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.


- - - - -

Hey whats that on the moon ?


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
361 replies to this topic

#1    Bogeyman

Bogeyman

    Poltergeist

  • Member
  • 2,841 posts
  • Joined:12 Oct 2004
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:The Emerald Isle

Posted 22 May 2006 - 09:57 PM

http://www.lunararcheology.org/station2_taurus.html


#2    Celumnaz

Celumnaz

    Telekinetic

  • Member
  • 7,039 posts
  • Joined:22 Aug 2003
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Texas

  • I don't know what I don't know.

Posted 22 May 2006 - 10:26 PM

That's the guy in the "other" space program.  The one that's not for public consumption.


#3    MID

MID

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 14,490 posts
  • Joined:06 Aug 2005
  • Gender:Male

  • ...The greatest error is not to have tried and failed, but that in trying, we did not give it our best effort.

Posted 22 May 2006 - 10:28 PM

Quote




That of course would be Dr. Jack, obviously standing a bit downslope from the boulder at Station 2, EVA 2 at 142:54:53 GET on Apollo 17.

The link is a complete howl  grin2.gif

...it is continually amazing to see the lunacy that these people put into their attempts at showing something that they'd like to believe.  It's almost laughable...that is, if it wasn't so sad. no.gif


#4    The Silver Thong

The Silver Thong

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 30,233 posts
  • Joined:02 Dec 2004
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Calgary Alberta Canada

Posted 22 May 2006 - 10:33 PM

Here  is something to look at

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ckr2w5XFJLw

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fltlD9YIdyI

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PfZwgMO-ZWA


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vgk1TQinLoA


Damn I can't find part 4 right now.  This is not concusive but it sure does make you think. What if it was faked.  I would have to say wow good job hehe.

Sittin back drinkin beer watchin the world take it's course.


The only thing god can't do is prove he exists ?

#5    The Silver Thong

The Silver Thong

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 30,233 posts
  • Joined:02 Dec 2004
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Calgary Alberta Canada

Posted 22 May 2006 - 10:37 PM

Quote


That of course would be Dr. Jack, obviously standing a bit downslope from the boulder at Station 2, EVA 2 at 142:54:53 GET on Apollo 17.

The link is a complete howl  grin2.gif

...it is continually amazing to see the lunacy that these people put into their attempts at showing something that they'd like to believe.  It's almost laughable...that is, if it wasn't so sad. no.gif



It's almost laughable
The evidience showing it was a fake is not however. That is why this keeps comming up. The van alder belt damn I hope thats what it's called could not have been traversed, even with todays tech. How did they do it with gold tinfoil.


Sittin back drinkin beer watchin the world take it's course.


The only thing god can't do is prove he exists ?

#6    MID

MID

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 14,490 posts
  • Joined:06 Aug 2005
  • Gender:Male

  • ...The greatest error is not to have tried and failed, but that in trying, we did not give it our best effort.

Posted 22 May 2006 - 11:04 PM

Quote


It's almost laughable
The evidience showing it was a fake is not however. That is why this keeps comming up. The van alder belt damn I hope thats what it's called could not have been traversed, even with todays tech. How did they do it with gold tinfoil.



Silver...

Yes, the evidence is laughable.  This is because it is not evidence.  The key to understanding this is knowledge.
You are obviously not familiar with this FOX TV aberration which aired some time ago.
It's pretty common knowledge that this "documentary" has been thoroughly trashed by those who know what happened and precisely how it happened.

You mean, I believe, the van Allen belts...and your arguement is rather silly, suggesting that they did it with gold tin foil. They did not (knowledge, again is the key to understanding this thing).

Forgive me if I've suggested you're silly.  I am not.  I realize from your comment that you are not versed in the sciences behind manned space flight, and I am stating that the arguement is silly from the perspective of someone who is so versed.

To explain:  

"Gold tin foil" was not used on Apollo (what you are referring to was actually a gold leaf mylar material that was used as external insulator on the LM descent stage, and had nothing to do with radiation protection during passage through the van Allen belts).  

The fact is that they could, and did pass through the van Allen belts, as every interplanetary spacecraft since has, without any adverse effects from van Allen radiation.

Dr. van Allen himself has stated that the idea that the radiation from the belts he discovered were impossible to pass through without detrimental effects to Apollo crews was a ridiculous notion.  I think that rather sums up the arguement, being that Dr. van Allen is the authority on those radiation belts...

The Apollo crews were in the CM during van Allen transit.   The CM was well insulated against any major radiation penetration, it's hull being rather thick in the crew-couch region, where the crew remained during this phase of the mission.   The transit through the radiation belts was very rapid, minimizing exposure, and you should know that every Apollo lunar mission was monitored by 5 different dosimeter sources in the spacecraft and on the crewmen themselves.

No Apollo crew member ever received a dose of radiation anywhere close to a danger level on any Apollo mission.

The reason this keeps coming up is that people do not take the time to investigate the immense documentation of Apollo and learn the facts of the matter for themselves.  Many people prefer the sensationalistic prattlings of the uneducated as they create crafty scenarios designed to prod the gullible into accepting the idea that the most documented scientific and engineering accomplishment in human history was a fake.

That too, is almost laughable...if it wasn't so sad.


#7    Zeus

Zeus

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,081 posts
  • Joined:14 Sep 2004
  • Location:London

  • The mind is Now.

Posted 22 May 2006 - 11:47 PM

Of course, no gulibility exists in what we believe we are told as official fact.


#8    ThickasaBrick

ThickasaBrick

    Extraterrestrial Entity

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 387 posts
  • Joined:22 Jul 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:USA

  • "Your wise men don't know how it feels to be thick as a brick." "I'll judge you all and make damn sure that no-one judges me."
    -Jethro Tull

Posted 23 May 2006 - 12:20 AM

That is a pretty wild picture, of what, I have no clue.
This is for those of you who believe that the lunar landings were faked. The only piece of proof which I can say is this. The Russians, who really disliked America at the time, would have been the first to come forward and say we didn't go there. They had the technology to track any spacecraft and the radio signals sent back. Don't you think they would have shown all the proof they could to discredit the capitalists, the Americans.
The Soviets basically gave up all ideas of a lunar landing after the "race" was lost. Any reason they could have found to disprove an american lunar landing they would have. Try thinking for yourselves for once. Not some information fed to you by smart people who probably have a slight problem with Mommy or Daddy's attention in their youth.

Edited by jgorman628, 23 May 2006 - 12:23 AM.


#9    MID

MID

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 14,490 posts
  • Joined:06 Aug 2005
  • Gender:Male

  • ...The greatest error is not to have tried and failed, but that in trying, we did not give it our best effort.

Posted 23 May 2006 - 12:23 AM

Quote


Of course, no gulibility exists in what we believe we are told as official fact.



If you "believe" anything, without actually having the experiential knowledge, then the gullibility factor is a player in the equation.

As I said, knowledge is a different thing.  Knowledge is the product of experience.   If you have that, then you don't any longer "believe".  You know.  


But you can go right ahead and "believe" that you're being gullible in listening to Dr. James van Allen, the foremost authority on the radiation belts that he discovered, when he stated rather clearly that there was no major threat to the astronauts in passing through the belts  (perhaps he was threatened with death if he revealed the truth   original.gif ).  You can take the voluminous medical reports, all of which indicate no major radiation exposure to any crewman, as fakes.

You may also take the tens of thousands of pages of scientific and engineeering documentation, the 25,000 photographs, the dozens of hours of TV and 16mm film as gibberish too...if you seriously think that is a realistic point of argument.




#10    MID

MID

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 14,490 posts
  • Joined:06 Aug 2005
  • Gender:Male

  • ...The greatest error is not to have tried and failed, but that in trying, we did not give it our best effort.

Posted 23 May 2006 - 12:42 AM

Quote


That is a pretty wild picture, of what, I have no clue.
This is for those of you who believe that the lunar landings were faked. The only piece of proof which I can say is this. The Russians, who really disliked America at the time, would have been the first to come forward and say we didn't go there. They had the technology to track any spacecraft and the radio signals sent back. Don't you think they would have shown all the proof they could to discredit the capitalists, the Americans.
The Soviets basically gave up all ideas of a lunar landing after the "race" was lost. Any reason they could have found to disprove an american lunar landing they would have.


Try thinking for yourselves for once. Not some information fed to you by smart people who probably have a slight problem with Mommy or Daddy's attention in their youth.



What picture is that you're referring to, jgorman?

You make a very good point, and a true one.
I will tell you that the Soviets lost the race to the moon in 1968, and as of July 1969, "gave up" on their effort completely because their capability to even test their lunar package was destroyed in a launch complex explosion on July 4, 1969.

Who are these "smart people" you refer to...who "probably have a slight problem with Mommy or Daddy's attention in their youth" ?

And what does that mean?

Just curious.


#11    punkmonkey123

punkmonkey123

    Ectoplasmic Residue

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 188 posts
  • Joined:10 Dec 2005

Posted 23 May 2006 - 12:53 AM

how dnow, ow could they have passed in this, when there is no room in the tiny thing to be insulated. how were they insulated?? if you can explain this to me, i would be suprised. how can you explain the footprints on the "moon's surface" when WE were the first on the moon?

and WHY dont we see the stars in the backround?? and im sur the russians would have tracked it, if we didnt SEE the ship go into space, i think what happened is we went into space, orbited the moon for several days, and went back, because how could the have done this correctly when there was footage of Niel armstrong eject the spacecraft right before it explodes at the cause of spinning and crashing? hmmm?


i have another little theory too, "it is called we need a better government because these people lie alot" theory

Edited by punkmonkey123, 23 May 2006 - 01:18 AM.


#12    RamboIII

RamboIII

    Killer Without Reason

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,124 posts
  • Joined:10 Jan 2006
  • Gender:Male

Posted 23 May 2006 - 12:54 AM

Quote


Silver...

Yes, the evidence is laughable.  This is because it is not evidence.  The key to understanding this is knowledge.
You are obviously not familiar with this FOX TV aberration which aired some time ago.
It's pretty common knowledge that this "documentary" has been thoroughly trashed by those who know what happened and precisely how it happened.

You mean, I believe, the van Allen belts...and your arguement is rather silly, suggesting that they did it with gold tin foil. They did not (knowledge, again is the key to understanding this thing).

Forgive me if I've suggested you're silly.  I am not.  I realize from your comment that you are not versed in the sciences behind manned space flight, and I am stating that the arguement is silly from the perspective of someone who is so versed.

To explain:  

"Gold tin foil" was not used on Apollo (what you are referring to was actually a gold leaf mylar material that was used as external insulator on the LM descent stage, and had nothing to do with radiation protection during passage through the van Allen belts).  

The fact is that they could, and did pass through the van Allen belts, as every interplanetary spacecraft since has, without any adverse effects from van Allen radiation.

Dr. van Allen himself has stated that the idea that the radiation from the belts he discovered were impossible to pass through without detrimental effects to Apollo crews was a ridiculous notion.  I think that rather sums up the arguement, being that Dr. van Allen is the authority on those radiation belts...

The Apollo crews were in the CM during van Allen transit.   The CM was well insulated against any major radiation penetration, it's hull being rather thick in the crew-couch region, where the crew remained during this phase of the mission.   The transit through the radiation belts was very rapid, minimizing exposure, and you should know that every Apollo lunar mission was monitored by 5 different dosimeter sources in the spacecraft and on the crewmen themselves.

No Apollo crew member ever received a dose of radiation anywhere close to a danger level on any Apollo mission.

The reason this keeps coming up is that people do not take the time to investigate the immense documentation of Apollo and learn the facts of the matter for themselves.  Many people prefer the sensationalistic prattlings of the uneducated as they create crafty scenarios designed to prod the gullible into accepting the idea that the most documented scientific and engineering accomplishment in human history was a fake.

That too, is almost laughable...if it wasn't so sad.


excellent points! People seem to forget that the astronauts DID recieve exposure to radiation, just not a lethal amount.  It would take many hours in the SAME SPOT for radiation to become harmful or lethal.


#13    Aristocrates

Aristocrates

    Extraterrestrial Entity

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 464 posts
  • Joined:02 Mar 2006
  • Gender:Male

  • A brother Seamus? Like an Irish monk?

Posted 23 May 2006 - 03:29 AM

the pic looks like a shadowed astronaut, nothing more thumbsup.gif

If you don't claim your humanity you will become a statistic.

#14    exeller

exeller

    Poltergeist

  • Member
  • 2,963 posts
  • Joined:18 Feb 2006
  • Gender:Male

Posted 23 May 2006 - 03:50 AM

During the Iranian revolution, the Iranians claimed they could see their presidents face on the moon. I got a laugh out of it happy.gif


#15    shikon1

shikon1

    Extraterrestrial Entity

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 459 posts
  • Joined:15 Jan 2006
  • Location:Chicago

  • Those who sacrifice liberty in the name of security deserve neither.

Posted 23 May 2006 - 04:50 AM

dont you think that someone that has to much time on their hands and doesnt like the government can make a fake moon landing and claim it to be real video?

Quote

Yet even as we speak, there are those who are preparing to divide us, the spin masters and negative ad peddlers who embrace the politics of anything goes. Well, I say to them tonight, there's not a liberal America and a conservative America there's the United States of America. There's not a black America and white America and Latino America and Asian America; there's the United States of America.

-Barack Obama




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users