Ultimate evidence on NASA faking Moon landings (VIDEO)

I dont know about the cameras controled remotely as I have not looked much into the function of this remote control device. But, if it is true that only around 3 seconds are needed for signals to be sent from Earth and reach the Moon then it is possible at least so I can not say this is much of an evidence for anything. Also, as far I know there was a guy left in the space module itself waiting for the astronauts to get back, I assume he had some things to take care of from there as well which could have been such things as controlling the cameras from close orbit.

But, I have seen myself videos where the communication is instantly received, which should not be possible as it should be 3 seconds delay, yet they do in many places communicate with Houston and instantly answer eachother like on being on a normal phone line without even one second delay. So that is somewhat suspicious to me since there should be a delay. I am still a bit unsure about the technology used back then for this communication, and how it is used today, and why they could communicate faster with eachother than people do today through satellite communication.

Maybe someone have some more information on the satellites and communication methods and technology used back then 40 years ago for further insights into this? Personally I do not know enough about satelliete communication to know what was possible back then in those regards.

Phage - You seem to have put some efforts into this topic, perhaps you can shred some more light on this one? Thanks.

-Maggador

I personally have always found the "faked moon landing" idea rather offensive. The moon landings are some of the greatest achievements in human history. Respect it.

[edit on 18-11-2009 by ConspiracyCracker]

reply to post by IX-777

As I said earlier, there is a delay. We are dealing with the speed of light. There is no way around it. The round trip delay (Houston-Moon-Houston) was about 2.5 seconds. You can hear it in the audio and you can see it in the timestamps on the transcripts.

You may be mistaken about hearing shorter delays (as you are in the words you think you hear) or you may have heard edited versions.





[edit on 11/18/2009 by Phage]

reply to post by Phage


Moon landings are fake, it's been talked about for months, years, debated.
None came to an understanding with eachother. Each side keeps it's opinions. I for one think it was all done in the nevada desert.
It's all a hoax why can't you take it for what it is.

reply to post by pepsi78

I do not believe the Moon landings were faked because there is an enormous amount of evidence that shows they happened. The fact that I was alive at the time helps.

They only "evidence" that shows that the landings were faked is the result of ignorance and/or deliberate misrepresentations.

Originally posted by JPhish

Originally posted by sputniksteve
Well I can see that you are making a great effort here IX, I will give you credit for that. However I just don't think your arguments are sticking up well.

his arguments aren't stacking up well? there are many fun things we can say but we normally need to back them up.

Well, when you are surprised how the moon looks, it is because you have never been there.

who said they were surprised of how the moon looks?!

You cannot possibly have any idea living on earth of how some distant planet or moon will look.

what the heck are you talking about?

It must be a requirement for you to drop all preconcieved notions of what you believe other planets look like.

who the hell said anything about what the moon is supposed to look like???

You cannot possibly expect these notions to stick to the same rules we have on earth.

what notions?????

I hope that made sense.

it made no sense . . .

Have fun in this burnout of a thread.

are you burned out?

Keep fighting the good fight Phage, until they beat you into submission eventually =)

I understand Phage; you i do not.

[edit on 11/18/2009 by JPhish]

Well if you read the whole thread it might make sense. I was referring to someones post, it should be obvious. Seems like a troll to me I shouldn't have bothered to even respond but oh well.

reply to post by Phage


Look I had the pictures, with the lem suspended on a platform on a moon set in the desert, with painted craters on the set, with people going out of their way to blow up the desert just to make craters.

Do you really think they went to the moon? They can't even reproduce the technology of the apollo missions.

The moon adventures in the Nevada desert were done because America needed to look strong in front of the comunist party at the time of the cold war.

There is no evidence of a flying brick that can land from orbit, there is no such thing. It's not possible. Drop 7000 kilograms from the orbit in the form of a cube, let the object pick up speed and then try to stop it

It will crash, before it will crash while trying to control it it will spin, the people in the object will die. It can't be done today, it did not happen at that time for sure. Don't you see it, the moon adventures were a joke, fictional just like Peeter Pan adventures.

Do you have any actual evidence or are you just talking out of your... Also the pictures please, or is this just one of those "I've got pictures of JFK and Hitler drinking margaritas on mars but can't post them"?

reply to post by IX-777


a few observations.

The pictures claiming to show rain...actually show nothing.
The pictures claiming to show grass, actually show rocks.

The video claiming to show an exposed hand, shows a glove with fingers (wow, you mean astronauts use gloves...with fingers????? )


All i can say is that kudos to the OP for putting on such a great show. I bet you'd make a terrific Sci-Fi director.

But your disinformation is laughable at best, and IMO, borderline criminal.

reply to post by pepsi78


Are you aware that this thread is actually arguing that we did indeed make it to the moon but that the videos and pictures were faked anyway because they found something they didn't want to see? I am just curious if you are up to date on what this is actually about.

On that point I think there is plenty of evidence showing we did go to the moon, and we still have not seen anything credible to the argument that we did not go there. As a matter of fact I don't think evidence could possibly exist to prove that we didn't do something. Can't prove a negative does that work here? So in short your argument will never have any credibility at all. Please let me know if I am wrong in that line of thinking.

reply to post by sputniksteve

I wish I was a baller I wish I had a girl who looked good I would call her

I wish i had a rabbit, in a hat, with a bat...and a 64 impala!!!

HAA YES! Love it.

On topic - what im taking away from the OP is that the moon landing was completely fake. But the OPs evidence offers nothing. not even a shred of evidence.

Sure, it offers what the OP calls evidence. But taking 2 seconds to look at it, you walk away thinking "huh???" to yourself...wondering how any rational human being could possibly see these videos and think "wow that definitely looks fake!!!"

reply to post by sputniksteve


The lem was never tested before it went to the moon.
The lem is not capabile of doing a vertical landing from orbit.
It's impossible. If you have evidence of a flying device preforming a similar task let me see it.



[edit on 18-11-2009 by pepsi78]

You're the one making the claim. The burden of proof is on you. You show us how it is not possible.

reply to post by PsykoOps


It's simply not possible because the Lem had 7000 kilos, speed from orbit while going down was enormous. It's possible with smaller drones, and success does not come in the form of 100% Most of the drones crash land
. when they do crash an inflatable raft opens up just before it crashes, and all this after it's velocity is slowed down by a parachute.

On the moon it does not work, no atmoshere for parachutes, and to think they controlled the craft manually, it's a hunk of BS.

Tell me how does this thing fly?

You don't think they slowed down before hitting the dirt? What speed do you suppose it hit the moon then?

Originally posted by pepsi78Look I had the pictures, with the lem suspended on a platform on a moon set in the desert, with painted craters on the set, with people going out of their way to blow up the desert just to make craters.

Ooo, lets see those pictures.

The moon adventures in the Nevada desert were done because America needed to look strong in front of the comunist party at the time of the cold war.

lol, great stuff. Now, proof please and less drabble

[edit on 18-11-2009 by Spiro]

reply to post by pepsi78


For getting down they used the one in the middle.



BTW, it was called a LM, not a lem.

[edit on 11/18/2009 by Phage]

Originally posted by pepsi78
reply to post by sputniksteve

 

The lem was never tested before it went to the moon.
The lem is not capabile of doing a vertical landing from orbit.
It's impossible. If you have evidence of a flying device preforming a similar task let me see it.



[edit on 18-11-2009 by pepsi78]

As someone else already posted, the burden of proof is on you. I have proof they did it already, we went to the moon man that is my proof! It is up to you to prove that they didn't do it. That is not an easy task I know.

Originally posted by PsykoOps
You don't think they slowed down before hitting the dirt? What speed do you suppose it hit the moon then?

Trying to control the craft would make it spin, this is what I'm saying, controling an object of such nature at that speed would make it unstable.

Airplanes have flaps, wings, they can slow down and get a perfect in a position to do such things. To fly vertical with only thrusters you must first slow down not pick up speed.



Notice the F35 how slow it's moving before it's able to do that and it';s still unstable. Drop a F35 from orbit and try to control it only with thrusters, it will crash.




Take a look at this rocket that lands vertical.
It will go up and without any speed at all almost stoping in the air it will use vertical thrusters to come down gently.




Imagine droping this thing from orbit, just like the lem and then trying to control it as it comes down with speed.

This is how unstable such crafts were, and that is just a small version of the LEM on a slower speed, controled for a few moments.



And to think they manualy controled the craft on the moon at that speed?
It would flip and crash.



[edit on 18-11-2009 by pepsi78]

reply to post by pepsi78

The primary guidance, navigation and control system (PGNCS) on the LM was developed by the MIT Instrumentation Laboratory. The Apollo Guidance Computer was manufactured by Raytheon. A similar guidance system was used in the Command Module. A backup navigation tool, the Abort Guidance System (AGS), was developed by TRW.

To learn lunar landing techniques, astronauts practiced in the Lunar Landing Research Vehicle ( LLRVAt the start of the Apollo program in 1960, there were no simulators for would-be moonwalkers to learn the art and finesse of landing on the lunar surface. So, as the program got under way, NASA began planning for such simulators. Three types were develop), a flying vehicle that simulated the Lunar Module on earth.

www.economicexpert.com...:Lunar:Module.htm