Craig Lamson Posted January 9, 2007 Share Posted January 9, 2007 That's what the article said ... Vaporized .... As in ; burnt to a crisp from the intense deep space radiation .Here's what you said .... "Obviously the government doesn't control all the media, or you wouldn't be able to post. ..." News flash my friend .. The internet is not part of the media , and remains one of the few places where freedom of speech is still allowed .. but probably not for long if that idiot still in the White House has anything to do with it . The media would be the government controlled newspapers , radio and TV broadcasts ... LOL! I guess the FOX broadcast of the moon hoax material never happend. Duane, your fingers are writing checks your mind can't cash... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duane Daman Posted January 9, 2007 Author Share Posted January 9, 2007 The Fox network almost lost it's licence for airing that program .... Fox was very daring in those days and decided to go not only go with the 'Conspiracy Theory : Did We Land on the Moon' program but also with the Roswell Alien Autopsy film footage , which they also got plenty of flack for . I remember quite well the false accusations made against Fox at the time ... Other networks tried to make them look as if the station was run by some kind of communist traitors ... and all kinds of hateful jokes were made about the network , saying that they should stick to cartoons like the Simson's because that's all they were good for .... I guess all the threats and the ensuing media circus paid off too , becasue Fox no longer shows anything controversal anymore ... At least nothing that our watch dog government would disaprove of anyway . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craig Lamson Posted January 10, 2007 Share Posted January 10, 2007 The Fox network almost lost it's licence for airing that program .... Fox was very daring in those days and decided to go not only go with the 'Conspiracy Theory : Did We Land on the Moon' program but also with the Roswell Alien Autopsy film footage , which they also got plenty of flack for .I remember quite well the false accusations made against Fox at the time ... Other networks tried to make them look as if the station was run by some kind of communist traitors ... and all kinds of hateful jokes were made about the network , saying that they should stick to cartoons like the Simson's because that's all they were good for .... I guess all the threats and the ensuing media circus paid off too , becasue Fox no longer shows anything controversal anymore ... At least nothing that our watch dog government would disaprove of anyway . Cites please, your words mean nothing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Greer Posted January 10, 2007 Share Posted January 10, 2007 (edited) I thought the nasa monkey launch was common knowledge among the nasa geeks ... But maybe not ... It's not like it's any information that any one of you would like to really know about anyway because the MONKEY DIED just a few days before the Apollo 11 launch .... I have read this information on many sites and will see if I can find it again for you .... But it was a nasa mission ,so shouldn't this sad information be on the nasa sites along with their many proud accomplishments ? ... Maybe Dave or Steve or Craig or Evan can find it for you ... After all , they are all such clever rersearchers ... Compliments are always welcome! Here's the link you wanted. Sleep/Wake Activity Patterns of a Pig-Tailed Monkey During Nine Days of Weightlessness (P-1001D) Duane - I can find nothing to back up your claims except for "information" that spreads virally from one conspiracy site to another. I've seen this time and time again - someone on one conspiracy site makes a wild unsubstantiated claim, it gets repeated on several others, then it is claimed to be the absolute truth. Do you have any geniune sources or links I can check out? Cheers Edited January 10, 2007 by Dave Greer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Len Colby Posted January 10, 2007 Share Posted January 10, 2007 That's what the article said ... Vaporized .... As in ; burnt to a crisp from the intense deep space radiation . Which article? Did the author cite a source? Excuse me , but how would you know what has been classified and what hasn't been ? .... Do you work for nasa also ? ... I highly doubt that anyone's medical records would be considered top secret and classified ...That is unless there is something very damaging about them that needs to be kept hidden ..... If the medical records included CIA debriefing , or possible brainwashing techniques , or possible mental disorders because of being forced to lie to the entire world , while pretending to be heros , when all you really are is a bunch of fly boys and bad actors , then I can see why Johnson ordered their medical records sealed . Since you suggested NASA files are classified a good question is "how would you know what has been classified and what hasn't been ?" please provide a citation for this claim.Why would personal medial records be classified? Perhaps because they are personal information would want your medical records made public? If you answer yes you're in the majority, most people consider their medical records to he highly personal. If there was such a massive cover-up why would they release fake medical records? I thought the nasa monkey launch was common knowledge among the nasa geeks. LOL this from the guy who complains about his opponents resorting to personal attacks, I noticed that one of his posts was so obnoxious it was edited by one of the moderators. Funny when he or Jack do it is somehow OK. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duane Daman Posted January 10, 2007 Author Share Posted January 10, 2007 (edited) Geek is not a defamatory term .... but paraniod, delusional , ignorant , stupid , clueless etc. are ... and I have been called all of these things here and more , ever since I made the collosal mistake of joining and then posting on this forum ... and I have no idea what remark of mine was so "obnoxious" that it deserved to be deleted . I thought this being an Education Forum that it would be different from the other forums , where insulting the opposition is the only way to 'win' the debate ... but the insidious insults are the same here as on every other forum where Apollo is 'discussed' .... It's quite a game plan the nasa defenders have going all over the internet .... First gang up on and then push all the right buttons to piss off the hoax believers ... and if your do you job right , they will finally give up and go away .... Well, congrats ! ... You have all accomplished that . Edited January 10, 2007 by Duane Daman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Len Colby Posted January 10, 2007 Share Posted January 10, 2007 Geek is not a defamatory term The editors of The American Heritage English Dictionary disagree 1. a. “A person regarded as foolish, inept, or clumsy. b. A person who is single-minded or accomplished in scientific or technical pursuits but is felt to be socially inept. http://education.yahoo.com/reference/dictionary/entry/geek .... but paraniod, delusional , ignorant , stupid , clueless etc. are... and I have been called all of these things here and morePehaps you can cite the times your critics have used such language to describe you what was the context. The only one I remember was paranoid and you were the first one to use the word. I’m sure if we comb over your posts which could find similar insults from you and especially Jack. You don’t like it when people say you ] are not knowledgeable about subjects like the Internet and photography but call others “masters of BS” and insinuate they are willfully blind, miss things so obvious a child could see them and defend the indefensible.and I have no idea what remark of mine was so "obnoxious" that it deserved to be deleted . If you truly don’t remember what “defamatory comments” John deleted you could send him a PM and ask him to remind you. I didn’t see it so I truly have no idea what it was. http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.ph...ost&p=88240 (LOL I saw did PM him you really don’t remember?) I thought this being an Education Forum that it would be different from the other forums , where insulting the opposition is the only way to 'win' the debate ... but the insidious insults are the same here as on every other forum where Apollo is 'discussed' ....LOL what a load of bunk, Evan Craig, Steve David and Kevin picked your arguments apartIt's quite a game plan the nasa defenders have going all over the internet .... First gang up on and then push all the right buttons to piss off the hoax believers ... and if your do you job right , they will finally give up and go away .... Well, congrats ! ... You have all accomplished that . “Live by the swoard…” actually you’re and not paranoid they DO connive to drive people who aren’t blind to the truth like you of the Net, they get bonus checks every time an HB quits a forum Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evan Burton Posted January 10, 2007 Share Posted January 10, 2007 (edited) It's quite a game plan the nasa defenders have going all over the internet .... First gang up on and then push all the right buttons to piss off the hoax believers ... and if your do you job right , they will finally give up and go away .... Well, congrats ! ... You have all accomplished that . “Live by the swoard…” actually you’re and not paranoid they DO connive to drive people who aren’t blind to the truth like you of the Net, they get bonus checks every time an HB quits a forum As I said in another thread, I don't do this for Duane. I'm fairly sure that no matter what evidence is placed before him, he will not alter his opinion. I do it so the lurkers get a different side of the story that Duane et al present, and - most importantly - are encouraged not to blindly accept anyones word about "facts" in these matters but instead go out and research events for themselves. They can contact various experts and gather opinions about matters which they are not qualified to judge (could the LM fly in space, would radiation have killed the astronauts, etc). There are photographic experiments they can reproduce to see if something is impossible or not. So that people go out with both eyes open, and make up their minds for themselves. I think it's vital that people do this, especially contacting the people that had first-hand knowledge of events. Go meet some of the astronauts. Talk to the people who were at Mission Control or helped build the spacecraft. The astronauts tend to like their privacy but still go out to plenty of public appearances. Other lesser-known people who were involved, such as the controllers, the technicians, the workmen, etc, are normally only too happy to relate their memories of that time to people who ask. These people are getting into their 60s now, and in the not too distant future we won't have anyone around who was actually there. Edited January 10, 2007 by Evan Burton Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Ulman Posted January 11, 2007 Share Posted January 11, 2007 From the OP... Speaking of the cameras, this may clarify a curious "fact" from the Apollo era . Officially, none of the custom-made Hasselblads the astronauts carried with them were brought home. This was said to have been to save weight and fuel on the return flight. One would think the historical and museum value of those cameras would have outweighed that consideration. Of course, if the intent was to limit the trail of evidence as much as possible, every piece of involved hardware that could be removed was one less potential clue. The cameras had built-in reticule screens that added those familiar cross-hairs to every picture, ostensibly to help the astronauts -who were clumsily encumbered in their suits- frame shots, and to aid in the later analysis of scale and position of the photo contents. This also made the images taken unique, distinct from any others. If the cameras were officially left in space or on the Moon, then any picture showing the cross-hairs would, ipso facto, have been taken during the missions. This has to be one of the sillier HB claims. The cameras were not “custom-made”. They were standard Hasselblad’s that were modified so that the astronauts could operate them fully suited. They have no value as a museum piece, anymore than any other piece of hardware flown during Apollo. Just a guess, but there were probably 15-20 cameras that were modified for “moon use”. 12 or 13 were actually flown for use on the on lunar surface. (1 for A-11 and 2 each for A13-A17 – I’m pretty sure A12 had 2 but not positive). Several more were used for training purposes here on Earth. Craig can correct me if I am wrong, but the base cameras were commercially available and I believe the reticule plate was available as well. The author asks - Why leave them behind? Fact 1 - They were of no real value once the astronauts were finished using them to take pictures. Fact 2 - There was a limited amount of weight the LM assent module could carry. Now you have a choice – you’re on the moon about to take off – do you bring back a camera body & lens, or the equivalent weight of lunar soil/rocks? Let me think… Wait... This is a hard one... He’s right! Lets bring back the cameras!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craig Lamson Posted January 11, 2007 Share Posted January 11, 2007 From the OP...Speaking of the cameras, this may clarify a curious "fact" from the Apollo era . Officially, none of the custom-made Hasselblads the astronauts carried with them were brought home. This was said to have been to save weight and fuel on the return flight. One would think the historical and museum value of those cameras would have outweighed that consideration. Of course, if the intent was to limit the trail of evidence as much as possible, every piece of involved hardware that could be removed was one less potential clue. The cameras had built-in reticule screens that added those familiar cross-hairs to every picture, ostensibly to help the astronauts -who were clumsily encumbered in their suits- frame shots, and to aid in the later analysis of scale and position of the photo contents. This also made the images taken unique, distinct from any others. If the cameras were officially left in space or on the Moon, then any picture showing the cross-hairs would, ipso facto, have been taken during the missions. This has to be one of the sillier HB claims. The cameras were not “custom-made”. They were standard Hasselblad’s that were modified so that the astronauts could operate them fully suited. They have no value as a museum piece, anymore than any other piece of hardware flown during Apollo. Just a guess, but there were probably 15-20 cameras that were modified for “moon use”. 12 or 13 were actually flown for use on the on lunar surface. (1 for A-11 and 2 each for A13-A17 – I’m pretty sure A12 had 2 but not positive). Several more were used for training purposes here on Earth. Craig can correct me if I am wrong, but the base cameras were commercially available and I believe the reticule plate was available as well. The author asks - Why leave them behind? Fact 1 - They were of no real value once the astronauts were finished using them to take pictures. Fact 2 - There was a limited amount of weight the LM assent module could carry. Now you have a choice – you’re on the moon about to take off – do you bring back a camera body & lens, or the equivalent weight of lunar soil/rocks? Let me think… Wait... This is a hard one... He’s right! Lets bring back the cameras!!! Na, who needs the cameras, lets just buy new ones! http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/compa.../models/mkw.htm http://www.clubhasselblad.org/museum/speci...lblad-mk70.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sid Walker Posted January 11, 2007 Share Posted January 11, 2007 The Fox network almost lost it's licence for airing that program .... Fox was very daring in those days and decided to go not only go with the 'Conspiracy Theory : Did We Land on the Moon' program but also with the Roswell Alien Autopsy film footage , which they also got plenty of flack for .I remember quite well the false accusations made against Fox at the time ... Other networks tried to make them look as if the station was run by some kind of communist traitors ... and all kinds of hateful jokes were made about the network , saying that they should stick to cartoons like the Simson's because that's all they were good for .... I guess all the threats and the ensuing media circus paid off too , becasue Fox no longer shows anything controversal anymore ... At least nothing that our watch dog government would disaprove of anyway . Cites please, your words mean nothing. I seem to recall Rumsfeld appeared on that amusing 'expose'. I wonder, could that be the real reason he was sacked as Defence Secretary? Guess he couldn't have been sacked immediately after the show. Too obvious. NASA agents controlling the White House had to use the excuses of Iraq & the Dems - just to mislead us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evan Burton Posted January 11, 2007 Share Posted January 11, 2007 I seem to recall Rumsfeld appeared on that amusing 'expose'. Sid, You're confusing it with the French 'mockumentry' called "Dark Side of the Moon"; Rummy was in that one. That one was very funny - especially the 'outtakes' at the end. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now