Would the United States Government lie about landing on the moon? Yes, they probably have that in their propaganda 101 testimonials. However, ask yourself, “As society what have we gained by the space age?” Ultimately everyone enjoys Direct TV or some spin off of Direct TV, etc. We have learned about our galaxy and realize there are thousands of galaxies besides our own Milky Way.
“Great advances are being made in the medical field. These developments are important to the well being of life on Earth. It is ironic, however, that this great research is being made in outer space. Amazingly, the results of the research are helping to address medical issues facing human beings. Much of the research done in outer space has a direct connection to many health problems people face everyday on earth. The medical research being done now in space is improving the health of humans on Earth” Written by: Janee' Avent.
The quote I have cited is a small example of what technology has accomplished from space. All though, some suggest the “MOON LANDING WAS A HOAX”, I do not believe that the case.
Consider, the earth has an atmosphere and the moon does not, thus light and shadows can’t really be an argument. The higher you travel, your perspective changes. Point being, what you see on the ground is different that what you would see in stratosphere. Hence, the view from the moon would be like nothing you could imagine, just like our natural laws on earth would not apply on the moon.
“Heiligenschein is a bright spot of light around the shadow of the observer's head, cast on dewy grass land. The dew droplets on the grass act as lenses, focusing sunlight on the grass leaves, strongly illuminating them, and working again as a lens for the backscattered light. This effect is enhanced by the fact that in the antisolar point (the point opposite the sun, i.e. the shadow of one's head), no other shadows are visible, and thus the region looks much brighter because the light and dark details of the surface are integrated by the eye. Look for the Heiligenschein early in the morning, when the sun is low and thus your shadow long, and move yourself to let the shadow be cast on wet dewy grass. The effect is very common, so you should be likely to see it.”
“That many times the astronauts appear to be standing in a spotlight. This is a natural effect of heiligenschein. You can reproduce this effect yourself; wet grass on a cool morning will do it. Face away from the Sun and look at the shadow of your head. There will be a halo around it. The effect is also very strong in fine, disturbed dust like that in a baseball diamond infield. Or, of course, on the Moon.” Phil Plait’s Bad Astronomy
NASA did not have the technology to pass through the van Allen Belts has been exaggerated. “Explorer I, launched by NASA in 1958, discovered these two regions of intense radiation surrounding the Earth. They are referred to as the inner and outer Van Allen radiation belts, after James Van Allen who designed Explorer I imagine.gsfc.nasa.gov/doc...0630a.html
Do people really think NASA spontaneously decided to go to the moon? They did not frolic to the moon. They took careful measures. Thus, I would argue in 1958 the planning for Explorer I took many pain stacking hours and years to plan. Thomas Edison tried over 2000 variations of the light bulb until he accomplished his goal. Is it fair to suggest NASA used the same trial and errors regarding the lunar landing?
“Oak Ridge biologists sent bacteria and blood samples into space and exposed small animals to radiation. They concluded that proper shielding would be key to successful flight not only for living organisms, but for electronic instrumentation as well. To develop shielding for the Apollo crews, Oak Ridge researchers recycled the Lab's Tower Shielding Facility, which had hoisted shielding experiments aloft for the 1950's nuclear-plane project.” imagine.gsfc.nasa.gov/doc...0630a.html
"The Van Allen belts are full of deadly radiation, and anyone passing through them would be fried. Needless to say this is a very simplistic statement. Yes, there is deadly radiation in the Van Allen belts, but the nature of that radiation was known to the Apollo engineers and they were able to make suitable preparations. The principle danger of the Van Allen belts is high-energy protons, which are not that difficult to shield against. And the Apollo navigators plotted a course through the thinnest parts of the belts and arranged for the spacecraft to pass through them quickly, limiting the exposure.
The Van Allen belts span only about forty degrees of earth's latitude -- twenty degrees above and below the magnetic equator. The diagrams of Apollo's translunar trajectory printed in various press releases are not entirely accurate. They tend to show only a two-dimensional version of the actual trajectory. The actual trajectory was three-dimensional. The highly technical reports of Apollo, accessible to but not generally understood by the public, give the three-dimensional details of the translunar trajectory.
Each mission flew a slightly different trajectory in order to access its landing site, but the orbital inclination of the translunar coast trajectory was always in the neighborhood of 30°. Stated another way, the geometric plane containing the translunar trajectory was inclined to the earth's equator by about 30°. A spacecraft following that trajectory would bypass all but the edges of the Van Allen belts.
This is not to dispute that passage through the Van Allen belts would be dangerous. But NASA conducted a series of experiments designed to investigate the nature of the Van Allen belts, culminating in the repeated traversal of the Southern Atlantic Magnetic Anomaly (an intense, low-hanging patch of Van Allen belt) by the Gemini 10 astronauts.” www.thekeyboard.org.uk/Va...0belts.htm
Deployment and Performance
The first U.S. flag on the moon was deployed by Neil Armstrong and Edwin "Buzz" Aldrin during their historic EVA on 20 July 1969 (at 4 days, 14 hours and 9 minutes mission-elapsed time). The flag was seen worldwide on live television (Fig. 6). At their technical crew debriefing, Armstrong and Aldrin reported few problems with the deployment. They had trouble extending the horizontal telescoping rod and could not pull it all the way out. This gave the flag a bit of a "ripple effect," and later crews intentionally left the rod partially retracted. The Apollo 11 astronauts also noted that they could drive the lower portion of the pole only about 6 to 9 inches into the surface. It is uncertain if the flag remained standing or was blown over by the engine blast when the ascent module took off. www.jsc.nasa.gov/history/flag/flag.htm
Some argue NASA forgot to put a blast crater from Apollo II. I have never been to the moon, but I do know there is no atmosphere and barely any gravity, so there is no OXYGEN and Newton’s law of gravity does not apply to the moon. The thrust on the lunar vehicle should be considerably different than, for example, a space shuttle on lift off from the earth. Very little gravity, I will assume you can slow down well before you reach the surface of the moon. For example, a freight train slows down miles in advance before the train comes to a complete stop. Thus, it makes sense for Apollo II to slow down well in advance. In addition, there were 10 Apollo trips before landing on the surface of the moon. Hence, it was not one trip to the moon or bust. Thus, with all the work in preparing for the lunar landing, Apollo II was a robust tip to the Sea of Tranquility. The time and effort put towards a lunar landing, could not possibly, in my opinion, be staged.
"When someone driving a car pulls into a parking spot, do they do it at 100 kilometers per hour? Of course not. They slow down first, easing off the accelerator. The astronauts did the same thing. Sure, the rocket on the lander was capable of 10,000 pounds of thrust, but they had a throttle. They fired the rocket hard to deorbit and slow enough to land on the Moon, but they didn't need to thrust that hard as they approached the lunar surface; they throttled down to about 3000 pounds of thrust.
Now here comes a little bit of math: the engine nozzle was about 54 inches across (from the Encyclopaedia Astronautica), which means it had an area of 2300 square inches. That in turn means that the thrust generated a pressure of only about 1.5 pounds per square inch! That's not a lot of pressure. Moreover, in a vacuum, the exhaust from a rocket spreads out very rapidly. On Earth, the air in our atmosphere constrains the thrust of a rocket into a narrow column, which is why you get long flames and columns of smoke from the back of a rocket. In a vacuum, no air means the exhaust spreads out even more, lowering the pressure. That's why there's no blast crater! Three thousand pounds of thrust sounds like a lot, but it was so spread out it was actually rather gentle".
"What about the lunar dust? On the descent of Apollo II, all the dust should have been blown away. Not necessarily, remember out natural laws do not apply on the lunar surface.
Once again, the weird alien environment of the Moon comes to play. Imagine taking a bag of flour and dumping it onto your kitchen floor (kids: ask your folks first!). Now bend over the pile, take a deep breath, and blow into it as hard as you can. Poof! Flour goes everywhere. Why? Because the momentum of your breath goes into the flour, which makes it move. But note that the flour goes up, and sideways, and aloft into the air. If you blow hard enough, you might see little curlicues of air lifting the flour farther than your breath alone could have, and doing so to dust well outside of where your breath actually blew.
That's the heart of this problem. We are used to air helping us blow things around. The air itself is displaced by your breath, which pushed on more air, and so on. On the Earth, your breath might blow flour that was dozens of centimeters away, even though your actual breath didn't reach that far. On the Moon, there is no air. The only dust that gets blown around by the exhaust of the rocket (which, remember, isn't nearly as strong as the HBs claim) is the dust physically touched by the exhaust, or dust hit by other bits of flying dust. In the end, only the dust directly under or a bit around the rocket was blown out by the exhaust. The rest was left where it was. Ironically, the dust around the landing site was probably a bit thicker than before, since the dust blown out would have piled up there.
I can't resist: another Hoax Believer argument bites the dust". www.badastronomy.com/bad/...tml#crater
There is more to debate, but remember the launch of Explorer I helped discover the van Allen belts and how many years it took to get into orbit. We sent animals, to discover the effects of radiation, and nuclear physics was not new. We had the technology to have a protective shield around the Apollo crafts, and smart enough not to sent the spacecraft through the thickest part of the van Allen belts. For the conspiracy theorist,
“Extordinary claims require extordinary evidence” Carl Sagan
Veilhawk Registered Member
Posts: 3
(10/19/05 15:00) Reply
*
Quote:“As society what have we gained by the space age?” Ultimately everyone enjoys Direct TV or some spin off of Direct TV, etc. We have learned about our galaxy and realize there are thousands of galaxies besides our own Milky Way.
“Great advances are being made in the medical field. These developments are important to the well being of life on Earth. It is ironic, however, that this great research is being made in outer space. Amazingly, the results of the research are helping to address medical issues facing human beings. Much of the research done in outer space has a direct connection to many health problems people face everyday on earth. The medical research being done now in space is improving the health of humans on Earth” Written by: Janee' Avent.
The quote I have cited is a small example of what technology has accomplished from space. All though, some suggest the “MOON LANDING WAS A HOAX”, I do not believe that the case.
We have gained absolutely nothing by going into space. No great advances are being made in the medical field either because, how many sick people are there today? How many doctors?
Why do they have to keep re inventing new antibiotics every single year that are stronger and stronger than the ones before?
So much for advances in medicine and science. The more drugs, the more the sick. People only get sick when they go against the laws of nature. Science doens't recognize this... let me give an example.
It's obvious food is what you eat to replenish energy - which in other words means healing the damage done to yourself throughout the day. Ask a doctor this and he'll say sure. Now when you get sick and ask a doctor if food would do the same for getting you well, he'd say no. you'd need drugs.
Why?
Because the doctor is a hypocrite. He'll admit food is what you need to get well, and that things like chicken soup and ginger ale and crackers are good for you when you're sick... but the drugs are what get you well. They hold two opinions contradicting themselves. They also go through about a 2 hour crash course on nutrition in college, and even those who do go through nutrition courses for a bunch of credits - they're government controlled and still cling to their indoctrination with drugs. Therefor we should all live on drugs because drugs get us so well, yet those who take drugs are never well. They're fat, bald, and sick. They don't exercise, they smell, they eat garbage, etc.
Medicince nor science recognizes that. All they about care is keeping their jobs where they get paid a lot of money from you for 5 minutes of your time, and $500 for some pills to make you forget the problem. So people can continue in their stupidity and just take the pill instead of solving the problem in the first place.
-------
Land of the Slave, and home of the Knave.
It is natural for man to deal in the illusions of hope; but as for me, I want to know the worst; the truth, and prepare for it
-Samuel Adams
“We have gained absolutely nothing by going into space. No great advances are being made in the medical field either because, how many sick people are there today? How many doctors?”
I disagree with your rhetoric. We do benefit from the space age through industry, and medical research. Your argument about doctors is a different debate. I agree with your points about doctors being hypocrites and are only concerned with the “all mighty dollar.”
Here are some examples that you can find on: www.fas.org/news/usa/2000/usa-001012.htm
3-D Biotechnology Developed for Space Shuttle medical research, a rotating cell-culture device simulates the microgravity of space. This allows researchers to grow cells in three dimensions. The device may one day help researchers find cures for dangerous infectious diseases and offer alternatives to patients who need organ transplant surgery.
Artificial Heart Technology used in Space Shuttle fuel pumps led to the development of a miniaturized ventricular-assist pump by NASA and renowned heart surgeon Dr. Michael DeBakey. The tiny pump, a mere two inches long, one inch in diameter, and weighing less than four ounces, is currently undergoing clinical trials in Europe, where it has been successfully implanted into more than 20 people.
Blood Serum Research
An astronaut's body, once free of gravity's pull, experiences a redistribution of body fluids that can lead to a decrease in the number of red blood cells and produce a form of space anemia. Monitoring and evaluating blood serum was required to understand these phenomena. However, existing blood-analysis technology required the use of a centrifugation technology that was not practical in space. NASA developed new technologies for the collection and real-time analysis of blood as well as other bodily fluids without the need for centrifugation.
Artificial Heart
Technology used in Space Shuttle fuel pumps led to the development of a miniaturized ventricular-assist pump by NASA and renowned heart surgeon Dr. Michael DeBakey. The tiny pump, a mere two inches long, one inch in diameter, and weighing less than four ounces, is currently undergoing clinical trials in Europe, where it has been successfully implanted into more than 20 people.
Blood Serum Research
An astronaut's body, once free of gravity's pull, experiences a redistribution of body fluids that can lead to a decrease in the number of red blood cells and produce a form of space anemia. Monitoring and evaluating blood serum was required to understand these phenomena. However, existing blood-analysis technology required the use of a centrifugation technology that was not practical in space. NASA developed new technologies for the collection and real-time analysis of blood as well as other bodily fluids without the need for centrifugation.
Artificial Limbs
Responding to a request from the orthopedic-appliance industry, NASA recommended that the foam insulation used to protect the Shuttle's external tank replace the heavy, fragile plaster used to produce master molds for prosthetics. The new material is light, virtually indestructible, and easy to ship and store.
Lifesaving Light
Special lighting technology developed for plant-growth experiments on Space Shuttle missions is now used to treat brain tumors in children. Doctors at the Medical College of Wisconsin in Milwaukee use light-emitting diodes in a treatment called photodynamic therapy, a form of chemotherapy, to kill cancerous tumors. Taking Temperatures Infrared sensors developed to remotely measure the temperature of distant stars and planets for the Space Shuttle program led to the development of the hand-held optical sensor thermometer. Placed inside the ear canal, the thermometer provides an accurate reading in two seconds or less.
Better Balance
Devices built to measure the equilibrium of Space Shuttle astronauts when they return from space are now widely used by major medical centers to diagnose and treat patients suffering head injury, stroke, chronic dizziness and disorders of the central nervous system. Faster Diagnostics NASA technology was used to create a compact laboratory instrument for hospitals and doctor offices. This device quickly analyzes blood, accomplishing in 30 seconds what once took 20 minutes with conventional equipment. Land Mine Removal The same rocket fuel that helps launch the Space Shuttle is now being used to save lives -- by destroying land mines. A flare device, using leftover fuel donated by NASA, is placed next to the uncovered land mine and is ignited from a safe distance using a battery-triggered electric match. The explosive burns away, disabling the mine and rendering it harmless.
Tracking Vehicles on Earth
Tracking information originally used for Space Shuttle missions now helps track vehicles here on the ground. This commercial spin-off allows vehicles to transmit a signal back to a home base. Many cities today use the software to track and reassign emergency and public works vehicles. The technology also is used by vehicle fleet operations, such as taxis, armored cars and vehicles carrying hazardous cargo. Rescue 911 Rescue squads have a new extrication tool to help remove accident victims from wrecked vehicles. The hand-held device requires no auxiliary power systems or cumbersome hoses and is 70 percent cheaper than previous rescue equipment. The cutter uses a miniature version of the explosive charges that separate devices on the Space Shuttle. Byte Out of Crime Image-processing technology used to analyze Space Shuttle launch videos and to study meteorological images also helps law enforcement agencies improve crime-solving videos. The technology removes defects due to image jitter, image rotation and image zoom in video sequences. The technology also may be useful for medical imaging, scientific applications and home video.
Gas Gauges
A gas leak-detection system, originally developed to monitor the Shuttle's hydrogen propulsion system, is now being used by the Ford Motor Company in the production of a natural gas-powered car. Product Labeling NASA needs to identify, track, and keep records on each of the thousands of heat-shield tiles on the Space Shuttle. This required a labeling system that could be put on ceramic material and withstand the rigors of space travel to be readable after a flight. NASA developed high data-density, two-dimensional, machine-readable symbol technology used to mark individual tiles. This novel method of labeling products with invisible and virtually indestructible markings can be used on electronic parts, pharmaceuticals and livestock -- in fact on just about anything. Keep Cool Under Fire Materials from the Space Shuttle thermal protection system are used on NASCAR racing cars to protect drivers from the extreme heat generated by the engines. This same material is also used to protect firefighters. Fire Resistant Foam A unique foam developed for Space Shuttle thermal insulation and packing is now being used as thermal and acoustical insulation in aerospace, marine and industrial products. Since it's also fire resistant, it's being used as well for fire barriers, packaging and other applications requiring either high-temperature or very low-temperature insulation in critical environments. For example, use of these foam products by airframe manufacturers such as Boeing, Lockheed-Martin, and Airbus provides major weight savings, while retaining good thermal and acoustical properties in the various products.
Fire Sighting
A sensitive, gas infrared camera, used by NASA observers to monitor the blazing plumes from the Space Shuttle's solid rocket boosters is also capable of scanning for fires. Firefighters use this hand-held camera to pinpoint the hotspots of wildfires that rage out of control.
Jeweler's Gem
Jewelers no longer have to worry about inhaling dangerous asbestos fibers from the blocks they use as soldering bases. Space Shuttle heat-shield tiles offer jewelers a safer soldering base with temperature resistance far beyond the 1,400 degrees Fahrenheit generated by the jeweler's torch.
Jet Stripping
NASA developed a tool that uses powerful jet streams of water to strip paint and primer from the Space Shuttle's solid rocket boosters. A commercial version of this water jet is now used to treat turbine-engine components, airframe components, large aerospace hardware, ships and other mechanical devices, using only pure water. No hazardous chemicals are needed.
Quick Fit Fasteners
Fastening items in space is a difficult task. A Virginia company developed a fastener that can be pushed on, rather than turned. These quick-connect fasteners are flexible and strong, and have been used by NASA astronauts since 1989. The product is now in use by firefighters and nuclear power-plant repair technicians, and has other commercial applications.
Computer Joysticks
Computer games can now be played with all the precision and sensitivity needed for a safe and soft Space Shuttle touchdown. A game-controlling joystick for personal computer-based entertainment systems was modeled after controls used in shuttle simulators. Astronauts used the joystick to practice runway landings and orbit maneuvering.
Jet Stripping NASA developed a tool that uses powerful jet streams of water to strip paint and primer from the Space Shuttle's solid rocket boosters. A commercial version of this water jet is now used to treat turbine-engine components, airframe components, large aerospace hardware, ships and other mechanical devices, using only pure water. No hazardous chemicals are neede
Toys for Tots
Already successful with its Nerf toy products, Hasbro, Inc. wanted to design a toy glider that a child could fly. Benefiting from NASA wind-tunnel and aerodynamic expertise used in the Space Shuttle program, Hasbro improved the flying distances and loop-to-loop stunts of its toy gliders.
Slick Products
A lubricant used on the transporter that carries a Space Shuttle to the launch pad has resulted in a commercial penetrating-spray lube, which is used for rust prevention and loosening corroded nuts. It's also a cleaner and lubricant for guns and fishing reels, and can be used to reduce engine friction.
Do we take these achievements for granted? Maybe some, but I sure the hell don’t. These are small examples. Please explain to me how we have not gained by our experiences in space!
Re: The Moon
I'd expect something to come from the 350 billion dollars that the space program recieved for faking the moon landing.
Consider these simple points:
Why did the space program seemingly end in 1972 without a single attempt to go back to the moon? Surely the Soviets would have tried to go, the British, the Chinese, or any number of other countries. Why haven't they? Why is the only footage that we have of the moon from 1969? Why hasn't NASA sent probes back in order to explore the surface of the moon? We've got rovers on Mars, why not on the moon? Do they not want us to see the actual surface of the moon? Would there be descrepancies on the actual surface of the moon that would make the 1969 hoax obvious? Why the silence on the issue by the astronauts involved? Are they afraid to call attention to it? Almost every 80's movie has us not only going back to the moon, but living on it. Here we are in 2005 living vicariously through the 1969 moon landing, for we don't have a landing of our own; from our generation? Doesn't it seem strange that in 2005 NASA doesn't even seriously consider going back to the moon? Bush may give it lip service, but is it even a big deal in 2005? We've been there and done that right?
Quote:By contrast, the still photos were stunning. Yet that's just the problem. The astronauts took thousands of pictures, each one perfectly exposed and sharply focused. Not one was badly composed or even blurred.
As Rene points out, that's not all: The cameras had no white meters or view ponders. So the astronauts achieved this feet without being able to see what they were doing. There film stock was unaffected by the intense peaks and powerful cosmic radiation on the Moon, conditions that should have made it useless. They managed to adjust their cameras, change film and swap filters in pressurized suits. It should have been almost impossible with the gloves on their fingers.
Award winning British photographer David Persey is convinced the pictures are fake. His astonishing findings are explained alongside the pictures on these pages, but the basic points are as follows: The shadows could only have been created with multiple light sources and,in particular, powerful spotlights. But the only light source on the Moon was the sun.
The American flag and the words "United States" are always Brightly lit, even when everything around is in shadow. Not one still picture matches the film footage, yet NASA claims both were shot at the same time.
Quote:The questions don't stop there. Outer space is awash with deadly radiation that emanates from solar flares firing out from the sun. Standard astronauts orbiting earth in near space, like those who recently fixed the Hubble telescope, are protected by the earth's Van Allen belt. But the Moon is to 240,000 miles distant, way outside this safe band. And, during the Apollo flights, astronomical data shows there were no less than 1,485 such flares.
John Mauldin, a physicist who works for NASA, once said shielding at least two meters thick would be needed. Yet the walls of the Lunar Landers which took astronauts from the spaceship to the moons surface were, said NASA, about the thickness of heavy duty aluminum foil.
How could that stop this deadly radiation? And if the astronauts were protected by their space suits, why didn't rescue workers use such protective gear at the Chernobyl meltdown, which released only a fraction of the dose astronauts would encounter? Not one Apollo astronaut ever contracted cancer - not even the Apollo 16 crew who were on their way to the Moon when a big flare started. "They should have been fried", says Rene.
Quote:Furthermore, every Apollo mission before number 11 (the first to the Moon) was plagued with around 20,000 defects a-piece. Yet, with the exception of Apollo 13, NASA claims there wasn't one major technical problem on any of their Moon missions. Just one effect could have blown the whole thing. "The odds against these are so unlikely that God must have been the co-pilot," says Rene.
Quote:Several years after NASA claimed its first Moon landing, Buzz Aldrin "the second man on the Moon" was asked at a banquet what it felt like to step on to the lunar surface. Aldrin staggered to his feet and left the room crying uncontrollably. It would not be the last time he did this. "It strikes me he's suffering from trying to live out a very big lie," says Rene. Aldrin may also fear for his life.
Virgil Grissom, a NASA astronaut who baited the Apollo program, was due to pilot Apollo 1 as part of the landings build up. In January 1967, he hung a lemon on his Apollo capsule (in the US, unroadworthy cars are called lemons) and told his wife Betty: "If there is ever a serious accident in the space program, it's likely to be me."
Nobody knows what fuelled his fears, but by the end of the month he and his two co-pilots were dead, burnt to death during a test run when their capsule, pumped full of high pressure pure oxygen, exploded.
Scientists couldn't believe NASA's carelessness - even a chemistry students in high school know high pressure oxygen is extremely explosive. In fact, before the first manned Apollo fight even cleared the launch pad, a total of 11 would be astronauts were dead. Apart from the three who were incinerated, seven died in plane crashes and one in a car smash. Now this is
a spectacular accident rate.
"One wonders if these 'accidents' weren't NASA's way of correcting mistakes," says Rene. "Of saying that some of these men didn't have the sort of 'right stuff' they were looking."
Quote:NASA wont respond to any of these claims, their press office will only say that the Moon landings happened and the pictures are real. But a NASA public affairs officer called Julian Scheer once delighted 200 guests at a private party with footage of astronauts apparently on a landscape. It had been made on a mission film set and was identical to what NASA claimed was they real lunar landscape. "The purpose of this film," Scheer told the enthralled group, "is to indicate that you really can fake things on the ground, almost to the point of deception." He then invited his audience to "Come to your own decision about whether or not man actually did walk on the Moon."
Quote:A sudden attack of honesty? You bet, says Rene, who claims the only real thing about the Apollo missions were the lift offs. "The astronauts simply have to be on board," he says, "in case the rocket exploded. It was the easiest way to ensure NASA wasn't left with three astronauts who ought to be dead." he claims, adding that they came down a day or so later, out of the
public eye (global surveillance wasn't what it is now) and into the safe hands of NASA officials, who whisked them off to prepare for the big day a week later.
Quote:9 SPACE ODDITIES:
1. Apollo 14 astronaut Allen Shepard played golf on the Moon. In front of a worldwide TV audience, Mission Control teased him about slicing the ball to the right. Yet a slice is caused by uneven air flow over the ball. The Moon has no atmosphere and no air.
2. A camera panned upwards to catch Apollo 16's Lunar Landerlifting off the Moon. Who did the filming?
3. One NASA picture from Apollo 11 is looking up at Neil Armstrong about to take his giant step for mankind. The photographer must have been lying on the planet surface. If Armstrong was the first man on the Moon, then who took the shot?
4. The pressure inside a space suit was greater than inside a football. The astronauts should have been puffed out like the Michelin Man, but were seen freely bending their joints.
5. The Moon landings took place during the Cold War. Why didn't America make a signal on the moon that could be seen from earth? The PR would have been phenomenal and it could have been easily done with magnesium flares.
6. Text from pictures in the article said that only two men walked on the Moon during the Apollo 12 mission. Yet the astronaut reflected in the visor has no camera. Who took the shot?
7. The flags shadow goes behind the rock so doesn't match the dark line in the foreground, which looks like a line cord. So the shadow to the lower right of the spaceman must be the flag. Where is his shadow? And why is the flag fluttering if there is no air or wind on the moon?
8. How can the flag be brightly lit when its side is to the light? And where, in all of these shots, are the stars?
9. The Lander weighed 17 tons yet the astronauts feet seem to have made a bigger dent in the dust. The powerful booster rocket at the base of the Lunar Lander was fired to slow descent to the moons service. Yet it has left no traces of blasting on the dust underneath. It should have created a small crater, yet the booster looks like it's never been fired.
Quote:I was reading about the supposed moon hoaxs (I'm not yet sure that they
were faked) on your web site when I came across an excellent point in your
arguments. You said that during the videos of the lunar landings the astronauts
replied instantly to Mission Control in Houston. Yet light, radio waves, and
all energies of the electromagnetic spectrum travel at roughly 186,000 miles
per second, meaning the response time of the astronauts to comments made
by Mission Control should have been a little over two seconds since the
moon is over 200,000 miles from the Earth. Excellent point! I was stumped
here for a minute, until I considered this: we're only hearing the astronauts
transmission. Okay, that explanation obviously needs an explanation. First
off, like you said, NASA didn't establish a direct link with televison stations
for the broadcast. Instead, the video we saw was actually filmed as it
happened on the huge television screen in Mission Control, which accounts
for the poor quality of the film. What does this mean? It means that the
video and audio in the broadcasts of the Apollo missions were both time
delayed. You didn't hear people speaking inside Mission Control, you heard
their transmission to the astronauts. The audio we heard from Mission Control
was actually several seconds old. In other words, the landings transmitted
back to Earth video and audio feed of their landing, audio including messages
from Mission Control that the astronauts had just received. To make this
easier to picture, image it this way: Mission Control transmitts a message to
Apollo 11 on the lunar surface saying Neil and Buzz can get out of the LM
and walk around (with suits on, of course.) This message travels just over a
second to the moon, where Neil and Buzz receive it and reply "Finaly!" This
message is transmitted all the way back to Earth, where it is received and
broadcast on the huge monitor in Mission Control. So you see, Mission
Control spoke first and then the astronauts replied, only the audio transmitted
to us contained both messages with no time lapse in between. Confused?
Don't worry, you'll get it soon. I've looked over the arguments used by
believers of a moon landing hoax and they are rather solid and rooted fairly
well in logic, so I can safely assume you're all pretty smart guys, so this
shouldn't be to hard for you to understand. I would appreciate it if you
would respond to this email with your thoughts on my explanation of this
lunar quandary that is now solved (hopefully.)
Quote:The sounds
The major point which has helped convince me that the moon landing was faked was the fact that when the control room asked a question to the Astronoughts the replies were instant with no delays. This seems strange as even with technology in the 1990's there is a delay from satellite links from the UK to the US. There is about a 0.7 second delay from London to California so how is it possible for instant replies from the Moon ?
There is also evidence that when people go into space that there voice goes tense although the Astronaughts voices have been analyzed and found to be normal, and 7/10 people said it sounded like someone reading from a script.
When Houston are talking to the module you should not be able to hear the responses at least when the module is landing and the infamous "eagle has landed" quote, this is due to the noise that should have been created by the rocket motor which generates several hundred thousand pounds of thrust 20 ft below the astronaughts. The noise would have completely drowned
the vocals out.
Facts about the Moon
An average days temperature on the moon ranges from 260° F to 280° F, too for film to survive. At those temperatures, film crinkles up into a ball.
About 20 miles about the Earth, there is a radiation belt named the Van Allen belt. No human can get through this belt, If you try than you get hit with 300+ rads of radiation. Unless they are surrounded on each side by 4 feet on lead.
There are millions of micro-metors traveling at speeds up to 6000 MPH, which would tear the ship to pieces.
If you look at the pictures/video of people on the moon, you will never see more than 3 stars.
When the LEM set down on the Lunar surface, it gave out 3000 lb. worth of thrust. This would have created a massive hole underneath the Lunar Module, but in pictures of the Lunar Module, the ground underneath is untouched.
www.givemeliberty.50megs.com/
---------
President Andrew Jackson stated in reference to the bankers at the state of his administration: "You are a den of vipers and thieves. I intend to rout you out, and by the Eternal God, I will rout you out."
"Our Founding Fathers believed that it was self-evident that the God of Nature is the sovereign of the universe and everything in it (as well as mankind) and that He had endowed all mankind with "certain unalienable rights" making them self-directing sovereigns, which means that any governments instituted among men derive their just powers (only) from the consent of the governed, who are the source of earthly power and authority. Hence any attempt to exercise any powers NOT conveyed by the People is unjust and unauthorized, and any act done pursuant to such usurpation of power is void."
"If one understands that socialism is not a share-the-wealth program, but is in reality a method to consolidate and control the wealth, then the seeming paradox of super-rich men promoting socialism becomes no paradox at all. Instead, it becomes logical, even the perfect tool of power-seeking megalomaniacs. Communism or more accurately, socialism, is not a movement of the downtrodden masses, but of the economic elite." Gary Allen, Author
Veilhawk Registered Member
Posts: 4
(10/22/05 12:03) Reply
*
Quote:I disagree with your rhetoric. We do benefit from the space age through industry, and medical research. Your argument about doctors is a different debate. I agree with your points about doctors being hypocrites and are only concerned with the “all mighty dollar.”
That's fine with me if you disagree. But none of those things you posted have helped anyone. Especially all the medical ones. Like organ transplants, or growing organs, etc.
A little searching into history and reasoning and it's easy to see you only get sick when you do stuff you shouldn't. If I swallowed some gasoline: I deserve to get sick. If I drink some alcohol; I get buzzed. Too much and I get drunk. And if I get drunk every day for a long time the effects build on me. These people with sick organs can thank their parents and/or themselves because they did not eat and live the way they should. Doctors can make all the pills and procedures they want but it will never help anyone because they do not deal with problems: Instead of teaching the person how to dissolve their kidney stones they say 'oh lets cut it out.'
Sounds fun!
Did you know the mayans knew brain surgery? Or how about the egyptians knew how to drill teeth and fill them with metals?
All more than 2000 years ago. And each of these cultures existed at around the same time, had similar technologies, ritual sacrifices of people and babies, and also worshipped serpent gods. Funny why it's all resurrected again today... Coincidence?
No way. Because the same powers that controlled people then do the same today in the same way. The fact is that us people have not made the earth, or each other... So we should not follow the laws that other men state. Rather the laws that god or nature shows us.
There is a lot of truth in the way ancient texts speak about abominations and everything else. Take a look at genetic engineering. In the book of 1 Enoch it mentions these same things happening in noah's days. And that it would happen again in the future (now).
smhill1120 Registered Member
Posts: 4
(10/25/05 18:04) Reply
Re: The Moon
ok, I believe we could have landed on the moon or we might not of.
Edited by: smhill1120 at: 1/23/08 15:22
Re: The Moon
"The self taught man seldom knows anything accurately, and he does not know a tenth as much as he could have known if he had worked under teachers, and besides, he brags, and is the means of fooling other thoughtless people into going and doing as he himself has done." - Mark Twain
Did NASA have the technology to not only land on the moon, and survive the heat? At lunar noon the surface of the moon will reach over 250 degrees and at the coldest time the surface will be below 200 degrees.
Consider these facts: The lunar "day" is about two weeks long. None of the Apollo astronauts were ever on the moon during the lunar noon. In addition, to this fact. The passengers who ride on the International Space Station at this very moment also face the full thermal heating that results from unfiltered solar flux. Space technology has always been designed with the thermal characteristics of space in mind.
Other than the Van Allen belts, the space between the earth and the moon is pretty quiet as far as radiation is concerned. Beyond the protective Van Allen Belts and earth’s atmosphere, concentrated deadly solar eruptions of nasty particles do occasionally occur, but not on a regular basis. Such radiation is not a constant flux, although the peak periods of “solar eruptions” can be potentially deadly. This issue was addressed and the hazards of potential solar “eruptions” were known to the astronauts and all of NASA. Solar scientists observed the sun closely prior to each flight to look for brewing magnetic disturbances on the solar “surface”. Even today, solar scientists continuously monitor the sun for signs of global communications disrupting solar eruptions. Such eruptions are far from routine, daily hazards to our communications satellites. Think about this: How many times a year do you see in the news an item about solar flares knocking out radio communications?
Solar flare monitoring sites located at Carnarvon & Culgoora, Australia,---the Canary Islands---and Boulder, CO USA continuously surveyed the sun for flare activity during the Apollo lunar missions. Solar flares do not occur without a preceding and observable "build up". This solar activity was monitored for the same reason that Doppler radar is used on earth to warn aircraft pilots about dangerous weather in their flight path. Apollo’s did not launch into "solar storms". The solar system is also a very large area and these solar eruptions do not emanate from the entire solar surface in one, monumental blast. They are kind of like shotgun blasts. A solar eruption has to occur with fairly precise aiming in order to hit a target as small as the earth-moon system.
Remember the un-manned EXPLORER missions that landed on the moon and surveyed the moon…then the Gemini missions preparing for the Apollo mission?
Project Gemini was a transitional step between the pioneering Mercury Program and the actual landing a man on the moon. Its success was critical to achieving the goal of reaching the Moon and was not without its problems and difficulties. The main objectives of the ten Gemini missions spanning a period of 20 months from 1965 to 1966, were to learn how to "fly" a spacecraft by 1) maneuvering it in orbit and by 2) rendezvousing and docking with other vehicles, which were essential skills for the later Apollo missions. One of these missions, Gemini VIII, nearly killed the man who would go on to be the first person to walk on the moon, Neil Armstrong.
What about the waving flag?
The extent of the accusers historical ignorance is revealed here. The NASA folks did not want the flag to hang limp so a wire stiffener was added to give the appearance of an unfurled flag in a breeze. This fact was published in numerous press releases and news stories of the day. An examination of the video never shows the flag flapping in any manner other than that inflicted during the mechanical action of planting it in the highly resistant lunar surface. Also, if “intense air-conditioning used to cool the astronauts” then why don’t we see the dusty surface soil bowing and swirling about in the video? You sure can see this powdery lunar surface material fly up when it is kicked up into fanlike patterns by Neil and Buzz’s lunar boots. It slowly falls back to the lunar surface in the 1/6 G gravity field.
During a C-SPAN interview, Buzz Aldrin categorically dismissed Bart and his fellow conspiracy proponents as profit-seekers who are merely taking advantage of the opportunity to exploit gullible people. Buzz does resent strange people with bizarre accusations who come to his door with video cameras rolling. Wouldn't you?
The Apollo conspiracy hoax hucksters have experienced some financial and marketing success because that are selling a "hoax" product that our schools and media have not adequately prepared the members of the general pubic to evaluate. Spaceflight is not an everyday area of expertise for most people. Spaceflight is a topic that requires some extensive preparation and intellectual effort to adequately understand. “Jim McDade”
How come there is no blast crater on the surface of the moon? Consider this, most helicopters that you will ever see have more thrust that the Lunar Module descent engine used during the final landing phase. Why don't they blast craters in the ground when they land in the desert or on a sandy beach?
The government spent billions of dollars during this period and we gained nothing but a lunar hoax? Lets suggest this to be true, and forget about the lunar landing. Maybe all the money was shuffled to Stealth Technology. The Stealth fighter did not magically appear in the ‘80’s. The Nazis were experimenting with ‘flying wing” technology during WWII.
STEALTH TECHNOLOGY
Without knowing it at the time, Krothapalli says he developed some of the data that eventually produced the F-117´s Stealth bomber’s rectangular exhaust system. It was during his doctoral student days at Stanford, where he worked a research project funded by NASA and the Air Force. Only years later did he learn of his contribution to the F-117 project, he said.
The plane’s sharply angled features included a jet exhaust nozzle that exhibited a striking departure from conventional designs--instead of being round, it was rectangular.
Why do the space suits of yesterday resemble today? If we question technology from the 60’s, why are we using the same principals in protecting the Astronauts of today?
SPACE SUITS
The suit systems must provide an artificial atmosphere (100-percent oxygen for breathing and for pressurization to 3.7 psi), adequate mobility (lunar gravity is one-sixth that of earth), micrometeorite and visual protective systems, and the ability to operate on the lunar surface for periods of 3 hours. Design of the Apollo spacecraft and suits will permit the crew to operateÄwith certain restraints in a decompressed cabin for periods as long as 115 hours.
Insulation must protect the astronaut from temperatures varying from 250 degrees F above (lunar day) to 250 degrees below zero (lunar night). Solar heat flux is calculated at 10,000 Btu per hour. Super insulation must limit heat leak into the suit to approximately 250 Btu per hour during lunar day and heat out to 350 Btu per hour during lunar night.
The astronauts must be protected from meteoroid particles traveling at speeds up to 64,000 miles per hour and from particles ejected by the meteoroid striking the lunar surface. During the lunar day, the crewmen's faces must be protected from solar ultraviolet, infrared, and visible light radiation.
The complete space suit is called the pressure garment assembly. It is composed of a number of items assembled into two configurations: extravehicular (for outside the spacecraft) and intravehicular. The addition of the backpack to the extravehicular space suit makes up the extravehicular mobility unit. The backpack (called the portable life support system) supplies oxygen, electrical power, communications, and liquid cooling.
The intravehicular space suit consists of: fecal containment subsystem, constant wear garment, biomedical belt, urine collection transfer assembly, torso limb suit, integrated thermal micrometeoroid garment, pressure helmet, pressure glove, and communications carrier.
In the extravehicular configuration, the constant wear garment is replaced by the liquid-cooling garment and four items are added to the intravehicular suit: extravehicular visor, extravehicular glove, lunar overshoe, and a cover which fits over umbilical connections on the front of the suit. Copyright 1997-2005 by John Duncan
Some will question a former NASA employee Julian Scheer. People can put all the political spin on comments made by Scheer suggesting that NASA faked the moon landing. However, here a brief background of Scheer.
Julian Scheer
Among his most notable accomplishments, Scheer was instrumental in helping propel the U.S. space program into the public consciousness in the 1960s and early 1970s. He joined the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) in 1962, working as assistant administrator for public affairs from 1962 to 1971. While at NASA, he arranged live television coverage of the first lunar landing in 1969 and helped convince astronauts to become ambassadors for the space program. He was awarded NASA’s highest award, the Distinguished Service Medal.
Julian Scheer, who ran NASA's Office of Public Affairs during the heady years of the race to the moon, died Saturday of a heart attack. He was 75.
When one of Nixon's staff insisted that the words "under God" be added, Scheer resisted, arguing that NASA didn't want to offend any particular religion.
Re: The Moon
Who stood more to gain from the moon hoax?? NASA or some guy with his own private website? I think that the answer is obvious considering the billions that NASA gets to give us pictures of Mars that look like my nephew playing with his new toy remote control buggy on Christmas day in Arizona. If you really want progress in the space program (and let's be fair, it has been pretty nonexistant since the 70's) then tell the government to quit screwing it up, and allow free enterprise to take over. Or is it that the government doesn't want success in the program because then it would expose their hoax? Hmmm.. I guess NASA just needs more money. Everybody, turn your pockets inside out!!
------------------
www.givemeliberty.50megs.com/
---------
President Andrew Jackson stated in reference to the bankers at the state of his administration: "You are a den of vipers and thieves. I intend to rout you out, and by the Eternal God, I will rout you out."
"Our Founding Fathers believed that it was self-evident that the God of Nature is the sovereign of the universe and everything in it (as well as mankind) and that He had endowed all mankind with "certain unalienable rights" making them self-directing sovereigns, which means that any governments instituted among men derive their just powers (only) from the consent of the governed, who are the source of earthly power and authority. Hence any attempt to exercise any powers NOT conveyed by the People is unjust and unauthorized, and any act done pursuant to such usurpation of power is void."
"If one understands that socialism is not a share-the-wealth program, but is in reality a method to consolidate and control the wealth, then the seeming paradox of super-rich men promoting socialism becomes no paradox at all. Instead, it becomes logical, even the perfect tool of power-seeking megalomaniacs. Communism or more accurately, socialism, is not a movement of the downtrodden masses, but of the economic elite." Gary Allen, Author
Email This To a Friend
Topic Commands
Click to receive email notification of replies 
Click to stop receiving email notification of replies 
