NASA moon capsule running late, full of problems

[GaryN]

I had tried to find photos from the Apollo mission that matched some of the transcriptions of conversation between the astronauts and mission control, without success.

Apollo 16

Orion: I'm looking out here at Stone Mountain and it's got - it looks like somebody has been out there plowing across the side of it. The beaches - the benches - look like one sort of terrace after another, right up the side. They sort of follow the contour of it right around.

Apollo 17

LMP: O.K. Al Buruni has got variations on its floor. Variations in the lights and its albedo. It almost looks like a pattern as if the water were flowing up on a beach. Not in great areas, but in small areas around the southern side, and the part that looks like the water-washing pattern is a much lighter albedo, although I cannot see any real source of it. The texture, however, looks the same.

A little later,

DMP: O.K. 96:03. Now we're getting some clear - looks like pretty clear high watermarks on this -

CMP: There's high watermarks all over the place there.

Also talk of 'tracks' that run along the surface, up the side of craters, and are of very regular thickness.
What I suspect is that they did go to the moon, but had a studio set somewhere so they could switch to studio mode when there was something they didn't want us to see coming from the moon.

[electriclife786]

I was wondering if you could travel in space without any considerations for plasma and electric force.Can you achieve this feat multiple times?
Astronauts described flash of light blinding them momentarily when in space. I think they said it was highly charged protons entering at high speed their suits and brains!
Can you walk on the moon with the kind of space suits they used?
Also I visited Cape Canaveral when little(25 years ago, i don't know about now), and was chocked with the kind of second grade equipments on show at their Kennedy Space Center Visitor Complex.
It didn't look like it was possible to go to the moon with that kind of equipments!
I was a little more impressed with Disney world pirates cove

[GaryN]

A suit with a metalic foil layer would keep any electrical charges outside.
http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Talk:Far ... raday_Suit
High energy particles will go through metal, and anyone who travels by aircraft has probably been hit many times by such.
NASA moves space station residents into a shielded area in times of high bombardment.

[bdw000]

For those interested, here are two short articles analyzing some parts of the space program:

For a wild comparison of moon launches to major incidents of the Viet Nam war (middle of article):
http://www.davesweb.cnchost.com/apollo.htm

For complaints about what appear to be patent lies of why some Mars probes failed a few years ago:
http://www.davesweb.cnchost.com/mars.htm

No proof here, but stuff that cannot be dismissed out of hand. Definitley food for thought.

As Robert Anton Wilson once wrote (from memory): "the dominant superstition of the scientific age is the belief in coincidance."

[electriclife786]

hello,
About post from:
bdw000 on Sat Jul 26, 2008 5:32 pm
Thank you for those links, a well written assortment of questions and speculations on moon landings.
About crater that should have been seen in moon landings, any valid explanation from NASA or cronies?

About second link, how on earth first class scientists and computer cracks be so stupid by not using same measurements?
Many time scientists from France, England and Russia joined in experiments, and they always adjusted their measurements, why not this time?
Unbelievable, again they have been caught by common sense!


I speculate they did go to the moon, using UFOs and using electrical model of the universe.

[bdw000]

hello,
About crater that should have been seen in moon landings, any valid explanation from NASA or cronies? ]

Sorry, no idea

About second link, how on earth first class scientists and computer cracks be so stupid by not using same measurements?
Many time scientists from France, England and Russia joined in experiments, and they always adjusted their measurements, why not this time?
Unbelievable, again they have been caught by common sense!

I agree: the explanation simply cannot be true.

I speculate they did go to the moon, using UFOs and using electrical model of the universe.

A definite possibility, but do any of us have any chance of ever knowing that? Probably not.

Also keep in mind that most writings about faked moon landings do have errors: in the above link the author complains about no stars being in the photos, which does not seem to be a valid complaint. Do you see stars in photos of your backyard during the day?

[redeye]

For complaints about what appear to be patent lies of why some Mars probes failed a few years ago:

We got into this on the old forum some time ago. There were many different reasons for the failure of each Mars probe but basically it boiled down to inferior materials and workmanship. As for the "inches - centimetres" debacle, check out the problems with Cassini's data transfer after the launch of the probe.

Actually, I can't find any info on this, but basically, after launching the Cassini/Huygens probe into LEO it was programmed to test it's various systems. The frequency it was using to send info back was incorrect so it had no way of returning info back to Earth (they fixed it by changing the speed of the probe as it was transmitting therefore changing the relative wavelength of the transmission).

My point is that this is the most expensive and ambitious project attempted and they made the most basic error possible.

If you wanted to test SDI capabilities there's a very long list of stuff that you could shoot at before you start taking out Mars probes, and apart from anything else, these probes failed at Mars...not in Earth orbit.

Cheers!

[junglelord]

Edgar Mitchell sets record straight on his recent disclosure.
http://www.ufodigest.com/news/0708/record-straight.html
His involement is meant to be that of the carrier of information that Roswell is real. It was outside NASA, and therefore the two having nothing to do with one another. He was chosen by a group of men who were directly involved with Roswell to carry the truth after their death.


you decide what you want, thats what he says. He has no firsthand evidence.

http://www.ufodigest.com/news/0708/record-straight.html

[redeye]

Thanks for the link JL, I loved reading the UFO stuff you posted on the old forum. I want to believe this sort of story but it almost always boils down to accepting somebodies word.

I want to believe

Cheers!

[nick c]

Edgar Mitchell sets record straight on his recent disclosure.

Here we have an enigma, or rather a contradiction. If we take Edgar Mitchell at his word, ie that he is sincere (right or wrong, he believes what he says is true concerning UFO's, and I do) than what are we to make of the fact that he has not come out and declared that the lunar landings were a hoax? This man was a part of the Apollo program and was a pilot on a moon landing. Why would he come out and declare the government was covering up UFO's and not mention the alleged lunar landing hoax? And if he was a part of a lunar landing hoax doesn't he lose all credibility as far as his UFO declarations?

Nick C

[BullSchmutz]

Well that astronaut admitted he conducted ESP exeriments during his Apollo flight with his friends back on earth.... so... he was a little bit cooky even before he left earth.

[junglelord]

Nick C I agree 100%. He might be a plant, double agent, who knows. I guess he could be what he claims. I don't think he would tell about the apollo stuff, either way. After all the Roswell group that gave him the job of keeper of the truth probably believed he did go to the moon themselves. I doubt he wants to spill the beans on everything. If your in the history books for going to the moon, why blow it, even if you did not? I would not, I would lie.


Does that make you untrustworthy> hard to say since we are talking national security. After all Roswell was as secure as they came back then. So if he blows national security, you got to ask how much can anyone trust him. Then again some disclosure seems to stem from the fact that the people in the know claim its wrong to keep it hidden. Maybe personal conscious is over riding national security on this issue.
http://www.timothygood.co.uk/
Thats basically what Mitchell is saying. Or it could be another smoke screen by the CIA?

Speaking of the CIA....well the CIA have spent millions on ESP, Remote Viewing and such.
http://www.rviewer.com/
I wonder how much is wasted millions with flights of fancy. Or is there a reason that they spent that kind of money on that research? Was it a total write-off, or did they actually make headway with Remote Viewing? I am not in support of or against research into altered states of consciousness, but some people some where decided that ESP was worth millions to investigate, and the CIA took it very seriously. Since that was around the same time as the apollo stuff, maybe it was more koshar at that time?

[bdw000]

Concerning radiation shielding that apparently was NOT necessary for Apollo:

http://www.davesweb.cnchost.com/nwsltr76.html from the page:

In completely unrelated news, NASA issued a curious report in June of this year [2005] that read, in part, as follows:

NASA's Vision for Space Exploration calls for a return to the Moon as preparation for even longer journeys to Mars and beyond. But there's a potential showstopper: radiation. Space beyond low-Earth orbit is awash with intense radiation from the Sun and from deep galactic sources such as supernovas. Astronauts en route to the Moon and Mars are going to be exposed to this radiation, increasing their risk of getting cancer and other maladies. Finding a good shield is important. (http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2005 ... tatics.htm)

Now, a person with questionable cognitive skills, such as myself, might assume that finding a good radiation shield would have been important back in the Apollo days as well. I mean, surely we must have solved this little technical problem back in the sixties, because we obviously couldn't have sent our boys to the moon without a suitable radiation shield. Right?

This is all a little confusing to me. On the one hand, we have a bold claim that new photographic evidence exists proving that man has indeed walked on the moon. But on the other hand, we have an acknowledgement straight from the horse’s mouth that even now, nearly forty years after the fact, and with technology having advanced by light-years during that forty years, we still haven't figured out how to make manned space travel possible.

The only reasonable explanation that I can come up with is that space radiation must have only become a problem in recent years. In the ‘60s and early ‘70s, space was apparently relatively free of radiation, allowing unshielded Apollo rockets to cruise about without a care in the world, while crew members primarily busied themselves with trying to figure out how to capture all the stems and seeds that were floating around the capsule as a result of cleaning their stash of low-grade ‘60s marijuana. It was just a different solar system back in those days. As aging hippies like to say, if you remember the solar system of the sixties, you weren’t really flying around in it.

If it proves not to be the case that this space radiation “showstopper” is a new development, then I guess what probably happened is that we did indeed have the technology back in the '60s to send men to the moon, but at some point during the intervening decades, that technology was simply lost. Maybe the information was stored on a single PC that suffered a major hard-drive crash, destroying all the precious data.

Oh wait … that can't be right, come to think of it, because we didn't even have PCs back in the day. But we had lots of other cool stuff, like rotary telephones, and transistor radios, and Brownie cameras, and ‘electric football’ games, and black-and-white televisions that received up to 13 channels without the use of a remote control device. So it’s easy to see how, with cutting-edge technology like that, we might have been a little more advanced in the ‘60s in the field of space travel than we are today.

What probably happened was that an overzealous night custodian simply threw the data away. The conversation around the NASA water cooler the next day probably went something like this: "Holy shit! Has anyone seen the file that I left on my desk last night?! That was the only copy of the secret formula that I devised for building a space radiation shield! Do you realize that it could be forty years or more before someone else can duplicate it? My ass is so fired if I can’t find that file!”

I’m sure the boys at NASA, with all their fancy book learnin’ and all, can explain why it is that we now need a space radiation shield when we did just fine without one in the ‘60s. I’ll be waiting patiently for that explanation.

(emphasis added)

Can anyone refute, outright, this complaint? The "radiation problem" seems to be a valid complaint made by those who do not trust NASA.

[junglelord]

Basicly that hits the head on the nail. Add to this the video of them in low earth orbit, faking with pictures they are halfway to the moon, and the date and time indicate they should be half way to the moon during that shoot.....
The video is real, if the time and date is real, which I am sure it is, then its a total fakeout. No one can refute that video, clearly it was a deception, and this video was never to be public, so we have the smoking gun, both in the video and that press release.

Since no man has ever left low earth orbit and since the van allan radiation belts are much higher up, NASA is coming clean without coming clean on that press release, thanks for relating the basic problem with space travel has not been achieved. Thats because everyone in space is far below the belts, and in fact are only 300 miles up.

[StefanR]

Can anyone refute, outright, this complaint? The "radiation problem" seems to be a valid complaint made by those who do not trust NASA.

I you can make out what is said in this video. Bad audio, but I can remember Van Alllen in an other interview that was of better quality.
Fun footage by the way watch your step


The James Van Allen, Charles T Hawkins and his Whiz Kids Lecture on Moon Hoax
http://video.google.nl/videoplay?docid= ... mwCA&hl=nl


In some other statements I heared was that one the radiation at the time wasn't so high and another one was that the belts where no problem because the flight of the capsule would only take a very short while to pass through the belts.
But I don't know enough about this to say if this is true or not.