We never went to the moon.

It looks exactly as it does in the video. See my avatar. Damp sand doesn't allow fine sand to be kicked unclumped!! You know this, you are cornered.

Bullshit, we see quite clearly that almost every other step taken kicks large quantities of regolith over previous prints. Always without any dust clouds and frequently we see prints being made, particularly in the 3 clips posted in thatthread.

Maybe you're full of shit. Damp sand doesn't fly like dust across the surface without clumping. Dry sand does, but doesn't take a print. You are cornered.

Liar. You raised the point and there are no alternative scenarios -let's here some. You are cornered.

http://debunking-a-moron.blogspot.co.uk/

Every point debunked and ignored by you because you are a coward and a liar.

The moronic objectivity test. What this person is doing is attempting to obtain his own biased and idiotic criteria for automatically dismissing posts that tear his argument to bits. If you disagree with his pathetic claims, you are "not credible", even if you give complete and concise rebuttal to every point he makes. He then ignores any responses and runs away like a squealing coward.

The website detailing debunks for both of these ignored.

http://debunking-a-moron.blogspot.co.uk/
Every point debunked and ignored by you because you are a coward and a liar.

Not one thing you present is proof. Every point has a better explanation and you ignore every one of them. The rocks is proof. Third party evidence is proof. The laser reflectors are proof. The ALSEP transmission data is proof. The thousands of photographs are proof. The video showing lunar motion that looks comedic sped up is proof.

Nothing can get through your brainless spam mentality.

You ignore everything.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Go on Black Knight, share your thoughts on this video!

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Or not.

He could just shut the hell up and go bother some other forum...

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Are there any left he hasn't spammed already?

 

Mine, at least, but he can't get in there.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

I said that particular spot may have been a little moist. If that one footprint is the only example that can be found in all of the Apollo footage, it's plausible that that particular spot was a little moist for some reason. He says it's been sharpened.
http://www.politicalforum.com/showthread.php?t=443515&page=3&p=1065845500#post1065845500

None of the prints posted by Betamax have the detail that this print has and there are plenty of prints in the Apollo footage that haven't had soil kicked onto them.

MoonFaker - Project Sandbox

(6:26 time mark)


Why would there be only one or two footprints that have a little detail and no others?

Tell us exactly what it is about the footprints and kicked sand that you consider to be proof that the footage was taken on the moon.

As I've already said, there might have been a few spots where there was some slightly moist sand and almost all of it was dry. The footage is consistent with this scenario.

He attempted to obfuscate the amonalies and then just considered them to be debunked.

Here's an example of sophist behavior.
http://www.politicalforum.com/showthread.php?t=362999&page=2&p=1064030792#post1064030792
http://www.politicalforum.com/showthread.php?t=362999&page=2&p=1064032430#post1064032430

I kept asking him about the second movement of the flag and he kept referring to the first movement because he knew the second movement had him checkmated.

It looks like Percy was wrong on this one. It might have been an honest mistake and it might have been deliberate. It doesn't prove that the missions were faked though and it doesn't make the clearest hoax proof go away.

I'm still waiting for some posters to respond to this.
http://www.sciforums.com/threads/we-never-went-to-the-moon.145207/page-14#post-3390923

I'd better post this at least once on every page so that it doesn't get buried.
http://www.sciforums.com/threads/we-never-went-to-the-moon.145207/page-15#post-3391329
http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=144487

That's because you don't want the viewers to see the clear hoax proof. It's so clear that the best sophist in the world couldn't obfuscate it. Your sophists would try to obfuscate it and then do the victory dance but you wouldn't acually be fooling very many viewers and you know this very well.

 

I don't think you believe any of this shit, actually.

I think it is just a a protracted exercise in winding people up for amusement.

.....[click].....

 

I asked you to respond to this objectivity test a while back.
http://www.sciforums.com/threads/we-never-went-to-the-moon.145207/page-14#post-3390923

If it's a ridiculous question, you shouldn't have any reason to hesitate to respond.

 

The moronic objectivity test. What this person is doing is attempting to obtain his own biased and idiotic criteria for automatically dismissing posts that tear his argument to bits. If you disagree with his pathetic claims, you are "not credible", even if you give complete and concise rebuttal to every point he makes. He then ignores any responses and runs away like a squealing coward.

 

Sharpened because the video quality is poor! You once again avoid the whole premise.

Your repetition on this point merely demonstrates the head in the sand lengths you go to in your spam efforts to avoid admitting anything. The print you keep referring to was carefully made to be photographed. The ones we see all through that half hour passage definitely have tread patterns. That is impossible on dry sand. It is impossible for dry sand to behave like dust. It is impossible for dust not to suspend. Cornered, owned and busted.

There are dozens. But you are just playing ignorant. Due to reduced gravity, the best way to move was a skipping/hopping motion that precluded making prints on every step.

Playing dumb again. Prints made require fine soil and on Earth, some level of moisture. With those conditions the soil when kicked will suspend. Prints made in sand never show any detail, let alone clear tread patterns visible from many metres away. You were shown video, animated gifs and stills of this in action and are too scared to admit it!

Bullshit. The actual footprint was made in the same spot as where we see clear fine dust being sprayed around. Cornered, owned and busted.

Every one of your wall of spam points debunked and ignored by you:

http://debunking-a-moron.blogspot.co.uk/

Liar. He explained everything perfectly and you refused every one of his requests and ignored his posts almost entirely!

He was deliberately lying. It should be a simple of matter of takes one to know one, so no idea how you can't see this.

Spam. Post it one more time and I will report it for spam.

 

Another "mistake"? Answer please. His whole film is replete with stuff like this:

http://debunking-a-moron.blogspot.co.uk/2011/07/what-happened-on-moon-debunked-part-1.html

 

If it's so moronic, why don't you flatly say whether or not you agree with Jay Windley?
http://www.sciforums.com/threads/we-never-went-to-the-moon.145207/page-14#post-3390923

This is one of those situation in which the pro-Apollo posters are between a rock and a hard place. If they agree with Jay Windley's lame analysis of the dust-free sand issue, they'll look like horses' a---s but they can't disagree with him because he's supposed to be the best authority on this subject and they can't discredit him. They all know he's wrong but they can't say so so they either say they're not sure, or just quote him.

Jay Windley knows as well as the hoax-believers that Apollo was a hoax and all of the pro-Apollo posters here know Apollo was a hoax.

 

I can speak for any of the others, though I am reasonably confident of their positions. However, I do not know Apollo was a hoax. I have never thought Apollo was a hoax. I have taken the role of Devil's Advocate to assess the evidence. Despite my ability to create convincing fiction I am unable to get even of a glimmer of a suspicion that Apollo was a hoax. Therefore, please withdraw your emboldened assertion.

 

When there is hoax proof that is too clear for you disinfo agents to obfuscate, you all try to bury it to reduce the number of people who see it. The only way to thwart this tactic is to post a link to it on every page. If the moderator keeps me from posting it on every page to thwart that tactic, he is obviously part of your disinfo team.

You people know that once the viewers have seen that clear hoax proof, there's really nothing you can do to make them think they really went to the moon. All you can do is try to take measures to keep them from seeing it.

 

If there was actually any real proof then nobody would still believe that we went to the moon after all.

You still didn't answer the question about what would happen if it was proven to be a hoax.

 

I linked to a bunch of real proof. They people wh0've seen it know they never went to the moon although a lot of them are probably in denial and can't say what they really believe as they're experiencing cognitive dissonance.
http://www.learningandteaching.info/learning/dissonance.htm

Most people in the US simply haven't seen the proof as there is so much censorship. Try to put this link in the comment section of an article that gets thousands of views.
http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=144487

You will have zero success.

When Neil Armstrong passed away there were front page articles in Yahoo news that had millions of views. All the comments in the comment section were celebratory hailing him as a hero. I tried to post that link. As I knew would happen, my post didn't appear. If there were no censorship on the internet, most Americans would know they never went to the moon.

Probably not much. Almost nobody believes the official story of the Kennedy assasination but the mainstream media keep trumpeting the official story. The fact that almost nobody believes it doesn't seem to have much effect except that lots of people take everything the government says with a grain of salt. The government can't get enough soldiers because lots of people know we're the bad guys in our wars.
http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=145531

The fact that the government lied about the Kennedy assasination probably woke up a lot of people to the fact that the government lies on a regular basis and they started taking alternative analyses of the Vietnam war and other conflicts more seriously. If truthers could get this info out, it would help that cause to some degree; it would probably help us get to a lot of young people and make them look at and form their opinions on what alternative info sites such as these say.
http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/
http://www.globalresearch.ca/

That would be a disaster from the government's point of view. That's why they are paying so many sophists to try to obfuscate the hoax proof.

 

There's a ton of proof on the internet that the missions were faked such as this classic video.

Apollo 15 flag, facing air resistance; proving the fraud of alleged manned moon landings.


It's not disappearing from the internet but it's pretty hard to find a place to share it so people have to either come across it or have a friend email it to them. On about ninety eight percent of forums the moderators delete info such as that as soon as they see it and ban the poster. If there were zero censorship on the internet, almost everyone who surfs the internet would see the proof and most people would know that Apollo was a hoax. That's why the government employs so many sophists to create websites that say Apollo was real and pays so many sophists to work the few forums where this discussion is permitted.

-------------------------
edit one minute later...

You added this to your post after I'd seen the first part.

That's not what happens at all. Do you think that Jarrah White is paid by the government to pretend to expose the hoax?
https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=moonfaker

He's a sincere truther who does a good job of pointing out the holes in the official story. You said what you said just to cause confusion.

 

That's what you want people who haven't seen the anomalies to think. Nobody who actually looks at the info will think it's been debunked. They'll think those flag anomalies prove the hoax.

Start reading this this page at reply #21 to see a summary of the flag issue.
http://www.apollohoax.net/forum/index.php?topic=993.15

Apollo 15 flag, facing air resistance; proving the fraud of alleged manned moon landings.

(2:35 time mark)