MID Registered User
Posts: 14
(7/4/05 6:43 pm) Reply
What this Apollo Hoax is about: People Need To Get A Life.
It's really rather interesting that this entire Apollo hoax business is, in a rather sad and strange way, the result of Apollo. All of the amazing discoveries and accomplishments, concentrated into so relatively short a period, and which triggered so much of what we have today in the form of technology, entertainment, and comforts, combined with the short-sightedness of certain administrations and the apparent ability of the American public to become completely jaded in the face of wonders (i.e., we landed on the Moon in 1969, and by 1970, many Americans had lost interest in Apollo)--triggered a certain laziness and an emphasis on other things.
Since Apollo, we have PCs and game boys and kids grow up with their own TVs and DVD players and etc., and we see calculators being used in elementary school classrooms and a decided detrioration in the technical educational level in high school students and an equal emphasis in our colleges which produces businessmen and psychologists rather than scientists and engineers. The U.S. was once #1 in those areas. Now? Not.
As a result, an entire generation has grown up, with the technological comforts afforded largely by the efforts of people who put men on the moon, and yet this generation has no idea about those days...in fact, they're gullible enough to actually buy into silliness like that put forth here.
It's actually understandable, although disturbing. Just add a little impetus, like the money-hungry prattlings of some kook like Bill Kaysing, and a bunch of web pages appear "proving" a conspiracy to cover up the fact that we never actually went to the moon. And the fact is that the vast majority of these exposes are authored (very obviously) by people with little or no technical background, and no knowledge pertaining to what it is they speak of (and few literary skills, as well).
Indeed, if I could get Gene Cernan and John Young into a room with people like you and they could describe the risks, the thrills, and the wonder of what they did--you wouldn't believe it...because there's no "proof"! Their photos are all faked, and it's their word against all the "proof" to the contrary. Very sad.
And so we have all this idiocy concerning "photographic anomalies" (none of which are anything but natural occurances that you apparently know nothing about), absolute fabrications regarding conversations between astronauts and mission control that never took place, and a plain ignorance of science and engineering that is exhibited in discussions regarding lunar dust, blast craters and flags blowing in the wind on the lunar surface, and even so-called conspiratory theories concerning the deaths and retirements of Apollo astronauts...as well as mundane and easily answerable questions pertaining to why we haven't gone back in the 33 years since the premature ending of Apollo.
We'll leave alone the moronic "why haven't we been able to image the Apollo artifacts on the surface of the moon?" question...since the answer is so obvious that it makes one laugh.
I suppose that addressing these silly things has become a bit necessary because the Internet allows millions of people with no actual knowledge concerning this stuff to see this junk, and of course, believe it.
But really, no-one promoting these ridiculous ideas is going to change his tune. They are almost exclusively the product of the post-Apollo generation...a rather pitiful reflection of what has happened since the days of actual manned space exploration.
Of course, superbly qualified people are still doing real space exploration at JPL and at ESA, and have accomplished astounding things...and I wonder when the conspiracy theories will start regarding Cassini-Huygens or the spectacle of Deep Impact and comet Tempel 1.
After all folks, where's the proof we've done those things!?!? There isn't any more proof that we've landed a spacecraft on the surface of Titan than there is that we've landed men on the surface of the moon. The photos and the data are all faked!
Maybe it's because there aren't any men involved in these explorations, save those who are running the missions from Earth? Huh...
Bottom line:
Sites such as this one, and the other Apollo Hoax aberrations, are a waste of time. A sad statement to the state of humanity, perhaps, but still, a waste of time...as despite all the solid destruction of these "theories" that has taken place by folks who are knowledgable (all easily viewed on the Internet as well), they still exist...still making themselves look pretty dumb by insisting on the idiotic as "truth".
Re: What this Apollo Hoax is about: People Need To Get A Li
So is the government paying you good money to spread their BS? How do you sleep at night with such a seared conscience?
MID Registered User
Posts: 17
(8/27/05 2:55 pm) Reply
Re: What this Apollo Hoax is about: People Need To Get A Li
"Seared conscience"?
I'm not sure I understand why one would think I should lose sleep over these simple observations. My conscience is just fine, and I do not lose sleep over much at all--certainly not over the lunar landing hoax theories.
I don't work for the government. The government has nothing to do with what I said above. Those are personal observations, and simple logical ones which really require nothing in the realm of advanced perception. They are merely observations of easily substantiated fact...what happened to allow such idiotic ideas to become so prolific in certain circles, and an understanding of the mechanics whereby a certain percentage of a certain generation allows themselves to believe in lunacy.
You obviously believe in a lunar hoax, and think it's the product of a huge (untenably huge) government cover-up.
I simply find that interesting, albeit a little sad.
Re: What this Apollo Hoax is about: People Need To Get A Li
No, by the looks of it you dont slee p much, judging by the amount of posts you write here anyway
Do you know, you sound just like a Bible basher who tries to tell everybody what to do and why. Your views are so blinkered that you cant even see when your talking rubbish.
You say if it werent for Space exploration we wouldnt have such things as DVDs or PCs? Hmm thats funny because werent both of those invented by the Japanese? What do they have to do with NASA?
Ill tell you what the space missions were - a complete waste of the taxpayers money. Thats why the general public lost interest because what did the Apollo missions really achieve?
Were living in a World where millions of poeple are dying of disease, being killed in wars and which suffer violence, but you'd rather the Government spend billions of dollars on going to an uninhabitable piece of rock?
I guess your conscience must be a lot different to mine and many other people who come to this website.
MID Registered User
Posts: 27
(9/8/05 2:44 am) Reply
Re: What this Apollo Hoax is about: People Need To Get A Li
As I said...you need to get a life.
Your problem with these posts is that you cannot succeed in making your case. You also have selective readers syndrome, where you ignore the pertinent facts and prefer to be childish and interject silly comments.
The rubbish is on your website. Mis-information, utter fabrications, and things you obviously don't understand.
No, the PC and the the integrated circuits and software that are used in them, and many other devices, weren't invented by the Japanese. They were invented right here, in the 1960s and 1970s, perfected over the following years, and manufactured here. The genesis of this development was Apollo.
It just so happens that the Japanese manufacture most of the stuff nowadays. That's another story altogether, but young people hardly realize that the Japanese didn't always make our electronics.
The Japanese have nothing to do with NASA. What does your lack of understanding about things have to do with proving an Apollo hoax? Why do you re-direct the conversation instead of address the issues?
The reason is simple: you can't address the issues.
Now, you may believe the space missions were a complete waste of the taxpayer's money. I'll certainly allow that. That, at least, is an opinion that doesn't reflect intellectual laziness. But in saying so, you obviously believe that THEY TOOK PLACE, so your point is no longer that the Apollo missions were faked, but to make some social commnentary about modern society!
Great, but I thought this was an Apollo hoax discussion.
Look, you've lost the battle. Apollo took place as it has been said. You cannot prove otherwise, and of course, you as the accuser must do just that. You've lost your case, only shallow minded, or ignorant people support or buy into your feeble "evidence", and you simply have to make arguements nonetheless.
A book on what the Apollo missions really achhieved could be, and has been written. The people's lack of interest, the short-sightedness of governments, and the degradation of educational standards and accomplishments which followewd that era are a separate issue...yet, a very real one.
Millions are dying of disease, and warring with each other, and suffering violence. They always have been. Yet, people in America spend about 4 times what Apollo cost in total annually on cosmetics and beer.
Your argument is shallow. If governments wanted to end wars, they would. If governments wanted to end famines and hungers, they would. They don't. Indeed, Apollo was cancelled prematurely to fund a war.
These arguements are shallow, and stupid. They have nothing to do with anything we've been talking about. Face facts, you've lost the argument. Of course men landed on the moon, and nothing you show can prove otherwise.
P.S. Despite having been involved years ago in Apollo, and despite watching the greatness of a nation erode at the hands of less than far-seeing leadership, I still sleep just fine.
Re: What this Apollo Hoax is about: People Need To Get A Li
Quote:The rubbish is on your website. Mis-information, utter fabrications, and things you obviously don't understand.
If this website ticks you off so much why do you bother coming here? Seems like your the one who needs to get a life?
Quote:Now, you may believe the space missions were a complete waste of the taxpayer's money. I'll certainly allow that. That, at least, is an opinion that doesn't reflect intellectual laziness. But in saying so, you obviously believe that THEY TOOK PLACE, so your point is no longer that the Apollo missions were faked, but to make some social commnentary about modern society!
No, what I see is the figures spent on the Apollo project. Just because the money was spent does not mean that it was successful. Look at the many missions to Mars that have failed and have cost billions of dollars - just because a vast amount of money was spent on the project does not automatically guarantee that they were successful.
Quote:Look, you've lost the battle. Apollo took place as it has been said. You cannot prove otherwise
And neither can you!
Quote:A book on what the Apollo missions really achieved could be, and has been written.
By NASA or a NASA employee - cant you see? everything regarding the Moon landings come from NASA, so they are the only ones to provide the 'official' information. The book being written by James Oberg to dismiss such claims as put forward by this website had its funding cut by NASA within days of it being announced - why? Surely if NASA wanted to put a stop to such criticism then they could do easily?
Quote:Millions are dying of disease, and warring with each other, and suffering violence. They always have been. Yet, people in America spend about 4 times what Apollo cost in total annually on cosmetics and beer.
And the US have spent even more killing people in other Countries just because they want their oil!
Quote:These arguements are shallow, and stupid. They have nothing to do with anything we've been talking about. Face facts, you've lost the argument. Of course men landed on the moon, and nothing you show can prove otherwise.
In your opinion - thousands of others think otherwise and are entitled to their opinions just as you are yours.
Quote:P.S. Despite having been involved years ago in Apollo, and despite watching the greatness of a nation erode at the hands of less than far-seeing leadership, I still sleep just fine.
So what exactly did you used to do?
Edited by: Cosmic Conspiracies at: 9/8/05 10:42 am
MID Registered User
Posts: 28
(9/9/05 12:17 am) Reply
Re: What this Apollo Hoax is about: People Need To Get A Li
I tell you that you post fabrications (like a photo of Neil Armstrong that never existed, and a photo "taken by Neil Armstrong" that never existed, as well as all the fabricated conversations....and you don't address that; you re-direct and ask why I bother coming here.
I come here to see what you people are really all about, as a major proponent of this hoax baloney. I found out.
___________________________________________________
By the way, look at the many Mars missions that have been successful. You're logic and arguing points leave a great deal to be desired.
A point you fail to realize regarding my statement that you've lost and you cannot prove your contention...clearly spelled out to you before, is that I don't have to prove we went to the moon. You accuse, you therefore must prove we didn't.
You cannot, and are avoiding any attempts to do so. You therefore lose your case, especially since the evidence we did go is established based upon any standard of scientific documentary criteria that exists.
____________________________________________________
Oh yes...of course, everyone who wrote a book or a paper regarding Apollo was employed by NASA (?). I suppose, even if they weren't, they were paid to lie? You paint yourself into a corner with this rubbish, you know. Oberg's book was cancelled for obvious reasons. You know what they are by now, certainly.
NASA doesn't want to give any credence whatsoever to these idiotic claims. It's also rather obvious to any one of intelligence, that whatever Mr. Oberg says wouldn't be taken with any seriousness by people like you anyway, so what's the point? (A rhetorical question).
____________________________________________________
Yes, the old oil arguement. The U.S. is killing for oil, when we've got an ample supply of oil and will for generations. We don't need to spend billions killing people for oil. What we need to do is spend millions building a few refineries to process the oil we have in better fashion and get it distributed better. That has been prohibited by ridiculous U.S. law for decades...
Your point in this escapes me...because I was pointing out that funding a planetary exploration mission is a matter of priorities and national consciousness...not money.
____________________________________________________
Everyone's entitled to their opinions, even if they be dead wrong. Percival Lowell was a brilliant man, a Harvard graduate in mathematics--yet he was dead wrong about Mars. Of course, in the face of evidence, he would wholly support the fact that he was indeed wrong, and accept the new findings wholeheartedly...which is a damn sight different than you.
Some people, who ought to know better, propogate this mythology of a moon hoax, and illustrate their own ignorance, for whatever reason. I discuss this with people all the time, and direct them into their own investigations, because as I said, it is not surprising that a whole generation of Americans could be doubtful.
I take a different approach with the lunatics who provide this skewed information, present it as fact and "evidence", and refuse to see they're full of it, like you people here, who have absolutely no actual knowledge of the topic of which you speak. You merely make conjectures based upon things you don't understand.
And, it appears that you will not face facts, do any investigation or study, and learn something.
What does it matter what I did? Neil Armstrong or Buzz Aldrin, or John Young or Al Bean or any of the guys that actually flew the missions could come here and tell you the facts, and you would discount what they say, despite the fact these men actually flew the missions.
You people have failed to prove anything, and always will. What I have discovered is a very troubling mentality, which is not surprising when someone claims to be a Ufologist... as if that were a scientist, or something close to one.
The problem is, Ufology is not a science, and people who claim to be one of these have no knowledge about scientific theory, nor how to form logical, reasonable hypotheses based on the scientific method.
Hell, anyone who "believes" that Apollo was hoaxed, and puts forth the ridiculous evidence you do, and ignores the facts as presented by someone who knows....and who re-directs practically every valid point into an unassociated area, especially in the face of scads of data and scientific documentation, has got to be a little touched.
Seeing that they can't be reached is something I had to see for myself. Hard to believe such people exist. But you do.
Your site is bogus. Your "evidence" is not. And obviously, you're intellectually lazy. That this forum has few visitors...for a long time at least, seems to speak to the efficacy of your message.
It's been interesting seeing what sort of minds actually come up with this stuff.
I'm sure that you'll want the last word, based upon your performance to date.
Be my guest. Make a fool of yourself in front of anyone who reads this forum....it won't be many, so don't worry.
Re: What this Apollo Hoax is about: People Need To Get A Li
No I dont know why NASA pulled the funding for the book - perhaps you could explain? But all the books used data directly fed to them from NASA, who obviously would present the data 'as expected' by the scientific community so as not to look 'faked'.
Quote:Yes, the old oil arguement. The U.S. is killing for oil, when we've got an ample supply of oil and will for generations. We don't need to spend billions killing people for oil.
Wrong! Now if you had watched one of those Michael Moore films like I suggested you would have known that the US had its lowest stores of Oil for many years when the 2nd Gulf War broke out. And you would have known that the first thing that was protected by armed guard after the taking of Baghdad was the oil fields. And lets just look at this weeks news - what was it? Several oil rigs were lost due to hurricane Katrina - and petrol prices here in the UK are almost £5 per gallon. Lets just wait to next week when the protests start here due to the oil prices and then come back and tell me that the western world has plenty of its own oil to go round.
Heres a little article to inform you what went on before the 2nd Gulf war.
The real oil-for-food scam
Last year, right-wingers in Congress began kicking up a fuss about how the United Nations had allegedly allowed Saddam Hussein to rake in $10 billion in illegal cash through the Oil for Food program. Headlines screamed scandal. New York Times' columnist William Safire referred to the alleged U.N. con game as "the richest rip-off in world history." But those who knew how the program had been set up and run--and under whose watch--were not swayed.
The initial accusations were based on a General Accounting Office report released in April 2004 and were later bolstered by a more detailed report commissioned by the CIA.
According to the GAO, Hussein smuggled $6 billion worth of oil out of Iraq--most of it through the Persian Gulf. Yet the U.N. fleet charged with intercepting any such smugglers was under direct command of American officers, and consisted overwhelmingly of U.S. Navy ships. In 2001, for example, 90 of its vessels belonged to the United States, while Britain contributed only four, Joy Gordon wrote in a December article for Harper's magazine.
Most of the oil that left Iraq by land did so through Jordan and Turkey--with the approval of the United States. The first Bush administration informally exempted Jordan from the ban on purchasing Iraqi oil--an arrangement that provided Hussein with $4.4 billion over 10 years, according to the CIA's own findings. The United States later allowed Iraq to leak another $710 million worth of oil through Turkey--"all while U.S. planes enforcing no-fly zones flew overhead," Gordon wrote.
Scott Ritter, a U.N. weapons inspector in Iraq during the first six years of economic sanctions against the country, unearthed yet another scam: The United States allegedly allowed an oil company run by Russian foreign minister Yevgeny Primakov's sister to purchase cheap oil from Iraq and resell it to U.S. companies at market value--purportedly earning Hussein "hundreds of millions" more.
"It has been estimated that 80 percent of the oil illegally smuggled out of Iraq under 'oil for food' ended up in the United States," Ritter wrote in the U.K. Independent.
Sources: "The UN Is Us: Exposing Saddam Hussein's Silent Partner," Joy Gordon, Harper's, December 2004; "The Oil for Food 'Scandal' Is a Cynical Smokescreen," Scott Ritter, U.K. Independent, Dec. 12, 2004.
Iraq is estimated to hold 115 billion barrels of proven oil reserves, and possibly much more undiscovered oil in unexplored areas of the country. Iraq also is estimated to contain at least 110 trillion cubic feet of natural gas
Perhaps the most devastating loss for the Iraqi people is the ransacking of the National Museum, the greatest trove of archeological and historical artifacts in the Middle East. The 28 galleries of the huge museum were picked clean by looters who made off with more than 50,000 irreplaceable artifacts, relics of past civilizations dating back 5,000 years. The museum's entire card catalog was destroyed, making it impossible even to identify what has been lost.
The US military stood by and permitted the ransacking of the museum, an incalculable blow to Iraqi and world culture, just as they allowed and even encouraged the looting of hospitals, universities, libraries and government social service buildings. The occupation forces protected only the Ministry of Oil, with its detailed inventory of Iraqi oil reserves, as well as the Ministry of Interior, the headquarters of the ousted regime's secret police.
Robert Fisk, writing in the British newspaper the Independent April 14, noted a pattern in the response of American forces to looting in Baghdad, which, he said, "shows clearly what the US intends to protect." He continued: "After days of arson and pillage, here's a short but revealing scorecard. US troops have sat back and allowed mobs to wreck and then burn the Ministry of Planning, the Ministry of Education, the Ministry of Irrigation, the Ministry of Trade, the Ministry of Industry, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the Ministry of Culture and the Ministry of Information. They did nothing to prevent looters from destroying priceless treasures of Iraq's history in the Baghdad Archaeological Museum and in the museum in the northern city of Mosul, or from looting three hospitals.
"The Americans have, though, put hundreds of troops inside two Iraqi ministries that remain untouched-and untouchable-because tanks and armoured personnel carriers and Humvees have been placed inside and outside both institutions. And which ministries proved to be so important for the Americans? Why, the Ministry of Interior, of course-with its vast wealth of intelligence information on Iraq-and the Ministry of Oil. The archives and files of Iraq's most valuable asset-its oilfields and, even more important, its massive reserves-are safe and sound, sealed off from the mobs and looters, and safe to be shared, as Washington almost certainly intends, with American oil companies."
So much for your claim then that the US has enough oil to go around?
Quote:Everyone's entitled to their opinions, even if they be dead wrong. Percival Lowell was a brilliant man, a Harvard graduate in mathematics--yet he was dead wrong about Mars. Of course, in the face of evidence, he would wholly support the fact that he was indeed wrong, and accept the new findings wholeheartedly...which is a damn sight different than you.
No, the shoe is on the other foot. I am putting forward the notion that you and NASA are wrong, just in the way that Lowell was told he was wrong. You dont accept the evidence that myself and countless others have put forward. Still, Im hopeful that youll apologise for trying to claim that the picture of Armstrong on the Moon on this site was bogus - it isnt as Ive proved - so your the one whos wrong - whether your man enough to admit it is another story.
Quote:What does it matter what I did? Neil Armstrong or Buzz Aldrin, or John Young or Al Bean or any of the guys that actually flew the missions could come here and tell you the facts, and you would discount what they say, despite the fact these men actually flew the missions.
In the case of Neil Armstrong, he is known for not giving interviews and the last time I heard about Buzz Aldrin being questioned, he hit the guy in the face - they dont seem like decent people to me?
Add to that the fact that all of them looked rather sheepish at their first interview after the mission, or should I say 'looking guilty' and I wouldn't expect any of them to be making an appearance at my doorstep soon. It does matter what you do because your trying to tell everyone what is right or wrong and claiming that we lack a scientific background when in fact youve disclosed nothing about yourself. And for your information, Andy Lloyd who writes our 12th Planet stuff and many other articles is a qualified Chemist who studied at San Diego University in the early 90's so stick that in your pipe and smoke it
Quote:You people have failed to prove anything, and always will. What I have discovered is a very troubling mentality, which is not surprising when someone claims to be a Ufologist... as if that were a scientist, or something close to one.
We have never claimed to be scientists on this website - even though Andy has a Phd, were not here to brag what qualifications we have - were here to uncover what we believe to be a cover up. I can never understand the mentality of people who reckon that because your not a scientist or went to university that you have no right to talk about a subject. I know many people who have top jobs who dont even know how to wire a plug. Nothing can be substituted for common sense, no matter how many qualifications you have written down on a piece of paper.
We are experiencers and writers who take a look at things with an open eye and mind. Nobody has to be a scientist to know when something isnt right. Thats the reason why so many hoax sites have appeared on the net, because the net gives the normal 'man in the street' a voice. Science believes that things can only be scientifically proven if they can be replicated time and time again. Lightning never strikes the same place twice - so does it really exist according to the scientific world?
Quote:The problem is, Ufology is not a science, and people who claim to be one of these have no knowledge about scientific theory, nor how to form logical, reasonable hypotheses based on the scientific method.
Rubbish!!!!!! As Ive explained in the other topic there are many scientists who are ufologists. And if you believe that you cannot be a scientist and ufologist, I could go out tommorrow and study for a degree in ufology! Dr. Richard Greer, Dr. Stanton Friedman, Dr. John Mack - all scientists or doctors and all ufologists. If you ask me your very narrow minded.
Quote:Your site is bogus. Your "evidence" is not. And obviously, you're intellectually lazy. That this forum has few visitors...for a long time at least, seems to speak to the efficacy of your message.
Perhaps you should check out the hits on the main site to see how many people visit the site? Not everybody has the time to visit a forum or have the energy to do so. And judging by the twaddle that youve been preaching for the last month or so is it any wonder that anybody be bothered to answer your posts?
I'll tell you one thing though, the Pentagon, and many US Military sites have been tracked as visiting this site. Now doesnt that seem odd if all we talk about is rubbish?
Edited by: Cosmic Conspiracies at: 9/9/05 1:30 pm
Re: What this Apollo Hoax is about: People Need To Get A LiThis reply came from EAC in the Guestbook.
Dang, I think you just made the guy's point right here.
You skipped right by the false conversations in that section (which, if you visited a NASA website, you could see the real transcripts of the conversations and see exactly what was what).
By the way, those 2 pictures don't exist in a NASA website either. Apollo 11 took 339 surface photos. Neither of those 2 are in that collection. The "ball of light" picture is impossible because of the terrain. You really oughta take a look see for yourself.
As I remember it, Watergate didn't get covered up too well. And that was small potatoes compared to Apollo.
The spacecraft not tested? Apollo 7,8,9 and 10 tested both craft thoroughly. You could probably read the missions reports for these missions and see the extent to which the Apollo package was tested. Just a little They're now on NASA websites too. Maybe you oughta go there?
What kind of message? Well, I think we were just trying to do this thing publicly...you know, the American way, while the Soviets were hiding everything from public view. If we lost a mission, it would've been right there on TV for all the world to see, kinda like Challenger and Columbia were. The message would've been tough...we tried, we failed and men died. That's exploration sometimes. It would've shown bravery, and it would've shared alot of pain with the world. It also would've shown the drive we had to succeed, as we'd try again...live and on TV. The only plan we had in case Apollo 11 failed was to try it again on Apollo 12, quite honestly.
I don't know if that fellow was from Bad Astronomy. I kinda doubt it. I've seen some of their arguements, and this guy seems to know more than they do. They've got good intentions, but have fallen a little short in places. This fellow didn't.
But by God, you seem to have.
Edited by: Cosmic Conspiracies at: 9/11/05 11:07 am
Re: What this Apollo Hoax is about: People Need To Get A LiThis reply came from Eric Cartman in the Guestbook.
"If they can cover up watergate i'm sure the moon landing would be easy."
Uhh...The Watergate coverup didn't actually work...........did it??
"Another point to make here is that I find it interesting that mostly Americans believe that Man went to the Moon whilst the rest of the World think that they didnt."
Care to back that claim up with a reference?
"The only manned craft that stays constantly in Space is the Russian International Space Station."
HAHA "Russian International Space Station" HEHE..SNORT. Shows how much you know about current space projects.
Edited by: Cosmic Conspiracies at: 9/11/05 11:08 am
Re: What this Apollo Hoax is about: People Need To Get A Li
My reply to EAC.
I think I may have the now out of print book that those transcripts came from - I will see if I can see exactly where the quotes came from. As regards to the photos showing anomalies, do you seriously believe that NASA would officially release pictures that showed ufos?
Quote:The spacecraft not tested? Apollo 7,8,9 and 10 tested both craft thoroughly.
What I meant by untested was any simulated landing on the Moon to see if it could have been done before risking lives. In February 1967 the Russian government approved an integrated L1/L3 project with plans indicating a first manned L1 circumlunar mission as early as June 1967.
First tests would use 7K-L1P prototypes. These had only a boilerplate descent module and were not capable of re-entry and recovery. They would be followed by unmanned circumlunar test flights. These had descent modules equipped with photography equipment, radiation measuring instruments, and biological specimens for return to earth. Only after the design was proven in two successive unmanned missions would a crew be risked.
The Russian 7K-L1 demonstrated that it could safely take a cosmonaut around the moon and return him to earth in August 1969, a month after the successful American Apollo 11 landing on the moon. I still dont understand why the Russians failed to even try if they had a craft to do so just a month after Apollo 11?
Edited by: Cosmic Conspiracies at: 9/11/05 11:05 am
Re: What this Apollo Hoax is about: People Need To Get A Li
My reply to Eric Cartman
Quote:"If they can cover up watergate i'm sure the moon landing would be easy."
Uhh...The Watergate coverup didn't actually work...........did it??
No, but it is a good example of the lengths that Governments will go to cover things up. Another example would be the JFK assassination. Here we are over 40 years later and still there are unanswered questions and a cover up about what really happened.
The same thing has happened with the death of Princess Diana - all video footage from the video camera placed inside the tunnel where she died has conveniently been lost, and there is no trace of the small Fiat car that was supposedly involved in the accident. Does anyone seriously believe that a small Fiat car could write off a heavily armoured Mercedes S-280. The real story of course is told by another driver who was following the Mercedes, who has said in statements, backed up by forensic evidence, that the car actually span out of control without hitting anything. A few years ago I attended a conference which had a speaker talking about Diana's death. The outcome of the talk was that a small device had been placed in the car which could make it go out of control. The same type of device had been tried on Camilla Parker Boules car just a few years beforehand.
Dont under estimate the lengths that Governments will go to keep information away from the general media or the lengths they will go to make sure that such evidence doesnt get publicised. If it were not for the internet, would we be so informed of such things today?
Quote:"Another point to make here is that I find it interesting that mostly Americans believe that Man went to the Moon whilst the rest of the World think that they didnt."
Care to back that claim up with a reference?
You and your friends here are a prime example. Having run this site for 6 years, I can personally tell you that most of the American readers who have contacted me to discuss Apollo are almost fanatical obsessives. As I live in the UK and see many documentaries over here on the subject (and own almost 200 videos on the subject), it is not a stretch of the imagination for anyone living in this part of the World to make such a claim.
Quote:
"The only manned craft that stays constantly in Space is the Russian International Space Station."
HAHA "Russian International Space Station" HEHE..SNORT. Shows how much you know about current space projects.
Maybe you would like to enlighten us? To my knowledge the ISS is the only manned spacecraft in orbit today. I know China is launching their own in October of this year, but as we speak on the ISS is up there.
Edited by: Cosmic Conspiracies at: 9/11/05 11:43 am
MID Registered User
Posts: 32
(9/11/05 11:57 pm) Reply
Re: What this Apollo Hoax is about: People Need To Get A Li
Well,
I thank EAC for his comments.
Taking transcripts out of "a book" is not really researching the matter before publishing it, eh?
I know where these conversations came from.
These things were pieced together rather carefully from segments of actual conversations. Some of the statements allegedly made by astronauts on the moon were actually made of of separate pieces of statements made by both of the astronauts at different times, sometimes hours apart. They were constructed to sound like descriptions of alien artifacts, and other such stuff. They are false. This can easily be researched nowadays.
The comments added to these fabrications ask all sorts of questions that point to a lack of understanding about what's being said. Of course, the conversations are false, so you've really created a great big herring here for people to sift through, whether you knew it or not.
Talking in "code". That's one of the big things you use to point to some coverup. Terms like "Condorset Hotel", EMU and PLSS, Domes, Blocked Fields, and names like Barbara, Vostok, Buster and the acronym "UFO" seem to be confusing to you.
EMU was an acronym for Extravehicular Manueuvering Unit. "Space suit" would've been easier, perhaps, since that's what an EMU was. PLSS was Portable Life Support System...the backpack. Again, that probably would've been easier...
Condorset hotel was a crater in the Condorset complex, designated "H", or, "Hotel" (pilot speak for the letter H, like Alpha is A, Bravo is B, etc.) on the lunar maps. Barbara, Vostok, and Buster were also craters. Blocked Fields, terraces, domes, and the like were in fact geologic terms for surface features. And UFO was a term used to mean exactly what it was designed to mean, unidentified flying object, a common thing really. It had nothing to do with aliens. The term "UFO" was commonly usewd in radio communications to describe something "unidentified" that appeared to be flying...that's all.
If NASA had any pictures of UFOs (i.e., alien craft) taken by Apollo crews...no, I think they would've held them up, were they definitive. You know, culture shock, etc... But none of the photos show anything suggestive of alien spacecraft, and no commentary exists even sugesting such a thing.
____________________________________________________
Apollo was a flight test program, a manned flight test program. A linear series of tests in the space environment were conducted exhaustively, all the way to Apollo 10 flying the initial descent profile, jettisoning the descent stage and returning to the CSM. All that was left was to attempt to set the craft down on the lunar surface. That of course was accomplished. The LM worked in the environment of space, where it was designed to work. An un-manned test flight was un-necessary, and would've ben a wee bit impossible, since the vehicle was designed to be landed manually.
Indeed, if men hadn't been aboard Eagle in July of 1969, there would've been a mess of hardware on the surface...in a pile.
Unfortunately for the Soviets, they had major booster problems. They kept blowing their large boosters up (they couldn't develop massive engines and cluster them, and they attempted clustering many smaller engines for their large boosters, which proved far to difficult). They were at the point of testing their manned lunar landing package (a mission akin to Apollo 9) on July 4, 1969, when during fueling, there was a pad explosion at Baikonur, which not only destroyed their major booster, but the launch complex as well. Their lunar landing program was over 12 days before Apollo 11 launched. The Soviets had problems with their spacecraft, as well as their boosters. Their lunar vehicle was well behind the American LM in its development, and unfortunately never got off the ground.
As to why the Soviets would abandon a lunar mission after the Americans had succeded, it's hard to say. I postulate that since they had lost the race, that they decided not to spend their resources on lunar missions, where they could only place a distant second place, but rather decided to develop in another area where they could advance ahead of the Americans...earth orbital /space station operations. Of course, they did just that for many years .
____________________________________________________
MID Registered User
Posts: 33
(9/12/05 12:09 am) Reply
Re: What this Apollo Hoax is about: People Need To Get A Li
I agree with your assessment regarding the lengths governments will go to cover things up. As to JFK, agreed.
As to Princess Diana, well, maybe.
As to Apollo...not possible. The scale is too grand. Conspiracies don't work on a large scale. Heck, conspiracies often don't work on a small scale. But the larger the conspiracy, the less of its effectiveness.
Your right as well that its not a stretch that people there, or in other parts of the world would believe in the Apollo hoax claims. With the Internet, I don't know why exactly that should be, as the data and information that have been in my hands for a generation are now all disemminated worldwide.
No, no...you're also right that the ISS is the only manned spacecraft in orbit right now. The issue I believe was your incorrect use of the term "Russian" when referring to it. It is not Russian. It is international, consisting of major components of both the U.S. and Russia, supllied by Russia, and the U.S., and has components made by other countries as well (like Canada, for instance). Indeed if the Shuttle didn't exist, the ISS wouldn't exist. It is also manned by international crews.
I think that's the issue this person's addrsssing.
Re: What this Apollo Hoax is about: People Need To Get A Li
Ah finally some balanced remarks.
Lets remember that the JFK cover up has been going on way before the Apollo landings.
I stand corrected on calling the ISS Russian too.
MID Registered User
Posts: 37
(9/14/05 1:28 am) Reply
Re: What this Apollo Hoax is about: People Need To Get A Li
I'd add that the JKF cover-up has scads of reasonable, if not circumstantial evidence to back it up. The Congressional committee on assassinations in the 1970s even concluded that a conspiracy was present.
My contention is that reasonable evidence of an Apollo hoax doesn't exist. I think more than adequate evidence exists to consider the JFK case hardly closed.
Email This To a Friend
Topic Commands
Click to receive email notification of replies 
Click to stop receiving email notification of replies