Go Back   David Icke's Official Forums > Main Forums > Political Manipulation / Cover-Ups / False Flags

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 19-07-2007, 01:36 PM   #41
raffles
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Huddersfield
Posts: 691
Likes: 17 (12 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by david ickes bike View Post
Can you explain why you think they are lies instead of just throwing out insults?
Go thru the other threads, cant be arsed going over the same crap again.
raffles is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19-07-2007, 01:42 PM   #42
raffles
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Huddersfield
Posts: 691
Likes: 17 (12 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by david ickes bike View Post
Sorry not so as you state it says relay thats 2 trips the time delay difference would be wrong. Also a satellite orbiting the moon couldn't provide the coverage you would loose all communication every time it went around the side that faces away from the Earth.
Depends what type of orbit it was put into.

By the sounds of it, it wasnt going to be a problem when they ran their "simulation"
raffles is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19-07-2007, 02:17 PM   #43
frenat
Inactive
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 934
Likes: 0 (0 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by raffles View Post
The explanations are a pack of lies that my problem.
Which ones? How? What is wrong with them? If they are lies then you should be able to point to things that are wrong.

Quote:
Can i ask you, why do you spend so much time on websites defending the nasa position ? why do you give a shit if me and others dont beleive the nasa hype, why are you doing their job for them ?

Do you work for nasa or have you in the past.
No I don't work for NASA and never have. Why would that matter anyway if what I have to offer is facts?

Can I ask you, why so hostile? Why do you give a shit if I do believe the "NASA hype". Has it even occured to you that not all that we know about space and the moon comes from NASA? That most of it is backed up by other companies and other countries? If what NASA says is "hype" then why do so many other countries go along with it when it would be so easy to prove wrong? Why would NASA even start the "hype" when it would be inevitable that they would one day be found out? I came here to learn and discuss and meet nothing but hostility. If that is a general characteristic of those that believe in Icke's theories then maybe I don't want to learn more about them.
frenat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19-07-2007, 09:03 PM   #44
hagbard_celine
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Oxford
Posts: 4,364
Likes: 4 (4 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by raffles View Post
The signals would have been coming from this.

NASA launched the TETR-A satellite just months before the first lunar mission. The proclaimed purpose was to simulate transmissions coming from the moon so that the Houston ground crews (all those employees sitting behind computer screens at Mission Control) could "rehearse" the first moon landing. In other words, though NASA claimed that the satellite crashed shortly before the first lunar mission (a misinformation lie), its real purpose was to relay voice, fuel consumption, altitude, and telemetry data as if the transmissions were coming from an Apollo spacecraft as it neared the moon. Very few NASA employees knew the truth because they believed that the computer and television data they were receiving was the genuine article. Merely a hundred or so knew what was really going on; not tens of thousands as it might first appear
Really? That's new one on me. Have you got any more information?

Both NASA and the Russians sent unmanned craft to the moon before Apollo. (They probably sent many more that have not been declassified, both manned and unmanned!) To relay a signal from Earth to make it seem to come from the moon would be easy. You just send your signal to the craft up there and get it to repeat it back to you.

I'm sure if someone claimed to receive a radio signal from aliens the Skeptics wouldn't hesitate to use this very same arguement to challenge it! This is what happened in the movie "Contact".
__________________
"Lynda, you're sweet. From what I've seen of your world, do you think anybody votes for sweet?"
Doctor Who- Bad Wolf.

"Because he refused to compete in games for domination he was indomitable."
from The Dispossessed by Ursula le Guin

Last edited by hagbard_celine; 19-07-2007 at 09:34 PM.
hagbard_celine is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20-07-2007, 11:13 AM   #45
david ickes bike
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 112
Likes: 0 (0 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by raffles View Post
Depends what type of orbit it was put into.

By the sounds of it, it wasnt going to be a problem when they ran their "simulation"
Your right it wasnt going to be a problem on the simulation the same as loosing all communication with the CM each time it went behind the moon. Still periodic lose of communication from the Moons surface was not noted.

As for the type of orbit what orbit do you suggest that would result in the Moon never being in between the satellite and Earth?
david ickes bike is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20-07-2007, 11:15 AM   #46
david ickes bike
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 112
Likes: 0 (0 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by hagbard_celine View Post
Really? That's new one on me. Have you got any more information?

Both NASA and the Russians sent unmanned craft to the moon before Apollo. (They probably sent many more that have not been declassified, both manned and unmanned!) To relay a signal from Earth to make it seem to come from the moon would be easy. You just send your signal to the craft up there and get it to repeat it back to you.

I'm sure if someone claimed to receive a radio signal from aliens the Skeptics wouldn't hesitate to use this very same arguement to challenge it! This is what happened in the movie "Contact".
You just send your signal to the craft up there and get it to repeat it back to you. You say, you do realise that would throw the delay times out yes? More trips more time.
david ickes bike is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20-07-2007, 03:16 PM   #47
raffles
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Huddersfield
Posts: 691
Likes: 17 (12 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by david ickes bike View Post
Your right it wasnt going to be a problem on the simulation the same as loosing all communication with the CM each time it went behind the moon. Still periodic lose of communication from the Moons surface was not noted.

As for the type of orbit what orbit do you suggest that would result in the Moon never being in between the satellite and Earth?
All they needed to do was put in geo-stationary orbit around the moon and it will always face the earth
raffles is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20-07-2007, 03:38 PM   #48
david ickes bike
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 112
Likes: 0 (0 Posts)
Default

A geostationary orbit round the Moon would still leave the satellite behind the Moon at times.



Place the Earth anywhere outside the satellite and you will see it dosent always face Earth.

Last edited by david ickes bike; 20-07-2007 at 03:44 PM.
david ickes bike is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20-07-2007, 03:46 PM   #49
raffles
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Huddersfield
Posts: 691
Likes: 17 (12 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by david ickes bike View Post
I was under the impression this was orbiting the Moon was it in Earth or lunar orbit?
If u read my last post i said "geo-stationary orbit around the moon" geez.
No wonder pro nasa guys aint got a clue.

Im outta here...
raffles is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20-07-2007, 03:46 PM   #50
david ickes bike
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 112
Likes: 0 (0 Posts)
Default

www.clavius.org/techcomm.html
david ickes bike is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20-07-2007, 03:47 PM   #51
raffles
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Huddersfield
Posts: 691
Likes: 17 (12 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by david ickes bike View Post
Piss off with ur clavius bs. how many times do i have to state thats a pro nasa disinfo site..
raffles is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20-07-2007, 03:53 PM   #52
david ickes bike
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 112
Likes: 0 (0 Posts)
Default

You need to prove that to get me to believe it.

I could just as easily spout piss off with your hoaxers its all bullshit but i dont.
david ickes bike is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21-07-2007, 11:09 AM   #53
rocco marchegiano
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 34
Likes: 0 (0 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by raffles View Post
If u read my last post i said "geo-stationary orbit around the moon" geez.
No wonder pro nasa guys aint got a clue.

Im outta here...
Well it was in orbit round the Earth not the Moon and not geostationary. While tracked from Earth it would appear and be gone in minutes The orbit a 172 × 294 mile job required only took only 92 minutes to complete one revolution. It streaked across the sky and because of this it would have been useless to convince people that the signals were coming from the Moon. Some of the larger stations couldn't move quick enough to track it. Also as someone mentioned the transmission delay times would be out.
rocco marchegiano is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21-07-2007, 11:07 PM   #54
hagbard_celine
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Oxford
Posts: 4,364
Likes: 4 (4 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by raffles View Post
The signals would have been coming from this.

NASA launched the TETR-A satellite just months before the first lunar mission. The proclaimed purpose was to simulate transmissions coming from the moon so that the Houston ground crews (all those employees sitting behind computer screens at Mission Control) could "rehearse" the first moon landing. In other words, though NASA claimed that the satellite crashed shortly before the first lunar mission (a misinformation lie), its real purpose was to relay voice, fuel consumption, altitude, and telemetry data as if the transmissions were coming from an Apollo spacecraft as it neared the moon. Very few NASA employees knew the truth because they believed that the computer and television data they were receiving was the genuine article. Merely a hundred or so knew what was really going on; not tens of thousands as it might first appear
Sorry to push you again, raffles, but this is dynamite! Where did you hear about it?
__________________
"Lynda, you're sweet. From what I've seen of your world, do you think anybody votes for sweet?"
Doctor Who- Bad Wolf.

"Because he refused to compete in games for domination he was indomitable."
from The Dispossessed by Ursula le Guin
hagbard_celine is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22-07-2007, 02:39 AM   #55
raffles
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Huddersfield
Posts: 691
Likes: 17 (12 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by hagbard_celine View Post
Sorry to push you again, raffles, but this is dynamite! Where did you hear about it?
Hi Hagbard,
Heres the nasa link with some basic info.

http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/nmc/tmp/1967-123B.html

Ill dig up some further info later, im at work at the moment,
raffles is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24-07-2007, 10:11 PM   #56
hagbard_celine
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Oxford
Posts: 4,364
Likes: 4 (4 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by raffles View Post
Hi Hagbard,
Heres the nasa link with some basic info.

http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/nmc/tmp/1967-123B.html

Ill dig up some further info later, im at work at the moment,
Thanks!

__________________
"Lynda, you're sweet. From what I've seen of your world, do you think anybody votes for sweet?"
Doctor Who- Bad Wolf.

"Because he refused to compete in games for domination he was indomitable."
from The Dispossessed by Ursula le Guin
hagbard_celine is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30-07-2007, 03:36 PM   #57
hagbard_celine
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Oxford
Posts: 4,364
Likes: 4 (4 Posts)
Default

How many of you have seen the bonus material on "Secret Space 2"? What do you think of Marcus Allen's info on the Apollo 17 photoes? For those of you who haven't seen it, he points out how the pictures taken of Taurus Littrow are composites and montages; and that in some sections the same bits have been mistakenly pasted on twice. I'll try and find something online about it.

I saw Marcus Allen live last year and he came out with some amazing stuff about artifacts on thr moon.
__________________
"Lynda, you're sweet. From what I've seen of your world, do you think anybody votes for sweet?"
Doctor Who- Bad Wolf.

"Because he refused to compete in games for domination he was indomitable."
from The Dispossessed by Ursula le Guin
hagbard_celine is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30-07-2007, 04:04 PM   #58
sensimillia
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: stockholm
Posts: 347
Likes: 0 (0 Posts)
Default

i really haven´t researched the moonlandings to much, but i wonder how they landed the lunar module on the moon without getting as mush as a speck of dust on it? the pictures i´ve seen shows no trace of dust, nothing...
sensimillia is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-08-2007, 04:15 PM   #59
hagbard_celine
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Oxford
Posts: 4,364
Likes: 4 (4 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sensimillia View Post
i really haven´t researched the moonlandings to much, but i wonder how they landed the lunar module on the moon without getting as mush as a speck of dust on it? the pictures i´ve seen shows no trace of dust, nothing...
They also show plenty of dust around the craft that should have been blown away. It looks all the world to me like a stage prop that's been carried in and dumped there.
__________________
"Lynda, you're sweet. From what I've seen of your world, do you think anybody votes for sweet?"
Doctor Who- Bad Wolf.

"Because he refused to compete in games for domination he was indomitable."
from The Dispossessed by Ursula le Guin
hagbard_celine is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 27-08-2007, 11:56 PM   #60
kromagg
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 59
Likes: 1 (1 Post)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by chattanova View Post
Here's 33 things that need to be answered!



http://www.ufos-aliens.co.uk/cosmicapollo.html
I haven't been to the moon yet, so I don't know how bright exactly the stars will be compared to down here, but as a photographer I can say it's quite difficult to photograph them. Especially when it comes to adjusting shutter speeds to get optimal exposure for both subject (astronomers or vehicles) and also the stars.

However, it is suspicious that there weren't a lot of pictures released of the stars from the moon? (In spite of the fact astronomers aren't photographers and would probably screw it up :P )

In spite of that, I still do think it was faked. Probably a reasonably easy thing to fake if there was anything to fake at all.
__________________
"There will be peace; there will be peace when the people of the world... want it so badly, that their governments will have no choice but to give it to them. I just wish you could all see the earth the way that I see it... Beause when you really look at it, it's just one world..."
kromagg is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Tags
moon landing hoax, nasa apollo fakes

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 09:25 AM.


Shoutbox provided by vBShout (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.