Evil Academy

Full Version: July 21, 1969: Man walks on the Moon for the 1st time?
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47
who is funding Ryan Gosling's career?

How did they get to the moon with that tech? How did they get back with that tech? I just unsure about the whole thing.
(09-20-2018 12:53 AM)trevorrice Wrote: [ -> ]who is funding Ryan Gosling's career?

How did they get to the moon with that tech? How did they get back with that tech? I just unsure about the whole thing.

Do you like technical details, Trev?

What part do you want to know more about? How they faked it, or why they couldn't (and still can't) go?

It is important to realize that the fakery was the men on the Moon aspect. I do think the Surveyor program, where they landed probes and the Soviet's rovers, Lunokhod, were legit. So it was possible to land a probe or rover on the Moon. But keep in mind, those didn't have to come back!

People somehow have this idea that you just take off from the Moon, and you coast back. Orbital mechanics, unfortunately, don't work like that. You don't have to escape from the Moon's atmosphere (duh) but you still have to leave its 'gravity well' (sphere of influence).

Oh, but they used a lunar orbit rendezvous, so the better part of the spacecraft stayed in lunar orbit! Yeah... In the days before computers and GPS (they had very primitive onboard computers) that rendezvous would have been VERY difficult. To top it off, the lunar lander had a non-gimballed engine, that could not be throttled! So it was full power, and only pointed straight down. There were a few RCS that would tilt the craft (attitude control).

Now imagine you take off 2 (or 10 or 30) minutes too late, due to some delay. Or early. The craft you are rendezvousing with is in a different spot in its orbit! And you can't just go to the same orbit and then speed up, like some scifi movie. That again changes your orbit. So you would be spending fuel to speed up but would then have to spend fuel to slow down.

Then you have re-entry... According to NASA's own figures, returning from the Moon means the craft is going 11 km/s! 7 miles per second! What!

This is a modern sample return mission, called Stardust from a decade back:
"At 05:57 UTC on 15 January 2006, the Sample Return Capsule successfully separated from Stardust and re-entered the Earth's atmosphere at 09:57 UTC,[38] at a velocity of 12.9 km/s, the fastest reentry speed into Earth's atmosphere ever achieved by a man-made object.[39] The capsule followed a drastic reentry profile, going from a velocity of Mach 36 to subsonic speed within 110 seconds.[40] Peak deceleration was 34 g,[41] encountered 40 seconds into the reentry at an altitude of 55 km over Spring Creek, Nevada"

I would have to check the official stats, but 34 g, I am pretty sure that is lethal! Anecdotal evidence (wonders of the Internet) suggests: "16G has lethal potential at 1min, 32 lethal at half a minute and so on "
^ great post
Right, thanks for the breakdown and also common sense.

"People somehow have this idea that you just take off from the Moon, and you coast back. Orbital mechanics, unfortunately, don't work like that. You don't have to escape from the Moon's atmosphere (duh) but you still have to leave its 'gravity well' (sphere of influence)."

You need tons of thrust on the moon too to get back even without the gravity look at the distance . Its just logic, chance of getting back is virtually impossible.
Is it possible that the 1969 landing actually occurred, but without humans?

The unmanned ship landed on the moon, and the rest of the story was fabricated?
OR

dead astronauts?

I leave open the possibility that they did go, but what was presented to us officially was nonsense.

i still lean towards they didn't go, but I am open to that possibility
(09-20-2018 10:31 PM)Redneck Wrote: [ -> ]Is it possible that the 1969 landing actually occurred, but without humans?

The unmanned ship landed on the moon, and the rest of the story was fabricated?

Yes, I think that they did send an unmanned probe to the Moon when they were doing each of the manned missions. So there probably is SOMETHING at the landing sites, but it is not proof that a MAN was on the Moon.

The reason I think they sent a probe each time was probably to get the street cred from all the amateur radio enthusiasts (AFAIK that was still big in those days). People in radio clubs were having meet ups and listening to the radio chatter that was supposedly coming from the astronauts on the way to the Moon. But the US admits that they busted the Soviets one time PRETENDING to have a man on a ship, when really it was just a radio relay. That is what communication satellites do, after all. And anything the Soviets/KGB are accused of doing, you can safely bet the Americans/CIA at least attempted/experimented with.

Machines have a higher tolerance for temperature ranges, G forces, space radiation... You can leave em up there...
Star Trek: Original Series: Star Trek aired on NBC from September 8, 1966, to June 3, 1969.

" While NBC paid lip service to expanding Star Trek's audience, it [now] slashed our production budget until it was actually ten percent lower than it had been in our first season ... This is why in the third season you saw fewer outdoor location shots, for example. Top writers, top guest stars,[b] top anything [/b](special effects) you needed was harder to come by. Thus, Star Trek's demise became a self-fulfilling prophecy. And I can assure you, that is exactly as it was meant to be.[63]"

The last day of filming for Star Trek was January 9, 1969,[25] and after 79 episodes[64] NBC cancelled the show in February despite fans' attempt at another letter-writing campaign"

Hmmm, so what is that, 6 weeks before the Apollo 11 'manned' Moon mission?

"Douglas Trumbull was born in Los Angeles. He is the son of Donald Trumbull who created visual effects for the 1939 movie The Wizard of Oz "

"Douglas Trumbull's early work was at Graphic Films in Los Angeles. The small animation and graphic arts studio produced a film called To the Moon and Beyond about spaceflight for the 1964 New York World's Fair. Trumbull, the son of a mechanical engineer and an artist, worked at Graphic Films as an illustrator and airbrush artist. The spaceflight film caught the attention of director Stanley Kubrick. Kubrick hired director Con Pederson from Graphic Films and the company was to work on visual effects for the film. When Kubrick decided to keep all production in England he cancelled the contract with Graphic Films. Trumbull wanted to keep working on the film as he had already done considerable pre-production work so he then cold-called Kubrick after obtaining the director's home phone number from Pederson. Kubrick hired Trumbull for the production of 2001: A Space Odyssey (in about 1965!).

Trumbull's responsibilities and talents grew as the production continued, and he became one of four special effects supervisors on the film (the others were fellow Graphic Films alumnus Con Pederson, along with Tom Howard and Wally Veevers.) We were struggling with the Star Gate. Nobody knew what a Star Gate was; but, I came up with some ideas that I didn't even know at the time were based on some things I was learning as a young guy about street photography and weird photographic techniques ...". Working on 2001 hooked Trumbull on the concept of producing immersive film experiences on huge screens"

Huge screens, huh? I wonder if that would be helpful in making big backdrops for doing Frontscreen Projection on huge sets, for the Apollo Program?

To the Moon & Beyond:
"The film was made by Graphic Films Corporation, a company run by former Disney animator Lester Novros who had been making technical films for NASA, the US Air Force, and various aerospace clients"

Disney, again...
"To The Moon and Beyond is ... special motion picture (more like a NASA R&D project) produced for and shown at the 1964/1965 New York World's Fair. It depicted traveling from Earth out to an overall view of the universe and back again, zooming down to the atomic scale"

I can't find so much as a STILL from this film. Not a clip, not a still, nothing, nada, zip, zilch, zero.

What lunar gravity was estimated to look like, in 1963 (start at 4:05):





Even if you divide that by half, to account for the weight and stiffness of the suit, they didn't come CLOSE to jumping like that. And look at the guy's handstands at the end, compare that to the Apollo astronauts struggling to get back to their feet, LOL
I am just going to cut to the chase here.

Kubrick revealed the whole deal with 2001: A Space Odyssey. The objective of 2001 was to 'prime the pump' for the manned Moon landing. It was supposed to tell you why the Moon landing was important, why it was more than just science or military/tech accomplishment.

But it was also revealing that it was 'made for TV', made for the screen. It showed you what to expect, when you saw men 'on the Moon' 6-12 months later (most people saw 2001 not when it came out but when it became a pop culture phenomenon a few months into its run, i.e. the beginning of 1969). In 2001 there is a scene where they are on the Moon, and it is REALLY boring. Nothing happens, until all of a sudden the monolith is revealed, and there is a high pitched noise. The astronauts walk in 1/6th gravity in SLOW MOTION, and do NO jumps or backflips or anything spectacular. It set the scene for what to expect from Apollo. No fireworks, just 'all business'.

But there is also a photographer there, on the Moon, and he keeps rotating his camera (ostensibly to reload it or something). Someone pointed out that this is a reference to the Monolith. Rotate it! And what do you get? The exact (!) proportions of a silver (movie) screen.

What is the climax of the film? Bowman (Apollo was an archer/bow man) touches the monolith, and the audience goes through it, just as 'Thus Spake Zarathustra' reaches a climax. And what does the audience see????

The friggin Moon. Telling you, we are going to show you the Moon, on the screen, and it is going to be worldchanging!




Watch from about 1:00 to around 1:20.
^ wow. what a new way to interpret that scene

Kubrick was a master filmmaker.. unbelievable set design, angles and pace
(10-10-2018 04:08 PM)pug-thug Wrote: [ -> ]^ wow. what a new way to interpret that scene

Kubrick was a master filmmaker.. unbelievable set design, angles and pace

I watched 2001 looking for a Moon reference and was starting to get pretty disappointed towards the end, although of course the last 20 minutes are a lot of fun. Then, when the film climaxed, I was NOT disappointed!

Did you know Pink Floyd did a song to go along with the end of 2001:ASO?

It is the song Echoes. I think you can find sync-ed versions online.

http://pinkfloydonline.com/echoes2001_synchs.html

Wikipedia as usual chimes in, with its infinite wisdom:
"Similar to the Dark Side of the Rainbow effect, at-large rumours suggested that "Echoes" coincidentally synchronises with Stanley Kubrick's 1968 film 2001: A Space Odyssey, when played concurrently with the final 23-minute segment titled "Jupiter and Beyond the Infinite". At the time of the film's production in 1967–1968, Pink Floyd was not working on any material suitable for the film, nor were they contacted about supplying music. It is likely that Kubrick never heard the band's music until after the film was finished.[20] Kubrick would later feature copies of both the soundtrack to 2001 and Pink Floyd’s Atom Heart Mother as props in the record store scene in A Clockwork Orange.[21]"

Apparently Kubrick had a guy do an entire (sci-fi type) soundtrack, and then when he heard it, he just thought "Nah, the classical music I have listened to while filming/editing works better".
the movie came out on May 12th 1968, so yeah it entirely makes sense it was done as a precursor to sort of show people what to expect
2001: ASO is also where the 'theory' comes from that "We really went, but they found something, so we can't go back". I.E. the excuse for why they faked footage and haven't 'returned' to the Moon.

There is some interesting dialogue from 2001 as well.

I will start with the far out conspiracy one!

"Dr Floyd: Can't you think of anything else you want for your birthday? Something very special?

Floyd's Daughter: Yes.

Dr Floyd: What?

Floyd's Daughter: A bush baby."

So in 2001, who is sworn in as President?

The first inauguration of George W. Bush as the 43rd President of the United States took place on Saturday, January 20, 2001

A Bush baby! He would have been in his early 20s at the time, and his dad was already a Congressman and millionaire (which is really irrelevant because his dad was probably a millionaire already 35+ years earlier!), but more importantly, Prescott Bush was still alive. Wiki lists his dad as a WWI 'artillery officer' but they are forced to declare (some of) the truth just a little further down:
"After graduation, Bush served as a field artillery captain with the American Expeditionary Forces (1917–1919) during World War I. He received intelligence training at Verdun, France, and was briefly assigned to a staff of French officers. Alternating between intelligence and artillery, he came under fire in the Meuse-Argonne offensive. "

So you mean... Almost like artillery was his cover??? I belong to the Otto Skorzeny school of thought about Prescott and GHW Bush, bit of a long story and a tangent, but suffice to say, the family was WAY up there, in terms of the American/Globalist elites, by the time WWII rolled around.

And Stanley obviously was involved in intelligence circles as well... Kinda hard not to be, when you are filming a 'manned' Moon landing for them! Just wanted to start with the 'crazy' one! Big Grin
What they told those involved in the Apollo Program, the 200 or so that had to be in the know, for why they had to keep quiet (again a 2001 quote):

"Dr Floyd: Now I'm sure you're all aware of the extremely grave potential for cultural shock and social disorientation contained in this present situation, if the facts were prematurely and suddenly made public without adequate preparation and conditioning. "

Basically they implied "We are going to go for real in a few years, and when we do, we will tell the public the truth about Apollo (if we have to). Just keep quiet for 5 or 6 years".
Chaos reigns is Dave McGowan 2.0!
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47
Reference URL's