The Why Files and fake Moon landing

a reply to: FishsticksAndKetchup

Except he didn’t. That was an actor playing Stanley Kubrick in a movie called Shooting Stanley Kubrick. The “journalist” was the director.

a reply to: FishsticksAndKetchup

No link?

Here's one.

It's fake, it's not him:

m.youtube.com...

originally posted by: FishsticksAndKetchup
In December of 1998, an independent journalist interviewed Stanly Kubrick where he made an astonishing admission to having filmed the moon landing personally. He then delivered EYES WIDE SHUT to Warner Bros. Executives in March of 1999 then died 6 days later. The heavily edited version of EYES WIDE SHUT was later released in July of 1999. In said interview Kubrick discussed with great detail for his reasons of disgust towards Warner Bros. for leaving out a large portion of what he considered to be his greatest contribution to mankind through his film making skills.

perhps you have not watched the video in OP, this is discussed and also explained as fake, with footage from the recording where "stanley" is actually called Tom and an actor

originally posted by: FishsticksAndKetchup
In December of 1998, an independent journalist interviewed Stanly Kubrick where he made an astonishing admission to having filmed the moon landing personally.

Confession by Stanley Kubrik

a reply to: nerbot

That wasn’t Stanley Kubrick, that was Tom Mayk, in Shooting Stanley Kubrick, which was released in 2015.

a reply to: Zaphod58

Thanks for clarification Z.

a reply to: stonerwilliam

Not interested in pictures of any part you, just some kind of proof that what you say happened, happened. Until that arrives then it's just a cool story bro.

I've been to presentations by Al Worden, Charles Duke, Alan Bean, Gene Cernan, James Lovell, Fred Haise, TK Mattingley and Tom Stafford. All of them have been to the moon, three of them walked on the surface. I can prove I met all of them. I'm more than happy they went to the moon, and the many years of research into the subject I've done proves it.

Here's the thing, even at their advanced ages they all still have excellent and very detailed knowledge of their space craft, how it works and the fundamental principles behind their operation. None of them would have been phased by your schoolboy physics question.

originally posted by: nerbot

originally posted by: OneBigMonkeyToo
a reply to: nerbot

It was bright sunshine, hence the visors. There are shots showing Armstrong (16mm footage shot from the LM) and Aldrin's face (flag salute image).

There is NO PHOTO of Buzz Aldrin saluting the flag with his sun visor up.

Where did I say his visor was up?

You are making ignorant knee-jerk statements.

And you need to learn some manners.

Show us the picture or provide a link please.

I was unable to when I made my post, or I would have. Other people have now. So hopefully you'll grow a pair and admit you were wrong.

There are numerous other shots from other missions showing the astronaut's faces (particularly Jack Schmitt in Apollo 17).

We are discussing the first moon landing so please don't be obtrusive.

Not 'obtrusive', merely informative. I've also been doing this a long time.

originally posted by: OneBigMonkeyToo
a reply to: cooperton

Cooperton: youtu.be...
^NASA engineer admits we don't know how to get to the moon anymore

OneBigMonkeyToo: Not what he says at all.

What? How is that not what he says at all lol? here's his quote:

"I'd go to the moon in a nanosecond, the problem is we dont have the technology to do that anymore. we used to, but we destroyed that technology and its a painful process to bring it back again"

originally posted by: OneBigMonkeyToo
a reply to: EternalShadow

The USSR's main issue was the design of their heavy lift vehicle, the N1, which had a habit of exploding on the pad, and crippling bureaucracy and paranoia that hampered development. The rocket that launched their unmanned probes is little different to the ones that launch from Baikonur to the ISS today.

Sounds like you should apply for a job at NASA, they could really use the help of someone who knows how to get to the moon

a reply to: cooperton

'^NASA engineer admits we don't know how to get to the moon anymore"

Where did he say that?

He said this:

"I'd go to the moon in a nanosecond, the problem is we dont have the technology to do that anymore. we used to, but we destroyed that technology and its a painful process to bring it back ".

This has been explained to you.

a reply to: cooperton

He’s saying that we know how to get there, we don’t currently have a system that can do it, and developing one is going to cost.

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: cooperton

He’s saying that we know how to get there, we don’t currently have a system that can do it, and developing one is going to cost.

This doesn't make you raise an eyebrow? We're talking missions that technology could do over 50 years ago. Every tech has advanced exponentially since then, but apparently moon missions is a lost art

originally posted by: Oldcarpy2


He said this:

"I'd go to the moon in a nanosecond, the problem is we dont have the technology to do that anymore. we used to, but we destroyed that technology and its a painful process to bring it back ".

This has been explained to you.

Yes they dont have the tech to go to the moon anymore. Meanwhile the Artemis landing keeps getting delayed and no other country has landed humans on the moon. Read between the lines.

a reply to: cooperton

Try reading what is written?

Just as i have no proof its real, you have no proof it isnt...that is the trick used to mix everybody up? a reply to: Oldcarpy2

originally posted by: Oldcarpy2
a reply to: cooperton

Try reading what is written?

They destroyed that technology and it's a painful process to build it back again. Imagine an agency with a multi-billion dollars budget telling you they can't remake something equal or better to technology from the 60's lol.

a reply to: FishsticksAndKetchup

Well, at least I bothered to post a link to the "interview" your claim is based on which is more than you did.

Did you watch it?

It's not Kubrick, it's an actor.

Your claim, you prove it.

I don't have to prove a negative.

It's your trick, not mine.

a reply to: cooperton

They can.

No one said "can't"? Except you?

originally posted by: Oldcarpy2
a reply to: cooperton

They can.

No one said "can't"? Except you?

Yeah sure they can, they just don't want to for some reason and the Artemis Moon landing keeps getting delayed.

I'd be open if they do land on the moon with humans in our age, but otherwise it's very sketch that no other country has pulled it off, and for some reason "we destroyed the technology and its (somehow?) a painful process to build it back again"

a reply to: cooperton

Again, that has been explained to you.

a reply to: cooperton

No it doesn’t raise eyebrows. We have the technology to do it, but no one has built it because it is expensive, and no one saw a need once we beat the Russians and people started demanding problems on earth be dealt with first. Once the political will was gone it was hard to get back.

The next mission to the moon is going to be totally different than Apollo, and will be geared towards establishing a long term presence on the moon. That’s going to cost a lot of money, and be difficult to do. But we’ll get there.