Disclosure of the moon landing hoax.

a reply to: onebigmonkey
kindly point out to us where anyone did.

you already know it was editted out,, I suspect you had a MOD do for ya...I gotta hand it to ya...didnt think ya stoop that low...

we arent going to get nowhere if we cant even agree whats allowed as evidence

originally posted by: Soylent Green Is People
a reply to: Ove38
So then what about the DAC footage taken from Apollo 17 in 1972 that matched images taken by the Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter (LRO) 40 years later? What did they use to "fake" that film?

Well the enhanced (fake) movie on the left is quite different from the raw movie on the right, don't you think ?

originally posted by: Misinformation

a reply to: onebigmonkey
kindly point out to us where anyone did.

you already know it was editted out,, I suspect you had a MOD do for ya...I gotta hand it to ya...didnt think ya stoop that low...

we arent going to get nowhere if we cant even agree whats allowed as evidence

Perhaps you are misremembering where you asked me to ignore the argument that the Russians would have pointed out the hoax.

Nobody said anything about not using LRO imagery. I think you are letting your paranoia get the better of you.

a reply to: Rob48

yah..I shot down your "Russians are coming" argument too....

the propagandists that said it should stand up and admit it if hes got any integrity left....
its obvious your not going to take my word for it

originally posted by: onebigmonkey
a reply to: Ove38

1. So how did the 16mm and Hasselblad images get back to Earth?
2. Where was the studio?
3. Who built the studio?
4. Who filmed it?
5. How did they intercut the two sets?
6. How did the set builders on Earth know which rocks and craters needed to be included in the broadcast?
7. How were the audio transmissions sent from the moon?
8. How was the scientific equioment set up?
9. How ere all those samples collected and returned?
10. How did they record the scenes in cislunar space if they weren't in cislunar space?
11. How did TV broadcasts from later missions feature time specific images of Earth?
12. How did astronauts get photographs of themselves with time specific images of Earth?

1. The Hasselblad images never left Earth
2. Pinewood Studios
3. Westbury Design and Optical Ltd (a special effects company at Pinewood Studios)
4. don't know (Stanley Kubrick ?)
5. with tv studio equipment
6. no rocks were seen in the blurry broadcast
7. As Armstrong said "relay transmitter"
8. remote controlled
9. they were from lunar meteorites found on earth
10. They were in cislunar space the whole time
11. Earth was filmed by remote controlled rovers and landers
12. this is just something you made up, out of some fuzzy pictures of earth

originally posted by: Ove38

originally posted by: onebigmonkey
a reply to: Ove38

1. So how did the 16mm and Hasselblad images get back to Earth?
2. Where was the studio?
3. Who built the studio?
4. Who filmed it?
5. How did they intercut the two sets?
6. How did the set builders on Earth know which rocks and craters needed to be included in the broadcast?
7. How were the audio transmissions sent from the moon?
8. How was the scientific equioment set up?
9. How ere all those samples collected and returned?
10. How did they record the scenes in cislunar space if they weren't in cislunar space?
11. How did TV broadcasts from later missions feature time specific images of Earth?
12. How did astronauts get photographs of themselves with time specific images of Earth?

1. The Hasselblad images never left Earth

To take just your first "answer"... Really? These photos were taken at Pinewood Studios and the negatives never left Earth? Funny.

originally posted by: yhin999
a reply to: Ove38
oh God bless America, we are the greatest, lets go get those towlheads.

In case it escaped your attention, I am not American. Neither is onebigmonkey. Neither is HolgertheDane (the clue is in the name).

Where does patriotism come into it exactly?

a reply to: yhin999

I challenge NASA to do it again with multiple HD video cameras broadcast live to the world from before they take off until after they arrive back on Earth showing everything inside and out. Showing the ejecting of the lander from the shuttle and getting it back in again. Showing the rover getting in and out of the lander. Showing the shuttle in orbit. Everything.

originally posted by: Ove38
Well the enhanced (fake) movie on the left is quite different from the raw movie on the right, don't you think ?

Well, yeah. One side is perspective-stablized and enhanced version of the other.
But I'm not sure what the enhancement has anything to do with anything.

The point is that the film is from 1972 and shows the Apollo 17 site -- and the layout of the site seen in the film (including footpaths) matches the photo that was taken 40 years later.

a reply to: Rob48

Jumped on that one fast enough.

originally posted by: yhin999
a reply to: Rob48

Jumped on that one fast enough.

Yes, stupid accusations deserve quick rebuttals.

My opinion of the US government is pretty low. Unlike you, I don't let that prejudice my analysis of scientific data.

And for Ove38: why do you find it OK to believe that back in 1969 they could send advanced robots to the moon to accomplish things that would still be very difficult today, but insist they couldn't fit two human beings in the LM? What is so special about the human cargo?

The gravity on the moon is much less than Earth correct? This does not mean your movements are slowed down. An arm or a leg still moves just as fast as on Earth. You would think one of the astronaughts would jump exceedingly high into the air just for fun but do they? No. That would be like the first thing I would do. PS I love how you know the nationality of other users. This site is bunk.

originally posted by: yhin999
The gravity on the moon is much less than Earth correct? This does not mean your movements are slowed down. An arm or a leg still moves just as fast as on Earth. You would think one of the astronaughts would jump exceedingly high into the air just for fun but do they? No. That would be like the first thing I would do. PS I love how you know the nationality of other users. This site is bunk.

I would agree on that, the slow motion movements are ridiculous. Has ever any of the astronaut said something about or commented the slow motion movements ?

a reply to: yhin999

My reasons for believing that the Moon Hoax conspiracy theory is a bunch of garbage has nothing to do with patriotism. It has to do with looking at the evidence objectively. The evidence supporting a Moon hoax is simply awful. I have yet to see evidence that stands up to logic, critical thinking, science, or an understanding of the technology.

In fact, rather than me believing we went to the moon because of some irrational blind cult-like patriotism, I think many hoax believers irrationally blindly believe in the Moon hoax simply because they WANT to believe in a hoax. It has nothing to do with critical thinking, logic, and science, but rather some blind need to feel as if they "in the know" on some sort of big secret. I think hoax believers want to feel they are somehow special, and believing in something that is so contrarian makes them feel that way.

I think many conspiracy theories can be boiled down to the fact that some people just like to always be contrary. It makes them feel superior.

originally posted by: Soylent Green Is People

originally posted by: Ove38
Well the enhanced (fake) movie on the left is quite different from the raw movie on the right, don't you think ?

Well, yeah. One side is perspective-stablized and enhanced version of the other.
But I'm not sure what the enhancement has anything to do with anything.

The point is that the film is from 1972 and shows the Apollo 17 site -- and the layout of the site seen in the film (including footpaths) matches the photo that was taken 40 years later.

Oh you do not understand that ? there are no "footpaths" in the raw movie on the right !

originally posted by: Ove38

originally posted by: yhin999
The gravity on the moon is much less than Earth correct? This does not mean your movements are slowed down. An arm or a leg still moves just as fast as on Earth. You would think one of the astronaughts would jump exceedingly high into the air just for fun but do they? No. That would be like the first thing I would do. PS I love how you know the nationality of other users. This site is bunk.

I would agree on that, the slow motion movements are ridiculous. Has ever any of the astronaut said something about or commented the slow motion movements ?

The only slow moving things on the Apollo films and videos are falling objects (which is expected due the lower acceleration-due-to-gravity). The rest of the movements are normal speed.

originally posted by: Ove38

originally posted by: Soylent Green Is People

originally posted by: Ove38
Well the enhanced (fake) movie on the left is quite different from the raw movie on the right, don't you think ?

Well, yeah. One side is perspective-stablized and enhanced version of the other.
But I'm not sure what the enhancement has anything to do with anything.

The point is that the film is from 1972 and shows the Apollo 17 site -- and the layout of the site seen in the film (including footpaths) matches the photo that was taken 40 years later.

Oh you do not understand that ? there are no "footpaths" in the raw movie on the right !

Should've gone to Specsavers.

It boggles me the amount of people on this forum that are so passionate about the moon landing being real who are so armed to the teeth with hoax debunking information. I've also noticed a particular tone that is used of righteousness against those that challenge the status qo and I've noticed particular users follow me around ATS wherever I go. Why are skeptics so un skeptical to the mainstream. These guys always have to beat you down and say your stupid. Attack, attack, attack. You can't have an honest debate without them getting all high and mighty with their nickers in a twist. You know what I think? ATS is set up like a magnet for alternative minded people to share their opinions just so these thugs posing as intellectuals can beat them down and mock them and there is way more mainstreamers than alternative which doesn't make sense. Go and watch FOX news if all you are into is status qo sheep fodder. So seriously, who is behind ATS? Is it Masonic? CIA? FBI? What's the deal? Last time I started asking these questions I got banned. Please don't ban me. Seriously please don't. I need to get 20 comments up first because I've got a doozy of a post but I'm not allowed to post yet. It's about time travel and rock n roll. Oh yeah moon landing totally true, for sure.

originally posted by: Misinformation

a reply to: onebigmonkey
kindly point out to us where anyone did.

you already know it was editted out,, I suspect you had a MOD do for ya...I gotta hand it to ya...didnt think ya stoop that low...

we arent going to get nowhere if we cant even agree whats allowed as evidence

So not only am I a liar but one of the moderating team is as well? care to name which one?

You don't get to decide what is acceptable evidence. End of.