Moon Landing Hoax [Archive] - Democracy Forums

Opponion

10-07-2006, 02:17 PM

For nearly 40 years Neil Armstrong has been accused of fluffing his lines during his first steps on the Moon. On tapes of the Moon landings, he appears to drop the "a" from the famous quote: "That's one small step for a man, one giant leap for mankind."

But new analysis of the tapes has proved Mr Armstrong right after all. Computer programmer Peter Shann Ford used audio analysis software to show that the missing "a" was blotted out by transmission static.
Full report here (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/5398560.stm)

On February 15th 2001, the Fox TV network aired a program called "Conspiracy Theory: Did We Land on the Moon?''.Â*Â*I watched it and have to say I was 99% convinced the moon landing was a hoax.Â*Â*Here are a few things that didn't add up.

*There is no air on the Moon, but you can see the American flag waving.
*The protective suit and shield were not enough to protect the astronauts from the lethal level of radiation.
*Most of the photos look doctored by looking at the camera angles, shadows, lighting, etc.Â*Â*These photos can fool most people, but pros can spot these forgeries miles away.
*The videos look like playing a regular video at the fast forward mode.Â*Â*
*During the weeks leading to the launch of Appollo, nothing was working or functioning, especially the landing ship.
*The person who knew the inside stories was about to testify at the congressional hearing, but he and his family was misteriously killed by a big truck.

9 SPACE ODDITIES:

1.Â*Â*Apollo 14 astronaut Allen Shepard played golf on the Moon. In front of a worldwide TV audience, Mission Control teased him about slicing the ball to the right. Yet a slice is caused by uneven air flow over the ball. The Moon has no atmosphere and no air.

2.Â*Â*A camera panned upwards to catch Apollo 16's Lunar Landerlifting off the Moon.Â*Â*Who did the filming?

3.Â*Â*One NASA picture from Apollo 11 is looking up at Neil Armstrong about to take his giant step for mankind. The photographer must have been lying on the planet surface. If Armstrong was the first man on the Moon, then who took the shot?

4.Â*Â*The pressure inside a space suit was greater than inside a football. The astronauts should have been puffed out like the Michelin Man, but were seen freely bending their joints.

5.Â*Â*The Moon landings took place during the Cold War. Why didn't America make a signal on the moon that could be seen from earth? The PR would have been phenomenal and it could have been easily done with magnesium flares.

6.Â*Â*Text from pictures in the article said that only two men walked on the Moon during the Apollo 12 mission. Yet the astronaut reflected in the visor has no camera. Who took the shot?

7.Â*Â*The flags shadow goes behind the rock so doesn't match the dark line in the foreground, which looks like a line cord. So the shadow to the lower right of the spaceman must be the flag. Where is his shadow? And why is the flag fluttering if there is no air or wind on the moon?

8.Â*Â*How can the flag be brightly lit when its side is to the light? And where, in all of these shots, are the stars?

9.Â*Â*The Lander weighed 17 tons yet the astronauts feet seem to have made a bigger dent in the dust. The powerful booster rocket at the base of the Lunar Lander was fired to slow descent to the moons service. Yet it has left no traces of blasting on the dust underneath. It should have created a small crater, yet the booster looks like it's never been fired. Â*Â*More here if you like to read (http://www.apfn.org/apfn/moon.htm)

The motivation: America was competing with the Soviet.Â*Â*If you can't make it, fake it!Â*Â*Has anyone else heard of this moon landing conspiracy?

CheesyMuslim

10-07-2006, 05:37 PM

Sorry bout that,

1. But i know this conspiracy cr@p fuels books, etc.
2. Its a money machine.
3. I know we walked on the moon.
4. Its a fact now, and we can go back anytime we please, USA owns it now.
5. How about we just focus some powerful telescopes up there, and see the small car we left up there, its there I'm sure.
6. Find it, it is also known just exactly where it is.
7. If its not there, then you have something.
8. We also left a American Flag, we should be able to find whats left of it anyways.

Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

false_creeds

10-25-2006, 01:26 AM

Those 9 oddities have been debunked by several already. Google around, you'll find one that does it accurately.

New argument will have to be created before this claim ever goes any further.

This is almost sillier than the 9/11 inside job and the young earthers claim of a 4000 year old earth.

Cosmored

12-16-2007, 06:08 PM

This is the clearest proof I've seen yet that the moon missions were faked.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n1UEv2PIzl4

At the 2 minute 35 second mark of the video the flag is still. When the astronaut goes past it, it starts to move.

There's an analysis of it here at the 3 minute 5 second mark.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rC1legw5-gs

PatrickHenry

12-16-2007, 10:21 PM

Hmmm...I think that if the landers aren't there when another nation lands on the moon, the US will suffer a huge loss of face.

Don't you think that alone would be a major deterrent for a hoax of this nature?

preservanation

12-16-2007, 10:55 PM

If we actually pulled this off, it is a much greater achievement than landing on the moon itself.
Kudos to all those involved.

Cosmored

12-17-2007, 09:46 AM

I suppose they were thinking short-term. The evidence is there that they faked it.
Here's some of it.

There's a noticeable difference in the body movements in these two clips.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wdMvQTNLaUE
http://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/a11/a11v.1101330.rm

What I hypothesize is that only slow-motion was used in Apollo 11. Later, they improved thier methods of simulating lunar gravity and started using a combination of slow-motion and support wires. The slow-motion in the later missions might not have been exactly half-speed. It might have been sixty five or seventy percent of natural speed. It looked better but it was inconsistent with Apollo 11 footage. The inconsistency is apparent.

At around the 21 minute mark of this video the above footage from Apollo 11 can be seen played at double speed.
http://video.google.es/videoplay?docid=4135126565081757736&q=apollo

It looks just like movement in earth gravity.
---------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------

If you look at the acceleration of the object that falls from the astronaut's backpack and the acceleration of the hammer and feather that fall, it's apparent that the there's a difference in the way gravity affects the objects differently.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5C5_dOEyAfk
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AK2Fy85VyRg

Evidently the slow-motion speed is different.
---------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------
Here are some videos.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sgID31UpYfA&NR=1
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A6MvcIs4OcQ
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wdMvQTNLaUE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EQj-Mh__fRc&NR=1
http://es.youtube.com/watch?v=sgID31UpYfA
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vENebR5hsRs
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=5278489814268946247

Here are some articles.
http://www.nardwuar.com/vs/bill_kaysing/
http://www.apfn.org/apfn/moon.htm
http://www.aulis.com/skeleton.html
http://erichufschmid.net/Interview-with-Bart-Sibrel.html
http://www.geocities.com/apollotruth/

The astronauts look pretty nervous at the press conference.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-RcKLAo62Ro

Their behavior look pretty suspicious here too. It begins in the second half of the video.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-2265515730495966561

Pookie

12-17-2007, 03:10 PM

Sorry, I don't think it was a hoax. This is much like the events of 9/11 - details picked apart and often twisted to fit one view, be it right or wrong, just to prove some kind of point.
The truth is, most people know the truth so by doing this to the moon landing, people are just going to sigh and say, "Okay...what kind of hooey is next?"
That's pretty much my take on it, and I'm a liberal. Go figure.
Purrs,
Pookie

PatrickHenry

12-17-2007, 04:05 PM

I saw the moon rocks at the Johnson Space Center near Houston. Are they fake, too?

Truth_and_Power

12-17-2007, 04:12 PM

Oh puhleeze. Google answers all those theories.

Wndrtch

12-17-2007, 05:54 PM

Well, people did watch the enormus Saturn-5's launch, so where did they go for all that time? If they were in orbit, the Russians would have been tracking them and exposed the plot. They wanted any opportunity to embarress the US Space Program, and that would have done it. For this consiracy to be true, you would have had to convince them to go along with it, during the peak of the Cold War. Going to the moon would have been a far easier.

Cosmored

12-18-2007, 10:10 AM

Who knows what was really going on behind the scenes during the cold war. What we see in the news almost never reflects the reality of the situation.

http://www.zmag.org/chomsky/sam/sam-3-1.html
http://www.zmag.org/Chomsky/dd/dd-c01-s01.html

http://www.nardwuar.com/vs/bill_kaysing/index.html
(excerpt)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Well, why did they keep faking the Apollo flights, I still don't understand. Did the Soviet Union know it was faked? Why did they keep shut up if they knew it was faked? 'Cause a lot of people would think they kept the moon race going to prove the U.S. was better than the Soviet Union. If the Soviet Union knew, why did they let the U.S. get away with this?
Well, I'll tell you - at the highest levels there is a coalition between governments. In other words, the Soviets said, if you won't tell on us - and they faked most of their space exploration flights - we won't tell on you. It's as simple as that. See, what Apollo is, is the beginning of the end of the ability of the government to hoodwink and bamboozle and manipulate the people. More and more people are becoming aware in the U.S. that the government is totally and completely public enemy number one.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

There are a lot of alternative scenarios for the rocks.

http://www.nardwuar.com/vs/bill_kaysing/index.html
(excerpt)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Another point here is that the moon rocks were fake. Are the moon rocks real?
No, they are not real. NASA has a well-developed ceramics laboratory with high-temperature ovens-
That's another way NASA could prove they went to the moon, 'cause they brought back these rocks. Interestingly enough, at the University of British Columbia here, David Strangway, the President of U.B.C., was the guy in charge of inspecting the moon rocks.
OK, fine, why don't you call him up and ask him what he thinks about them.
So what happened, the moon rocks were not real?
No, they were manufactured on Earth to look like moon rocks, but since nobody has any moon rocks to compare them with, it's very simple to make up a moon rock and say, hey, this came from the moon.
Well, how would you know it is a moon rock? Like, how do you know it's not a moon rock - how do you know it's a fake?
I had a Seattle geologist who examined moon rocks and he said, "There's no question, Bill, that these rocks were made in a laboratory on Earth."
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://www.erichufschmid.net/MoreInfoForScienceChallenge.html
(excerpt)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
9) Moon rocks are in Antarctica?
Barbara Cohen, a researcher from the University of New Mexico, was picking up rocks in Antarctica. She sent them to Houston, Texas for an analysis.
The scientists in Houston discovered that one of the Antarctic rocks closely matched the NASA moon rocks.
The scientists then concluded that one of the rocks from Antarctica was actually from the moon:
www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6620370/
How did rocks from the moon get in Antarctica?
NASA and Ms. Cohen want us to believe that a big meteor crashed into the moon a while ago, and pieces of the moon were sent flying into space. A few of those pieces landed in Antarctica.
Take a look at how far away the moon is from the earth. If it were true that rocks were ejected from the moon with such velocity that they could escape the moon's gravity and fly out into space, what are the chances that any of them would survive the fall through the atmosphere and land on tiny Antarctica hundreds of thousands of kilometers away? Furthermore, the rock has to land in a location where humans can find it many years later.
A more sensible explanation is that the NASA moon rocks were rocks from Antarctica.
Therefore, when someone travels to Antarctica and sends rock samples to Houston, Texas for analysis, some of the rocks will closely match the Apollo moon rocks.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

We read that the scientific community thinks the rocks really came from the moon. Maybe there are scientists who think the rocks are bogus and the press doesn't print their opinions. Maybe there are scientists who have sold out or are afraid to say what they really think and the press and journals only print what they say and ignore the rest. All we have is what we read. We see the rocks in museums but if we're not trained geologists, how can we be sure they're really from the moon?

Here is some evidence that what we read about science is bogus.

Look at what this report on DU by RAND says.
http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/land/docs/b04151999_bt170-99.htm
There were probably a few PH.D's working on it.

This woman has a PH.D.
http://video.google.es/videoplay?docid=-5109486402266517406
She holds the opposite view.

Look at what this person says about "Genetically modified foods".
http://www.projectcensored.org/censored_2007/index.htm#11

Look at this.
http://www.rand.org/commentary/051204FT.html

This woman talks about how a lot of the science community has sold out.
GLOBAL NUCLEAR COVER UP part #1
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-3626298989248030643
(around the 30 minute mark)

GLOBAL NUCLEAR COVER UP part #2
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-7451332617120640846

If scientists can lie about the above issues, why can't they lie about moon rocks?

Oh puhleeze. Google answers all those theories.

What it does is provide an alternative scenario which may or not be wrong. That's not debunking.

I've seen loads of what I'd call proof that some of the moon footage was faked but I've never seen anything I'd call proof that they were really on the moon.
Somebody post something specific that he or she thinks is proof that they went and we can talk about whether it's really proof.[hr]This may be one of the reasons they had to fake the missions.

http://www.geocities.com/apollotruth/
(excerpt)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
There is an old saying that "A liar needs a good memory". Nowhere is this more true than in the Apollo program. NASA tell lies to cover up previous lies, and other discrepancies uncovered by people investigating the Moon landings. Altering previous data, removing photographs, and retracting statements made, only re-enforces the evidence that NASA are on the run, and being forced into a corner to which they cannot escape. The actions of those under investigation makes the investigator more aware they are bluffing. The longer that person, or persons, who make the extravagant claims continue, the more lies they have to tell in order to counteract it, until it reaches the point where it becomes ridiculous. That point was passed in July 1999, when NASA officials were questioned about the Moon landings on television. They dodged the all important questions like a drifter dodges the heat.

Many Apollo astronauts have long since died, as to have many of the original NASA officials involved in the scam, consequently current officials, who know that Apollo was a fake, have not quite got it right when talking openly in public. Perhaps the biggest slip of the tongue was made by NASA Chief Dan Goldin when interviewed by UK TV journalist Sheena McDonald in 1994. He said that mankind cannot venture beyond Earth orbit, 250 miles into space, until they can find a way to overcome the dangers of cosmic radiation. He must have forgot that they supposedly sent 27 astronauts 250,000 miles outside Earth orbit 36 years earlier.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vENebR5hsRs
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oZ65d30kYME

two sets of radiation data
http://hey_223.tripod.com/bulldoglebeautaketooooo/id82.html
(excerpt)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
To prove his thesis, Rene tries to get certain solar data from NATIONAL
OCEANIC & ATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRATION, (NOAA) using clever techniques
to
disguise his true intentions, [i.e. to get true data on solar flares.] NOAA,
unfortunately, proved to be as cagey as Rene in dodging the giving out of any
really good DETAILS on this matter, [you know, where the devil resides.]

Rene, seeing games being played, deduced that there must be two sets of data,
one which is sent to scientists on the preferred list, and one sent to the
likes of Rene as casual strangers. (p.125)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://ocii.com/~dpwozney/apollo5.htm
http://www.erichufschmid.net/MoreInfoForScienceChallenge.html
http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=9659&hl=apollo

PatrickHenry

12-18-2007, 10:15 AM

Would photos of moon landers taken from orbit around the moon do it?

K-D-K-D-K

12-18-2007, 11:52 AM

Wndrtch

12-18-2007, 02:52 PM

Oh good grief. As the Poster above said the Saturn 5 Rocket did blast off and we did go to the moon. We even established a mirror placed by the lander to shine a laser on from earth to track the moons distance at all times. This post is nonsense and everyone should be proud of the American achievement we accomplished that no other nation has been able too do. I tell you what if you think it was a hoax then how do you will think we will cover it up this time with the Constellation Rocket that will go to the moon? With all the technology to the masses and space telescopes to individuals how can we keep it a secret? We cant and we can track it all the way to the moon. We did it then and we will do it in 8 years. We will prevail again.

Oh come on K-D-K, this is fun! :clapper:

Conspiracy theories are like any good fiction, in that if you are presented with either common sense or actual proof that is counter to the theory, you can always make stuff up to continue the story. :dizzy:

Besides, we should be thankful there are people who are willing to buy the books on this stuff, otherwise all those conspiracy writers would be on Welfare. You and I would be feeding their kids. :madlaugh:

Wndrtch

12-18-2007, 06:36 PM

Well, I'll tell you - at the highest levels there is a coalition between governments. In other words, the Soviets said, if you won't tell on us - and they faked most of their space exploration flights - we won't tell on you. It's as simple as that. See, what Apollo is, is the beginning of the end of the ability of the government to hoodwink and bamboozle and manipulate the people. More and more people are becoming aware in the U.S. that the government is totally and completely public enemy number one.

I suppose that we now need to believe that the Cuban Missle crisis never happened either? It to was just staged by the US and Soviet Governments? :madlaugh:

Sorry, but the "reality" is that the US and the Soviets were playing cat & mouse. IF the Soviets found anything even remotely like it could be used to embarres the US, they would have exposed it. And yes, with the perliferation of ICBM systems, also came the development of orbital tracking systems, that both the US and the Soviets had. If we had said that our rocket was going to the moon, and the Soviets didn't see it leave Earth's orbit, they would have raized hell over it, big time.

I've seen loads of what I'd call proof that some of the moon footage was faked but I've never seen anything I'd call proof that they were really on the moon. Somebody post something specific that he or she thinks is proof that they went and we can talk about whether it's really proof.[hr]This may be one of the reasons they had to fake the missions.

Ok, so we say "look at the Moon rocks" and you say all the scientists could be lying. Then we say "the Soviets would have seen the hoax, because they have been tracking every rocket launch of the US, and would have seen if the Staurn-5's left Earths orbit" and you say, they were in on it, even though our cat & mouse game with them came close to eliminating the Human race. Then we say " get a telescope and look at the stuff we left up there", and you cover your eyes and start singing "la, la, la, I can't hear you, la,la, la,...".

And regarding all the strange "video" footage, ever think that perhaps the conspiracy nuts have doctored the video to suit THEIR consiracies? You know, conspiracy nuts lie too.

There is an old saying that "A liar needs a good memory". Nowhere is this more true than in the Apollo program. NASA tell lies to cover up previous lies, and other discrepancies uncovered by people investigating the Moon landings. Altering previous data, removing photographs, and retracting statements made, only re-enforces the evidence that NASA are on the run, and being forced into a corner to which they cannot escape. The actions of those under investigation makes the investigator more aware they are bluffing. The longer that person, or persons, who make the extravagant claims continue, the more lies they have to tell in order to counteract it, until it reaches the point where it becomes ridiculous. That point was passed in July 1999, when NASA officials were questioned about the Moon landings on television. They dodged the all important questions like a drifter dodges the heat.

Again, it is far easier to go to the Moon, than it is to keep-up on a lie for the past 40 years, especially a lie that you claim involves literally thousands of people around the Globe, including our Cold War enemy.

Many Apollo astronauts have long since died,

Of the 12 that have walked on the Moon, only three have died. The rest are in their seventies.

as to have many of the original NASA officials involved in the scam, consequently current officials, who know that Apollo was a fake, have not quite got it right when talking openly in public. Perhaps the biggest slip of the tongue was made by NASA Chief Dan Goldin when interviewed by UK TV journalist Sheena McDonald in 1994. He said that mankind cannot venture beyond Earth orbit, 250 miles into space, until they can find a way to overcome the dangers of cosmic radiation. He must have forgot that they supposedly sent 27 astronauts 250,000 miles outside Earth orbit 36 years earlier.

Or, he was talking about long-term space flight and exposure. Remember, radiation sickness is a combination of the intensity of the exposure, and the time you are exposed to it.

Protecting against radiation is as simple as just electrifying the skin of the ship, which can happen naturally as the ship passes through Earth's aptmosphere at 17,000mph.

Also consider that the Earth's "protective" Magneto-sphere extends several ten's of thousands of miles, so for some portion of the trip, you are still protected by Mother Earth. Add to that that the Megnetic effect doesn't just end, but fades-out over a much greater distance, and you may be able to get almost all the way to the Moon while still having some protection from the Earth.

So, if you put all three of these last paragraphs together, you can probably last for several months, before radiation will start to have a negative effect on you in the near future.

Cosmored

12-19-2007, 06:31 PM

Would photos of moon landers taken from orbit around the moon do it?
If we can be sure they're not faked photos, they would. Photos can be faked. If the government publishes "Photos" of the landing sites with all the equipment there, they should be examined by objective experts. We have to keep in mind that there are lots of experts who are willing to sell out and lie as I showed in my last post.

This site is an example of experts who are obviously lying.
http://www.clavius.org/

They made a very big blunder which is explained in this thread from that site.
http://apollohoax.proboards21.com/index.cgi?board=theories&action=display&thread=1194111920

We even established a mirror placed by the lander to shine a laser on from earth to track the moons distance at all times.
Reflectors can be attached to unmanned robot craft so this is not conclusive proof that they went to the moon.

Sorry, but the "reality" is that the US and the Soviets were playing cat & mouse. IF the Soviets found anything even remotely like it could be used to embarres the US, they would have exposed it. And yes, with the perliferation of ICBM systems, also came the development of orbital tracking systems, that both the US and the Soviets had. If we had said that our rocket was going to the moon, and the Soviets didn't see it leave Earth's orbit, they would have raized hell over it, big time.
You're being downright dogmatic here. Is this just your intuition?

And regarding all the strange "video" footage, ever think that perhaps the conspiracy nuts have doctored the video to suit THEIR consiracies? You know, conspiracy nuts lie too.

I've seen lot's of the footage from YouTube here in the official footage. I haven't seen anything that has been in any way different from it yet.
http://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/a11/
http://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/a12/
http://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/a14/
http://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/a15/
http://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/a16/
http://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/a17/
(Click on "Video and Movie Clips " in these links.)

Again, it is far easier to go to the Moon, than it is to keep-up on a lie for the past 40 years, especially a lie that you claim involves literally thousands of people around the Globe, including our Cold War enemy.
Are you just saying that off the top of your head? What about the alleged high radiation levels in space?

Here's some more stuff.
http://www.apfn.org/apfn/moon.htm
(excerpt)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Several motives have been suggested for the U.S. government to fake the moon landings - some of the recurrent elements are:
Distraction - The U.S. government benefited from a popular distraction to take attention away from the Vietnam war. Lunar activities did abruptly stop, with planned missions cancelled, around the same time that the US ceased its involvement in the Vietnam War.
Cold War Prestige - The U.S. government considered it vital that the U.S. win the space race with the USSR. Going to the Moon, if it was possible, would have been risky and expensive. It would have been much easier to fake the landing, thereby ensuring success.
Money - NASA raised approximately 30 billion dollars pretending to go to the moon. This could have been used to pay off a large number of people, providing significant motivation for complicity. In variations of this theory, the space industry is characterized as a political economy, much like the military industrial complex, creating fertile ground for its own survival.
Risk - The available technology at the time was such that there was a good chance that the landing might fail if genuinely attempted.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Ok, so we say "look at the Moon rocks" and you say all the scientists could be lying. Then we say "the Soviets would have seen the hoax, because they have been tracking every rocket launch of the US, and would have seen if the Staurn-5's left Earths orbit" and you say, they were in on it, even though our cat & mouse game with them came close to eliminating the Human race. Then we say " get a telescope and look at the stuff we left up there", and you cover your eyes and start singing "la, la, la, I can't hear you, la,la, la,...".
All I'm saying is that there are plausible alternative explanations for the rocks so the rocks can't be used as conclusive proof.

Protecting against radiation is as simple as just electrifying the skin of the ship, which can happen naturally as the ship passes through Earth's aptmosphere at 17,000mph.
I've never heard of this. Please give a source.

Let's talk about some of the evidence I posted. What do you think of this?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A6MvcIs4OcQ

Wndrtch

12-19-2007, 07:18 PM

Protecting against radiation is as simple as just electrifying the skin of the ship, which can happen naturally as the ship passes through Earth's aptmosphere at 17,000mph.

I've never heard of this. Please give a source.

It's simple matter of static build-up due to friction, similar to the way we generate electricity in power generators.

http://www.compositesworld.com/hpc/issues/2006/July/1349

NASA is researching static electricity as a shielding method for long-term space flight and Moon colonization.

http://www.space.com/businesstechnology/lunarshield_techwed_050112.html

Let's talk about some of the evidence I posted. What do you think of this?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A6MvcIs4OcQ

I'm going to have to wait to veiw this. My company has disabled all our media playing devices on our work computers. Appearently, we were causing problems in the server.

Cosmored

12-20-2007, 08:52 AM

According to this article they are working on the technology now and it was not used in Apollo.

http://www.space.com/businesstechnology/lunarshield_techwed_050112.html

Mark L Hamburger

12-20-2007, 09:32 AM

http://liftoff.msfc.nasa.gov/news/2001/news-moonlanding.asp[hr]
According to this article they are working on the technology now and it was not used in Apollo.

http://www.space.com/businesstechnology/lunarshield_techwed_050112.html

Not like Apollo

Despite the apparent ease of past lunar exploration radiation-wise, such as NASA's successful Apollo moon landings, without adequate shielding long-term occupation of the moon and space exploration may remain out of reach, researchers said.

"A lot of people think about the Apollo astronauts, and that they didn't have much protection and were fine," Lane told SPACE.com. "But in Apollo, it was a very short mission and a lot of it was basically luck. I'm not sure how they managed to be so lucky, but I don't think you can count on luck on short missions for the future or trips to the planets."

Researchers have said that a major radiation event during the any of six Apollo moon landings could have been catastrophic to the astronauts who carried them out. But Apollo crews lived on the moon for days at most, while long-term mission will run much longer.

Radiation from galactic cosmic rays or solar particles, however, would be extremely likely to affect a long-duration stay on the moon, researchers said.

A large amount of static electricity generated from leaving the atmosphere could have, for a short period of time, go a long way in protecting them. I believe that was the point being made previously.

oh, forgot this link:

http://www.snopes.com/inboxer/hoaxes/moon.asp

Wndrtch

12-20-2007, 03:06 PM

According to this article they are working on the technology now and it was not used in Apollo.

http://www.space.com/businesstechnology/lunarshield_techwed_050112.html

You have to go back a few posts. I was responding to the theory that a NASA official "slipped" and let out the fact that space travel beyond 250miles, would give Astronauts radiation poisoning. This was offered as "proof" that the Moon landing were not possible back then, and therefore fake.

One of the things I said to counter that point, was to say that protecting against "space-radiation" is as simple as imparting an electrical charge on the skin of the craft, which happens naturally when any craft flies through the atmosphere. Static build-up happens when friction takes place, like in how a generator works, or in how lightning-storms happen, or the "Ben Franklin" kite experiment.

The first link, is "proof" that aircraft static build-up is a real condition in aviation, and the second one is "proof" that electric charges protect from radiation. Thus, the Apollo Astronauts had some level of protection from space radiation.

I mentioned other things too, but that one he wanted "proof", so I did my best to supply it. For my part, I just know how electricity works.

Chris

12-22-2007, 01:54 PM

For nearly 40 years Neil Armstrong has been accused of fluffing his lines during his first steps on the Moon. On tapes of the Moon landings, he appears to drop the "a" from the famous quote: "That's one small step for a man, one giant leap for mankind."

But new analysis of the tapes has proved Mr Armstrong right after all. Computer programmer Peter Shann Ford used audio analysis software to show that the missing "a" was blotted out by transmission static.
Full report here (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/5398560.stm)

On February 15th 2001, the Fox TV network aired a program called "Conspiracy Theory: Did We Land on the Moon?''. I watched it and have to say I was 99% convinced the moon landing was a hoax. Here are a few things that didn't add up.

*There is no air on the Moon, but you can see the American flag waving.
*The protective suit and shield were not enough to protect the astronauts from the lethal level of radiation.
*Most of the photos look doctored by looking at the camera angles, shadows, lighting, etc. These photos can fool most people, but pros can spot these forgeries miles away.
*The videos look like playing a regular video at the fast forward mode.
*During the weeks leading to the launch of Appollo, nothing was working or functioning, especially the landing ship.
*The person who knew the inside stories was about to testify at the congressional hearing, but he and his family was misteriously killed by a big truck.

9 SPACE ODDITIES:

1. Apollo 14 astronaut Allen Shepard played golf on the Moon. In front of a worldwide TV audience, Mission Control teased him about slicing the ball to the right. Yet a slice is caused by uneven air flow over the ball. The Moon has no atmosphere and no air.

2. A camera panned upwards to catch Apollo 16's Lunar Landerlifting off the Moon. Who did the filming?

3. One NASA picture from Apollo 11 is looking up at Neil Armstrong about to take his giant step for mankind. The photographer must have been lying on the planet surface. If Armstrong was the first man on the Moon, then who took the shot?

4. The pressure inside a space suit was greater than inside a football. The astronauts should have been puffed out like the Michelin Man, but were seen freely bending their joints.

5. The Moon landings took place during the Cold War. Why didn't America make a signal on the moon that could be seen from earth? The PR would have been phenomenal and it could have been easily done with magnesium flares.

6. Text from pictures in the article said that only two men walked on the Moon during the Apollo 12 mission. Yet the astronaut reflected in the visor has no camera. Who took the shot?

7. The flags shadow goes behind the rock so doesn't match the dark line in the foreground, which looks like a line cord. So the shadow to the lower right of the spaceman must be the flag. Where is his shadow? And why is the flag fluttering if there is no air or wind on the moon?

8. How can the flag be brightly lit when its side is to the light? And where, in all of these shots, are the stars?

9. The Lander weighed 17 tons yet the astronauts feet seem to have made a bigger dent in the dust. The powerful booster rocket at the base of the Lunar Lander was fired to slow descent to the moons service. Yet it has left no traces of blasting on the dust underneath. It should have created a small crater, yet the booster looks like it's never been fired. More here if you like to read (http://www.apfn.org/apfn/moon.htm)

The motivation: America was competing with the Soviet. If you can't make it, fake it! Has anyone else heard of this moon landing conspiracy?

After reading the above post and skimming through the entire thread, I will say that the hoax claims are desperate attempts - to what aim I am unsure. Maybe it is to sell books for profit as mentioned.

We put up the proof that the astronauts placed retro-reflectors on the moon, and the conspirators counter with - "they were placed there by robots". So The only sensible alternative is for us who try to prove the validity of the moon landing - to give up. Nothing we say is going to convince the conspiracy theorists otherwise.

fact now, and we can go back anytime we please, USA owns it now.
5. How about we just focus some powerful telescopes up there, and see the small car we left up there, its there I'm sure.

As much as I would LOVE for this to be possible, if it were possible we would have done it already. Even with Hubble, the resolution is not good enough to make out objects on the moon that small.

Cosmored

12-22-2007, 06:27 PM

We put up the proof that the astronauts placed retro-reflectors on the moon, and the conspirators counter with - "they were placed there by robots".
They had allegedly put the surveyor craft on the moon before Apollo.

Why do you find that explanation so implausible?
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/solar/surveyor.html

You're ignoring all the video evidence I posted on page 1.

Tell us what you think of the astronauts' behavior in this video.[/quote]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-RcKLAo62Ro

Chris

12-22-2007, 07:21 PM

I have seen those videos a thousand times.

Their behavior is not indicative of a hoax. They are old men, they belonged to a different era, back when men weren't sissies. They have had camera after camera and tape recorder shoved in their faces by dumb-assed conspiracy tards who want to believe in the hoax -trying to make money. I say their reaction is quite understandable.

As far as the video evidence of the flag, et al. Out of all the thousands of hours of moon video, All the rocks, all the retroreflectors, this is the only piece of evidence you have? All the other bits of conspiracy "evidence" has either been laughed out of debate or proven scientifically. Out of the many thousands of engineers and mathematicians, scientists, and flight ops personnel, the govt agencies, pilots, news media, the Russians!, the CIA, the Space program they ALL had to be in on it!? Come on you can't be serious.

And if we can send robots to the moon to aim and place retro reflectors, why not send people?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UkzjdTDdq0A

How do you account for the footprints in this photo?
http://www.washington.edu/newsroom/news/images/reflector-011402.jpg

Were those robot footprints?

Cosmored

12-23-2007, 07:35 PM

As far as the video evidence of the flag, et al. Out of all the thousands of hours of moon video, All the rocks, all the retroreflectors, this is the only piece of evidence you have?
Look at post #7.

And if we can send robots to the moon to aim and place retro reflectors, why not send people?
I posted some stuff about space radiation in post #12.

How do you account for the footprints in this photo?
http://www.washington.edu/newsroom/news/...011402.jpg

Were those robot footprints?
They were human prints but it was in a studio--not on the moon. The reflectors could have been attached to an unmanned craft that was soft-landed on the moon.

The astronauts' behavior is circumstantial evidence. I never said it was conclusive proof.
They looked pretty nervous to me in the press conference. People can judge for themselves on this one.

Chris

12-23-2007, 07:53 PM

you have got to give me a break.

the russians also placed reflectors -using robots, but they are not nearly as accurate and reliable as the ones we placed.

the whole radiation issue is addressed here - http://www.clavius.org/envrad.html

As every other thing you can think of.

http://www.clavius.org/

Cosmored

12-23-2007, 09:12 PM

As every other thing you can think of.

http://www.clavius.org/
Clavius is a government damage-control site. The regular posters there know Apollo was a hoax. They don't even believe their own arguments.

I was debating there and they made a big blunder. It's all described here.
http://apollohoax.proboards21.com/index.cgi?board=theories&action=display&thread=1194111920

They were so accustomed to lying about science that they got careless and lied about something that was so basic that it would make high school science students laugh. Nothing they say can be taken seriously. Experts should be consulted about the anomalies in the video and still pictures but objective experts--not those shills.
You should take a look at this.
http://www.opposingdigits.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=1222

Just the fact that the Clavius site exists is circumstantial evidence that Apollo was a hoax. If it really happened, why do they have to lie about science?

As far as radiation goes, the only people who really know the truth about space radiation are people in countries which have sent probes into space who have high security clearances. The official information may or may not reflect reality. At Clavius they just parrot the official version. Since the only people that know the truth about radiation in space are people with high security clearances, we can't be sure what it really is. This is only one of the possible reasons why they had to fake the missions. The video evidence is what proves they faked them.

Chris

12-23-2007, 09:33 PM

you are splitting hairs. That first link is garbage -just another moon hoax forum with a crap load of links I have no time to go and check. And the word "Clavius" is not mentioned in the entire page.

Also where do you get off saying its a govt site?

As far as radiation goes, the only people who really know the truth about space radiation are people in countries which have sent probes into space who have high security clearances. The official information may or may not reflect reality. At Clavius they just parrot the official version. Since the only people that know the truth about radiation in space are people with high security clearances, we can't be sure what it really is. This is only one of the possible reasons why they had to fake the missions. The video evidence is what proves they faked them.

So they only people who really know the truth about radiation are people with high security clearances, government spooks, and moon conspiracy people? How do you know there is something else beyond the "official version"?

You cite the video evidence of being proof, but yet you fail to address the debunking of said "proof" from clavius -dismissing the site off as "these guys, yeah I debated them, and they tripped up"

please.

I do believe this says it all too:

cosmored
Mercury
BANNED
member is offline
Joined: Sept 2007
Posts: 8

Hmmm... Cosmored has the same internet provider and makes the same claims as Rocky... but nah, it couldn't be him. I'm sure it's just a coincidence. ::)
Oh yes, just a coincedence that he uses the same phrasing too. Or is it a conspiracy?
I guess Rocky was feeling kind of lonely after being kicked off of the Loose Change boards.
rocky
Earth
BANNED
member is offline
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 212

Also there was a guy named "rocky" who was on the V forums. Spouting the same lunar lunacy.

Nothing I -or anyone else- can say is going to get you to change your mind, so I think your job here is done mate. We, along with the majority of the American public, and the world, believe that we landed on the moon.

PatrickHenry

12-23-2007, 10:23 PM

Well, Chris...WE...didn't, but maybe some astronauts did.

Or maybe not...I know the government lies constantly...

Cosmored

12-24-2007, 01:28 PM

You cite the video evidence of being proof, but yet you fail to address the debunking of said "proof" from clavius -dismissing the site off as "these guys, yeah I debated them, and they tripped up"
What they do at Clavius is put forth alternative explanations for the anomalies.

Look at the analysis at Clavius of this video.
http://es.youtube.com/watch?v=A6MvcIs4OcQ
http://apollohoax.proboards21.com/index.cgi?board=theories&action=display&thread=1187201374

They speak with authoritative attitudes when they put forth their explanations for the anomaly but is it really debunked? Do you just automatically believe their version? Objective experts have to be consulted in a case like this.

There's lots of evidence that those people at the Clavius forum are less-than-objective.
There's this issue.
http://apollohoax.proboards21.com/index.cgi?board=theories&action=display&thread=1194111920

Look at the responses on the first page of this thread to this issue I raised.
http://apollohoax.proboards21.com/index.cgi?board=othertheories&action=display&thread=1181039621

They can't discredit what the scientist says so they attack the messenger. Objective truth-seekers go directly to the substance of an argument and see where the evidence leads without trying to control the direction in which the evidence leads. These people have their foregone conclusions about all of these issues and they only see what they want to see to get to the conclusion they already have. Look in the conspiracy theory section there and you'll see lots of examples.

Experts should be consulted about the anomalies in the Apollo footage and still pictures but those people at Clavius are the last people to ask.

At Clavius the moderator controls the direction the debates take.
I got banned for thirty days for discussing government lies in general which included lies about Apollo.
http://apollohoax.proboards21.com/index.cgi?board=theories&action=display&thread=1172922252
Look at reply #33.

I tried to talk about it in the "Conspiracy theory" section but the moderator closed the thread.
http://apollohoax.proboards21.com/index.cgi?board=othertheories&action=display&thread=1180875941
Look at the last post.
He forbade talking about Apollo in the conspiracy theory section and he forbade talking about other lies by the government in the Apollo section. What he did was keep me from using evidence of government lies in other areas to further my argument that the official version of the Apollo data such as space radiation can't just be taken as fact.

Look how Jay Windley ducked this question.
http://apollohoax.proboards21.com/index.cgi?board=othertheories&action=display&thread=1187016551
(reply #3)

Here's who Jay Windley is.
http://www.clavius.org/about.html

This guy works for the government and he knows that Apollo was faked. He doesn't act like a truth-seeking scientist and he was caught in that lie about the dust-free sand. Just the fact that he's there is circumstantial evidence that Apollo was a hoax.

Cosmored

12-30-2007, 09:33 PM

"A Funny Thing Happened on the Way to the Moon" is back online.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=idDzsC9xMRQ

Watch it soon as it will probably go offline quickly as it always does.

Here's some more stuff.
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=rhoWabHSm_g
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=0ohDdNRq2Og
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=1gD2P-Po_Gk
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=EaV7QB_ReTw

Cosmored

03-05-2008, 01:34 PM

The documentary "What Happened on the Moon" is back online. It's the best moon-hoax video I've ever seen.

Part 1
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-3622009579385499503

Part 2
http://video.google.es/videoplay?docid=-3186616594425246748

It usually doesn't stay online for very long so watch it fast; I've seen it go on and offline twice before.

Cosmored

04-26-2008, 03:15 PM

PostmodernProphet

04-26-2008, 06:15 PM

AlanC

04-26-2008, 07:39 PM

Here's the latest piece of evidence I've come across.

Start watching this video at the 50 second mark.

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

Collins' jacket moves the way things move in gravity even though they are supposed to be in zero-gravity.

As Bugs Bunny used to say, "What a maroon!"

You do realize don't you that the moon does NOT have zero gravity. Smaller body, less gravity. But all bodies in space have gravity relative to their mass.
So you are starting off with a false premise. Thus the need for thrust to leave the moon. Thus no one floats off the moon by kicking against it. But you guys are fun to watch, thanks.

Elrathin

04-27-2008, 01:10 AM

okay, this is the way it went down.....we did land on the moon....but they forgot to send a camera.....and rather than admit they were so stupid, they faked the pictures and pretended they were taken on the moon......

Given all the conspiracy theories on this matter, I would say this one if the most probable :)

Pookie

04-27-2008, 03:49 AM

I don't believe the conspiracy theories on this. That is my opinion.
Purrs,
Pookie

Easy90

04-27-2008, 09:33 PM

As one who watched the space race from start to current, I wonder what reason the conspiracy folks believe the US would go to all the trouble to build all that hardware, engineer, construct, and fire those giant rockets, go through all the steps of Mercury, Gemini, and Apollo...have funerals for the astronauts who died, etc. etc...and the most amazing part...how did America manage to keep the hundreds of thousands of "co-conspirators" on script? Seems to me it would just be easier to just go to the moon. It's a strange mentality indeed that thinks that way.

Pookie

04-28-2008, 03:12 AM

I think you're right, Easy. I don't think the moon landing was any hoax. I have been following NASA for the better part of 20 years, and I realize the dangers and all, and that this is no hoax at all.
Purrs,
Pookie

Cosmored

04-28-2008, 04:10 PM

You do realize don't you that the moon does NOT have zero gravity. Smaller body, less gravity. But all bodies in space have gravity relative to their mass.

In this footage they were supposed to be halfway between the moon and the earth. Wouldn't that mean zero-gravity?

AlanC

04-28-2008, 06:00 PM

In this footage they were supposed to be halfway between the moon and the earth. Wouldn't that mean zero-gravity?

Ah okay. Yes that is right, I made a wrong assumption. But, did you watch the video? All of it?

There are two things that stand out.

1. He was exercising as the monitored his heart rate. His suit is obviously flexable. And cloth floats in zero gravity the same as every thing else. It would move independantly of movements of his hand, arm or body. Look at the bottom of the shirt or blouse and the way it moves as he deliberately tries to increase his heart rate. If the cuff is moving, I don't find that eveidence of anything. But...

2. Did you notice the video quality? Everything was wavy and moving. The outline of the moon looked like it was wavy on the edges. The numbers on the panel looked like they were waving back and forth. Everything in the cabin had a wavy apperance to it.

If metal and the moon looked like they were moving, how can you base a single conclusion of any kind on the apperance of movement by the cuff of his sleeve?

The moon landings all happened. There is no conspiracy. But if you need to believe it for some unimagined reason, enjoy your delusion.

Easy90

04-28-2008, 06:01 PM

I am pretty sure there is acceleration (gravity, though not "1 G") going on during most of the ascent phase. If you think the whole U.S. moon shot program was a hoax...ya gotta do better than that. LOL!

Of course, who cares if you think it was a hoax? There are people on this forum, of otherwise average intellect, who believe in ghosts. You fit right in here. More posts please!

MCTHOUSAND

04-28-2008, 06:37 PM

Cosmored

05-02-2008, 12:32 PM

I am pretty sure there is acceleration (gravity, though not "1 G") going on during most of the ascent phase.

That is something to think about. If they were accelerating or slowing down, that would mean gravity. The force pulling the jacket down is pretty strong though. It looks about like earth gravity.

If you think the whole U.S. moon shot program was a hoax...ya gotta do better than that.
I posted lots of evidence in this thread. Here is some of it.

What Happened on the Moon" (documentary)
Part 1
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-3622009579385499503

Part 2
http://video.google.es/videoplay?docid=-3186616594425246748

Was it Only a Paper Moon? (documentary)
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=5278489814268946247

A Funny Thing Happened on the Way to the Moon (documentary)
http://video.google.es/videoplay?docid=-7335269088210976286

There's the astronauts' behaviour at the press conference.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=1535324572487804641

There's the way a draft caused by the passing astronaut in atmosphere makes the flag move in this clip at the 2 minute 35 second mark.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n1UEv2PIzl4

Wndrtch

05-02-2008, 03:25 PM

Given all the conspiracy theories on this matter, I would say this one if the most probable :)

Plus, weight is of criticle importance, because every pound requires something like 100 pounds of additional fuel in order to acheive orbit.

(I'm sure I'm wrong on the ratio)

Easy90

05-02-2008, 07:15 PM

That is something to think about. If they were accelerating or slowing down, that would mean gravity. The force pulling the jacket down is pretty strong though. It looks about like earth gravity.

I posted lots of evidence in this thread. Here is some of it.

What Happened on the Moon" (documentary)
Part 1
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-3622009579385499503

Part 2
http://video.google.es/videoplay?docid=-3186616594425246748

Was it Only a Paper Moon? (documentary)
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=5278489814268946247

A Funny Thing Happened on the Way to the Moon (documentary)
http://video.google.es/videoplay?docid=-7335269088210976286

There's the astronauts' behaviour at the press conference.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=1535324572487804641

There's the way a draft caused by the passing astronaut in atmosphere makes the flag move in this clip at the 2 minute 35 second mark.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n1UEv2PIzl4

All of those "hoax" theories have been debunked over and over...but it doesn't matter. Once you conspiracy types get it in your mind...that's just the way you intend to believe. The audacity of actually faking something like that is so weird that would be enough to make most rational people laugh at the "hoax" slant...but whatever.

nateb

05-03-2008, 03:53 PM

1st, I don't believe the conspiracy.

2nd, even if it was a conspiracy, so what. I'm not going to lose sleep over it.

Cosmored

05-04-2008, 02:17 PM

All of those "hoax" theories have been debunked over and over
This is just empty rhetoric. Some mistakes have been made but there is some evidence that has not been debunked--just ridiculed. Of course disinfo agents consider it to be debunked.

http://www.opposingdigits.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=1222

People can judge for themselves.

Look at the way gravity affects the corners of the jacket the woman astronaut is wearing in this clip.
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=TejsnPThmd4
(first 10 seconds and last 30 seconds)

Now look at how the jacket Collins is wearing is pulled down in this clip at the 50 second mark.
http://es.youtube.com/watch?v=I_CMgqitv98

According to the video they were halfway to the moon--that means zero-G.

Let's hear your analysis of the difference.

Easy90

05-05-2008, 04:16 PM

My analysis of the difference? One is in zero g flight in orbit .....and the other is in near zero g flight in the ascent phase en route to the moon several decades earlier..showing an astronaut engaging in an exercise routine. Both show people working in a space environment. Neither clip has any visual cue that would make a rational person decide that the moon landing program is a hoax. That kind of nonsense runs right along with the flat earth theory and ravings of folks like this: http://www.fixedearth.com/

People who have no idea what they are talking about, but enough time and motivation to be skeptical of clearly recorded historical events (for whatever weird reason) should find something more productive to do with their imagination.

Cosmored

05-05-2008, 07:04 PM

and the other is in near zero g flight in the ascent phase en route to the moon
That is something to think about. How many G's do you think they are in? It looks pretty heavy--pretty close to one G but it's hard to tell.

It may turn out that that's the explanation but you don't seem to be considering the rest of the evidence I've posted such as this.

http://es.youtube.com/watch?v=n1UEv2PIzl4

What Happened on the Moon" (documentary)
Part 1
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-3622009579385499503

Part 2
http://video.google.es/videoplay?docid=-3186616594425246748

Was it only a Paper Moon? (documentary)
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=5278489814268946247

http://video.google.es/videoplay?docid=4135126565081757736&q=apollo
http://video.google.es/videoplay?docid=-7335269088210976286

Have you seen all the evidence?

Easy90

05-05-2008, 09:01 PM

That's not evidence. It's nonsense. Believe what you want to believe. I don't care if you think the moon is made of cheese.

preservanation

05-05-2008, 09:17 PM

But Eeeeeasy....
Didn't you see the Astronaut's press conference like I did?
Irrefutable proof that the moon landing is a hoax.:rolleyes:

Easy90

05-05-2008, 09:20 PM

I am thinking I am one of only a couple of posters here old enough to remember the 1960s...

preservanation

05-05-2008, 09:28 PM

I saw the whole thing on an old BW Zenith that my dad bought used, perched atop a plastic art-deco two-tiered pushcart.
I was four.
Good times.

Buck Laser

05-05-2008, 09:33 PM

I am thinking I am one of only a couple of posters here old enough to remember the 1960s...
I watched the landing on my just-built Heathkit color TV. My son was 6, my daughter 4.

Easy90

05-05-2008, 10:11 PM

I watched it on a 13 inch black and white TV with rabbit ears. My son was almost 2. Landing men on the moon and bringing them back during that time, with that technology has to be the most amazing technological event in the history of mankind. A new car has more computer power in it than the moon lander module had. Those guys were super-mondo brave to do it too! America showed what it could do with dedicated people and a goal. We've been rudderless mostly since then....Too bad. In 400 years there may be more people like that conspiracy dude who don't believe it ever happened, than who know it did.

preservanation

05-05-2008, 10:16 PM

It was a huge deal, HUGE, and not just for the geopolitical implications but because we were going to the effin MOON!. WOW
I guess people who didn't live through it might not comprehend the enormity of it to the imagination of an entire nation at that time.
we were absolutely rapt.

Scribbler1

05-06-2008, 12:29 AM

I was 17. Old enough to remember a lot of us holding our breath as the Eagle descended.

Buck Laser

05-06-2008, 01:14 AM

I wonder how many of the people who were around for the voyage and landing in 1969 now believe it was a hoax. Please speak up if you saw it the first time around and still don't believe it.

Cosmored

05-07-2008, 04:43 PM

I was fourteen. I lived in South Florida and I stayed up late to see it. It was kind of a letdown as the pictures were so grainy and unclear. I remember being disappointed. I went to the beach to see the night launch of Apollo 17.
I believed it all until the arrival of the internet. As soon as I'd seen the evidence, the grainy unclear footage we saw of Apollo 11 made sense--it was all faked.

Once people actually see the evidence, there's nothing you pro-Apollo people can do to make them think they really went to the moon.

Easy90

05-07-2008, 05:23 PM

Scribbler1

05-07-2008, 11:10 PM

Once people actually see the evidence, there's nothing you pro-Apollo people can do to make them think they really went to the moon.There's nothing you can do to make some people think ANYTHING, and this is just one of them. It doesn't make them right simply because they place a lot of stock in some extremely trivial "facts".

They can believe what they want. I don't care.

Easy90

05-08-2008, 12:41 PM

You guys spend too much time at places like this: http://www.fixedearth.com/

Buck Laser

05-08-2008, 02:26 PM

You guys spend too much time at places like this: http://www.fixedearth.com/

You should also have a link to the Flat Earth Society and the Committee to Stop Plate Tectonics.

Cosmored

05-11-2008, 08:22 PM

What other things has the government faked Cosmo?

I think they faked 9/11.

http://www.question911.com/linksall.htm
(Be sure to watch "Painful Deceptions")

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-8172271955308136871
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-8989407671184881047&q=9%2F11

I think they're faking the role of the US in the world. They tell us we're defending freedom in the world when we are really an imperialist power.

http://mtwsfh.blogspot.com/
http://michaelparenti.org/Imperialism101.html
http://www.huppi.com/kangaroo/CIAtimeline.html
http://video.google.es/videosearch?q=confessions+of+an+economic+hitman&sitesearch=
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G7Tn_oqOdQ4
http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com

I think by showing people the Apollo hoax, a lot of them will be more open to the idea that the US government is capable of telling big lies and will stop supporting it when it intervenes in other countries.

Buck Laser

05-11-2008, 08:36 PM

I think they faked 9/11.

I know they did. I was playing with my Flight Simulator the other day, and the Twin Towers were there.

Remember the news story recently about the "invisibility" paint they're working on? They coated the Towers with that, and nobody knows they're still there.

Easy90

05-11-2008, 08:38 PM

Well Cosmo..you represent the viewpoints more than a few others here. Patrick Henry, Potter, Buck...several like you. Of course, I think you're all off your rockers, but your in good company with a lot of the tin-foil hat crowd in this forum.

Who's your favorite to win the election?

Cosmored

05-12-2008, 03:16 PM

Who's your favorite to win the election?
It won't matter whether Hillary or Obama wins as each one will obey orders from the shadow government. The whole plan is already laid out and these elections are just a facade to make Americans think they live in a democracy.

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

The guy in this video talks about how a big plan is being followed; it doesn't matter whether the president is a democrat or a republican.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=3117338213439292490&pl=true

For any real change we'd have to be able to elect a president like Ralph Nader.

http://video.google.com/videosearch?q=ralph+nader&sitesearch=
http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=ralph+nader&search_type=

The press ignores any candidate that hasn't made a pact with the shadow government so electing a president that represents the people instead of corporations is a near imposibility. If someone like Nader were to get elected, he'd be assassinated pretty quick. The corporations would never tolorate itl.

Easy90

05-12-2008, 06:47 PM

You paint a pretty bleak picture. Obviously you think America is evil. Do you live in America? Will you vote for someone in the election? Are you out of school? (I have no idea how old you might be, is the reason I ask.)
How long has America had this "shadow government?" How did it get started? What would Ralph Nader do to make things different/better?

Cosmored

05-14-2008, 06:27 PM

Easy90

05-14-2008, 07:05 PM

You sound like you haven't watched any of the videos or read any of the articles I posted. The answers to your questions are there. Also, you should check out some of the stuff I posted in reply #65.

I'm 52. I'm an American but I live abroad. I'm going to vote for Ralph Nader.

Oh, I've seen those things Cosmo...I'm not interested in them...Frankly they fall into two categories..Either so absurd they are funny..or downright insulting!...They are produced by people who have some kind of agenda. I doubt the people who produced them even believe them...I suspect some are produced as jokes, just to see how many people will glom onto the concepts...

I am interested in YOUR opinions, how you came by them, and your life history....not a "Youtube" production.. Nader huh? Good for you! How many votes do you think Ralph will get this time around? What do you think he would do as president?

Scribbler1

05-15-2008, 01:45 AM

Oh, I've seen those things Cosmo...I'm not interested in them...Frankly they fall into two categories..Either so absurd they are funny..or downright insulting!...They are produced by people who have some kind of agenda. I doubt the people who produced them even believe them...I suspect some are produced as jokes, just to see how many people will glom onto the concepts... I've seen a lot of them too. I figure they all boil down to either a nit-picking treatise about things which have ALREADY been explained (no stars in photos, "flapping" American flag) or they try to recreate things which were originally done a quarter of a million miles from here, on an airless planetoid with 1/5 earths gravity, and which are EXTREMELY difficult to recreate on Earth, if not downright impossible.

Me, I prefer to rely on the fact that of the tens of thousands of people who worked on all phases of the Apollo project, NOBODY has yet to come forward with any REAL proof.I am interested in YOUR opinions, how you came by them, and your life history....not a "Youtube" production.. Nader huh? Good for you! How many votes do you think Ralph will get this time around? What do you think he would do as president?I think it safe to say he will at least get ONE, now.

Cosmored

05-15-2008, 11:47 AM

Oh, I've seen those things Cosmo...I'm not interested in them...Frankly they fall into two categories..Either so absurd they are funny..or downright insulting!...They are produced by people who have some kind of agenda. I doubt the people who produced them even believe them...I suspect some are produced as jokes, just to see how many people will glom onto the concepts...

I am interested in YOUR opinions, how you came by them, and your life history....not a "Youtube" production.. Nader huh? Good for you! How many votes do you think Ralph will get this time around? What do you think he would do as president?

I'd learned about American Imperialism years before I ever read anything about it in Enlgish just by living in other countries. I've been teaching "English as a Second Language" to adults since 1985. During conversation classes my students explained all of this to me. I've found websites that are consistent with what people in the third world tell me such as this one.

http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/

Watch Nader talking in his videos to see what he would do as president.

Easy90

05-15-2008, 08:38 PM

I see... You've learned about "American Imperialism" from your students who were trying to learn English...as a second language. And of course, part of the evil, "Imperialist" plan included pretending to send men to the moon in the 1960s...as well as faking an attack on the World Trade Center (to justify invading and subjugating Afghanistan and Iraq no doubt.)

Well Cosmo...looks like you have a good grip on your understanding of how things are. Good luck with your mission of "being an American who believes America is an evil imperialist nation...bent on world domination through deception and conquest." You're a great representative of the typical Nader supporter, and I'm sure your students love you. You have a lot of "fellow travelers" here in this forum. Post here often, as you are very interesting...

Scribbler1

05-16-2008, 01:27 AM

I'd learned about American Imperialism years before I ever read anything about it in Enlgish just by living in other countries. I've been teaching "English as a Second Language" to adults since 1985. During conversation classes my students explained all of this to me. I've found websites that are consistent with what people in the third world tell me such as this one.So you place a lot of stock in what people from third world countries say about the American space program, eh?

And as for "consistent" websites, for $5 I can set up a website tonight PROVING George Bush is a malfunctioning android. Would you believe that?

David

05-22-2008, 01:30 AM

Just to point something out, the moon does have a thin atmosphere of Helium 4, Neon 20, Hydrogen, Argon 40, Neon 22, Argon 36, Methane, Ammonia and Carbon Dioxide with trace amounts of Oxygen, Aluminum, Silicon, Phosphorus, Sodium and Magnesium.

tecoyah

05-22-2008, 02:21 AM

In my opinion (having decided to look at the Data on a dare)....anyone who actually studies the massive data set verifying the Apollo missions, and can say it's a Hoax with a straight face deserves ridicule.

Waffletush

05-26-2008, 04:06 AM

So from where did all the moon rocks come?

Scribbler1

05-26-2008, 04:12 AM

K Mart. They were on sale in the garden shop.

tecoyah

05-26-2008, 12:23 PM

So from where did all the moon rocks come?

Well...DUH!

It's a testing platform used by the shadow Government to filter out the aliens among us. Only the Venusians have access to the falsified Moon Data and rocks, and are capable of using the hidden code in Taliban messages that indicate the reality of the 9/11 attacks being a United States plan to destabilize the World monetary funds, and designate Chevron as the new world Government.
By faking a moon landing series, the illuminati set into action a pattern of events (Bay of Pigs, Viet Nam , and most importantly the falkland Islands) which allowed for the formation of a European Union. Unbenownst to us all the primary function of the E.U. is to develop genetically altered foods that will change human DNA to make us a more docile species, and inevitably allow for our enslavement by the Aliens.
The ongoing wars are merely a means to cull the aggressive remnants of the species, and allow them to kill each other rather than forcing the Venusians to do so themselves.

I am astounded you were unaware of these facts.

Waffletush

05-26-2008, 03:51 PM

Well...DUH!

It's a testing platform used by the shadow Government to filter out the aliens among us. Only the Venusians have access to the falsified Moon Data and rocks, and are capable of using the hidden code in Taliban messages that indicate the reality of the 9/11 attacks being a United States plan to destabilize the World monetary funds, and designate Chevron as the new world Government.
By faking a moon landing series, the illuminati set into action a pattern of events (Bay of Pigs, Viet Nam , and most importantly the falkland Islands) which allowed for the formation of a European Union. Unbenownst to us all the primary function of the E.U. is to develop genetically altered foods that will change human DNA to make us a more docile species, and inevitably allow for our enslavement by the Aliens.
The ongoing wars are merely a means to cull the aggressive remnants of the species, and allow them to kill each other rather than forcing the Venusians to do so themselves.

I am astounded you were unaware of these facts.

My bad.

Easy90

05-26-2008, 04:29 PM

Cosmored

07-29-2008, 12:53 PM

Here's some more stuff if anyone wants to delve further.

http://es.youtube.com/results?search_query=moonfaker&search_type=&aq=f

yowza

08-15-2008, 06:03 AM

the notorious image of the moon landing has always seemed strange to me. The FLAG looked like it was moving...but there isnt any gravity in space right? it had to be staged....HAD TO BE!

tecoyah

08-15-2008, 08:13 AM

the notorious image of the moon landing has always seemed strange to me. The FLAG looked like it was moving...but there isnt any gravity in space right? it had to be staged....HAD TO BE!

Indeed, Gravity in space is so weak as to be inconsequential...but...uh...the flag was not in space. See, they call it the moon landing onna counta because they ....well....Landed on the Freakin MOON.

And believe it or not...the moon has a gravitational field...I know, I know....it's an amazing news flash, and you are astounded by the incredible advances in information the last...oh...500 YRS. have given us.

Don't be a Foo....Stay in Schooo

Dawkinsrocks

08-15-2008, 09:24 AM

The astronauts who 'went to the moon' are a largely miserable dysfunctional group often seeking solace in the bottom of a glass. (read Moon Dust by Andrew Smith in which he meets all the living 'moon walkers').

Maybe living with the lie takes its toll.

tecoyah

08-15-2008, 10:01 AM

Yeah...those stupid astronauts, exploring space and riding unproven but controlled Bombs into vacuum to inspire us all, what jerks. I am sure you have accomplished far more in your life than they ever did, and risked your life countless times in the name of science and the Nation.
I am also verily impresses that you know those guys well enough to watch them get all sloshy at the local Bar...truly you are an amazing inspiration to us all with your incredible accomplishments.

In my opinion, anyone who accepts the Myth scenario either lacks the ability to understand hard data...or would be well advised to gain access to one of the more advanced neural medications available today.

Dawkinsrocks

08-15-2008, 10:20 AM

tecoyah

08-15-2008, 10:41 AM

An interesting and informative post.

You might want to remember that the US is a nation that took genocide and turned into a children's game and also made a film genre where the victims (native Americans) were painted as the bad guys. That would be like Germany making lots of films about the evil Jews attacking the good Germans.

So, it is not as if the US doesn't like a good old hoax is it?

OK....so you have managed to extrapolate from our admittedly brutal and deceitful history, that thousands of images, telemetry, massive physical evidence, first person accounts, verification from outside sources, and documentation from multiple sources are a Hoax.

An interesting and informative ability to use the imagination you seem to have developed.

Unfortunately, I fail to see how the Native American Holocaust is directly (or indirectly) related to the United States space program...perhaps I lack the creative manipulation of reality you seem to have developed.

I can see by the extremely limited detail you use in the generation of opinion and theory (primarily entertainment media it seems), that you cannot provide me anything but limited entertainment at best...So....

Have fun stormin' the Castle

Dawkinsrocks

08-15-2008, 11:12 AM

tecoyah

08-15-2008, 11:49 AM

My point about the cowboys and Indians was to illustrate that mosty of the US citizens are incapable of believing anything bad about their country until even their leaders have to acknowldge it. The cowboy films were lapped up but they should have caused rioting in the streets at such a preposterous abuse of the truth and insult to a violated race.

The US allegedly has the best intelligence and defence systems in the world but they could not stop a few alleged Al Qaeda guys attacking the US and they went to war on a lie about WMD and then changed the reason to regime change and most people in the US go 'oh, OK, that's fine'. Nobody got sacked for the failures on 9/11 and the US citizens go, 'oh ok, that's fine.

Very few people seem to think it is very fishy that oil barons, running out of oil, running an oil dependent country attacked a country full of oil on changing and false pretexts.

If you can believe all that you are going to be hostile to the notion that USA USA USA might not have actually got to the moon but rather lied to the world to 'win the space race'.

See, here's where I suppose we differ. Everything you posted in the above comment, right up to the whole Moon Landing thingy can be considered legitimate conspiracy theory as these issues have Data and information that the logical mind must consider when creating informed opinion. In some cases the theory is discarded, and in others it awaits more information before opinion is formed one way or another.

The whole Moon Landing Hoax issue is not truly a conspiracy theory, as it literally has no actual Data backing it that can hold up under even a basic scrutiny, thus it (In My Opinion) is immediately discarded in favor of the enormous amount of information that debunks it. Not to be rude, but I personally consider this a form of IQ test, and tend to not only dismiss the posts as anything but entertainment....but usually place the member who believes it in that category as well.

Dawkinsrocks

08-15-2008, 02:10 PM

tecoyah

08-15-2008, 02:27 PM

Your IQ test comment is beneath you.

Here's the problem. You live in a country (as most of us do) where the people are lied to consistently by the Government on almost every issue in the pursuit of the ends of the few (usually the banks).

There is a lot about the moonlandings that is questionable and when you add up a lying self-seeking Government, desperate to win the space race with that you get something that is worthy of skepticism. You should question it and demand to know what explains the fact that the shadow goes the wrong way and that the jumps should have been 10 feet high not one one foot high etc etc.

You are just doing a blanket acceptance and this kind of unquestioning belief is precisely what enables your Government to do stuff like bring down the twin towers without any worry about the people's reaction cos they know you would never believe it. And they can use it to justify stealing trillions of dollars in the pursuit of oil.

My comment on IQ test was a simple statement of opinion, and I don't see how my own opinions are beneath me. About a decade ago, when the moon landing hoax began to be taken seriously I looked into the claims and found them rather silly. those you mention are no exception.
I am not debating the possible conspiracy theories in the tragedy of 9/11, the war in Iraq, the world bank, or the alien abduction of Jimmy Hoffa...we are discussing the moon landing hoax and my comments pertain to that issue alone. You seem to feel the need to tie it all into some gigantic decades long Government plan to...uh....to.....

What was it they are trying to do again?

Dawkinsrocks

08-15-2008, 02:35 PM

tecoyah

08-15-2008, 03:51 PM

No, I am simply establishing that the character of the witness is suspect.

The US Government is a teller of enormous lies. The US citizens have shown time and time again how gullible they are.

So, the idea that the moonlanding is a lie that the US citizens believe to the point where they can't look at the evidence dispassionately is not remotely out of the question.

I will agree it was not out of the question when the hypothesis was put forth. However, over the ensuing years so much evidence has been produced to debunk people who make such claims as you seem to, that the entire concept has become something of a running joke.

I will also agree the U.S. Government is deceitful, sly, and capable of attempting the hoax...it is however,completely (worth repeating) COMPLETELY proven to be false.

Here...I'll even make it easy for you....no reading required:
http://digg.com/space/Proof_that_the_Moon_landing_is_NOT_fake

Wndrtch

08-15-2008, 04:05 PM

Dawkinsrocks

08-15-2008, 04:15 PM

You are moving in the right direction.

Wndrtch

08-15-2008, 04:32 PM

You are moving in the right direction.

Hope springs eternal.

Easy90

08-15-2008, 06:06 PM

Now you have, what is commonly referred to as....a bad attitude there Mr. Dawkinsrocks. Are you an American? Or is your hate for America foreign born?

Dawkinsrocks

08-15-2008, 06:15 PM

I don't have a bad attitude.

I am the little boy in the crowd shouting 'the emperor's not got any clothes on'.

Easy90

08-15-2008, 06:20 PM

I don't have a bad attitude.

I am the little boy in the crowd shouting 'the emperor's not got any clothes on'.

Ah... Ok then... You've confirmed my suspicions. Thanks.

Dawkinsrocks

08-16-2008, 06:49 AM

What, you suspected that I was a fictional character from a great story?

I don't want to burst your bubble but.....

Easy90

08-16-2008, 01:30 PM

What, you suspected that I was a fictional character from a great story?

I don't want to burst your bubble but.....

Ah..no. What I suspected was that you're delusional.