Disclosure of the moon landing hoax.

oops forgot some other important images.

Look how carefully those wires/cables from the apollo missions were covered.

To provide continuity between scenes, anchoring the wires like this would be the perfect solution in the studio.

After all, if the wires moved even a little bit, it would be obvious between different frames.

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/538ad004c93c.jpg[/atsimg]

full frame sources: history.nasa.gov... history.nasa.gov...

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/30120e7009a2.jpg[/atsimg]

source: history.nasa.gov...

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/38402fa0f45b.jpg[/atsimg]

source: history.nasa.gov...

Did the astronauts spend time anchoring the cables like this, or was it an amazing coincidence?
Most likely the set designers.

edit: I've only scratched the surface of this. I would encourage all ATS readers to download as many images as possible and search for more occurrences of cables / wires anchored unusually.

reply to post by ppk55


may i ask why you are so concerned about anchoring of wires of a few centimeters instead of the anchoring of wires several meters longs..



so am i to guess that it more dangerous for the set designers to anchor a few centimeters of wires to ensure continuity instead of anchoring several meters of wires??

you are a troll arent you?

ppk55
After all, if the wires moved even a little bit, it would be obvious between different frames.

I would assume the only way the wires could move is if a person moved it or if they moved the equipment it was attached to on either end. But couldn't that happen whether it was in a studio or on the Moon?

If a wire was seen to have moved from one picture to another, I'm not sure what that would prove either way. Sure, it could have been moved by a stage hand in a studio -- OR it could have been moved by an astronaut on the Moon.

reply to post by ppk55

After all, if the wires moved even a little bit, it would be obvious between different frames.

Naturally, you are overlooking the most obvious point. All of these wires describe crazy curves. If these cables were disturbed between photographs, it would be extremely obvious at a single glance. Can you provide an example of one of these cables being disturbed in such a way that it proves a "continuity error?"

ppk55
oops forgot some other important images.

Look how carefully those wires/cables from the apollo missions were covered.

To provide continuity between scenes, anchoring the wires like this would be the perfect solution in the studio.

After all, if the wires moved even a little bit, it would be obvious between different frames.

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/538ad004c93c.jpg[/atsimg]

full frame sources: history.nasa.gov... history.nasa.gov...

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/30120e7009a2.jpg[/atsimg]

source: history.nasa.gov...

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/38402fa0f45b.jpg[/atsimg]

source: history.nasa.gov...

Did the astronauts spend time anchoring the cables like this, or was it an amazing coincidence?
Most likely the set designers.

edit: I've only scratched the surface of this. I would encourage all ATS readers to download as many images as possible and search for more occurrences of cables / wires anchored unusually.

edit on 30-10-2013 by ppk55 because: added request for ATS members to continue the search and fixed link to history.nasa.gov...

Cable tie dows do you even know what this is your showing? The Active Seismic Experiment is a geophone placed on the ground for a siesmic experiment. Did they carefully run the cables yeah the reason they had to use something called a thumper and move it down the line where the geophones were placed.Then they set off explosives i think this one you show was from apollo 16 so they set off 8 explosions. Notice the dirt on the device well that happens when regolith is thrown into the air.Funny you see a picture and you dont even think to find out what it is wow. So any way yes they placed the cables in an attempt to make sure they were not damaged no they didnt anchor them down other then using a few rocks.

reply to post by ppk55


I can only imagine that you have never worked with long reels of cable or had to worry that they would be a trip hazard.

onebigmonkey
reply to post by ppk55

 

I can only imagine that you have never worked with long reels of cable or had to worry that they would be a trip hazard.

I am detecting some TRANSFER with a subtle hint of TESTIMONIAL.

reply to post by SayonaraJupiter


I am detecting a subtle hint of tedious and repetitive diversionary tactics aimed at avoiding answering questions. Where do you think it fits in on this?



How about transferring this to some testimony about Nixon, it's what happens when you don't secure cables properly:

www.youtube.com...

reply to post by onebigmonkey


Well his problem is all he can do is chip away with misleading facts said so himself. His whole proof NASA faked it is to get you to think about totally irrelevant things like what did Richard Nixon have for breakfast the morning of the launch. And when thats all you have theres little you can do but try to use magazine covers to spice it up.

onebigmonkey
How about transferring this to some testimony about Nixon, it's what happens when you don't secure cables properly:

www.youtube.com...

Notice how the Apollo 16 astronaut gets down on his knees, with his knees in the lunar regolith, which proves that the suit did not infringe on his ability to bend his knees. (Operating Pressure: 3.7 psi ).

In the youtube video the suited astronaut can bend his knees and fold his legs. This defeats the other Defender arguments stating that the pressure suits could not allow sufficient flexibility in the legs to jump more than a few inches off the ground -- due to the limitations in the suit construction and pressurization.

SayonaraJupiter

onebigmonkey
How about transferring this to some testimony about Nixon, it's what happens when you don't secure cables properly:

www.youtube.com...

Notice how the Apollo 16 astronaut gets down on his knees, with his knees in the lunar regolith, which proves that the suit did not infringe on his ability to bend his knees. (Operating Pressure: 3.7 psi ).

In the youtube video the suited astronaut can bend his knees and fold his legs. This defeats the other Defender arguments stating that the pressure suits could not allow sufficient flexibility in the legs to jump more than a few inches off the ground -- due to the limitations in the suit construction and pressurization.

My god you actually attempted to make a POINT you did watch my video!
Well the knees on the space suits do bend when you have enough force. Like falling for example here watch the astronaut dance from apollo 16.

choos

thats because you are not understanding the problem.. it can be simulated but not like this, not at 66% playback

No, it can be done - simply slow the descent a little bit. What's so hard for you to get here?

choos

mythbusters jump was done at 66% which is what jarrah claims to be the accurate slowdown speed in order to accurately recreate lunar gravity, but you cant just slow it down because that is an illusion.. this attempt by mythbusters and jarrah shows that the mythbusters jumped higher and stayed in the air shorter than john young..

this shows that the initial velocity of the mythbusters jump was higher than john youngs jump and that the change in initial velocity occured at a faster rate causing him to land first. what does this mean?? it means that the mythbusters jump represents a higher gravity force.

gravity will affect the height and the rate at which they fall and from the video its seen that 66% does not reflect that.

You don't get it...

They have total control of it, from start to finish. Not part(s) of it. ALL OF IT.

Including the descent.

choos

because you dont understand physics.. earth will accelerate objects to the ground at a faster rate than the moon is able to.. this cannot be denied.. if you are denying this then you are defying physics.

Nor can we do 10-15 ft. jumps in Earth's gravity, either. But we can with wires. And we can descend at any speed with wires, too!!

Yes, indeed.

choos

jarrahs attempt was to recreate the jump.. the 66% slow is his own number.. yet the mythbusters at 66% still falls faster than john young.. now why is that?

This should be clear to you now, but if not...

A person can be lifted with wires, say, 5 ft. high above ground. The wires can suspend him in mid-air for, say, 10 seconds.

Can wires settle him back to the ground, in the very same way?

Sure.

reply to post by dragonridr

Well the knees on the space suits do bend when you have enough force.

Well Dragon, you seem confident in that the A7L suits can be flexible when you want them to be flexible. Do you also mean to suggest that the Apollo suits are inflexible when you want them to be inflexible?

The Apollo A7L space suits will inevitably lead back to President Richard Nixon in the historical narrative.

The connections only become evident after scratching the surface of ILC Dover,


and coming to terms with the Wohlgemuth industrial espionage incident in the early Apollo program,


and then still digging deeper into the conglomerate that owned ILC Dover during the Nixon presidency.


And the coup de grace, Nixon's financial relationships with the owner of ILC Dover, Meshulam Riklis.


Are you really up for this one Dragon?

reply to post by turbonium1


Your clueless about how stunt rigging works i can see that.Do you realize how much they have to edit out using
cgi for wire stunts? Technology which didnt exist back them your trying to use rigging's used today in the 60s but in the 60s they didnt HAVE THE TECHNOLOGY TO HIDE THE RIGS!

watch this video it lets you see behind the scenes:



PS feel free to call motion works and ask them there professionals.

turbonium1

No, it can be done - simply slow the descent a little bit. What's so hard for you to get here?

oh and how will you do that?? ropes cant slow the descent down a little bit.. and they didnt have a feasible way of recording hours of slow motion in case you have forgotten.

You don't get it...

They have total control of it, from start to finish. Not part(s) of it. ALL OF IT.

Including the descent.

having total control of the jump makes the jump unrealistic.. dont you get it?? a jump is smooth from start to finish, there are no jerky movements when you jump.

the ropes suspended a portion of the mythbusters weight and that remained constant throughout the jump, this is to ensure smoothness in the jump, if they decided oh we are going to use ropes to give him this much weight and then half way through the jump decide oh we are now going to reduce his weight even more, the jump will not be smooth it will be jerky.

Nor can we do 10-15 ft. jumps in Earth's gravity, either. But we can with wires. And we can descend at any speed with wires, too!!

Yes, indeed.

you dont understand physics at all.. why is it that the myth busters jumps higher and stays in the air less than john young??

the ropes have been configured to represent a weight similar to the moon.. they do not vary during the jump, we know this because the jump is smooth throughout.. and why are you only focused on the descent?? what about the ascent?? seems the mythbusters reached a slightly higher height slightly faster also??

making up technology that didnt exist in the 60's doesnt cut it.

choos

jarrahs attempt was to recreate the jump.. the 66% slow is his own number.. yet the mythbusters at 66% still falls faster than john young.. now why is that?

This should be clear to you now, but if not...

A person can be lifted with wires, say, 5 ft. high above ground. The wires can suspend him in mid-air for, say, 10 seconds.

Can wires settle him back to the ground, in the very same way?

Sure.

you dont get it.. a jump with no wires needs to be smooth because when said footage is analysed, the jump will not be consistent.. wouldnt it be weird if the jump went up fast like normal and the descent was slower?? this is what you are proposing with your variable rope resistance method.. you like making stuff up on the fly dont you?

also as above.. its not just the descent, the ascent is also faster and higher than john young.

SayonaraJupiter
choos, you haven't figured out my strategy? I don't need to prove anything to you 100%. All I need to do is chip away at the mythology of Apollo until the columns collapse and the temple of Apollo worship will fall apart under it's own weight.

Speaking of weight, your Apollo boys dumped the Hasselblad cameras on the surface of the "moon" because they were too heavy to bring back to Earth. That's the official story. How heavy were the cameras, choos? Not so heavy that Ed Mitchell couldn't sneak one back to earth, am I right?

So, by your own admission Ed Mitchell brought one of the cameras back. You clearly state this in several of your posts. My rhetorical question: If Ed Mitchell snuck one of the cameras back, you've gotta admit he snuck it back from ... where?

reply to post by SayonaraJupiter

the Wohlgemuth industrial espionage incident in the early Apollo program,

In which Wohlgemuth brought knowledge to ILC that would be beneficial in creating real space suits. Are you sure you want to go there, Sayanara?

SayonaraJupiter
Notice how the Apollo 16 astronaut gets down on his knees, with his knees in the lunar regolith, which proves that the suit did not infringe on his ability to bend his knees. (Operating Pressure: 3.7 psi ).

In the youtube video the suited astronaut can bend his knees and fold his legs. This defeats the other Defender arguments stating that the pressure suits could not allow sufficient flexibility in the legs to jump more than a few inches off the ground -- due to the limitations in the suit construction and pressurization.

It's usually the Apollo deniers that claim the suits would be too pressurised to do anything, so feel free to quote anyone who has claimed no Apollo astronaut would ever be able to bend his knees - they'd clearly be wrong. The reason he is not bending his knees in the jump salute footage is because he doesn't have to, because he's in lunar gravity.

Snarl So, by your own admission Ed Mitchell brought one of the cameras back. You clearly state this in several of your posts. My rhetorical question: If Ed Mitchell snuck one of the cameras back, you've gotta admit he snuck it back from ... where?

Snarl, in the interests of clarity, (and it's fairly easy for any one us to make the same mistake), we should all be more clear and specific when we are talking about the Apollo cameras. Hasselblads, Mauer, etc.

Mitchell brought a Mauer 16mm DAC from the "moon". "Moon" is where he was.

Essentially, Snarl, the cameras as evidence debate goes something like this.
1. Nasa ordered the astronauts to dump the cameras on the "moon" for weight considerations, ostensibly so they could carry back more "moon" rocks. The cameras are supporting evidence for the "moon" trips because they contain the unique lenses and glass plates with the cross-hair reticles in them.

11 of 12 Hasselblad's are on the "moon". Jim Irwin's Hasselblad, which had malfunctioned somewhere around Dune Crater, was brought back to Earth, it was disassembled and then it vanished.

2. Mitchell brought back 1 Mauer 16mm DAC and held it for many years. He did not follow his orders by doing this and by adding the extra weight to the spacecraft he needlessly endangered the mission.

Only when Mitchell attempted to auction the camera did NASA come down on him with legal threats, obviously to protect the camera from independent scientific examination.

"Defendant Edgar Mitchell is a former NASA employee who is exercising improper dominion and control over a NASA Data Acquisition Camera," NASA alleged in court documents obtained by The Palm Beach Post.

3. The Irwin camera and the Mitchell camera defeats two other arguments that the cameras were either, a) too heavy (the useless weight argument) or b) took up too much space/cargo volume in the command module.

These NASA activities are strong circumstantial evidence of NASA's ongoing, multi-agency, decades long, coordinated effort to control access to Apollo evidence that includes the cameras, the negatives, the lunar sample material, the telemetry tapes, including the stationery/envelopes from the Apollo 15 scandal, etc... it is a bizarre pattern of behaviour for such a government agency which has nothing to hide yet never provides a straight answer...

I do understand (I think) the source of the passion with which people who believe the moon landing was a hoax argue their case. They believe they are right and I respect that.

I simply find it improbable because they had the technology, the money and everything else they needed to do it. It's a matter of pure willpower. If they wanted to do it, they could. Makes no sense to me that they would fake it if they didn't have to.

There are other more important things that are much more likely (in my view) to have been hoaxes/conspiracies. The moon thing just isn't a big deal and it distracts people from things like 9/11.