Disclosure of the moon landing hoax.

originally posted by: SayonaraJupiter

Still waiting for that demonstration. December 19, 1972. The day that lives in infamy.

Start at this post and keep reading. It's only two pages back in this thread (well three now this post has gone over to the next page!) Those photos were taken just a few days before your "day that lives in infamy". Can you explain where they were taken if not on the moon? The panorama in particular gives one of the best illustrations I have seen of what it must have been like to be on that lonely hillside on the moon, miles even from the lunar module.

Apollo 11 gets a lot of the attention, but to my mind Apollo 17 was in a totally different league. They explored so much. Just think what they could have achieved if Nixon hadn't pulled the plug.

a reply to: SayonaraJupiter

I think this has pretty much everything

a reply to: SayonaraJupiter

Why do you keep ignoring the fact that I have agreed to debate you? It is now up to you to submit the proposal to the Mods, since it was your idea. Go ahead, go for it!

originally posted by: SayonaraJupiter
That's right bro. I offered 4 debates and had no takers. Eat that Apollo Defenders.

Do you withdraw your claim you have no takers on a debate?

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: SayonaraJupiter

Why do you keep ignoring the fact that I have agreed to debate you?

originally posted by: SayonaraJupiter

originally posted by: DJW001
What about the debate you challenged me to? Getting cold feet?

Taunting now?

originally posted by: SayonaraJupiter

originally posted by: DJW001

originally posted by: SayonaraJupiter

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: SayonaraJupiter

Sayanara, I have accepted your challenge to a debate. I am awaiting your choice of a specific topic. Why are you ignoring that all of a sudden?

DJW this is my offer, it remains the same, it has not changed since p.215 of this thread. Why ask me to pick a specific topic when I have generously given you the advantage of choosing one? Are these terms somehow unacceptable to you?

I'll give YOU the advantage of selecting the specific topic, I will give YOU the advantage of selecting/recruiting 2 moderators, I will give YOU the advantage of going first. How does that sound to you, DJW?

How about: "President Richard Nixon faked the Moon landings?"

OK. I'll take it. Who do you want for the 2 mods? And then we can settle the general structure of the debate. Settling the terms of the debate can be public or private conversations I will let you decide on that. No hurry, I realize it takes time to get responses from mods.. tothetenthpower (supermod) has added me to fighter status so I'm ready to go.

I wanted to be sure that I offered DJW the most generous terms. It is now up to DJW to select two moderators. Taunting at this stage of the game is the poor man's debate tactic.

Dave Scott recently delivered the Masursky Lecture (April 2014). Scott says manned missions to Mars are "many many generations away".

It is notable for Apollo Reviewers because Dave Scott uses the "400,000 fallacy" early on in the lecture. What I found interesting was Scott's proposal for return moon missions, "Optimum Apollo" with a lunar module called a "HALO".


Apollo Reviewers might also pay attention near the end for the Q&A. There was a question from a deep voiced Smithsonian about communications on the far side. Scott answered that there was not need for constant communications on the far side. Scott explained the Apollo "T cubed" training philosophy of "Train 'em, Trust 'em, and Turn 'em loose."

It reminds me of the plot to that movie... it was called "The Dirty Dozen" (1967)


Here is the Masursky Lecture for Apollo Reviewers:
new.livestream.com...

a reply to: SayonaraJupiter

I don't have the time to waste on choosing Moderators. I allow you to have the choice.

a reply to: SayonaraJupiter

what was the point of that post seriously?? you said alot, but in the end you said nothing.. like the majority of your posts

originally posted by: choos
a reply to: SayonaraJupiter

what was the point of that post seriously?? you said alot, but in the end you said nothing.. like the majority of your posts

I watched the Dave Scott video. He made an interesting comment about "T cubed" which I parlayed into a comment about "The Dirty Dozen". Some readers might be interested about the "Optimum Apollo" program and his "HALO", which, you may not know this, was the true name of the Howard Hughes "Surveyor".... Hughes Aircraft Lunar Observer... those interested in Apollo Disclosure should watch the video. Dave Scott also said he wants to send an expanded mission back to Hadley Rille!

See any connections now?

originally posted by: SayonaraJupiter
Apollo Reviewers might also pay attention near the end for the Q&A. There was a question from a deep voiced Smithsonian about communications on the far side. Scott answered that there was not need for constant communications on the far side. Scott explained the Apollo "T cubed" training philosophy of "Train 'em, Trust 'em, and Turn 'em loose."

He said the main thing they needed Houston for was help in monitoring their consumables, and he suggested that they take a 3rd person to the moon surface and let that person stay in the lunar lander to basically perform the same function as Houston did, in which case you wouldn't really need a communication satellite in orbit, but he also offered that option.

For some reason you didn't mention the part of that lecture that was most relevant to this thread, where a little after 19 minutes into the video he said:

"You can see our tracks. We were there. It wasn't a hoax. (audience laughs)."

[/thread]

a reply to: SayonaraJupiter

yes, i saw the connection you tried to make the first time..

david scott said something that reminded you of a movie.. WOW

so ill say it once again, you say a lot but in the end you say nothing.. like the majority of your posts..

originally posted by: SayonaraJupiter

originally posted by: choos
a reply to: SayonaraJupiter

what was the point of that post seriously?? you said alot, but in the end you said nothing.. like the majority of your posts

I watched the Dave Scott video. He made an interesting comment about "T cubed" which I parlayed into a comment about "The Dirty Dozen". Some readers might be interested about the "Optimum Apollo" program and his "HALO", which, you may not know this, was the true name of the Howard Hughes "Surveyor".... Hughes Aircraft Lunar Observer... those interested in Apollo Disclosure should watch the video. Dave Scott also said he wants to send an expanded mission back to Hadley Rille!

See any connections now?

I did watch the video. i watched it some time ago and also mentioned Scott's comment about it not being fake. What I saw was an Apollo astronaut who recounted his experience on the moon and discussed future missions based on that mission.

You obviously saw something else.

The is nothing for you to get excited about in the 'T-cubed' reference, so why spend your time on it? What you fail to appreciate is that Apollo astronauts did not just know their own job, they knew everyone else's job, they knew their vessel inside out, the knew countless emergency procedures, as did the people upon whom they relied. I can say this for certain having heard 3 Apollo astronauts speak, where I have been amazed by both the depth and breadth of their knowledge about their job.

The 400000 figure is not a fallacy. It is simple maths. Provide a different number, a verifiable one, if you dispute it. Otherwise all you're saying is "I don't like this number, it's too big for my fantasy version, please provide me with another one that I prefer".

a reply to: onebigmonkey

You obviously saw something else.

Yes. I saw the Apollo smuggler Dave Scott tell a gullible audience that "We were there." It could mean that he was in Nevada. Unfortunately, Scott was not in a court of law where he could be cross-examined about his vague statements.

"You can see our tracks. We were there. It wasn't a hoax. (audience laughs)." - Dave Scott, smuggler and comedian.

originally posted by: SayonaraJupiter
a reply to: onebigmonkey

You obviously saw something else.

Yes. I saw the Apollo smuggler Dave Scott tell a gullible audience that "We were there." It could mean that he was in Nevada. Unfortunately, Scott was not in a court of law where he could be cross-examined about his vague statements.

"You can see our tracks. We were there. It wasn't a hoax. (audience laughs)." - Dave Scott, smuggler and comedian.

I would imagine he probably meant that you can see their tracks on the moon. Which you can.

originally posted by: Rob48

originally posted by: SayonaraJupiter
a reply to: onebigmonkey

You obviously saw something else.

Yes. I saw the Apollo smuggler Dave Scott tell a gullible audience that "We were there." It could mean that he was in Nevada. Unfortunately, Scott was not in a court of law where he could be cross-examined about his vague statements.

"You can see our tracks. We were there. It wasn't a hoax. (audience laughs)." - Dave Scott, smuggler and comedian.

I would imagine he probably meant that you can see their tracks on the moon. Which you can.

He will just say its a walking robot built by Howard Hughes along with the time machine he would have needed as well.Its easy to make accusations as long as no proof is required of him.

a reply to: Rob48

I would imagine he probably...

I'd like to continue on this line of questioning Rob48, if you don't mind...

I would imagine that he was probably making a very subtle (you missed it, the audience missed it) reference to Howard Hughes' H.A.L.O. You guys are really blinded by the hero worshipping... Iron Bob Maheu had just as much integrity and honesty as any one of the Apollo Dirty Dozen.

When IBM said that the Surveyor was the same thing as H.A.L.O. you should really begin taking notes.

I think, I really do, that the Dave Scott Masursky Lecture video has some outstanding stuff in it. He said that human trips to Mars are "many, many generations away." and he wants so bad to go back to Hadley Rille --- did Dave Scott leave something behind at Hadley Rille? Or, does he want to go get something?

Courtesy link to Dave Scott's Masursky Lecture video
www.lpi.usra.edu...

Fittingly, the talk was presented on March 17, which also marked the 48th anniversary of the Gemini VIII splashdown, in which Scott and fellow astronaut Neil Armstrong landed in the South China Sea following the completion of the mission.

originally posted by: SayonaraJupiter
a reply to: Rob48

I would imagine he probably...

I'd like to continue on this line of questioning Rob48, if you don't mind...

I would imagine that he was probably making a very subtle (you missed it, the audience missed it) reference to Howard Hughes' H.A.L.O. You guys are really blinded by the hero worshipping... Iron Bob Maheu had just as much integrity and honesty as any one of the Apollo Dirty Dozen.

When IBM said that the Surveyor was the same thing as H.A.L.O. you should really begin taking notes.

I think, I really do, that the Dave Scott Masursky Lecture video has some outstanding stuff in it. He said that human trips to Mars are "many, many generations away." and he wants so bad to go back to Hadley Rille --- did Dave Scott leave something behind at Hadley Rille? Or, does he want to go get something?

Courtesy link to Dave Scott's Masursky Lecture video
www.lpi.usra.edu...

Fittingly, the talk was presented on March 17, which also marked the 48th anniversary of the Gemini VIII splashdown, in which Scott and fellow astronaut Neil Armstrong landed in the South China Sea following the completion of the mission.

More speculations maybe he dropped his wallet. Just the shear fact your merely speculating shows how stupid this is. See if you think something is wrong with his statement you can present proof as to what he really means. But as with any speech or statement people can interpret it any way they want just in your case you choose to see something no one else does.

a reply to: dragonridr

You are not adding anything to the discussion, dragonplayer. Go watch the Dave Scott video and report your findings in this thread. Everything else you said is just a waste of text. ATS time is valuable. DJW's time is valuable. My time is valuable.

Are you gonna defend Apollo smuggler Dave Scott or are you just going to ad hominem your way through this one? Ante up.

Watch the video. Give us your review of it. We would all appreciate your inputs on it. Is that a lot to ask?

originally posted by: SayonaraJupiter
a reply to: dragonridr

You are not adding anything to the discussion, dragonplayer. Go watch the Dave Scott video and report your findings in this thread. Everything else you said is just a waste of text. ATS time is valuable. DJW's time is valuable. My time is valuable.

Are you gonna defend Apollo smuggler Dave Scott or are you just going to ad hominem your way through this one? Ante up.

Watch the video. Give us your review of it. We would all appreciate your inputs on it. Is that a lot to ask?

Ok you want input make your acusation what are you trying to state? Point out fact not questions what do you believe he left behind or needs to get? See you dont even make a valid argument to argue against or for??? You do nothing other than leave open ended questions with no possible answer since the whole scenario of an astronaut needed to return to the moon to get something he left is utterly ridiculous. So tell us what he left and maybe we can see if it makes sense weird you need proof of something i can give you better proof dragons exist than you give on this thread.

Make your case mister prosecutor show us the apollo hoax walk us through it just like a jury. Surely you must have a theory of the events how they occured and proof no????

originally posted by: SayonaraJupiter


did Dave Scott leave something behind at Hadley Rille? Or, does he want to go get something?

Wait, I thought your theory is that he was never there in the first place? So how dodge leave something behind?

Come to that, how is he an "Apollo smuggler" if he was never there?