NASA Admits THAT APOLLO NEVER WENT TO THE MOON 50 YEARS AGO. SHOCKING OFFICIAL VIDEO DISCLOSES ALL

yup! related video!

The pic you linked does not have the resolution necessary to draw the conclusions you drew.

One of the pics that shows that area is AS11-40-5927-29 and a hi res can be found linked here
[link to spaceflight.nasa.gov (secure)]
which describes the pic
AS11-40-5927 (20 July 1969) --- Astronaut Edwin E. Aldrin Jr., lunar module pilot, prepares to deploy the Early Apollo Scientific Experiments Package (EASEP) during the Apollo 11 lunar surface extravehicular activity (EVA). Astronaut Neil A. Armstrong, commander, took this picture with a 70mm lunar surface camera. During flight the EASEP is stowed in the Lunar Module's (LM) scientific equipment bay at the left year quadrant of the descent stage looking forward. Aldrin is removing the EASEP from its stowed position.

I see no wires or channeling. I do see the EASEP.

Last Edited by LHP598 on 12/31/2018 10:04 PM

Another view found here
[link to www.hq.nasa.gov (secure)]
which also has a 3 frame animated gif

So it's called the SEQ Bay.

Did that have the amazing cameras, microphones, and super transmitter that beamed video and sound back to earth in real time?
The transmitter and antenna needed to transmit video and sounds back to earth (!) - wouldn't they be too big and heavy to bring along on a space trip? Back then, that powerful of a transmitter must have been huge!

After the government decided that we should believe three skyscrapers fell down at freefall from airplanes hitting TWO of them, shocking is not a word to use for government psyops. Maybe if you found out it was fake before 911 and you saw the moon landings on tv at the time, then shocking.

Now, nothing is shocking...including the recent wildfires.

Congress should take all their money back.

smaller if Earth uses a larger dish to receive it. I believe the transmitting equipment was stored elsewhere and they did use a fairly large S-band antenna to transmit back.
But the better question is, why don't you know?

Van Allen Belts? Still a barrier to get to the moon.

Not according to Van Allen. Apollo took a path around the denser parts of the belts through the thinner outer edge.

I've seen videos of the astronauts "on the moon", the astronauts are see-through. Looks like trick video work from back then.

I gotta get going tonight, but will check this thread tomorrow. You seem to know a lot about the story of the Apollo moon landing.

the camera used on Apollo 11 was a low frame rate and due to the way it worked it suffered from some ghosting issues. the later missions used a different camera and didn't have the same issues.

Only the astronauts were see-through, but the Apollo, the earth, and everything else - NOT see through. Looks like they used the projection method of altering video.

Only the astronauts were moving from frame to frame. The oft suggested front projection doesn't work with bright objects in the foreground like sunlit reflective spacesuits. And again, only Apollo 11 used that type of camera.
but say the footage was altered as you say. Why? If they faked the footage, why insert astronauts later? Why not film it all at once. Or you could read up on the camera used and learn the real reason.


this book could explain it better than I ever could
[link to www.amazon.com (secure)]

another explanation here
[link to blogs.discovermagazine.com]
and here
[link to www.youtube.com (secure)]

Last Edited by LHP598 on 01/01/2019 11:59 PM

There is a theory on the net that suggests the astronauts were filmed bouncing on a trampoline, then that video projected onto the desert-filmed Apollo, to create the bounch astronaut effect (you know, the zero gravity thing).
And it looks like it.

======

And this video, starting at 05:45

When they cut the public broadcast, ham radio operators were still tuned in.
What they heard is proof enough for me that they were there.
They got this 8-year-old back out of bed to watch that one small step.

Last Edited by hillbilly on 01/02/2019 12:20 AM

well, they had transistors and and basic integrated circuits.

so, they could get it all into a bread box.

In your opinion only.
Looks like an effect of the video and conversion to me. and of course you're ignoring that only Apollo 11 used that camera.




And? Looks like movement in low gravity.


So are you abandoning your claims that they needed "huge" transmitting and receiving equipment? Your jumping from claim to claim looks like a gish gallop.

Stop the callouts. I've debunked this claim a thousand times on GLP. Orion EFT-1 was sent through a much more intense region of the belts than Apollo, by design. One of Orion EFT-1's objectives was to test its resilience to intense radiation, so its trajectory carried it into the Van Allen belts near the South Atlantic Anomaly, where the lowest portion of the belts dip down to low earth orbit altitudes. It reached an apogee of about 3600 miles while traveling through the densest portion of the belts. Apollo avoided that with an inclined trajectory as previously stated; the belts are not homogeneous in density. Apollo was also traveling at a higher speed and spent minimal time in the belts. All of this matters to the final received dose of radiation.

Here is a plot of how much radiation the astronauts would be expected to receive given Apollo 11's trajectory to the moon, one way. Apollo had an areal density equivalent to about 7~8 g/cm^2:
[link to drive.google.com (secure)]
Less than 1 rad each way, it's harmless, the trapped proton dose from the Van Allen belts is less than a tenth of a rad (so even with the Q factor discussed below, less than a rem of VAB radiation).

By way of comparison, here is the dose you would receive in an Apollo capsule flying the same trajectory as Orion EFT-1's final orbit (though with a slightly higher perigee, SPENVIS won't let you calculate trajectories that go through the atmosphere):
[link to drive.google.com (secure)]
Here's a map of the orbit:
[link to drive.google.com (secure)]
Nearly 10 rads, with the dose almost entirely made up of radiation trapped in the belt. The Q factor on that could be as high as 10 ( [link to www.nrc.gov (secure)] ), so you could be looking at about 100 rem equivalent dose. At that dose with an acute exposure, you're looking at chromosome damage, reduction in white blood cell count, and the onset of radiation sickness within a few hours ( [link to www.atomicarchive.com] ).

So trajectory matters, as does the duration of exposure and the spacecraft's density. The NASA engineer was right; NASA could not have flown astronauts through that particular region of space safely with their old Apollo capsule. They would have had radiation sickness even after just 1 orbit, at the very least. For an unmanned test, it was ideal as a way of giving the capsule a trial by fire, which is what they called that presentation.



You mean during a solar eclipse? The moon is between the earth and the sun during a solar eclipse, there's no way for it to illuminate the side of the moon facing earth. You can however see earthshine reflecting off the moon during a total solar eclipse during totality.

Last Edited by Astromut on 01/02/2019 11:03 AM

This is an interesting video.

1. Go to 1:30 in it.
2. Then look at the picture - spot anything missing?

What is missing is The Moon. Where has it gone? If the moon was a 50 yard cube I'd accept that picture, but it's a great big thing, bigger even than a football field. So why can't we see it?

Yeah, why is it totally smooth in at 1:30, but earlier we see detailed craters, etc? I guess that is weird unless there was a sand dune on the moon looking the other direction.

The only way to know is for one of us GLPers to personally go to the moon, and come back and tell us as a witness. Then we could believe.

So are you abandoning your claims that they needed "huge" transmitting and receiving equipment? Your jumping from claim to claim looks like a gish gallop.


The transmitting equipment that they would have had to take up to the moon with them. The receiving equipment's irrelevant. I figure late 60's transmitter that will send a signal to earth would be physically heavy / large. What battery did they have to take with it (lol).

Why didn't they bring a dune buggy on their first trip up to the moon?

So Apollo blasted off from the moon when they left the moon, and rejoined the other part that was floating around the moon, so it could all fly back to earth! They're lucky they survived all this, and that they made it on their first serious attempt.

i know right?

No, no, they are in on it together. Controlled by the same entity.

This is good:

So there's a race between America and Russia to get to the moon. America supposedly gets their first and Russia throws up their hands and says fuck it. No reason to go now. LOL

===

So once a country wins the moon, how do they enforce their domain there? Send up troops?

Is there a photo of the transmitter and battery that they took to the moon available to view?

Here's a photo of the dish antenna: where did they store it in apollo? Did it fold up?
[link to www.ab9il.net (secure)]

Here's apollo's camera: Is this the camera that stayed on the moon? Is it the one that tracked followed Apollo as it blasted off from the moon?
[link to upload.wikimedia.org (secure)]

different angle and lighting. craters are less visible in the part at 1:30 as the light is from behind the camera and we don't see the shadowed part of the crater.

You figure? Why don't you know? What actual research have you done? Why don't you know the power source? If this is your argument, shouldn't you at least know what you're arguing about?


Which trip? the first one was Apollo 8. the second was Apollo 10. the first to land was Apollo 11. None of those had a rover because they weren't large enough. Apollo 15, 16, and 17 all had a larger LM with a slightly more powerful engine. Again, why don't you know this?




the rendezvous procedure was practiced during the gemini missions and practiced in lunar orbit with Apollo 10. It isn't luck, it was skill, and it wasn't their first attempt. But thanks again for proving that hoaxies know the least about the subject they argue against.

answered already in thread. Russia did not give up. They had an active program trying to go until 1974, two years AFTER Apollo ended. But they couldn't get there because they couldn't get their heavy lifting rocket, the N-1, to work. The N-1 exploded every time it was tested. The Saturn V in comparison, never failed to reach orbit.
At least try to read the thread, ok?

Who says they have domain? International treaty prevents claiming of the Moon. Another basic thing you should already know.