Disclosure of the moon landing hoax.

reply to post by onebigmonkey


How many People had Lasers in 1969 to find out if there was a reflector there before and after??

and prior to the next mission.

Were the receivers sensitive enough at the time to tell the difference?

another what if:

What if they just found a spot of exposed smooth platinum and deemed that reflector til a mission could be done to get one there.

and then, with the real reflector, they will say they are installing an upgrading detector at a different location.

I didn't put much into the apollo 11 hoax stuff til I learned about the Radiation issue and I noticed on Google Earth a couple years ago. The India Satellite was sharing Hi -Res imagery with Google Earth. Or one of the satellites. I believe it was the India one.

Well, the section of satellite data that should have had the hi-res apollo 11 proof, was replaced with the old , horrible res, originals from back in the day. Other Apollo missions confirmed. But 11 seems shady.


Now, the ultimate conspiracy.

Someone is up there fixing it right now so no one will ever know!!

turbonium1

I was pointing out to you that the only difference was a 4-year peak, which was only about 2x the average annual budget of today. And the other years were about the same as today - on average.

You cry foul, of course.

ah yes a 4 year peak, during the hot part of the Apollo R&D portion means absolutely nothing to you, ofcourse..

Why didn't you mention the average from 2001-09?
No matter - it is about 15867 per year.
Or, almost 2/3 (62.5%) of the average annual budget from 1961-69.
Is there some point you wanted to make here?
How it's all about a lack of money?

look at the % of GDP and you should have your answer.. but given you latest post i wont hold my breath since education failed you horribly.. i really cant believe you are trying to make an argument with those figures.. seriously just look at % GDP..

Still trying to put words in my mouth, I see.

poor education and also a short term memory issue.. you have said mulitple times that GCR's will make someone sick or even kill them within one week..

are you seriously going to deny that??
are you seriously going to make me dig up that post of yours again??

or have you changed your mind now and concede your "point" and agree that GCR's are not high enough to make someone sick or kill them within one week?

p.s. *hint* pg 75

No, it's just another story you've concocted for me (see above)

I am NOT saying it is "proof" of a fake. You spin it as my claim. Back it up, if you can. Or stop making up crap I didn't say.

sooo.. by saying that the constellation program is repeating the apollo goals and extending the goals and them failing to do so proves that apollo was fake? or effectively failure in the constellation program proves apollo was faked

this is the proof you have put forward of proving apollo fake.. if its not then what proof do you have that apollo was faked?

p.s. i did not concoct the story of you saying GCR's are high enough to make someone sick or even kill them within one week.. do you or do you not deny you said this? i have proof and i will dig it up..

I just compared them above. About 1/3 more per year would do the trick, right?

Sure it would. Not.

you just making up numbers now?? give NASA a budget of about 5% GDP and then we can start comparing the constellation program with Apollo.. but i doubt you will understand this given how badly the education system has failed you.

Why would it take less time?

It is the very first time ever attempted, and takes 7-8 years to accomplish.

with a huge budget.. nearly 5% GDP was allocated to man power and R&D on the apollo missions.. compared with under 1% GDP they have now..

It is done again, soon after. A total of nine missions reach the moon, with six landing.

So they knew exactly how to do it, right? Sure..

More than 40 years later, we would still know exactly how to do it.

We would know it better, in fact.

when was the last time NASA had a heavy lift rocket capable of going to the moon? and no the shuttle is not capable of going to the moon..

and more over.. with a budget of under 1% GDP you expect NASA to do something that they accomplished with nearly 5% GDP.. and in less time?? logic fails you again.

We DO know more about space now.

With advancements in technology, hand-in-hand with a greater knowledge of space (and its environment(s), we only improve on it.

Consider unmanned spacecraft. It is a great example of space exploration. With genuine technology.

It shows how we truly progress. It is not going to the moon, then back into LEO for the next 40 years.

Unmanned vehicles make logical steps. They progress outward, to the planets, and beyond. They land on the moon, and later they land on Mars. They probe hazardous environments to understand them, to make human missions possible. As they are doing now in the VA Belts.

yes like voyager 1 and 2 both launched in 1977 and are now maybe outside of the solar system.. and here NASA is still sending probes in LEO.. i guess to you this proves that the voyager program was a hoax also right??

because you personally wouldnt send probes out to the edge of the solar system and them for the next 30+years be sending probes within the solar system let alone LEO..

Telescopes are another example of genuine progress in space.

Same goes for manned space exploration. If we have a technology that allowed manned moon landings, we would never have stopped our progress. Not a chance. We would not drop the technology as if it were worthless garbage. We would not go back into LEO for the next 40 years.

This is complete nonsense

so you are saying that technology has gone backwards??

The point is that money can excuse anything.

A manned Mars landing is theoretically possible, but tons of money doesn't magically transform it into reality. That's what I mean with Apollo. Money is not the reason we can't go to the moon. We simply don't have the technology required for it - not yet, anyway.

actually it can.. theoretically if money was not an object and the desire to land man on mars was there.. it can be done .. i know it seems wacky to you.. but landing man on mars is entirely possible if money was no object..

I'm very clear on it.

clearly you are not.. because the peak of NASA's budget means absolutely nothing to you.. so go look up how much aeronautical companies spend on R&D.

It shows we have many issues not yet solved.

yes this is the type of technology that NASA is lacking.. back in the apollo days the heatshield was hand made.. the contractor wants to automate the process, but this procedure does not exist yet.. this is the type of technology holding them back.. and you are using this "lack" of technology to try to prove apollo was a hoax..

A proven technology is the foundation. Nothing is more important to manned space exploration than having the fundamental technology to land man on the moon and back to Earth.

If it is used successfully in a manned moon landing program, it is not going to be buried away for eternity because the moon landing program ends. Then they just fly around in LEO for the next 40 years? What a pathetic joke!

the fundamental technology to land man on the moon and back to earth is PHYSICS!!!!!!!! that is the fundamentals.. rendezvous procedures were developed as a means to land and launch off the moon and these procedures are very valid..

the fundamentals to land man on the moon and return him have not been buried.. ie. rendezvous procedure will most likely still be used for future lunar missions, the slow tumble will still be used to keep the craft from over heating..

reply to post by seabhac-rua


Most educated people know the moon landing was never done anyway, for a start the computer needed would never have got in side of the rocket or Moon Lander anyway, Radio com's would not have got that far in such a short time span for them to reply within seconds, the delay would ve massive, to understand that you need only listen to a news broadcast from the reporter the other side of earth, they stand there on camera waiting to hear what has been ask of them.

reply to post by Alternative4u


The computer wasn't in the spacecraft in the first place, it was on earth. And satellite communications are totally different from line of sight.

Alternative4u
reply to post by seabhac-rua

 

Most educated people know the moon landing was never done anyway, for a start the computer needed would never have got in side of the rocket or Moon Lander anyway, Radio com's would not have got that far in such a short time span for them to reply within seconds, the delay would ve massive, to understand that you need only listen to a news broadcast from the reporter the other side of earth, they stand there on camera waiting to hear what has been ask of them.

Congratulations in one post you state your educated and prove your not.. Laws of physics hasnt changed it doesnt take seconds for electromagnetic radiation to reach the moon. Radio waves for someone with your vast intellect.The average distance from Earth to the Moon is 384,400 km. Radio waves travel at the speed of light: 300,000 km/s average time = 384,400 / 300,000 = 1.28 sec. Now as far as computer Apollo astronauts did everything the only exception was a guidance computer built by MIT and was nothing more then a really big calculator. It had 2k memory and ran at the blinding speed of 1 MHz . Your cell phone has more capability this was merely a way to input commands and have it switch things on it was incredibly simple.But only having 2k still took up alot of room about the size of a pc by late 1970 the pc is born with the 8086 processor. but apollos guidance computer really didnt count as a computer.

Alternative4u

Most educated people know the moon landing was never done anyway

thats funny because from my experience, its been the lesser educated people who seem to believe in the manned lunar hoax theory..

i want to ask as a test.. do you believe you can run faster on the moon than you can on earth?

reply to post by ppk55


I'm a naughty sceptic.

I STILL don't believe a human being has ever been to the Moon.

I have read all the arguments for and against and I must admit that I think we were duped back then and still are.

Admit it, Dear NASA! You never went there did you!!! Hmmmm???

choos

Alternative4u

Most educated people know the moon landing was never done anyway

thats funny because from my experience, its been the lesser educated people who seem to believe in the manned lunar hoax theory..

i want to ask as a test.. do you believe you can run faster on the moon than you can on earth?

I'm pretty educated. Have been to university if that counts for anything.

It is not about education. It is about deducing from the state of technology back then not being capable of delivering a human cargo to the Moon and back. They could not do it then and they still can not do it now.

AbleEndangered
reply to post by onebigmonkey

 

How many People had Lasers in 1969 to find out if there was a reflector there before and after??

and prior to the next mission.

Were the receivers sensitive enough at the time to tell the difference?

The Russians did for a start, that's why they put their own laser reflectors up there.

Yes, they wee sensitive enough, otherwise what would be the point - if they were sensitive enough to get a weak return signal from the moon without a reflector, they were sensitive enough to get a stronger reflection. If you think differently then feel free to provide the numbers in support of your argument.

another what if:

What if they just found a spot of exposed smooth platinum and deemed that reflector til a mission could be done to get one there.

and then, with the real reflector, they will say they are installing an upgrading detector at a different location.

Some coincidence that. How would they find such a spot? You're basically making stuff up to support your argument as well as suggesting that they did actually have a mission to get there. We have photo and movie evidence of the laser reflectors being installed. Photographs from the same location show details that are not seen again until the LRO takes photographs of the same area. Photographs in the same magazine as the ones showing the reflectors being installed show Earth with weather patterns that exactly match the satellite meteorology data. The evidence in favour of Apollo installing the reflectors far outweighs your made up story.

I didn't put much into the apollo 11 hoax stuff til I learned about the Radiation issue and I noticed on Google Earth a couple years ago. The India Satellite was sharing Hi -Res imagery with Google Earth. Or one of the satellites. I believe it was the India one.

Well, the section of satellite data that should have had the hi-res apollo 11 proof, was replaced with the old , horrible res, originals from back in the day. Other Apollo missions confirmed. But 11 seems shady.


Now, the ultimate conspiracy.

Someone is up there fixing it right now so no one will ever know!!

You need to explain that better, because it doesn't make sense. Was it India or not? Were the images of Earth or moon? When were they replaced? Which images were replaced? Your ultimate conspiracy doesn't have much of a foundation if you can't explain it.

Revolution9

I'm pretty educated. Have been to university if that counts for anything.

It is not about education. It is about deducing from the state of technology back then not being capable of delivering a human cargo to the Moon and back. They could not do it then and they still can not do it now.

you didnt answer my query??? and i dont know if you are pretty educated.. well atleast not in physics or science.. and dont say you did arts in university..

you were the one that said this

Most educated people know the moon landing was never done anyway

and you say its not about education?? its about deducing from the state of technology back then?? all the calculations were done on earth, only some were done by the astronauts themselves..

but if its the state of technology in the 60's you are after heres a few videos for you to deduce from:







but ill bet you will ignore these videos.. so we will keep it simple, answer my query:

would you be able to run faster on the moon than you can on the earth? simple query

reply to post by onebigmonkey


I was unfamiliar with a Russian reflector

The Russians did a Manned Mission to get the Reflector there?



Sorry for not clarifying what satellite Data. Yeah and I meant Google Earth > Moon!

The india satellite confirmed apollo 14 to my best recollection, no satellite confirmed 11 yet!

Chandrayaan-1 or Chandrayaan-2

See for yourself.

Go to Apollo 11 on google Earth > view > Moon

You will see the fakery!!

Im calling Shenanigans!!

AbleEndangered
reply to post by onebigmonkey

 

I was unfamiliar with a Russian reflector

The Russians did a Manned Mission to get the Reflector there?

 

Sorry for not clarifying what satellite Data. Yeah and I meant Google Earth > Moon!

The india satellite confirmed apollo 14 to my best recollection, no satellite confirmed 11 yet!

Chandrayaan-1 or Chandrayaan-2

See for yourself.

Go to Apollo 11 on google Earth > view > Moon

You will see the fakery!!

Im calling Shenanigans!!

edit on 22-9-2013 by AbleEndangered because: added: no satellite confirmed 11 yet!

Google moon is shanaigans they tried to piece together when you zoom in they shove filler in becuase they dont have detailed pictures. They repeat landscape because whatever idiot that tried to stitch them together obviously wasnt a geologist. Google moon isnt a research tool its just something to do if your bored. Maybe some day will be really cool now that we are mapping the surface in detail if they ever get ahold of those images maybe. But i have the feeling even if they did they would have the same idiot piece them together so i suspect still be a mess.

If you want to see hi res pictures of the landing sites try NASA or JAXA. As far as we know Russia has never sent a manned flight to the moon, though there is rumor of a dead cosmonaut being on the moon and were on a conspiracy website(suspect this is the cosmonaut that died on reentry in 1967 Vladimir Komarov) . Any way the Russians attempted to put to reflectors on the moon Lunokhod 1 and 2. The first one was lost until NASA found it recently its actually kinda funny. NASA Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter photographed its tracks and final location, and researchers, using a telescopic pulsed-laser rangefinder, detected the robot's retroreflector. So it bounced its laser right back at LRO much stronger then normal. Now the other one the Russians attempted they could bounce a laser off it problem was its not oriented quite right so its not a strong signal. Currently Russian scientists just use the ones from the Apollo missions.

choos

who said its completely untrue??

Again, here's what they said...

“For years we thought the Van Allen belts were pretty well behaved and changed slowly,” said Geoffrey Reeves of Los Alamos National Laboratory’s Intelligence and Space Research Division. “With more measurements, however, we realized how quickly and unpredictably the radiation belts change, and now we have real evidence that the changes originate from within the belts themselves.”

Follow along..

"For years, we thought the Van Allen belts were pretty well behaved and changed slowly"

So the above describes what they previously believed about the VA Belts. It is completely untrue

Why? Because they now realize "..how quickly and unpredictably the radiation belts change.."

Get it now?

choos

looks to me that in 60+ years of space exploration that it doesnt occur often

The October 9 event mimicked an observed, but poorly understood event measured in 1997 by another spacecraft. Ever since the 1997 event, scientists have pondered whether the increase in electron energy was the result of forces outside of the belts, a mechanism known as “radial acceleration,” or from forces within the belts, known as “local acceleration.” Data from the Van Allen Probes seems to put this question to rest.

they only noticed it in 1997.. so from the 50's to the 90's all those satellites were more or less unaffected now i wonder why that is??

The vast majority of satellites have never gone into the VA Belts, so your whole argument is flawed to begin with.

You also suggest it is a rare, uncommon phenomenon, but have no valid evidence to support that claim. Your source is simply comparing the Oct. 9, 2012 event to another event measured by another spacecraft back in 1997.

Hmm - one in 2012, and one in 1997 - so it happened two times over a period of 15 years!

Are you serious?

choos

“In the October 9, 2012, event, all of the acceleration took place in about 12 hours,”

oh i see it only lasts about 12 hours at a time.. i bet you have interpreted that those 12 hours means that the particles are accelerate 24/7 during the apollo era right?

No, you have interpreted it only lasts about 12 hours because they mention one that lasted about 12 hours.

And you have interpreted those two separate events as being the only two times it ever occurred over a 15-year period.