Godlike Productions - Conspiracy Forum
Users Online Now: 3,099 (Who's On?)Visitors Today: 1,900,100
Pageviews Today: 2,634,055Threads Today: 629Posts Today: 11,216
05:38 PM


Rate this Thread

Absolute BS Crap Reasonable Nice Amazing
 

The final verdict on NASA´s Apollo Missions: No. Here is why not and how they pulled it off

 
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 776232
Spain
09/21/2009 01:37 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: The final verdict on NASA´s Apollo Missions: No. Here is why not and how they pulled it off
bump
Byteman

User ID: 564424
United States
09/21/2009 01:53 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: The final verdict on NASA´s Apollo Missions: No. Here is why not and how they pulled it off
And another thing, expose a camera to as little as 5 rem and you will have severe over exposure. Why are all the pictures made with the Hasselblad cameras so perfect?

That is hard to believe. What was the shielding on the Hasselblad camera? Not too much appearantly. Certainly not enough to keep the rads < 5 rem.

Film travelling to ISS with the Space Shuttle is protected by a special thick lead line box for just that reason: radiation even at low level orbit messes with the celluloid.

At that is not even PASSED the VAB's.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 776232


If you don't know what the shielding was, then your not qualified to judge it's effectiveness.
nomuse (NLI)
User ID: 776034
United States
09/21/2009 03:10 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: The final verdict on NASA´s Apollo Missions: No. Here is why not and how they pulled it off
Of course not. He had no real knowledge of the program, strenuously disapproved of it, and in all likelihood strongly suspected its fraud. What does it tell you when a renowned scientist likens the "moon landings" to a science fiction movie?
 Quoting: Skeptic the First 773810



I'd say neither your reading ability nor your tendency to incorrectly juxtapose different statements has improved, and I would go back to ignoring you.
Eden (OP)

User ID: 638592
Spain
09/22/2009 01:13 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: The final verdict on NASA´s Apollo Missions: No. Here is why not and how they pulled it off
Lets see the courage of YOUR convictions and you march right
into St. Jude's Children't Research hospital and call those
scientists "cowards".
 Quoting: DrPostman


What is this? Schindlers List?

violin

Gimme a break.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 777009
United States
09/22/2009 10:34 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: The final verdict on NASA´s Apollo Missions: No. Here is why not and how they pulled it off
And another thing, expose a camera to as little as 5 rem and you will have severe over exposure. Why are all the pictures made with the Hasselblad cameras so perfect?

That is hard to believe. What was the shielding on the Hasselblad camera? Not too much appearantly. Certainly not enough to keep the rads < 5 rem.

Film travelling to ISS with the Space Shuttle is protected by a special thick lead line box for just that reason: radiation even at low level orbit messes with the celluloid.

At that is not even PASSED the VAB's.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 776232

yeah there is tons of evidence proving we've been had, deceived, hoaxed lied to over and over again....so what?

The boys at the top don't care anymore...they are drunk with power. They have bio weapons, weather control and mind control. They think they have it all...but it won't be enough

They can blow up huge buildings in broad daylight and blame it on a few gallons of kerosene from an airplane---the public will accept anything. They think they have it made.

THEY ARE WRONG.
Skeptic the First
User ID: 773810
United States
09/22/2009 10:55 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: The final verdict on NASA´s Apollo Missions: No. Here is why not and how they pulled it off
You back up your bullshit or you lose.
 Quoting: DrPostman

What in the world are you blathering about so incoherently?

I pointed out that Dr. Van Allen was one of the few scientists willing to challenge the Establishment by comparing the "moon landings" to a science fiction movie--as bold a statement as anyone can expect an ordinary scientist to make without risking the lives of his children and grandchildren.

You hypocritically accuse him of cowardice.

I reply that in comparison to the many scientists who have participated in murders ranging from the Port Chicago nuclear test to the Tuskegee genocide to the 9/11 false-flag attack, Dr. Van Allen is a hero.

You then begin to babble incoherently.
Skeptic the First
User ID: 773810
United States
09/23/2009 06:52 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: The final verdict on NASA´s Apollo Missions: No. Here is why not and how they pulled it off
Why weren't there reports of radiation poisoning?
 Quoting: DrPostman

Doctors at the time didn't know what radiation burns, and wouldn't have used that term to describe the symptoms.

Educate yourself:

[link to www.petervogel.us]
Skeptic the First
User ID: 773810
United States
09/23/2009 07:03 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: The final verdict on NASA´s Apollo Missions: No. Here is why not and how they pulled it off
Why weren't there reports of radiation poisoning?
 Quoting: DrPostman

[link to archive.peacemagazine.org]
---
However, Contra Costa county, where the explosion occurred, had an unusual cancer rate, according to a March 28, 1982 New York Times article. Also, the State of California showed a pronounced increase in the statistical incidence of characteristic post-fallout exposure illnesses in the prot area and downwind from it.
---
Skeptic the First
User ID: 773810
United States
09/23/2009 07:08 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: The final verdict on NASA´s Apollo Missions: No. Here is why not and how they pulled it off
Why weren't there reports of radiation poisoning?
 Quoting: DrPostman

The elevated radiation persists to this day:

[link to ian.kluft.com]
---
The Grizzly Island data is cause for concern, whatever its explanation. With the new data collected on July 15, one plausible hypothesis is that I've discovered a possible 2-mile wide radioactive plume which faces Port Chicago. The nuclear accident theory at Port Chicago isn't looking so far-fetched any more, because the center of area appears to line up with the location where the explosion took place.
---
The Commentator

User ID: 587619
United States
09/23/2009 07:25 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: The final verdict on NASA´s Apollo Missions: No. Here is why not and how they pulled it off
Why weren't there reports of radiation poisoning?
Doctors at the time didn't know what radiation burns, and wouldn't have used that term to describe the symptoms.

Educate yourself:

 Quoting: Skeptic the First 773810



Fission products from such a blast would still be easily detectable, yet no one seems to have done such a simple test.

But then you don't learn about fission products in grade school.
non sufficit Orbis

Being a zetatard means never having to make sense.

"Nancy pays me to post on Her threads"

Free Store admits to being a paid zetadrool shill

NO max/bridget EVER!!!!!
NO luser EVER!!!
NO clunker EVER!!!!!
Eden (OP)

User ID: 638592
Spain
09/23/2009 08:09 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: The final verdict on NASA´s Apollo Missions: No. Here is why not and how they pulled it off
You back up your bullshit or you lose.
Plain and simple.
 Quoting: DrPostman


So according to you everyone who posts their theories on this Conspiracy Theory forum "loses".

A statement which strikes me as a bit odd for a moderator.

Let´s all stop posting folks because we are losers if we cannot produce hard evidence. Whoopie.

Please provide one piece of hard evidence on any theory posted in here and you "win".

Plain and simple.
AstronutModerator
Forum Moderator

User ID: 634208
United States
09/23/2009 08:55 AM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: The final verdict on NASA´s Apollo Missions: No. Here is why not and how they pulled it off
Are you serious? I hope you are joking... Evidence is presented in the videos above with references to scientific studies of the sun. Deep space is full of deadly radiation, even NASA admits this. Would you have watched the videos you would have known this and seen the NASA segments.
 Quoting: Eden

In the long term maybe, but on a short mission? Quantify the dose to prove lethality or shut up. Here's a tool that you could use to quantify it:
[link to www.spenvis.oma.be]
Oops, too late, someone else already did for an orbit passing through the Van Allen belts slower than Apollo did:
[link to spacetethers.com]
The Apollo spacecraft had 4mm of Aluminum shielding, not to mention fibrous insulation not accounted for. This results in a dose of less than 6 rads. The radiation is non-lethal for an Apollo-style trip, you lose, good day sir.
astrobanner2
Skeptic the First
User ID: 779173
United States
09/25/2009 10:17 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: The final verdict on NASA´s Apollo Missions: No. Here is why not and how they pulled it off
Has everyone noticed that the reported discovery of water on the Moon has caught NASA in a bald-faced lie?

Until recently, NASA's story was that the "moon rocks" had no water, and that such was strong evidence of their lunar origin. NASA touted the elaborate precautions to prevent earthly contamination of the samples:

[link to www.space.com (secure)]
---
If those objects were water-rich comets, as some have suspected, why didn't the water remain in the rocks?
...
Compared with terrestrial samples, all lunar rocks are oddballs because they are so dry," Ryder said. "They contain no molecules of water, they're not oxidized and they contain no ferric iron. They're easy to distinguish from rocks on Earth."
...
Most of the Apollo samples are at the lunar sample building at the Johnson Space Center (JSC) in Houston, stored in dry nitrogen to keep them moisture-free.
...
"They can only be touched with aluminum, stainless steel or teflon to avoid contamination. Even the rubber gloves you use have to be covered with teflon," he said.
---

But the announcement of water on the Moon makes the above story utterly untenable. First, according to NASA itself, the Cassini probe actually discovered water on the Moon in 1999 but NASA concealed this from the public until now. Second and more importantly, NASA must now explain its "moon rocks." To do so, they have totally jettisoned the previous story, and now assert that the "moon rocks" do have water, but that such was ignored until now because it was presumed to be earthly contamination!

[link to www.dailyrecord.co.uk]
---
The samples, collected during the Apollo missions between 1969 and 1972, were found to bear traces of water. But experts at the time dismissed the finding, believing it to be due to contamination by air leaking into the sample containers.
...
Professor Larry Taylor, a member of the team from the University of Tennessee at Knoxville, US, explained how scientists made a mistake when they identified traces of water in the Apollo moon rocks.

Most of the boxes containing the rocks had leaked, leading experts to suspect contamination.

"To some extent, we were fooled," said Prof Taylor. "Since the boxes leaked, we just assumed the water we found was from contamination with terrestrial air.

"The isotopes (versions of atoms) of oxygen that exist on the Moon are the same as those that exist on Earth, so it was difficult if not impossible to tell the difference between water from the Moon and water from Earth.

"Since the early soil samples only had trace amounts of water, it was easy to make the mistake of attributing it to contamination."
---

I am amazed at NASA's chutzpah. Their bureaucrats, flunkies, and fanboys remind me of little children who show no difficulty in switching from one lie to another.
ToSeek

User ID: 748065
United States
09/25/2009 05:20 PM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: The final verdict on NASA´s Apollo Missions: No. Here is why not and how they pulled it off
But the announcement of water on the Moon makes the above story utterly untenable. First, according to NASA itself, the Cassini probe actually discovered water on the Moon in 1999 but NASA concealed this from the public until now.
 Quoting: Skeptic the First 779173


As you are so eager to point out when it suits you, science requires repeatability. One result from one experiment is eyed with suspicion, particularly when you're talking about a totally unexpected result like water on the Moon. Once this finding had been confirmed, then there was an announcement.
Skeptic the First
User ID: 779173
United States
09/25/2009 10:26 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: The final verdict on NASA´s Apollo Missions: No. Here is why not and how they pulled it off
Seems like you're the liar. Here's a NASA article from 2005:
[link to science.nasa.gov]

And oh look, here's an interview conducted with a NASA
scientist from 1998!
[link to www.pbs.org]
 Quoting: DrPostman

No, NASA is the liar. Both NASA itself, and its fanboys everywhere (especially in this forum!), specifically pointed to the lack of water in "moon rocks" as proof of their lunar origin.

[link to www.space.com (secure)]
---
"Compared with terrestrial samples, all lunar rocks are oddballs because they are so dry," Ryder said. "They contain no molecules of water, they're not oxidized and they contain no ferric iron. They're easy to distinguish from rocks on Earth."
---

[link to www.newser.com]
---
Water Found in Moon Rock
Discovery stuns lunar experts

(Newser Summary) – Water has been detected in moon rock brought to Earth by Apollo astronauts, reports Space.com. A team used a new super-sensitive technique to discover the water in volcanic glass beads in the rock. The stunning find, detailed in the journal Nature, is forcing scientists to rethink theories about the moon's origin 4.5 billion years ago.
---

When we first got these "moon rocks," they caused scientists to redo all their theories to fit them. So now the same scientists are going to redo all their theories again, based on the same "moon rocks"? Gosh, it's amazing how hard those little rocks work to keep NASA rolling in $billions, year after year and decade after decade.
IDW
User ID: 779702
United States
09/25/2009 10:56 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: The final verdict on NASA´s Apollo Missions: No. Here is why not and how they pulled it off
Seems like you're the liar. Here's a NASA article from 2005:
[link to science.nasa.gov]

And oh look, here's an interview conducted with a NASA
scientist from 1998!
[link to www.pbs.org]

No, NASA is the liar. Both NASA itself, and its fanboys everywhere (especially in this forum!), specifically pointed to the lack of water in "moon rocks" as proof of their lunar origin.

[link to www.space.com (secure)]
---
"Compared with terrestrial samples, all lunar rocks are oddballs because they are so dry," Ryder said. "They contain no molecules of water, they're not oxidized and they contain no ferric iron. They're easy to distinguish from rocks on Earth."
---

[link to www.newser.com]
---
Water Found in Moon Rock
Discovery stuns lunar experts

(Newser Summary) – Water has been detected in moon rock brought to Earth by Apollo astronauts, reports Space.com. A team used a new super-sensitive technique to discover the water in volcanic glass beads in the rock. The stunning find, detailed in the journal Nature, is forcing scientists to rethink theories about the moon's origin 4.5 billion years ago.
---

When we first got these "moon rocks," they caused scientists to redo all their theories to fit them. So now the same scientists are going to redo all their theories again, based on the same "moon rocks"? Gosh, it's amazing how hard those little rocks work to keep NASA rolling in $billions, year after year and decade after decade.
 Quoting: Skeptic the First 779173

It seems to me that NASA just says whatever suits their agenda at the time and continually readjusts its story.
Space exploration financed by the American people should e open, the results available to the people who paid for it.
ToSeek

User ID: 445334
United States
09/25/2009 11:06 PM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: The final verdict on NASA´s Apollo Missions: No. Here is why not and how they pulled it off
When we first got these "moon rocks," they caused scientists to redo all their theories to fit them. So now the same scientists are going to redo all their theories again, based on the same "moon rocks"? Gosh, it's amazing how hard those little rocks work to keep NASA rolling in $billions, year after year and decade after decade.
 Quoting: Skeptic the First 779173


I don't see what the Moon rocks have to do with NASA's billions - very little of NASA's budget goes to investigating Moon rocks. Even LRO, which is a fairly major mission by unmanned spacecraft standards, has a total cost of only $460 million - that's about 2.6% of NASA's budget for one year.
AstronutModerator
Forum Moderator

User ID: 715991
United States
09/25/2009 11:24 PM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: The final verdict on NASA´s Apollo Missions: No. Here is why not and how they pulled it off
Well spoken. The Russians placed a reflector on the surface using an unmanned craft without any problems.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 776232

Bullshit, they had plenty of problems. On one of the missions it failed to align altogether and the other was less accurately aligned than the human-placed versions.
astrobanner2
AstronutModerator
Forum Moderator

User ID: 715991
United States
09/25/2009 11:31 PM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: The final verdict on NASA´s Apollo Missions: No. Here is why not and how they pulled it off
No, NASA is the liar. Both NASA itself, and its fanboys everywhere (especially in this forum!), specifically pointed to the lack of water in "moon rocks" as proof of their lunar origin.
 Quoting: Skeptic the First 77917

Right, you get back to us when you can prove the presence of significant water IN the moon rocks, not within the dust covering the surface of the moon, which is a wholly different matter and the source of the trace amount of water detected. Even the new results show a moisture content in the dust that is several fold drier than desert sand on earth, and that's not even the same as finding water within a rock itself.
astrobanner2
Skeptic the First
User ID: 779173
United States
09/26/2009 06:45 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: The final verdict on NASA´s Apollo Missions: No. Here is why not and how they pulled it off
I don't see what the Moon rocks have to do with NASA's billions
 Quoting: ToSeek

NASA is clearly alleging water on the Moon in order to justify the extra $billions it wants to squeeze out of President Obama.

Obama's space panel basically said that:

1) Without extra $billions, NASA must abandon manned space exploration

2) With extra $billions, NASA can get a man on the Moon by 2035, if it's lucky.

Clearly, NASA will say or do whatever it takes to persuade the President and Congress to cough up the extra cash. Claiming Moon water is a clever way to make manned space travel appear more attractive.

Perhaps next month NASA will announce that it has "discovered" gold on the Moon.
wing-ed

User ID: 763653
United States
09/26/2009 07:02 AM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: The final verdict on NASA´s Apollo Missions: No. Here is why not and how they pulled it off
They may have lost the moon landing tapes but after 40 years they did notice a 200,000 YEAR OLD STATUE FOUND ON MOON !! They brought this back 40 years ago and just noticed it in the rocks !! [link to weeklyworldnews.com]
Holy, holy,holy, Lord God Almighty, which was, and is, and is to come.Praise the one who gives you peace beyond all understanding Yes that scripture still sounds good !
wing-ed

User ID: 763653
United States
09/26/2009 07:04 AM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: The final verdict on NASA´s Apollo Missions: No. Here is why not and how they pulled it off
They may have lost the moon landing tapes but after 40 years they did notice a 200,000 YEAR OLD STATUE FOUND ON MOON !! They brought this back 40 years ago and just noticed it in the rocks !! [link to weeklyworldnews.com]
 Quoting: wing-ed

Geologist Dr. Morris Charles revealed last week that NASA lab workers chipped the angel from one of the rocks brought to Earth by Apollo 11 astronauts 40 years ago, in 1969. Dr. Charles was a NASA scientist himself for 23 years but left the agency in 1987. He still maintains close ties to many of his former colleagues. [THAT'S NOT HARD TO BELIEVE IS IT !!]

Last Edited by wing-ed on 09/26/2009 07:05 AM
Holy, holy,holy, Lord God Almighty, which was, and is, and is to come.Praise the one who gives you peace beyond all understanding Yes that scripture still sounds good !
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 779992
United Kingdom
09/26/2009 07:29 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: The final verdict on NASA´s Apollo Missions: No. Here is why not and how they pulled it off
They may have lost the moon landing tapes but after 40 years they did notice a 200,000 YEAR OLD STATUE FOUND ON MOON !! They brought this back 40 years ago and just noticed it in the rocks !! [link to weeklyworldnews.com]

Geologist Dr. Morris Charles revealed last week that NASA lab workers chipped the angel from one of the rocks brought to Earth by Apollo 11 astronauts 40 years ago, in 1969. Dr. Charles was a NASA scientist himself for 23 years but left the agency in 1987. He still maintains close ties to many of his former colleagues. [THAT'S NOT HARD TO BELIEVE IS IT !!]
 Quoting: wing-ed


WWN bump

If it's in WWN, it MUST BE TRUE!!!

rofl
wing-ed

User ID: 763653
United States
09/26/2009 10:03 AM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: The final verdict on NASA´s Apollo Missions: No. Here is why not and how they pulled it off
They may have lost the moon landing tapes but after 40 years they did notice a 200,000 YEAR OLD STATUE FOUND ON MOON !! They brought this back 40 years ago and just noticed it in the rocks !! [link to weeklyworldnews.com]

Geologist Dr. Morris Charles revealed last week that NASA lab workers chipped the angel from one of the rocks brought to Earth by Apollo 11 astronauts 40 years ago, in 1969. Dr. Charles was a NASA scientist himself for 23 years but left the agency in 1987. He still maintains close ties to many of his former colleagues. [THAT'S NOT HARD TO BELIEVE IS IT !!]


WWN bump

If it's in WWN, it MUST BE TRUE!!!

rofl
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 779992

Here is a better link ! [link to thecrit.com]
Holy, holy,holy, Lord God Almighty, which was, and is, and is to come.Praise the one who gives you peace beyond all understanding Yes that scripture still sounds good !
Eden (OP)

User ID: 1108070
Spain
09/29/2010 04:27 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: The final verdict on NASA´s Apollo Missions: No. Here is why not and how they pulled it off
bump for relevance to other thread

[link to www.godlikeproductions.com]
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 1114160
United Kingdom
09/29/2010 04:29 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: The final verdict on NASA´s Apollo Missions: No. Here is why not and how they pulled it off
bump for relevance to other thread

[link to www.godlikeproductions.com]
 Quoting: Eden


Nice bump!

The Apollo Hoax is being exposed for the atrocious scam that it was, more and more, every day!
Eden (OP)

User ID: 1114423
Spain
09/29/2010 05:42 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: The final verdict on NASA´s Apollo Missions: No. Here is why not and how they pulled it off
bump for relevance to other thread

[link to www.godlikeproductions.com]


Nice bump!

The Apollo Hoax is being exposed for the atrocious scam that it was, more and more, every day!
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 1114160


Why thanks!

Oops I bumped it again... lolsign
Eden (OP)

User ID: 1114423
Spain
09/29/2010 08:00 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: The final verdict on NASA´s Apollo Missions: No. Here is why not and how they pulled it off
Here is a better link ! [link to thecrit.com]
 Quoting: wing-ed


Look at the picture a little down on this page:
[link to www.llnl.gov (secure)]

This is the original picture of the scientist they used to make this hoax. Funny and it did go viral.

Or maybe the S&TR picture is fake, but I don´t think so...
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 981863
Canada
11/07/2010 01:47 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: The final verdict on NASA´s Apollo Missions: No. Here is why not and how they pulled it off
Hmmmmm...I LIKE it!!!!!



I think this has some good points OP and I'll check the vids.

I think the whole thing is bogus too. And I have always thought Neil Armstrong acts like a typical mind control victim. His behavior (and silence) over the years has always been very telling. I think the man can't remember a LOT and it really bothers him. Mind Control is a given when it comes to NASA and the rest of the NAZI covert govt. that works in the shadow of NASA.
bump 5a

butt Astronaut in a diaper...nuff said.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 526155

applause2
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 981863
Canada
11/07/2010 02:04 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: The final verdict on NASA´s Apollo Missions: No. Here is why not and how they pulled it off
They tracked something to the moon. I believe it was the third stage /LM.


Wow, that is even better than ditching the LEM in the Pacific.

Excellent. That would explain the "tracking".


I also believe NASA attempted or accomplished an unmanned landing with the LM and collected samples.


I do not think that was neccessary because there is an abundance of Moon rock to be found on Antarctica.

Coincidentally, Werner Von Braun did head an expedition there shortly before Apollo. Were they collecting landing evidence?


What I do not believe is that any man has ever left Earth orbit to venture into interplanetary space.


Hear, hear.

+1
 Quoting: Eden


AGREED.

News