion. Having NOT gone to the moon would be too easily proven by other nations... especially Russia. If we had not been there, they would have smeared (exposed) us by now in ways that we can't even begin to imagine, lol.

Moreover, our lack of effort to go back is another telling bit of evidence. Something is there... whatever it may be, that we know and that we know we don't want to know or let anyone else know.

reply to post by redoubt


redoubt,

It is fairly obvious Apollo was a cover for many of our activities with respect to weaponizing space. Our efforts in space were 90% military and included, but were not limited to, efforts as regards surveillance, reconnaissance, ICBM targeting/tracking/performance, Dyna-Soar Development, MOR development.

Who was in charge of the Apollo Manned Lunar Landing Program ? USAF General Samuel Phillips.

What was Phillips job just prior to Apollo ? He was IN CHARGE OF THE US MINUTEMAN ICBM PROGRAM.

Why would Phillips write in a May 1969 National Geographic article that the Apollo 8 astronauts could not possibly have had INFLUENZA because they were vaccinated? Phillips is not a doctor. Everyone knows you can still get INFLUENZA despite vaccination. Not unlikely at all. Especially given the context, the Hong Kong fly pandemic of 1968/1969. (This comment of Phillips was given to address the reports of Borman's alleged vomiting and diarrheal illness in the pretended cislunar space of storied and most fraudulent Apollo 8. ) Why does Phillips lie like a moon dusty rug ? Cuz' he is a fraud perpetrator.

The Russians were doing the exact same things, 'cept they used other covers. They did feign a moon effort, but did not go to American extremes. That said, with regard to their efforts in space, they too were geared toward surveillance/reconnaissance, ICBM tracking/targeting/performance and so on. Of course they were not going to say squat. They were planting weapons/equipment on the moon and in space before we did.

First soft landing on the moon was by whom ? Soviets....

Think of OPERATION MOON BOUNCE AND GO FROM THERE.

The manned efforts are genuine, but trivial, except as regards things like the US MOL effort or the Soviet Almaz. These were manned space reconnaissance platforms. The Soviets/Russians admit openly to having operated theirs. Did you know the Soviet Almaz carried a CANNON ? That is not a point in dispute.

Need I go on ?

reply to post by decisively


Nice rant but... geez, you went in circles. As I recall, I never said anything about covert efforts to weaponize space in my comment. I only spoke to the Apollo landings and the obvious evidence of their being there. I never addressed 'who' was first anywhere.

The title of this thread is: Simple Irrationalities Are The Best Way To Show The World Apollo Was Fake

Apollo was not 'fake'. It happened. Now, if you want to retail the details of everything in between, that's fine. I was just speaking to the concept that the landings were fake and my own ideas of things going on that leap over the military aspects.

I remember Mercury, Gemini and Apollo. I was there. I was alive. I saw a lot when I lived in Florida in the 50s and 60s. Those rockets launched, i assure you and there were manned capsules at the top, lol.

What they found on the moon is my rant...

reply to post by redoubt


I thought your post was the Russians would smear us had it been phony. My point, given what we were up to, of course the Russians would not smear us. They were doing the same, if not more, and were a bit ahead in their efforts not infrequently.

Originally posted by decisively
One may say this with utter confidence as Alan Shepard, a man alleged to have been diagnosed with Meniere's Disease would never have been sent to the moon were Apollo real.

When Alan Shepard was first diagnosed with Ménière's Diesease, it was considered incurable and as a result he was grounded.

In 1969, he had surgery using a new technique which corrected his condition allowing his flight status to be restored.

reply to post by Junkheap


FYI, Meniere's disease is not considered curable now, in 2012. And fyi, even if William House fixed Shepard's bad ear, Shepard may well have come down with symptoms due to disease developing in his nonsurgerized ear, the previously good one.

Apollo is fake my friend and the Meniere's disease issue is a full proof PROOF of that simple fact.

Sorry boys....

reply to post by decisively


"They were planting weapons/equipment on the moon and in space before we did."

I would like to read you prove that one. What use are weapons on the moon?

Your logic is flawed and your "above average technical knowledge" is questionable. Most of what you consider proof is your own opinion, misrepresented as a fact. Do you have anything of any substance to support the "fact" that the Apollo missions were fake? How can the distance to the moon be measured with a reflector left on the moon by the Apollo missions, if the missions were a lie told by thousands of people?

I have personally talked to astronauts and they have talked about being nauseous while being in space. I have seen with my own eyes the a recovered Apollo command module that was taken from the ocean floor with all the sea life still being removed from it. I have several engines that have been covered before they where restored. I have seen hundreds if not more the actual film in storage. Most of what I have seen has not been seen by the public.

reply to post by mcsteve


We are not talking nukes.

Here ya' go, a simple thing to prove weapons were/are a part of Apollo.

In the 1960s, as now, one of the most important "numbers" to know in targeting/programming an ICBM was/is the earth's gravitational field strength. It is also important to know how the field varies over the earth's service, where a bit stronger, where a bit weaker, but for now, let us focus on fundamentals, the overall field strength.

In the 1960s, the very best way to determine this number, the earth's gravitational field strength number, was by MEASURING THE DISTANCE BETWEEN THE EARTH AND MOON AS PRECISELY/ACCURATELY AS POSSIBLE. This is not a point in dispute, very common knowledge now.

Before the advent of LRRRs, this was accomplished with conventional electromagnetic wave ranging. "Light" was bounced off the moon, the earth-moon distance obtained, and with that, the earth's gravitational field strength was known with ever improving accuracy as distance to the moon measurement techniques improved with regard to accuracy.

Once the LRRR was placed at Tranquility Base, we then could measure the earth-moon distance VERY accurately and so we knew the earth's field strength all the better, and as such, we could indeed hit Moscow with ever greater confidence.

The LRRR example is trivial in the sense of BIG PICTURE STUFF, of course many other things were done during Apollo. Were we to know , proverbial chills would go up and down our spines. But the point here is that the LRRR WAS A WEAPON, or better said, an important component of our ICBM targeting system.

Did you know that military personal told Professors Wampler, Miller and the other great astronomers at Lick Observatory that they were in no uncertain terms to not disclose Tranquility Base's location. The reason, so the military boys claimed, was that if the Ruskies knew where the LRRR was , then they could measure the distances across the great oceans better. At the time, some said the distances were not known with accuracy adequate to confidently program an ICBM. Do you believe that ? Not the part about WHAT was TOLD by the military guys to the astronomers, we know that for a fact to be true. The part about the reason itself being true, that the distance across the Atlantic, Arctic, Pacific oceans was not known well enough to pop the U.S. Say Washington DC with a Soviet SLBM from somewhere hidden ?

reply to post by decisively

In the 1960s, the very best way to determine this number, the earth's gravitational field strength number, was by MEASURING THE DISTANCE BETWEEN THE EARTH AND MOON AS PRECISELY/ACCURATELY AS POSSIBLE. This is not a point in dispute, very common knowledge now.

Since it is not in dispute, but common knowledge, you should have no problem posting a link illustrating this point.

reply to post by chevy369


I am not sure I understand your point.

Let me say more about my views, perhaps this will be helpful.

My view is that Apollo, indeed all of the US Manned Space Flight Efforts, were covers for our military space efforts. In the 60s, these programs included but were not limited to, surveillance, reconnaissance, ICBM tracking/targeting/performance, Dyna-Soar development, MOL development.

When they launched a Saturn V, say an Apollo 11, that baby is going somewhere big time, GOING with a purpose. My point is that where ever it is going, and some of it may well be going to the moon, it most decidedly is NOT carrying men in said capacity. It is NOT carrying men to land them on the moon. But it is a real rocket with an "important goal" in mind.

A Saturn V may carry a LM or something like a LM for the express purpose of soft landing it on the moon with let's say, just to make something up, an LRRR and some kind of data relay package, and perhaps the Saturn V goes up additionally with some piece of equipment they want to park in a libration point, the latter for Ruskie surveillance purposes.

No one is claiming Apollo is "not real". What those of my ilk claim is it is all indeed VERY REAL, SCARY REAL, and real in a way that it so so so ain't about landing dudes on the moon. It's rather about preparing one day to vaporize the Bolshoi, as/if need be, in some general sense.

Get it ?

reply to post by DJW001



I can give you a great book quote on that, but will have to wait until tomorrow. Interesting point, is it not ? Came as a bit of a revelation when I first learned of it. Then when one pauses to think of it for a minute, makes complete sense.

AN INTERESTING LITTLE TIDBIT

I found this surfing about this evening, a review article of sorts as regards Charles Berry's experience with space medicine, originally published in 1969.

Note how Berry, in this review;

ntrs.nasa.gov...

, just like astronaut Borman in his LIFE Magazine piece referenced in the introduction to this thread/original post, LEAVES OUT THE PART ABOUT BORMAN HAVING DIARRHEA IN CISLUNAR SPACE.

You can betcha' that ain't no coincidence.

Fascinating, No?

decisively,

And don't forget the Michael Collins speedy recovery from his back surgery in 1968 (actually neck surgery).

Collins had a major surgery to fuse 2 vertebrae. It is called spinal fusion. According to the history books he made a rather miraculous recovery. The G-forces at launch are strenuous but the splashdown can be even more intense.

In most cases, the fusion is augmented by a process called fixation, meaning the placement of metallic screws (pedicle screws often made from titanium), rods or plates, or cages to stabilize the vertebra to facilitate bone fusion. The fusion process typically takes 6–12 months after surgery. During this time external bracing (orthotics) may be required. External factors such as smoking, osteoporosis, certain medications, and heavy activity can prolong or even prevent the fusion process. If fusion does not occur, patients may require reoperation. Source Wiki en.wikipedia.org...

And these are the G-forces that an astronaut would be expected to tolerate on Saturn rocket launch in 1968.


And on splashdown,

Deceleration begins quickly as the spacecraft slams into the upper fringes of the atmosphere, rising from a fraction of 1 G to almost 7 G's in less than 30 seconds. Source Page 342 The Apollo Guidance Computer: Architecture and Operation
By Frank O'Brien

Putting Michael Collins on the Apollo 11 is a simple irrationality that shows the world that Apollo was fake.

It makes me laugh every time I see a moon landing hoax post how clueless the people are regarding space and space travel really are.

The dark side? have to use low light technology? Never any pictures of if?

You do realize that the FAR side of the moon get's just as much light as the near side don't you? When you see a crescent moon on earth, what do you think is lit up on the moon? that's right, the other side. Basic understanding is beyond some people I guess.

And no pictures of the far side? you don't know how to use google?

decisively,

Take a look at who was in Richard Nixon's "small office" on the morning of July 16, 1969. Your buddy, Frank Borman.

My watch has more computing power than the Apoll did and my cell phone (W408g) has more computing power than all the computers NASA had at the time and they did it with that level of tech and we have not gone back with all the tech we have now. Rovers on the moon? I would think the moon being close by they would have rovers all over the place. If for no other reason to test them before wasting the extra time and money sending them to places like Mars. The level of tech is what gets me the most about it all. Any less tech and the Apollo would have been powered by a stream engine.

Originally posted by decisively
reply to post by Junkheap

 

FYI, Meniere's disease is not considered curable now, in 2012. And fyi, even if William House fixed Shepard's bad ear, Shepard may well have come down with symptoms due to disease developing in his nonsurgerized ear, the previously good one.

Apollo is fake my friend and the Meniere's disease issue is a full proof PROOF of that simple fact.

Sorry boys....

Yeah you have no clue what your talking about. Its currently not curable with medications even the cause is unknown.However the symptoms can be relieved with surgery in fact a couple of different ways. what they did to Sheppard was endolymphatic shunt (A surgical procedure in which a shunt (tube) is placed in the endolymphatic sac that drains excess fluid from the ear.) So although there is no real cure for Meniere's disease the attacks of vertigo can be controlled in nearly all cases.

Originally posted by fixer1967
My watch has more computing power than the Apoll did and my cell phone (W408g) has more computing power than all the computers NASA had at the time and they did it with that level of tech and we have not gone back with all the tech we have now. Rovers on the moon? I would think the moon being close by they would have rovers all over the place. If for no other reason to test them before wasting the extra time and money sending them to places like Mars. The level of tech is what gets me the most about it all. Any less tech and the Apollo would have been powered by a stream engine.

Ready for this people actually did math even there planed trajectories were handled by something called a slide rule.Computers have gotten smarter but guess what people were all ready smart.They were rocket scientists you know.

reply to post by SayonaraJupiter


Rock on buddy, thanks for that one....