# We never went to the moon.

Status
Not open for further replies.
Let's do the math!

Landing weight of LM: 30,000 lbs (4800lbs in the Moon's weaker gravity)
Diameter of engine bell: 59 inches
Area of engine bell: 2800 square inches
Pressure on the ground at hover if the landing bell were flush with the ground (which it isn't) - 1.7psi

That's about the pressure you can create in your mouth when you blow hard.

Try to go outside and "blow a crater" with your mouth. I bet you'll just end up blowing some dust around (which is exactly what happened.)

Myth - BUSTED.

Did you skip high school math?

Any junior high student can see that this is not consistent with what's happening in this fake footage.

Apollo 15 Landing
(start watching at the 1:53 time mark)

If it were air, they'd get flipped over the top - and stay there due to the air pressure on them.
The movement is consistent with the air explanation. Whether the flaps would get blown over the top would depend on how much wind there was. Maybe there was enough to raise them almost to the top but not over the top.

The rocks are proof.

You people have never debunked this.

http://www.geschichteinchronologie.com/atmosphaerenfahrt/28_moon-stones-from-Earth-ENGL.html
(excerpt)
-----------------------------------------------------
"Moonstones" have no possibility to be compared on moon itself, because there is no possibility of a neutral control on the "moon". So, it's permitted for anybody to claim this or that stone would come from the "moon". Also when certain "moon probes" are said having landed on the moon also this is not controllable. And it's not possible to control if these "moon probes" have brought stones or dust from the "moon" to the Earth or not either. At the end the super powers "USA" and "SU" claim together to the public that "moonstones" would be "very similar" to "Earth stones". This "similarity" brings up some new questions
-----------------------------------------------------

What Happened On the Moon? Part 2 - Environmental Dangers & The Trouble with Rockets
(1:05:40 time mark)

You just have the attitude that you have. The Rocks are not proof.

LROC is proof.

The proof that the LRO photos are photoshopped

Last edited:
Okay, get back to us when you've finished Junior High School.

Any junior high student can see that this is not consistent with what's happening in this fake footage.

Prove its fake. Your spam reply is the appeal to imaginary support. Any student with any basic physics can work out the psi for the engine. The reason we see dust being blown at that height is because it is a vacuum and the central area of the exhaust stream has not expanded out.

You are a big fraud Fats. You were asked to show your maths and failed to do so.

The movement is consistent with the air explanation. Whether the flaps would get blown over the top would depend on how much wind there was. Maybe there was enough to raise them almost to the top but not over the top.

How utterly stupid. So now the slow moving vehicle is being hit by wind strong enough to support maybe half a kilogram of flap but not to move any of the surface material. Fail again.

You are just too deluded and fixated to see any logic or reason. You think your puny understanding of physics amounts to something. You are a complete embarrassment.

You people have never debunked this.

Nothing to debunk. Some idiot makes a statement in poor English that shows appallingly inept geology knowledge.

"Moonstones" have no possibility to be compared on moon itself, because there is no possibility of a neutral control on the "moon". So, it's permitted for anybody to claim this or that stone would come from the "moon". Also when certain "moon probes" are said having landed on the moon also this is not controllable. And it's not possible to control if these "moon probes" have brought stones or dust from the "moon" to the Earth or not either. At the end the super powers "USA" and "SU" claim together to the public that "moonstones" would be "very similar" to "Earth stones". This "similarity" brings up some new questions

Hey Fats, if I answer this shit, what is the betting you ignore it?

http://meteorites.wustl.edu/lunar/howdoweknow.htm

My renowned geologist trumps your idiot.

What Happened On the Moon? Part 2 - Environmental Dangers & The Trouble with Rockets

The extremely useless and dishonest David Percy. Summarise in your own words what your argument is. Use citations to support it. Using liars who have only the goal to make money rather than accuracy, how typical of you!

You just have the attitude that you have. The Rocks are not proof.

The rocks are 100% irrefutable proof that man landed on the Moon. Your attitude is evade, divert and wave your arms. You are pathetic.

The proof that the LRO photos are photoshopped

This will surprise you. He did prove that the image used was photoshopped. It was.

The problem is that hunchbacked, the imbecile who claimed Aldrin weightless in space was underwater! , hasn't analysed the source for that image. The LROC images are absolutely vast. The Apollo landing sites cover maybe 1/2 % of the total image.

It is impossible to show the Apollo section without enlarging it and cropping it. Just for good measure, they boost the contrast and brightness. They use Photoshop to do this! So your pitiful source of information is really pitiful.

It won't stop you spamming that video at a future date though.

Hey Fats you old Fraud,

Gonna tell us how they filmed this video?

1. Massive area of many square miles, all grey soil, no vegetation.
2. Massive area of many square miles all evenly lit up and extremely bright.
3. Distant mountains never get any nearer.
4. The whole reflectivity of the ground changes as the LRV changes across Sun.
5. Astronauts in unbroken sequence have only the Sun in their visor.
6. Every single shadow is crisp black and well defined.

Try again failure:

The rocks are proof.
LROC is proof.
LRRR is proof.
The video showing impossible to fake lunar gravity is proof
The film of the LRV you ignore is proof.
The digging a trench video is massive proof.
Japanese topography corroboration is proof.
Third party tracking is proof.
Jodrell Bank tracking is proof.
Not one single thing debunks any of the above.
Not one single piece of evidence exists to give an alternative to any of the above.

You would be ejected forcefully from the Debate Hall for being incompetent. You are the Black Knight. You know the missions are real.

THAT is the real bottom line!

Any junior high student can see that this is not consistent with what's happening in this fake footage.
Then learn some physics beyond 8th grade and you'll see there's nothing inconsistent there.
The movement is consistent with the air explanation. Whether the flaps would get blown over the top would depend on how much wind there was. Maybe there was enough to raise them almost to the top but not over the top.

If there wasn't enough wind to "blow them over the top" there wasn't enough wind to lift them in the first place. (Hint - it is harder for wind to lift a flap when it is 10 degrees from the horizontal than when it is 90 degrees from the horizontal.) Try it.

Again, your argument seems to be "I am too stupid to understand the physics, so therefore I don't understand the physics, so therefore any depiction of physics must be fake!" By those standards, the Earth is flat and the sky is a big dome with stars hung from it.

Waiting for "Earth is a snow globe" theories.

1. Massive area of many square miles, all grey soil, no vegetation.
2. Massive area of many square miles all evenly lit up and extremely bright.
This is nothing.
http://apollofake.atspace.co.uk/

3. Distant mountains never get any nearer.
I'm no authority but I found this in the comment section of this video.

(excerpt)
----------------------------
What about the lunar rover sitting on the moon surface with no tire tracks around it? How did it get there? There were film projection techniques available that could have been used to keep the "distant" mountains in this video at a constant magnification as the rover drove toward the screen on which the mountain scenery was being projected. ALL Apollo moon landings were done during Nixon's time as president (tricky Dick), need I say more?
----------------------------

4. The whole reflectivity of the ground changes as the LRV changes across Sun.
Wouldn't that happen on an outdoor movie set doing what the above link explains?

5. Astronauts in unbroken sequence have only the Sun in their visor.
I can't see what you're trying to prove here.

The Mystery of the Apollo Sun

Physics of the Apollo Moon Reflection

LROC is proof.
Japanese topography corroboration is proof.

Pictures are fakable so there's no prove there.

LRRR is proof.
I don't know how many times I've posted this on this thread.

What Happened On the Moon? Part 2 - Environmental Dangers & The Trouble with Rockets
(1:17:00 time mark)

The film of the LRV you ignore is proof.
Lunar rover on the moon. Was it a RC model? (Extended Edition)

Third party tracking is proof.
We read that a bunch of third parties tracked Apollo but did it really happen? Read this info about the media.

Third parties can be paid to lie. The US has a lot of control in the world.

Jodrell Bank tracking is proof.

MoonFaker: Russia, Jodrell Bank & Frequencies. PART 1

The digging a trench video is massive proof.
It looks like footage of earth gravity shown in slow-motion.

You haven't shown anything that could be considered proof. Nothing you've posted as "Proof" makes the anomalies that prove it was all faked go away.

The case was closed a long time ago. You people just won't recognize it.

edit twenty minutes later
---------------------------------

You people also destroyed your credibility a long time ago by the stands you took on the Chinese spacewalk and Jay Windley's* analysis of the "Dust-free sand" issue.

*

Last edited:
Good, stay busy with that bullshit. Keeps you out of mischief.

Good, stay busy with that bullshit. Keeps you out of mischief.
The hallmark of the loony conspiracy theorist is the blast of Youtube videos. I think that people with limited ability to process factual data (i.e. conspiracy theorists) have a lot of trouble reading and understanding quantitative information, and so revert to the mode of communication they have the most experience with - watching TV.

Good, stay busy with that bullshit. Keeps you out of mischief.

My god, he's gone full spam on us. This is laborious.

The University of Boobtube grants Ph.D.'s indescriminately.

Without doubt you are obfuscating. You cannot be that stupid that you compare 20 minutes of DAC film footage at 20FPS to a single image edited with MODERN software. If you do, you are really pathetic. Now answer properly!!

1. Massive area of many square miles, all grey soil, no vegetation. WHERE did all the grey soil come from, who pout it there, where is the paper trail. Where on Earth does that area exist with big mountains?
2. Massive area of many square miles all evenly lit up and extremely bright. Your stupid claim doesn't work for a film sequence done in 1971.

I'm no authority but I found this in the comment section of this video. There were film projection techniques available that could have been used to keep the "distant" mountains in this video at a constant magnification as the rover drove toward the screen on which the mountain scenery was being projected.

I refer you to point 5. Also, what magical system keeps static mountains and backgrounds in all directions with no visible projection. It is clearly solid and has noticeable depth and shading.

3. Distant mountains never get any nearer. Now, try again!

Wouldn't that happen on an outdoor movie set doing what the above link explains?

The Moon is a retro-reflective surface, sending light back at source. When travelling down Sun, the reflection back is extremely bright. Across Sun, the brightness diminishes significantly. The Earth is NOT a retro-reflective surface.

4. The whole reflectivity of the ground changes as the LRV changes across Sun. Identify where on Earth this could have occurred and how the surface would possibly do this!

I can't see what you're trying to prove here.

So you fire off your pathetic spammed videos that have already been debunked!

The point is that there are no cameras, projectors or anything visible on the entire surrounding area. How is that possible?

Pictures are fakable so there's no prove there.

Yes there is. The entire list of pictures counts 100% as proof. YOU are the joker who needs to PROVE they were faked. Good luck with that.

I don't know how many times I've posted this on this thread.

I'm sure you don't. You spam so much it is painful. Nothing in that useless video is an answer to the LRRR. I know your spam response, so I guess you just spammed the wrong cut and paste. PROVE they were unmanned. One single tiny piece of evidence. Paper trails on testing, development, launch, tracking, any single testimony or video or picture. You have zero. NOTHING. The evidence stands.

Lunar rover on the moon. Was it a RC model? (Extended Edition)

A fake non-expert and a moronic claim that the LRV footage is a model car. If you believe that you are way more stupid than you appear!

We read that a bunch of third parties tracked Apollo but did it really happen? Read this info about the media.

Third parties can be paid to lie. The US has a lot of control in the world.

Prove they lied. The evidence stands. You seem to think your ludicrous arm waving and insanely simplistic statements are proof that the evidence is suspect. You really have no clue how to assess evidence.

MoonFaker: Russia, Jodrell Bank & Frequencies. PART 1

The evidence stands.

It looks like footage of earth gravity shown in slow-motion.

The problem is that the soild to fall at Earth speed makes the astronauts move at crazy speeds. What things "look like" to you is clouded in your delusion and useless understanding.

You haven't shown anything that could be considered proof.

Yes I have, it all stands. Nothing you typed makes it go away. Your entire useless post is nothing but hot air with nothing concrete as rebuttal.

Nothing you've posted as "Proof" makes the anomalies that prove it was all faked go away.

None of the so called anomalies are unexplained. None of your crap observations and conclusions make the enormous amount of evidence go away. The missions occurred as history states.

The case was closed a long time ago. You people just won't recognize it.

Yes, but sadly for you, 10 years on and you still can't see it's you who is the fake.

You people also destroyed your credibility a long time ago by the stands you took on the Chinese spacewalk and Jay Windley's* analysis of the "Dust-free sand" issue.

Moron spam. You are the least credible person I have ever conversed with.

Anyone who thinks the flag moves in water like that is lying or incredibly dumb. I cannot accurately determine which.

Anyone who thinks the flag moves in water like that is lying or incredibly dumb. I cannot accurately determine which.
You just destroyed you credibility big time (again).

Viewers:

Check out the second to the last link in this post.

All of you pro-Apollo posters maintain that the Chinese spacewalk was real. This totally destroys your credibility. None of you has any credibility.

edit fifteen minutes later
--------------------------------

Please don't lamely say this is off-topic. NASA's official position is that the Chinese spacewalk was real so this is relevant to the Apollo issue.

Last edited:
All of you pro-Apollo posters maintain that the Chinese spacewalk was real. This totally destroys your credibility. None of you has any credibility.
You have to understand something here. You telling us we have no credibility is like Kim Jong Un telling us we are evil. We take it as a compliment.

As far as we can tell, you don't know the first thing about physics, aerodynamics, optics or orbital dynamics - and the more you post the more you reveal your complete and utter ignorance.

I look forward to your next conspiracy theory - that the Earth is flat, or that climate change is a big hoax, or that evolution is a myth, or that the Holocaust didn't really happen. Because you saw something on Youtube.

It's impossible for you to pass judgment on credibility, FF.

You just destroyed you credibility big time (again).

You have no credibility. You routinely wave away evidence saying it could have been faked, therefore bullshit. You just avoided that entire last post.

Think you are an embarrassing human being.

Check out the.................

...........diversionary spam.

All of you pro-Apollo posters maintain that the Chinese spacewalk was real. This totally destroys your credibility. None of you has any credibility.

Hmmmm, the zero credible joke sits in judgement. You, the crazy one who thinks flags move like that in water and magic bubbles are white, jagged and rotate, whilst getting bigger tenfold in under a metre "depth" have the audacity to say others lack credibility. And all based on your batshit crazy opinion.

Please don't lamely say this is off-topic. NASA's official position is that the Chinese spacewalk was real so this is relevant to the Apollo issue.

I see you have written about this on spursforum, where the viewers find you as welcome as cancer. It takes a monumental moron to think China, who clearly have the technology to reach LEO with men, would fake this rather than open the door and pop outside. I think you have what it takes.

Waiting for "Earth is a snow globe" theories.

Don't you mean Flat Earth is a Snow Flat with Dome theory?

Dear Send me away Travel Agency
Your right. This is a "Get away from 99.99% of it all" holidays

Just arrived and checking in now

Pros
• Great view of Dinner plate Earth (I must be tired - it looks like a round ball)
• Free parking
Cons
• Took 3 days to get here
• No pool
• No atmosphere

Still won't be here long

Gift shop still being set up

With bring you some rocks for your garden

Great place to set up a lunatic asylum. I would pay passage for my cousins.

Great place to set up a lunatic asylum. I would pay passage for my cousins.

You would send them to the very place which made them sick???

You do know lunatics come from the changes in the moon?

You are a very naughty person

Status
Not open for further replies.