Disclosure of the moon landing hoax.

reply to post by Nedusa


If you're going to copy and paste complete and utter nonsense from the internet you should credit whereit's come from.

This post has been circulating the net for years and it is full of hot air - it was written in 1997.

www.hourofthetime.com...

It was garbage then and it's garbage now.

If no man has ever been out of LEO, explain the photographs I put in my previous post.

roadgravel
Simulators for aircraft such as the 747 prove that aircraft do not exist and are just a hoax.

The same could be posed for the space shuttle, trains and other vehicles.

Excellent point!

However, it's not necessarily true. The idea that a simulator exists does posit the idea that it could have all been a simulation. Not absolute, but there is a potential of it having happened.


- SN

reply to post by Nedusa


You contradict your self right from the beginning.You say know one has been outside the Van allen belt then you elude to secret space missions to keep some crazy theory you have alive im sure. So please give me the readings so we can do the simple math you said every high school kid with a physics book can prove. Hey prove that and were done here no more arguments you would prove we didnt go because the astronauts would die instantly.Also space is cold i strongly suggest you pick up one of those physics books you talked about and learn about thermal radiation. And please show me where nasa claimed the suits are air conditioned since the suits dont use air to keep astronauts cool? I love it when people get there science of joe blows blog.

Let me tell you story ... long a go say 2 years ago 2011

a not so well know website forum conspiracy site ... show a link (from Japan ) as some of us know that Japan has all the carbon copy of all Files Documents Reports Film of all of the Apollo Events from 2 to 18 and so fourth .. a guy From Japan that has Access of the materials from where he worked Copied them Convert them to PC FLV and MPG format for better quality the Files were big as 600 mgs The Missions were put up on his own website videos that is .. then there is a guy a distant person i had known of mine that when Up to this link that this Japanese guy had linked to his site as he had only 2 days of his website board up before The Government shut him down and who knows what happened to him well The Guy I know got these large files from the site that linked as the site more less was all in Japanese writing and what he got shows absolute proof that we did go to the moon .. the mission that he got from this link witch sorta as he said a FTP Format The Apollo Missions was 8 9 10 11 12 15 17 From The The CM to LM to Rover missions .. unfortunately there is no Sound at all it all film and it shows all the crew it all crystal clear near like HD of what we know as HD the file are in 640 x 480 format and smaller ones are 320 x 120 ... Ive seen everyone of these Files and it just Amazing it show allot nothing really special in the rover missions but from The CM to Lunar Lander before it Landed Just WOW !! but it Guaranteed that there is nothing out there on any other websites of what i have seen.. its possible it could be the lost reels or film that was claimed to have been destroyed or Filmed over as Japan has All the Carbon Copy's of Everything of all NASA missions Mercury to Apollo ... now has anyone here on ATS seen or Heard of these Films Ive search around and nothing of what ive seen has been placed on the Internet ... Well That My Story... take it as you will.. oh about what i saw there was a Shiny blue luminous large object in the middle of a crater from the apollo 11 mission and either Aldrin or Armstrong was filming it for about at least 2 minutes before they landed .... a site on youtube showed a brief 3 sec clip of it the tubers site call Luna Cognita ... it the same Object where this tuber got this IDK but its the same and the other is Guysers coming out of the Craters... Well Hopfully someone has heard about this

reply to post by Wolfenz


I think what your referring to is the Cosmic Brotherhood Association, a ufo group in japan. They published photos of a UFO reportedly following Apollo 11 on the way to the moon. And if we statrt talking about this i gurantee Jim Oberg will show up he has a 6th sense very strange.

reply to post by choos


Technology doesn't go backwards. And I never said it did.

That's why Apollo is not logical.

Such an achievement would be far easier now, with 40 years of progress in technology. But it was just the opposite, it was much harder.

Which means Apollo was not the achievement NASA claimed it was, in the first place.

reply to post by turbonium1


What's the point of recreating Apollo? They've been there, they've done that. Why spend all that money to do it again just to satisfy your belief in how the world works. It requires different technology to stay for two weeks or more, which is what the next mission would be doing. It requires different technology to land on an asteroid, or to go to Mars. All of which they plan on doing. Why should they waste the money to recreate a capsule that can only stay on the moon a couple of days?

geobro
reply to post by SayonaraJupiter

 

how many pictures did they take on the moon i saw the figures somewhere and it was amazing do you have the numbers and answer your p.m

Are you referring to the time & motion studies? I am not familiar with who did them - but I have heard that a study was done and there is a good argument that time & motion studies are a valid scientific analysis/critique of the Apollo lunar landings.

From my view, NASA has had 40 years to consolidate and rectify and "harmonize" the scriptures, the transcripts, and the timelines. But the time & motion study is so sneaky, in a sneaky scientific way, that NASA probably didn't think about it!

I support the further investigation of time & motion studies on Apollo lunar landings. And I also support the investigation of astronaut PRD readings. The Personal Radiation Dosimeter readings that were verbally transmitted to Houston according to checklists that astronauts followed.


The PRD readings will be expressed in RADS. But NASA's summary radiation summary tables are measured in mGy according to NASA publication SP-368, Biomedical Results of Apollo.


To make matters more complicated, there has been, over the past 50 years, a scientific revolution as to how radiation readings are expressed in quantitative measurements, from mGy to mSv, so what has happened in the scientific community is a massive, consolidated effort to redefine radiation in terms of how it is measured ... up to and including redefining the measurements (and limits) of human radiation tolerance.

The rad is a deprecated unit of absorbed radiation dose, defined as 1 rad = 0.01 Gy = 0.01 J/kg.[1] It was originally defined in CGS units in 1953 as the dose causing 100 ergs of energy to be absorbed by one gram of matter. It has been replaced by the gray in SI but is still used in some countries. A related unit, the roentgen, is used to quantify the number of rad deposited into a target when it is exposed to radiation. The F-factor can be used to convert between rad and roentgens.

The material absorbing the radiation can be human tissue or silicon microchips or any other medium (for example, air, water, lead shielding, etc.).

reply to post by onebigmonkey

Let's discuss how they did live broadcasts from the moon that shows rocks and craters that were completely unknown and would not be shown again until the LRO photographed them.

That would be like asking Uri Geller to bend a spoon and then asking him again to prove he can bend a spoon.

turbonium1
Technology doesn't go backwards. And I never said it did.

That's why Apollo is not logical.

Such an achievement would be far easier now, with 40 years of progress in technology. But it was just the opposite, it was much harder.

Which means Apollo was not the achievement NASA claimed it was, in the first place.

So you think the same applies to a SST, so according to your lack of logic Concorde never existed, and never flew....

just when you think people made the most stupid statement ever, they surprise you and make a even more stupid one!

reply to post by SayonaraJupiter


You really ought to try to learn these things before you open your mouth and remove all doubt you have no idea what you are talking about.

Nothing has changed with regards to radiation measurements except the names. The Common Unit used in the US was the Rad, Rem, and Roentgen. The International System of Measurements (SI) is the Gray and the Sievert. The SI measurements are now the accepted units of measure everywhere. It's not hard to convert from one to the other. You can go to some websites and do it, or you can use the math to do it.

1 rad is 0.01 Gray (Gy)
1 rem is 0.01 Sievert (Sv)
1 roentgen is now coulomb/kilogram which is 0.000258

To convert from millirads to milliGrays you multiply by 0.01. The same with Sieverts.
To convert from milliroentgen to microcoulomb/kilogram you multiply by 0.258

There is no conspiracy to hide measurements, or to change how much exposure is safe. There was a change to a standardized acceptable measurement chart. So you don't have to know how to convert between the two, like you do with metric measurements. It's called simplification.

Zaphod58What's the point of recreating Apollo? They've been there, they've done that.

Did you realize that what you are saying is akin the Catholic Church insisting to Copernicus that the Sun revolves around the Earth!

Science doesn't work like that, mate. Science is brutal. It can turn any worldview upside down, like Darwin turned the mythology of Creationism U P S I D E D O W N.

Copernicus Wiki: A black granite tombstone now identifies him as the founder of the heliocentric theory and also a church canon. The tombstone bears a representation of Copernicus' model of the solar system—a golden sun encircled by six of the planets.

As you know Zaphod, history is tricky.

It has been much debated why it was not until six decades after the publication of De revolutionibus that the Catholic Church took any official action against it, even the efforts of Tolosani had gone unheeded. Proposed reasons have included the personality of Galileo Galilei and the availability of evidence such as telescope observations.

My main point is that the concepts of evolution, creationism, and apolloism are concrete belief systems, they have scriptures, they have holy relics, and they have 12 apostles... the 12 Apollo astronauts who walked on the surface of the "moon".

reply to post by Zaphod58


Zaphod, I am impressed. That was the most eloquent rebuttal post ever offered by an Apollo Defender in this thread.

Do you believe that a time & motion study, applied to the astronaut PRD readings, as documented in the air-to-ground Apollo transcripts, do you believe that those readings would be in perfect harmony with every other published Apollo source materials?

SayonaraJupiter
Did you realize that what you are saying is akin the Catholic Church insisting to Copernicus that the Sun revolves around the Earth!

No, what I'm saying is akin to "why go backwards, when we can go forward?" Apollo has been done, there is no need to do it again, which is what NASA would be doing. Take the time and spend the money to build something useful, like a ship that can stay on the moon for weeks or months, or even years at a time, instead of a few days.

reply to post by SayonaraJupiter


Yes I do. I haven't seen anything to make me think that the readings wouldn't match up nicely.

reply to post by Zaphod58

You really ought to try to learn these things before you open your mouth and remove all doubt you have no idea what you are talking about.

Well you basically admitted that the scientific community DID change the units of measurement for radiation and radiation exposures over the last 40 years. I think you just confirmed what I was previously saying. So we are the same side on that, am I right?

There must have been some fundamental, scientific flaw with measuring in RADS versus mSv.

turbonium1
reply to post by choos

 

Technology doesn't go backwards. And I never said it did.

That's why Apollo is not logical.

Such an achievement would be far easier now, with 40 years of progress in technology. But it was just the opposite, it was much harder.

Which means Apollo was not the achievement NASA claimed it was, in the first place.

so explain china's great wall of china.. or their forbidden palace.. has china gone backwards in achievements too?? does this prove that the great wall of china and the forbidden palace does not exist?

egypts great pyramids.. the sphinx.. they have never been topped by the egyptians does that prove that the great pyramids and the sphinx does not exist??

burj khalifa.. has not been topped by dubai.. does this mean that it also does not exist? no other building in the world is taller than it not even the new one world trade centre is taller than it.. does this prove the one world trade centre does not exist?

so are all these countries and more all going backwards also?? does that prove to you that the world is fake?

reply to post by Wolfenz

The Apollo Missions was 8 9 10 11 12 15 17 From The The CM to LM to Rover missions .. unfortunately there is no Sound at all it all film

The Apollo Defenders cannot dispute this. Thank you!

reply to post by SayonaraJupiter


No, which if you read the rest of my post you will understand what I said. What I said was that they went to a standard of measurement around the world. Like they tried to do with the metric system years ago, and failed. Instead of having the US using Rad, and Rem, and everyone else using Gray and Sievert and having to convert between the two, which could lead to errors, they went to a standardized unit of measurement. It simplified things, and reduced the error rate of measurements by eliminating the conversion.

The Gray and Sievert were already in use, in Europe.

The 1973 Apollo Experience Report- Protection Against Radiation found here clearly said at the top:

The MSC Director waived the use of the International System of Units (SI) for this
Apollo Experience Report because, in his judgment, the use of SI units would impair
the usefulness of the report or result ~ in excessive cost.

So even as far back as Apollo the SI units were in use.

SayonaraJupiter

Well you basically admitted that the scientific community DID change the units of measurement for radiation and radiation exposures over the last 40 years. I think you just confirmed what I was previously saying. So we are the same side on that, am I right?

There must have been some fundamental, scientific flaw with measuring in RADS versus mSv.

so what you are suggesting is that there is also a scientific fundamental flaw with measuring in feet/miles versus cm/km??