Moon and Rover fakery - Shocking PROOF like never before seen!!!

reply to post by r2d246


Thanks a lot butthole! Now I don't believe we ever landed on the moon, nor mars. It's funny I have a degree in multimedia and I kept looking at the mars photographs and I kept asking myself why is there this distinct line in every photo where it seems that you are always on a large hill and you can never see more than a few hundred yards away?

This is nuts, I am seeing someone promising the proper use of cash and have to make people believe that cash was used wisely. Why go all the way with the money when you can create a studio and make a movie instead for .0008 of the budget?

S&F

Originally posted by r2d246

Originally posted by phantomjack
Did you ever think that the 2.5billion or 100 billion went to the HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS of contractors who built parts for the missions?

And, of the MILLIONS who were employed by those HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS of contractors over the last 60 years?

Give me access to a junk yard, maybe an airplane junk yard as well, a couple guys and some blow torches maybe a hollywood prop consultant and I'll build you a rover in a weekend okay. And it will look and even go like the real deal, all for under 10k.

Great, but that still doesn't explain the hundreds of thousands of companies who worked on parts for the missions.

Is it really that hard to grasp that they have both landed on the moon and showed us fake footage of it?

They did go to the moon, but years before apollo 11. So have the Russians. But what they found there gave them no choice but to lie.

For the same reasons they lie about the color of mars's sky and its surface temperature. Nothing to see here people, move along.

You know what OP, I'm rather cynical on the matter frankly, it's peanuts...



Think about the power of the dollar; son's sell their mothers down the river for just a wee portion of the pie.

reply to post by seabhac-rua


I'm not into the moon-hoax theories enough to comment one way or the other concerning fakery. But let me play the devil's advocate for a moment. They fake it by building all of these contraptions, putting them into a very real and very large rocket, they send the capsule and its contents (lunar lander, astronauts, etc) into orbit. They stay in orbit for an extended period of time, and after disconnecting the damning evidence (lunar lander etc.) into deep orbit or even out of the earths orbit, the space capsule lands with the three heroes with a tale of "landing on the moon".
In this manner, you have all of the people involved believing in something "real" and only a handful knowing the truth.

Originally posted by therealdemoboy
reply to post by seabhac-rua

 

I'm not into the moon-hoax theories enough to comment one way or the other concerning fakery. But let me play the devil's advocate for a moment. They fake it by building all of these contraptions, putting them into a very real and very large rocket, they send the capsule and its contents (lunar lander, astronauts, etc) into orbit. They stay in orbit for an extended period of time, and after disconnecting the damning evidence (lunar lander etc.) into deep orbit or even out of the earths orbit, the space capsule lands with the three heroes with a tale of "landing on the moon".
In this manner, you have all of the people involved believing in something "real" and only a handful knowing the truth.

Not plausible, and it never ceases to amaze me that people will try and field this scenario.

Have you ever heard of 'triangulation' as in radios?

Have a think about it.

Originally posted by StellaByStarLight
reply to post by seabhac-rua

 

The onus is on neither side. Each side presents their respective case, and ultimately the truth shall be told. This is not a court of law, nor anything else remotely like one.

Well if somebody is gonna claim that certain events that the entire scientific world was pretty much engrossed in in the 1960's was a silly fake, and that all these hundreds of thousands of scientists were fooled by some guys jumping around on wires in a studio, and that 40 years later people who can't spell are gonna blow the lid on it........I'm gonna ask for evidence. If strong evidence cannot be furnished then hoax believers are living in a world of delusion.

Here's a claim I'm gonna make, you're not who you say you are.

Originally posted by oldmeatwad
What's hard to believe is that we had enough technology to get us there, but none to do a proper job of documenting it.

The same questions over and over - why no long exposures of the sky? Why no video pans upward or 360 degrees? It's an omission that does not seem plausible. When evidence is put forward, it's either low resolution or far from clear. The only hard evidence is in the form of rocks and mirrors on the moon - both of which could be accomplished using remote technology. It has the earmarks of a spun story and if I was in charge of spending billions of tax payers dollars, I would need a 100% guarantee of success. I could not risk killing american Heros, or having my expensive mission fail. It would be a true epic fail that could have killed the entire project and the hearts and minds of the country.

What's easy to believe is mans greed and how it can manifest itself.

Jeezus Christ, have any of you people who come on here claiming fakery, have any of you ever studied the Apollo missions in any way or form beyond the lunatic fringe 'everything is a lie' paradigm??

You do know that practically every minute of the astronauts time was planned and scheduled, they had a large workload to accomplish and limited time to do it. I guess long exposures and 360 panoramas weren't high on the priority list, as who would have guessed that the conspiracy fueled appetites of very plainly stupid people, 40 years in the future, would need to be assuaged.

You people are a bunch of morons.

r2d2, man you know I think you're an ok bloke, but I'm out. I'm done with this horsesh*t.

This topic is for the ignorant.

Originally posted by de_Genova
Moon/ Mars believers ~ 9/11 believers -They are cut from the cloth. I

Exactly, how can one believe that the moon or Mars exist, especially that 9/11, I was told that that date happens once a year, fortunately for me I'm not that gullible

reply to post by r2d246


Here's what happened: The programs, people and funding were/ are all real - Tens of thousands of "hands" on the project, that's what the Con-Thiers forget. That part can't be faked. We spent the money and sent the REAL equipment and people up into the sky. Here's what happens afterward...Nothing goes to plan i.e. aliens caught in the footage, up isn't up, down isn't down all known understanding of physics breaks down and its actually chaos. So, we stage the moon landings and Mars data to be something normal and mass pleasing. The events and trips are real - The footage given to the cattle is fake as fake can be - Plain and simple. We are "not worthy" of disclosure folks. Get out of your Mom's basement, get a job, get productive and pro-active...Knowledgeable and actually dangerous to see the change you are looking for in conspiracies and disclosure.

Originally posted by r2d246
...My guess is that if they did that it would expose the fakery, as astrophysicists and astronomers would be able to easily tell where certain stars are, and be able to figure out all the trajectories and know immediately if what they're seeing is actually footage coming from Mars or from the Moon. Why is why they never can pan up in a video, or take pictures of the sky, because the sun and the stars would tell the viewer where they really are. I could be wrong but at least to me that would make some sense. no different from how navigation is done using the stars when looking up from earth.

You would need ultra, ultra precise measurement to discern the difference between the positions of the stars as seen from the moon and the positions of the stars as seen from earth. NOBODY would not be able to tell the difference from a camera being pointed up on the moon.

Think of it this way:

The Earth moves at a speed of about 67,000 miles per hour as it goes around the Sun. Therefore, if the Moon is 240,000 miles from earth, the time it takes the earth to travel that same distance -- that 240,000 miles -- is less than 4 hours. So, in 4 hours time, the Earth would be in a position along its orbit similar to the difference between the position of the Earth and Moon.

The difference in positions of the stars in the sky due to earth's speed of REVOLUTION around the Sun (ignoring their apparent movement due to Earth ROTATION, which is not relevant here) over the span of 4 hours is negligible, and could never be measured by what can be seen by a simple camera pointing up.

Originally posted by r2d246

Originally posted by Argyll
reply to post by r2d246

 

Trust me I'm like 99.9% positive that they did it this way.

I won't if you don't mind.

Trust me, you can trust me. I know what happened back then!

So why not tell us in an intelligent fashion and stop with the wild speculation and repeating of misleading info.

Originally posted by BrokenCircles
reply to post by r2d246

 

I was actually planning on reading this OP, when I first opened this thread.

That quickly changed however, while reading the first couple sentences.

Originally posted by r2d246

Look I could be way off base here. But lets try to look at this from one vantage point. I mean, take it with a grain of salt if you want but....

Why would you scream it out as ' shocking PROOF', if even you don't completely believe what you say?

Because first of all it's not SHOCKING PROOF. These youtube videos have been around for years. He goes on to say that while he's a business man, it's his expert opinion (or his stated fact, I guess we take that with a grain of salt, too) that it's SO OBVIOUS the moon landings were shot in a studio.

I guess Google is in on the "conspiracy" too since through Google Maps you can explore the landing sites, complete with what we left behind. So tell me - did Google photoshop those images or were they actually taken at these secret studios? Youtube is becoming the visual wikipedia. Throw it up on the internet and by golly it must be true.

BTW, I've met Buzz Aldrin, and to accuse this man of lying about going to the moon, or to suggest he dropped hints that he never really went, is to insult a true American hero. You also insult the families of Guss Grissom, Ed White, and Roger Chaffee. Or did they not die in a terrible fire on the landing pad training for Apollo 1? Was that fire part of the conspiracy? This is where it goes from a really silly debate to outright nonsense and disrespect. These men gave their lives to this cause, and the 12 men who actually walked on the moon risked their lives as well.

This also isn't our first rover to visit Mars yet because that planet happens to look desert-like you choose to not believe that as well. IT'S SUPPOSED TO LOOK LIKE THAT! It's a barren planet! What did you expect, little green men? Temples? Faces?

Originally posted by seabhac-rua

Originally posted by oldmeatwad
What's hard to believe is that we had enough technology to get us there, but none to do a proper job of documenting it.

The same questions over and over - why no long exposures of the sky? Why no video pans upward or 360 degrees? It's an omission that does not seem plausible. When evidence is put forward, it's either low resolution or far from clear. The only hard evidence is in the form of rocks and mirrors on the moon - both of which could be accomplished using remote technology. It has the earmarks of a spun story and if I was in charge of spending billions of tax payers dollars, I would need a 100% guarantee of success. I could not risk killing american Heros, or having my expensive mission fail. It would be a true epic fail that could have killed the entire project and the hearts and minds of the country.

What's easy to believe is mans greed and how it can manifest itself.

Jeezus Christ, have any of you people who come on here claiming fakery, have any of you ever studied the Apollo missions in any way or form beyond the lunatic fringe 'everything is a lie' paradigm??

You do know that practically every minute of the astronauts time was planned and scheduled, they had a large workload to accomplish and limited time to do it. I guess long exposures and 360 panoramas weren't high on the priority list, as who would have guessed that the conspiracy fueled appetites of very plainly stupid people, 40 years in the future, would need to be assuaged.

You people are a bunch of morons.

r2d2, man you know I think you're an ok bloke, but I'm out. I'm done with this horsesh*t.

This topic is for the ignorant.

edit on 2-10-2012 by seabhac-rua because: (no reason given)

Couldn't have said it better. I stopped clicking on the 911 hogwash and somehow got sucked into this nonsense - for the last tie. I'm with you, mate. A few fringers claiming fakery doesn't make the Apollo missions any less important on so many levels. See you on other topics, hopefully. Over and out.

"Shocking PROOF like never before seen!!!"

Fail?

Originally posted by Zaphod58
reply to post by r2d246

 

Uh, the stars will look exactly the same from the Moon and Mars as they do from Earth. You have to move a huge distance for their location to change, so anyone looking at them from a video from Mars, would see the same stars, in the same location as they would from anywhere on earth. You would need special instruments to see any difference from Mars. The moon is so close that there isn't a measurable distance.

edit on 9/30/2012 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)

Not when you count our atmosphere and all the light pollution

I usually point out here that you can the film can be faked but that does not mean that the landing was faked.
Only personal opinion but... They must have trained in as close situation of the moon as possible and probably filmed this to learn from it. NASA must have also known that the world was watching and would have "stock film" ready if any situation arose.

No-one has mentioned this but it disturbs me about the moon landings, the experiments did not seem to find water on the moon. The discovery was first found by the Soviets in 1976 but was ignored by the west. It was later confirmed by NASA and Chandrayaan. At the time, NASA admitted that they found water in the rock in the moon from the Apollo landing but ignored it as contamination.

This does not add up. Finding water on the moon is too massively important for NASA to pass off as a contaminant without retesting in a later mission. Remember they sent a rocket crashing into the moon to determine how much water. Either they knew about it with the Apollo, retested but never told us that water was there until the Indian satellite had identified it - OR - lied to us about knowing about it from Apollo. Either way they lied -so what other things did they lie about.

reply to post by tzdub


No, the atmosphere doesn't affect where the stars are located. If you were to go outside the atmosphere, then the stars position will be exactly the same, as if you looked at them through the atmosphere. The atmosphere doesn't make them move, it just makes the way they look change from if there was no atmosphere.

Originally posted by hellobruce

Originally posted by syrinx high priest
what about baysinger and kaminsky ?

they always get ignored in these threads

why ?

Because the conspiracy theory sites ignore them, or when the lunies do their "research" they ignore it.

no kidding !

those pesky facts sure get in the way of a good fantasy !

there is a LOT of third party evidence the apollo misisons happened. so that is why they get ignored.

selene ? what is that ? a jap mission ?

lol

no, it's not funny it's sad

The cracked pottery here never ceases to amaze me, shameless.