Did Buzz Aldrin reveal that the Apollo Missions were just simulations?

originally posted by: Bilk22
Hey buddy, lying, deluded, stupid? Really? Is that your argument? If so that is "stupid" if you like to use those words in debate. Yes this is a debate and investigation into what may or may not have happened.

We're told for millennia that Jesus was the son of god. Some believe it and some don't. Some believed it then, when Jesus walked the Earth and some didn't. The same thing applies here. We're told something and expected to accept it on face value because it comes from authority.

We're told many things by authority that are proven to be false. This site exists to investigate that which is told to us by authority - to prove it or disprove it.

No. Jesus said take it on faith.

NASA says here is the evidence, not faith. So yes, LYING is perfectly valid for this debate because that is what you are doing. No one says take it on faith, like Jesus, they say there is overwhelming evidence and it's proven we went. Unless you LIE about the evidence, are DELUDED so you refuse to let evidence sway you, or you are not intelligent enough to understand the evidence and thus claim it can't be real.

Well Occam's I suppose we're left to take a lot of things on Faith, mostly provided by Politicians and Bureaucrats, Kind of a strange thing to me is that the only president in power during all the moon landings was Richard Nixon (Look it up). Not exactly A Pillar of Truthfulness and The American Way, as Cicero said in The Roman Senate "never believe a liar, even when he's telling the truth". LOL Arjunanda. a reply to: OccamsRazor04

a reply to: arjunanda

And as I have said there is no need to "take their word" for it. Amateur astronomers and radio operators watched and listened. Every day people like me and you verified everything.

The reply I got was that I can't use that as evidence unless I did it personally, which is just a way of ignoring evidence to perpetuate the delusion. Why would my word saying I did it be more valid than the other people who did it? If you don't believe them there is no reason to believe me.

If you won't believe anyone or anything (unless it's an anti NASA/government YT video those must be believed every time without question), that is called a delusion.

My point was Beware of taking the word of proven liars. It's usually not just one thing they lie about, as you know all sociopaths are pathological liars by nature. No Delusion mate, just a friendly heads up. Namaste Arjunanda a reply to: OccamsRazor04

originally posted by: arjunanda
My point was Beware of taking the word of proven liars. It's usually not just one thing they lie about, as you know all sociopaths are pathological liars by nature. No Delusion mate, just a friendly heads up.

Namaste Arjunanda a reply to: OccamsRazor04

Yes, but as I have stated, I am not even using them as evidence. They don't factor into it. If the only thing we had to go on was Nixon's word, with no other evidence, I would be highly skeptical. Luckily that's not what we have to go on.

originally posted by: bitsforbytes

Who is this guy with the mustache saying gibberish?

Well, here we are on page 5 and still nobody has bothered to actually identify the mystery "handler". It would have been nice if the person who made the video, or FoosM who posted it on ATS, had taken a few minutes to find out, wouldn't it?



Above, left to right we have:

Dave Brody, executive producer at Space.com

Buzz Aldrin, octogenarian former astronaut.

Tariq Malik, managing editor at Space.com.

Miri Kramer, staff science writer at Space.com.

The "handler" is Dave Brody, and the only thing he is handling is the questions for the Google Hangout.




Once again it comes down to: will you believe some anonymous bull-puckey on YouTube, or will you bother to dig a little and find out the real story? Or even some basic facts that would put an end to your speculation in less time than it takes to throw a video up on YouTube?

Hoax believers always do the former, and then they have the cheek to call other people "sheep" for "believing the official story". It's incredibly depressing.

originally posted by: douglas5
I once asked MR Aldrin 35 years ago could he explain the HOT/COLD on the moon 2 astro-noughts were on the moon when it changed from night to day /hot to cold minus -287 to plus 450 in a second how the suits and visors had handled it .

First of all YOU have to explain how it takes one second from night to day

YOU do know how long it takes for the Moon to rotate once on it's axis

People talking about "taking the moon landings on faith" is totally misleading.

Nobody believes the landings were real "because NASA/Nixon said so". That would be ridiculous. I wouldn't trust Nixon to speak my weight.

Instead, you have to look at the evidence. NASA doesn't just say "Hey, we went to the moon, look at these photos", it says "We built this hardware, here are the specifications and here is the surviving hardware. We built a rocket weighing X and carrying Y pounds of propellant, which produced a thrust of Z. We fired the engines at these times and for these durations, and entered an orbit with these parameters. We landed at these co-ordinates and collected these samples. We took photographs at these times in these locations using these camera settings: here are the specifications for the equipment we used..."

And so on and so on, it's never just "a claim", it's EVIDENCE. And each and every one of us is free to do the maths, check the sums and work out whether the mission as described would have produced the results that it is claimed to do. Physics and orbital mechanics don't care about nationalities. They don't care who the president is. They don't care who is doing the calculations. They just ARE.

On the other hand, the hoax proponents never provide any evidence. They just rely on hearsay, on quotes taken out of context, on misunderstandings or on outright fabrications. Putting your faith in them really IS following blindly.

I blame the modern fashion for "moral relativism", that everybody's viewpoint is equally valid. While that may be true on matters of opinion or taste, it doesn't apply to hard facts. It's not like a political debate where everything is shades of gray. If you're arguing a fact then you are either wrong or you're right.

I'd prefer to watch it without that idiot who made it yapping all the way through.
The old guy just sounds confused or suffering from Alzheimer's

originally posted by: violet
I'd prefer to watch it without that idiot who made it yapping all the way through.
The old guy just sounds confused or suffering from Alzheimer's

I linked the actual interview on page 1. It makes a lot more sense when you watch it all. Yes Aldrin being in his 80's doesn't help.

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04

originally posted by: Sparkymedic
Looks like Buzz really likes to "story tell". Monolith on Phobos...on C-Span? Really? How do they keep interviewing him? How have they not wrote him off as crazy yet? He either really knows what's up and has a card up his sleeve or hes lost his marbles. Or both...

LiveLeak.com - Buzz Aldrin reveals the existence of alien monolith on Phobos

I already quoted Aldrin, he never once talked about an alien monolith, he explicitly stated it was a rock, something people would look at and be interested in, but just a rock made by nature, not aliens.

You're right. Thanks for clarifying. Amazing how someone's words can be mixed up with some simple editing.

originally posted by: Sparkymedic

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04

originally posted by: Sparkymedic
Looks like Buzz really likes to "story tell". Monolith on Phobos...on C-Span? Really? How do they keep interviewing him? How have they not wrote him off as crazy yet? He either really knows what's up and has a card up his sleeve or hes lost his marbles. Or both...

LiveLeak.com - Buzz Aldrin reveals the existence of alien monolith on Phobos

I already quoted Aldrin, he never once talked about an alien monolith, he explicitly stated it was a rock, something people would look at and be interested in, but just a rock made by nature, not aliens.

You're right. Thanks for clarifying. Amazing how someone's words can be mixed up with some simple editing.

Yes, a trick that the hoax believers love to do. Deceptive editing is their bread and butter.

I watched the interview, I saw an elderly man possibly on the start of dementia or perhaps semi drunk struggling to remember anything, he even said they got in the top of the lander.

How anyone can try and use a confused old man as leverage in an argument worries me..

Buzz has always had some weird claims, even though he's a hero and has done more in his life than many of us could ever hope to but the man in that interview was a shadow of his former self and should be left to grow old and spend his days in peace and quiet rather than being pushed in front of camera's.

And again I say, to use that interview as proof of anything is insane...

The ultimate Monday morning quarterbacking. 50 years later, an event the world scientific community corroborates, thousands of scientists, technicians, engineers and astronauts worked on this. An 80 some year old mans performance in an interview doesn't meet your standard. Who are you again?, an astronaut, a scientist???
No, you're a nobody. You're a Monday morning quarterback.

One thing's for sure, the men that made it to the moon didn't sit around and think about what wasn't possible. They went out and accomplished things.

originally posted by: wmd_2008

originally posted by: douglas5
I once asked MR Aldrin 35 years ago could he explain the HOT/COLD on the moon 2 astro-noughts were on the moon when it changed from night to day /hot to cold minus -287 to plus 450 in a second how the suits and visors had handled it .

First of all YOU have to explain how it takes one second from night to day

Click your fingers

YOU do know how long it takes for the Moon to rotate once on it's axis

: which one luna google it :

S&F

You can definitely see when he say's simulation the handler takes a deep breath and is holding down some emotion, the breath which is visible by the shoulders and chest raising is also followed by some awkward swallows (The lump in your throat kind lol)

The guy is without doubt monitoring the old boy, the fact he turns to him every 2 seconds for confirmation says it all.

a reply to: Rob48

Dave Brody, executive producer at Space.com

Dave Brody has credentials that would make him an ideal handler for Buzz Aldrin.... Brody is a Tv producer and Apollo was a Tv phenomenon.

Dave Brody
Executive Producer
TechMediaNetwork

Dave Brody is Executive Producer of online and on-air video and multimedia for TechMediaNetwork’s owned and operated brand. These include SPACE.com, LiveScience.com, TopTenREVIEWS.com, Newsarama.com and 10 others.

Dave’s been a presenter on NBC’s Today Show, Fox Business News, CNBC, Discovery Science Channel, MSNBC, BBC, G4TV and others. Prior to TechMediaNetwork, Dave was Supervising Producer/Original Programs for SYFY and USA Networks. He is a longtime television documentarian specializing in science/technology programming. He created the Starry Night series of educational DVDs, produced films for NASA and United States aerospace contractors and developed video properties for Orion Telescopes.

Additionally, Dave writes for various TechMediaNetwork Web sites, for Space News and other science/technology periodicals. Dave has a degree in electronic journalism/communications from the New York Institute of Technology and has won three Tellys, a Monitor and a Broadcast Design Association Award.

originally posted by: SayonaraJupiter
a reply to: Rob48

Dave Brody, executive producer at Space.com

Dave Brody has credentials that would make him an ideal handler for Buzz Aldrin.... Brody is a Tv producer and Apollo was a Tv phenomenon.

A TV producer in charge of a video production on the internet. Who'd have thought it?

a reply to: OccamsRazor04
Ok thanks
Sorry I missed that

I just watched the whole Stanley Kubrick/ The Shining/ Moon Landing Conspiracy. I always thought they did go to the moon, just that they found a lot more than they ever let on. Maybe they knew what was there and weren't allowed to go so they did fake it.