Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


* * * - - 6 votes

[Merged] Did we land on the moon?

nasa apollo hoax

This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
2593 replies to this topic

#1351    skyeagle409

skyeagle409

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 30,218 posts
  • Joined:14 Apr 2006

Posted 11 November 2012 - 07:31 AM

Apollo Moon Missions Tracked
Observers of all missions

The Soviet Union monitored the missions at their Space Transmissions Corps, which was "fully equipped with the latest intelligence-gathering and surveillance equipment". Vasily Mishin ("The Moon Programme That Faltered."), in Spaceflight. 33 (March 1991), pages 2–3 describes how the Soviet Moon programme lost energy after the Apollo landing.

The missions were tracked by radar from several countries on the way to the Moon and back.

The NASA Manned Space Flight Network (MSFN) was a world-wide network of stations that tracked the Mercury, Gemini, Apollo and Skylab missions. Most MSFN stations were only needed during the launch, Earth orbit and landing phases of the lunar missions, but three "deep space" sites with larger antennas provided continuous coverage during the trans-lunar, trans-earth and lunar mission phases. Today, these three sites form the NASA Deep Space Network: the Goldstone Deep Space Communications Complex near Goldstone, California; the Madrid Deep Space Communication Complex near Madrid, Spain; and the Canberra Deep Space Communication Complex, in Tidbinbilla, near Canberra, Australia.

Although most MSFN stations were NASA-owned, they employed many local citizens. NASA also contracted the Parkes Observatory in New South Wales, Australia, to supplement the three deep space sites, most famously during the Apollo 11 EVA as documented in Publications of the Astronomical Society of Australia and portrayed (humorously and not quite accurately) in the movie The Dish. The Parkes Observatory is not NASA-owned; it is, and always has been, owned and operated by the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organization (CSIRO), a research agency of the Australian government.

Several other Australian sites which are no longer part of the Deep Space Network were also involved in relaying Apollo lunar transmissions. The deep space (lunar) tracking station was originally Honeysuckle Creek Tracking Station. Carnarvon Tracking Station was one of the smaller and more numerous MSFN sites used primarily to support the near-earth segments of Apollo missions, though it also relayed data from the ALSEP lunar surface experiments. Due to its location on Australia's west coast, Carnarvon played a special role in the Apollo trans lunar injection and atmospheric reentry phases. Deakin Switching Centre routed the Apollo television broadcasts.
It would have been relatively easy for NASA to avoid using the Parkes Observatory to receive the Apollo 11 EVA television signals by scheduling the EVA at an earlier time when the Goldstone station could provide complete coverage.

http://www.publish.c...per/AS01038.htm

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Chang'e 2

China's second lunar probe, Chang'e 2, which was launched in 2010 is capable of capturing lunar surface images with a resolution of up to 1.3 metres (4.3 ft). It spotted traces of the Apollo landings.

The scientists also spotted traces of the previous Apollo mission in the images, said Yan Jun, chief application scientist for China's lunar exploration project. Several countries, including the United States, have obtained lunar images with higher resolution, but have not published full-coverage images of the moon with a resolution of seven meters or greater, as China has done, Tong said.

http://news.xinhuane...c_131393210.htm

Edited by skyeagle409, 11 November 2012 - 07:49 AM.

KEEP YOUR MACH UP AND CHECK SIX

#1352    frenat

frenat

    Poltergeist

  • Member
  • 2,920 posts
  • Joined:22 Jun 2005

Posted 11 November 2012 - 01:49 PM

View Postturbonium, on 11 November 2012 - 06:30 AM, said:

It's all I needed to say??? Thanks for finally admitting it??

You don't have a clue about what I've said. If you did, you'd have seen me point it out, repeatedly. Here's some examples you obviously didn't read.......



I suppose you don't even know I DIRECTLY RESPONDED TO YOUR POST ON THIS??....

frenat, on 27 October 2012 - 04:57 AM, said:

What does it have to do with wires?  Are you just trolling now?  YOU claimed they did everything with wires.  YOU claimed they were edited out just like any other movie.  YOU need to show how they did that in real time on a demonstrably live video.  Support YOUR claim
.

And here's what I told you, in part.....



And here's one more time I mentioned it, just for good measure...





Pretty much sums up your entire experience here and elsewhere and explains why you keep asking me the same questions I've already responded to, then you accuse ME of "avoiding" them!!.

you've already admitted you can't prove a thing.  No need to get snippy admitting it more.  Although answering some of the MANY questions you've avoided over the past few years might be nice.  As for providing YOU  a vidoe to help you prove or disprove YOUR theory, I already said your track record shows you'll likely avoid it anyway.  Start answering your outstanding questions and maybe you'll find you get treated differently

Edited by frenat, 11 November 2012 - 01:54 PM.

-Reality is not determined by your lack of comprehension.
-Never let facts stand in the way of a good conspiracy theory.
-If I wanted to pay for commercials I couldn't skip I'd sign up for Hulu Plus.
-There are no bad ideas, just great ideas that go horribly wrong.
If you have to insist that you've won an Internet argument, you've probably lost badly. - Danth's Law

#1353    Gaden

Gaden

    Conspiracy Theorist

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 935 posts
  • Joined:17 Sep 2010

Posted 11 November 2012 - 04:18 PM

View Postturbonium, on 11 November 2012 - 06:44 AM, said:

First of all, don't alter my own quotes, which you did here. It's a goofball tactic.

As for pointing other radio telscopes, cite the specifc telescopes you claim tracked Apollo to the moon. However, even without seeing them, I'm quite sure a probe coud have easily accounted for it.

I've already shown you one "expert" was wrong abouth being "impossible to fake". And now it seems a second "expert" is wrong about it too.

You also said..

"If we can pull that off, why not send astronauts along for the ride?"

Well, it's obvious that we CAN pull it off, as shown in the document I last cited, and/or using unmanned probes.

Why do you think that's more difficult than actually sending a manned craft to the moon? We already had unmanned probes going to the moon before Apollo In case you aren't aware, those probes also sent signals back to Earth. We also had the ability to do the simulations.

You have it completely backwards, and how.

First of all, you need to improve your comprehension skills. I did not use a quote from you, that was an excerpt from the link I mentioned. If you had bothered to read it, you'd have known it was from a guy who actually did the tracking, in other words, someone who knows what he is talking about). Reading it, in fact, would have made your post  moot. I do thank you, though, for corroborating. It's pretty obvious who doesn't "get it". Furthermore, avoidance is a goofball tactic.

Edited by Gaden, 11 November 2012 - 04:25 PM.

I'm trying to see things from your point of view, I just can't get my head that far up my butt

#1354    DBunker

DBunker

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 3,485 posts
  • Joined:26 Aug 2005

Posted 13 November 2012 - 12:38 AM

I dont believe I have ever seen a case of willful ignorance this clear before.

Turb.... what would it take for you to accept the landings as fact??

Now that communications technology has made it possible to give global reach to the bizarre and archive it forever, it is essential for men and women of reason resolutely to counter the delusions of the fringe element. James S. Robbins

#1355    psyche101

psyche101

    Conspiracy Realist

  • Member
  • 30,759 posts
  • Joined:30 Nov 2005

Posted 13 November 2012 - 01:23 AM

View Postturbonium, on 11 November 2012 - 06:44 AM, said:


As for pointing other radio telscopes, cite the specifc telescopes you claim tracked Apollo to the moon. However, even without seeing them, I'm quite sure a probe coud have easily accounted for it.


It is not a radio telescope, but I have already pointed out that James Young tracked the Apollo missions from Table Top Mountain.

LINK - Bill Keel.

Things are what they are. - Me Reality can't be debunked. That's the beauty of it. - Capeo 'If I have seen further it is by standing on the shoulders of giants.' - Sir Isaac Newton. "Let me repeat the lesson learned from the Sturrock scientific review panel: Pack up your old data and forget it. Ufology needs new data, new cases, new rigorous and scientific methodologies if it hopes ever to get out of its pit." Ed Stewart. Youtube is the last refuge of the ignorant and is more often used for disinformation than genuine research.  There is a REASON for PEER REVIEW... - Chrlzs. Nothing is inexplicable, just unexplained. - Sir Wearer of Hats.


#1356    Obviousman

Obviousman

    Spaced out and plane crazy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,622 posts
  • Joined:27 Dec 2006

Posted 13 November 2012 - 09:51 AM

I belong to a newsgroup of ex-Honeysuckle Creek personnel. I quoted Turbs comments, provided a link to the thread, asked if anyone had any comments regarding Turb's assertion that they were under NASA control.

Most quite understandably declined, correctly positing that people like Turbo will not accept anything they say that contradicts their beliefs, and so to try and rebut Turbs was a waste of effort. Some people, though, did choose to reply and so I present these: one short and two long.

Quote

Hi there!
I was a recorder operator @Hsk in 68/69 .. did 8,9,10,&11 You will find photos of me in the the HSK files. I'm now 70 .. and living in Thailand where I can afford to eat!
I was hired by a contractor called STC cables .. They were contracting to the department of supply, and that was contracting to NASA ... And No.. we did not always do what we were told to do .. we sometimes argued a better way .. when we had a point .. our guys were very committed and very sharp ..(And still are ).

SRT exercises arrived on a tape as far as I know ... and then we all had to get around the difficulties presented to us ... There are people here that will know the details.

In retrospect I'd say that it was totally impossible to hoax this stuff .. The computing power of the whole of the network in those days, was less than is in your mobile phone now .. It was simply not possible to send stuff to our station and have it sent back out!

The slow scan TV was beamed out by microwave to Canberra ,.. where a standard TV camera was pointed at the monitor and the resulting converted signal went to the network! The guy standing next to me was <name redacted by request>.. It took two of us to load a tape onto the VCR used then.!!

On the other side of this coin .. I'm quite sure that the story one of these guys is on about in another video .. the claim us that NASA went to the moon to pick up something they knew was there ... Is hot air as well, because the '11 spacecraft was lucky to land at all, and after the computer guidance failed it was landed manually at the last possible moment, with very little reserve fuel left ... There is NO way that they would have been able to control where they landed .. They just wanted a flat spot ANYWHERE! There is an animation showing the landing moves on the NASA site.

There was however, a heap of stuff that was kept secret and still is .. On the way to the moon .. second day of the "Translunar coast" We woke the guys through our station at about 4 am our time .. That was moon rise at the time in Canberra. The chat was about another space craft ... "Is it still there" was the opening line as I remember hearing it! " hang on .. I'll go have a look" ... some minute later ... " yes its still there " ... " can you tell how big it is ?" ... " no I don't know how far away it is!"... " Ok .. we will debrief you later". No one else on this planet had the capability to be there!

The preamble to that was in MAD station the pass before ours .. ..." Uh .. where is the CS4 ?" .. "Don't know .. I'll check it out" .. " ... Its 6000 miles from you and heading in a different direction .. Why?" ... "Huh .. well I guess its not that then .. "

It was not the only one of these adventures .. there were lots ... including a sighting of a parked craft from the lunar buggy .. up the hill and off camera! ... and they are still happening .. with the occasional film from the space station sneaking out.

On a later mission they did pick up a piece of one of the surveyors .. and bring it home .. NASA added it to heaps of metal and coined some medals for everyone in the network .. I have one!

I'm not generally a gullible person ...
(I'm not sure if I have permission to post their name, so I'll leave it out)

Next, an observation for Turbs:

Quote

"I’m glad to see that your comprehensive analysis of Project Apollo isn’t complicated by any knowledge of the subject.”

Stan Anderson
ARIA Control, 1967-71

Quote

I think I've been across this group before, and I think I was the author of the quote (repeated below). So have no more to add. There are still quite a number of us who either had to be part of the hoax, or somehow taken in by it. And, by extension, all the other missions before and after Apollo, manned and unmanned, that many of us were actively involved with. You can throw that in the ring if you like.

Mike Dinn-- Canberra

"But there is an even stronger and more pertinent argument involving "telemetry". There was a world-wide tracking network providing communications to and from the various Apollo mission elements and although the people involved in doing this were indirectly paid by the project, they were not all US government employees or even citizens. So they would have had to have been part of the conspiracy or taken in by it.

And as I was the Australian citizen employed by the Australian government responsible for running the operations at the prime Australian tracking site here near Canberra I can vouch for the scientific/engineering fact that we pointed our antenna at the trajectory to, at and from the moon and transmitted and received radio signals containing commands, telemetry, television together with navigation info from antenna angles, Doppler frequencies and two way range delays. Impossible to fake."


Thank you to all the people who replied, and thank you for your efforts in achieving what I consider to be our greatest achievement ever. And fear not: for every one person that claims Apollo was faked, there are 100,000 that know better and appreciate the dedication of people like you.

Edited by Obviousman, 13 November 2012 - 10:03 AM.


#1357    Gaden

Gaden

    Conspiracy Theorist

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 935 posts
  • Joined:17 Sep 2010

Posted 13 November 2012 - 02:49 PM

I'd like to say thanks to all who responded, I especially liked Stan Anderson's quote "I’m glad to see that your comprehensive analysis of Project Apollo isn’t complicated by any knowledge of the subject.” I had a close call when I read that, as I was sipping coffee at the time.
Good work, Obviousman. (I feel I need to be using a deep, booming voice when I say that)

I'm trying to see things from your point of view, I just can't get my head that far up my butt

#1358    DONTEATUS

DONTEATUS

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 17,083 posts
  • Joined:15 Feb 2008

Posted 15 November 2012 - 12:59 AM

Thats a fact There are really no conspiracies about the Moon Landings,only people with out any logic or common sence !

This is a Work in Progress!

#1359    turbonium

turbonium

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 4,330 posts
  • Joined:14 Mar 2005

Posted 17 November 2012 - 05:32 AM

View Postfrenat, on 11 November 2012 - 01:49 PM, said:

you've already admitted you can't prove a thing.  No need to get snippy admitting it more.

Dealing with a brick wall is frustrating.

View Postfrenat, on 11 November 2012 - 01:49 PM, said:


As for providing YOU  a vidoe to help you prove or disprove YOUR theory, I already said your track record shows you'll likely avoid it anyway.

First of all, it is YOUR claim the footage/video in question was shown to us 'live', 'real-time'. And that rules out wires, no time to edit anything out.

That is YOUR claim.

And it is YOU who must support it.

Or else admit you cannot.
  

View Postfrenat, on 11 November 2012 - 01:49 PM, said:


Start answering your outstanding questions and maybe you'll find you get treated differently

After your last fiasco, may I suggest you review the thread and see if I've already answered them.

Then, f you're sure I didn't, let me know, and I'll gladly answer them.

How about showing a video(s) on the current issue, in the meantime?


#1360    skyeagle409

skyeagle409

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 30,218 posts
  • Joined:14 Apr 2006

Posted 17 November 2012 - 05:51 AM

View PostDONTEATUS, on 15 November 2012 - 12:59 AM, said:

Thats a fact There are really no conspiracies about the Moon Landings,only people with out any logic or common sence !

I guess there are those who just can't catch the message that there is no evidence the Apollo moon missions were hoaxed. Seems there are those who can't accept the reality of the Apollo moon missions despite the overwhelming evidence.

Quote

Apollo 14

Return, splashdown and quarantine

On the way back to Earth, the crew conducted the first U.S. materials processing experiments in space.

The command module Kitty Hawk splashed down in the South Pacific Ocean on February 9, 1971 at 21:05 [UTC], approximately 760 nautical miles (1,410 km) south of American Samoa. After recovery by the ship USS New Orleans, the crew was flown to Pago Pago International Airport in Tafuna for a reception before being flown on a C-141 cargo plane to Honolulu. The Apollo 14 astronauts were the last lunar explorers to be quarantined on their return from the Moon.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apollo_14

Apollo lunar landing launch window: The controlling factors and constraints

http://history.nasa....window/lw1.html


Edited by skyeagle409, 17 November 2012 - 06:07 AM.

KEEP YOUR MACH UP AND CHECK SIX

#1361    turbonium

turbonium

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 4,330 posts
  • Joined:14 Mar 2005

Posted 17 November 2012 - 06:30 AM

View PostGaden, on 11 November 2012 - 04:18 PM, said:

First of all, you need to improve your comprehension skills. I did not use a quote from you, that was an excerpt from the link I mentioned. If you had bothered to read it, you'd have known it was from a guy who actually did the tracking, in other words, someone who knows what he is talking about). Reading it, in fact, would have made your post  moot. I do thank you, though, for corroborating. It's pretty obvious who doesn't "get it". Furthermore, avoidance is a goofball tactic.


Do you see the sentence below, in italics?

So it's obviously NOT "impossible to fake".

I wrote it. And you posted it. So you DID quote me after all, right?

Now, do see what I've bolded below?

blah, blah, blah, blah

So it's obviously NOT "impossible to fake".
blah, blah, blah


You posted it as my quote - that I said all of it.

Perhaps you meant "blah, blah, blah" to note that material was posted before and after my quote. But it failed to do that. Nothing indicates what I did say from what I didn't say. No quotation marks. No italics. No bolding. Nothing.

You need to improve your comprehension skills, as well as your writing skills.


#1362    skyeagle409

skyeagle409

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 30,218 posts
  • Joined:14 Apr 2006

Posted 17 November 2012 - 06:39 AM

The Apollo 15 Hammer-Feather Drop


At the end of the last Apollo 15 moon walk, Commander David Scott (pictured above) performed a live demonstration for the television cameras. He held out a geologic hammer and a feather and dropped them at the same time. Because they were essentially in a vacuum, there was no air resistance and the feather fell at the same rate as the hammer, as Galileo had concluded hundreds of years before - all objects released together fall at the same rate regardless of mass. Mission Controller Joe Allen described the demonstration in the "Apollo 15 Preliminary Science Report":


During the final minutes of the third extravehicular activity, a short demonstration experiment was conducted. A heavy object (a 1.32-kg aluminum geological hammer) and a light object (a 0.03-kg falcon feather) were released simultaneously from approximately the same height (approximately 1.6 m) and were allowed to fall to the surface. Within the accuracy of the simultaneous release, the objects were observed to undergo the same acceleration and strike the lunar surface simultaneously, which was a result predicted by well-established theory, but a result nonetheless reassuring considering both the number of viewers that witnessed the experiment and the fact that the homeward journey was based critically on the validity of the particular theory being tested.


Joe Allen, NASA SP-289, Apollo 15 Preliminary Science Report, Summary of Scientific Results, p. 2-11


http://nssdc.gsfc.na...ather_drop.html

KEEP YOUR MACH UP AND CHECK SIX

#1363    turbonium

turbonium

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 4,330 posts
  • Joined:14 Mar 2005

Posted 17 November 2012 - 07:18 AM

View PostDBunker, on 13 November 2012 - 12:38 AM, said:

I dont believe I have ever seen a case of willful ignorance this clear before.

Turb.... what would it take for you to accept the landings as fact??

Two ways, but only one is feasible.

To go there is the best way, but it's clearly not possible.

Second best way is with telescopes, but still only possible for a few people able to view personally. And I'd have to see it with my own eyes to accept it.

Would the opposite - seeing no sites - convince you it was a hoax?


#1364    Czero 101

Czero 101

    Earthshattering Kaboom

  • Member
  • 5,140 posts
  • Joined:24 Dec 2007

Posted 17 November 2012 - 07:53 AM

View Postturbonium, on 17 November 2012 - 05:32 AM, said:

Dealing with a brick wall is frustrating.

Yes.... it is.... so now you understand how we feel when dealing with you.

Quote

First of all, it is YOUR claim the footage/video in question was shown to us 'live', 'real-time'. And that rules out wires, no time to edit anything out.

That is YOUR claim.

And it is YOU who must support it.

Or else admit you cannot.

*sigh*.

Must you be reminded YET AGAIN just who has the burden of proof here?

Here's a hint: IT IS YOUR BURDEN TO PROVE YOUR "WIRES" THEORY CORRECT.

View Postturbonium, on 17 November 2012 - 07:18 AM, said:

Two ways, but only one is feasible.

To go there is the best way, but it's clearly not possible.

Second best way is with telescopes, but still only possible for a few people able to view personally. And I'd have to see it with my own eyes to accept it.

Would the opposite - seeing no sites - convince you it was a hoax?

So, please tell us... which telescopes exist today that are able to image the landing sites in enough detail to see the equipment / artifacts present there?

Oh, and if you can do it without referring to your woefully misinformed theories involving your kindergarten-level understanding of the VLT, that would help speed the process along.





Cz

Edited by Czero 101, 17 November 2012 - 08:04 AM.

"Thinking is critical, because sense is not common..." - GreaterSapien

"For it is the natural tendency of the ignorant to believe what is not true. In order to overcome that tendency it is not sufficient to exhibit the true; it is also necessary to expose and denounce the false." – H. L. Mencken

#1365    skyeagle409

skyeagle409

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 30,218 posts
  • Joined:14 Apr 2006

Posted 17 November 2012 - 08:55 AM

View PostDBunker, on 13 November 2012 - 12:38 AM, said:

I dont believe I have ever seen a case of willful ignorance this clear before.

Turb.... what would it take for you to accept the landings as fact??

Apparently, he has been overlooking and dismissing overwhelming evidence that proved beyond any doubt, the Apollo moon missions were not hoaxed. Photos and tracking information from countries around the world have been presented, which confirmed the reality of the Apollo moon landings.

KEEP YOUR MACH UP AND CHECK SIX