We never went to the moon.

Discussion in 'Conspiracies' started by Ryndanangnysen, Mar 4, 2015.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
Page 16 of 59
  1. FatFreddy

    FatFreddy Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    930
    Nobody who takes the time to read those debates will agree with you.
    http://www.politicalforum.com/moon-landing/?pp=30&daysprune=-1

    What happens is that paid sophists can't admit it when they're checkmated by clear proof so they play the clear proof down and concentrate on vaguer issues that are easier to obfuscate. All of those issues have alternative explanations so they aren't proof that the missions were real. There is no proof that the missions were real.

    http://www.whale.to/m/disin.html
    (excerpt)
    ------------------------------------------------
    4. Use a straw man. Find or create a seeming element of your opponent's argument which you can easily knock down to make yourself look good and the opponent to look bad. Either make up an issue you may safely imply exists based on your interpretation of the opponent/opponent arguments/situation, or select the weakest aspect of the weakest charges. Amplify their significance and destroy them in a way which appears to debunk all the charges, real and fabricated alike, while actually avoiding discussion of the real issues.
    ------------------------------------------------

    Once the clear proof that the missions were faked has been posted and the sophists discredited by their lame stands, there's really no need for the truther to continue except to keep the sophists from burying the part of the debate where they're checkmated which is what they always try to do.

    Do you think the Black Knight in this video who claims to be the winner is really the winner?

    Black Knight Scene - Monty Python and the Holy Grail



    Do you think the other knight is really a coward as the Black Knight claims? Whether you recognize it or not, you people are all washed up. The only thing that matters is what the viewers end up thinking and only people with an IQ of ninety or over could be convinced that the moon missions were real after having seen the clear proof of fakery
     
    FatFreddy, Jul 7, 2016
    #301

  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. David C

    David C On planet earth Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    445
    I suggest you reread your post again. Stupidity is not a virtue.

    You are doing what you always do. You get backed into a corner, respam all your favourite 3-4 pieces of bullshit and ignore all the posts. You then tell everybody the opposite of what occurs. You claim everybody will see things your way, when only gullible morons do.
     
    David C, Jul 7, 2016
    #302

  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. David C

    David C On planet earth Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    445
    Reposting this as you seem to have deliberately missed this:

    None of your crap closes anything!

    http://debunking-a-moron.blogspot.co.uk/2011/06/apollo-15-flag.html
    http://debunking-a-moron.blogspot.co.uk/2011/08/apollo-17-flag.html

    It proves you are gullible and ignorant. Any flag with vertical and side support is a complex pendulum with multiple pivot points and multiple energy transfers between them. From here.

    http://debunking-a-moron.blogspot.co.uk/2011/06/apollo-11-michael-collins-jacket.html

    You disgust me with your spam and dishonesty. Not only have you been given exhaustive and comprehensive responses to this from very informed people, you run away like an ignorant coward every time it happens!

    http://www.apollohoax.net/forum/index.php?topic=1146.0 REPLY 11.

    http://www.apollohoax.net/forum/index.php?topic=79.0;nowap Particularly REPLY 2 and 5.

    http://www.politicalforum.com/showthread.php?t=403884&p=1064898905#post1064898905

    Show me where you responded to any of those with anything but squealing and hot air!


    You also deliberately missed post numbers 263 267 273 277 278 and 290.
     
    David C, Jul 7, 2016
    #303

  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. Bells

    Bells Staff Member

    Messages:
    24,270
    This is your evidence?

    Okay, a few things. If the flag moved because of say, wind or an atmosphere or some sort, the soil beneath it would also move. It did not. Because for the flag to move that much, there would need to be a breeze and if you watch that first video from the start of when they put the flag in, the flag does not stop moving for quite some time. So either there was a breeze or something else was causing it to move. A tell tale sign of no atmosphere to speak of is the folds in the flag. It isn't starched into that shape, because the whole flag itself moves as he was carrying it because he was jiggling it around. So it had kinks in it that stayed in place, because if there was more gravity and an atmosphere, the cloth of the flag would hang straight. It clearly does not in every single video you posted. And it wasn't starched, because if it was starched, it would not move and would remain stiff like cardboard, which it clearly is not in the videos you posted. Instead, we have a flag, on a thin and light pole, with a thin wire running along the top of it so that it looks unfurled and this thin wire is key to this, as I will explain later.

    The flag was put in a few seconds before the astronaut bounced past it.

    If you watch how they put the flag in, they didn't just shove it down, they twisted it around to get it into little spike that was in the regolith. The pole and the wire running along the top of the flag was moved repeatedly and twisted and turned.

    From about 6 seconds (or from earlier than that), the flag was being handled and moved by either carrying it or setting it down into or onto the spike that was in the ground. This lifting, twisting and shifting the pole of the flag continues until around 29 seconds.

    If you watch, the flag continues to move as one would expect it too because the pole it is attached to is still moving back and forth, as is the thin wire that runs across the top of the flag. If you look at the ground during that time, nothing is moving (until an astronaut bounces into the frame and the regolith lifts up with his movement). Just the pole is moving because the astronauts had been moving it and twisting it beforehand. This is again proof of no atmosphere or air, because to make a flag move that much, then the regolith would have shifted along with it and it does not. And if there was wind, there would be zero kinks in that flag.

    What you actually posted completely disproves your point. In fact, what you posted clearly shows that man walked on the moon and that they were on the moon.

    Had there been resistance, such as in an atmosphere, and more gravity, it would not have wobbled as much as it did for as long as it did because for one thing, the atmosphere would cause friction, which would have slowed it down and stopped it. Had there been an atmosphere and more gravity, the flag would have hung beneath that wire and it does not hang.

    The flag moved because the pole and the wire along the top of the flag was wobbling because it was still bouncing back and forth after being moved and twisted for nearly 30 seconds. Lack of atmospheric friction means it will wobble for longer than it would had it been on Earth. And if you watch the video, the wobble or the movement of the flag slows down and decreases as time goes on. Had there been any sort of wind, as you seem to be insinuating, the flag would have moved more, or increased its movement. It does not. It does not move again until the astronaut comes close to it as he bounced past the camera and this is the one you are focusing on.

    Static charge. Static electricity and static charges from the suit and its interaction with the moon (causing friction that gave off charges) was a fairly big concern for NASA. The suits were giving off sparks, which prompted the investigation because of the concern that it could ignite the gases in their spacecraft. The flag is made from nylon. Shouldn't be hard for you to figure out.

    So frankly, your example is ridiculous because it completely contradicts you.
     
    Bells, Jul 7, 2016
    #304
  8. FatFreddy

    FatFreddy Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    930
    Wrong. If the soil is large grained dust-free sand, a person's trotting past it would not make it move.

    MoonFaker - Project Sandbox



    You people must be really desperate if you're saying stuff such as this. Do all of the rest of you agree with Bells?

    There's a mountain of proof that the footage was taken in a studio and these three pieces are some of the clearest.
    http://www.sciforums.com/threads/we-never-went-to-the-moon.145207/page-15#post-3391329


    Betamax tried to obfuscate the first two anomalies but anyone who reads what he says will see that he doesn't even believe his own arguments. He also maintains that the Chinese spacewalk was real and agrees with Jay Windley's analysis of the dust-free sand issue so he's a known sophist. The same is true for all of you people. A couple of you were just wondering about Jay Windley's analysis of the dust free sand issue. It's so obviously wrong that there's nothing to wonder about; you're trying to take a middle road because you can't say he's wrong and you can't say he's right either. You're not fooling anybody. Anyone who doesn't flatly say that Jay Windley is wrong has no credibility no matter how patronizing and authoritative your attitude is which means that none of you has any credibility.
     
    FatFreddy, Jul 7, 2016
    #305
  9. David C

    David C On planet earth Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    445
    During that entire long sequence where they erect the flag, we see clear footprints being made and fine soil being kicked. So once again you are full of crap. There is no way that is large grained sand, as it doesn't take any sort of prints!!

    People? That was from one person and there is no desperation you troll. There is opinion and it is better than yours.



    Some of it. But once again you avoid all the major stuff levied at you - coward.

    Windley was so obviously giving a better account than your ignorant claim. Betamax101 annihilated you. It was embarrassing for a normal person, which discounts you.
     
    Last edited: Jul 7, 2016
    David C, Jul 7, 2016
    #306
  10. David C

    David C On planet earth Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    445
    Post 302 is being ignored up above as are all the other ones you avoided. You always do this. On every forum, then stand on top of your pile of batshit droppings proclaiming victory.

    Anyone who reads this will not agree with anything you say. They never do, they always laugh at you and think you are crazy. But you always make the claim that they do, delusion as I said.
     
    David C, Jul 7, 2016
    #307
  11. DaveC426913

    DaveC426913 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    18,960
    What studio would that be?

    Strange how no Hoaxer has the slightest interest in looking for extant evidence of the hoax itself.


    We agree on one thing: there is no point in looking for more evidence of a hoax.

    But if I were convinced of a cover-up, I would not be closing the case until I'd actually come up with extant evidence. One document, one requisition slip, one bill, one photo of a model, one piece of lumber from the hoax site, one truck, one studio lamp one disgruntled janitor, one photo of a guy standing next to a model,

    Anything. But in 45 years, not one piece has emerged.
     
    DaveC426913, Jul 7, 2016
    #308
  12. Xelasnave.1947

    Xelasnave.1947 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,502
    So did someone leave the door open and a breeze from outside cause the flag movement.
    Anyways you have proved you are right now go away.
    Alex
     
    Xelasnave.1947, Jul 8, 2016
    #309
  13. Daecon

    Daecon Kiwi fruit Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,133
    If you do somehow manage to prove that this footage wasn't filmed on the moon, you still need to prove that it was filmed in a studio on Earth.
     
    Daecon, Jul 8, 2016
    #310
  14. DaveC426913

    DaveC426913 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    18,960
    Found the proof.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
    DaveC426913, Jul 8, 2016
    #311
    Xelasnave.1947 and Bells like this.
  15. Bells

    Bells Staff Member

    Messages:
    24,270
    I said, now pay attention, that if any breeze made that flag move as it did, the regolith at the bottom would also shift slightly. If it was sand, as you seem to believe it was, grains of sand would shift and move, even slightly if there was a breeze or wind. It does not.

    You keep bringing these people up, but no one here really cares about them because a) they are not party to this conversation and b) no one knows who they are. All we get are these bizarre snippets from you, about so and so said this and that, links to discussion forums that literally and clearly indicate you are wrong.

    To wit, nothing you have provided actually proves the moon landings were fake.

    At this point, I am trying to determine if you are trying to convince us or yourself that it was fake. You haven't convinced us, so your ranting and raving about Jay whatever his name is and another guy whose name sounds like he's a kitchen hand mixer being wrong on other forums makes you look like a raving lunatic (pun intended). The irony is that the videos you provided about the flag, actually prove that it could not have been shot on Earth. If I could be bothered, I'd actually laugh. But I can't really be bothered.

    It's not a matter of desperation. No one here really cares about what you think. Our responding to you is to point out that you are sounding like a lunatic and exposing your conspiracy theory for what it is.

    Absolute rubbish.

    You have provided nothing that would make anyone question the moon landings being fake. The only desperation in this discussion has been from you, because you seem to believe that you have to prove it was all fake. You haven't. And you won't.
     
    Bells, Jul 8, 2016
    #312
  16. Dr_Toad

    Dr_Toad It's green! Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,527
    Bells, don't you think we should just tell him that only a few people are supposed to know the truth? He wasn't on the list, but somehow he found out, damn it.

    Do we have to let him get on the ship when the rest of us leave?

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
    Dr_Toad, Jul 8, 2016
    #313
    exchemist likes this.
  17. Bells

    Bells Staff Member

    Messages:
    24,270
    What the hell, man!?

    This is the last time I ever let you in on anything..

    Last..

    Time!!

    I tell you about the list and tell you, repeatedly, that it's a secret..

    And what do you do?

    Confirm the existence of the list..

    To a person not on the list.

    You didn't even bother doing the arm signals and the co-ordinated blinking signal to make sure he was one of us first. You just blabbed it and confirmed it.

    Not cool dude.

    Not.. Cool!
     
    Bells, Jul 8, 2016
    #314
    exchemist and Dr_Toad like this.
  18. FatFreddy

    FatFreddy Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    930
    How do you know that soils isn't large-grained dust-free sand? I can't see any way to tell it from beach sand such as this.

    MoonFaker - Project Sandbox

    (4:30 timme mark)

    Tell us how you do it.

    Here is a clear footprint.
    http://www.space.com/images/i/000/0...g?interpolation=lanczos-none&fit=inside|660:*

    None of the footprints we see being made in the Apollo foogage are that clear. None of the ones that are that clear are seen being made. The ones Betamax claims are that clear are obviously not that clear.


    You people and Betamax are all washed up because you all maintain that the Chinese spacewalk was real and agree with Jay Windley's* lame analysis of the dust-free sand issue...
    http://www.apollohoax.net/forum/index.php?topic=1149.0
    http://www.apollohoax.net/forum/index.php?topic=1118.15

    ... so nothing you say really matters as you are all known sophists.

    There's a mountain of proof that the missions were faked.
    http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=144487

    What I have to do now is keep you from burying the proof as that's about all you can do now.


    Only a paid sophist would have said this...

    (from post #104)
    ...and none of you has said it was wrong. This further discredits you.



    *
    http://www.clavius.org/about.html
     
    FatFreddy, Jul 8, 2016
    #315
  19. Daecon

    Daecon Kiwi fruit Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,133
    So let's pretend you're right and we never went to the moon.

    So now what?
     
    Daecon, Jul 8, 2016
    #316
    Xelasnave.1947 likes this.
  20. Xelasnave.1947

    Xelasnave.1947 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,502
    Well we can discuss the secret Moon bases the USA and Russia built to hide the alien space craft.
    I have photos.
    Alex
     
    Xelasnave.1947, Jul 8, 2016
    #317
  21. David C

    David C On planet earth Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    445
    Because large grained sand takes no print at all. You are cornered and anyone with an IQ above 90 can see it. Quite simply put: sand fine enough to take a print will atomise in air. Soil too big to atomise will not take any print. You know that the Apollo records show extremely fine sand being kicked. You also know that prints are being made that show the treads in detail. You know this and denying it makes you a liar. But everybody knows you are a liar anyway.

    Spam. The way to tell is that when the imbecile Jarrah White wanders across the beach like a lunatic kicking sand we can observe that he never even remotely leaves a clear print.

    I use a braincell. More importantly is how high is your IQ that you fail to do such a basic thing?

    Made as part of a deliberate camera moment. That kind of print doesn't get made during normal motion and activity.

    LIAR see my avatar.

    LIAR see my avatar. http://www.politicalforum.com/moon-landing/443515-dust-free-sand-strawman-claim.html shows two animations from the same position. One with a pattern and clear treads, one with very fine dust.

    You are cornered as always and do what you always do. You never admit it, deny it even, then come back with bullshit!

    The rest of your post is your stock spam and crap. Nobody agrees with you. You are a laughing stock.

    COWARD: You avoided post 303. You also deliberately missed post numbers 263 267 273 277 278 and 290.
     
    David C, Jul 8, 2016
    #318
  22. David C

    David C On planet earth Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    445
    As betamax101 asked you and you ran away like an anti-troofer:

    Can you see any tread marks at all in any of the bootprints we see being made? Any at all.
    And your answer is? nb. see my avatar

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    Show me something even close to that level of detail in sand.
     
    David C, Jul 8, 2016
    #319
  23. FatFreddy

    FatFreddy Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    930
    It looks to me like he manipulated his version of the print as it looks more detailed than it does in the video. Maybe that particular place had slighty damp sand.

    Check this post out.
    http://www.politicalforum.com/showthread.php?t=443515&page=4&p=1065855578#post1065855578

    As that guy says, there would be detailed prints all over the place.

    Maybe the sand they used in the studio was a little damp.


    This issue doesn't make the other clear proof go away as there are too many alternative scenarios that would explain it.

    This proof is still here...
    http://www.sciforums.com/threads/we-never-went-to-the-moon.145207/page-15#post-3391329

    ...and you still don't have any credibility because you maintain that the Chinese spacewalk was faked and agree with Jay Windley's lame analysis of the dust-free sand issue (see above link).

    There's a ton of proof that they didn't go and zero proof that they went.
    http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=144487

    Everything you present as proof is not proof as there are alternative scenarios that would explain it.
     
    FatFreddy, Jul 8, 2016
    #320
Page 16 of 59
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page