NASA Moon Landing hoax

[Zoomerz]

Re: NASA Moon Landing hoax

How can that be? They didnt bring any artificial light sources, according to NASA. All they had was the natural light, that being the sun light.

DB, I believe you, but do you have any references on that? Maybe they didn't use artifical light, it just looks that way on the pics....But either way, the cameras wouldn't focus on distant light, and would show as "blackness" in the background.

Unlesss you are refering to the studio on Earth where they did the shots?

heh, that's on you to prove, not me to disprove.

\"After all, the astronauts are sitting on an engine that can produce 10.000 lb. of thrust and burning at 5000 degrees Fahrenheit of heat. Air inside the module was pressurized to 1/3 sea level atmosphere, so why no sound and vibration? According to some sources the astronauts could hear the thrusters charging, yet we cannot hear the immense engine in the background of any transmissions?\"

You're right, I didn't read that far LOL....Anyway, if you've ever listened to "communications" transmissions (which I'm assuming they're talking about), a uni-directional proximity microphone sits almost directly in front of the astronaut's mouth and voice activated. Not likely to hear much besides the astronaut's voice, which we didn't. Otherwise, there would be most likely be silence. I'm sure the astronauts did hear the thrusters. Had there been "cabin" microphones, we probably would have too.

Z-

 

[darkbreed]

Re: NASA Moon Landing hoax

The guy who actually worked for NASA designing the cameras used on the moon confirms there were no artificial lighting sources. He himself finds the photos strange and can't explain the lighting in a natural way, he actually says it looks like spotlights have been used. Other professionals involved in the projects also speak out in the video documentary Did we land on the moon? You can watch it for free at http://www.truthstream.org/moon.htm

 

[darkbreed]

Re: NASA Moon Landing hoax

This is two different Apollo 15 pictures superimposed over each other. Notice how the background and foreground match perfectly with each other. But look closer, you will notice two LM's. How can this be? Two LM's in the same landing spot? It appears that the pictures fit together so well that it looks like one picture. But the fact that there are two LM's in the picture is just outrageous.

This is also two pictures superimposed over each other from Apollo 17. Notice how the background and foreground match perfectly again. But again there are two LM's. How is this possible? Notice also how close the flag is to the LM on the picture to the right and how far it is from the LM in the picture to the left? Did the astronauts plant it somewhere and then decide they didn't like where they planted it and decided to move it again?

 

[BubbuClinton]

Re: NASA Moon Landing hoax

Zoomerz Said:

YIKES! I grew up in the space program. My Father designed the space pack used by the Apollo 13 crew to traverse outside of the ship at Gianini and North American Rockwell. You've all seen it, and might recognize it as the \"james bond jetpack\". Anyway, he was also deeply involved in the lunar rover design.

I can still remember watching the landing with my family. Dad commenting at various points to explain what was happening.

There's plenty of conspiracy theories to focus on my friends. This one is most certainly a dead end.

Hey Zoomerz, my Dad actually worked for the Apollo program in Houston. I have a great deal of respect for him and all that worked on the program. I too think/ hope we went to the moon. However your statement about

This one is most certainly a dead end.

is about as lame as the PM article debunking 9/11.

Remember the time period we were living in. It was the height of the Cold War. The US needed something to convince the Russians and the World that we had technological superiority. They had nukes and wanted to use them against us in the early 60's. Of course, you being much older than I would remember this better. I would not put it past the powers that be to make an elaborate hoax to convince the world or our superiority. It would not take the involvement of thousands, only the top leaders and a few astronauts that would do anything for King, God and Country. If they were not this type of person, then they would not be qualified to be in the program. They were truly heros in many different ways.

However, the photo's mentioned above are most certainly faked. That doesn't mean we didn't go. I remember a picture at the Johnson Space center showing the Golf swing showing both of the astronauts watching the ball fly into space. The only problem was, one of them was supposed to have taken the picture.

NASA most definitely mocked up publicity pictures. They would have done this regardless of whether we were successful or not. If the astronauts didn't get good pictures, had film problems, whatever, they still needed cool pictures to show the people how good we are. You don?t invest this kind of money not have good pictures for what ever reason. The Pictures don't concern me.

I believe we had rockets, did the math to get us there and everything. The only issue that I personally have is the radiation.


read this article as Space.com http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/radi...isk_040517.html

Apparently, Deep space radiation is an issue to going back to the moon. The Researchers at NASA are still trying to solve this. The article states:

?[Radiation] is one of the largest obstacles that we?re going to have to overcome,? said Terri Lomax, NASA director of fundamental space biology division and a professor at Oregon State University,

They try to blow off the exposure that the Apollo guys had by saying we only sent them on 3 day trips. Well, it seems to me that either, we were very comfortable with our technology in 1968 to protect the astronauts or they took an extreme risk, or they were just stupid or something and didn't think about radiation or they didn?t land.

I know they weren't stupid because I know my Dad. I also know they thought about it because my father told me about the Van Allen belts when I was 7 or so. So that means they must have had great confidence or they didn't go. I think the Apollo capsules themselves had good protection. However, the space suits are suspect. When they were on the moon was the most exposed they would be.

The Lunar surface in full sun would be extremely hot and radioactive. The Hinkle Cameras they were using are un shielded. You can see these at the Space museums. They also had to be focused, F-stopped, etc ... there was no view finder and the Astronauts could not see if the film had advanced when their spacesuit covered hands pushed the button on the side of the camera. Therefore, it would be a miracle to get one good picture, let a lone hundreds of perfect, professionally composed pictures. Thus the only conclusion can be that the pictures were faked. But, like I said before, they are irrelevant to the fact of whether we landed.

NASA says that there was not high radiation at the time of the landings therefore, the EVA's were safe. I just find this hard to believe. The space suits just didn't have any real radiation shielding in them. I remember seeing a piece of the suit my father had that I took to ?show and tell.? I was young though and not an expert in shielding. But, thinking back now it had many layers but were designed to block heat, move moisture, trap the body heat ect ? And they are still trying to make shielded suits for EVA's inside of the Van Allen belts. That is one reason Hubble is allowing to be decommissioned. It is too risky to go fix it because of radiation the astronauts experience during EVAs.

I believe they could have landed on the Dark side of the mood and done and EVA, and they definitely could have flown to the moon circled it and flown back. I remember my father telling me that he was on the team doing the math to prove there were no black holes between the earth and the moon. The only part that needed to be faked was the actual lunar landing itself.

I agree that the sound recording is a bit suspicious even with your in-depth analysis of microphone technology. A directional voice activated mike still should pick up the sound of an engine with 10000lbs of force about 2 feet under the astronaut. The Lander was not very big and Armstrong was definitely not enclosed in a space suit when landing or he could not have used the joy stick to maneuver the rockets. This too could have been produced for the same reason as the pictures. To put on a good show. It would only take an astronaut playing a tape while circling the moon. No one at Mission Control would have known any thing was wrong.

I am convinced we circled the moon. I know they put a reflector on the moon they have been pinging with Lazars since 1968. Perhaps they landed or dropped it. This alone was a miracle feat for 1968 with completely analogue tools. However, although I hope we actually landed and did the EVA's I am not convinced it happened. If they did, boy did they have balls and got real lucky because none of the astronauts ever got sick from radiation poisoning.

So to me either we know how to shield astronauts, should go fix the hubble and should go back or we don't. The Chinese will tell us the truth when they get there. I really hope there is a little flag and a rover up there when they get there.

Bubbu
____________________________________

 

[Zoomerz]

Re: NASA Moon Landing hoax

Of course, you being much older than I would remember this better.

!@$#%@#%^%$^@#! Shaaaaaaadddduppp!!!

:angry:

Well, interesting, ok. I have limited time I guess, and have bigger fish to investigate. I guess it's possible, but illogical (MHO) that we had the technology, and still faked it. Also, we would be relying on many people to keep a deep dark secret all these years, and I've met Jim Lovell (have an autographed pic by him). I just don't believe these honorable pioneers would stand for it.

That's not scientific, I know, but as I said, I won't believe we didn't until someone "proves" it, and I'm really not interested in putting in the time to do so myself. I leave that investigation in your "capable" hands,,hehehehe.....

Z-

 

[darkbreed]

Re: NASA Moon Landing hoax

Personally, I also believe we had the technology, at least to get in orbit around the Earth. But the radiation subject is of concern, if I remember correct even the russians who once were leading in this field were too afraid of the radiation problem to put people deeper out in space than they did.

My main theory is that either they simply didnt have the possibility to put any people on the moon, even though they could send unmanned crafts there etc, or they actually got there, but by some reason faked alot of the footage etc for other reasons. It's pretty obvious its faked though. Maybe not all but sure alot.

Also their moon lander craft wasnt exactly very manuverable. I remember seeing tests of it done on earth where it crashed and spinned around like crazy etc, because they had just one big thruster engine in the middle of it. This was just a short time before they supposedly landed on the moon.

And also old suspicious footage etc have been found. Such as

An investigative journalist uncovers a 31-year-old mislabeled, unedited reel of footage (dated three days into the flight) that shows the Apollo 11 crew falsifying part of their photography! This exclusive footage is available in \"A Funny Thing Happened On The Way To The Moon.\" When Apollo 11 astronaut Buzz Aldrin (the one believed to have shot the bogus footage) was recently shown the tape he said, \"Well you're talking to the wrong guy! Why don't you talk to the administrator at NASA? We're passengers!\" He then threatened to sue us if we showed it publicly.

 

[Dmitri]

Re: NASA Moon Landing hoax

Calm down, or redistribute the excess of the energy that can be applied to a better use. My father has been in the ussr (russia-ukraine) industry in its top of sci space launch industry. He and a hundred of others had monitored all of your moon efforts and successes, all details of them; and when wanted requested all those extra details (from you folks). Got to be comparatively proud have you not? Or keep watching TV, it may educate you in good healthy skepticism</span>.</span></span></span> </span>

D

 

[XDrFirefly]

Re: NASA Moon Landing hoax

Ok guys how about this theory. Now, I want not around when all this happened, but I feel I understood that state of the world.

The TV version of the moon landing is fake, we staged it cause we realized we could video tape the event very good. So, the government made a mock up and used photographics from the real landing to create a believeable show to the viewer of the TV version. So, everyone who's family worked on the program worked on it. Those went to space.

The TV version was important at the time, the people of the world need to see "clearly" we were in space walking around on the moon.

Dr FF

 

[waroftheworlds]

Re: NASA Moon Landing hoax

Okay, I'm an aviation enthusiast and thought I would post my little bit

Someone was saying about the unstabability of the lunar lander when tested on Earth. It is true that there was a mockup built, to train astronauts in landing the LM (Lunar Module). This trainer required special systems that replicaed, to a degree, flying in a vacuum. If the pilot navigated forward the flyer would keep going forward until force in the opposite direction was applied, just like in the vacuum of space (no air resistance to slow the spacecraft down) and so on.

The LM itself was NEVER BUILT TO FLY ON EARTH. It was built to fly in the vacuum of space where air resistance and wind that would normally affect an aircraft does not exist- therefore if a LM was fired up on earth it would crash! Thats why special systems had to be developed for the trainer. BUT, the LM's behavior on earth does NOT reflect it's handling abilities in space.

Second thing- the radiation around the earth, or the Van Allen belts. There were experiments to destroy these radiation belts in the early 1960's I believe but the US military in their infinite wisdom (teehee!) made the belts more radioactive. Although NASA did a lot of research into protecting astronauts from these belts, such as shielding for the ship and astronauts, it is my understanding that they are not that much of a problem. I believe that only a couple of hours at the most, that is to say 1-2 hours, were spent in the Van Allen Belts, which is a negligable amount. It would not produce ill effects.

Next point, with regards to the camera. Admittedly, it was mounted on the front of the spacesuit and this made taking shots harder. The astronauts were extensively trained in space suit handling, not to mention taking photos. I'm sure you'll find that many photos were discarded due to poor focus ect. The astronauts also had a handheld camera that was used. On Apollo 12 (I believe), the astronauts actually brought a timer for the camera, a Hasselblad, and the idea was to attach the timer and let it take photos on its own whilst the astronauts posed in front of the Surveyor probe! (The timer was lost before the joke could be pulled off).

Finally, the astronauts did NOT land with the space suits on to my knowledge. The astronauts pulled the suits and backpacks on in the LM before they disembarked the spacecraft.

 

[waroftheworlds]

Re: NASA Moon Landing hoax

(Quick expansion on the above, I can't edit the post)

It is also true that the LM Trainer that I discussed above did crash several times. This was due to aerodynamic problems (because they tried to replicate the LM design too much and the LM was not designed to fly in any sort of atmosphere and was NOT aerodynamic- this was not a requirement due to the vacuum of space). It also had thruster issues which were later resolved.