Moon Landing, A Hoax?

Discussion in 'Pseudoscience Archive' started by Vaiorom, Aug 30, 2008.

  1. Read-Only Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    10,296
    You actually accept THAT as evidence???

    Why is it that nutters and woo-woos pretty much all feel that youtube is THE best source of information on the Internet???????? If it can be shown in a video it MUST be the truth, right? Say... wait a minute... isn't it photos and videos that they disbelieve in the first place???? (That sure says a lot about their lack of ability to discern fact from made-up fiction.)

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. FatFreddy Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    930
    What I was doing was pointing out that almost everything Americans "Know" is wrong. Therefore, if we read that the Russians and Chinese tracked the Apollo craft to the moon, it isn't necessarily true. You are assuming it's a fact.

    Here's some stuff from my other post. Tell me what you think of it.

    http://www.nardwuar.com/vs/bill_kaysing/index.html
    (excerpt)
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Well, how did the media fall for this?
    Well, the media doesn't fall for anything. The media is controlled by the government. The Dutch papers on July 21 [1969] said that the moon landing was a hoax, was a fake, and I have been unable to find any of those Dutch papers, although it's well documented that they did publish information, with proof, that the U.S. was spoofing everybody.
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=moonfaker cold war&search_type=&aq=f


    The only thing on which we can form opinions is the video footage and still pictures as we have no idea what kind of deals the US government might have made with other countries or what the press is failing to report or is lying about as illustrated by the info in post #67.

    Here's some serious evidence of a hoax that you ignored.
    As far as I'm concerned this evidence closes the whole case. The corner of Collins' jacket is swinging back and forth the way it would in gravity when they were supposed to be halfway to the moon and the pro-Apollo people who were in charge of obfuscating hoax evidence on YouTube weren't very organized and contradicted each other. Then they had to say that the different explanations were all correct and that they were just different ways to describe the same thing which is ridiculous as the explanations are very different from each other.

    Don't you pro-Apollo people have anything to say about this? Please say what you think of those three explanations for why the corner of Collins' jacket doesn't continue going upward as it would according to Newton's first law of motion. Is only one of them correct? Are they all correct? Are none of them correct?
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Ganymede Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,322

    Yes I do, we didn't land on the Moon. That's why you'll never see it happen again for as long as you live.
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. KennyJC Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,936
    Can someone please make the point to Ganymede (he claims to have me on ignore), that there are reflective mirrors on the Apollo landing site that is confirmed by astronomers on Earth?
     
  8. Read-Only Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    10,296
    It would accomplish nothing. He would just claim that it's yet another part of the conspiracy that the WHOLE world is involved in.

    How anyone can be so stupid as to believe that MILLIONS of people all over the world are working together - and have been for over 20 years - to perpetrate a single hoax is way beyond me.

    Yet there he is.:shrug:
     
  9. Ganymede Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,322
    Millions of people all over the world believe in Jesus too.
     
  10. KennyJC Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,936
    See... he makes no attempt to explain the reflective mirrors on the moons surface.
     
  11. FatFreddy Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    930
    If the surveyor landings were real, they had the technology to soft-land unmanned robotic craft on the moon. A robotic craft with adjustable mirrors attached to the sides could have soft-landed on the moon. Mirrors on the moon are not proof that there were people on the moon.

    http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/planetary/lunar/surveyor.html

    It wasn't necessarily millions. Not everybody working on the Apollo program had to know it was a hoax. The program was compartmentalized. Not that many people were in a position to know if the whole thing would work. If there were robotic craft on the moon, the transmission could have really come from the moon fooling the people at mission control. In other countries only people in high levels of government had to know about the hoax. There might have been lots of people talking about it. If the US press doesn't report it, it might as well not have happened as far as Americans are concerned; the press keeps everybody in the dark.

    http://www.nardwuar.com/vs/bill_kaysing/index.html
    (excerpt)
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Well, how did the media fall for this?
    Well, the media doesn't fall for anything. The media is controlled by the government. The Dutch papers on July 21 [1969] said that the moon landing was a hoax, was a fake, and I have been unable to find any of those Dutch papers, although it's well documented that they did publish information, with proof, that the U.S. was spoofing everybody.
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    http://apollohoax.proboards21.com/index.cgi?board=othertheories&action=display&thread=1525
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bbnxsPgcsH0

    You should read Chomsky's analysis of the cold war. It's off-line now but it's in his book entitled "Deterring Democracy".

    This the videos in this series deal with the same subject.
    http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=moonfaker cold war&search_type=&aq=f

    It's very plausible that the US and the Soviets made a deal.

    Sorry about posting the same links more than once but people don't seem to be considering the information in them. If anybody thinks it's wrong, we can talk about that too.

    The video evidence proves it was a hoax. There are plausible scenarios that explain how people were fooled, etc.

    In post #82 I asked you pro-Apollo people to say what you think about the way the corner of Collins' jacket swings back and forth in this video.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I_CMgqitv98
    (50 second mark)

    Let's hear your analyses of this issue.
     
  12. KennyJC Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,936
    If that was the case, then NASA wouldn't have bothered mentioning anything about retroreflectors since that would mean they would have to fly probes to the moon and go to the extra effort to have them exactly placed in the Apollo landing sites.

    Anyway, here is independent evidence for the Apollo moon landings.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Independent_evidence_for_Apollo_Moon_landings

    I guess the only way to know for sure is at some point in the future when man eventually returns to the Apollo sites. At which point future CT's will claim that the revisitation was a hoax also

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    If the media is controlled by the government, then why is the media always so critical of government institutions and the president?

    What a conveniant justification for you to continue your tin-hatted antics.

    I'm not sure why you think this proves anything? Correct me if I'm wrong, but even in zero gravity, objects are affected by momentum and collisions with other objects.
     
  13. FatFreddy Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    930
    Look at it again. There's nothing that hits the jacket corner to make it go back down. The only identifiable force making it go down is gravity. Please identify the force you see making it go back down.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I_CMgqitv98
    (50 second mark)

    For all we know, there is only one reflector. Maybe there are several. That would have been expensive to do but it was possible. The video shows it was a fake so either several mirrors were placed on the moon by robotic craft or we're being lied to about the mirrors.


    There's nothing here that isn't explainable.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Independent_evidence_for_Apollo_Moon_landings

    There might be few geologists who think the moon rocks are fake but the press and scientific journals are ignoring them. Also, if any geologists were to say that they were fake, their carreers would be ruined.

    Look in the comment section of this video about the rocks.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VCN7qWrLHVw

    Here's more about the rocks.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4AQQHTjeMkA

    It's also plausible that some of the rocks were actually collected by robot craft on the moon.

    We are told that third parties tracked the missions. There are plausible scenerios that would explain that. If you think that it's implausible that secret deals were made, you should read Chomsky's analysis of the cold war. Also, you can watch this series of videos.

    http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=moonfaker cold war&search_type=&aq=f

    Those videos were in my last post. Have you watched them?

    It's also plausible that a robot craft went to the moon, orbited during the length of the alleged missions and returned. All this may seem far-fetched but the video and still picturers show that the missions were faked.

    It says a fuel dump was photographed. Pictures are fakable.

    All the sightings have altenative explanations. The people who "Sighted" the craft might have been working for NASA or there might have been an actual robot craft.

    If NASA says the parts of the Surveyor probe were exposed to moon conditions, it isn't necessarily true. NASA is the party accused of faking the whole thing.

    The ultraviolet photos could have been taken from an orbiting craft or from a robot craft on the moon.

    With the technology available today any picture is fakable so any future pictures of the equipment left on the moon will not be proof of anything.

    There's nothing in that link that proves the missions were real and the video shows it was faked.


    The media criticize the government between very narrow limits. Can you imagine some anti-establishment pundits like Noam Chomsky, William Blum, Edward Herman, James Petras, Michel Chossudovsky, or Michail Parenti talking on one of those Sunday pundit shows? They wouldn't allow it as the realistic discussion that would ensue would go way beyond the accepted limits.

    http://www.michaelparenti.org/
    http://petras.lahaine.org/todos.php
    http://members.aol.com/bblum6/American_holocaust.htm
    http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Herman /Edward_Herman.html
    http://www.chomsky.info/
    http://www.globalresearch.ca/
     
  14. Steve100 O͓͍̯̬̯̙͈̟̥̳̩͒̆̿ͬ̑̀̓̿͋ͬ ̙̳ͅ ̫̪̳͔O Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,346
    What about tension?
     
  15. FatFreddy Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    930
    Go into some more detail.

    When I look at the movement, I see rippling in the fabric. It looks pretty loose to me. When you say "Tension", do you mean like in elastic? If that's what you mean, it would have to be pulled--not pushed. It would have to be stiff to be pushed and it doesn't look stiff at all.

    Also, did you compare the movement with the way the corners of the woman astronaut's jacket behave in this clip?
    http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=TejsnPThmd4

    Her jacket corners are floating--not hanging.
     
  16. KennyJC Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,936
    The corner if the jacket is attached to the rest of the jacket, which is attached to someone jumping up and down. The jacket corner simply goes with it.

    If we are being lied to about the mirrors, then how come any independ astronomer in a large laser telescope can have it's light reflected back to it when pointed at the Apollo landing sites?

    And the video does not show it was faked at all. Much of the video vindicates the physics you would expect on a lunar landscape.

    I would reply to all this stuff one by one, but I realise that they are all the same fallacy. If something is used as proof for lunar landings you are full of thin justifications that they are all fakable or they are secret NASA agents or "deals" were made. Basically, I'm not impressed by the sheer amount of baseless allegations against the evidence for the Apollo Moon landings.

    Correct me if I'm wrong, but no unmanned space craft has been able to land, collect rocks, take off, and come back to Earth. If we could do this, we would have rocks from Mars on Earth that were collected in such a manner.

    Not true. The media virtually destroyed the Bush administration about it's failure during hurricaine Katrina. Bush's approval rating is a pathetic 27% and has always been falling. If the government controlled the media, that would be a completely different story.
     
  17. FatFreddy Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    930
    It would have to be stiff for that to happen. It's loose.
    What do you think of the other three explanations that I posted? Are those people right?

    We read that independent astronomers have light reflected when they point to the sites but is it really true? They might be people working for NASA. The journals in which we read this might be printing lies. There are lots of plausible scenarios. Video evidence trumps evidence that has several plausible alternative scenarios. The video evidence of a hoax is irrefutable.

    Check out this video.
    http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=0ohDdNRq2Og

    The fact that those scenarios are plausible means that none of the stuff on the list you posted is conclusive proof. The only thing we can really go on is the video footage and still pictures that have been released by the government. If there are unexplainable anomalies there, all the stuff on that list falls by the wayside.

    We have no idea what kind of classified equipment the government has or what kind of classified missions have been carried out.

    The criticism takes place between very narrow limits. If they can criticize the government for something like negligence, it gives a false appearance of objectivity on the part of the press. You don't seem to have read any of the articles I've posted that show what it's like to go beyond the limits.

    Those guys I listed in post #90 would eat Bush for lunch at a press conference of they were allowed to attend one. Nothing they say is printed in the mainstream press. Most people don't even know they exist because the press ignores them. They write articles and book that explain the way the world really works to Americans.

    Tell me what you think of these articles that would never pass the US mainstream press censors.
    http://www.globalresearch.ca/

    You can also do YouTube searches on those people and listen to their analyses of what the US does in the world.

    Noam Chomsky
    William Blum
    Edward Herman
    James Petras
    Michel Chossudovsky
    Michail Parenti
     
  18. Ophiolite Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,232
    You are completely wrong.

    Sept. 12, 1970 E-8-5 No. 406 Luna-16 Sample return UR-500 First automatic lunar sample return
    Feb. 14, 1972 E-8-5 No. 408 Luna-20 Sample return UR-500 Returned samples from the Moon
    Aug. 9, 1976 E-8-5M No. 413 Luna-24 Sample return UR-500 Returned lunar samples

    There were three other unsuccesful attempts.
     
  19. KennyJC Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,936
    I don't follow...

    That's a ridiculous claim. I've seen programs like mythbusters and a BBC program about the moon were they take cameras to these observatories and the light reflection is demonstrated empirically. When they point to random parts of the moon, nothing is reflected except background light, when they point to Apollo sights, there is a large spike in reflected light.

    The start of that video shows the astronaut gracefully bouncing accross the moon as if in low gravity. I know you will say the tape was just slowed down, but we have tried the same thing here on Earth (like in the BBC program), and it revealed that even when slowed down, signs of Earth gravity were still obvious. On Moon landing footage, there is no such obstruction or 'heaviness' in the astronauts movements.

    As for the rest of the video... are you fucking kidding me? Because James Bond movies built a Moon set, that means NASA did too? How did NASA have a large studio that was a vacuum, and did they suck out all the extra gravity from the studio too? Impressive.

    With each justification you make for all the evidence, your fantasy becomes more and more unlikely.

    I wouldn't call it narrow limits. Katrina was a disaster not only for the victims, but for the government.
     
  20. FatFreddy Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    930
    This is what you had said.
    In order for the jacket corner to go with it, it would have to be pushed down from the top. If a force pushes down on a loose piece of cloth, it will wrinkle. Only a very stiff object would move down without wrinkling.

    If you look at the comment section of the YouTube video in question, you'll see that three different pro-Apollo people gave three contradictory explanations for the movement of the jacket corner. Two of those people are well-known pro-Apollo posters. One of them is a regular poster at the Clavius forum.

    I'm asking you what you think of the three explanations that they gave and what you think of the fact that three pro-Apollo people give different explanations.

    I can't see any way to prove that what we read is true when they claim that there is a large spike in reflected light when they point at the Apollo sites. If it turns out to be true, there's the plausible scenario that NASA soft-landed robotic craft with adjustable reflectors attached to their sides at all the alleged sites. The only thing we can use as proof of anything is undoctored video footage and still pictures released by the government as there are plausible alternative scenarios for mere arguments. The footage and stills are full of anomalies such as the one being discussed now.

    When the Apollo 11 footage is doubled in speed, it looks exactly like movement on earth.

    http://video.google.es/videoplay?docid=-7335269088210976286
    (30:55)

    http://video.google.es/videoplay?docid=4135126565081757736
    (21:00)

    Also, when Apollo 11 footage is compared with later footage, the body movements at different.

    http://apollohoax.proboards21.com/index.cgi?board=theories&action=display&thread=1021

    In Apollo 11 they used a crude 50% slow-motion. Later they used a slow-motion of about 67 percent and wire supports.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AXALCQgrvPE
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wdMvQTNLaUE

    That's why gravity seems to be affecting the astronauts differently.

    It wasn't filmed in vacuum. Look at the way atmosphere makes the flag move when the astronaut walks by it in this video.
    http://es.youtube.com/watch?v=n1UEv2PIzl4

    The people who control the government are never in any danger of losing their control as they've got the system rigged. They let the press criticize the government about things like huricanes as it gives the illusion that the press is independent.

    http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Ruling_Elites/BilderbergClub.html

    Go into Google Video or YouTube and enter "Bilderberg" and "Chomsky media" for more.

    You're not considering the info in any of the articles or videos that I've been posting. Are you looking at the info at all?
     
  21. KennyJC Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,936
    I don't know what the precise scientific explanation would be, but to me just watching, it simply looks like the movement of the jacket is based upon the movement of the astronaut and nothing to do with gravity.

    By saying that independent astronomers and TV crews can fake their evidence just reduces the credibility of your claims. The reason you should concede that there are without doubt mirrors on the Apollo landing sites is due to the fact that you can not have independent astronomers in on the conspiracy from now and the end of time. Go ahead and say they got there by robotic craft, even if that is in itself also very stupid and baseless. But the mirrors are there. A conspiracy that tries to persuade independent astronomers to join them from now till far in the future is doomed to failure.


    Not true. I remember watching a BBC documentary were they tried to replicate the Moon landings and one of the tests they carried out was to film an astronaut bouncing across the desert and then slow the footage down by half. Even when the footage was slowed, the astronaut showed tell tale signs of Earth gravity as his body was more violently affected by each step made when compared to Moon footage. I do agree that perhaps the inclusion of wires would have been able to lessen the effect of Earth gravity, but there is just no evidence for that. And if you are going to say that the "wires" glinted in the Sun, like I saw in one of your videos, that was simply glare from the helmet.

    I tried to find footage of the documentary I mentioned above. I watched it on Google Video last year. Perhaps it's still there, but I can't find it.

    As far as I'm aware, the space suits would be venting Co2 and water vapor from the cooling system. As the astronaut was walking past it's likely the gas emitting from the suit came in contact with the flag.

    Further evidence of a vacuum:

    If you watch the clip, you will see dust thrown up by the wheels of the rover. The dust goes up in a perfect parabolic arc and falls back down to the surface. Again, the Moon isn't the Earth! If this were filmed on the Earth, which has air, the dust would have billowed up around the wheel and floated over the surface. This clearly does not happen in the video clips; the dust goes up and right back down. It's actually a beautiful demonstration of ballistic flight in a vacuum.
    http://www.badastronomy.com/bad/tv/foxapollo.html#doubletime
     
  22. FatFreddy Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    930
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I_CMgqitv98

    When the jacket corner is pulled up by Collins' upward movement, it would keep going up according to Newton's first law of motion. Gravity is what's stopping it from continuing upward.

    This is real zero-G. Look at the corners of the woman's jacket.
    http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=TejsnPThmd4


    Lots of them were probably working for NASA. If any intependent astronomer not working for NASA were to say anything different, the press and astronmy magazines would ignore him.

    http://apollohoax.proboards21.com/index.cgi?board=othertheories&action=display&thread=1525

    http://youtube.com/watch?v=bbnxsPgcsH0

    How can independent astronomers see what's on the moon if the Hubble telescope can't even make out the landing sites?

    Watch the video of Apollo 11 played at double speed at the 30 minute 55 second mark of this video.

    http://video.google.es/videoplay?docid=-7335269088210976286

    In the first missions, they used 50% slow-motion. In the later missions they used a faster slow-motion combined with wire supports.
    http://apollohoax.proboards21.com/index.cgi?board=theories&action=display&thread=1021

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AXALCQgrvPE
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wdMvQTNLaUE

    That video you mentioned does not debunk this evidence. They just moved their bodies a little differently to get the effect they wanted.


    Watch this three part series about the flag movement.

    http://es.youtube.com/watch?v=Zr76qSQ9ZQQ


    Watch the clip in slow-motion.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Eo66TOwxXGQ

    I once mistakenly thought that the soil was moving like this.
    http://i142.photobucket.com/albums/r81/headlikearock/grandprix01.jpg

    It was pointed out to me that it was moving according to these arrows.
    http://i142.photobucket.com/albums/r81/headlikearock/gp_frames_2.jpg

    In order to see the trajectory, we have to look at a section of dirt that is ejected at a low angle. When I look at a section of dirt that is ejected at a low angle in the video, I see that it is not landing at the same speed at which it is ejected as would be the case if it were in a vacuum.
     
  23. Ophiolite Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,232
    I don't lbeleive loose thinking should be encouraged. I do think ridiculous ideas should be ridiculed. If you find any of my remarks offensive, please accept your responsibilty for having prompted me to make them.

    Have you heard of strength of materials? You don't think the attractive forces within the jacket might tend to resist movement? No, obviously you don't think so. As a consequence I am forced to ask are you stupid, or just poorly educated? Take your time to answer.
    You don't have any knowledge of how the media work whatsoever, do you? You are woefully ignorant of the incessant pressure to come up with stories that sell copy. If an independent astronomer came up with such evidence then the media would be falling over themselves in a bidding war.
    Here's a suggestion. Why not try to meet some real people once in a while? You may learn to like it.[/QUOTE]
    After such a weak opening I have little incentive to wade through the rest of your delusions.
     
    Last edited: Sep 21, 2008

Share This Page