Please explain how every lunar backdrop can be identified on Mauna Kea in Google Earth?

reply to post by Phage


But I've been there Phage, while in the military. We needed permission from Parker Ranch to cross through to get to the base -- it's filled with quonset huts. Unless things have changed that much in 15 years, I swear I was there.

reply to post by Jason88

But I've been there Phage

So have I.
Pohakuloa Training Area is not at the summit and is reachable without crossing Parker Ranch. The only thing at the summit is the observatories.

Seriously amigos just have a look a Google Earth you can find the crater where lots of the moon panoramas were taken..

Suspend disbelief and have a little 5 minute look.

Latitude 19°46'50.38"N

Longitude 155°27'26.74"W

I wonder how long it will stay up, take some screen captures because I think this will be edited !

reply to post by Phage


Got it. So I was wrong on the area. My bad, I thought we were close to the summit at the time.

reply to post by rolfharriss


So all of the images from each Lunar landing were filmed at this spot? Seems pretty plausible to me.

Yes ,

This is a better one.



It takes 5 minutes to identify one then to match up the angle takes a little longer. No Stretching or angles were changed.

reply to post by rolfharriss


In the Earth image the ridge you have labeled as "C" is higher and more connected to the ridge you have labeled as "B" than it is in the Lunar image. That's clearly obvious. Place the Lunar Image over the Earth image and you'll see it even more so.

I have no skills or capabilities with image editing software, otherwise I would do it myself. I'm sure someone else on here can do what I suggest though!

I think you have conclusively deduced one thing from all this. That is that hills, mountains, and ridges can look very similar from a distance.

EDIT TO ADD:
You can also see a clear difference in the top ridge line where the Earth image connects to the Lunar image on the right side of the composite. They don't match up even closely! How can you explain that?

reply to post by rolfharriss
There are similarities.

I do not believe that it approaches 90%, but then it doesn't even take 10% to make it a different thing.

reply to post by butcherguy


The angle is a bit off, I think there is join of two image to make the backdrop here. Also you have to allow for erosion. It is the right feature angle needs to be higher up the ridge.


I will just walk around the ridge to where it was snapped originally.. It matches better and you can see the top of the other mountain that protrudes between the ridges.

rough kinda sorta similarities are not proof of anything

except boredom

Originally posted by syrinx high priest
rough kinda sorta similarities are not proof of anything

except boredom

Anything is better than doing a tax return..

reply to post by rolfharriss


Allow for erosion? What? Erosion is a process that takes place in hundreds, if not thousands, of years! Looking off of this map...



...and one assumes that is a normal amount of rainfall over the last fifty years, the spot you claim could not have done that. It appears to be right on the edge of the 8-30 inches of rain/year and 30.1-50 inches of rain/year line.

I'm not a geologist, but I would have believe that amount of rainfall would not erode a ridge that much in that short amount of time. Considering that Mauna Kea has been dormant for at least the last 4,000 years, if that were possible the entire Big Island would be gone.

Your ideas hold no water, but you're using them like a dam.

I'm with everyone else here, you can't fit a square peg in a round hole - it's not going to work. I think a little respect is due to the incredible feat that NASA engineers, scientists and astronauts pulled off 50 years ago. Threads like this, while entertaining, do devalue what has been accomplished by mankind.

Originally posted by Jason88
I'm with everyone else here, you can't fit a square peg in a round hole - it's not going to work. I think a little respect is due to the incredible feat that NASA engineers, scientists and astronauts pulled off 50 years ago. Threads like this, while entertaining, do devalue what has been accomplished by mankind.

Look at Google Earth Mount Kea, the sites are there you can identify where the backdrop photographs were taken.

This is just observation, for anyone who can have a look and keep an open mind you can clearly identify sites where photographs of the false lunar backdrops were taken. Be part of the change that doesn't allow our governments to lie to us anymore. It does seem crazy and I was convinced the first person who told me they were a hoax was a mental case, but slowly it does begin to make sense.

It does involve completely changing your view of the world. Do not see the moon race as a race between two nations but as a pet project of the elite who played both sides to expand space exploration.

There is a set timeline for the revelation it was a hoax, chances are when the generation that lived through are gone.. younger generations won't really care. People were far more trusting in the 60's these days you can't even sneak a 9/11 in without getting rumbled.

reply to post by Phage


I had to jog my memory, but I believe we needed permission from Parker Ranch because we were "humping" (hiking) to the training area - and as memory serves we didn't hit a road for many miles whereby upon seeing our base and the 30 mile hump was over, I promptly tripped and fell on my face because I was so happy - forever earning the nickname "Dizzy" while in the service.

Edit:

reply to post by rolfharriss


I'm a level headed person (I hope!), but if you open your mind too much your brains will fall out. I think there's plenty of evidence we were on the moon as detailed on page 1 of this thread. Just sayin'

reply to post by Jason88

That would make sense. Why drive when you can hoof it cross country?

The backdrops are all there you can see them on Google Earth look for yourselves.

It really is worth a look. Each backdrop from the Apollo landing is on Mauna Kea.

Suspend disbelief and have a look around, the view is fantastic!

I have a friend on Hawaii, they would never climb a mountain! or I could get some pics taken at the sites I propose match the backdrops. Is it restricted access or open?


Fool me once, shame on — shame on you. Fool me — you can't get fooled again' — George W. Bush.

reply to post by Phage


I'll just assume that's a rhetorical question because you're a smart guy.

reply to post by rolfharriss


The only reason I'm on this site is because I'll entertain an unusual thought to see if it's feasible (and plenty are); this idea though has mountains of evidence that says it happened - so much evidence it shouldn't even be questioned as a fraud. On page 1 member Mart0 said, "Because hills have a tendency to look like other hills," ... I think that's what you've started to prove, which you could probably write an graduate-level thesis on and likely gain peer acceptance, but it's not a conspiracy that Moon hills look like Earth hills (and Martian hills too).

If you're going to subscribe to the theory they faked it, it makes much more sense that they did it in a hangar where they could control the environment. Black backdrops, cables, fake light from the "sun", etc.

Wow! I've read that NASA was their at one time training, because of the lack of moisture, the soil is the closest thing you can find on Earth to Lunar soil. Also, somewhere on the internet their was talk that back in the 60's they had created a apecial camera that could take pictures of terrain, leaving out all of the vegetation. Their answers the for discrepancies in landscapes.