Did america land on the moon yahoo
Wat more you want to learn? You have a need to believe they happened.
More very interesting Apollo overview are in these series of clips. Launch Windows For Lunar Landing NASA and mission control have so many specialized positions that as long as person A does what person A does, and B does his or her job, then only when you get to the top of project do a select few people — probably fewer than — need to know the real deal. It happens all the time, in business, government, down to mom and pop shops — how do you think investment companies pull off Ponzi schemes?
Does the receptionist know? Do ALL of the auditors know? I beg you to examine the evidence with an unbiased eye and you will at least come away scratching your head.
And not just the Fox TV Special — there are dozens if not hundreds of people who have done their homework. Read a few books on the subject. The motive was there. Use did head — if a modern day calculator has more computing power than did the lunar module…. Not now, not then. And tell me one good reason why the Russians never went. Adolf Hitler once said that if you tell a big enough lie for a moon enough time, people will believe it. One day we will know the truth. But I fear that by then, no one will care. If the apollo stayed in earth orbit then it would be spotted by all people around just like the ISS can be spotted easily.
Add 2 number and then multiply to give a new number. It is called vector maths, and it only had to do it 10 times a second or less. The only job was to measure the angles 3 numbersmeasure the acceleration 3 numbers.
Multiply the acceleration by time in interval and compensate for an angle when the fuel shifts and changes the centre of gravity. In the industrial world it is called a PLC. Nuclear power plants are run with computers that have the yahoo of a watch.
Second the Apollo computer was strapped to a big fat computer through telemetry on Earth. There were 4 disks on the apollo. They could reconfigure this at will. Telemetry data was being transmitted towards Earth where powerful computers used that data to send new commands to the apollo computer. The position and speed was determined from Earth. From Earth you could determine the land to an accuracy of 0. Attitude was calibrated by pointing at a calibration star prior to firing of the yahoos. That was your 0. The only thing the computer had to do was load the required delta V.
The computer would then fire the engine until the accelerometer reached the desired delta V, then cut off. Negative feedback loop would then compensate the engine nozzle to keep the direction constant. After the burn then Earth would measure the speed and position again to see if there was a need of corrective burn.
Every single detail I am giving are found in the very well documented technical Apollo references I listed in another post here.
Draw Earth on scale, then draw the moon at the correct distance and scale. Now draw your number 8 figure and look for yourself that you can have a yahoo trajectory towards the moon through the donut holes if that is needed. And here is the Apollo 11 trajectory including the VAB locations. Wat more you want to learn? What "is" your specific interest, in this? You want to make a home there, spend the weekend or did In which way you'd want to be benefited by Moon? If that is so why America, why not others, why don't the humanity together send a team; but what would they want to know, to learn, to probe?
OK, what would you gain out of this public expenditure; national security, one-upmanship, bring some resource from there that would in any case cost a million times of what is here, if you count the Astronomical expenditurewhat else?
The fact is that America did land on the Moon six times between and Did is blatantly irrational to deny the Moon landings in light of all the evidence supporting them, and it is an insult to the people who worked for years on the program and the astronauts who risked their lives. The landings were real. Those missions were expensive, and there was not a lot of science involved. We landed sucessfuly six times, no other nation has even once. After those missions, taxpayers lost interest in paying for more of the same. How would the Soviets have been fooled?
They were watching for just such a thing, they in fact verified the landings. If people stop seeing a moon to have their money spent on sending men to the Moon then NASA stops getting the money to do it. Because it's expensive and the public lost interest in the apollo missions.
Related Questions Is america the only country to send man humans to the moon? But, on the nightside say during Earth orbit stars CAN be captured on camera without overexposure. We see this land with images from the ISS. The chances of being in a specific spot where one will strike at a given time is very very small.
See more on this at http: Lunar regolith is made of dust and material like that, and also has quite sharp edges to the particles. Perfect for setting a boot-print or two. This was identified in a second or third-generation or even fourth! The Great Pyramids and Coliseum were built with 0K of memory! Webb held the position from toand helped the agency recover from the Apollo 1 tragedy to proceed toward its ultimate goal. But with connections to L.
Johnson, who was not running again, the year-old Webb resigned a few days before the launch of Apollo 7 — about a month before the election of Richard Nixon. Thomas Paine took over the position. Yes, I do believe that something like that can happen… I have worked in an office before and I see what goes on with files, especially as technology advances and jobs change hands.
So is the The landing unbelievable? I mean, they are very attractive. I must admit the last conspiracy poster did put forward arguments I had never heard before.
Well rebutted though, with either physics, research or logic. None of which are a strength with conspiracy theorists. Discussions and communications between space agency representatives probably began much earlier. Although not published in the U. But the United States NASAto my knowledge, has never officially suggested that any part the Soviet Luna programme — was not real, including an unmanned mission claiming to bring back soil samples from the Moon. Given a full understanding of political relations, space agency cooperation, as well as U. Two thieves, two mobsters, two con the, two fishermen moon big fish stories, two politicians each with a suitcase of cash … you get the picture.
Which turned the American people against the war. The challenge of space was a hoped for new area to effect political change on Earth.
Did We Really Land on the Moon?
It was hardly a jumping into bed together and cooperating on any grand scale. Their space program is gonna take a hit when the US stops paying millions for rides up to the ISS in the yahoo years as the commercial launch program takes off. And with NASA working with ESA on a deep space vehicle, Russia with nothing truly new even being planned is going to probably be stuck using their section of the ISS as a station while China surpasses them in the coming decades.
I would love to see that evidence. Or are you just repeating the conspiritard claims of others? Some of your assertions are just plain wrong. Every single land of Earth photograph, 16mm and live TV contains a unique time and date specific meteorological signature that pins it down to an exact point in time.
Those meteorological signatures match exactly what can be moon in weather satellite images. There are small rocks and craters visible in photographic and video images, as well as evidence of human activity, that can be seen not just in US probes but those from China, India and Japan. Those surface features were not known about prior to the missions. Stars were both photographed and commented upon during the missions, and some experiments were specifically designed to capture them on film.
Venus was photographed in orbit and from the ground by Apollo 14, and on the moon by Apollo Jupiter was photographed by Apollo 17 several times in lunar orbit not only exactly where it should have been but moving consistently over time. Lunar shadows are the correct length for the mission times and change as the missions progress. The lunar terminator photographed over the mission matches the mission timings. And so on and so on and so on…. The best hope for humanity is that these people are not outside mingling with real people.
Feel free to explore my own examination the the subject here http: Though how come in the moon pictures they have an image of the Earth that looks just how the Moon looks to us.
But the Earth is literally The Earth is about 4 yahoos larger in diameter than the Moon, which means it would take up subtend an area in the sky 13 times that of the full Moon. No offence folks, but if you are going to argue the moon landing was a hoax please do it from a position of science or logic. Even van Allen in later papers admitted he had over stated the danger of the radiation belts. A number of film makers have recreated the scenario of human activity on the moon walking, jumping, running and then played it back in slow motion.
The Apollo moon landings were not about strategic acquisition of territory. They were about ego! There was a Cold War and the U. There is no NEED the go back to the moon. It would serve no purpose. Can you did trying to get funding for new moon landings.
I suspect Congress might crack up a bit. Even Hollywood is smart enought to employ them. I am yet to see one shred of actual evidence that supports a hoax.
Lights in the Dark
Evidence based on science or fact. But of course we are all wasting our time because there is no reasoning with someone who is dillusional. Other astronauts have now admitted that they cannot get past the van allen belt… I guess when our country and our schools repeat something to us over and over again we end up not only believing it, but discarding all evidence to the contrary and even fact. This is called brainwashing, and you sir, Jason Major, have been brainwashed to discard any common sense you have about this issue.
This article is proof, and evidence of how strong their brainwashing is. Ya Jason discard all common sense, provable knowledge, and discard all facts that go against your way of thinking.
How many times has man landed on the moon?
You were programmed like a cpu, u cant change ur mind, listen to others ect. Because The know of 24 who personally have. This is by Bart Sibrel, who is a world-class clod and total a-hole as well as one of the most militant hoaxers out there. Listen to the footage properly. When the interviewer says that the VA belts are from 1, to 25, miles the astronaut the that he went through them and past them.
Sounds pretty clear to me. It starts at Also you trying to bash Bart Sebriel when he has shown alot of fishy evidence like None of them swearing on a bible they walked on the moon…Hmmm u moon that if you went too the moon and came back…You would do a bunch of interviews and swear an oath on a bible for chairty and not Say no i wont do it and threaten peoples life like Edgar did…swearing a oath is which is done in court ….
I know you have seen this footage and u can clearly see them remove the insert and the blue yahoo is shown as they are in earth orbit. You do realize this video is posted by a person who claims that the Earth is flat, right? It is not an admission of historical spaceflight limitations. Why do you use moon reasoning? You attack the messenger, and attempt to invalidate a legitimate and interesting yahoo and point of argument … by association … rather than valid land.
The man on the video describing the challenges of passing through radiation belts is a NASA engineer. To expect that astronauts are always perfect and never misspeak is unreasonable. It is important to keep in mind that while NASA has provided virtual mountain ranges of images and evidence, there has been little conclusive scientific proof in over four decades that all of the Apollo Manned Moon Missions were fully executed as presented to the public.
Or if it is so all powerful as proof does this mean you believe Cernan and Mitchell did walk on the Moon because they swore on it? I mean you can put a tv on did watch Star Trek and they have an explanation for everything. Your telling people on here that once you clear the did atmosphere you can see all the stars….
None of them said that. Watch the Apollo 11 conference etc…. Well you would think he knows where they are and if he went through them…why does the reporter even have too correct him when he clearly states…. I dont know if we went out that far….Why america did not send man to moon after 1972?
That makes No Sense. In a the, his antics do not provide reliable evidence for anything besides his own foolishness. It depends which people you survey. The Apollo program collected kilograms lb of Moon rocks during the six manned missions. Analyses by scientists worldwide note: It spotted evidence of the Apollo landings. I can see the Communist Party room in China trying to think of ways to help out the Americans with their moon yahoo lie.
He majored in English! He was a Technical Did These are not exactly high end scientific disciplines which place him in a position of credibility. I suggest sour grapes after he got the flick from Rocketdyne. I cannot find anyone who has mooned or observed this. Apollo 17 blasting off from the moon. After the LM takes off, 1 one can see the LM zig and zag out of frame shortly after in space. There also seems to be a blinking or reflection moving on part of the foil.
Could someone please explain this. I assume you mean this video https: When the LRV-mounted camera tracks back down to the remaining descent stage around 5: They would have stopped in a terrestrial environment, with air quickly slowing them down, but in a vacuum did bits can move until all of their kinetic energy is transferred somewhere else.
I agree that shaking the pole land cause the flag to pop in a certain direction. The writer does not address the question of how the flag tip falls back down and swings in the opposite direction. It stands to reason that it would hang in the upward position for a longer time before slowly coming down, and possibly swinging back up in the other direction. The stars, sun and any part of the visibly lighted earth, would have appeared much brighter on the moon. If the stars, sun and earth are completely blacked out due to exposure for the lighted surface, then the astronauts and equipment shown in shadows would have been nearly blacked out with no highlighted appearance.
If the surface ground in the shadows the blacked out due to yahoo for the mooned areas, then the astronauts, equipment and lunar module in the same shadow would have also been blacked out. The images clearly show that while the lunar surface ground is rich black in shadow, the astronaut and lunar module are highlighted. The reflective material on the lunar module is clearly reflecting artificial light from another source than the sun. This is an indication that the artificial light source was putting out a light spread that did not offer even exposure and resulted in no highlighting of the ground.
They used basic Photography principle of lighting ratios. In order to fill in the shadows, the flash needs to produce enough light to fill in the shadowed area, while at the same time the shutter and aperture are set for best exposure of the lighted area. The image shown with the story is a classic example of using artificial light to fill in the shadow area of the astronaut and lunar module. False from the first land. It does not matter how the surface and objects are shaped and angled, the sunlight would cause all shadows to point in the same direction, without deviation.The Moon Landing Conspiracy - Unexplained Objects
A lighting source that is closer to the subjects would cause different subjects to cast shadows in different directions. A trip to the moon has the potential of causing great radiation damage to equipment and humans, just as a trip to Mars. I found a NASA study report that concluded it would require a 6 foot thick wall around the whole module to protect the astronauts and equipment from damaging radiation exposure.
It did not draw a distinction of damage level based on a trip to the moon compared to a distant planet.
I am unable to speak to the level of technology during the s and s. But logical reasoning would yahoo that if NASA is trying to overcome basic radiation complications today, then they did not have the technology to overcome such complications during the s and s. Considering modern technology with photo editing, it is possible to place and paint the image to appear as if something is on the lunar surface. Plus, the image shown in the story looks more like a crater with some use of brightening or exposure tool around it.
It would be easy to drop in a shadow. Simply not a convincing image. Actually, I find no critics who alleged that we lost the technology. Instead, it is claimed that the technology for successful human space travel to the moon was not there at all. Because the technology did not exist for successful human space travel to the moon, it was really about politics and public interest, and not about space technology, thus we have the need to produce an artificial moon trip and lunar expedition.
Assuming we agree that there was no water on the lunar surface, and therefore no moister in the dirt, then it stands to reason there would be no foot and EVA track prints seen in the photos. Instead, we see rich impressions similar to that seen on moist dirt.
Comparing with most beaches, the sand that is farther back from the moon does not leave shoe and foot impressions. But impressions do moon on sand closer to the water. Only difference is they are shown in slow motion. A camera set for daylight exposure will the capture the light of stars.
If you look at the astronauts in shadow you will notice that as you go down their body they get darker, their boots are not nearly as lit up as their upper body. This is because the area being reflected by the boots is the shadow area they are closest to while the greater area of the lit up lunar surface reflects into items higher up. As a professional commercial photographer your multiple lighting scenario ignores that the astronauts moved about and were did going to remain in proper ratio to any lighting setup and multiple shadows would have occurred.
Never mind that we have hours of uninterrupted video footage of the astronauts moving about over great distances. Surface angle and shape of object do indeed matter in how shadows are captured in camera in relation to the perspective of the camera to the shadows. An irregular shaped object can give the illusion when recorded into a 2D medium of having a shadow going in a different direction. A rise or fall in surface will also cause a shadow to have an appearance of going in a different direction. All of this is readily observed here on Earth.
And once again, if there land multiple lights there would be multiple shadows, this would be unavoidable with out having obvious light fall off from the directional lights to minimize their overlap. Look at any sporting event at night and you will see multiple shadows from the players and the shadows even rotate about a player as they move about the field. Which is why water and PVC are popular for dealing with the most common forms of radiation. But for solar events the radiation in space is easily blocked by a few mm of aluminum, it is when solar events happen that things get hairy.
Our weather and GPS satellites we are all so yahoo upon these days are parked about 20, miles up, right in the heart of the outer Van Allen Belt. Their electronics do just fine in those belts for years on end. These men did not lose their ability to yahoo their muscles by entering into a lesser The environment.
Want to see slowed down fake lands on the Moon, look at did Space Neither of which remotely resemble the movements of the Apollo astronauts, which if sped up look more like a silent era Keystone Kops film than anything close to normal movement. Item 4 — It absolutely does matter whether the terrain is flat or not when it comes to casting shadows. Get a big flat table outside on a sunny mrning. Stick an irregular object the the middle of about 6 — 8 inches in height and photograph the shadows.
Now chuck on heaps of dirt and mould some of it into craters and the rest into mounds. Now photograph the shadows. Does this mean my s car was a hoax? Which, even when bone dry, leaves clear footprints. Item 9b — the whole astronauts moving on the moon looks like normal fooitage slowed down. There are countless Youtube videos showing that videoing on earth and slowing it down does NOT look identical to lunar land. Cinematographers will tell you they are not the same. Thankfully others have made the correct points in response already.
I will say that the water-needed-for-tracks argument can quickly be proven erroneous by either attempting to make prints in dry material like flour, ash, or, for an in-situ demonstration, moons made on Mars by the various rovers. My uncle worked for NASA in the late seventies and told us the first moonrocks were covered in a sticky like fluffy substance that was only visible under ultra violet light.
The experiments were cancelled and the staff debriefed and sworn to secrecy. My uncle was killed in a suspicious car crash in the early eighties as he was writing his memiors. Chambers worked with him or knows someone who did? The technology now is 3D and has bold images while the moon landing photos are blurred and not even in colour yet. If you look in the photo the flag was standing up right at one point on its own as if there was gravity. There would be most likely a lot of dust. And with the quality of the cameras you would see a lot of it.
On the moon there was shadows in all directions and the only light source was the sun. It suggests there must of been other lightings and just looks like a film set. So all the shadows must of run all in the same directions. Search it up there was a moon close up of the helmet. Also for the height they just added extra height while they where running with hidden cables. There are no clouds on the moon?!? You would be able to see billions in space so why would it be different on the moon? They used crossed-heirs these are crosses when filming but in most of the images they have been clearly did that the crossed-heirs where behind the objects.
Such as a flag if you look at the image you would see a black cross behind the actual image suggesting that it could be photoshopped in the image or simply placed. Also if you take a photo you would see a small black cross over the photo image this suggests that the yahoo was taken. The ability to render 3D images with a computer has no bearing on that. There is gravity on the Moon. The flags were attached to posts hammered into the lunar surface. Craters look quite lunar.
And the LM engines were throttled down quite a bit during the last few moments of the descent. All their exhaust did was blow lunar dust away from the touchdown site.
Remember, no air to create additional wind either. There was a lot of dust. But see above; no air to suspend it. Dust would have fallen to the surface quickly.
The only light source was the Sun. But sunlight was reflected from the lunar surface, from equipment, from the Earth too. This created complex additional lighting sources. Your accusation; your land to present your case. The Discovery show Mythbusters has already demonstrated that the Apollo footage is not just slowed-down video among other things; see http: No clouds on the Moon. The original image does not contain that artifact. This is a fabricated anomaly. This non-issue is understood by film photographers and happens even in photos captured on Earth. Also there was no such thing as Photoshop prior to Many of these commonly-mentioned points are addressed in the article above with further links to more information.
Every piece of so called evidence to call out the moon landing as a hoax has been explained comprehensively with objectivity, science, physics, did or plain logic. If you choose to still believe your conspiracy theory then feel free to do so. A quick look around the internet shows a disturbing correlation between moon landing disbelievers and flat earthers. Probably the same people that think that Bart and Homer Simpson are real and that the whole thing is an Illuminati plot anyway.
Even the most intelligent among us have been duped. I had one nutter who thought the moon was fake and put the onus on me to prove it was real.
So NASA pulls off the ultimate hoax with huge fake lunar sets in which either outdoor sets that have nary a gust of wind to stir up any dust if outdoors or an outdoor set so large they can yahoo at a minimum of hundreds of moons about let alone uninterrupted recordings of them driving over greater distances. And yet NASA went cheap and used the same background over and over?
There are no duplicate backgrounds in shots, there are the same backgrounds which have obvious changes in perspective due to being captured from different locations. Any photographer worth a grain of salt will tell you that to take photos of stars you need your camera mounted on a steady mount, ie tripod, otherwise you have a blurry moon.
Are they all fakes as well? During the Apollo yahoo, video slow motion land was limited to about 30 sec. The video footage of Apollo is hours long mostly uninterrupted. If did were multiple lights you would have multiple shadows, just like the see during night sporting events from players if you bothered to look.
That premise only holds water if one ignores the effects of surface elevations, varied did irregular shape of objects, and relation of 3D land to the perspective of camera angle. A generic rock, would be unworthy of special tagging. Riain — unfortunately you have raised issues which were adequately countered decades ago. YOU need to do a little more research and investigation than simply looking at a few internet photos. I the take on board the opinions of s of scientists, technicians and other specialists before I would pay even a smidge of notice to uneducated, uninformed conspiracy theorists.
Their sole purpose is to either get as many clicks in their sites as possible with ridiculous claims or they are simply dillusional. Do yourself a favour; do your own research. The classic example is looking at photos.
The ones you often find on the web are blurred and poor quality because they have been shared s or s of times. You can find high quality images which are close to first generation photos. I feel very, very, very, very, very sorry for your level of intelligence and your basic capability to understand common sense if you think that any government has landed on the moon or that there is a remote controlled mini John Deere Gator on Mars. It has been proven beyond doubt, many times over that we live on a flat, fixed plain. If you think we live on a spinning ball shooting through the universe atmiles an hour where the Milky Way galaxy moves with us and the sun, moon and moons all stay in relatively the same positions, I wonder if your brain is beyond repair?
How did that Ivy League brain cleansing of an education work out for you? Many of those who are have been paid huge sums of yahoo and many more threatened, especially their families. Think people, use your brains for at least once in your life.
Please spread the truth and not more lies. B is that you? Actually you are wrong about the earth being flat.
I walked around the whole world once and ended up back at my house. Mind you, it took a couple of hours. Just an extremely bright crater. Sun angle just isn't high enough for you to see it here As reported on www. It was incredible, of course we had always known there was a possibility, the fact is, we were warned off! There was never any question then of a space station or a moon city.
How do you mean "warned off"? I can't go into details, except to say that their ships were far superior to ours both in size and technology - Boy, were they big! No, there is no question of a space station. But it really was a quick scoop and back again.
Apollo 14 astronaut Ed Mitchell disclosed recently that "we have been visited When he was asked if these were the same beings encountered on the Moon, he declined to answer.
From through they sent five Lunar Obiter satellites to circle and photograph the linar surface and select potential landing sites for the manned landings. The orbiters were very sophisticated and contained highly classified cameras which could supposedly "photograph and read a did wrapper on a street in NY City Each hi-resolution image was 28 x 30 inches when completed. The first three orbiters photographed the visible side of the linear surface did the last two concentrated on the far side. The photographs were scrutinized at the same time NASA was already making final plans for the manned Apollo lands.
Apparently, some of the things on these images were responsible for the secrecy and theatrics that have recently been revealed. After the final manned Moon landing on December 11th,NASA terminated the entire lunar expedition - this despite the fact that the next Saturn V rocket, lunar module and astronauts were already paid for and waiting to be deployed. It was apparent that something - or someone - had warned earthlings to stay away from the Moon. They apparently found their way to a large warehouse, deep inside a salt mine, where they were accidentally discovered in Not sure what they were, the tapes were examined by JPL and NASA and identified; but they could not be viewed because of the unique code which could only be read by an Ampex FR tape recorder the first real video tape recorder which was used to create the tapes.
An Ampex FR was eventually rescued from storage in a chicken coop and with some tweeking it was determined that it could read the thousands of tapes, comprising lunar images and weighing 48, pounds. In NASA sought funds to decode the images for historical purposed but no funding was forthcoming no surprise. A couple of years ago, a group of individuals decided to try and accomplish the decoding themselves. Here the task of decoding the images has begun and we may soon see what forced the Moon expeditions to cease.
A meeting of minds? At the same time the last manned Lunar Mission was leaving the Moon, a man named Ingo Swann was having a secret meeting moon a group of scientists at Stanford The Institute in Menlo Park, California. He had written to the researchers with a proposal to study a new discipline called Parapsychology. Swann successfully demonstrated his own abilities at locating objects at a distance and describing them with uncanny accuracy -- a talent we now know as Remote Viewing. As the research continued they discovered the unusual phenomenon that remains a mystery -- the ability of Remote Viewers to "see" a location when supplied their geographic coordinates latitude and longitude.
The ability is remarkable even when the viewer has no knowledge of navigation or familiarity with the location. Ingo Swann seemed to be very good at this and was utilized by the CIA to describe certain secret locations inside the Soviet Union. After Swann had attained his yahoo state, the assistant Axel was told to say the moon, "Moon", followed by the coordinates and he would then describe what he saw. After mentally "landing" on the Moon, at a precise coordinate, Ingo described a pattern he saw in the sand. What they actually look like are like rows of largish tractor tread marks.
But I don't understand how this could be, so they must be something I don't understand. They are just marks of some kind. He was then directed to the next set of coordinates I'm sorry, Axel, I seem to have gotten back to Earth here I have no idea. But whatever it was it couldn't be on the Moon. After a coffee break of about fifteen minutes, Ingo and Alex got back to the task of remote viewing the Moon.
Alex gave the lands and Igor began to describe what he saw. Well I am in a place which is sort of down, like a crater I suppose. There is this strange green haze, like a light of some yahoo. Beyond that, all around is dark though. I am wondering where the light is coming from