NASA has been CAUGHT retouching and switching photos

[Duane Daman]

NASA's "shrinking" budget has plenty of money for DoD black ops projects though.

And here's me thinking the Military had to pay for Military missions.

Although, I suppose if NASA are using civilian funds for military projects, I guess that's why they don't have enough to also go around disproving every crackpot "theory" about previous missions, eh?

Steve,

I know this isn't common knowledge, but NASA has been working for the US military and the Department of Defence for quite some time now.

NASA never was a "civilian" space agency and never will be.. Their claim of being that is just a cover story for what their missions to low earth orbit are really all about.

I have many of the DoD / NASA documents saved in my YouTube account and will happy to send you the proof of my claims, though it may take me awhile to find them, as these documents were sent to me a couple of years ago and therefore are buried many pages back in my account.

Meanwhile, may I suggest you Google any info you can find about NASA's involvement with the military.

[Dave Greer]

Meanwhile, may I suggest you Google any info you can find about NASA's involvement with the military.

I wouldn't be surprised if NASA and the US military have been involved to some degree in several projects. I don't know enough of the structure of either organisation to form a definite opinion as to whether NASA falls under the jurisdiction of the military, but I think it's unlikely, since Obama proposed that NASA and the Dept of Defense space programme should effectively merge.

"President-elect Barack Obama will probably remove barriers between the U.S. civilian and military space programs once he takes office, according to one report.

Bloomberg News reported late Thursday that Obama's transition team was exploring collaboration between NASA and the Pentagon in order to get America's next generation of spacecraft into orbit before the scheduled date of 2015."

Source

There have obviously been big spin-offs for the military from much of NASAs research (see link as example).

http://www.nasa.gov/pdf/381584main_Military_Contributions.pdf

As an outsider looking in, I hope NASA and the Dept of Defense stay separate, but as I don't pay any tax dollars I have absolutely no say in the matter!

[Steve Knight]

NASA is a civilian organisation.

It is an independent Executive Branch of the US Government. IE - it doesn't have a cabinet-level secretary.

Granted, at its creation in 1958, it absorbed parts of the military's research into space-based technologies, but also more educational and civilian scientific research complexes and projects.

Yes, they used Military pilots for their early manned missions, but wasn't that because it was more ecumenical than training someone for high-stress jobs from the ground-up? Also of note is most of them, if not all, were test pilots - practised in flying brand-spanking-new craft upto and beyond its design-envelope. So they weren't going to be that unprepared for emergencies.

Besides the manned missions for getting to the moon, there were, and still are, many purely scientific missions - Mariner; Pioneer; Voyager, etc.

Do they still put military projects up into orbit? Yes, but then they've never really hidden that, only the specific contents, as required. And they make them pay for it.

So technically, yes, they work "for" them, but that's about it.

[Jack White]

I contacted Kipp at the Apollo Image Gallery and he went back into his files and found the B/W PRINT he had originally scanned. He made a new scan of the print and sent a crop along to me. He also noted that the scan from this print had been replaced by a much better scan from the original negative which resides on his site now.

IN any case I took this crop and opened it in photoshop, created a duplicate layer and placed the two images side by side. In the un-adjusted image, the see through nature of the wheel is evidenced in the shadow. However a simple curves adjustment later (the values are indicated in the curve dialog box)and the see through shadow effect is gone.

I really wish that people would take the time to actually investigate claims before making them.....

So?

[Jack White]

I consider calling my studies of obvious anomalies CRACKPOT THEORIES an unwarranted personal attack.

Jack

No one mentioned your name, but if the cap fits...

I consider this an unwarranted personal attack.

Jack

[Craig Lamson]

I contacted Kipp at the Apollo Image Gallery and he went back into his files and found the B/W PRINT he had originally scanned. He made a new scan of the print and sent a crop along to me. He also noted that the scan from this print had been replaced by a much better scan from the original negative which resides on his site now.

IN any case I took this crop and opened it in photoshop, created a duplicate layer and placed the two images side by side. In the un-adjusted image, the see through nature of the wheel is evidenced in the shadow. However a simple curves adjustment later (the values are indicated in the curve dialog box)and the see through shadow effect is gone.

I really wish that people would take the time to actually investigate claims before making them.....

So?

SO?

[Craig Lamson]

I consider calling my studies of obvious anomalies CRACKPOT THEORIES an unwarranted personal attack.

Jack

No one mentioned your name, but if the cap fits...

I consider this an unwarranted personal attack.

Jack

Do Apollo ct's retouch images?????

http://wn.com/Debunking_the_Mount_Hadley_Orbital_Photo_Conspiracy_Claim

[Duane Daman]

Meanwhile, may I suggest you Google any info you can find about NASA's involvement with the military.

I wouldn't be surprised if NASA and the US military have been involved to some degree in several projects. I don't know enough of the structure of either organisation to form a definite opinion as to whether NASA falls under the jurisdiction of the military, but I think it's unlikely, since Obama proposed that NASA and the Dept of Defense space programme should effectively merge.

"President-elect Barack Obama will probably remove barriers between the U.S. civilian and military space programs once he takes office, according to one report.

Bloomberg News reported late Thursday that Obama's transition team was exploring collaboration between NASA and the Pentagon in order to get America's next generation of spacecraft into orbit before the scheduled date of 2015."

Source

There have obviously been big spin-offs for the military from much of NASAs research (see link as example).

http://www.nasa.gov/pdf/381584main_Military_Contributions.pdf

As an outsider looking in, I hope NASA and the Dept of Defense stay separate, but as I don't pay any tax dollars I have absolutely no say in the matter!

"As an outsider looking in, I hope NASA and the Dept of Defense stay separate, but as I don't pay any tax dollars I have absolutely no say in the matter!"

I can't believe you're actually naive enough to believe that NASA and the Department of Defence have ever been seperate.. Especially considering the fact that NASA was established through Operation Paperclip, a CIA / military operation that hired Nazi rocket scientists to work for NASA.

The Apollo Program's own Wernher von Braun was even an ardent Nazi .. So not only was that when pure evil entered America, as the "the spoils of war", but it was also when pure evil went to work for that "civilian" space agency known as NASA, ie; Never A Straight Answer.

"Operation Paperclip was the Office of Strategic Services (OSS) program used to recruit the scientists of Nazi Germany for employment by the United States in the aftermath of World War II (193945). It was executed by the Joint Intelligence Objectives Agency (JIOA), and in the context of the burgeoning SovietAmerican Cold War (194591), one purpose of Operation Paperclip was to deny German scientific knowledge and expertise to the USSR[1] and the UK.[2]"

"The Office of Strategic Services (OSS) was a United States intelligence agency formed during World War II. It was the wartime intelligence agency, and it was the predecessor of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA). This agency was formed in order to coordinate espionage activities behind enemy lines for the branches of the United States military."

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

Edited September 13, 2010 by Duane Daman

[Dave Greer]

I can't believe you're actually naive enough to believe that NASA and the Department of Defence have ever been seperate.

As naive as President Obama, since it was he that suggested they merge! Which seems to support the notion that they have at least some degree of seperation.

Especially considering the fact that NASA was established through Operation Paperclip, a CIA / military operation that hired Nazi rocket scientists to work for NASA.

Operation Paperclip took place in 1945. NASA was created in 1958. Von Braun worked for the US Army in the intervening period, before joining NASA. I suppose by extension you could say that NASA was created indirectly by the recruitment policies of Operation Paperclip. Clearly there is a degree "cross-pollination" between NASA and the military, but in terms of its present structure, you must be privy to better knowledge than your president, since he is the one who wants NASA and the Dept of Defence space programmes to merge to save money!

[Duane Daman]

I can't believe you're actually naive enough to believe that NASA and the Department of Defence have ever been seperate.

As naive as President Obama, since it was he that suggested they merge! Which seems to support the notion that they have at least some degree of seperation.

Especially considering the fact that NASA was established through Operation Paperclip, a CIA / military operation that hired Nazi rocket scientists to work for NASA.

Operation Paperclip took place in 1945. NASA was created in 1958. Von Braun worked for the US Army in the intervening period, before joining NASA. I suppose by extension you could say that NASA was created indirectly by the recruitment policies of Operation Paperclip. Clearly there is a degree "cross-pollination" between NASA and the military, but in terms of its present structure, you must be privy to better knowledge than your president, since he is the one who wants NASA and the Dept of Defence space programmes to merge to save money!

If you believe anything any politician says, then you're more naive than anyone on the freaking planet!

NASA and the DoD are connected at the hip and always have been .. Anyone who believes differently doesn't know the truth.

Department of Defense Manned Space Flight Support Office

"Chartered in 1958 by the Secretary of Defense, DDMS was originally formed with the express purpose of providing much needed DoD support to our initial manned space flight effort ... putting people into space and returning them safely to Earth.

Since those early days, the support office has continued to be the focal point for all DoD contingency support to Project Mercury, Gemini, Apollo, Apollo/Soyuz Test Project and Space Shuttle.

This support included astronaut and space capsule recovery, worldwide communications, tracking and data relay, public affairs, and medical support."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Department_of_Defense_Manned_Space_Flight_Support_Office#Operations

[Dave Greer]

If you believe anything any politician says, then you're more naive than anyone on the freaking planet!

Oh I agree! Anyone who believes everything all politicians says is indeed very naive. Why you would say that when I clearly said or inferred no such thing (about myself) is beyond me. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt, and assume you weren't just trying a cheap slur, but mis-read or mis-understood what I wrote.

It's on the record that Obama proposed that NASA and the Dept of Defence space programme should effectively merge: that infers that at present they are separate entities in terms of management structure and budget allocation(that doesn't preclude them working together). Either you know more than him, or he is lying for some reason, and only pretending he wants them to merge for reasons that are unclear.

[Jack White]

NASA seems to be playing catchup on CLEANUP.

Jack

[Duane Daman]

If you believe anything any politician says, then you're more naive than anyone on the freaking planet!

Oh I agree! Anyone who believes everything all politicians says is indeed very naive. Why you would say that when I clearly said or inferred no such thing (about myself) is beyond me. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt, and assume you weren't just trying a cheap slur, but mis-read or mis-understood what I wrote.

It's on the record that Obama proposed that NASA and the Dept of Defence space programme should effectively merge: that infers that at present they are separate entities in terms of management structure and budget allocation(that doesn't preclude them working together). Either you know more than him, or he is lying for some reason, and only pretending he wants them to merge for reasons that are unclear.

I didn't misunderstand what you wrote.. Nor was I making a cheap slur.. You quoted President Obama about the merging of NASA with the DoD, so naturally I assumed you agreed with him.

As for him lying, I doubt it .. More like he's been misinformed by the powers that be in NASA / DoD, which, as I stated before, are joined at the hip, and always have been.

Maybe I need to send you the documents, proving that most of NASA's "civilian" space missions were performed to place DoD spy sattelites into low earth orbit.

[Kevin M. West]

Jack, neither of those are crops of the images you claim they are. They have been photoshopped by conspiracy theorists. And they haven't been manipulated in the same way, so comparing them is silly.

Considering you haven't shown the originals of either, or told us exactly how they were both manipulated, your "study" is worthless.

Edited September 14, 2010 by Kevin M. West

[Duane Daman]

Jack, neither of those are crops of the images you claim they are. They have been photoshopped by conspiracy theorists. And they haven't been manipulated in the same way, so comparing them is silly.

Considering you haven't shown the originals of either, or told us exactly how they were both manipulated, your "study" is worthless.

Your accusation of one of the "conspiracy theorists" photoshopping that cheesy looking Apollo photo is just one of the disingenuous mind games I was reffering to on another thread here.

What proof do you have that anyone else photoshopped that phony Apollo photo, besides NASA?