Please Debunk The Moon Landing Hoax For Me...

Originally posted by Monkeygod333
I dont have much to say about the moon, space temperatures or golf balls, but since this thread appeared on the board a number of 'The Moon Landings Are Real' threads have been quick to follow... 3 so far...

 

Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com

 

Perhaps links to these other threads would be interesting, ie. to see who started them, the evidence, etc.

If you could walk there and check it out, I am sure plenty would have, but as we can't go up there and check it out, perhaps we will never know, with no atmosphere and disturbance to affect the alleged landing sites, they would stay untouched for hundreds of years or more, perhaps someday, one of our own future relatives may just go and find out for sure !

reply to post by prizim


I saw a news report on CNN this am that showed some "new" photos as well.

Soooo... I was wondering if the new releases of landing site photos were coincidental to the new moon orbiter, or if this recent hottest thread/topic sparked Nasa to answer ATS with this timely update? Just wondering...

reply to post by astroroach


Yeah you got that right. There is no proof that will be good enough. I give up. GrassyKnoll can live his life in ignorance if he wants to. It has no affect on me. Wait that's not quite true. His ideas make me laugh. I guess he does effect me.

Originally posted by GrassyKnoll

Originally posted by astroroach
reply to post by karen61057

 

I challenge those who believe Apollo was a hoax to specify WHAT EVIDENCE YOU WOULD ACCEPT as proof we landed. It seems to be a constantly moving target.

Video footage of the Apollo craft in orbit of the moon, approaching the moon's surface then touching down.

Lie detector tests for the surviving astronauts administered by both the pro and anti hoax camps.

Crystal clear video footage on the lunar surface.

High resolution colour pics on the moons surface provided by a lunar rover similar to the one on mars.

This would be a good start.

Just who did you have for filming the orbit and approach? A team we sent up in advance so they could capture the moment that man first stepped on the moon? Wouldnt that then be the second moment that man first stepped on the moon? You forgot to list yourself on a rocket to the moon so you could see first hand.

reply to post by Kitilani

Originally posted by quber
Why don't people (Krusty the Klown and Netscurge) read a thread before posting, or a least the last couple of pages?

You have no idea whether I have read through the thread or not. The point of my post was to point out that the news story hit the press as this thread and other moon landing hoax threads are in progress.

the images you have just posted have been discussed and even posted in the thread, if you don't read a thread then you are not contributing anything you're just getting in the way

And what value did this post of yours actually contribute the thread?

there is bad timning for a thread, and then there is this thread.

it's ironic in a way, it actually wound up serving as way for people to get the word out that the hoax has been debunked, thoroughly and definitively, so it did serve a purpose. it's also rare to see a poster request something on the internet and get it in spades, so there is that

the good news grassy is you have company. you can always go to a titor thread and you can commiserate with the 3 people who are waiting for the nuclear war to break out

any day now

Originally posted by karen61057
reply to post by astroroach

 

Yeah you got that right. There is no proof that will be good enough. I give up. GrassyKnoll can live his life in ignorance if he wants to. It has no affect on me. Wait that's not quite true. His ideas make me laugh. I guess he does effect me.

The fact that you can't provide legitimate proof of the Apollo 12 walking the moon makes me laugh.

Keep writing useless and meaningless posts it makes you look bad.

You can insult me all you want it just makes me think less of you and your postings.

Originally posted by syrinx high priest
there is bad timning for a thread, and then there is this thread.

it's ironic in a way, it actually wound up serving as way for people to get the word out that the hoax has been debunked, thoroughly and definitively, so it did serve a purpose. it's also rare to see a poster request something on the internet and get it in spades, so there is that

the good news grassy is you have company. you can always go to a titor thread and you can commiserate with the 3 people who are waiting for the nuclear war to break out

any day now

Provide proof that the Apollo 12 walked the surface of the moon.

Post your proof on this thread and I will examine it objectively.

Seems you are trying to prove a moon landing by taking jabs at people who don't believe NASA's story.

All your meaningless postings do is to bump my topic to the top of the topic list.

You look bad by not providing anything of substance.

Originally posted by karen61057

Originally posted by GrassyKnoll

Originally posted by astroroach
reply to post by karen61057

 

I challenge those who believe Apollo was a hoax to specify WHAT EVIDENCE YOU WOULD ACCEPT as proof we landed. It seems to be a constantly moving target.

Video footage of the Apollo craft in orbit of the moon, approaching the moon's surface then touching down.

Lie detector tests for the surviving astronauts administered by both the pro and anti hoax camps.

Crystal clear video footage on the lunar surface.

High resolution colour pics on the moons surface provided by a lunar rover similar to the one on mars.

This would be a good start.

Just who did you have for filming the orbit and approach? A team we sent up in advance so they could capture the moment that man first stepped on the moon? Wouldnt that then be the second moment that man first stepped on the moon? You forgot to list yourself on a rocket to the moon so you could see first hand.

I don't see why the Apollocraft didn't have an onboard camera(s). A moon landing is a sight to behold. Seems like NASA is hiding the truth and making stuff up.

Originally posted by Krusty the Klown

the images you have just posted have been discussed and even posted in the thread, if you don't read a thread then you are not contributing anything you're just getting in the way

And what value did this post of yours actually contribute the thread?

Plenty if you read it. This thread is 25 pages long and there are about 20 pages where at least one person posted the exact same pictures as if they were the first. Do 20 pages of posts saying the exact same thing do anything to help? It makes the thread longer and less worth reading is all.

Originally posted by syrinx high priest
it's ironic in a way, it actually wound up serving as way for people to get the word out that the hoax has been debunked, thoroughly and definitively, so it did serve a purpose.

Boy did I miss that. Can you provide a link to the page?
Apparently you can link to any page in this thread if you are just going to push those empty pictures again. I understand people are passionate about this subject and some people are downright nuts about it but if any one rational can respond that would be great.

There are lots of threads on ATS where people say things like "Now that it has been proven" or "Now that it has been debunked" where those are nothing but personal opinions. It really seems like this topic could use something more empirical.

Originally posted by netscurge
reply to post by GrassyKnoll

 

Below are links to some pretty darn good images of landing sites and equipment. I suppose that one could say they are fake but convincing the ones who think there are conspiracies around every corner is next to impossible. You either believe it or you don't.


www.ibtimes.com...

theness.com...

How could the astronauts possibly create a solid well worn footpath several miles in length in just a few short hours?!?!

The only reason I can come up with is that the footpaths and the rover tracks were photoshopped. Gray blobs and blotches do not constitute proof.

The footpaths are darker than the rover tracks...it would take days and weeks of walking along those paths to produce the dark lines in the satellite photo.

I have yet to hear one good footpath explanation. I have posted it several times on this thread and one other...no moon landing believer can provide me with a logical explanation.

Originally posted by Kitilani

Originally posted by syrinx high priest
it's ironic in a way, it actually wound up serving as way for people to get the word out that the hoax has been debunked, thoroughly and definitively, so it did serve a purpose.

Boy did I miss that. Can you provide a link to the page?
Apparently you can link to any page in this thread if you are just going to push those empty pictures again. I understand people are passionate about this subject and some people are downright nuts about it but if any one rational can respond that would be great.

There are lots of threads on ATS where people say things like "Now that it has been proven" or "Now that it has been debunked" where those are nothing but personal opinions. It really seems like this topic could use something more empirical.

edit on 7-9-2011 by Kitilani because: (no reason given)

Strange how people post links to pictures and say "here is the proof" then when it is time to discuss the validity of the photos they either disappear or respond by saying how ridiculous hoax believers are instead of discussing the finer points raised...wow really weak on their part.

All I know is that truth does not fear investigation.

reply to post by GrassyKnoll


Yeah I am a little dumbfounded at the response I got. My only point was that these gray pictures of blobs do not actually show any of the things that people claim they show and yet most of the responses I got were personal attacks and arguments about something else.

Seems like if you were such a nut for thinking what you think, people would just prove you wrong politely and move along but instead they sit here and toss barbs.

This is a kick in the nuts at best: NASA

We all know this is crap and they are sitting on images that I am sure at min rival Google Earth. Regardless of the reasons, the tax payers paid for this expensive trip and all we asked for was a Fing postcard. Instead we got the bill and a pile of fuzzy images that are worse then an drunk amateur with an iphone. Someone at ironmountain needs to open the right box and share the contents.

Originally posted by GrassyKnoll

How could the astronauts possibly create a solid well worn footpath several miles in length in just a few short hours?!?!

The only reason I can come up with is that the footpaths and the rover tracks were photoshopped. Gray blobs and blotches do not constitute proof.

The footpaths are darker than the rover tracks...it would take days and weeks of walking along those paths to produce the dark lines in the satellite photo.

I have yet to hear one good footpath explanation. I have posted it several times on this thread and one other...no moon landing believer can provide me with a logical explanation.

I don't often post here; in fact, I think this is only my second post. However, I was compelled to offer you what I consider a valid explanation for the darkness of the footpaths relative to the rover tracks.

Simply put, I think your first and third paragraphs are flawed. The footpaths are not "several miles" long, as the resolution in these newest pictures is 1px=25cm. Quite the long trek to make in a cumbersome spacesuit, most likely, but certainly not impossible as you claim.

The footpaths are darker than the rover tracks because the astronauts' hopping and stepping about would disturb the lunar soil more than a set of wheels cutting a clean path through it. Soil that is more disturbed will scatter light more than soil that has been compacted by a lunar rover, thus appearing darker to a satellite some 21-odd kilometers away. Factor in that the lunar soil is said to be very rough, and that it holds its shape well, and I consider this conclusion sound.

reply to post by oldmeatwad


You're not just paying for pictures of the landing sites, they were an afterthought. Here's the mission statement...

LRO Mission Statement

Originally posted by Allargando

Originally posted by GrassyKnoll

How could the astronauts possibly create a solid well worn footpath several miles in length in just a few short hours?!?!

The only reason I can come up with is that the footpaths and the rover tracks were photoshopped. Gray blobs and blotches do not constitute proof.

The footpaths are darker than the rover tracks...it would take days and weeks of walking along those paths to produce the dark lines in the satellite photo.

I have yet to hear one good footpath explanation. I have posted it several times on this thread and one other...no moon landing believer can provide me with a logical explanation.

I don't often post here; in fact, I think this is only my second post. However, I was compelled to offer you what I consider a valid explanation for the darkness of the footpaths relative to the rover tracks.

Simply put, I think your first and third paragraphs are flawed. The footpaths are not "several miles" long, as the resolution in these newest pictures is 1px=25cm. Quite the long trek to make in a cumbersome spacesuit, most likely, but certainly not impossible as you claim.

The footpaths are darker than the rover tracks because the astronauts' hopping and stepping about would disturb the lunar soil more than a set of wheels cutting a clean path through it. Soil that is more disturbed will scatter light more than soil that has been compacted by a lunar rover, thus appearing darker to a satellite some 21-odd kilometers away. Factor in that the lunar soil is said to be very rough, and that it holds its shape well, and I consider this conclusion sound.

A stride is about 3ft on earth. The moon has 1/6th the gravity of the earth so the strides should be a lot bigger. The footpath should be intermittent not a solid line. The astronauts would have to go over the same path many times for it to appear as though it is a continuous well-worn footpath.

Zoom the footpath on the picture editor of your choice.

Imagine if you were on a beach and you were walking across virgin sand one single time. Would your footsteps appear as a well worn footpath the way it does in NASA's newest image? If you walked back and forth a dozen times it might.

I also never said it was impossible...I just find it improbable.

I also just came across this new ATS thread today:

Moon To Have No-Fly Zones By The End Of The Month

www.abovetopsecret.com...

A very interesting news article that raises a lot of questions.