Disclosure of the moon landing hoax.

reply to post by SayonaraJupiter


well if you look at your argument from your post above.. you wanted them to use ed nixon over farouk el baz.. even though farouk el baz was much much more qualified..

here is your argument again in case you forgot because you seem to be changing your argument

Who hires an Egyptian geologist for an American expedition to the moon ??-- when the president's brother Ed already has two geology degrees and can't find a job in geology!

so once again, farouk had a PhD in geology, farouk was much much more qualified than nixon..

choos
well if you look at your argument from your post above.. you wanted them to use ed nixon over farouk el baz.. even though farouk el baz was much much more qualified..

Of course if they had used Nixon he would be claiming it was just part of the moon landing hoax that Nixon put his brother in NASA to help with the coverup....

It's a shame we're going back to discussing personalities, because it means that the actual evidence I posted a bit ago will disappear and the hoax proponents will be able to pretend it never happened. They usually do that with things they can't disprove or don't understand.

I don't see why they get to dictate the terms or direction of the debate, so here's some more evidence to mull over.

Take a look at this photo from Apollo 12:



It's the moon.

So what?

Well, for one thing it's sandwiched between images of Earth that can be very precisely timed thanks to the weather patterns visible on the Earth and the weather satellite photos taken at the time. The timings match up very nicely with the Apollo Image Atlas' label of 'Pre-REV 1' - before they went into lunar orbit.

Again, so what. Well, let's pick a time for the image between those of the Earth images either side of it.

Now let's get a view of what the Moon would look like from Earth at that time and see how it compares with the picture of the moon when it's been correctly oriented.



The red arrow points to the same feature.

See if you can work out the significance of this all by yourself.

I met Captain Alan Bean last weekend - he was one of the photographers from that mission. He is nice beyond words and walked on the surface of the moon. Disliking Nixon, von Braun, or Egyptian geologists will never change that.

reply to post by onebigmonkey

I met Captain Alan Bean last weekend - he was one of the photographers from that mission. He is nice beyond words and walked on the surface of the moon. Disliking Nixon, von Braun, or Egyptian geologists will never change that.

So Bean was a photographer on the mission. Did you ask him what he thinks of having Arizona State University erasing the cross-hairs from the images he took on the "moon"? Is Bean aware of it?

Bean was a photographer who skillfully pointed a $70,000 color TV camera directly at the sun to burn out the picture tube. Did you ask him about that?

Bean was a photographer who forgot to dismount his camera from the window of the command module, it flew off and hit him in the head on splashdown. Maybe the concussion erased his memory of the mission? Did you ask him about that?

I met Captain Alan Bean last weekend

Pics or it didn't happen.

reply to post by Pinke

IIRC there was an Apollo thread (busting my brain to remember which one) that you posted in where one of the members was asking questions about the hoaxes. They asked some very good questions. Those who responded to them, gave excellent answers. This person had stated they were somewhat on the side of the Moon landings being a hoax when they first posted. But, after several pages of solid evidence being presented, they admitted they were now convinced the Moon landings did occur as recorded in history.

I have been going back through my posts (I think I responded to them) but have yet to find him.

SayonaraJupiter
reply to post by onebigmonkey

 

I met Captain Alan Bean last weekend - he was one of the photographers from that mission. He is nice beyond words and walked on the surface of the moon. Disliking Nixon, von Braun, or Egyptian geologists will never change that.

So Bean was a photographer on the mission. Did you ask him what he thinks of having Arizona State University erasing the cross-hairs from the images he took on the "moon"? Is Bean aware of it?

Bean was a photographer who skillfully pointed a $70,000 color TV camera directly at the sun to burn out the picture tube. Did you ask him about that?

Bean was a photographer who forgot to dismount his camera from the window of the command module, it flew off and hit him in the head on splashdown. Maybe the concussion erased his memory of the mission? Did you ask him about that?

I met Captain Alan Bean last weekend

Pics or it didn't happen.

So what was the point of this diatribe other then i guess trash an astronaut for making mistakes.You know what making mistakes is part of being human but at least your admitting he went to the moon. Because pointing a 70000 dollar camera at studio lights isnt going to damage the camera. The Videcon tube used in the A12 camera was known to be very sensitive to concentrated light. You know like the sun while on the surface of the moon. Interesting part of it was it was simply a stupid design really because the camera was still usable and all that needed was a wire to be cut allowing the level control circuitry back in to usable brightness. Later missions they added a switch just for this reason.

reply to post by SayonaraJupiter




The magazine I am holding is an original copy of Life Magazine featuring mission photographs. He is on the cover and he very kindly signed it.

And no, I didn't ask him any dumb questions.

reply to post by onebigmonkey


OBMonkey,

You have met Alan Bean face to face.

I would have asked him about the lightning strike at 56 seconds, and the $70,000 dollar sizzled TV camera and his admittedly dumb idea to leave the camera mounted to the window during splashdown.

I will never understand the celebrity worshipping that goes on with these 12 NASA "moon" walkers. Why, when these astronauts appear in public, WHY won't you ask them any tough questions?

Has anyone ever asked Alan Bean what does Alan Bean think about Richard Nixon? Probably not. Because the Apollo Defenders are too concentrated on the celebrity of Alan Bean. They won't ask him any questions, they just kiss his ass, as usual, that's what the Apollo Defenders can be expected to do.

hellobruce

choos
well if you look at your argument from your post above.. you wanted them to use ed nixon over farouk el baz.. even though farouk el baz was much much more qualified..

Of course if they had used Nixon he would be claiming it was just part of the moon landing hoax that Nixon put his brother in NASA to help with the coverup....

It's too bad that you guys are taking the wrong side on Apollo. Farouk is Nixon's boy. And Farouk was secretary of the landing site selection committee. So far you both scored an "F" on Ed Nixon, Farouk El-Baz and Bellcomm.

I would suggest that you guys retreat back to your debunker bunkers and sort out your available options on the Ed Nixon, Farouk El-Baz and Apollo thing. Good Luck with that.

The Apollo Defenders are squirming on the issue of Nixon/ElBaz/Bellcomm because they know it's a red flag.

SayonaraJupiter
It's too bad that you guys are taking the wrong side on Apollo. Farouk is Nixon's boy. And Farouk was secretary of the landing site selection committee. So far you both scored an "F" on Ed Nixon, Farouk El-Baz and Bellcomm.

I would suggest that you guys retreat back to your debunker bunkers and sort out your available options on the Ed Nixon, Farouk El-Baz and Apollo thing. Good Luck with that.

The Apollo Defenders are squirming on the issue of Nixon/ElBaz/Bellcomm because they know it's a red flag.

tell us how ed nixon is more qualified for the job than farouk is again please..

reply to post by TheLieWeLive


Of course it's detailed. We sent humans to a rock in space. Could you imagine what grief they would have gotten if the pictures didn't turn out because the hadn't dialed it in on earth? If you make a simulator detailed enough, you can prepare for all contingencies. It would be stupid and possibly embarrassing not to.

choos
tell us how ed nixon is more qualified for the job than farouk is again please..

No, you need observe that connections exist between Richard Nixon, Ed Nixon and Farouk El-Baz have been established. These are real, factual connections. When you downplay these connections you are supporting a view which is ignorant of the historical narrative.

SayonaraJupiter
reply to post by onebigmonkey

 

OBMonkey,

You have met Alan Bean face to face.

I would have asked him about the lightning strike at 56 seconds, and the $70,000 dollar sizzled TV camera and his admittedly dumb idea to leave the camera mounted to the window during splashdown.

I will never understand the celebrity worshipping that goes on with these 12 NASA "moon" walkers. Why, when these astronauts appear in public, WHY won't you ask them any tough questions?

Has anyone ever asked Alan Bean what does Alan Bean think about Richard Nixon? Probably not. Because the Apollo Defenders are too concentrated on the celebrity of Alan Bean. They won't ask him any questions, they just kiss his ass, as usual, that's what the Apollo Defenders can be expected to do.

I believe its time for your medication. Any way once again you make innuendos with no substance or form and claim victory. Funny no one else seems to see it that way maybe you should attempt to change your bebate tactics and actually put forth some evidence to back up your assertions. I believe this may be a refreshing change for all of us. At the very least it will allow you to maybe actually show something of value a win win for everyone. Id hold my breath but i really dont like passing out and its probably bad for me.

fenson76
reply to post by TheLieWeLive

 

Of course it's detailed. We sent humans to a rock in space. Could you imagine what grief they would have gotten if the pictures didn't turn out because the hadn't dialed it in on earth? If you make a simulator detailed enough, you can prepare for all contingencies. It would be stupid and possibly embarrassing not to.

Really a simulator in 1969 that could be so realistic as to be convincing. People are funny they think that people who carried around 8 track tapes in the cars could make a simulator even slightly resembling reality. Trust me there was no mistaking they were in a simulator it was so bad in fact they had to build a model to practice in a desert using a jet engine.

However in your honor heres a simulator for you have fun,

www.apolloarchive.com...

SayonaraJupiter

No, you need observe that connections exist between Richard Nixon, Ed Nixon and Farouk El-Baz have been established. These are real, factual connections. When you downplay these connections you are supporting a view which is ignorant of the historical narrative.

and even if you look at the connections you still believe that they should have hired ed nixon instead of farouk is that it??

considering all the connections the fact remains, farouk was much more qualified for the position.. there is nothing fishy with using someone more qualified for a position to do what he is paid to do..

ppk55
I sense it's getting close to when the moon landing hoax is finally revealed.

Why today did the mainstream media decide to reveal to the public the 'ingenious' moon simulator?
Why today? What was the purpose of this article today?

dailymail.co.uk

I believe it's drip feeding the public the truth. Obviously they can't handle it in one fell swoop, so here is an article laying the ground work for eventual disclosure.

Plant the idea that it could have all been a simulation. It will make the truth so much more palatable when it comes to pass.

What will that day be like?

Its time to deny ignorance.... sorry to burst your bubble bro, but it looks like they really DID go to the moon!

www.youtube.com...

sorry i dont know how to embed a vid!

reply to post by QQXXw


This is one of the most ignorant things I've ever heard.

Do you know why it was successful?

Because they spent years and an insane amount of money to research, and be prepared for, all of the steps needed for the mission to be a success.

SayonaraJupiter
reply to post by onebigmonkey

 

OBMonkey,

You have met Alan Bean face to face.

I would have asked him about the lightning strike at 56 seconds, and the $70,000 dollar sizzled TV camera and his admittedly dumb idea to leave the camera mounted to the window during splashdown.

I will never understand the celebrity worshipping that goes on with these 12 NASA "moon" walkers. Why, when these astronauts appear in public, WHY won't you ask them any tough questions?

Has anyone ever asked Alan Bean what does Alan Bean think about Richard Nixon? Probably not. Because the Apollo Defenders are too concentrated on the celebrity of Alan Bean. They won't ask him any questions, they just kiss his ass, as usual, that's what the Apollo Defenders can be expected to do.

I didn't go there to act like a moron, and I didn't go there to satisfy the agenda that you are obsessed with promoting. I went there to listen to someone talk about their experiences on the moon, and it was extremely interesting and informative. If you want to ask those kind of questions, why not go to one yourself and stop expecting everyone to jump to your tune??


You seem to be the one obsessed with personalities, how about you ditch that dead-end approach and consider the evidence I have presented above? You seem to have a blind spot about it.

dragonridr

fenson76
reply to post by TheLieWeLive

 

Of course it's detailed. We sent humans to a rock in space. Could you imagine what grief they would have gotten if the pictures didn't turn out because the hadn't dialed it in on earth? If you make a simulator detailed enough, you can prepare for all contingencies. It would be stupid and possibly embarrassing not to.

Really a simulator in 1969 that could be so realistic as to be convincing. People are funny they think that people who carried around 8 track tapes in the cars could make a simulator even slightly resembling reality. Trust me there was no mistaking they were in a simulator it was so bad in fact they had to build a model to practice in a desert using a jet engine.

However in your honor heres a simulator for you have fun,

www.apolloarchive.com...

This brings me nicely on to my next bit of evidence that hoax believers fail to consider. Much is made of the fact that Apollo astronauts actually bothered to practice their procedures on simulators.

The simulators were based on photographs obtained by the Lunar Orbiter series of probes. "A-haa" they say, they must have used these photographs to fake the lunar surface, and that's why the modern LRO probe views of the landing sites match up with the Apollo views.

So let's move away from the landing sites. Here's an Apollo photograph taken on the lunar far side by Apollo 16, AS16/118/19002. Again it's sandwiched between shots of Earth that can be precisely dated so we can see when it was taken.



It shows a small area near Green crater on the lunar far side.

The image below shows the view of one small crater in the image as seen by the modern LRO (left), Apollo 16 (centre) and the best available view from Lunar Orbiter (right).



This is one picture picked out at random, and one crater picked out at random from that. The photographs were published shortly after the mission, long before any other lunar probe captured that area in more detail.

It shows small details that they could not have known about without being there.

ppk55
I sense it's getting close to when the moon landing hoax is finally revealed.

Why today did the mainstream media decide to reveal to the public the 'ingenious' moon simulator?
Why today? What was the purpose of this article today?

dailymail.co.uk

I believe it's drip feeding the public the truth. Obviously they can't handle it in one fell swoop, so here is an article laying the ground work for eventual disclosure.

Plant the idea that it could have all been a simulation. It will make the truth so much more palatable when it comes to pass.

What will that day be like?