limcid

A different unanswered question about the Moon Landing

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

I have a question that I have yet to see/hear asked concerning the believability of the Moon landing. It concerns the speed of communications between the Earth and astronauts.

 

Question: Why is it that the delay in communications between the Earth and the Moon is a fraction of the delay observed between the Earth and the Space Shuttle(SS)? How can this be sensible?

 

There is always quite a pregnant pause between both parties, Earth and the SS. This is with technological advances spanning over 40 years since the Moon missions.

 

In the videos of the Moon landing, the conversations have almost no pause between the messages.

 

Now, the SS is usually around ~250 miles above the surface of the Earth. The Moon is roughly 250,000 miles from the surface of the Earth. I'm rounding the numbers for easier comparison.

 

How is it that communication signals travelled over 1000x faster, some 40 years ago, than today's signals? These signals are emanating from the same organization, from the same GPS location on the Earth. Was a more advanced communications technology used way back then?

 

What don't I understand about communication signals that would clear up this strangeness. It's one of the reasons that I absolutely have to, just for the sake of good logic, doubt the validity of the Moon landing...show.

 

(okay, make that several similar questions.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't. But NASA does. Just go and search (on nasa.gov or youtube) for videos of the moon landing, and any of many videos of them conversing with astronauts in an orbiting space shuttle. Pay attention to the length of the pause between communications...BOOM! There it is. :)

 

The space shuttle communications are usually about a group of kids visiting and getting to commemorate some occasion with a message to the astronauts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Never answer a question with a question. I'm not saying we faked the moon landing. I'm asking a rather simple question. If you have an answer, please provide it. I genuinely would like to know.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Perhaps the two different systems had different permeters and thus functioned in different ways. If the moon landing was not real, I would think that other countries, especially Russia would have been pitching a fit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe, but I don't want to simply make up an answer and be satisfied. That's a bit dismissive, when I really want to understand (not with reasoning) this issue based on corroborable information.

 

The answer needs to hold up to simple questions like:

- Are there other examples (not associated with the Moon landing) that exhibit this phenomenon?

- Is there an official observation of this that has been explained with math and physics?

- Does this phenomenon have a scientific name?

- When was it first observed and who discovered it?

 

If it's an anomaly of math and physics, then we have a bit of a smoking gun don't we? I just want to know the truth.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Perhaps the two different systems had different permeters and thus functioned in different ways. If the moon landing was not real, I would think that other countries, especially Russia would have been pitching a fit.

 

i imagine they would if they could. But how could they if they themselves have never landed on the moon? Only someone else who has actually landed on the moon later would be able to tell if the first lunar landing is real.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, I don't doubt we landed on the moon.  There are images of the moon to this day that if you get close up you see the American Flag that was planted there all those years ago.  To my knowledge transporter technology hasn't been invented yet so how did it get there if we didn't land there to plant it.  However, I do also tend to wonder if some of the footage that was claim to have come from the moon could of been staged because it was hard to get actual footage of the landing.  Just a theory that I have because some think these images looked staged.

 

As for your queston about communications.  You bring up a good point, the only explanation I can come up with is maybe it has to do with the shuttle being an enclosed space which makes the transmissions harder to get through and the moon was an open space for the transmssion to get the Earth.  I know some what of a silly explanantion but about the only one I can come up with for your question.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think you have asked a really good question there ! I have read some of the theories that the moon landing was faked, and seen the pictures that looked like there was a bottle of CocaCola laying on the ground, and the ones showing that the shadows are wrong, but I have not studied it in depth enough to come to any conclusion about whether it is actually real or faked. I do seem to remember that there was not much of a gap in conversation when they showed the moon landing on TV. I have not heard any of the conversations from the space station, to compare the two, but possibly you tube has some thing that shows one or both of these things. It does seem really strange that we could put a man on the moon all those years ago, and with the technology advances since then, we have never done it again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well, I don't doubt we landed on the moon.

 

Thank you! You've just demonstrated the root of the problem. You refuse to doubt, which means you blindly believe. That is the problem.

 

I'm simply presenting a simple question based on a simple observation. Compare the original "moon" broadcast with the many videos available of modern communications with astronauts in low Earth orbit. Note the difference in delay between transmissions. Ask a simple question: Why?

 

I don't care what the answer is, so long as it's not dismissive and is based on provable facts. I'm not interested in something that requires Faith, I already have a religion. I would like to see something scientific that explains the phenomenon. That's all.

 

There were many missions to the moon that were unmanned, so a lot of footage of the moon is mostly real. In fact, questioning the video footage can be taken off of the table (temporarily), but I can't dismiss the audio.

 

I believe the detail of the time delay was compromised because it would have made the broadcast too long (and boring). It was necessary to have better pacing (like a movie) in order to maintain the viewer's interest. It had to be entertaining. After all, it's television. That's why I think a decision was made to disregard the issue of the time delay. Plus, the viewing audience was more naive and gullible back then, almost innocent and too trusting. We should know better by now.

 

The moon landing, as depicted on television, MAY have taken place. But, I think all anomalies should really be cleared up by now. If you go back and review (there are some excellent, long forgotten, maybe never televised documentaries about the Great Space Race) what was really going on in the world during the times leading up to the moon landing, you can see there was tremendous incentive to simply make the moon landing be a success, at all costs. I wouldn't even find fault with the decision to fake the landing because it really put the brakes on some things that may have easily gotten out of control. We HAD TO prove out superiority, we couldn't afford to fail.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's a youtube video of conversations with the space shuttle. There are many videos around. At around the 4:20 mark of this youtube video, the nasa guy even mentions (and apologizes for) the delay "...because we are talking to space...". Funny.

 

http://youtu.be/y1Rhqg3pvqQ

 

 

Edit: Oh, wow, YouTube embeds within the forums! NICE!! This could get interesting, especially on a site like this. <ahttp://www.therealconspiracyforum.com/uploads/emoticons/default_smile.png' alt=':)'>

 

Here's footage from the Moon Landing. Pay attention to the length of the pauses between communications. Some are longer than others, I believe simply due to natural pauses that are always there when two people communicate. However, there should not be any pauses that are very short, over such a long distance, with communicaations technology that's half a century old. There are many very short breaks. Pay attention to the communications between Houston and the astronauts. There is some conversation between the astronauts as well. Of course, the beeps indicate the ones with Houston.

 

http://youtu.be/d73jCthcAok

 

Note: This moon video is a bit short on communications with Houston, I thought it was a clip that had more of that. There are many different videos with plenty more examples. See youtube.

 

Also note that when the astronauts head is in the sunlight and his body is fully in the shade, there is at least a 400 degree difference in temperature. Those must have been really fantastic space suits with incredible climate control within the suits. LOL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, I've also heard theories that we did not land on the moon. I never thought about the delay in communication because of the distance. That's a very good point. I would have to say that either we did not actually land on the moon or maybe the audio was edited because the pauses were too incredibly long?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
How is it that communication signals travelled over 1000x faster, some 40 years ago, than today's signals?

 

The signals travel at the speed of light in both cases. This is simple physics. 

 

If there's a marked delay in communication with the ISS, I would guess that it's due to the fact that communications are routed through the US Satelite Tracking System which  did not exist during the moon landings.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ah, I just looked that up. High-frequency radio waves travel at the speed of light. So, that may be a piece to the puzzle. I appreciate this, thanks.

 

However, you said that you "guess", which isn't the same as knowing. I want to know what the truth is, not simply accept it because someone can offer a reasonable response. There is a difference.

 

I'm comparing the communications between NASA and the Space Shutte vs. NASA and the Lunar Astronauts. Not the ISS. It may not make a difference, but I'm tired of the string of assumptions people make because from a factual point of view, it might make all the difference in the world.

 

This is a conspiracy website, so this is the place to ask, not to dismiss. If you can't ask and talk about so-called crazy things here, then where? Also, the delay in communications is but one of a laundry list of issues that are well-established and unanswered (they've been responded to, which is different from an actual answer).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ah, I just looked that up. High-frequency radio waves travel at the speed of light. So, that may be a piece to the puzzle. I appreciate this, thanks.

 

However, you said that you "guess", which isn't the same as knowing. I want to know what the truth is, not simply accept it because someone can offer a reasonable response. There is a difference.

 

At some point, you have to ask yourself how you "know" something. How do you "know" that the Earth is round? How do you "know" that the Earth revolves around the Sun? How do you "know" that George Washington was the first President of the United States?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now my pop who was a very very intelligent man never believed the moon landing happened. He and my nan refused to let their kids watch it they believed so strongly. My pop believed in conspiracy theories (well some of them) and he got me interested. I wish I had of had the mind to ask for his reasons for knowing as his life seems kind of odd to me for someone so intelligent and I now wonder about my pop and if he had things to hide.

 

For instance my nan only went to school from grade 4 to grade 7 I think, this meant she had difficulty with spelling and the way she spoke she didn't pronounce some stuff properly. Now my pop on the other hand claimed to have the same level of education, but he spoke very properly and we had to speak properly around him and pronounce all our words correctly.

 

He would keep newspaper clippings of events like the death of princess Diana. Most outwardly strange was he had uncanny intelligence like much more than a farm boy who spent maybe 5 years tops at school. He could do gigantic mathematical problems in his head like university professor level mathematics. He could work out the numbers behind everything. If you ever saw that tv series Numbers that's what he was like.

 

I always wondered what he did in his life before he married my nan because farmer doesn't seem plausible you know. I wonder what he really knew and how a farm boy could be so refined. I wish I had the presence of mind and knowledge to question him when he was alive because now I think about it and all the things he told me not to believe that the news was telling us I'm quite intrigued by this man I spent my childhood listening to.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Regarding the delay or the lack of it, it has been said that the delays were edited out. But I don't see any signs of editing in those cases. I have done plenty of editing myself, you know. It sounds like rationalization, instead. In any event, this is merely one of the many, many unanswered questions regarding Apollo. Maybe I will write an article on that someday.

As far as the Russian leaders are concerned, they were probably "gagged" with greenbacks. They were quite corrupted and incompetent at that time; otherwise they would not have lost on the space race, given the early lead they had enjoyed, which included the first soft landing on the lunar surface! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have a question that I have yet to see/hear asked concerning the believability of the Moon landing. It concerns the speed of communications between the Earth and astronauts.

 

Question: Why is it that the delay in communications between the Earth and the Moon is a fraction of the delay observed between the Earth and the Space Shuttle(SS)? How can this be sensible?

 

There is always quite a pregnant pause between both parties, Earth and the SS. This is with technological advances spanning over 40 years since the Moon missions.

 

In the videos of the Moon landing, the conversations have almost no pause between the messages.

 

Now, the SS is usually around ~250 miles above the surface of the Earth. The Moon is roughly 250,000 miles from the surface of the Earth. I'm rounding the numbers for easier comparison.

 

How is it that communication signals travelled over 1000x faster, some 40 years ago, than today's signals? These signals are emanating from the same organization, from the same GPS location on the Earth. Was a more advanced communications technology used way back then?

 

What don't I understand about communication signals that would clear up this strangeness. It's one of the reasons that I absolutely have to, just for the sake of good logic, doubt the validity of the Moon landing...show.

 

(okay, make that several similar questions.)

Total propaganda.

 

Phone company had trouble maintaining open lines from city to city.

 

This was 1969.

 

From Moon to Earth?

 

No way in Hell!

 

:angry:

I don't. But NASA does. Just go and search (on nasa.gov or youtube) for videos of the moon landing, and any of many videos of them conversing with astronauts in an orbiting space shuttle. Pay attention to the length of the pause between communications...BOOM! There it is. :)

 

The space shuttle communications are usually about a group of kids visiting and getting to commemorate some occasion with a message to the astronauts.

From Fantasyland?

 

-_-

Question:

 

If we faked the moon landing, how come we haven't yet faked a Mars landing? 

How about the Mars probes?

 

Wrong color of terrain.

 

Probably shot in Arizona.

 

Total BS.

 

:rolleyes:

Perhaps the two different systems had different permeters and thus functioned in different ways. If the moon landing was not real, I would think that other countries, especially Russia would have been pitching a fit.

Why?

 

:huh:

Maybe, but I don't want to simply make up an answer and be satisfied. That's a bit dismissive, when I really want to understand (not with reasoning) this issue based on corroborable information.

 

The answer needs to hold up to simple questions like:

- Are there other examples (not associated with the Moon landing) that exhibit this phenomenon?

- Is there an official observation of this that has been explained with math and physics?

- Does this phenomenon have a scientific name?

- When was it first observed and who discovered it?

 

If it's an anomaly of math and physics, then we have a bit of a smoking gun don't we? I just want to know the truth.

The answer needs to hold up to simple questions like:

 

- Are there other examples (not associated with the Moon landing) that exhibit this phenomenon? NO!

 

- Is there an official observation of this that has been explained with math and physics? NO!

 

- Does this phenomenon have a scientific name? NO!

 

- When was it first observed and who discovered it? NO!

 

Never A Serious Answer (NASA) expects no questions.

 

Sheep should just believe what they are told.

 

No matter how pathetic truth-wise.

 

:angry:

Well, I don't doubt we landed on the moon.  There are images of the moon to this day that if you get close up you see the American Flag that was planted there all those years ago.  To my knowledge transporter technology hasn't been invented yet so how did it get there if we didn't land there to plant it.  However, I do also tend to wonder if some of the footage that was claim to have come from the moon could of been staged because it was hard to get actual footage of the landing.  Just a theory that I have because some think these images looked staged.

 

As for your queston about communications.  You bring up a good point, the only explanation I can come up with is maybe it has to do with the shuttle being an enclosed space which makes the transmissions harder to get through and the moon was an open space for the transmssion to get the Earth.  I know some what of a silly explanantion but about the only one I can come up with for your question.

Total propaganda BS!

 

You a NASA truther troll?

 

:angry:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am not qualified to offer any technical comment ,  although I assume it is common knowledge that at least two channels were open all the time .

This might mean that a system or procedure  checked and reported on every communication to decide whether follow - up  talk should be open or private only to Houston . This or similar considerations might explain " delay " which seems to puzzle a few of you .

I personally have no doubt that manned moon flights did occur and for me the more interesting questions surround  ,  " Why did they stop , because it certainly was NOT due to budget restrictions as is the official story "

Incidentally , I believe I know the correct answer to that question but have no interest in discussing it .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I personally have no doubt that manned moon flights did occur and for me the more interesting questions surround  ,  " Why did they stop , because it certainly was NOT due to budget restrictions as is the official story "

Incidentally , I believe I know the correct answer to that question but have no interest in discussing it .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you wish to take a more sober approach  , you might start by reading what Fred Steckling has to say .

Then have a look at things said by astronauts such as Carpenter , Aldrin and Mitchell .

All I will say is that the alleged overall  order  is  most interesting .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.