Proof of moon landing hoax/Neil Armstrong One Small Step

reply to post by ckitch


All of the jobs would have been interlinked though. It would be very difficult for an engineer to manufacture a part from a space ship if he did not know what the full purpose or design looked like. Also, this

Originally posted by ckitch
reply to post by Griffo

 

Well Mr Wise Guy, your post may seem to say it must be true then... However, forget all the trick photography and professionally faked videos... All you need to consider to understand why the trip was faked is a follows;

1. The Van Allen Belt!
2. The technology available at that time
3. The President had committed the US to beat the Russians, yet with the world watching, couldn't risk frying
astronauts live on TV.


If you watch ALL the youtube footage, and study all the evidence, it's easy to piece together why this never happened. Think outside of the 'box'.

They never landed and never could have - fact!

Thank You, couldn't have said it better myself......There is way to much evidence that it never happened.....To date 87 reasons why it couldn't have happened. They can't even go there today.....Fake vids put out by them to try and discredit the real truth of it never happening....911 Buildings were nuked, the moon landing never happened...

Originally posted by Caji316

Originally posted by ckitch
reply to post by Griffo

 

Well Mr Wise Guy, your post may seem to say it must be true then... However, forget all the trick photography and professionally faked videos... All you need to consider to understand why the trip was faked is a follows;

1. The Van Allen Belt!
2. The technology available at that time
3. The President had committed the US to beat the Russians, yet with the world watching, couldn't risk frying
astronauts live on TV.


If you watch ALL the youtube footage, and study all the evidence, it's easy to piece together why this never happened. Think outside of the 'box'.

They never landed and never could have - fact!

Thank You, couldn't have said it better myself......There is way to much evidence that it never happened.....To date 87 reasons why it couldn't have happened. They can't even go there today.....Fake vids put out by them to try and discredit the real truth of it never happening....911 Buildings were nuked, the moon landing never happened...

...and the sky is full of chemtrails and you will vote for Palin 2012 /irony

Absolutely ridiculous to say that technology wasn't advanced enough to get to the moon in '69, and even more ridiculous to say it's impossible today.

The technology required to get to the moon is very slim...the only thing you really need is enough fuel to reach earth orbit, then a little extra for the trip to the moon. You make about a 30 second burn from orbit to transfer over to lunar orbit, and then another short burn to slow down and land. Then, when you want to return, you're gonna burn your engines for another 30 seconds or so to get back, with another 30 second or so burn to slow down and land. You don't even really need computers to do it, just a really strong working knowledge of orbital physics, a craft that won't burn up on reentry, and enough fuel.

Besides, if noone has landed on the moon, then where did those laser reflectors come from? These Lunar Laser Ranging Experiment. NASA might be hiding some stuff from us, but it certainly isn't a fake moon landing. This was real, we just don't spend the public funds to do it anymore.

Does anyone know if the moon rover which was left on the moon was ever photographed by the Hubble telescope or by Japan's and China's moon probes? I would think that both countries and the U.S. would be interested on how well the rover stood up to the moon's thin atmosphere over all these decades. If any country wanted to build a base on the moon, that would be some important information on what material could withstand the moon's environment.

Speaking of Japan's and China's probes, have there been a lot of moon photographs released? And what about photographs of the dark side of the moon? Considering the advances made in photography, I would think we would be seeing some pretty clear and defined photos to help put some of these ideas of alien or U.S. moon bases to rest.

Originally posted by nwdogg1982
Absolutely ridiculous to say that technology wasn't advanced enough to get to the moon in '69, and even more ridiculous to say it's impossible today.

The technology required to get to the moon is very slim...the only thing you really need is enough fuel to reach earth orbit, then a little extra for the trip to the moon. You make about a 30 second burn from orbit to transfer over to lunar orbit, and then another short burn to slow down and land. Then, when you want to return, you're gonna burn your engines for another 30 seconds or so to get back, with another 30 second or so burn to slow down and land. You don't even really need computers to do it, just a really strong working knowledge of orbital physics, a craft that won't burn up on reentry, and enough fuel.

Besides, if noone has landed on the moon, then where did those laser reflectors come from? These Lunar Laser Ranging Experiment. NASA might be hiding some stuff from us, but it certainly isn't a fake moon landing. This was real, we just don't spend the public funds to do it anymore.

Never heard of the unmanned Soviet Lunokhod 1 and Lunokhod 2? These rovers carried smaller arrays and laser signals were initially received from Lunokhod 1. So there is always the possibility NASA placed them unmanned. But to be honest, i think they went, be it could be we watched a faked landing... Just in case something went wrong, or if they would find something no man was to see...

reply to post by Grifter.be


Yeah, we could've easily set up those reflectors remotely, no doubt about it. The whole landing could have been filmed in a studio just to cover their butts, it's certainly plausible. My issue is the thinking that it's impossible to put man up there on the moon, because of lack of technology or other reasons. I tend to think that if it weren't for his warmongering, Adolph Hitler would've had Germany on the moon in the late 40's or early 50's. They definitely had the tech to do it (as it doesn't take much) just not the will. And it was a Nazi who put the US up there anyway.

There is just way too much video and photographic evidence, as well as eyewitness accounts and literally thousands of people who worked on the project. As fanatical as Buzz Aldrin is concerning NASA cover-ups, I would think him to be the first to speak out if there really was a fake landing. He hasn't said it was fake, so I believe it wasn't.

Proof You Are Wrong!!!

www.youtube.com...

Originally posted by nwdogg1982
reply to post by Grifter.be

 

Yeah, we could've easily set up those reflectors remotely, no doubt about it. The whole landing could have been filmed in a studio just to cover their butts, it's certainly plausible. My issue is the thinking that it's impossible to put man up there on the moon, because of lack of technology or other reasons. I tend to think that if it weren't for his warmongering, Adolph Hitler would've had Germany on the moon in the late 40's or early 50's. They definitely had the tech to do it (as it doesn't take much) just not the will. And it was a Nazi who put the US up there anyway.

There is just way too much video and photographic evidence, as well as eyewitness accounts and literally thousands of people who worked on the project. As fanatical as Buzz Aldrin is concerning NASA cover-ups, I would think him to be the first to speak out if there really was a fake landing. He hasn't said it was fake, so I believe it wasn't.

A movie i once made

reply to post by zatara


There was an EXTREME bandwidth limit as well as Power Budgets that would make a Tv producer from today CRY... The westinghouse camera's had to be built specially and only shot 15 frames per second.

Hope that answers some of your questions...

Oh ps: for a REAL APOLLO CONSPIRACY one should look into the Electrostatic shielding system that apparently was used on the apollo space craft.

Originally posted by Griffo
Let's just see what we have here:

People who say the moon landing was real: NASA; USSR; amateur astronomers; astronauts and their doctors; every scientist before and after the landing; anyone who knows how satellites work; the entire aerospace industry; every reporter and investigative journalists who have lived since the moon landings; telecomms industry; CNSA; ESA; Mythbusters; most people who finish school; people who can read

People who say the moon landing was fake: conspiracy theorists; weirdos on youtube

edit on 4/4/2011 by Griffo because: (no reason given)

Amazing. They fooled all but the really smart people!!!

Double post

Originally posted by cushycrux

Originally posted by mkkkay

Originally posted by AlexIR
reply to post by zatara

 

... Not to mention that its 390 000 KM AWAY!!!!!!

It means they traveled at 1000 km/h for 390 hours... Or 2000km/h for 195 hours... Just how long were they gone... how much gas does a trip like that take? times two cause they had to come back also... 390 000 km.
So if they could go 2000km/h round trip is 390 hours.

The speed of sound is 1,236km/h so they could go twice as fast and it would take 390 hours round trip...
is that it. If so, is there some thing that i do not understand, can some one explain...

No air resistance maybe?

....and the fact that you don't run the engines the whole time?

Originally posted by ckitch
reply to post by Amaterasu

 

Look at it this way... You've stated in front of the world you will be on the moon by the end of the decade. A few weeks before, your test flight landing vessel is flying like a kite in a strong wind, and you've recently fried some astronauts in a ground based simulator. You need to lead the way and beat the Russians! There is no going back.

Then you realise its impossible to achieve given the technology at your disposal, so what do you do. If you risk it, given the rather useless tests to date, you risk blowing all your credibility and killing more astronauts in full view of the world. Failure to land would obviously be an enormously embarassing failure for the future of the USA.

Solution... Keep all parties involved isolated from each other, so they can't know more than their set involvement. Develop a studio setting and limiting knowledge to a small select few. Run a simulation on the day that Huston itself thinks is for real. Let the public watch and believe.

Net result... No one dies. The USA land on the moon... and everything is glorious!

The USSR tracked the first moon landing, and in fact congratulated the US on their achievement, as did the Jodrell bank telescope in the UK.

So you have the US biggest competitor in the space race congratulating them on "winning" the space race, and you have a private company tracking and monitoring the moon landing.

How do you get your biggest competitor, and a private company to lie, when they have everything to lose and you have everything to gain?

Originally posted by ckitch
reply to post by Griffo

 

Your link to Hoax Claims is interesting, but can be disputed in many ways. For example, just because 400,000 people were involved doesn't mean they had to lie.

If I employed you and 9 others to build parts for a secret weapon I was making, and you were instructed to produce one element of that weapon, not knowing what the other 9 were doing, could you confirm a secret weapon was built, or simply that you built one part of it?!

The more people that were involved made it easier to hide the next and previous stages. No one saw the complete task from build to launch, to land!

As for other 'proofs' it happended, most of these can be disputed.

I say, even if Van Allens Belt wasn't a threat, the technology wasn't advanced enough, and the risk was too great to kill a bunch of astronauts live on TV.

edit on 4-4-2011 by ckitch because: typo (say to saw)

Amen, Amen, Amen!!! I worked in military aviation for 20 years and I do not believe we went to the moon - simply for one reason . . . the technology of today and what I worked around hands on just does not support the concept in my mind. Good point about the 10. I have also witnessed a bit of this in action in real psych ops situations. I've only seen enough to know . . . we just don't know. I will not be bullied either. I can hold these views and not be crazy. If you knew what I've seen - you would understand my doubts.

Click here for more information.

There is no inevitable proof that the U.S.A landed on the moon.

Yes, I used to be a skeptic too. Then I gathered the facts, and observed. I've been doing research on the moon hoax too.

And then I found out........ The Moon Hoax is actually a hoax itself. The Government just doesn't want you to know about the aliens they saw when they first landed. It's easy to get on the moon. Covering up the alien eye witnesses is not. But, obviously they succeeded.

If you follow this principle you will start to uncover more Government coverup

reply to post by ckitch


ahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahhahahahahhahahahahahahahaha.....
Truly ignorant.

reply to post by ckitch


A flyby with the shuttle?
Are you saying you think the shuttle flew past the moon?
What's wrong with you?

There is much third-party evidence for Apollo Moon landings and detailed rebuttals to the hoax claims.[1] Polls taken in various locations have shown that between 6% and 28% of the people surveyed believed that the manned landings were faked.

Yuri Mukhin — Russian opposition politician, publicist and writer of the book The Moon Affair of the USA (2006) in which he denies all Moon landing evidence and accuses the US government of plundering the money paid by the American taxpayers for the Moon program. He also claims the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union and some Soviet scientists helped NASA fake the landings.