Disclosure of the moon landing hoax.

reply to post by SayonaraJupiter


He didn't say that going to the moon was cheap and easy. He said it was cheaper and easier than faking it. Context is everything.

Originally posted by Zaphod58
reply to post by SayonaraJupiter

 

He didn't say that going to the moon was cheap and easy. He said it was cheaper and easier than faking it. Context is everything.

Yes. Context is everything. Nixon was the president for all 6 lunar landings. Amazing context, isn't it??

reply to post by SayonaraJupiter


Oh yes, amazing how that happened considering he won the election for President.

Originally posted by Zaphod58
reply to post by SayonaraJupiter

 

Oh yes, amazing how that happened considering he won the election for President.

Yes, It always comes down to Richard Nixon. 1969-1972. Read it and weep. Apollo 11. Apollo 12. Apollo 13. Apollo 14. Apollo 15. Apollo 16 Apollo 17. All Richard Nixon.

Apollo 8 and Apollo 10 can also be included under Richard Nixon during the time he was president-Elect.

As you know, Nixon was a traitor in 1968. He and Spiro Agnew willfully interfered with the peace negotiations between USA and N. Vietnam in the run up to his 1968 Comeback. LBJ was the president, Richard Nixon was a traitor.

Can you hear me now?

reply to post by SayonaraJupiter


So what? You seriously believe that Richard Nixon somehow came up with the plan to fake every Apollo mission, and pulled it off in that short an amount of time, and not one single person has been willing to talk about it? Richard Nixon must have been an incredible genius, to have thought of everything.

Originally posted by Zaphod58
reply to post by SayonaraJupiter

 

So what? You seriously believe that Richard Nixon somehow came up with the plan to fake every Apollo mission, and pulled it off in that short an amount of time, and not one single person has been willing to talk about it? Richard Nixon must have been an incredible genius, to have thought of everything.

The Apollo 11 crew selections were announced on Richard Nixon's birthday, January 9, 1969.
I am afraid that you are not going to win this argument, Zaphod.

Richard Nixon's Apollo is directly inspired by Richard Nixon's involvement with Operation Paperclip, his connections to Navy Intelligence, his connections to Howard Hughes, Nixon's 1968 comeback, and his decisions to escalate the Viet Nam War while claiming to do exactly the opposite.

I don't understand why you would defend NASA under Richard Nixon when you know Nixon was a traitor in 1968.

The important fact remains:
All the NASA missions outside of low earth orbit were under Nixon's control.

reply to post by SayonaraJupiter


And again, so what? He didn't suddenly get into office one day and say "We can't make the moon, we're going to fake it." and come up with a plan. You make him out to be some super genius.

Originally posted by SayonaraJupiter
The important fact remains:
All the NASA missions outside of low earth orbit were under Nixon's control.

Except that is not a fact at all, just a silly made up story like all your other facts.

So you claim NASA has launched nothing at all that went outside low earth orbit since Nixon left office....

Originally posted by SayonaraJupiter

Originally posted by Zaphod58
reply to post by SayonaraJupiter

 

So what? You seriously believe that Richard Nixon somehow came up with the plan to fake every Apollo mission, and pulled it off in that short an amount of time, and not one single person has been willing to talk about it? Richard Nixon must have been an incredible genius, to have thought of everything.

The Apollo 11 crew selections were announced on Richard Nixon's birthday, January 9, 1969.
I am afraid that you are not going to win this argument, Zaphod.

Richard Nixon's Apollo is directly inspired by Richard Nixon's involvement with Operation Paperclip, his connections to Navy Intelligence, his connections to Howard Hughes, Nixon's 1968 comeback, and his decisions to escalate the Viet Nam War while claiming to do exactly the opposite.

I don't understand why you would defend NASA under Richard Nixon when you know Nixon was a traitor in 1968.

The important fact remains:
All the NASA missions outside of low earth orbit were under Nixon's control.

You have a severe lack of knowledge on Howard Huges and Richard Nixon. In fact he didnt like Howard Huges this is because Nixons brother took an investment loan from him. And he bribed one of his friends a man by the name Charles Rebozo gave 100,000 to nixons campaign fund basically trying to buy access like he said he was going to do. Rebozo was frankly duped and only thinking of the money this put Nixon in cover your butt mode. In fact this is the reason for the water gate break ins. Nixon was trying to find out what Larry O’Brien knew about the donation.

Now keep in mind Nixon all ready knew the Howard huges backed Hubert Humphrey in his failed bid donating over 300000 to his campaign. Nixonin no way shape or form thought Howard Huges a friend but a political rival. They wereforced to work together partly because of huges reputation he was loved by the public. Which amazed me really since he was the quintessential playboy. And for building aircraft there was no one better on the planet. .

So your whole theory just doesnt hold water. You cant get your information from conspiracy websites they only tell you part of the story but never the whole truth.

Originally posted by SayonaraJupiter

choos. Look at what you just said.

Originally posted by choos
its cheaper and easier for them to have just gone to the moon.. and pocket the rest..

Now do you believe the von Prophecy is real?

von braun's "prophecy" has no implication that they faked the moon landing.. von braun's "prophecy" implies that they would make up a threat in order to increase funding so they could make weapons win contracts..

real weapons were made.. the threats are what may or may not be real.. von braun's "prophecy" is implying that the threats may or may not be real.. not the weapons and not the moon landing.

the weapons and the moon landing were very much real.. they would be wasting money they could have pocketed if they faked it.. why fake it when its cheaper to not fake it?

Originally posted by choos

Originally posted by SayonaraJupiter

choos. Look at what you just said.

Originally posted by choos
its cheaper and easier for them to have just gone to the moon.. and pocket the rest..

Now do you believe the von Prophecy is real?

von braun's "prophecy" has no implication that they faked the moon landing.. von braun's "prophecy" implies that they would make up a threat in order to increase funding so they could make weapons win contracts..

real weapons were made.. the threats are what may or may not be real.. von braun's "prophecy" is implying that the threats may or may not be real.. not the weapons and not the moon landing.

the weapons and the moon landing were very much real.. they would be wasting money they could have pocketed if they faked it.. why fake it when its cheaper to not fake it?

Von Braun never said this it was something started by his secretary Dr Carol Rosen. When Von Braun was alive he would sometimes send her in his place explaining how he didnt want weapons in space. He believed that space based weapons needed to be banned because they were the ultimate threat to mankind explained it was worse then the atomic bomb. Instead his dream was for man to explore space and he wanted it to involve all the nations of earth. Basically creating a global cooperative space program that will be large enough to replace the entire war game and mindset...and build a security system based on collaboration and information sharing .Remember he saw what Hitler did in WW2 and he was an unwilling participant. In fact it is said only wore his uniform 1 time and that was because the fuhrer visited him. After his death Carol Rosen claimed while he was on his death bed he supposedly told her aliens do exist and there going to use that to put weapons in to space.

Now the funny part after he dies what does she do she goes to work for defense contractors doing what making weapons such as rockets for example. The minute she starts her own organization called the Institute for Security and Cooperation in Outer Space (ISCOS). Then suddenly this death bed confession by Von Braun comes up. Trust me she made more money off that lie then you could believe.

Originally posted by dragonridr Werner von Braun.... an unwilling participant

Did you think because von Braun only wore his Nazi outfit a few times that history would forget his total effort of 'unwilling participations'? HAHAHA. The jokes on you. Because if that were true, von Braun would have ended up on house arrest, like Hugo Junkers.

You misclassified Werner von Braun as an 'unwilling participant' when you know for a fact he was willing to do anything to achieve his dreams. Anything up to and including using slave labor and creating WMD for the Führer.

Google Hugo Junkers, who was a REAL unwilling participant to the Nazi regime, see what happened to him. House arrest in 1933 because he was not willing to participate simply in the manufacture of aircraft for a war effort that Germany was not supposed to be undertaking.

In 1933 the new Nazi government interfered and, on taking power, immediately demanded ownership of Junkers' patents and control of his remaining companies. Under threat of imprisonment he eventually acquiesced, to little avail; a year later he was under house arrest. He died on 3 February 1935 in Germany. Source www.wehrmacht-history.com...

So you say Werner von Braun was the 'unwilling participant' in the manufacture of 3,000 "Vengeance Weapon 2" and then unwilling participant in the rocket terrorist attacks on the Allies. Was Werner von Braun also unwilling participant in using forced labor?

According to a BBC documentary in 2011, the attacks resulted in the deaths of an estimated 9,000 civilians and military personnel, while 12,000 forced labourers and concentration camp prisoners were killed producing the weapons.

Hugo Junkers was unwilling to participate while Werner von Braun was a willing to participate, in the design engineering manufacture and delivery of weapons of mass destruction.

See how your Disneyland version of history doesn't stand up to scrutiny?

reply to post by SayonaraJupiter


thats a big rant about unwilling participant..

but it still doesnt make radiation within 12 days a limiting factor for man to land on the moon.

Originally posted by dragonridr
You have a severe lack of knowledge on Howard Huges and Richard Nixon. In fact he didnt like Howard Huges this is because Nixons brother took an investment loan from him. And he bribed one of his friends a man by the name Charles Rebozo gave 100,000 to nixons campaign fund basically trying to buy access like he said he was going to do. Rebozo was frankly duped and only thinking of the money this put Nixon in cover your butt mode. In fact this is the reason for the water gate break ins. Nixon was trying to find out what Larry O’Brien knew about the donation.

Now keep in mind Nixon all ready knew the Howard huges backed Hubert Humphrey in his failed bid donating over 300000 to his campaign. Nixonin no way shape or form thought Howard Huges a friend but a political rival. They wereforced to work together partly because of huges reputation he was loved by the public. Which amazed me really since he was the quintessential playboy. And for building aircraft there was no one better on the planet. .

So your whole theory just doesnt hold water. You cant get your information from conspiracy websites they only tell you part of the story but never the whole truth.

On December 24th, 1972 at 9:18 AM Howard Hughes "official" birthday Nixon made a call from Key Biscayne, Florida to Hughes in Nicaragua . Your view on the Nixon/Hughes relationship is completely wrong although you did manage to bring up Watergate into a disclosure thread! up: up:

What reasons would Nixon have to call Hughes on Christmas Eve??. Here are some possible reasons.

1. RN wanted to wish a Merry Christmas to HH. Why would RN do that if he didn't like HH?
2. RN wanted to wish HH a Happy Birthday. Again.
3. RN wanted to work on a business deal with HH on Christmas EVE and on HH's birthday knowing full well that HH doesn't take calls from the President of the United States. EVER!
4. RN wanted to thank HH for his hard work in the Apollo 17 Moon Landing TV Hoax which had just finished up on Dec. 19th.
5. RN wanted to talk to HH about what movies he was watching in Managua.

Your attempt to disconnect Nixon from Hughes is wrong. How will you explain the phone call?

Originally posted by choos
reply to post by SayonaraJupiter

 

thats a big rant about unwilling participant..

but it still doesnt make radiation within 12 days a limiting factor for man to land on the moon.

Would you like to make the case for Werner von Braun is an 'unwilling participant'? You would be fighting a battle that has already been lost.

To suffer another defeat in this thread on the same issue would be devastating for your side.

I never made a radiation argument that said that. My position is that Bellcomm had plans on the books for using Apollo hardware on 12+ day missions and if I recall correctly, up to a week or more on the lunar surface. What that means is Apollo hardware was considered fully capable and radiation safe for longer duration missions.

The basic Apollo missions lasted of about 12 days. 21 day missions would not pose any radiation hazardous conditions for the astronauts, according to the summary data in NASA SP-368, Bio-Medical Results of Apollo.

At what point would the radiation exposures on the extended missions become hazardous, choos? 30 days using Apollo era hardware? 60? 90 days?

Originally posted by SayonaraJupiter
I never made a radiation argument that said that. My position is that Bellcomm had plans on the books for using Apollo hardware on 12+ day missions and if I recall correctly, up to a week or more on the lunar surface. What that means is Apollo hardware was considered fully capable and radiation safe for longer duration missions.

The basic Apollo missions lasted of about 12 days. 21 day missions would not pose any radiation hazardous conditions for the astronauts, according to the summary data in NASA SP-368, Bio-Medical Results of Apollo.

At what point would the radiation exposures on the extended missions become hazardous, choos? 30 days using Apollo era hardware? 60? 90 days?

Irrelevant question, seeing as Apollo hardware was not intended for stays of that duration. Glad you're happy that it was fit for the purpose they did use if for though.

Originally posted by SayonaraJupiter

Originally posted by dragonridr Werner von Braun.... an unwilling participant

Did you think because von Braun only wore his Nazi outfit a few times that history would forget his total effort of 'unwilling participations'? HAHAHA. The jokes on you. Because if that were true, von Braun would have ended up on house arrest, like Hugo Junkers.

You misclassified Werner von Braun as an 'unwilling participant' when you know for a fact he was willing to do anything to achieve his dreams. Anything up to and including using slave labor and creating WMD for the Führer.

Google Hugo Junkers, who was a REAL unwilling participant to the Nazi regime, see what happened to him. House arrest in 1933 because he was not willing to participate simply in the manufacture of aircraft for a war effort that Germany was not supposed to be undertaking.

In 1933 the new Nazi government interfered and, on taking power, immediately demanded ownership of Junkers' patents and control of his remaining companies. Under threat of imprisonment he eventually acquiesced, to little avail; a year later he was under house arrest. He died on 3 February 1935 in Germany. Source www.wehrmacht-history.com...

So you say Werner von Braun was the 'unwilling participant' in the manufacture of 3,000 "Vengeance Weapon 2" and then unwilling participant in the rocket terrorist attacks on the Allies. Was Werner von Braun also unwilling participant in using forced labor?

According to a BBC documentary in 2011, the attacks resulted in the deaths of an estimated 9,000 civilians and military personnel, while 12,000 forced labourers and concentration camp prisoners were killed producing the weapons.

Hugo Junkers was unwilling to participate while Werner von Braun was a willing to participate, in the design engineering manufacture and delivery of weapons of mass destruction.

See how your Disneyland version of history doesn't stand up to scrutiny?

Where you aware he was arrested and detained by the gestapo? in 44 he had been under surveillance for over a year was charged with making several anti Nazi statements and was accused by Himmler of being a communist sympathizer. Also you keep mentioning operation paperclip like the US approached Von Braun. It was him and his team that decided to defect to the US and made extensive plans to do so which included forged papers changing there post and hiding rocket plans to prevent there destruction. AS far as slave labor had little choice when himmler said do it you do. This is a large part of why Himmler accuses him of being a communist because of his reservations of using slave labor at Peenemuende. In truth its more likely his reservations were because he was a lutheran and very religious. Which he shows through out his life.

Originally posted by SayonaraJupiter

Originally posted by dragonridr
You have a severe lack of knowledge on Howard Huges and Richard Nixon. In fact he didnt like Howard Huges this is because Nixons brother took an investment loan from him. And he bribed one of his friends a man by the name Charles Rebozo gave 100,000 to nixons campaign fund basically trying to buy access like he said he was going to do. Rebozo was frankly duped and only thinking of the money this put Nixon in cover your butt mode. In fact this is the reason for the water gate break ins. Nixon was trying to find out what Larry O’Brien knew about the donation.

Now keep in mind Nixon all ready knew the Howard huges backed Hubert Humphrey in his failed bid donating over 300000 to his campaign. Nixonin no way shape or form thought Howard Huges a friend but a political rival. They wereforced to work together partly because of huges reputation he was loved by the public. Which amazed me really since he was the quintessential playboy. And for building aircraft there was no one better on the planet. .

So your whole theory just doesnt hold water. You cant get your information from conspiracy websites they only tell you part of the story but never the whole truth.

On December 24th, 1972 at 9:18 AM Howard Hughes "official" birthday Nixon made a call from Key Biscayne, Florida to Hughes in Nicaragua . Your view on the Nixon/Hughes relationship is completely wrong although you did manage to bring up Watergate into a disclosure thread!

up: up:

What reasons would Nixon have to call Hughes on Christmas Eve??. Here are some possible reasons.

1. RN wanted to wish a Merry Christmas to HH. Why would RN do that if he didn't like HH?
2. RN wanted to wish HH a Happy Birthday. Again.
3. RN wanted to work on a business deal with HH on Christmas EVE and on HH's birthday knowing full well that HH doesn't take calls from the President of the United States. EVER!
4. RN wanted to thank HH for his hard work in the Apollo 17 Moon Landing TV Hoax which had just finished up on Dec. 19th.
5. RN wanted to talk to HH about what movies he was watching in Managua.

Your attempt to disconnect Nixon from Hughes is wrong. How will you explain the phone call?

Its called politics people were scared of Howard Hughes and with good reason. His attitude is summed upin one of his quotes. "Remember that there is no person in the world that I can’t either buy or destroy.'" Larry O Brian was his man in Washington he was a former employee and then hires him as a consultant to look out for his interests in Washington. In other words a lobbyist but with considerable pull. So much so he becomes leader of the Democratic party, O'Brien, who once worked in the Kennedy administration, had become a thorn in the side of Nixon. Trust me Nixon wasnt stupid he knew Howard Hughes political leanings and a strong supporter of democrats. Nixon knew the threat Huges was to him.Hughes made it no secret when he realeased the information about the business loan to Nixons brother just before his election. In politics you keepyour friends close your enemies closer.

Originally posted by SayonaraJupiter

Would you like to make the case for Werner von Braun is an 'unwilling participant'? You would be fighting a battle that has already been lost.

To suffer another defeat in this thread on the same issue would be devastating for your side.

I never made a radiation argument that said that. My position is that Bellcomm had plans on the books for using Apollo hardware on 12+ day missions and if I recall correctly, up to a week or more on the lunar surface. What that means is Apollo hardware was considered fully capable and radiation safe for longer duration missions.

The basic Apollo missions lasted of about 12 days. 21 day missions would not pose any radiation hazardous conditions for the astronauts, according to the summary data in NASA SP-368, Bio-Medical Results of Apollo.

At what point would the radiation exposures on the extended missions become hazardous, choos? 30 days using Apollo era hardware? 60? 90 days?

actually you have said that maybe radiation is the limiting factor.. add in the fact that they have no other reason to want to fake a moon landing.. the only reason they would fake it is if radiation was a limiting factor.. which it clearly isnt..

if you looked at any radiation data from any time period, you would see that it would take several months before radiation reaches specified limits.. and those limits are quite conservative already, i mean a career dose of 1-4 Sv depending on age and gender.. 0.5Sv annually and 0.25Sv for 30days.. and 1Sv is estimated to have a chance of only 5.5% chance of developing cancer later in life, not immediate death..

and i dont really care if werner von braun was an unwilling participant or not nor whether or not he was a NAZI, because whatever he was still wont defy physics.

Originally posted by SayonaraJupiter
...My position is that Bellcomm had plans on the books for using Apollo hardware on 12+ day missions and if I recall correctly, up to a week or more on the lunar surface. What that means is Apollo hardware was considered fully capable and radiation safe for longer duration missions.

The basic Apollo missions lasted of about 12 days. 21 day missions would not pose any radiation hazardous conditions for the astronauts, according to the summary data in NASA SP-368, Bio-Medical Results of Apollo.

At what point would the radiation exposures on the extended missions become hazardous, choos? 30 days using Apollo era hardware? 60? 90 days?

The hardware that was to be used for the proposed Apollo Applications Program (the program that would have further explored the moon beyond the original Apollo Mission) was to be derived from the original Apollo hardware, but would have been modified to be used for the longer missions.

For example, the Apollo LM Taxi would be based on the original Apollo LM design, but would be modified with (among other things) additional shielding:

Apollo LM Taxi
American manned lunar lander. Cancelled 1968. The LM Taxi was essentially the basic Apollo LM modified for extended lunar surface stays.

This was expected to be the workhorse of both Apollo Applications Extended Lunar Surface Missions beginning in 1970 and still be used to shuttle crews to the surface to larger LESA (Lunar Exploration System for Apollo) in the mid- to late- 1970's.

Changes included additional water, oxygen, LH2, and Lox tankage in the descent stage in the payload bays; fuel cells in the ascent stage; a redundant Lox tank in the ascent stage over the back of the LM; and additional micrometeorite and radiation shielding. This would permit the LM to accommodate a crew of three with the capability for a 14-day quiescent (inactive) lunar stay time, in addition to 3 days (active) operational time. The LM Taxi would land near the previously-landed LM Shelter or LESA Shelter, where the crew would spend most of its time during surface explorations lasting from 14 days to three months.

[emphasis mine]

Source