Comments by "xFirstAidx" (@xFirstAidx) on "AT&T Tech Channel"
channel.
-
Guys, let's not get aggressive with each other and start throwing insults with the replies. Let's have a discussion and not an argument. Those who think this moon mission actually happened, can you please explain how the astronauts were able to receive audio signals from Earth to their space suits. Explain how video and then the audio from three different space suits were able to be synchronized into one format and then broadcasted live to the world...all from the moon. Explain how the broadcasting of this phone call from the oval office was able to be synchronized with the video and audio from (again) three different space suits , and broadcasted split screen (*)live(*) to the world.
Look at the size of computers, satellites etc that NASA had at mission control. Can you explain how it is possible to fit all that broadcasting and communication technology into a backpack, or even into the spacecraft? Look at the size of the space craft, it was barely the size of an R.V. How could it fit all the broadcasting equipment/ technology, and even more revealing, how could it fit all the space travel technology!! Coordination, acceleration, oxygen provisions, Pressurization etc etc etc?!?!! Please be reasonable and let's have a discussion. Or just throw out insults if you have nothing better to do.
8
-
8
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
5
-
5
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
3
-
@andrewburris4370 It is easy to provide rebuttals to the theories after the fact. It is all anecdotal repsonses though. Funny you should bring up the moon rocks. Some have been proven to be fake: http://www.nbcnews.com/id/32581790/ns/technology_and_science-space/t/moon-rock-museum-just-petrified-wood/
- how did they bring the moon rocks back to earth ? Adding weight to the cargo would have a large effect on fuel consumption, navigation, etc. Yet, everything went according to plan with no navigational alterations. How did they know the exact weight of moon rocks they could take back to earth? How did they know the impact of the unknown added weight ?
- where did they put this ton of moon rocks? You believe they had an empty trunk/storage space in the module and the shuttle?
- in the space module which landed on the moon, how did they fit so much broadcasting technology in such a small unit? You see mission control, you see how big their equipment is ? Really, how did they fit the material and technology in there: ability to record and combine video footage from three different sources, audio sources from two different sources. Integrate and coordinate all 5 sources into 1 signal and send it back to earth, all in real time. Where is this device? That broomstick size antenna?
- where is the technology to be able to receive a phone call - a land line- from the oval office , not Houston, on the moon, and repsond in real time (minus the delay of the speed of waves)?
Where is all this technology built in to their lunar module, which is the size of an RV? All this broadcasting equipment which is intelligent and completes all operation on its own, plus engines, navigation software, pressure systems, heating/cooling systems, general system monitoring. Again, compared to the size of the equipment needed at mission control, how is it possible all that for into the lunar module?
3
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@JohnM3665570 JohnM3665570 I must point out issues with your statements that you believe provide overwhelming evidence of the moon landing. Again, I don't know and we will not know. It was 50 years ago and all the items you mentioned are proved only anecdotally. At the same time, they can be argued against anecdotally.
- you contradict yourself with the moon rocks/petrified wood topic. You say it has been debunked and later state that the whole story is questionable. But what was debunked? I never said astronauts presented wood as moon rocks. I said the USA gave another country wood and claimed it was moon rocks. The government lies. The government has been caught lowing several times, and on very serious matters. This echos my point of where does the truth begin and the fakery end? There is no way a single individual, the US ambassador, decided to pick up some wood from Antarctica and present it as moon rocks. The orders were sent downhill from the top. The same hierarchy which conducted this fake phonecall with Nixon and the moon. This phone call was all for theatrics.
The claim that other countries would have exposed the fake moon landing....would they of? Did they have the tech at the time? During the time period of the cold war, for some reason, USA and Russia along with many other countries signed the Antarctica peace treaty. Why are they allies all of a sudden? What did they find in Antarctica that was powerful enough to make them put the war aside for this treaty?
The ISS, as the name states, houses Americans and Russians at the same time. Friends in space, but enemies on land? There is more going on than we are privy to. The 1% has always been the 1% and will always be. They make the rules.
Again, I don't have a clear opinion. But I won't deny the amount of suspicion about this event. I know you have heard all this before but the thing is that you cannot provide something reasonable for the rebuttal:
- lost telemetry data. The most significant event of mankind and the one thing that could prove authentication is missing/destroyed
- Richard Nixon is a proven crook. Warner VB is a proven crook/nazi/murderer. We are supposed to blindly trust these individuals?
- how did we leave low earth's atmosphere, many scientist state we cannot with our current tech
- how did the spacesuits function in a near vacuum? It was never proven successful on earth in NASA's vacuum chamber.
- how did the cameras and film survive the extreme temperatures of outer space. They were off the shelf cameras. Later missions, nasa bragged about their new jacketing for the cameras which would resist the hot/cold temps of outer space. Why did they not need it before?
- the interview of the astronauts of Apollo 11 on their return have been analyzed by experts, and the conclusion is that they are lying. For one, their accounts of outer space (eg. That stars were not visible) contradicts what our astronauts are saying today (eg. Stars are visible and extremely vibrant).
2
-
2
-
2
-
@JohnM3665570 hi John, you have been making a lot of assumptions and accusations of my character and thoughts. It is rude. It's a weak support for your arguments, to try to define the other person and their thought patterns.
I never said i do not trust the government. I merely stated that the government has lied to to public in order for their own benefit. The conclusion being is that the government does lie and does not lie, depending on each individual circumstance. Therefore we cannot take the gov's word for gospel, we have to evaluate without bias.
Yes, WVB was a Nazi, but he was also a murderer. He traded sides to save his own ass. He never had to account for his crimes. What that has to do with the moon landing? Very little. My point is that his character is not accurately represented in NASA's history, and is his word trustworthy? That is hard to define, but is something that should be on the back of the arguments.
For the thousands of NASA employees who worked long and hard to make the moon landing, how many employees actually knew what was going on, what was being discussed 2-3 levels above their role? The Manhattan Project, 50,000 ppl all compartmentalized and not knowing what they were building. Each role had a specific duty and was not privy to any further knowledge. The USA has demonstrated that they are capable of having 10s of thousands of individuals working on a single project without leakage of information and with revealing minimal to zero information to the majority. Now, is this what happened at NASA? Hard to say, but evidence suggests yes as interviews with employees show they knew nothing other than their specific task.
The Antarctica Treaty was signed during the cold war, AND more importantly during the Cuban missile crisis. So Russia signs a treaty with the USA that they won't militarize Antarctica, but at the same time they militarize Cuba? What was in Antarctica that is so sensitive that the entire world agrees not to let general public to the continent?
You mention the cruises and tours of Antarctica that are available. No. There are no tour or travel across the continent available to the public. Look into it. You can visit the outskirts of the land, but you cannot venture further. Look into it. Similar to visiting an army base. They have tourism stops setup, you get to see a jet up close, a tank up close, the gift shop. But are you allowed to walk through the facilities and bunkers? Nope. Antarctica has been militarized by a few to several nations.
Here's something easy for you to do. Google satellite Antarctica. It's all censored. What are they hiding?
The ISS has not been traveling through lower earth's atmosphere for the past 20 years. There is sooooo much evidence with their promotional videos (all easily found on YouTube) which show they are using augmented virtual reality in combination with their zero gravity plane to simulate they are in space. I will post some links to videos and please have an open mind. It is clear they are faking the videos.
The telemetry data. Why don't you think it's a big deal!? Yes there were several other missions..... And all the telemetry data was "lost" for those as well. I mean, c'mon. Look at it unbiased. It's not like the public was asking for the telemetry data 20, 30, or 40 years after the fact. They were asking for it with 3 years of the Apollo program. And, oops, we cant find it. We cannot find the single piece of evidence that would, without a doubt, prove that the moon landings happen. The greatest accomplishment of mankind. And for some reason we lost it. We have Mike Collins journal and crayon sketches. But we lost the most important evidence, the one thing you cannot fake, we lost it. Oops!
Yes, un-manned space travel. You proved my point for me, that humans cannot withstand the trip. And you are correct in saying that just because we know, for a fact, that we cannot go through the van Allan belts at this current time, it doesn't mean that Apollo never made it through 50 years ago. BUT, being reasonable and logical, it alludes to the fact that we couldn't before, no? Please explain to me why you think 50 years ago the belts were no issue, but now, unbiased scientists and engineers who are leading the space exploration industry, who have no political or financial connections, are struggling to overcome the belts with human travel? Think for yourself. Really, I look forward to how you can twist this sentiment to favour your view.
I will state for the third time. I do not have enough information to clearly state that the moon landing/post-landing space exploration is all a hoax. However the evidence I have seen show that they are faking a lot of their work. For what reason? I dunno. Is it just theatrics they are faking to keep the public interest and continue to get funding? I dunno. Is there a production/media side to NASA and a practical/scientific side that is too boring to broadcast i dunno.
You know a lot of stuff and were easily referencing proofs and evidence that debunks some of the hoax theories (which I agree with and refute those hoax theories). This is why I don't understand why you ignore all the fraudulent events/videos/media that NASA puts out.
It is clearly fake. Again, this doesn't mean that everything is fake. It just brings into question where does the truth begin, where does the lies end?
2
-
@JohnM3665570 hi John, I re-read my post and I do not see any assumptions I made with my arguments. There is some opinion within my arguments, however they are only towards the anecdotal points (since hard proof is unavailable) and I phrase the opinions as questions rather than claiming it as fact.
Yes, you are right that I brought up many points and it is hard/time consuming to respond to each item. But! You did neglect the points which the debunker-side has no response to. I won't slight you for it, let's blame it on the quantity.
You also misinterpreted some of my points and your responses digress from what I am trying to get across. My arguments may be poorly phrased.
- the mention of the Manhattan project was pointing out that the government had strategies and hierarchies in place for a large employee work force. They proved they were able to compartmentalize each role to the point the major of the workforce did not even know what they were building. Yes, the goal of NASA/Apollo was public. But if it was unachievable, then how many people (of the 400,000) would have known?
- the Antarctica treaty: yes was signed in 1959, by 12 countries including USA and USSR. The twelve countries had already occupied Antarctica and setup +50 sites between the 12 of them. To prevent a war over territory, the treaty was FORMED. However, the treaty was not put into force until 1961. The USA committed to the treaty 3months earlier than USSR. And less than a year after USSR committed to the treaty, the Cuban missile crisis occurred. Regardless, the cold war was occuring years before and years after the Antarctica treaty. The reason I bring this treaty up is because it is historical evidence that the USA and alleged enemies (Russia) work together, coincidentally when the general public cannot participate nor has much knowledge about the matter: whatever is going on in Antarctica, space.
The ISS is essentially two conjoined stations, one owned by USA and one owned by Russia. Is it not strange that they are enemies on land, in the public eye, but are working side by side in space. Think about how typical business partners operate, leveraging each other to gain equal/more share.
- you should review the links you post. Your Antarctica trips describe exactly what I wrote about. The cruises and tours travel along the outskirts. You cannot travel with your own team. You need to go with a tour. You can apply to travel with a private group, but no one gets approved. The rules they make for compliance (if they ever approve a private group to travel through the continent) are insane: can't leave anything behind (including your own feces and urine, you gotta carry it with you), no gas/electric methods of travel, no planes can fly over, fires are restricted on what you can use...
I'll respond to the rest in a bit!
2
-
@JohnM3665570 hi john, your discussion about manned space travel is all a hypocritical statement - you are the one making assumptions and stating an opinion.
Here are straight facts, no opinion or assumptions made:
- manned space travel past ower earth's orbit has never been completed other than the Apollo Program which ended in the early 1960s. Never demonstrated before nor afterwards, even 50 years later.
- NASA/Apollo has never demonstrated functionality of a spacesuit within a vacuum during the Apollo Program. Even though they built a million dollar vacuum chamber, all released test trials of human operates space suits failed significantly within the vacuum chamber.
- telemetry data. Yes, this is a big deal. You made a comment that hoaxers are always bringing up the lost telemetry data, and tries to down play it. Why? Is it because you don't have an answer? The fact remains: a piece of hard evidence that shows the travel of the spacecraft (which could not be faked to trick third party experts reviewing the data) went missing a few years after the missions. Yes, it's a big deal.
- NASA posted a photo of one of their trial 'space walk' runs on earth and tried to pass it off as a photo of the astronaut in space. They mirrored the image, so it wasn't that they just added the photo to the gallery by mistake. They edited the photo with a computer and posted it as an actual spacewalk rather than the underwater trial which the photo actually showed. This shows methodology, they knew exactly what they were doing.
- there is video by Apollo, accidentally leaked, which shows buzz and Neil faking the distance of their spacecraft relative to the earth. They are in lower earth orbit and put a screen over a window to make the earth look further away. The title screen is post dated to time they allegedly were traveling to the moon, however the footage was filmed says in advance. This is a fact, verifiable, it happened.
- Neil, buzz, Collins all say they could not see any stars during the entire trip. Modern astronauts say the exact opposite. This is a fact. Who do you think is telling the truth, because there is no way, ABSOLUTELY no way, physically possible that both perspectives are true.
Again! Where do the lies end Yadadadada..?
2
-
@JohnM3665570 Hi John, your bias has you blind from the validity of NASA's claims. I will respond to the missing telemetry data. If you will not accept the suspicion and crookedness of this event then I will disengage and we can both stop wasting our time. I have said many times already, I do not know for sure if we did or did not land on the moon, but the whole charade is suspicious.
You seem to have your mind made up and regardless of evidence, you are finding a way to refute it and stick with your belief . No quantity of science can convince a preacher that his religion is false, same goes towards an individual who believes his government has his own personal well being in mind. We are all people. President, congressmen, 'astronaut', civilian. All people...selfish people who would whatever is required to better themselves and their loved ones.
The telemetry data. I have to reiterate this. Have you actually read the links you provided??
"This live conversion was crude, essentially using a video camera pointing at a high-quality 10-inch TV monitor" - your wiki Link
Do you even understand the broadcast? Everything broadcasted live on tv was off a projector which the TV stations then filmed, with their own cameras, whatever was being shown off the projector. Even more simply: NASA protrayed the entire event on a 10inch monitor. The tv networks then used their own cameras to film this 10inch monitor. This footage, being filmed off the 10inch monitor, is ALL THAT REMAINS. Everything else beforehand on NASAs side (everything that created the images on the 10inch monitor) HAS GONE MISSING 🙃
There is a clear disconnect to the communication stream. There is no way the tv networks could tell where the footage was coming from. It was coming from a screen, which they then filmed.
How is this not a big a deal to you? I asked this before: the one stream of data which would without a doubt prove if the footage and audio came from the moon went missing.
So NASA can coordinate a phone call, from the oval office, from a rotary phone, to the moon...but they couldn't have a legit stream to be broadcasted? It had to go to a projector, a screen, that the TV stations had to then video tape and broadcast live?
Please answer. You actually believe/buy this story? Oh, the actual telemetry data received was "just backup". Fack off. How can you not even fathom they are making excuses.
Screw your wiki article, here's something released by NASA:
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/a11/Apollo_11_TV_Tapes_Report.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwig_N6lwLTlAhXPmuAKHc9tA7QQFjADegQIARAB&usg=AOvVaw1HGkwQRo7ZiCaiYyq6XDck&cshid=1571906936867
The Apollo 11 Telemetry Data Recordings
" While the public saw blurry, ghostlike images, the engineers working at NASA's tracking stations in California and Australia saw clear, crisp video on special television monitors capable of displaying the unconventional video."
So crystal clear footage of the moon is worth nothing to the space agency? Crystal clear footage of the facking moon landing is considered 'backup' to the blurry footage which was filmed off a 10inch tv screen????? Considered so worthless that it can be recorded over/destroyed/misplaced??????? How can you go along with that shit?
You have a bias towards all the anecdotal reasoning regarding the telemetry data. Get educated, and please actually look into it without your mind already made up.
If you cannot provide a reasonable argument or admit that the whole "oops, lost the crystal clear telemetry data" is suspect, then I'm done. I'm not asking you to state the moon Landing was a hoax, because I dunno either. But this is BS. The phone call from Nixon is BS. I will address your other arguments if I think there is a point to it.
2
-
2
-
@JohnM3665570 My friend, have you watched/read the information provided by your links? I'll keep it short, but I really want you to ask questions instead of blindly following. This is not Gospel, it is science. There is logic and clear proof, you need to lose 'belief' in the world of science.
1) Why is Neil's footprint imprinted but there is no blast crater from the LM.
- C'mon! Seriously! The video you posted to explain it, have you watched it? Jaysus!! All the reasoning they used to explain why there was no HUGE blast crater with the LM landing or taking off, it does not explain why there is absolutely no crater at all. Neil's body weight at moon's gravity was enough to make a footprint which remained. The lunar module (which contained Neil's body weight and then some) left zero impact to the moons surface. Regardless of the whole thruster /moon's gravity explanation. If it touched down to the moon and weighed more than Neil's bodyweight, then there should have been an imprint. The only way there could not have been an imprint is if the LM was hovering the entire time, which we know did not happen.
2) At&t is proud to be part of such a blah blah blah. You are aware that AT&T works for the government and has archived every single phonecall, text message that has passed through their network (not only their telecomm service but anything that has passed through a cell tower they own) and has handed it over to the US gov? Why is it, from all the phone service companies available, that at&t is the only one (proven) handing over telecomm data to the gov? They were always working together.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1