Nvidia Debunks Conspiracy Theories About Moon Landing

a reply to: Arbitrageur


I've seen the video time and again and really haven't been bothered by it in terms of what I think and I'm sorry but there is no explaining why they would delete the tapes. You can say that they were recorded or whatever the fact that the original information (in whatever format) and the tapes were lost or deleted or reused however you wish to put it, from something that is pretty much the most important moment in human history because they weren't paying attention to what was there just doesn't gel with me and maybe that's my issue to deal with. It is not the only evidence for it (would be to long to write it all out right now - its ten to three in the morning here UK), but as I said the tapes being deleted I don't care how careless you wish to say they were the fact of the matter is that they deleted ALL ORIGINAL INFORMATION concerning the data and telemetry, hell there were even reports that they got rid of the most of the original designs for the gadgets and gear they used on the moon, the landers etc. which if true is insane.

But again not the only piece of evidence. I'm leaning more toward putting up a thread or something and maybe letting people attempt to pick it apart. (At least then we can get this site back to the conspiracy site it used to be lol).

originally posted by: NoCorruptionAllowed
Curious why Nvidia would waste time trying to debunk something where everyone already laughs at moon landing deniers with no help needed.
To my observation it seems those who are more dedicated to debunking things have underlying inferiority complexes and thus feel superior by telling others how ridiculous they are for believing certain things even though those beliefs are indeed ridiculous. (Which is obvious without any need to be emphasized by anyone in the MSM or celebs who fixate on these to promote their proclaimed quest).

They did it to improve their technology and to demonstrate its effectiveness and superiority.

Which is the EXACT same reason we went to the moon in the first place.

originally posted by: ZombieZygote

originally posted by: MteWamp
If there are real people, who are stupid, ignorant, uninformed, retarded, or just plain dumb enough to actually believe that we didn't go to the moon, there's an EXTREMELY small chance that they are even going to be able to comprehend the OP.

I would think they would be much more concerned with learning to do the important things, like how to eat, walk, or understand concepts like speech, learning to walk, or even the most basic social skills.

You know, survival stuff.

Hopefully, they won't reproduce, and contaminate the rest of the gene pool.

I just don't have much tolerance lately for stupid.

However, if some of them learn to actually communicate, you know, with actual people, bring it. Seriously.

You sound like a condescending, wannabe know it all.

If people can't comb through the copious amounts of fraudulent pictures and videos with today's modern technology, and come to the conclusion it was all a bad Hollywood production, they are simply in denial.

It is what it is, yo...

Do you have an ACTUAL argument, or not? If so, make it...

a reply to: MteWamp

You ask me if I have an actual argument, after spewing forth a bunch of condescending nonsense. Perhaps lead by example? Any proof on your behalf to validate your laughable claim?

originally posted by: lunarcartographer
There is third party verification from other countries of orbital imagery of the Apollo Lunar landing sites.

I worked on the 'Appolo Lunar Landing Mission' so I know it did happen, however don't take mine and others word for it, as plenty of non US orbital imagery exist showing the landing sites.

That pretty much ends any unsubstantiated theory that the US did not land on the Moon.

With all due respect, only the LRO imagery shows the landing sites with enough resolution to show the Apollo landing stages and other stuff left there. All other imagery is much lower resolution.

a reply to: wildespace

True, but probes from other countries show evidence of the activity around that hardware.

a reply to: Dwoodward85

They dud not delete all of the data and all of the tapes. They lost the telemetry tapes from Apollo 11. All the video, photo, experimental data and rock samples are still around.

I don't have the the original samples from my PhD around, my PhD is still valid.

a reply to: BigDave-AR

His sig shows something I've been working on for years. It's an Apollo 11 image showing Hurricane Bernice in a formation that only existed on the day the photograph was taken. On top of it is a weather satellite photo taken the same day.

Matching that photo is a live TV broadcast, images from which appeared on the next day''s newspapers.

The only way they could get those images was being on the way to the moon.

onebigmonkey.com...

originally posted by: OneBigMonkeyToo
a reply to: BigDave-AR

His sig shows something I've been working on for years. It's an Apollo 11 image showing Hurricane Bernice in a formation that only existed on the day the photograph was taken. On top of it is a weather satellite photo taken the same day.

Matching that photo is a live TV broadcast, images from which appeared on the next day''s newspapers.

The only way they could get those images was being on the way to the moon.

onebigmonkey.com...

I figured it was taken from farther out, for curiosities’ sake do the distances for the objects and scales work out? I’m not an Apollo denier as my family has big aerospace ties. For example if you check my siggy my family machined the wheels for the Mars Pathfinder rover. Your avatar is perfect I love it being a Motor Head!

ETA- The Page looks good I’m going to have to save it for further consumption.

a reply to: BigDave-AR

As far as I can tell they do, but it's not always easy to say given that they used zoom lenses, but certainly what is on view is always consistent with what should be shown.

One interesting giveaway is the shape of the terminator.

The shape of the terminator depends on your perspective - for example it looks different if you are half way to the moon compared with when you are at the moon. When I use Stellarium to see what land masses should be visible at a given time I set the perspective as being from the landing site of the mission in question. The nearer they got to the moon, the more the terminator line matches between the two.

My avatar is a photo I took of a statue in a village outside Nice where some friends lived

Just because someone doesn't think man went to the moon, it doesn't mean they are retarded, stupid or an idiot. It's an opinion they have every right to it.
What does annoy me is people who state FACT that we DID go to the moon. They know as much as the rest of us. Discussing the moon landing really gets people angry for some reason. I have mentioned it in work before and it turns into chaos everytime.
Either way, it's a fascinating topic to talk about.

originally posted by: rhynouk
Just because someone doesn't think man went to the moon, it doesn't mean they are retarded, stupid or an idiot. It's an opinion they have every right to it.
What does annoy me is people who state FACT that we DID go to the moon. They know as much as the rest of us. Discussing the moon landing really gets people angry for some reason. I have mentioned it in work before and it turns into chaos everytime.
Either way, it's a fascinating topic to talk about.

I actually agree with you there. Many people are simply sceptical about the Moon landings, and it's not related to their intelligence at all.

We who believe/know that the landings happened usually try to stick to discussing the evidence or hoax claims, but sometimes it's hard to be civil when the other party rages about how NASA always lies or how we're all sheep or get paid to make these posts.

But the Moon landings are as much of a fact as Columbus' landing in America, or Magellan's round-the-world voyage. We weren't there ourselves, all we have is historical records and other types of evidence, but no one's been doubting that those historic events happened. The Apollo landings were just another of such voyages, except beyond our planet.

a reply to: rhynouk

As has been said before, people are entitled to their own opinion but not their own facts. When people are presented with facts that show them to be incorrect but they still persist in clinging to a lie then I think I am also entitled to draw my own conclusions about their level of intelligence and ability to think logically.

Apollo deniers seem to think they are the only people who have examined the subject in any depth. In reality they tend to form their opinions on the misconceptions (and sometimes outright lies) of others, have a very shallow and superficial understanding of the subject and don't appreciate that a lot of people have spent a lot of time studying the subject and disagree with them.

I am stating for a fact that they went to the moon. I know this because I've spent years looking at the subject and I have found nothing that convinces me otherwise but plenty of things that prove me to be correct. You are entitled to prove me wrong, but you won't. It makes me angry when people deny the landings took place because it means that ignorance has won instead of scientific and engineering knowledge. The more that happens, the more 'Idiocracy' begins to look like a self-fulfilling prophecy.

originally posted by: Dwoodward85
a reply to: Arbitrageur
Why do I think they claim it's missing or been destroyed (over and over again) because people personal computers now and can literally go through anything and everything.

Name one person with a personal computer who can do anything with those tapes. You can't because there's not a personal computer anywhere than can do anything with them, so the whole basis for your conspiracy theory is completely false. This is the equipment that's needed to read the data from the tapes on the left, and the equipment that's needed to analyze the data on the right side of the room. I hope it's obvious this equipment is nothing like a personal computer.

www.honeysucklecreek.net...


That picture and caption is dated 2006 and in 2009 there was a report issued that the man in that picture and a team of other people spent thousands of man-hours looking through records and warehouses trying to find the Apollo 11 telemetry tapes, and all they found instead was evidence of a severe tape shortage when tape makers switched the process for making their tapes so they no longer met NASA standards so NASA couldn't buy enough tapes to meet their needs. So their best guess for the reason they weren't able to find the tapes is that they were used during that tape shortage, to record other data, but I don't think they ever found definitive records of the final disposition of the tapes.

Maybe it was a blunder to re-purpose the Apollo 11 telemetry tapes if that's what happened as suspected, but NASA has made bigger blunders and the people working there are only human and are capable of making mistakes just like the rest of us.

More importantly, the biggest flaw in your logic is looking at these tapes being lost as some evidence of whether the landing happened or not, when it seems like the best place to look for evidence of the landing is the imagery taken by various space organizations of the moon to see if there's is evidence in those of the Apollo 11 landing site, and there is.

Moreover since NASA has the only telemetry tape readers I know of (if they are even still working, that photo above was from 2006), the only data people would see from those tapes would come from that equipment and it would fall into the same conspiracy black hole that everything else from NASA seems to fall into, that NASA can't be trusted etc, so there's also no logic in claiming it would make any difference to conspiracy theorists if the tapes were even found. Even you admit you have other issues so presumably if they found the missing tapes tomorrow that still wouldn't convince you.

If you want to make a thread with your other issues with Apollo 11, that's fine, all I ask is that you please read some of the existing moon landing hoax threads on ATS before you do, and review some of the online resources they point to, so we don't have to re-hash the same things that have been explained over and over again ad nauseum. You should familiarize yourself with what's already been discussed first. But if you have any new issues, or if you read the previous explanations and didn't understand them and need clarification, you can discuss that in your new thread.

originally posted by: rhynouk
Just because someone doesn't think man went to the moon, it doesn't mean they are retarded, stupid or an idiot. It's an opinion they have every right to it.
What does annoy me is people who state FACT that we DID go to the moon. They know as much as the rest of us. Discussing the moon landing really gets people angry for some reason. I have mentioned it in work before and it turns into chaos everytime.
Either way, it's a fascinating topic to talk about.

Know if you ignore all the scientific evidence you have to be stupid or an idiot. Do you know how many astronomers on the planet followed the apollo mission. The antennas that were pointed at the moon trying to grab transmissions. But assuming you chose to disbelieve 1000s of peoples 8ncluding the Russians who would have loved to prove we didnt go to the moon.

You have to ignore things like the thr feather experiment and assume they filmed it in a vacuum chamber. You can also use this thing called math on videos and show astronauts are dealing with reduced gravity. Then we have the thousands of pounds of moon rocks. The eyewitness testimonies of the astronauts. The fact that the Chinese space agency shows the LEM is still on the moon.

So yes given the mountain of evidence you have to be stupid.

a reply to: dragonridr

Ah yes, the precious moon rocks that turned out to be nothing more than petrified wood when analysed.

m.phys.org...

originally posted by: ZombieZygote
a reply to: dragonridr

Ah yes, the precious moon rocks that turned out to be nothing more than petrified wood when analysed.

m.phys.org...

That rock came with a plaque that did not identify the rock as a moon rock, but for some reason some sloppy investigators like you seem to think it did. The "verification" by the museum was just as sloppy, when they called NASA to ask about it and NASA didn't even see the rock but said it "could be" a moon rock since they knew that over 100 real moon rocks were given away, without careful record keeping by the state department. The only way NASA could know if it was a moon rock was by examining it and the museum didn't ask them, or their own scientists to review it, apparently. The grandson thinks his grandfather didn't hear well and misunderstood what it was, but if the plaque doesn't say it's a moon rock, it's not safe to assume it's a moon rock.

abcnews.go.com...

The Amsterdam case appears to be not fraud but the result of poor vetting by the Rijksmuseum.

Spokeswoman Xandra van Gelder said the museum checked with NASA after receiving the rock in 1992 from the estate of the late Prime Minister Willem Drees. NASA told the museum, without seeing it, that it was "possible" it was a moon rock.

But it weighed a whopping 89 grams (3.1 ounces). In addition, its gold-colored cardboard plaque does not describe it as a moon rock.

The U.S. ambassador gave Drees the rock during an Oct. 9, 1969 visit by the Apollo 11 astronauts to the Netherlands. Drees's grandson, also named Willem, told the AP his grandfather had been out of office for more than a decade and was nearly deaf and blind in 1969, though his mind was still sharp.

"My guess is that he did not hear well what was said," said the grandson. "He may have formed his own idea about what it was."

The family never thought to question the story before donating the rock, to which it had not attached great importance or monetary value.

originally posted by: ZombieZygote
a reply to: MteWamp

You ask me if I have an actual argument, after spewing forth a bunch of condescending nonsense. Perhaps lead by example? Any proof on your behalf to validate your laughable claim?

Your Honor, the defense rests.

originally posted by: MteWamp

originally posted by: ZombieZygote
a reply to: MteWamp

You ask me if I have an actual argument, after spewing forth a bunch of condescending nonsense. Perhaps lead by example? Any proof on your behalf to validate your laughable claim?

Your Honor, the defense rests.

🙄 How old are you, 10?
Even current astronauts admit that they need to figure out a way to get humans safely past the Van Allen Radiation Belts before they can leave low Earth orbit.
Yet somehow they did it plenty of times during the Apollo missions? When asked about it, one of the Apollo astronauts said, "We weren't aware of it at the time." Like that ignorance magically kept it from killing them.
I bet you also believe that the Tesla is flying through space as well. 😂

originally posted by: norhoc
a reply to: Arbitrageur


Then there is this.....

www.youtube.com...

How is Nasa having to figure out ,anew, how to pass through the van allen belts if already did it in the 1960's and 1970's?

New craft require different set ups. DUH!