The Naked Scientists

The Naked Scientists Forum

Author Topic: Did we land on the moon?  (Read 202859 times)

Offline Cosmored

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 60
    • View Profile
Did we land on the moon?
« Reply #375 on: 25/10/2009 17:42:04 »
Quote
Cosmored,
all your questions (and I mean ALL your questions) are answered in this extensive website:

http://www.clavius.org/index.html
The Clavius site is a governemt damage-control site and all it's regular pro-Apollo posters know that Apollo was a hoax.
 
Jay Windley got caught telling a big lie which is explained here.
http://apollohoax.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=theories&action=display&thread=1094
 
Look at reply #386 here.
http://apollohoax.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=theories&action=display&thread=1009&page=26#29354
 
Now look at the 3rd and 6th posts on this thread.
http://www.geologyrocks.co.uk/forum/q_and_a/a_strange_scenario_re_sifted_sand
 
Look at the way Jay Windley ducked this question asked of him.
http://apollohoax.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=othertheories&action=display&thread=1584
 
This is who Jay Windley is.
http://www.clavius.org/about.html

 
I got banned for thirty days at Clavius for using non-Apollo info to further my argument that the government is capable of telling gigantic lies.
http://apollohoax.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=theories&action=display&thread=971&page=1
(see reply #33)
 
They talked about it in reply #138 here.
http://apollohoax.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=announce&action=display&thread=1401&page=10
 
I continued the topic in the "Conspiracy theory" section instead of the "Hoax theory" section in the hope that they would let me speak freely.
http://apollohoax.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=othertheories&action=display&thread=1575
 
As you can see by reading the thread, the moderator closed it because his people couldn't discredit the topic without looking silly.

Just the fact that the Clavius site is there is circumstantial evidence that Apollo was a hoax.
 
Quote
it's not clear what you mean by "dogtags".
Look at the 1:00 minute time mark.

Quote
Cosmored, the moonlandings were real and reality. No doubt about that.
You say they were faked? Faked six times?! Think of the best special effects movies that you have ever seen. Now think of the inconsistensies or visual errors that even the casual uninformed audience can see in these films. Now think back to the sixties and the movies that were made then. Could NASA have produced such a fakery that it would not only stand up to the scrutiny of a 1969 audience, but also a whole generation of engineers and scientists familiar with the geologic studies of celestial bodies?

Cosmored, most people are smart enough to believe reputable engineers, geochemists, physicists, geologists, astronomers and astronauts from across the globe who, based on actual empirical evidence, state that the landings were a fact. Some people however believe some anonymous high-school dropouts who found everything they needed to conclude the moonlandings were a hoax from a few YouTube videos.

The Apollo missions were tracked by the Madrid Apollo Station, the Goldstone Tracking Station, the Jodrell Bank Observatory, the Chabot Observatory, the Corralitos Observatory, the Jewett Observatory, the Honeysuckle Creek station and the Bochum Sternwache. You say that all the hundreds of engineers and scientists at those stations were fools?
 
The point about conspiracy theories is, that’s all they are, theories. Anyone can start one and there are always some guys who will believe it. And if there is any aspect of the theory that does not fit, then ignore it. Considering there was a space race with the USSR going on at the time do you not you think the Soviets would found out about the hoax through their intelligence networks? And think of the amount of people who would have to be involved to set up this hoax and keep it secret, how would you be able to keep all those people quiet for all these years?

As GoneToPlaid wrote today, every one (EVERY ONE) of the hoax claims have been debunked so many times. Some very easily, some with the use of people specialized in photography, physics, engineering and so on.

Nothing you said here makes the anomalies in the video disappear. 
 
Read my first post on page 15.  There are possible scenarios about the Soviets in that post.
 
There are scenarios that would explain Apollo's being tracked.  The people who say they did the tracking might have been colluding with NASA.  An unmanned craft might have actually gone to the moon and orbited for the duration of the alleged missions and then came back.
 
Engineers, geochemists, physicists, geologists, and astronomers can be bought.
 
Here's some evidence that scientists can be paid to lie.

At around the 30 minute mark of this video a scientist alleges that science fraud is rampant in the US.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-3626298989248030643#
 
 
Some scientists at the Rand corporation say that depleted uranium is safe.
http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/land/docs/b04151999_bt170-99.htm
 
There are other experts in these videos who have the opposite view.
http://video.google.es/videosearch?q=depleted+uranium#
 
 
The experts at the Rand corporation also say that GM foods are not dangerous.
http://www.rand.org/commentary/2004/05/12/FT.html#
 
There seem to be other experts who hold the opposite view.
http://www.projectcensored.org/top-stories/articles/11-dangers-of-genetically-modified-food-confirmed/
 
 
We are lied to about history. This stuff below is pretty different from what we learn in school isn't it?
http://mtwsfh.blogspot.com/
http://video.google.es/videosearch?q=economic+hitman&hl=es&emb=0&aq=f#


Of course I don't know anybody who thinks we can trust the American media.
http://www.youtube.com//watch?v=bbnxsPgcsH0
http://www.youtube.com/results?search_type=&search_query=chomsky+media
http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Media/media_watch.html

Americans are bombarded by lies about science, news, and history.  In an environment like this, simply believing what some expert says because he's an expert would be very naive.

Now can you explain the anomalies I pointed out in my last post, or not?
 

Offline Jolly

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 155
  • Thanked: 6 times
    • View Profile
Did we land on the moon?
« Reply #376 on: 25/10/2009 17:53:02 »
Cosmored, the moonlandings were real and reality. No doubt about that.
You say they were faked? Faked six times?! Think of the best special effects movies that you have ever seen. Now think of the inconsistensies or visual errors that even the casual uninformed audience can see in these films. Now think back to the sixties and the movies that were made then. Could NASA have produced such a fakery that it would not only stand up to the scrutiny of a 1969 audience, but also a whole generation of engineers and scientists familiar with the geologic studies of celestial bodies?

Cosmored, most people are smart enough to believe reputable engineers, geochemists, physicists, geologists, astronomers and astronauts from across the globe who, based on actual empirical evidence, state that the landings were a fact. Some people however believe some anonymous high-school dropouts who found everything they needed to conclude the moonlandings were a hoax from a few YouTube videos.

The Apollo missions were tracked by the Madrid Apollo Station, the Goldstone Tracking Station, the Jodrell Bank Observatory, the Chabot Observatory, the Corralitos Observatory, the Jewett Observatory, the Honeysuckle Creek station and the Bochum Sternwache. You say that all the hundreds of engineers and scientists at those stations were fools?
 
The point about conspiracy theories is, that’s all they are, theories. Anyone can start one and there are always some guys who will believe it. And if there is any aspect of the theory that does not fit, then ignore it. Considering there was a space race with the USSR going on at the time do you not you think the Soviets would found out about the hoax through their intelligence networks? And think of the amount of people who would have to be involved to set up this hoax and keep it secret, how would you be able to keep all those people quiet for all these years?

As GoneToPlaid wrote today, every one (EVERY ONE) of the hoax claims have been debunked so many times. Some very easily, some with the use of people specialized in photography, physics, engineering and so on.



I have heard that Stanly Kubric was employed to fake the Moon landing video. Not saying he was but I have heard it mentioned.

It was from NASA that he got the cameras to film 'Barry Lindon'.

 

Offline Jolly

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 155
  • Thanked: 6 times
    • View Profile
Did we land on the moon?
« Reply #377 on: 25/10/2009 17:55:24 »
Quote
It could be both, they did go to the moon but they Faked the moon landing video etc to hide information from Russia.

So, in your opinion, are the examples of fakery that I posted really fakery?

Fakery is fakery, My point was about motivation.
 

Offline Rob260259

  • First timers
  • *
  • Posts: 5
    • View Profile
Did we land on the moon?
« Reply #378 on: 25/10/2009 19:26:49 »
Cosmored, once again, ALL 'anomalies' are explained in the Clavius website. If you don't want to read it, fine. I am not going to copy/paste all that information. Why are there no scientists, engineers, astronomers and professional photographers protesting against this website?
Because it is all true. There is no moonhoax conspiracy.
 

Offline Bored chemist

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 8667
  • Thanked: 42 times
    • View Profile
Did we land on the moon?
« Reply #379 on: 25/10/2009 19:35:45 »
Cosmored
the acceptable answers to my question are "yes" or "no".
"Watch the video" isn't an acceptable answer because I have clearly watched it before; that's how I was able to post a still from it.
If you cannot respond in a sensible way to a simple question it hardly helps your credibillity.
Saying "Now can you explain the anomalies I pointed out in my last post, or not?" is a bit daft when, having been asked to clarify what you mean by anomalies, you give a pointless response.

I note with interest that you cite a page that puts Dr Arpad Pusztai forward as an expert. His work  on GM foods was totally discredited.

BTW, I forgot to mention the rather important problem with the stuff you posted based on this
"Then, in l958, as part of the International Geophysical Year (a year in which men like James A. Van Allen were praised for exploring the realms of time and space) the young professor asked the U.S. military to send his experiments deeper into space, this time using a Geiger Counter to measure the intensity of the radiation. He further requested the most sophisticated rockets that would penetrate l00,000 miles into space.
"
You can't actually measure radiation doses with just a Geiger counter. It will tell you how many "particles" hit the tube but it doesn't tell you what thery are or how much energy they are carrying.

The Van Allen belts exist but there's no way that he could have known if they were deadly or not. It turned out that thery were not.
Sorry to kill another of your beloved myths.
« Last Edit: 27/10/2009 19:58:15 by Bored chemist »
 

Offline Rob260259

  • First timers
  • *
  • Posts: 5
    • View Profile
Did we land on the moon?
« Reply #380 on: 02/11/2009 12:42:42 »
This video says a lot about the idiots and hoaxtards that believe in the moonlanding conspiracy nonsense:



 

Offline seemoe

  • First timers
  • *
  • Posts: 2
    • View Profile
Did we land on the moon?
« Reply #381 on: 27/01/2010 14:23:10 »
The hoax was proven a long time ago.

Quote
What I hypothesize

Quote
..in the later missions might not have been exactly half-speed. It might have been ...

Quote
One possible explanation is that...

Quote
There are plausible explanations that would explain them.

Quote
The main reason they had to fake it was probably space radiation.


Speculation does not equal evidence, especially when your premise contradicts your findings.







 

Offline Cosmored

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 60
    • View Profile
Did we land on the moon?
« Reply #382 on: 29/01/2010 13:51:14 »
Quote
Speculation does not equal evidence, especially when your premise contradicts your findings.
You haven't said anything that makes the evidence go away.  This has never been satisfactorily explained.
http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=moonfaker+the+flags+are+alive&search_type=&aq=f

The people at Clavius seemed to be having a hard time dealing with it.
http://apollohoax.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=theories&action=display&thread=1138&page=1

They didn't even post a link to it in their discussion; I guess they didn't want the viewers to see it.

Give us your analysis of the movement of the flag when it isn't touched.

Maybe this will help.
 

Offline Democritus

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 44
    • View Profile
Did we land on the moon?
« Reply #383 on: 31/01/2010 14:27:36 »
Hi Cosmored
Forgive me, I came late to this discussion. I understand that you are an advocate of the notion that the Apollo project of the 60s and 70s of the last century never really happened; that a conspiracy to simulate the project's ambitions, setbacks and successes was and is afoot.

Well as a schoolboy then I was excited and inspired by Apollo; followed it closely for a decade and more; watched Neil live on black & white low res TV in class with my school mates, teachers, an enlightened principal, support staff & many others crammed into the TV room as Neil for us all placed a human footprint on our Moon.

And now...and now you tell me that...it didn't really happen!! Well you can imagine my disappointment with this news. But you know, I cling to a hope that it did happen; that we together there in July 69 in that little local school were a small part of it. And even given that the Apollo project may have been politically and ideologically driven, in my view the Apollo effort was the greatest, most noble, most courageous, most inspirational achievement of humanity on our Earth in our twentieth century. Well, that's if it really happened...sigh.

So tell me Cosmored please, give it your single best shot, your single best piece of evidence, your single incontrovertible truth, your best single bedrock of fact; that which within one statement supported by evidence convinces me that I was misled about Apollo. That's not too much to ask is it? To support or destroy my life's inspiration?

The reason I ask for just one, your single best piece of evidence supporting the alleged conspiracy theory about Apollo is because I'm reminded of Albert Einstein, a German Jew. With regard to some theory or another proposed by Einstein, may have been Relativity (Special or General), may have been something else, Adolph Hitler of Nazi infamy assembled "one hundred scientists against Einstein".

Albert said "Why one hundred? If I'm wrong, one is enough."

So please Cosmored, just one is enough. Just one smoking gun. Your best single shot. If that is true for you, then all is true. If that fails, then all fails. Please, what is it?
Sincerely
Democritus     
 

 
 

Offline Cosmored

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 60
    • View Profile
Did we land on the moon?
« Reply #384 on: 31/01/2010 18:12:44 »
Democritus-

Have you seen the seventh post from the top on page 15?
http://www.thenakedscientists.com/forum/index.php?topic=232.msg280389#msg280389

I watched Apollo 11 when I was thirteen.  It was a bit of a letdown; I was expecting very clear footage of some real amazing stuff.  I believed Apollo was real until the arrival of the internet when I finally saw some hoax evidence. 

The government can't censor the evidence on the internet, but it can fill the internet with disinfo sites to make the real evidence harder to come across.  If you google "Apollo hoax", you'll get about fifteen pro-Apollo sites for every hoax-believer site.  The post on page fifteen is a partial summary of the evidence that the government is trying to bury to reduce the number of people who see it.  I put several pieces of evidence at the top of the post that are such clear examples of fakery that they close the whole case.  If you're a serious truth-seeker, start watching the "MoonFaker" series...
http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=moonfaker&search_type=&aq=f

...and the documentary "What Happened on the Moon".
http://video.google.es/videosearch?q=what+happened+on+the+moon&hl=es&emb=0&aq=f#

 
 

Offline Bored chemist

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 8667
  • Thanked: 42 times
    • View Profile
Did we land on the moon?
« Reply #385 on: 31/01/2010 19:13:13 »
Watch those then go here
http://www.clavius.org/index.html
and see them explained away.

BTW, re. "he government can't censor the evidence on the internet, "
Please tell China.
 

Offline Democritus

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 44
    • View Profile
Did we land on the moon?
« Reply #386 on: 01/02/2010 01:43:15 »
Hi Cosmored
Of course we should all be truth seekers. That's why I asked you for your best single piece of evidence that Apollo was a simulation. It's an extraordinary claim accusing hundreds of thousands of people, agencies and governments of the most spectacular fraud in the history of civilisation. Speaking of truth, I'm sure you will agree that everyone everywhere deserves the truth in this very worrying matter.

So extraordinary claims usually require extraordinary evidence. But all I'm asking for is your best single piece of any evidence supporting the hoax theory. Just one. Just your best single shot. No, I do not want to scan dozens or hundreds of posts or other pages or sites. I don't have time, and you have done it for me already, so choose from all of it the best shot and describe it to me in your own words. If you are right, then one piece of evidence is enough, so you may as well make it your best.

I do have time to read your own single best example in your own words of evidence of NASA Apollo fraud. Please don't just post links to other pages or sites. I'd like your view. In your own words. Your single best piece (that's one only) of evidence that Apollo was a hoax. Please. Just one; your best shot. In your own words. One, if true, is enough.

Thanks Cosmored, I don't think I could make my request any clearer to you.

Best wishes
Democritus

     
 

Offline Bored chemist

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 8667
  • Thanked: 42 times
    • View Profile
Did we land on the moon?
« Reply #387 on: 01/02/2010 07:04:37 »
Cosmored seems well versed in ignoring things that are perfectly clear.
 

Offline RD

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 8132
  • Thanked: 53 times
    • View Profile
Did we land on the moon?
« Reply #388 on: 01/02/2010 10:39:20 »
 

Offline Bored chemist

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 8667
  • Thanked: 42 times
    • View Profile
Did we land on the moon?
« Reply #389 on: 01/02/2010 21:37:32 »
I await Cosmored's "unworldly" explanation of that picture.
 

Offline Cosmored

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 60
    • View Profile
Did we land on the moon?
« Reply #390 on: 03/02/2010 14:26:50 »
Quote
I await Cosmored's "unworldly" explanation of that picture.
Are you saying that picture wasn't fakable?  Anything that's fakable can't be used as proof.

Quote
That's why I asked you for your best single piece of evidence that Apollo was a simulation.
I think the clearest piece of evidence that the missions were faked is this clip of the flag moving when nobody touches it.
http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=moonfaker+the+flags+are+alive&search_type=&aq=f

This is such clear evidence of fakery that the best sophist in the world couldn't convince a twelve-year-old that the footage wasn't taken in a studio.

The flag moves at the exact moment when it's consistent witht the atmosphere explanation.
In the third link above, it can be seen that the the flag moves away from the astronaut before it moves toward him.  This rules out static electricity as it would either only be repelled, or only be attracted.  He was too far away to have touched it.  In the begining of the clip when the astronaut is next to the flag the astronaut's helmet is about one fifth the size it was when he trotted by and made the flag move.  I cut some newspapers to be about the size of the helmets and put one of them about as far away from me as the flag was from the camera.  In order for the other piece to appear five times as big as the further one, it had to be about six feet closer to me.  Also, when he was next to the flag, there was no attraction or repelling due to static electricity either.  If he'd kicked dirt against the flag, it would have been visible.  If it had been ground vibration, the pole and the staff would have moved.

Anyone can hang some light material from a ceiling light and trot by it and duplicate the flag movement.  The flag in the video moves a little more slowly for a longer time because the footage was shown at about sixty seven percent slow-motion (according to Jarrah White's studies).

Quote
It's an extraordinary claim accusing hundreds of thousands of people, agencies and governments of the most spectacular fraud in the history of civilisation.
It's possible that most of those people were fooled too.  If the program was compartmentalized, most people might not have been in a position to know if the whole thing would work.  If there was a robot lander on the moon relayiong radio signals, mission control could have been fooled too.
 

Offline Cosmored

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 60
    • View Profile
Did we land on the moon?
« Reply #391 on: 03/02/2010 14:35:40 »
Quote
Watch those then go here
http://www.clavius.org/index.html
and see them explained away.
You're ignoring what I said about Clavius in the second post from the top of this page and what I said in the ninth post from the top.  That was a rebuttal to the last post on page fifteen.  In a debate, you're suppose to give a rebuttal and then a counter-rebuttal.  You're not supposed to just reiterate.

Please give your analysis of what I posted about Jay Windley and the Clavius site or you know what people might suspect.
http://www.opposingdigits.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=1222
(excerpt)
----------------------------------------------------
9. Play Dumb. No matter what evidence or logical argument is offered, avoid discussing issues with denial they have any credibility, make any sense, provide any proof, contain or make a point, have logic, or support a conclusion. Mix well for maximum effect.
----------------------------------------------------
 

Offline Madidus_Scientia

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1451
    • View Profile
Did we land on the moon?
« Reply #392 on: 04/02/2010 09:41:43 »
Quote
The flag moves at the exact moment when it's consistent witht the atmosphere explanation.

You really think so? The astronaut seems far enough away that it would take a second for any wind currents he made to reach the flag, and the flag starts moving exactly as he bounces. Seems to me like it moved from the vibrations.
 

Offline BenV

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1503
    • View Profile
Did we land on the moon?
« Reply #393 on: 04/02/2010 11:15:58 »
Quote
The flag moves at the exact moment when it's consistent witht the atmosphere explanation.

You really think so? The astronaut seems far enough away that it would take a second for any wind currents he made to reach the flag, and the flag starts moving exactly as he bounces. Seems to me like it moved from the vibrations.
And doesn't move when he initially walks away from it, which would have created the same kinds of currents.  Also, I'm not at all convinced that it moves before he gets to it.
 

Offline Cosmored

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 60
    • View Profile
Did we land on the moon?
« Reply #394 on: 04/02/2010 15:26:26 »
Quote
You really think so? The astronaut seems far enough away that it would take a second for any wind currents he made to reach the flag, and the flag starts moving exactly as he bounces. Seems to me like it moved from the vibrations.
The pole and the rod don't move at all.  If it had been vibrations, there would have been some visible movement of the pole and support rod.

Quote
And doesn't move when he initially walks away from it, which would have created the same kinds of currents.
When he initially walks away from it, he doesn't walk by it in the same way.  He's behind it.  Please post a time mark showing the exact point to which you're referring.

Quote
Also, I'm not at all convinced that it moves before he gets to it.
It doesn't move before he gets to it.  It moves as he trots by it.
 

Offline neilep

  • Withdrawnmist
  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • Posts: 20602
  • Thanked: 8 times
    • View Profile
Did we land on the moon?
« Reply #395 on: 04/02/2010 16:07:05 »
I don't even think the moon is real. I think it's a big balloon hoax to make us think we have a natural satellite.
 

Offline Bored chemist

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 8667
  • Thanked: 42 times
    • View Profile
Did we land on the moon?
« Reply #396 on: 04/02/2010 17:32:50 »
Quote
I await Cosmored's "unworldly" explanation of that picture.
Are you saying that picture wasn't fakable?  Anything that's fakable can't be used as proof.




Since any web page is just a bunch of ones and zeros it can be faked. It will never be possible to convince you that we went to the moon. Nor will it be possible for you to convince us otherwise.
Stop trying
« Last Edit: 04/02/2010 17:34:32 by Bored chemist »
 

Offline Geezer

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 8328
  • "Vive la résistance!"
    • View Profile
Did we land on the moon?
« Reply #397 on: 04/02/2010 22:48:01 »
I don't even think the moon is real. I think it's a big balloon hoax to make us think we have a natural satellite.

You are quite correct Comrade Sheepy. NASA accidentally destroyed it with an unmanned spacecraft, so they had to replace it with a large cardboard replica stuck to a balloon. If you look at it carefully with that telescope of yours you can actually see that the images only have two dimensions. How much more proof do we need?

That's why they had to fake the whole moon landing thing. I'm surprised more people are not aware of this. I suppose it's because the US is beaming thought control waves from their satellites.
« Last Edit: 05/02/2010 00:27:12 by Geezer »
 

Offline Madidus_Scientia

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1451
    • View Profile
Did we land on the moon?
« Reply #398 on: 05/02/2010 04:34:50 »
Not to me, I always wear my alfoil cap.
 

Offline Geezer

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 8328
  • "Vive la résistance!"
    • View Profile
Did we land on the moon?
« Reply #399 on: 05/02/2010 07:11:46 »
I shield my brain with a lead lined sporran.
 

The Naked Scientists Forum

Did we land on the moon?
« Reply #399 on: 05/02/2010 07:11:46 »

 

SMF 2.0.10 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines
SMFAds for Free Forums