Author Topic: Moon Landings - No Hard Science Knowledge (Read 14555 times)

Ladislaus · « **Reply #15 on:** May 14, 2018, 12:56:15 PM »

Quote from: Jaynek on May 14, 2018, 12:48:12 PM

I agree that it is a reasonable approach, but, perhaps because my personal memories of the Cold War are so vivid, that argument casts enough doubt in my mind that I cannot commit to believing it is a hoax. I am left not being prepared to argue either way on this issue.

I agree with another poster that many of the top actors in both countries were on the same team. One need merely investigate who were the real powers behind the Russian Revolution as well as the top levels of the U.S. government. Both groups owed their allegience to the government of Kazharia ... ahem. Neither country would have had any credible space program at all were it not for the kidnapped German scientists.

In addition, both countries probably had some secrets of other countries that they mutually agreed not to reveal in a kind of stalemate or blackmail.

Matthew · « **Reply #16 on:** May 14, 2018, 02:15:16 PM »

Quote from: Ladislaus on May 14, 2018, 12:56:15 PM

I agree with another poster that many of the top actors in both countries were on the same team. One need merely investigate who were the real powers behind the Russian Revolution as well as the top levels of the U.S. government. Both groups owed their allegience to the government of Kazharia ... ahem. Neither country would have had any credible space program at all were it not for the kidnapped German scientists.

In addition, both countries probably had some secrets of other countries that they mutually agreed not to reveal in a kind of stalemate or blackmail.

Based on everything I know about the way the world REALLY works behind the scenes, this seems not only possible or reasonable, but even probably or highly likely.

Croix de Fer · « **Reply #17 on:** May 14, 2018, 03:56:13 PM »

Moonlandings were definitely faked as a psyop to the Soviets who first succeeded at orbiting a dog in Sputnik above the earth, and to convince the world through this deception that the U.S. space program was technologically superior.

Matthew · « **Reply #18 on:** May 14, 2018, 04:01:56 PM »

Quote from: Croix de Fer on May 14, 2018, 03:56:13 PM

Moonlandings were definitely faked as a psyop to the Soviets who first succeeded at orbiting a dog in Sputnik above the earth, and to convince the world through this deception that the U.S. space program was technologically superior.

A Psy-op aimed at the Soviet and American peoples, perhaps.
But I'm sure the Soviet higher-ups knew the truth -- especially since they sent so many men into orbit in the years running up to the Apollo "moon landings". They weren't newbies to space. They would have known about the lethal nature of the Van Allen Belt, for example -- probably with first hand experience. (They probably lost a few cosmonauts to gain that particular knowledge)

Pax Vobis · « **Reply #19 on:** May 14, 2018, 04:09:19 PM »

How many BILLIONS (probably trillions at this point) have US taxpayers given to NASA over the decades, because we believed we went to the moon? Where does that $ really go? To develop top-secret military tech that isn't public (i.e. HAARP, bluebeam, chemtrails, etc, etc)? Probably. To develop surveillance tech (like implantable chips, GPS tracking, facial recognition) so that the govt can spy, track and find us? Probably.

Matthew · « **Reply #20 on:** May 14, 2018, 04:15:46 PM »

Quote from: Pax Vobis on May 14, 2018, 04:09:19 PM

How many BILLIONS (probably trillions at this point) have US taxpayers given to NASA over the decades, because we believed we went to the moon? Where does that $ really go? To develop top-secret military tech that isn't public (i.e. HAARP, bluebeam, chemtrails, etc, etc)? Probably. To develop surveillance tech (like implantable chips, GPS tracking, facial recognition) so that the govt can spy, track and find us? Probably.

There are so many possibilities, all reasonable.

But what is NOT reasonable is that we had this miraculous trip to the Moon in 1969 with a few follow-ups in the 1970's, and then NOTHING for the next 50 years -- not from America, or any other technologically advanced country. Oh, and no country has ventured beyond low earth orbit for the almost 5 decades since then. Yeah right!

I love their lame excuse why we haven't gone back -- people got bored with it; people even complained when ______ (some old show) was pre-empted to broadcast one of the later "moon landings". That's when they knew it was over.

Yeah, I know -- all the visits to other celestial bodies all the time, it's almost a blur. GIVE ME A BREAK. You have to be old enough to RETIRE now to even remember the original alleged "moon landing". A boy or girl 8 years old in 1969 would be 57 years old today!

rum · « **Reply #21 on:** May 14, 2018, 04:20:37 PM »

Thanks for the replies. I've seen the Bart Sibrel docuмentary a few times. I don't have an answer for that footage you mention. If the moon landings were faked why would they fake it 9 times? More funding? The Apollo astronauts would have to have been in on it, and yet they seem too low-level for the conspirators to trust them to not divulge things. They also must be master actors because I've seen many interviews with these astronauts and they seem honest. But perhaps I'm naive.

But to the question of the impossibility of humans surviving a pass throught the Van Allen Belts, is the following not a good explanation?

Quote

4. Some people believe that the Apollo moon landings were a hoax because astronauts would have
been instantly killed in the radiation belts. According to the US Occupation Safety and Health Agency (OSHA) a lethal radiation dosage is 300 Rads in one hour. What is your answer to the 'moon landing hoax' believers?

Note: According to radiation dosimeters carried by Apollo astronauts, their total dosage for the entire trip to the moon and return was not more than 2 Rads over 6 days

A. The total dosage for the trip is only 11.4 Rads in 52.8 minutes. Because 52.8 minutes is equal to 0.88 hours, his is equal to a dosage of 11.4 Rads / 0.88 hours = 13 Rads in one hour, which is well below the 300 Rads in one hour that is considered to be lethal.
Also, this radiation exposure would be for an astronaut outside the spacecraft during the transit through the belts. The radiation shielding inside the spacecraft cuts down the 13 Rads/hour exposure so that it is completely harmless.

--https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&ved=0ahUKEwipn7vIjYbbAhVtw1kKHZmJBmYQFggpMAA&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.nasa.gov%2Fsites%2Fdefault%2Ffiles%2Ffiles%2FSMIII_Problem7.pdf&usg=AOvVaw3HpSBt7Uhth4e5K-VlXKLe

happenby · « **Reply #22 on:** May 14, 2018, 04:35:50 PM »

•Reuters: The original recordings of the first humans landing on the moon 40 years ago were erased and re-used NASA officials said on Thursday, July 16, 2009.

•NASA also admits the Apollo 11 moon trip telecast in its raw format on telemetry data tape of the first Moon landing in 1969 was subsequently lost.

• NASA says there are 600 boxes, weighing over one ton, of telemetry data missing from EVERY Apollo mission.

noOneImportant · « **Reply #23 on:** May 14, 2018, 04:51:06 PM »

Quote from: Matthew on May 14, 2018, 10:18:39 AM

Yeah, that's pretty good.

I've seen a lot of evidence, plus a good dose of common sense, which has convinced me firmly that we never went to the Moon. There is a belt of radiation around the earth that, if passed through, is lethal to humans. That is why NORMAL, real, repeated, ongoing space exploration by NASA and every other space agency is 100% done in LOW EARTH ORBIT. Anything further out than that is ALWAYS (100%) done by machines.

If someone submitted their morning weight for the past month and it looked like this:

...
200
201
202
201
200
10,500
202
201
200
...

What would you do with that "10,500" reading? Anyone with a brain, common sense, or training in Science or Statistics would tell you: you throw it out as an aberration. When you have a single datum which is ridiculously above the norm, and has never been even CLOSE TO repeated, you cast it out as an anomaly or an aberration.

Leaving aside the actual question for a moment, this argument is complete nonsense. No competent scientist would throw out that reading without a second glance, because it says in huge, glaring red letters "SOMETHING UNUSUAL HAPPENED HERE!!!!!!". In this case, what happened is that there is a whole lot of nothing between the distances used for orbital satellites and the moon, so why on earth would anyone want to go to "500" or 2000 in your example? There's NOTHING there. So you skip past all that until you get to something of interest (the moon).
There are some actually reasonable arguments regarding whether the moon landing happened or not. This is not one of them.

rum · « **Reply #24 on:** May 14, 2018, 05:03:21 PM »

Quote from: An even Seven on May 14, 2018, 04:37:35 PM

Did you not see the video I posted of the NASA guy? He was saying they need to come up with a way to shield astronauts going through the Van Allen belts, as in they haven't invented that yet. No knowledge of science required to get that. Just the knowledge that the Van Allen belts are deadly, as per that video, and the knowledge that they supposedly already went through them in the 60's and 70's gained from common "knowledge".

I just looked at both your links. The link about Von Braun saying we would need a rocket the span of the empire state building to get straight to the moon preceded by some years Houbolt's LOR. And the earth-orbit rendezvous method was considered as well:

--https://www.nasa.gov/centers/langley/news/factsheets/Rendezvous.html

Your other two videos could be explained away as Nasa having lost the technology it once had for shielding from the Van Allen rays. This is a hard-to-believe explanation, as you'd think the government would realize how important was NASA's work and keep detailed records of everything the organization did. The facts happenby's post above mentions are mighty suspicious.

Another explanation is that they simply want to try a new approach to shielding using modern materials and he just didn't mention due to oversight that they have earlier shielding technology.

rum · « **Reply #25 on:** May 14, 2018, 05:04:56 PM »

Quote from: noOneImportant on May 14, 2018, 04:51:06 PM

Leaving aside the actual question for a moment, this argument is complete nonsense. No competent scientist would throw out that reading without a second glance, because it says in huge, glaring red letters "SOMETHING UNUSUAL HAPPENED HERE!!!!!!". In this case, what happened is that there is a whole lot of nothing between the distances used for orbital satellites and the moon, so why on earth would anyone want to go to "500" or 2000 in your example? There's NOTHING there. So you skip past all that until you get to something of interest (the moon).
There are some actually reasonable arguments regarding whether the moon landing happened or not. This is not one of them.

When I read Matthew's post the Egyptian Pyramids popped into my head. Aren't modern engineers still wondering how the Pyramids were erected using the tools available at the time? Giant leaps seem possible.

Pax Vobis · « **Reply #26 on:** May 14, 2018, 05:22:05 PM »

Quote

But what is NOT reasonable is that we had this miraculous trip to the Moon in 1969 with a few follow-ups in the 1970's, and then NOTHING for the next 50 years -- not from America, or any other technologically advanced country. Oh, and no country has ventured beyond low earth orbit for the almost 5 decades since then. Yeah right!

Exactly. Makes no sense. I love space movies even though they're fake; that's what the moon landing was - a movie.

happenby · « **Reply #27 on:** May 14, 2018, 05:22:35 PM »

St. Nilus' prophesy applies:..."And when they have achieved all this, these unhappy people will spend their lives in comfort without knowing, poor souls, that it is deceit of the Antichrist. And, the impious one! -- he will so complete science with vanity that it will go off the right path and lead people to lose faith in the existence of God in three hypostases.

Mark Twain aptly observed: “The glory which is built upon a lie soon becomes a most unpleasant encuмbrance. … How easy it is to make people believe a lie, and how hard it is to undo that work again!” – Autobiographical dictation, 2 December 1906. Published in Autobiography of Mark Twain, Volume 2 (University of California Press, 2013)

noOneImportant · « **Reply #28 on:** May 14, 2018, 05:37:04 PM »

Quote from: Pax Vobis on May 14, 2018, 05:22:05 PM

Exactly. Makes no sense. I love space movies even though they're fake; that's what the moon landing was - a movie.

It makes perfect sense. There is no reason to go back. If you do something like that once, what's the reason to go back? It's not like there's any practical reason to do it other than as a giant vanity project. Again, there are arguments to be made, but this isn't one of them.

Croix de Fer · « **Reply #29 on:** May 14, 2018, 05:56:42 PM »

Quote from: Matthew on May 14, 2018, 04:01:56 PM

A Psy-op aimed at the Soviet and American peoples, perhaps.
But I'm sure the Soviet higher-ups knew the truth -- especially since they sent so many men into orbit in the years running up to the Apollo "moon landings". They weren't newbies to space. They would have known about the lethal nature of the Van Allen Belt, for example -- probably with first hand experience. (They probably lost a few cosmonauts to gain that particular knowledge)

True.

Author Topic: Moon Landings - No Hard Science Knowledge (Read 14555 times)

Ladislaus

Re: Moon Landings - No Hard Science Knowledge

Matthew

Re: Moon Landings - No Hard Science Knowledge

Croix de Fer

Re: Moon Landings - No Hard Science Knowledge

Matthew

Re: Moon Landings - No Hard Science Knowledge

Pax Vobis

Re: Moon Landings - No Hard Science Knowledge

Matthew

Re: Moon Landings - No Hard Science Knowledge

rum

Re: Moon Landings - No Hard Science Knowledge

happenby

Re: Moon Landings - No Hard Science Knowledge

noOneImportant

Re: Moon Landings - No Hard Science Knowledge

rum

Re: Moon Landings - No Hard Science Knowledge

rum

Re: Moon Landings - No Hard Science Knowledge

Pax Vobis

Re: Moon Landings - No Hard Science Knowledge

happenby

Re: Moon Landings - No Hard Science Knowledge

noOneImportant

Re: Moon Landings - No Hard Science Knowledge

Croix de Fer

Re: Moon Landings - No Hard Science Knowledge