Disclosure of the moon landing hoax.

originally posted by: SayonaraJupiter

Astronaut's joystick used for Apollo moon landing tops half a million at auction

May 23, 2014 — The joystick controller used by astronaut David Scott to land Apollo 15's lunar module on the moon 43 years ago this July has sold for more than half a million dollars.

The sale is believed to be the highest price ever paid at a public auction for part of a NASA spacecraft.

RR Auction of Boston sold the spacecraft's rotational hand controller for $610,064 to an unidentified online bidder on Thursday evening (May 22). www.collectspace.com...

Man im upset never had anyone offer me 500000 for my joystick. Anyway i guess thats what happens when you go to the moon ive seen the axe commercials.

By the way when are we going to get back to discussing apollo ?? Though i enjoy the random history updates being great for trivia this isnt really the thread for it.

Have you started batting for the other team, SJ?

Seems to me, if the joystick wasn't used to land on the moon, it would just be a joystick and certainly wouldn't be worth half a million. What was your point, again?

a reply to: Rob48
Have you started batting for the other team, SJ?

He must realize by now that the argument thats the Russians would of told the world that Apollo was a hoax is nothing but a red herring.... That is not the way the spy game is played...you dont tell your enemies what you know & dont know ,,you try to find out more & use it for other nefarious purposes , not just give it away for free...


Why didn't the Russians expose that Hughes was probing the 4th dimension through the Moon PooL...

This video proves that propaganda pieces were being filmed & released to the public under the guise of scientific research during the apollo era, as part of a coverup,, just as an Apollo hoax would of been



I'd like to discuss other aspects of Apollo but,, If your unwilling to take the fallacy that the Russians would of exposed the Hoax argument off the table,, then you've lost all objectivity , & become nothing more than another propagandist....

a reply to: Misinformation

The story of the Glomar Explorer became publicly known about 8 months after the salvage operation. It really isn't an apples to apples analogy.

As for the Soviets spilling the beans on the project -- maybe they did; maybe they had a hand in it becoming known to the public. However, that would just be wild speculation, and I have no evidence indicting that happened...

A more likely scenario may also be that the Soviets were fine keeping the salvage operation a secret because they didn't want the world to know they lost a submarine full of nuclear missiles and just left it lying there for 6 years.

As for the Americans, they may have wanted the loss of the Russian sub to be kept secret because (1) maybe they realized right after the Sub sunk that they had an opportunity to recover it, and/or (2) They also didn't want the public knowing that this sort of stuff could happen -- i.e., a sub full of nuclear warheads being sunk to the point that the warheads are just left lying there in the ocean.

originally posted by: Misinformation

a reply to: Rob48
Have you started batting for the other team, SJ?

He must realize by now that the argument thats the Russians would of told the world that Apollo was a hoax is nothing but a red herring.... That is not the way the spy game is played...you dont tell your enemies what you know & dont know ,,you try to find out more & use it for other nefarious purposes , not just give it away for free...


Why didn't the Russians expose that Hughes was probing the 4th dimension through the Moon PooL...

Because he wasn't "probing the 4th dimension", he was helping to recover a wrecked Soviet submarine, under the guise of a deep-sea mining operation. Where does this "4th dimension" idea come from?

And more importantly, what on Earth does a secret CIA mission to recover a Commie sub (which wasn't actually all that secret given that the New York Times knew about it within weeks) have to do with Apollo?

I'd like to discuss other aspects of Apollo but,, If your unwilling to take the fallacy that the Russians would of exposed the Hoax argument off the table,, then you've lost all objectivity , & become nothing more than another propagandist....

I'm quite happy to ignore that argument. Taking the fact that the Russians would have exposed any hoax off the table still leaves, at a rough guess, about 99.99% of the evidence for the moon landings intact. Which bit do you want to tackle first?

originally posted by: Soylent Green Is People
a reply to: Misinformation

The story of the Glomar Explorer became publicly known about 8 months after the salvage operation. It really isn't an apples to apples analogy.

As for the Soviets spilling the beans on the project -- maybe they did; maybe they had a hand in it becoming known to the public. However, that would just be wild speculation, and I have no evidence indicting that happened...

A more likely scenario may also be that the Soviets were fine keeping the salvage operation a secret because they didn't want the world to know they lost a submarine full of nuclear missiles and just left it lying there for 6 years.

As for the Americans, they may have wanted the loss of the Russian sub to be kept secret because (1) maybe they realized right after the Sub sunk that they had an opportunity to recover it, and/or (2) They also didn't want the public knowing that this sort of stuff could happen -- i.e., a sub full of nuclear warheads being sunk to the point that the warheads are just left lying there in the ocean.

So what your saying something as small as keeping a salvage operation secret and the US government couldnt manage that? Hmmmm yet somehow they managed to keep faking the moon landing a secret for decades. We have a president in the white house outing CIA agents im pretty sure the US government is incapable of keeping big secrets.

a reply to: dragonridr

So what your saying something as small as keeping a salvage operation secret and the US government couldnt manage that? Hmmmm yet somehow they managed to keep faking the moon landing a secret for decades. We have a president in the white house outing CIA agents im pretty sure the US government is incapable of keeping big secrets.

Perhaps you should look at the research of Charles Vick at globalsecurity.org he proved that NPIC/NRO/CIA are very capable of keeping secret satellite images from the 1960's. Vick is the #1 researcher in the world on Soviet space history, the N-1 article on astronautix.com was taken largely from his research.

Vick has shown in his 20 years of research that the US government is very capable of keeping secrets for 40+ years.

It seems clear to me that the US government has something to hide on the moon.

originally posted by: SayonaraJupiter
a reply to: dragonridr

So what your saying something as small as keeping a salvage operation secret and the US government couldnt manage that? Hmmmm yet somehow they managed to keep faking the moon landing a secret for decades. We have a president in the white house outing CIA agents im pretty sure the US government is incapable of keeping big secrets.

Perhaps you should look at the research of Charles Vick at globalsecurity.org he proved that NPIC/NRO/CIA are very capable of keeping secret satellite images from the 1960's. Vick is the #1 researcher in the world on Soviet space history, the N-1 article on astronautix.com was taken largely from his research.

Vick has shown in his 20 years of research that the US government is very capable of keeping secrets for 40+ years.

It seems clear to me that the US government has something to hide on the moon.

So how can they keep a secret when other nations send probes and map the moon is there a cloaking device? Hiding something on the moon is impossible unless other nations were in on it. And well at least it seems you agree they went to the moon because if they didnt go than how can they hide something so at least your making progress.

a reply to: Misinformation

He must realize by now that the argument thats the Russians would of told the world that Apollo was a hoax is nothing but a red herring.... That is not the way the spy game is played...you dont tell your enemies what you know & dont know ,,you try to find out more & use it for other nefarious purposes , not just give it away for free...

Exactly. Nixon was a superb high stakes poker player. Howard Hughes owns half the casinos in Las Vegas. The spy game is played in much the same way... bluffing, raising the stakes, raking in the pot, stacking the deck...

As a high roller, someone like Frank Sinatra or Dean Martin, comes to the Desert Inn (or one of Howard's many casinos between 1966-1976) and loses perhaps as much as $100,000 playing craps (on house credit)... over the course of 2 or 3 nights... but a briefcase can be stuffed with $100,000 cash money and delivered to BeBe Rebozo for use by Richard Nixon at a moments notice.

Howard Hughes moved into Las Vegas on Thanksgiving 1966 and he stayed in that hotel (Desert Inn) for exactly 4 years. Robert Maheu was Hughes' #2 man during that whole time and Iron Bob 'IBM' Maheu never ever saw Howard Hughes face to face. Not even once.

When the Nevada Gaming Commission came looking for Howard Hughes... he went on the run.

When the Watergate/Bay of Pigs mercenaries were caught red handed in the Watergate building... Howard was already on the run an Richard Nixon also understood that the game was up.

Apollo fits in many conspiracies because Hughes built the Surveyors and Hughes had robots with TV camera eyes and Hughes had satellites... Howard Hughes had everything at his disposal and was entirely capable of pulling a hoax of this scale and magnitude. Let us not forget the ample references to hoaxing as illustrated by the Clifford Irving hoax affair which resulted in the Howard Hughes remote press conference which is a total hoax because nobody has seen Howard since 1966 at least!

The Apollo Defenders are trapped by history.... Richard Nixon's presidency.... Surveyor... Mobots.... Howard Hughes... trapped by history they are from December 1968- December 1972.

4 years.

+_+ Awesome avatar you have!

a reply to: SayonaraJupiter

If anyone is trapped by history, it is the people who are denying the reality of a documented historical event, ie you and your dwindling band of hoax believers.

When was the last time you presented an actual piece of evidence related to the moon?

Or anyone for that matter.

Turbonium appears to have abandoned his flawed concept of one-sixth gravity and tying wires onto dust particles.

Cestrup claimed to have an explanation for how the 3-D landscape of Taurus-Littrow was faked in dozens of consistent photographs, but that has yet to appear. (I'll gloss over his attempted sidetrack into Sibrel land, because that didn't go at all well.)

Even FoosM seems to have given up his hero-worship of the Wonder from Down Under after it was shown that, even by his usual standards, his latest video was a comedy of errors.

So what are we left with? Howard Hughes and his Kleenex-covered hotel room, and now for some reason a bungled CIA mission to recover a Soviet sub that they couldn't even hide from a hack at the New York Times.

And all this some 18 months and 250+ pages after we were assured that "disclosure" was imminent. Not looking too good for the Apollo Reviewers, is it?

a reply to: Rob48

When was the last time you presented an actual piece of evidence related to the moon?

More specifically, when was the first time he presented an actual piece of evidence that the lunar landings did not occur?

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Rob48

When was the last time you presented an actual piece of evidence related to the moon?

More specifically, when was the first time he presented an actual piece of evidence that the lunar landings did not occur?

Bring it on. Nobody has the balls but Richard Nixon. History agrees with me.

originally posted by: SayonaraJupiter

Bring it on. Nobody has the balls but Richard Nixon. History agrees with me.

No it doesn't, because Nixon didn't become president until the Apollo program was in full swing. Nixon had nothing to do with it. He became president AFTER men first flew to the moon, and only six months BEFORE they first landed on it.

And the moon landing used the exact same technology that had been developed and tested long before Nixon got his feet under the Oval Office desk. How exactly did Nixon perform a switcheroo and replace the entire genuine Apollo programme with his buddy Howard's top-secret Mobots in the space of six months? Or six weeks if you assume Apollo 9 was also a fake?

It's obvious TPTB will go to great lengths to prevent the hoax from being exposed....

I find it odd that ,the day of 9-11 , it just so happens that information regarding Howard Hughes was suddenly interrupted...

was 9-11 perpetrated to coverup Howard Hughes involvement & prevent the hoax from being exposed...

coincidence...I think not...

a reply to: Soylent Green Is People

Add in the fact that it's entirely possible that it sank attempting to launch on Honolulu, and the last thing the Kremlin would want would be for it to get out.

a reply to: Misinformation

Your kidding right now Howard Huges caused 9/11 you do realize he died in 1976 dont you? Was it his ghost see what happened to this thread its sad people just making random accusations with no actual proof of any conspiracy. See making a claim and showing proof are indeed two different things sadly many dont seem to get that.

a reply to: Rob48

Cestrup claimed to have an explanation for how the 3-D landscape of Taurus-Littrow was faked in dozens of consistent photographs, but that has yet to appear. (I'll gloss over his attempted sidetrack into Sibrel land, because that didn't go at all well.)

no it didn't go well. There wasn't a discussion - that was purely madness and resorted in some pretty cruel posts by even some prominant posters. Apollo is a sacred cow with a dedicated team to defend it from top to bottom. Just this post here will result in some back-handed insult from someone. As to your landscape - when I saw how easily you can fake a black and white moon-scape - there you go. Easy - especially when you control all of the data of rock placement and photography. It's really not that hard IMO

edit to add: so not all of the photos were done with a back drop. Some could have just been done in a desert or beach area here on earth and edited.

originally posted by: Misinformation
It's obvious TPTB will go to great lengths to prevent the hoax from being exposed....

I find it odd that ,the day of 9-11 , it just so happens that information regarding Howard Hughes was suddenly interrupted...

was 9-11 perpetrated to coverup Howard Hughes involvement & prevent the hoax from being exposed...

coincidence...I think not...

Or was 9/11 perpetrated by Sarah Ferguson? We should be told!

NEW YORK — The news came into Matt Lauer’s ear as he interviewed a Howard Hughes biographer on what felt like another slow news day in the summer of shark attacks and Chandra Levy.
“Go to commercial,” “Today” executive producer Jonathan Wald told him tersely. “Breaking news: A plane has hit the World Trade Center.”
That’s all anyone knew at 8:50 a.m. ET on Tuesday, Sept. 11, 2001. “Good Morning America” hurried out of an interview with Sarah Ferguson, CBS’ “The Early Show” cut off a cooking segment.

www.today.com...



It's fun when you don't have to provide any evidence, isn't it?

originally posted by: cestrup
a reply to: Rob48
As to your landscape - when I saw how easily you can fake a black and white moon-scape - there you go. Easy - especially when you control all of the data of rock placement and photography. It's really not that hard IMO

edit to add: so not all of the photos were done with a back drop. Some could have just been done in a desert or beach area here on earth and edited.

Except that it has to be a real landscape that precisely matches the real moon as it was at the time of the landings, and therefore as it is now and as it will be in 50 or 100 years from now. Otherwise, as soon as anybody else visits or takes a photo and finds that it doesn't match, the whole thing would be exposed. And, back in the Apollo era, NASA had no idea how long it would be before anybody else went to the moon.

So, once again, how could the photos be taken in a desert or on a beach on Earth? It would be utterly impossible to landscape dozens of square miles of terrain so that it matches the real moon right down to individual pebbles and footprints.

You seem to be forgetting that all those rocks, all those footprints, all the equipment is STILL THERE, just waiting to be looked at. It all has to match EXACTLY what is shown in all those photographs, otherwise the hoax would be no good. How was that done?

a reply to: Rob48

Except that it has to be a real landscape that precisely matches the real moon as it was at the time of the landings, and therefore as it is now and as it will be in 50 or 100 years from now. Otherwise, as soon as anybody else visits or takes a photo and finds that it doesn't match, the whole thing would be exposed. And, back in the Apollo era, NASA had no idea how long it would be before anybody else went to the moon.

I know, and I can't wait - I'm hoping for some independant moon studies/travel. Like I said - If I'm proven wrong - holy # will that be cool.