Disclosure of the moon landing hoax.

FoosM

Since you never have been to the moon, you dont know what it really looks like, do you?
So what detail are you exactly talking about?

You have never been either, so you are similarly unqualified to judge what is real and what isn't.

However as you won't like that argument I'll point out that I have seen better detail through my own telescope than the models used in the simulators, and the best photographs of the lunar surface available at the time (from the Lunar Orbiter series) did not show the details visible in the Apollo photographs that can also be seen in the LRO photographs.

Seeing the starry constellations in the photos... Oh wait.

Oh dear oh dear, are people still really churning out that nonsense? Apollo astronauts took many many photographs of stars and planets, the latter proving that they were exactly where they said they were.

Some reading for you onebigmonkey.comoj.com...

Actually, neither could NASA, as they failed to demonstrate it in their videos and films.
Astronaut could barely, jump, or hit a golf ball or throw a javelin any farther than if they were on Earth.

Nonsense, the 16mm and live TV evidence proves otherwise. Try wearing a full space suit and see how far you can hit a golf ball one handed with a makeshift club or thrown a piece of equipment. Let's see how high you can jump in a space suit. You're right though, they couldn't simulate the effect of zero and lunar gravity as it is shown in the footage - they didn't have to because they were in space and on the moon.

No, you use special effects for that. Animations, compositions, etc.

Ooooh do tell, which special effects and animations and compositions did they use? Who did them? Where? When? Show me a specific piece of footage that you claim has a special effect in it and detail exactly (and i mean exactly) how it was done.

How? They had Satellites that were taking photos of the Earth.
Those Satellites didn't have to be in LEO. Why do fail to see it?
Im sure you have just as hard of a time understanding magic tricks when
explained to you.

Go back and re-read my original post that points out who badly wrong your argument is. The only satellites in geostationary orbit capable of taking images of Earth did not take colour photographs and did not cover the entire lunar surface. You're just saying "I don't believe it" and providing nothing else apart from ad hominems.

Whats worse, you don't even challenge yourself to figure it out on your own!
You just sit there and accept it. Asking for others to do the brainwork for you.
Thats why you can get fooled over and over again.
You don't question.

Garbage, don't make assumptions. Read my website and you'll see how much figuring out I did on my own, no help from anyone else. The brainwork is all mine, no-one helped me with it, no-one did my research for me, no-one provided me with information to use. How about you?

Try it once.
Look at the photos and ask yourself how they could be faked.
You might be surprised what you come up with.

I have looked at every single Apollo photograph more times than you can count. I have watched all the video. I have examined everything in them in the context of mission transcripts and timelines, science reports and journal articles. I've also spent a lot of my own money buying contemporary resources to prove that the photos and footage are not some recent inventions. What effort have you put in?

What I came up with is that the photographs are undeniably and irrefutably genuine, and listening to basement keyboard warriors tell me that they aren't with absolutely no arguments of their own to back it up does not change that. You just sitting there saying "well I just know they faked it, so they must have used something to fake it" is not a valid counter-argument.

Apollo photographs of Earth show weather patterns absolutely and totally consistent with the time they were taken. They show the landmasses exactly where they should be. They show the Earth's terminator exactly where it should be. They even show a viewing angle entirely consistent with being taken in space on the way to the Moon and not in LEO. Apollo photographs show areas of the moon that could not have been taken from Earth. Apollo photographs 16mm footage and live TV show surface features that could only have been known about by being there. The positions of the lunar terminator exactly matches where it should be and changes in the photographs exactly as it should over the course of each mission. The position of stars and planets in Apollo photographs are exactly correct for the time and location in which they were taken.

All the above is on my site. Go read it.

The pro-Apollo argument has all that before it even gets to the samples, the transmitted data, the telemetry, the laser retroreflectors.

What do you have other than incredulity and a lack of knowledge and understanding of the program of which your so critical?

Try thinking for yourself instead of regurgitating wholesale the arguments of people like Jarrah White and his cohort of fraudsters and you just might see the light.

onebigmonkey
Try thinking for yourself instead of regurgitating wholesale the arguments of people like Jarrah White and his cohort of fraudsters and you just might see the light.

OBM, Don't allow yourself to debase your opponents. Remember, you are not only speaking to the opponent, you are speaking to the thread and everyone who reads it, now and in the years to come.

If the 6 moon landings were going so successfully, and Wernher von Braun had plans to get to Mars in the 1980's, and no humans have been outside of low earth orbit since December 19, 1972... there is no reason to stop going.

Space is like a stream and the moon is the first stepping stone. When has humanity ever been stopped from going places? When has humanity ever stopped trying to cross that next river or ocean? When does humanity say "Oops that's too hard"?

Did Lewis & Clarke say "Oops that's too hard, let's turn back and wait 43 years?"
Did Columbus turn back?
Did Alexander the Great turn back?

December 19, 1972
December 19, 1972
December 19, 1972
December 19, 1972
December 19, 1972

Let that date sink into your brain Apollo Defenders because that is the date of splashdown for Apollo 17. That's the last time any human beings were outside of the earth radiation belts.

Richard Nixon was president of the USA on December 19, 1972. Richard Nixon had 'delicate' financial relations with Howard Hughes. And it was a Hughes scientist James Fletcher who was NASA administrator for Apollo's 15, 16, and 17.

And then Nixon ordered the cancellation of Apollo and encumbered NASA to the Space Shuttle for the next 40 years, appointing a Howard Hughes scientist to oversee the coverup (1971-1977). How conveniently the Apollo Defenders ignore the facts.

I believe in the inner earth. Also i dont really believe in the landing c: Everything can be faked you know. There is also the possibility they were in space, but on a fake platform. Honestly im one of the people that if they dont land on moon and walk by himself for at least 2-3 hours , He will never believe

If you can prove they didnt use allien tehnology to fake it , or you havent been to the moon yourself, dint try to convince me otherwise.

ZeroFurrbone
I believe in the inner earth. Also i dont really believe in the landing c: Everything can be faked you know. There is also the possibility they were in space, but on a fake platform. Honestly im one of the people that if they dont land on moon and walk by himself for at least 2-3 hours , He will never believe

If you can prove they didnt use allien tehnology to fake it , or you havent been to the moon yourself, dint try to convince me otherwise.

question..

if they used alien technology to fake it, why didnt they use alien technology to get man to the moon?

SayonaraJupiter

Space is like a stream and the moon is the first stepping stone. When has humanity ever been stopped from going places? When has humanity ever stopped trying to cross that next river or ocean? When does humanity say "Oops that's too hard"?

you should watch the documentary "Who Killed the Electric Car"..

SayonaraJupiter
Did Alexander the Great turn back?

that is a very poor example you have picked out for yourself..
Alexander was sort of forced to stop by his own troops.. after defeating the first major indian province his army was too afraid to continue on since the defeated army was small in comparison to what lay ahead and Alexander had taken larger than normal losses.

He wanted to conquer India but his troops did not. so umm yes, he did turn back.

SayonaraJupiter
Richard Nixon was president of the USA on December 19, 1972. Richard Nixon had 'delicate' financial relations with Howard Hughes. And it was a Hughes scientist James Fletcher who was NASA administrator for Apollo's 15, 16, and 17.

so NASA which had been researching and developing real rockets based on real science to fly man to the moon long before nixon was in office, had built the infrastructure to support the real rockets long before nixon was in office, had started building real rockets based on real science to fly man to the moon long before nixon was in office..

then all of a sudden decided to fake it, as well as launch the real stuff, in less than 6 months because nixon was in office..

choos

SayonaraJupiter

Space is like a stream and the moon is the first stepping stone. When has humanity ever been stopped from going places? When has humanity ever stopped trying to cross that next river or ocean? When does humanity say "Oops that's too hard"?

you should watch the documentary "Who Killed the Electric Car"..

SayonaraJupiter
Did Alexander the Great turn back?

that is a very poor example you have picked out for yourself..
Alexander was sort of forced to stop by his own troops.. after defeating the first major indian province his army was too afraid to continue on since the defeated army was small in comparison to what lay ahead and Alexander had taken larger than normal losses.

He wanted to conquer India but his troops did not. so umm yes, he did turn back.

edit on 9-4-2014 by choos because: (no reason given)

What does that mean in the context of Apollo disclosure? Wernher von Braun had plans for Mars in the 1980's. Are you saying that technology has been suppressed?

Was NASA getting ideas from Hollywood?

What role did Stanley Kubrick really play in Apollo?

Apollo 15 named their lunar module after the falcon. Dave Scott is also famous for his 'hammer & falcon feather' trick.



Jim Irwin worked on the AIM-47 guided missile, a product known as Falcon missile, developed by Hughes Aircraft. en.wikipedia.org...

SayonaraJupiter

What does that mean in the context of Apollo disclosure? Wernher von Braun had plans for Mars in the 1980's. Are you saying that technology has been suppressed?

edit on 4/9/2014 by SayonaraJupiter because: (no reason given)

nope.. you asked

SayonaraJupiter
When has humanity ever been stopped from going places? When has humanity ever stopped trying to cross that next river or ocean? When does humanity say "Oops that's too hard"?

the electric car was theoretically the next step, and they killed it in the 80's or something if i remember right (cant remember who).. you wanted examples i gave you examples..

you asked

SayonaraJupiter
Did Alexander the Great turn back?

yes, he did turn back..

does it come as such a shock to you that people do things that you dont expect that you must claim it was a hoax??

SayonaraJupiter
Apollo 15 named their lunar module after the falcon. Dave Scott is also famous for his 'hammer & falcon feather' trick.

Jim Irwin worked on the AIM-47 guided missile, a product known as Falcon missile, developed by Hughes Aircraft. en.wikipedia.org...

you suggesting the AIM-47 guided missile was a hoax??

SayonaraJupiter
What role did Stanley Kubrick really play in Apollo?

None whatsoever.

Next.

choos

SayonaraJupiter
Apollo 15 named their lunar module after the falcon. Dave Scott is also famous for his 'hammer & falcon feather' trick.

Jim Irwin worked on the AIM-47 guided missile, a product known as Falcon missile, developed by Hughes Aircraft. en.wikipedia.org...

you suggesting the AIM-47 guided missile was a hoax??

No, I'm suggesting that Howard Hughes baked you an Apollo cake and you keep eating it up. And that the name "Falcon" given to the Apollo 15 module was an homage to the missiles work Jim Irwin (under cover, I might add) was doing for HH.

Also, Apollo 15 was the first of three missions under new NASA administrator James Fletcher, a Hughes scientist from Utah and a Mormon, which adds significantly to my Nixon-Apollo theory and doesn't help your theory one bit.

December 19, 1972, a day which will live in infamy.

Apollo 15 are also the team that had money connections to Hughes employees in the Apollo 15 stamp/envelope controversy, you know, when Chris Kraft fired his 3 astros for breaking the rules.

onebigmonkey

SayonaraJupiter
What role did Stanley Kubrick really play in Apollo?

None whatsoever.

Next.

But the photos don't lie.

reply to post by SayonaraJupiter

Space is like a stream and the moon is the first stepping stone. When has humanity ever been stopped from going places? When has humanity ever stopped trying to cross that next river or ocean? When does humanity say "Oops that's too hard"?

Did Lewis & Clarke say "Oops that's too hard, let's turn back and wait 43 years?" Did Columbus turn back? Did Alexander the Great turn back?

That was most edifying, thank you.

2nd

reply to post by Bybyots

The Apollo program had as its primary goal landing men on the moon before the Soviets. It completed its goal and nobody with two brain cells to rub together denies that fact. Spending tens of billions on keeping on going back to the moon once they'd already been six times and comprehensively won the race is rather less of a vote winner than beating the Russkies there in the first place.

Life isn't a movie. It doesn't have to follow a clean narrative arc. Priorities change. Men walked on the moon and not a single piece of evidence in 200+ pages of this thread casts even the tiniest bit of doubt on that.

I'd love manned missions to resume, but the reason they don't exist today is purely political and financial rather than technical. Even so I'm pretty confident that most of the people reading this thread will see manned moon landings within their lifetimes. And when they do they will see that the hoax theorists are a bunch of money-grubbing charlatans.

reply to post by Rob48


I think that truth is more magnanimous than what you seem to be suggesting. I think both sides are due for a swift kick in the nuts.

I believe that we have been to the Moon, I also believe that any time that we attribute engineering feats that we don't have the firepower to understand to anyone other than ourselves we are insulting the human race in the worst possible way.

But, I agree with SayonaraJupiter in that our not returning to the Moon and what it may signify seems to fly in the face of what really makes us human. It seems to me that whatever it is that truth has ion store for us it will include an explanation of why we haven't been back.

Thanks for your response and have a great day. No need to loop back on the politics and financial hurdles, on most days I default to that explanation myself.

Rob48
reply to post by Bybyots

 

The Apollo program had as its primary goal landing men on the moon before the Soviets. It completed its goal and nobody with two brain cells to rub together denies that fact. Spending tens of billions on keeping on going back to the moon once they'd already been six times and comprehensively won the race is rather less of a vote winner than beating the Russkies there in the first place.

Life isn't a movie. It doesn't have to follow a clean narrative arc. Priorities change. Men walked on the moon and not a single piece of evidence in 200+ pages of this thread casts even the tiniest bit of doubt on that.

I'd love manned missions to resume, but the reason they don't exist today is purely political and financial rather than technical. Even so I'm pretty confident that most of the people reading this thread will see manned moon landings within their lifetimes. And when they do they will see that the hoax theorists are a bunch of money-grubbing charlatans.

Sad really we spend money on defense and government programs designed to make government bigger. Yet we spens very little on arts and science as a nation. There are not immediate benefits and very little profit. The only way we are going tomove back out into space is forit to become profitable or again an issue of national security. If someone where to try to colonize mars i would see it become a priority for the US once again. As for now congress just sees NASA as trivial and doesnt need funding. Every effort to increase there budget had been denied with the exception of oddly Bush but when obama took over he again cut funding.

SayonaraJupiter

No, I'm suggesting that Howard Hughes baked you an Apollo cake and you keep eating it up. And that the name "Falcon" given to the Apollo 15 module was an homage to the missiles work Jim Irwin (under cover, I might add) was doing for HH.

Also, Apollo 15 was the first of three missions under new NASA administrator James Fletcher, a Hughes scientist from Utah and a Mormon, which adds significantly to my Nixon-Apollo theory and doesn't help your theory one bit.

December 19, 1972, a day which will live in infamy.

Apollo 15 are also the team that had money connections to Hughes employees in the Apollo 15 stamp/envelope controversy, you know, when Chris Kraft fired his 3 astros for breaking the rules.

ok, so why did you bring up the AIM-47??

add to your Nixon apollo theory?????

what theory exactly?? the theory that Nixon shows up and in about 6 months was able to fake the lunar landings (even though NASA has spent billions on researching and building the real rockets, building the infrastructure, to send real men to the moon long before Nixon had any real power)

and in the space of about 6 months Nixon and howard hughes single handedly built super advanced remotely controlled bi-pedal/tracked transforming mobots just to setup the lunar landscape (even though 40 years later ASU would have to photoshop the LRO pictures making the super advanced ... mobots completely useless)

all of this because Nixon likes to watch movies..

Nixon so godly he can fake the moon landings with impossible techniques and time restrictions, while creating useless machines that would create a landscape for no reason as its going to be photoshopped 40+ years later anyway..

but not godly enough to hide a break-in..

SayonaraJupiter

onebigmonkey

SayonaraJupiter
What role did Stanley Kubrick really play in Apollo?

None whatsoever.

Next.

But the photos don't lie.

the photos dont lie??? whats this?? double standards from SayonaraJupiter??

no it cant be..

hey lets play a game.. why dont you tell me who took that photo?? if you cant tell me who took that photo do i have the right to say its fake?? i know you have made such claims before..