Disclosure of the moon landing hoax.

originally posted by: cestrup
a reply to: Rob48
They control how you believe the moon's physics operate - so - ????

What is that supposed to mean? The field of orbital mechanics has been around for centuries, a lot longer than NASA!

And the same rocket equations that verify the Saturn V and the LM were perfectly up to the job are used by every single nation that has ever launched a rocket.

Do you really think NASA controls physics?

originally posted by: cestrup
a reply to: choos

Poor guy - your imagination just isn't up to par. Have you ever considered they used a unique satellite for their fakery? One that's not on the record? No, I don't have proof but judging by your posts, they certainly wouldn't have hired you to pull of this production. No offense.

oh i see.. NASA has means of hiding the launching of satellites now as well..

with like klingon stealth technology right? built by humans and scientists that dont and never existed.. such a fantasy world you have there..

i mean how else would an entire country miss the trail of unexplained plumes..

a reply to: choos

Yep, they're clever enough to launch secret weather satellites that can instantly download data to a transparency printer on a space capsule in earth orbit, but not clever enough to fly to the moon, apparently.

originally posted by: Rob48
a reply to: choos

Yep, they're clever enough to launch secret weather satellites that can instantly download data to a transparency printer on a space capsule in earth orbit, but not clever enough to fly to the moon, apparently.

I believe there was a real Moon mission, however the real mission and Moon race was because something was seen on the moon.

The partially false mission presented to the public, contained some or the real mission, the rest like the area of landing and surroundings was hoaxed so as to not show the real area. It also served the purpose of making it seem that the US was there and first, even though most of the real mission the landing was probably later than what we were led to believe.

The Russians believing we had already gotten there first then had no way to reach whatever was of interest on the Moon. The US had Hollywood on their side.

a reply to: Char-Lee
Hmm. India, Japan and China have all surveyed the whole moon at high resolution, and China has landed a rover. Looks pretty barren so far.

originally posted by: Char-Lee

originally posted by: Rob48
a reply to: choos

Yep, they're clever enough to launch secret weather satellites that can instantly download data to a transparency printer on a space capsule in earth orbit, but not clever enough to fly to the moon, apparently.

I believe there was a real Moon mission, however the real mission and Moon race was because something was seen on the moon.

The partially false mission presented to the public, contained some or the real mission, the rest like the area of landing and surroundings was hoaxed so as to not show the real area. It also served the purpose of making it seem that the US was there and first, even though most of the real mission the landing was probably later than what we were led to believe.

The Russians believing we had already gotten there first then had no way to reach whatever was of interest on the Moon. The US had Hollywood on their side.

Did someone drop there wallet? Russia could have gotten to the moon if they felt there was something there. They launched probes so if something was there im sure they would know. Not to mention other probes sent bu other nations sorry to disapoint but there not hiding anything,

originally posted by: Rob48
a reply to: Char-Lee
Hmm. India, Japan and China have all surveyed the whole moon at high resolution, and China has landed a rover. Looks pretty barren so far.

Not to hard to hide things if you were able to move it that is.

a reply to: dragonridr

They launched probes so if something was there im sure they would know.

I would have no doubt they would know, so many interesting things going on all the time but they all manage to keep it from the public. Just look deep at history, most of the worst secrets were known by other Governments just not the average citizen.

a reply to: choos

You think there is no secret launches to space? There are even openly secret launches of unknown mission.

originally posted by: Char-Lee
a reply to: choos

You think there is no secret launches to space? There are even openly secret launches of unknown mission.

There is a big difference between launching a satellite and not telling people what it does, and launching a satellite and having nobody know.

The former is not unusual. The latter is not possible. There are far too many people watching the skies all over the world. Not only would the launch be noticed, but the satellite would be spotted. For a satellite to be any use to anybody, it has to be transmitting data. People are listening! Even if the data is encrypted, you can still pick up the encrypted signal.

Not to mention, of course, that all rocket launches are shared with other nations ahead of time to ensure that they are not mistaken for nuclear missile launches. Forgetting to tell Russia before launching a big rocket is what is known in military circles as a Bad Plan. That's true today: at the height of the Cold War it would have been suicidal!

originally posted by: Char-Lee
a reply to: dragonridr

They launched probes so if something was there im sure they would know.

I would have no doubt they would know, so many interesting things going on all the time but they all manage to keep it from the public. Just look deep at history, most of the worst secrets were known by other Governments just not the average citizen.

Just because your not privy to all the government secrets doesnt invalidate things that government does. That sort of logic doesnt make sense. Now more to your point governments arent good at keeping secrets even black projects gets discussed now a days because we see for example appropriations from congress. Or people who are in the know will let things leak to people like JANES and will be discussed. The government is so big it cant hide things from the public its approach is to bury it in mounds of paperwork.

People are free to discuss magic and secret stuff that they think must exist because it's the only recourse they have when their science fails them, but I'd like to return to actual facts.

We've had recent discussion in this thread about the size of the area of operations for Apollo astronauts, and how it's possible to see how big these areas are by doing basic photogrammetry. I recently came across a view of station 6 from Apollo 17's EVA, the so-called 'Split rock' at the base of a long boulder trail.

A couple of panoramas also exist, one by Gene Cernan the other by Jack Schmitt taken at the same site.

These panoramas are presented in the Apollo 17 Preliminary Science Report, published in 1973 and of which I have an actual paper copy.

Below are links to labelled versions of the LRO vertical view, taken 40+ years after the photographs were published in my PSR, which were available for public consumption as stipulated in the provisions of the 1958 National Aeronautics and Space Act (in other words, NASA was legally obliged to publish the data from Apollo missions).

The same coloured arrows identify the same features (where they exist) in each panorama. The green and red dots are the location of the photographers, the yellow dot is the location of the rover. Tracks can be made out around the large split rock.

What the panoramas reveal is that, as usual, you can see rocks (and a crater behind one of the rocks) that are clearly identifiable in the LRO image. Those rocks are not to be found on any photos taken from lunar orbit prior to the LRO images. In other words the only people who knew they were there when they took the photos are Gene Cernan and Jack Schmitt.

It should also be clear that the rocks are in a large 3D space and not painted on a cloth.

Happy viewing.

i58.tinypic.com...

Gene's pan taken from the green dot:

oi58.tinypic.com...

Jack's pan taken from the red dot:

oi60.tinypic.com...

a reply to: onebigmonkey

What's the scale on the top photo,i.e. how far from end-to-end is that image?

a reply to: Imagewerx

Judging by the measurement on the LRO image on this page

lunarnetworks.blogspot.co.uk...

I'd say it's about 175m by 250m

originally posted by: onebigmonkey

Gene's pan taken from the green dot:

oi58.tinypic.com...

Something that is easy to miss from that panorama: the Lunar Module is visible as a tiny dot to the right of the big boulder.

See the high-res picture here: www.hq.nasa.gov...

The LM is about halfway between the top of the boulder and the next crosshair to the right.



A long way to your lifeline home...

a reply to: onebigmonkey
Ok thanks,just wondered.

Nice find Rob

You can also identify many of the same rocks on the EVA footage that was transmitted live back to Earth via the LRV camera. This youtuve video has lots:



including where Schmitt actually takes his panorama (around 7:30) with his face nicely visible

a reply to: onebigmonkey

Just playing around with these images a bit more. You can spot the LM in both Gene's and Jack's panorama sequences.

Here I have made a GIF with the images aligned on the LM (circled). You can clearly see the perspective change because of the difference in position of the camera.




Ah, the doubters might be saying, but how do we know that tiny little blob is really the LM? Well, On the third EVA, Jack had a 500mm lens on the camera, and took some telephoto shots from a very similar vantage point. Here is one:



High-res version here: www.hq.nasa.gov...

That's the LM all right:



And comparing that shot to a detail from the wide-angle photo from before:



For context, this red box shows the approximate area of that detail. A tiny area, and yet the telephoto shot shows fine detail, totally consistent with that wide-angle view:




Once again, this is all my own work. Not NASA's. I'm not taking people's word for it, I'm searching for the images and putting them together and looking to see whether they are consistent. They are, and they clearly show a huge, three-dimensional landscape, the same landscape seen in the videos in OBM's post above, and the same landscape seen from above by the LRO.


So, we're accused of "lacking imagination" in how a hoax could have been achieved. Could the wild imagination of any hoax believers please explain just how these images were faked?

You can add even more depth to the scene.

Next stop for EVA2 was Station 7, and there is another panorama available for that too:

astropedia.astrogeology.usgs.gov...

Here's an overview of the two stops, with some pretty coloured arrows and circles to help with what follows



for which I've identified features that can be seen in the view from Station 6 looking towards 7 (the green arrow is left over from mhy previous look at this pan)



and station 7 towards 6



A small amount of googling will net you the component high resolution images of the panoramas, from which it's easier to see that I've got the rocks correct.

Spiro Agnew

Howard Hughes acquired control of TWA in 1939


Back to the Moon? “Not in my lifetime,” , said Charles Bolden