Disclosure of the moon landing hoax.

reply to post by turbonium1


So the 0.01% that it changes makes travel through it impossible? Amazing.

turbonium1

About 99.99% of the time, the VAB environment changes slowly. About 0.01% of the time, the VAB environment changes quickly.

They used to believe the VAB envronment changes slowly, but they now know it changes quickly.



How about the Earth environment? We used to believe it was a slow, calm environment. We then saw a rare phenomenon, called a 'hurricane'.

So ...'We used to believe the Earth was a slow, calme environment. But we later found out it is a fierce, treacherous environment.'

That's not grasping at straws, is it?

thats because you are not understanding it.. you are the one saying what they used to believe was completely untrue.. when they knew it changes.. the speed of which was wrong, but they still knew it changed..

now if you knew something but didnt have all the knowledge about it how is that something completely untrue??

if they knew it changed slowly and in fact found out it didnt change at all.. that belief is completely untrue.. but when something changes from slowly to rapidly that is only partially untrue.. you are exagerrating..

and the fact you are using this to mean that the apollo missions were impossible is grasping at straws.. remember this phenomenon has a window of 8 hours out of 8760 possible hours per year to have affected an apollo flight.. still dont think you are grasping at straws?

onebigmonkey

Your contention that dust heights should be much higher than on Earth is unsupported.

A man would be able to jump higher, a ball can be thrown up higher, and a small pebble can be thrown up higher...

My contention that dust would be thrown up higher is therefore....unsupported!!

Good to know!!

turbonium1

As for dust not forming clouds on the moon, you better look at the LDEX mission - its main purpose is to measure how much dust lingers above the lunar surface. And compare the height of the dust, which is no higher than it is on Earth. It should be much, much higher than anything on Earth.

i dont think you understand the concept of force related with gravity..

the only dust that would have gone higher than anything on earth would be the dust blown away during landing and you wouldnt have seen those..

if you are expecting the dust kicked up but the astronauts to go higher than anything on earth lets say a dust storm.. than i have news for you.. you have failed basic physics yet again.. seriously dont use your "logic" on how things should behave according to physics..

are you still holding onto the notion that you should be able to walk faster on the moon than on earth?

SayonaraJupiter
reply to post by Soylent Green Is People

 

You are truly grasping at straws now. We all saw that footage, and it is in black and white. Why would mission control show a version of it (for all of the world to see as we watch mission control) that looks mostly black and white, but has color tinting?

I just want to analyze the picture. Who is the astronaut coming down the ladder in the projection screen, on the wall, being projected? At the same time we must imagine that there is a cameraman, with a movie camera, in mission control, filming the same events. It looks to me that the astronaut coming down the ladder has some amazing detail. More amazing than was ever shown on TV.

Take a Look down on the console. 2 TV's . The picture on those small TV's are what the people at home were more likely to see... then look back up at the amazing detail on that projection screen.

Are you going say that the projection screen was dirty with the cigar and cigarette smoke? I might buy that

No...no...no...my friend, you just don't get it, SayonaraJupiter...

You see, you've asked a QUESTION...which goes against the Group Think of the idea that

WE ALL SAW THE FOOTAGE

You obviously *must* believe something completely opposite if you don't believe WHAT WE ALL SAW...so you're dangerous, SJ....you're dangerous.


- SN

reply to post by SadistNocturne



and the people who didnt see the live footage?? there are some very young scientists, astronomists, astrophysicists, engineers that didnt see the live footage but believe in the moon landing based on the given evidence.

on one hand you have the HB saying GCR's are too high and man will get sick or even die within a week with no proof whatsoever..
you have HB saying that shadows are not parallel because they assume that shadows on a flat surface will apply to shadows on an uneven surface..
you have HB making claims that would make NASA not only the world's most powerful organisation but very damn near to the GOD himself if you are religious..

basically you have HB saying this and saying that with no real evidence.. in sayonara's case its speculation and innuendo as evidence that the moon landing was a hoax..

and you have NASA who have a library of information, the physics to back up the claims, documentation to back up their claims, knowledge that we didnt have the technology to fake a manned lunar landing ie. in order to have fake the apollo missions NASA needed to have controlled several nations, thousands of personnel, thousands of contractors, and a time machine..

and basically you are doing the same thing, using innuendo sarcasm to prove something.. but that doesnt cut it in the scientific community, it will in the HB community because as you suggest they have the "group think" mentality, if you look at the evidence in this thread, HB dont need evidence to be convinced of the hoax, they just need like minds..

if you HB really want to prove that the moon landings were a hoax, then you need to prove it scientifically not "hoax believer" theoretically..

and soon you will see sayonara saying this is missing and that is missing, so that proves the moon landing were a hoax.. but in reality it only proves incompetence leaving the possibility of landing on the moon entirely possible..

choos
and basically you are doing the same thing, using innuendo sarcasm to prove something..

I am not doing anything in the effort to actively *prove* anything, other than the fact that I personally feel that there are grey areas. I believe that NOTHING is black and white.

I believe that you have drank the kool-aid, and are just as much as a "believer" as you accuse SayonaraJupiter of being.

Where I herald his focus on the idea that there are areas that don't really add up, you appear to focus on the dogma and the word. You seem to be interested in the Catholic Church aspect of repeating the sermon in latin...where (possibly) the clergy and the constituents of the church are not fluent in the dead language that latin is.

It is often said, is it not, that by simply repeating something over and over and over and over and over, that it becomes true, no?

I have not espoused a belief in this, or in that. Rather, I oppose fervent belief and defense of any on sacred pillar of thought. I see that as cancerous thought, as something that should be cut out and removed for the health of the being. A healthy mind stays open to new currents of thought. Reviews things when new topics or facts come to life...even new perspectives.

Label me away...go ahead, I truly could care less.

And btw, for what it is worth...innuendo is an excellent tool to make others think about something. Sacrcasm, well, it merely serves to underscore what I see as being downright funny. And in this case, it is the religious adherence to "the bible" line and verse. Yepp, pretty frakking funny if you ask me. Elicits a hearty chuckle each and EVERY time I read your posts. So please, post on!

but that doesnt cut it in the scientific community, it will in the HB community because as you suggest they have the "group think" mentality, if you look at the evidence in this thread

Evidence. Evidence that is hoarded by one governmental agency with reasons to keep the status quo.

Sure, tout your evidence. Believe it. Go for it. Have a great time.

There are actions that need to occur before we have the whole story. And until I have the whole story, I am not ignorant nor arrogant enough to believe that I personally can pass judgement on anything.

, HB dont need evidence to be convinced of the hoax, they just need like minds..

I hope to hell you're nowhere near my children, because you're one scary #$%#%^%^ in my humble opinion.

And btw, WTF does HB stand for ? Educate me, please

(I figure everyone should hear something once in their life)



Ciao, and let's just call this conversation over, shall we? I honestly don't feel you have anything new to offer me that I have not already read of your own words...


- SN

SadistNocturne

I am not doing anything in the effort to actively *prove* anything, other than the fact that I personally feel that there are grey areas. I believe that NOTHING is black and white.

and neither is sayonara, he is using innuendo to promote the idea of a hoax.. he doesnt provide proof of such at all just innuendo.. you keep bringing up this group think and saying that the general public believing in that man landed on the moon is the group think.. and that sayonara and yourself who are thinking that its a hoax is not part of the group think mentality..

but thats just wrong.. you really need to apply some critical thinking and look at the given evidence.. what you are doing here is that you and sayonara are saying this doesnt add up and this doesnt add up, so thats means its a hoax.. so how did they hoax it? oh we shall make something up like super advanced remote controlled tranforming bi-pedal/tracked robots made by howard hughes.. group think mentality much?

I have not espoused a belief in this, or in that. Rather, I oppose fervent belief and defense of any on sacred pillar of thought. I see that as cancerous thought, as something that should be cut out and removed for the health of the being. A healthy mind stays open to new currents of thought. Reviews things when new topics or facts come to life...even new perspectives.

Label me away...go ahead, I truly could care less.

you say you are sitting on the but you come off as a hoax believer.. perhaps im wrong?

Evidence. Evidence that is hoarded by one governmental agency with reasons to keep the status quo.

Sure, tout your evidence. Believe it. Go for it. Have a great time.

evidence that is supported by the larger scientific community through-out the world.. engineers thoughout the world, astrophysicits, astrologists.. the list goes on.. but you arent a hoax believer right? text book HB retort to evidence.

There are actions that need to occur before we have the whole story. And until I have the whole story, I am not ignorant nor arrogant enough to believe that I personally can pass judgement on anything.

ive considered that its pretty much impossible to fake.. unless there was a way to control the cloud patterns??
or perhaps they had a time machine in order to get the cloud patterns right? and to import video editing hardware to do the magic required which didnt exist in the 60's.
but ofcourse you have already considered this evidence and well, this evidence just wont do right?

I have not espoused a belief in this, or in that. Rather, I oppose fervent belief and defense of any on sacred pillar of thought.

i missed this part.. but i should point out that you havent been following what sayonara says much have you? because he basically does just this.

SadistNocturne

choos
and basically you are doing the same thing, using innuendo sarcasm to prove something..

I am not doing anything in the effort to actively *prove* anything, other than the fact that I personally feel that there are grey areas. I believe that NOTHING is black and white.

I believe that you have drank the kool-aid, and are just as much as a "believer" as you accuse SayonaraJupiter of being.

Where I herald his focus on the idea that there are areas that don't really add up, you appear to focus on the dogma and the word. You seem to be interested in the Catholic Church aspect of repeating the sermon in latin...where (possibly) the clergy and the constituents of the church are not fluent in the dead language that latin is.

It is often said, is it not, that by simply repeating something over and over and over and over and over, that it becomes true, no?

I have not espoused a belief in this, or in that. Rather, I oppose fervent belief and defense of any on sacred pillar of thought. I see that as cancerous thought, as something that should be cut out and removed for the health of the being. A healthy mind stays open to new currents of thought. Reviews things when new topics or facts come to life...even new perspectives.

Label me away...go ahead, I truly could care less.

And btw, for what it is worth...innuendo is an excellent tool to make others think about something. Sacrcasm, well, it merely serves to underscore what I see as being downright funny. And in this case, it is the religious adherence to "the bible" line and verse. Yepp, pretty frakking funny if you ask me. Elicits a hearty chuckle each and EVERY time I read your posts. So please, post on!

but that doesnt cut it in the scientific community, it will in the HB community because as you suggest they have the "group think" mentality, if you look at the evidence in this thread

Evidence. Evidence that is hoarded by one governmental agency with reasons to keep the status quo.

Sure, tout your evidence. Believe it. Go for it. Have a great time.

There are actions that need to occur before we have the whole story. And until I have the whole story, I am not ignorant nor arrogant enough to believe that I personally can pass judgement on anything.

, HB dont need evidence to be convinced of the hoax, they just need like minds..

I hope to hell you're nowhere near my children, because you're one scary #$%#%^%^ in my humble opinion.

And btw, WTF does HB stand for ? Educate me, please

(I figure everyone should hear something once in their life)



Ciao, and let's just call this conversation over, shall we? I honestly don't feel you have anything new to offer me that I have not already read of your own words...


- SN

edit on 29-9-2013 by SadistNocturne because: Becuase I am open to the angles...new and old....

So, despite believing that nothing is black and white you are quite happy to believe that anyone whose point of view you are not happy with must be victims of some pseudo-religious fervour? You're also quite happy for SayonaraJupiter to believe that all the evils in the world are a direct result of a disgraced former US president and to stick to that story no matter what?

How's this for a new idea you can explore and entertain: Apollo happened exactly as described, and all the information about the missions and the research data it produced is publicly available. Nothing is hoarded, nothing has been kept secret.

Not all of the evidence supporting Apollo is produced by NASA - they really don't are if you believe in it or not. Lots of analysis has been done by people like me, doing their own investigations not because they drank the kool-aid, but to prove that HBs, the people who wrongly claim Apollo was hoaxed, are wrong. Try entertaining that idea for while.

The reasons things get repeated a lot is not to force a story to stick but because the story is true.

reply to post by dragonridr

i think you were imagining things ill make it easy for you.

I am rejecting the video you posted because it is not a credible source. Posting the anonymous youtube video of Apollo proves not a thing. Hopelessly imagining things now, aren't you.

Don't you realize how easy it is to mix and match the Apollo films and Apollo voice recordings? Or voice recordings from training sessions? Or maybe voice recordings from a Nevada desert?

Now, the screen capture I posted was taken right off the LPI website and it is from a digitalized version of "Apollo 11:For All Mankind" that I streamed directly from that website. I consider my source to be more credible than your source.

I would not be surprised if the earliest and best prints of this film are lost... lost forever.... like telemetry tapes.

onebigmonkey

How's this for a new idea you can explore and entertain: Apollo happened exactly as described, and all the information about the missions and the research data it produced is publicly available. Nothing is hoarded, nothing has been kept secret.

So....

How about divorcing yourself from that obvious love of hearing your own voice (albeit, typed) and just ignore obvious simpletons such as myself and SayonaraJupiter?


Wouldn't life be so much more serene in the long run that way ?

Oh, but I must have forgotten...it's because you are desperately clinging to dogma....

Let that poor dog run!!!! Let it go!!!!





- SN

Dragon, Where did all the color go in your source material? I put my screen capture next to what you found in that youtube video.


add thumb link

No one answered my question, so allow me to extend the question to everyone in this thread:

Moduli
Serious question--do you really believe that millions of physicists and engineers, the kind of people who would understand in great detail how this should look, over the course of forty years have all missed this? And you and other conspiracy people are the only ones to have noticed it?

You really think that it's more likely that all of the physicists and engineers of the world have failed at basic physics, than that you have?

Do you think that we've all been paid off? Do you think that we somehow lack the basic physics knowledge that somehow only you have?

I really want to know this! How do you think it is that literally millions of scientists, over 40 years, haven't picked up on this, but you have?

SadistNocturne
I am not doing anything in the effort to actively *prove* anything, other than the fact that I personally feel that there are grey areas. I believe that NOTHING is black and white.

Personal feelings don't prove anything, but they can be the driving force which causes us to learn.

I disagree with your assessment that "nothing is black and white, but that everything has 'grey areas'." (My restatement of your quote) Take for example: 2 + 2 = 4 . Where is the "grey" area in this statement. It is a fundamental statement and can be considered as a black and white statement. In other words it is a "True" statement.

SadistNocturne
I have not espoused a belief in this, or in that. Rather, I oppose fervent belief and defense of any on sacred pillar of thought. I see that as cancerous thought, as something that should be cut out and removed for the health of the being. A healthy mind stays open to new currents of thought. Reviews things when new topics or facts come to life...even new perspectives.

Let's look at an example of a "sacred pillar" that is being attacked today in our schools (a place of learning?)

Johnny gets his spelling test back and finds several words that have been highlighted and asks the teacher why these words: u, br, pls, tnx, were highlighted?

"Well, Johnny, while you may use these spellings for texting, it is preferred that you use the longer spelling for "you", "bathroom", "please", and "thanks". I greatly appreciate your efforts and so I am giving you a 100% for your grade."

Of course the new approach in teaching is that we "must not" damage the ego or spirit of the child, so no matter how badly the child may misspell a word, they cannot receive a red mark!

Seems there are those, for what ever reason, that are attempting to do the same thing when it comes to the facts of Apollo's history. This includes all HBs (Hoax Believers).

This "sacred pillar" as you call it, is based on verifiable science. Are there gray areas? Yes, but most of it can be explained with the available data, no matter what the source. This is why, HBs come up against this stone wall so often. The answers are "Black and White" based on scientific evidence which cannot be refuted no matter how much someone says "it is not true" or "it doesn't look right" or "I found an anomaly in . . .". Here is a good example: Apollo 14 SEQ Bay Pendulum Analysis

This video shows the accidental Apollo 14 SEQ Bay Pendulum Analysis that can be replicated by anyone that has the means and desire. It is simple physics. Empirical evidence that man has been on the Moon! Do you know the difference between weight and mass?

SadistNocturne
And btw, WTF does HB stand for ? Educate me, please

See Above ^ ^

reply to post by SayonaraJupiter


The u tube video was from a network broadcast live from Houston. you really dont understand how poor there live video was in the 60s. Color telivision was a new invention at that time most Americans didnt even have one. One of the characteristics of early television broadcasts is they were very dark, vibrant colors were difficult to show because when they did the picture became so bright you would end up with white out. So the contrast was all ways kept low so people wouldnt be looking at a white screen.Now i dont know if your aware of this but every major network had reporters and video equipment right there at mission control they watched the whole thing. So dont you think they would have noticed something odd with the monitors?

GibboriumHere is a good example: Apollo 14 SEQ Bay Pendulum Analysis

This video shows the accidental Apollo 14 SEQ Bay Pendulum Analysis that can be replicated by anyone that has the means and desire. It is simple physics. Empirical evidence that man has been on the Moon! Do you know the difference between weight and mass?

Ooh, that's a good video! It's nice to see some video proof that just slowing down the footage is ridiculous.

GibboriumSee above post...

I appreciate the tone you took in looking to make your statement to me. I do.

I disagree that there are no grey areas.

I agree that there is a definitive problem in the way we are teaching children today. I intend to stand over my daughter with a ruler as she is typing and enforce the ability to KNOW what proper spelling and grammar is. Choosing not to use it is one thing, but knowing the difference, and being able to express yourself appropriately when the time calls for it is entirely another. Also, the idea that children are not given negative marks for fear of damaging their ego...wow. I intend to crush my daughter's ego where appropriate, and inflate it where appropriate as well. All in all, it is appropriate. This is life.

I also disagree with your putting those who simply notice anomalies and posit "what if's" or "Is it really?" questions with children being coddled in their attempted learning of science. I beg differ, in as much as I personally am an intelligent person. I have read reports on the topic. I am fully aware of the ramifications of what questioning what I question. I am intelligent enough to understand that those far more experienced in their respective fields have declared these things to be true.

However, I feel there is a bit of a shell game at foot. I will not be intellectually cowered into not acknowledging it. Nor will I be bullied. Not that you are attempting to do so, but the rest of the forum and the world at large does *I* will hold onto my questions until I feel that they are satisfactorily answered.

Notice I have not once said I believe that the moon landing was hoaxed? I did not say this ever, not once.

Much as I do not see things in black & white, I accuse your side of being capable of ONLY seeing things in black & white. Surely, if I ask questions, and therefore not accept the "accepted facts" wholeheartedly, I must be a HB, mustn't I ?

Do you see the fallacy here?

I am simply asking questions on areas where I do not feel satisfied intellectually.

I believe that at the end of the day, SayonaraJupiter believes the exact same thing I do, however I will not put words in his mouth.


Thanks for your post


- SN

This is one of those topics that keeps coming back and refuses to die.

There's zero evidence to support a moon landing hoax that is credible or makes any sense.. there is however a mountain of evidence that we did in fact go to the moon.

Furthermore, the communications with the crew of the moon missions were picked up by the likes of Russia ( and ham radio enthusiast ), who was competing with us in the space race. Russia has confirmed the moon landing, they monitored the missions!

Also, many countries including Russia, China and I believe even India have spotted the tracks on the moon, the lander, the flag, the foot prints.. all of it can be seen with their various satellites

Russia is not our best friend, they would have NO reason to be part of a US moon landing hoax, if we faked it they would have called us out..

reply to post by SadistNocturne


I can't speak for everyone, but I (just like you) don't take any piece of moon landing evidence for granted, either, just because someone has told me that the evidence is true. I look at the alleged evidence that supports the landings as being real, and the alleged evidence that supports the hoax, and I examine that evidence, and I form my opinion based on that examination.

Because of this, I can speak to that evidence and tell you why (using critical thinking, common science knowledge, common engineering knowledge, and logic) why I think the evidence shows that we went to the Moon...AND I can use those same measures to debunk the claims of photographic anomalies or claims of anomalies in the Apollo engineering, or claims that the radiation is too deadly.

On the other hand, Sayonora Jupiter deals with innuendo and speculation that he does not really back up with using critical thinking, common science knowledge, common engineering knowledge, and logic. The evidence he uses to corroborate his claims is simply more innuendo and speculation.

No matter what the case, someone could always throw out speculation and innuendo against a idea. However, at some point the hard evidence is more overwhelming in support of an idea than the speculation is against that idea. That is the case for the idea that we went to the Moon.


SadistNocturne-
I'd like to ask you what specific issues do you have with the Moon landing that has you questioning it?

reply to post by SadistNocturne


Thank you for understanding I was trying to be careful to not put you down, but to demonstrate the frustration many Moon landing supporters have that post in the Apollo threads. Most, and I say that with a bit of hesitation, HBs have some kind of an agenda and are ready to hold to their belief no matter what the consequences. This tenacity to hold onto an unsound premise or theory is usually why "believers" seem to come across dogmatically in their answers. If one wanted to do the searching, I would venture a guess there are probably thousands of threads that have had Apollo moon landing discussions in them.

You will find, there are many proponents of NASA who are very willing to have a civil dialogue and will give you good information if you are open to what they are presenting. However, there are those nay-sayers who will look at the empirical evidence and "move the goal posts" and claim they can't accept what is being given because it comes from NASA. Give them evidence from non NASA sources and the goal posts are moved again and now these agencies have been bought out, or threatened, or whatever and cannot be trusted.

In short, after years of answering the same questions over and over can cause one to become dogmatic. It is not wrong to question and to seek the truth. It is something else however to be shown irrefutable evidence and continue to argue against it simply because you are trying to garner hits for your Youtube account. I won't mention any names but this thread:

Young Aussie genius whipping NASA in Moon Hoax Debate!

Is good evidence of that very thing.

Keep asking honest questions and you will be given honest answers!