Verfügbare Informationen zu "The moon landing."
Qualität des Beitrags: Beteiligte Poster: BenDaMan - Kiomi - d503 - ndl - ichabod00x - Sander Forenurl: Klick aus dem Unterforum: The Order of the Tin Foil Hat Antworten: 13 Forum gestartet am: Freitag 20.05.2005 Sprache: englisch Link zum Originaltopic: The moon landing. Letzte Antwort: vor 18 Jahren, 10 Monaten, 1 Tag, 21 Stunden, 30 Minuten
Alle Beiträge und Antworten zu "The moon landing."
Re: The moon landing.
BenDaMan - 05.06.2005, 22:48The moon landing.
I would post it all here, but the site I found is REALLY huge, and has a number of links to videos, so I'll just post a link to the site, however, I will post something that will get even the sceptics thinking.
Moon landing conspiracy
32 things that need to be answered!
1. Sceptics say there are no stars in the black sky, despite zero atmosphere to obscure the view. The first man in Space, Yuri Gagarin, pronounced the stars to be "astonishingly brilliant". See the official NASA pictures above that I have reproduced that show 'stars' in the sky, as viewed from the lunar surface.
2. The pure oxygen atmosphere in the module would have melted the Hasselblad's camera covering and produced poisonous gases. Why weren't the astronauts affected?
3. There should have been a substantial crater blasted out under the LEM's 10,000 pound thrust rocket. Sceptics would have you believe that the engines only had the power to blow the dust from underneath the LEM as it landed. If this is true, how did Armstrong create that famous boot print if all the dust had been blown away?
4. When the LEMs were supposedly leaving the Moon, they should have produced a large bright exhaust flame from the rocket propellant. Instead, zero exhaust. (I have turned this one around and have found evidence of a flame on one ascent of the LEM... just to prove the sceptics wrong!)
5. Footprints are the result of weight displacing air or moisture from between particles of dirt, dust, or sand. The astronauts left distinct footprints all over the place.
6. The Apollo 11 TV pictures were lousy, yet the broadcast quality magically became fine on the five subsequent missions.
7. In most Apollo photos, there is a clear line of definition between the rough foreground and the smooth background.
8. Why did so many NASA Moonscape photos have non parallel shadows? sceptics will tell you because there is two sources of light on the Moon - the Sun and the Earth... That maybe the case, but the shadows would still fall in the same direction, not two or three different angles.
9. Why did one of the stage prop rocks have a capital "C" on it and a 'C' on the ground in front of it?
10. How did the fibreglass whip antenna on the Gemini 6A capsule survive the tremendous heat of atmospheric re-entry?
11. In Ron Howard's 1995 science fiction movie, Apollo 13, the astronauts lose electrical power and begin worrying about freezing to death. In reality, of course, the relentless bombardment of the Sun's rays would
rapidly have overheated the vehicle to lethal temperatures with no atmosphere into which to dump the heat build up.
12. Who would dare risk using the LEM on the Moon when it was never, ever tested successfully? Would you send a relative to the Moon in a vehicle that had never been driven before?
13. Instead of being able to jump at least ten feet high in "one sixth" gravity, the highest jump was about nineteen inches.
14. Even though slow motion photography was able to give a fairly convincing appearance of very low
gravity, it could not disguise the fact that the astronauts traveled no further between steps than they would have on Earth.
15. If the Rover buggy had actually been moving in one-sixth gravity, then it would have required a twenty foot width in order not to have flipped over on nearly every turn. The Rover had the same width as ordinary small cars.
16. An astrophysicist who has worked for NASA writes that it takes two meters of shielding to protect against medium solar flares and that heavy ones give out tens of thousands of rem in a few hours. Why didn't
the astronauts on Apollo 14 and 16 die after exposure to this immense amount of radiation?
17. The fabric space suits had a crotch to shoulder zipper. There should have been fast leakage of
air since even a pinhole deflates a tire in short order.
18. The astronauts in these "pressurized" suits were easily able to bend their fingers, wrists, elbows, and knees at 5.2 p.s.i. and yet a boxer's 4 p.s.i. speed bag is virtually unbendable. The guys would have looked
like balloon men if the suits had actually been pressurized.
19. How did the astronauts leave the LEM? in the documentary 'PaperMoon' The host measures a replica of the LEM at The Space Centre in Houston, what he finds is that the 'official' measurements released by NASA are bogus and that the astronauts could not have got out of the LEM...
20. The water sourced air conditioner backpacks should have produced frequent explosive vapor discharges. They never did.
21. During the Apollo 14 flag setup ceremony, the flag would not stop fluttering.
22. With a more than two second signal transmission round trip, how did a camera pan upward to track the departure of the Apollo 16 LEM?
23. Why did NASA's administrator resigned just days before the first Apollo mission?
24. Another overlooked intriguing fact is that NASA launched the TETR-A satellite just months before the first lunar mission. The proclaimed purpose was to simulate transmissions coming from the moon so that the Houston ground crews (all those employees sitting behind computer screens at Mission Control) could "rehearse" the first moon landing. In other words, though NASA claimed that the satellite crashed shortly before the first lunar mission (a misinformation lie), its real purpose was to relay voice, fuel consumption, altitude, and telemetry data as if the transmissions were coming from an Apollo spacecraft as it neared the moon. Very few NASA employees knew the truth because they believed that the computer and television data they were receiving was the genuine article. Merely a hundred or so knew what was really going on; not tens of thousands as it might first appear.
25. In 1998, the Space Shuttle flew to one of its highest altitudes ever, three hundred and fifty miles, hundreds of miles below merely the beginning of the Van Allen Radiation Belts. Inside of their shielding, superior to that which the Apollo astronauts possessed, the shuttle astronauts reported being able to "see" the radiation with their eyes closed penetrating their shielding as well as the retinas of their closed eyes. For a dental x-ray on Earth which lasts 1/100th of a second we wear a 1/4 inch lead vest. Imagine what it would be like to endure several hours of radiation that you can see with your eyes closed from hundreds of miles away with 1/8 of an inch of aluminium shielding!
26. The Apollo 1 fire of January 27, 1967, killed what would have been the first crew to walk on the Moon just days after the commander, Gus Grissom, held an unapproved press conference complaining that they were at least ten years, not two, from reaching the Moon. The dead man's own son, who is a seasoned pilot himself, has in his possession forensic evidence personally retrieved from the charred spacecraft (that the government has tried to destroy on two or more occasions).
27. CNN issued the following report, "The radiation belts surrounding Earth may be more dangerous for astronauts than previously believed (like when they supposedly went through them thirty years ago to reach the Moon.) The phenomenon known as the 'Van Allen Belts' can spawn (newly discovered) 'Killer Electrons' that can dramatically affect the astronauts' health."
28. In 1969 computer chips had not been invented. The maximum computer memory was 256k, and this was housed in a large air conditioned building. In 2002 a top of the range computer requires at least 64 Mb of memory to run a simulated Moon landing, and that does not include the memory required to take off again once landed. The alleged computer on board Apollo 11 had 32k of memory. That's the equivalent of a simple calculator.
29. If debris from the Apollo missions was left on the Moon, then it would be visible today through a powerful telescope, however no such debris can be seen. The Clementine probe that recently maps the Moons surface failed to show any Apollo artefacts left by Man during the missions. Where did the Moon Buggy and base of the LEM go?
30. In the year 2002 NASA does not have the technology to land any man, or woman on the Moon, and return them safely to Earth.
31. Film evidence has recently been uncovered of a mislabeled, unedited, behind-the-scenes video film, dated by NASA three days after they left for the moon. It shows the crew of Apollo 11 staging part of their photography. The film evidence is shown in the video "A Funny Thing Happened on the Way to the Moon!".
32. Why did ALL of the blueprints and plans for the Lunar Module and Moon Buggy get destroyed if this was one of History's greatest accomplishments?
Re: The moon landing.
Kiomi - 07.06.2005, 07:36
Oh my god, I love conspiracy theories!
I saw an excellent program on TV last year or the year before, and it was about this, that people couldn't possibly have landed on the moon!
Also, in the show they thought that they actually filmed this in a place in America called Area 51...
And it all makes sense!
On the video, the flag was waving in the wind...if there is no wind or atmosphere (or something) on the moon, how is this possible? It just isn't!
And many of the things you said were mentioned in the show. It was really interesting.
Why haven't they sent anyone up to the moon since?
And they reckon that the reason the americans did this (in area 51) was because the Russians were trying to get to the moon, and had decided that they couldn't do it..it was impossible at that time.
Oh it was such a good show! If I could, if it was on again I'd tape it and send it to you..
I wonder if the site is based on the show?
Anyway, it was extremely cool, and turned my thinking right around.
There's no way they could have possibly landed on the moon at that time.
I'll go and read the site now..It looks like a fabulous site..
Re: The moon landing.
Kiomi - 07.06.2005, 07:45
Omg, and the shadows!!!!!!!
They were in all different directions, that's right!
and OMG the rocks!!
It MUST be connected to the programme.
Oh my goooodnesss!! Ahh!
And the lack of dust with the landing!!!!!
Yes!!!!!!!
I know this, this is fantastic!
Oh i love you ben!
Aiye!!!!
the levels of the ground!
"It would be better to try and fool the public and hoax the footage, rather than let their biggest rival in the World strike a huge moral victory by beating them to the Moon."
EXACTLY!!!
And there's the flag!!
Ahhhh!!!
Re: The moon landing.
BenDaMan - 07.06.2005, 08:22
The fact that interested me the most, and that I hadn't even thought about until I saw that sight, is the footsteps, how could there be footsteps without air and water molecules? There would be no displacement of the dust. And, the reason they gave for being no dust shower when they lander took off, was because all the dust was blown away when they landed, so how did they make footsteps in the dust?
Re: The moon landing.
Kiomi - 07.06.2005, 08:31
BenDaMan wrote: The fact that interested me the most, and that I hadn't even thought about until I saw that sight, is the footsteps, how could there be footsteps without air and water molecules? There would be no displacement of the dust. And, the reason they gave for being no dust shower when they lander took off, was because all the dust was blown away when they landed, so how did they make footsteps in the dust?
Exactly!
And they made such a big thing of the footsteps, too..and I can't get over the flag that waves. :-P
Duh, there's no wind on the moon..ker-plunk..
Have you heard of area 51? It's always windy there, and deserted, and used for "military"stuff.. And no one would ever know that they were filming that there, because no one is allowed near it..
It's the perfect place.
Re: The moon landing.
BenDaMan - 07.06.2005, 08:39
Of course I've heard of Area 51, just about everyone has.
The flag waving can be explained by the astronaughts actually waving the flag, and having to twist the pole to get it into the ground. But, on one mission that flag was mocing without the astronaughts being anywhere near it.
However, the flag wouldnt stay up in the air, there is gravity on the moon.
I believed man landed on the moon until I turned about ten and started thinking for myself.
And if a ten year old kid doesnt believe that shit, then I don't know how anyone can.
And still more, why havnt they been back there? You'd think there'd be plenty of research to do on the moon.
Re: The moon landing.
d503 - 12.06.2005, 16:43
A great fiction book on this subject is Oman ra, my avy on YT. It's by Victor Pelevin. Really awesome book and available online to read for free i will post the link as soon as i re-find it
I tend to believe in the moon landing, in the same way that I believe in most things the US government claims....it is easier and doesn't really affect me much.
This belief is contingent on the fact that I don't really believe just don't find it interesting enough to actively try to contradict.
Re: The moon landing.
d503 - 12.06.2005, 16:58
http://lib.ru/PELEWIN/omon_engl.txt
Re: The moon landing.
ndl - 15.06.2005, 09:40
The flag was stiffened with a Wire so it would be more photogenic.
Re: The moon landing.
ichabod00x - 15.06.2005, 11:08
I saw a program about the moon the other night. They made a point of asking why we didn't go back after so much technology had been invented to do it.
Another thing they brought up was that Kennedy had made plans with Russian to toss aside the rivalry and work together for a joint mission to the moon.
The meetings to begin planning were scheduled to be just a few weeks after Kennedy was asassinated, and therefore cancelled.
Puts a new spin on the Kennedy asassination, eh?
Re: The moon landing.
ichabod00x - 15.06.2005, 11:09
Also, I've seen photos of the moon landing in which the backdrop of stars was sagging in places.
Re: The moon landing.
Sander - 15.06.2005, 11:36
I have only bothered to answer the silly questions, not the really stupid ones:
1. Sceptics say there are no stars in the black sky, despite zero atmosphere to obscure the view. The first man in Space, Yuri Gagarin, pronounced the stars to be "astonishingly brilliant". See the official NASA pictures above that I have reproduced that show 'stars' in the sky, as viewed from the lunar surface.
In order to take a pic of your pal, your rover, the flag or anything else in your close surroundings on the Moon, you have to close down the aperture setting & use a very fast exposure.
So it would be a miracle indeed if any stars were visible!
3. There should have been a substantial crater blasted out under the LEM's 10,000 pound thrust rocket. Sceptics would have you believe that the engines only had the power to blow the dust from underneath the LEM as it landed. If this is true, how did Armstrong create that famous boot print if all the dust had been blown away?
The LM's thrust during the final approach was just about 1.5 pounds per square inch. If it was high, the module would simply have gone off into space. So why should there have been a crater???
4. When the LEMs were supposedly leaving the Moon, they should have produced a large bright exhaust flame from the rocket propellant. Instead, zero exhaust. (I have turned this one around and have found evidence of a flame on one ascent of the LEM... just to prove the sceptics wrong!)
The craft wasn't powered by your ordinary fireworks black powder engine, but fueled with a mixture of hydrazine and dinitrogen tetroxide. None of these chemicals produce any flame in the visible range of the spectrum.
The one incident of visible flames mentioned above might have been local lunar particles made to glow by the heat.
5. Footprints are the result of weight displacing air or moisture from between particles of dirt, dust, or sand. The astronauts left distinct footprints all over the place.
WHAT? If you drop an object in the sand in vacuum, it won't make an imprint??? Think about it for half a second, and realize the utter silliness of the above statement :-D
6. The Apollo 11 TV pictures were lousy, yet the broadcast quality magically became fine on the five subsequent missions.
Yeah, technology advanced significantly during those years. And so did available bandwidth and speed.
8. Why did so many NASA Moonscape photos have non parallel shadows? sceptics will tell you because there is two sources of light on the Moon - the Sun and the Earth... That maybe the case, but the shadows would still fall in the same direction, not two or three different angles.
Get your ass away from the computer, grab your camera and take some outdoor pics when the sun is low on the horizon (as it was during all the Apollo missions). What do you get? Yup; non-parallell shadows.
This, of course, is due to perspective, distance, and what happens when you project a three-dimensional scene on a two-dimensional plane.
11. In Ron Howard's 1995 science fiction movie, Apollo 13, the astronauts lose electrical power and begin worrying about freezing to death. In reality, of course, the relentless bombardment of the Sun's rays would
rapidly have overheated the vehicle to lethal temperatures with no atmosphere into which to dump the heat build up.
"Apollo 13" was not a science fiction movie; it was a movie about something that really happened many years ago.
I remember it very well. The principal called everybody to the auditorium, where we had a big TV. No one thought the astronauts had any chance at all. We were first- to sevengraders, and for once, the auditorium was very, very quiet...
As for the temperatures of space, check out any physics or astronomy textbook. Besides, the sunlight only reached 50% of the craft, while the rest was exposed to the heat shadow of space, close to absolute zero (-273.16 celsius).
12. Who would dare risk using the LEM on the Moon when it was never, ever tested successfully? Would you send a relative to the Moon in a vehicle that had never been driven before?
When Dr. Barnard did the first heart transplant he shouldn't have done it because it hadn't been done before?
All the time we do things that haven't been done before. It's one of the more fundamental characteristics of our species, and without it we would still be living out in the open, because noone would dare enter a cave.
13. Instead of being able to jump at least ten feet high in "one sixth" gravity, the highest jump was about nineteen inches.
With their suits & power packs the astronauts had almost the same limitations on the moon as they would have down here without them. Besides, they were not allowed to play, for obvious reasons!
14. Even though slow motion photography was able to give a fairly convincing appearance of very low
gravity, it could not disguise the fact that the astronauts traveled no further between steps than they would have on Earth.
See 13.
16. An astrophysicist who has worked for NASA writes that it takes two meters of shielding to protect against medium solar flares and that heavy ones give out tens of thousands of rem in a few hours. Why didn't
the astronauts on Apollo 14 and 16 die after exposure to this immense amount of radiation?
I haven't checked the details on this one, but I suspect it's just another case of very bad physics, misquotations or statements taken out of context, just like the others.
17. The fabric space suits had a crotch to shoulder zipper. There should have been fast leakage of
air since even a pinhole deflates a tire in short order.
The suits was made from some 16 different layers, and were hermetically sealed. The outer layer's (the one with the zippers) purpose was just to protect the other layers from scratches and punctures.
19. How did the astronauts leave the LEM? in the documentary 'PaperMoon' The host measures a replica of the LEM at The Space Centre in Houston, what he finds is that the 'official' measurements released by NASA are bogus and that the astronauts could not have got out of the LEM...
Yes, it was extremely difficult getting in & out of the LEM. In fact, it could only be done by turning & twisting in a certain sequence. They trained for it quite a lot. If NASA spent $40 billion on faking this this, would they have designed a door that was too small?
22. With a more than two second signal transmission round trip, how did a camera pan upward to track the departure of the Apollo 16 LEM?
Give me an egg timer, a small electrical motor and a box of Lego, and I could solve that problem in about one hour. And I'm not rocket scientist material!
24. Another overlooked intriguing fact is that NASA launched the TETR-A satellite just months before the first lunar mission. The proclaimed purpose was to simulate transmissions coming from the moon so that the Houston ground crews (all those employees sitting behind computer screens at Mission Control) could "rehearse" the first moon landing. In other words, though NASA claimed that the satellite crashed shortly before the first lunar mission (a misinformation lie), its real purpose was to relay voice, fuel consumption, altitude, and telemetry data as if the transmissions were coming from an Apollo spacecraft as it neared the moon. Very few NASA employees knew the truth because they believed that the computer and television data they were receiving was the genuine article. Merely a hundred or so knew what was really going on; not tens of thousands as it might first appear.
It is easy to make statements and accusations, especially when you don't have to document them in any way...
25. In 1998, the Space Shuttle flew to one of its highest altitudes ever, three hundred and fifty miles, hundreds of miles below merely the beginning of the Van Allen Radiation Belts. Inside of their shielding, superior to that which the Apollo astronauts possessed, the shuttle astronauts reported being able to "see" the radiation with their eyes closed penetrating their shielding as well as the retinas of their closed eyes. For a dental x-ray on Earth which lasts 1/100th of a second we wear a 1/4 inch lead vest. Imagine what it would be like to endure several hours of radiation that you can see with your eyes closed from hundreds of miles away with 1/8 of an inch of aluminium shielding!
Yes, the van Allen Belt is deadly: It's not a healthy place to live! The Apollo crafts passed this area in less than an hour, though, and the peak intensity area in just a few minutes.
Before the age of manned space exploration the was some concern about this, because very little was known about this phenomenon. But already when Gagarin blasted off (he didn't even come close to the van Allen belts) we knew that this did not pose any danger.
26. The Apollo 1 fire of January 27, 1967, killed what would have been the first crew to walk on the Moon just days after the commander, Gus Grissom, held an unapproved press conference complaining that they were at least ten years, not two, from reaching the Moon. The dead man's own son, who is a seasoned pilot himself, has in his possession forensic evidence personally retrieved from the charred spacecraft (that the government has tried to destroy on two or more occasions).
I would like to see this evidence. And if the Government felt they had to kill Grissom, the very last thing they would do was setting fire to an Apollo craft; thus putting the entire program at risk!!!
A hit-and-run accident would have been much simpler, cheaper, and wouldn't have threated NASA or the program in any way.
27. CNN issued the following report, "The radiation belts surrounding Earth may be more dangerous for astronauts than previously believed (like when they supposedly went through them thirty years ago to reach the Moon.) The phenomenon known as the 'Van Allen Belts' can spawn (newly discovered) 'Killer Electrons' that can dramatically affect the astronauts' health."
The keyword here is "can", one of those small words so often overlooked...
28. In 1969 computer chips had not been invented. The maximum computer memory was 256k, and this was housed in a large air conditioned building. In 2002 a top of the range computer requires at least 64 Mb of memory to run a simulated Moon landing, and that does not include the memory required to take off again once landed. The alleged computer on board Apollo 11 had 32k of memory. That's the equivalent of a simple calculator.
Yup, and to this day, the space shuttles still carry a sextant just in case you have to make corrections by navigating by the stars.
(My old Commodore64 had a program that simulated all the systems of the Apollo craft, btw :-D )
29. If debris from the Apollo missions was left on the Moon, then it would be visible today through a powerful telescope, however no such debris can be seen. The Clementine probe that recently maps the Moons surface failed to show any Apollo artefacts left by Man during the missions. Where did the Moon Buggy and base of the LEM go?
We don't have that kind of telescope on Earth. Far from it!
I haven't checked this about the Clementine.
30. In the year 2002 NASA does not have the technology to land any man, or woman on the Moon, and return them safely to Earth.
The technology is there, of course, but if we were to do it today it would be done with a lot more care, as there is no Soviet Union, no cold war, and no hurry.
The fact that we can't go there tomorrow is due to purely budgetary reasons; Near Space has been a prority for a couple of decades.
31. Film evidence has recently been uncovered of a mislabeled, unedited, behind-the-scenes video film, dated by NASA three days after they left for the moon. It shows the crew of Apollo 11 staging part of their photography. The film evidence is shown in the video "A Funny Thing Happened on the Way to the Moon!".
Yes, somebody seems to be faking evidence here :-D
32. Why did ALL of the blueprints and plans for the Lunar Module and Moon Buggy get destroyed if this was one of History's greatest accomplishments?
Who said they did?
Re: The moon landing.
ndl - 16.06.2005, 05:58
Thanks Sander :-) That was too long for me, everytime I contemplated refuting all those points I got sleepy.
Mit folgendem Code, können Sie den Beitrag ganz bequem auf ihrer Homepage verlinken
Weitere Beiträge aus dem Forum Untitled
Did I mention I'm getting shitfcaed?? 2 - gepostet von Elegantly Evil am Freitag 06.01.2006
wow gold - gepostet von myshangnet am Donnerstag 18.05.2006
Ähnliche Beiträge wie "The moon landing."
T-Rex 700E Mechanik + Align 3G 2.1 *Preisupdate* - Deluxe1 (Montag 30.08.2010)
Guardians of the Abyss - kjaar (Donnerstag 18.05.2006)
NANA~ The Movie - Rei|ta (Dienstag 19.09.2006)
Queens of the stone age - Name_taken (Samstag 07.10.2006)
The Chronicles of Narnia - Aurora (Freitag 27.05.2005)
Jay-Z disst The Game - Bigg Dan (Mittwoch 09.02.2005)
The Legend of Zelda - The Minish cap - Trunks (Mittwoch 28.06.2006)
Kampfberichte [-DW-] The Wrath of the W - Dark Achilles (Montag 03.09.2007)
under the sea - yuichan (Samstag 25.11.2006)
[Festival-Tipp] State of the heart - Thomas (Dienstag 29.05.2007)