The Real Reason We Never Went Back to the Moon

a reply to: FearYourMind


So we have an OBVIOUS hoax video and yet more posts about the ice and debris floating around the shuttle/tether that has been explained as being caused by the camera and optics used to film it, that match BASIC photographic principles and member Mianeye has posted a link to a video that explains it that was posted a long time ago on here.

The video again

a reply to: Phage

Today we have with us a group of students, among America's best. To you we say we have only completed a beginning. We leave you much that is undone. There are great ideas undiscovered, breakthroughs available to those who can remove one of the truth's protective layers.

So what breakthrough's have been hidden from the public domain then?

Interesting , the fact every space agencies around the globe are focusing there attention on mars and the not the moon it does raises very important questions, surely since we are in the era of great Camera gadgets and still they are changing each year, surely an space agency could just simply lunch a drone or a rover with an Camera with a radiation protection onto the moon.

To really see whose telling the truth and of course to see the stars finally. So they haven't done so yet? is there something there they dont want us to be informed about it?

originally posted by: AutumnWitch657
This theory has been exhausted on more threads than I care to mention. It's been shown to be unsupportable when intelligently investigated. It gets so tiresome having the same discussions over and over and over again. And reading the same arguments and seeing the same inwardly edited videos trying to make a case that cannot be made.

Aw, it gets tiring for you having the same discussions again and again.

Well, you are the one that professes to not believe in conspiracies, yet you keep coming to this conspiracy site and making your debunking comments on various conspiracy threads. Is anyone forcing you to do so? So if you don't like doing it as you post above, why do you keep doing it? With all your scorn and sarcasm you can hardly claim to be helping people...

Off the top of my head I can only think of one case that cannot be made with regards to this, and it has nothing to do with the OP.

Great thread OP!

I never bought in to the "we didn't go to the moon theory".

Why? Well, I do believe Kubrick did help NASA film many moon scenes on earth, he all but spells it out for us in movies like "The Shining".

Why did they have to do this? Well, they had limited time on the moon, and they were so busy with all the alien artifacts and structures, they did not have much useful footage they could show the public, thus had to film some "moon type" scenes with Kubrick on Earth. Just my opinion.

originally posted by: Agent_USA_Supporter
Interesting , the fact every space agencies around the globe are focusing there attention on mars and the not the moon it does raises very important questions, surely since we are in the era of great Camera gadgets and still they are changing each year, surely an space agency could just simply lunch a drone or a rover with an Camera with a radiation protection onto the moon.

To really see whose telling the truth and of course to see the stars finally. So they haven't done so yet? is there something there they dont want us to be informed about it?

Could the SIMPLE fact we have been to the Moon a few times be the reason, the next target is the next object out which is Mars.

We are getting hires pictures of the Moon from the LRO, we DO get very nice images of stars,galaxies etc already from Hubble and ground based telescopes and now thanks to larger mirrors and adaptive optics ground based telescopes will improve on Hubble's results.

So what do you mean see the stars finally

a reply to: PlanetXisHERE

Funny he MADE A LOT of mistakes in 2001 A Space Odyssey that actual video/film in space shows!

None of this convince me, that man ever set foot on the moon.

a reply to: PlanetXisHERE

Why did they have to do this? Well, they had limited time on the moon, and they were so busy with all the alien artifacts and structures, they did not have much useful footage they could show the public, thus had to film some "moon type" scenes with Kubrick on Earth. Just my opinion.

In other words, all the evidence that proves there are no alien structures on the Moon are proof that it was faked to cover up all the evidence that there are alien structures on the Moon. Wow.

I always try to keep an open mind on these threads, while struggling to stop my brains falling out, I sometimes wonder about those huge UFO's seen parked next to Saturn's rings, another 9 hour wonder...

originally posted by: AutumnWitch657
This theory has been exhausted on more threads than I care to mention. It's been shown to be unsupportable when intelligently investigated. It gets so tiresome having the same discussions over and over and over again. And reading the same arguments and seeing the same inwardly edited videos trying to make a case that cannot be made.

If it is "so tiresome" then why even bother to involve yourself and post on the topic?

What's tiresome is people constantly posting comments just to argue and fuss. If you're not interested and are so tired, then just let those who ARE interested post, debate, and discuss. No reason to clog up a thread just because you're tired...

S&F for the OP. I've watched a couple docs on hype topic but not the ones you've posted. I'll check them out sometime soon!

forget about landing it, How did they get off the moon? They ran out of fuel before landing and narrowly missed a crash scenario.

a reply to: AnuTyr

forget about landing it, How did they get off the moon? They ran out of fuel before landing and narrowly missed a crash scenario.

The lander was composed of two parts, each having its own rocket motor and fuel supply. The Descent Stage nearly ran out of fuel, but the Ascent Stage was unaffected.

a reply to: seabhac-rua

While I agree with some of your points, the Scientific community are a curious lot. I am sure we have had quite few beating the drum to go back since we have so many new toys, gadgets and the technology to thoroughly study and explore the Moon better than ever before now.

You were doing so good and I was with you until this bit here.

originally posted by: FearYourMind

Puma Punku for example.


The Incas elder, who holds all knowledge of their history, says Giants built the structures around 13,000-16,000 years ago. He went on to say that there were 22 winged "Watchers" of those times.

'Inca Elders' say no such thing.

When the Spanish explorers first asked the Inca who created such sites the Inca replied "We don't know" Now either they had forgotten their own history or there were possibly older indigenous people *Homo-Coneheads which were possibly emulated by head binding among some of the people then and later generations* preceded them who built the sites in question that were long gone before the Inca.

Puma Punku was believed to be wiped out by a "Great Flood" according to the Incas elder which coincides with the Bible's great flood in which God attempted to wipe out these Nephilim, but said that there were still Nephilim on Earth even after the flood. So these stories can be found around the Globe and are very similar to one another.

Again, 'Inca Elders' say no such thing.

The theory of being wiped out by a 'Flood' was first put forth by Professor Posnansky, This is where the age controversy really begins.

POSNANSKY'S DATING TECHNIQUE

Prof. Posnansky summed up his 50 year study in a 4 volume work entitled Tiahuanaco, The cradle of American Man first published in 1945. He explains his theories, which are rooted in archeoastronomy, as follows. Since Earth is tilted on its axis in respect to the plane of the solar system, the resulting angle is known as the "obliqueness of the ecliptic" (one should not confuse this with another astronomical phenomenon known as "Precession", as critics of Posnansky have done). If viewed from the earth, the planets of our solar system travel across the sky in a line called the plane of the ecliptic.

At present our earth is tilted at an angle to of 23 degrees and 27 minutes, but this angle is not constant. The angle oscillates slowly between 22 degrees and 1 minute miminum to an extreme of 24 degrees and 5 minutes. A complete cycle takes roughly 41,000 years to complete. The alignment of the Kalasasaya temple depicts a tilt of the earth's axis amounting to 23 degrees, 8 minutes, 48 seconds, which according to astronomers, indicates a date of 15,000 B.C.

Between 1927 and 1930 Prof. Posnansky's conclusions were studied intensively by a number of authorities. Dr. Hans Ludendorff (Director of the Astronomical Observatory of Potsdam), Friedrich Becker of the Specula Vaticana, Prof. Arnold Kohlschutter (astronomer at Bonn University), and Rolf Müller (astronomer of the Institute of Astrophysics at Potsdam) verified the accuracy of Posnansky's calculations and vouched for the reliability of his conclusions.

Although the verdict is still out for me and many others on the Age and Who originally built such sites the whole AA theory has more holes in it than Swiss cheese. There is no doubt the sites are very mysterious but too many go for a quick kill and play the AA card imho.

I think the video of that structure, is hoaxed. There is NO way an Astronaut wearing all that heavy, bulky gear, could take video shots like that. As the videographer moves in and out of the structure, no jerky movements, just a slow pan in and around columns. I think they through a little shaky video in, to keep it looking authentic. But its anything but what the title suggest. Plus if it was on the Dark side of the moon, why is the background blasted with bright light. Other parts of the video, show half the screen looking grainy, and the other half of the supposed space looks like a better quality video. Some tampering of the video, and a crazy title.

a reply to: FearYourMind

I have been fascinated by this subject for years, it started for me a few years before that Apollo 18 movie came out. The story as I understand goes: That some Apollo missions had overflown ruins, structures and a massive derelict ship on the far side of the moon and subsequent Apollo missions like 18-19-and 20 were to go investigate these things. Apollo 20 they went down into the ancient ship and retrieved a mummified? body. There is some footage of an over flight of the ship that appears authentic to me and others I have seen comment on that video.

I also have read about "The Shard" and "The Spire" tower or towers that allegedly are miles tall, one video I watched before has someone filming the moon through an earthly telescope and as the moon goes into shadow you can still make out a point of light in the shadow where the top of this or one of these towers is still in sunlight. I have some more videos to watch and might pop in later with more info as this topic corresponds with another broader one I'm researching.

Also your user name is counter productive and sort of negative. Nothing to fear going on up there, just have to understand how the darn thing works. You find an instruction manual you let me know. LOL.

originally posted by: wmd_2008
a reply to: FearYourMind


So we have an OBVIOUS hoax video and yet more posts about the ice and debris floating around the shuttle/tether that has been explained as being caused by the camera and optics used to film it, that match BASIC photographic principles and member Mianeye has posted a link to a video that explains it that was posted a long time ago on here.

The video again

That explanation is lame and doesn't account for the fact that these objects make U-Turns, stopping and going while moving in all kinds of directions.

originally posted by: SLAYER69
You were doing so good and I was with you until this bit here.

originally posted by: FearYourMind

Puma Punku for example.


The Incas elder, who holds all knowledge of their history, says Giants built the structures around 13,000-16,000 years ago. He went on to say that there were 22 winged "Watchers" of those times.

'Inca Elders' say no such thing.

When the Spanish explorers first asked the Inca who created such sites the Inca replied "We don't know" Now either they had forgotten their own history or there were possibly older indigenous people *Homo-Coneheads which were possibly emulated by head binding among some of the people then and later generations* preceded them who built the sites in question that were long gone before the Inca.

Puma Punku was believed to be wiped out by a "Great Flood" according to the Incas elder which coincides with the Bible's great flood in which God attempted to wipe out these Nephilim, but said that there were still Nephilim on Earth even after the flood. So these stories can be found around the Globe and are very similar to one another.

Again, 'Inca Elders' say no such thing.

The theory of being wiped out by a 'Flood' was first put forth by Professor Posnansky, This is where the age controversy really begins.

POSNANSKY'S DATING TECHNIQUE

Prof. Posnansky summed up his 50 year study in a 4 volume work entitled Tiahuanaco, The cradle of American Man first published in 1945. He explains his theories, which are rooted in archeoastronomy, as follows. Since Earth is tilted on its axis in respect to the plane of the solar system, the resulting angle is known as the "obliqueness of the ecliptic" (one should not confuse this with another astronomical phenomenon known as "Precession", as critics of Posnansky have done). If viewed from the earth, the planets of our solar system travel across the sky in a line called the plane of the ecliptic.

At present our earth is tilted at an angle to of 23 degrees and 27 minutes, but this angle is not constant. The angle oscillates slowly between 22 degrees and 1 minute miminum to an extreme of 24 degrees and 5 minutes. A complete cycle takes roughly 41,000 years to complete. The alignment of the Kalasasaya temple depicts a tilt of the earth's axis amounting to 23 degrees, 8 minutes, 48 seconds, which according to astronomers, indicates a date of 15,000 B.C.

Between 1927 and 1930 Prof. Posnansky's conclusions were studied intensively by a number of authorities. Dr. Hans Ludendorff (Director of the Astronomical Observatory of Potsdam), Friedrich Becker of the Specula Vaticana, Prof. Arnold Kohlschutter (astronomer at Bonn University), and Rolf Müller (astronomer of the Institute of Astrophysics at Potsdam) verified the accuracy of Posnansky's calculations and vouched for the reliability of his conclusions.

Although the verdict is still out for me and many others on the Age and Who originally built such sites the whole AA theory has more holes in it than Swiss cheese. There is no doubt the sites are very mysterious but too many go for a quick kill and play the AA card imho.

This was documented in a recent episode of "In Search of Aliens" while interviewing the Incan elder.

An old topic but one I feel the need to react with an old source. A topic I think is the most important for human evolution.

From www.evawaseerst.be... (after the chapter click further if you want to)

Before we start we want you to know our meaning about the moon landings. The moon may be a lifeless rock. Reaching it may be a waste of time and money for some -which it is not-. One thing is for sure if you ask us: generations after those of 1969 would never have waited 40 years and more to walk on the moon again. It simply holds no sense. Every generation wants to do better than the previous. Every superpower wants to challenge the US. There should have been at least (a little) moonbase -ask Michael Douglas Griffin, the previous boss of NASA-. A man (like many other great men) with a superior vision, who apparently knows nothing about what the real rulers of this planet know.
The moon is not what we think she is. And we, unknowing citizens, we can only guess … Read further if you want on the site mentioned above.