Did we land on the moon?

  • 436 Replies
  • 205005 Views

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

*

lyner

  • Guest
Did we land on the moon?
« Reply #100 on: 16/12/2007 20:50:30 »
Conspiracy in the Scientific Community? On a Worldwide scale?
You might be able to gag the military and make politicians do what the government says but gagging all the Scientists, technicians and engineers in Nasa and around the work?
Not possible; Scientists are too full of themselves and too keen on sharing their information. It would have got out within 24 hours of the deception and with irrefutable evidence.
My best argument for it being genuine is 'human nature'.

For every 'PhD' who believes it was a setup, there are hundreds of thousands who believe it was not..

*

Offline Bored chemist

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 8851
    • View Profile
Did we land on the moon?
« Reply #101 on: 16/12/2007 22:37:16 »
Paul, are you watching the football on satelite TV?


For every PhD who believes this there are probably a dozen who are prepared to write about it as if they believe it because "Actually it's all just what NASA said and not a conspiracy at all" doesn't sell many copies and PhDs need to earn money too.

If someone really believes that all the scientists are "in on it together" then I wonder what they do believe in. After all it makes at least as much sense to say that the churches are all a conspiracy; he already thinks the world's governments are part of a conspiracy.

If the weather service tells you it will be cold today do they believe them? After all they are run by the government and staffed by these untrustworthy scientists while they claim to use satelite imagery. Do they think it's all a fake?

Oh, I'm still waiting to hear about the retroreflectors.
Please disregard all previous signatures.

*

paul.fr

  • Guest
Did we land on the moon?
« Reply #102 on: 16/12/2007 23:01:26 »
"Paul, are you watching the football on satelite TV?"

No, live streaming over the net.

*

Offline Cosmored

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • 60
    • View Profile
Did we land on the moon?
« Reply #103 on: 20/12/2007 22:32:56 »
Quote
We can clearly put stuff in space now. Why assume that we couldn't do it before?
One theory is the radiation in space.

http://www.geocities.com/apollotruth/ [nofollow]
(excerpt)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
There is an old saying that "A liar needs a good memory". Nowhere is this more true than in the Apollo program. NASA tell lies to cover up previous lies, and other discrepancies uncovered by people investigating the Moon landings. Altering previous data, removing photographs, and retracting statements made, only re-enforces the evidence that NASA are on the run, and being forced into a corner to which they cannot escape. The actions of those under investigation makes the investigator more aware they are bluffing. The longer that person, or persons, who make the extravagant claims continue, the more lies they have to tell in order to counteract it, until it reaches the point where it becomes ridiculous. That point was passed in July 1999, when NASA officials were questioned about the Moon landings on television. They dodged the all important questions like a drifter dodges the heat.


Many Apollo astronauts have long since died, as to have many of the original NASA officials involved in the scam, consequently current officials, who know that Apollo was a fake, have not quite got it right when talking openly in public. Perhaps the biggest slip of the tongue was made by NASA Chief Dan Goldin when interviewed by UK TV journalist Sheena McDonald in 1994. He said that mankind cannot venture beyond Earth orbit, 250 miles into space, until they can find a way to overcome the dangers of cosmic radiation. He must have forgot that they supposedly sent 27 astronauts 250,000 miles outside Earth orbit 36 years earlier.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vENebR5hsRs [nofollow]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oZ65d30kYME [nofollow]

two sets of radiation data
http://hey_223.tripod.com/bulldoglebeautaketooooo/id82.html [nofollow]
(excerpt)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
To prove his thesis, Rene tries to get certain solar data from NATIONAL
OCEANIC & ATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRATION, (NOAA) using clever techniques
to
disguise his true intentions, [i.e. to get true data on solar flares.] NOAA,
unfortunately, proved to be as cagey as Rene in dodging the giving out of any
really good DETAILS on this matter, [you know, where the devil resides.]

Rene, seeing games being played, deduced that there must be two sets of data,
one which is sent to scientists on the preferred list, and one sent to the
likes of Rene as casual strangers. (p.125)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://ocii.com/~dpwozney/apollo5.htm [nofollow]
http://www.erichufschmid.net/MoreInfoForScienceChallenge.html [nofollow]
http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=9659&hl=apollo [nofollow]

Here's something else I found.
http://www.apfn.org/apfn/moon.htm [nofollow]
(excerpt)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Several motives have been suggested for the U.S. government to fake the moon landings - some of the recurrent elements are:
Distraction - The U.S. government benefited from a popular distraction to take attention away from the Vietnam war. Lunar activities did abruptly stop, with planned missions cancelled, around the same time that the US ceased its involvement in the Vietnam War.
Cold War Prestige - The U.S. government considered it vital that the U.S. win the space race with the USSR. Going to the Moon, if it was possible, would have been risky and expensive. It would have been much easier to fake the landing, thereby ensuring success.
Money - NASA raised approximately 30 billion dollars pretending to go to the moon. This could have been used to pay off a large number of people, providing significant motivation for complicity. In variations of this theory, the space industry is characterized as a political economy, much like the military industrial complex, creating fertile ground for its own survival.
Risk - The available technology at the time was such that there was a good chance that the landing might fail if genuinely attempted.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Quote
And, at the risk of sounding like a cracked record, who put the retroreflectors there?
An unmanned vehicle could have soft-landed.  It could have had the reflectors attached to its sides.

Quote
Conspiracy in the Scientific Community? On a Worldwide scale?

If there are any scientists who don't believe it, the press would ignore them.

Here's something I found.
http://www.nardwuar.com/vs/bill_kaysing/index.html [nofollow]
(excerpt)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Well, how did the media fall for this?
Well, the media doesn't fall for anything. The media is controlled by the government. The Dutch papers on July 21 [1969] said that the moon landing was a hoax, was a fake, and I have been unable to find any of those Dutch papers, although it's well documented that they did publish information, with proof, that the U.S. was spoofing everybody.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

It sounds impossible to keep a secret like that but evidently they did it somehow; the video evidence shows it was a hoax.
 
Quote
How about static ,vibration or dirt kicked up against the flag pole or flag.
If it had been static electricity, wouldn't the flag have been attracted to the astronaut as soon as he arrived to the closest point to the flag?
I had never heard the idea that he might have kicked some dirt against the pole; that does sound plausible but I've never seen dirt kicked that far in any of the footage where it shows dirt being kicked.  The astronaut is at least three or four feet from the pole when he goes by it and it would have had to be kicked to the side.  That's pretty far for a side kick.

What does everybody think of the astronauts' behavior at the press conference?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-RcKLAo62Ro [nofollow]

*

paul.fr

  • Guest
Did we land on the moon?
« Reply #104 on: 21/12/2007 05:30:26 »
#1 when talking about the "moon landing hoax", why is the term "theory" used to express what someone with an internet connection and too much free time dreams up?

#2 when did geocities home pages become fountains of knowledge?

*

Offline Bored chemist

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 8851
    • View Profile
Did we land on the moon?
« Reply #105 on: 21/12/2007 15:33:49 »
Anyone with a poor enough understanding of reality to take this idea seriously probably can't quite grasp things as complicated as the meaning of the word "theory" as used in science.

If you are trying to back up a crackpot theory, geocities is about as good a set of "evidence" as you will find.
Please disregard all previous signatures.

*

Offline Cosmored

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • 60
    • View Profile
Did we land on the moon?
« Reply #106 on: 22/12/2007 20:08:29 »
Quote
How about static ,vibration or dirt kicked up against the flag pole or flag.

If it had been static electricity, wouldn't the flag have been attracted to the astronaut as soon as he arrived to the closest point to the flag?
I had never heard the idea that he might have kicked some dirt against the pole; that does sound plausible but I've never seen dirt kicked that far in any of the footage where it shows dirt being kicked.  The astronaut is at least three or four feet from the pole when he goes by it and it would have had to be kicked to the side.  That's pretty far for a side kick.
I just took another look at the video.  When the flag moves, the pole doesn't move so it can't have been soil kicked on it that cause the movement.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n1UEv2PIzl4 [nofollow]

When are you going to comment on the astronauts' behavior at the press conference?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-RcKLAo62Ro [nofollow]

*

Offline Bored chemist

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 8851
    • View Profile
Did we land on the moon?
« Reply #107 on: 23/12/2007 14:12:26 »
OK, I will comment on it; the bloke looks nervous. I have seen better speakers but I don't think many of them would have been better pilots. Since NASA would have chosen people who could fly the thing rather than good actors that makes sense.
Of course if it were faked you would need to explain why NASA couldn't get a better actor.
If anything, that video clip is evidence in favour of a trip to the moon.
Please disregard all previous signatures.

*

Offline Cosmored

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • 60
    • View Profile
Did we land on the moon?
« Reply #108 on: 28/12/2007 19:51:08 »
Quote
Of course if it were faked you would need to explain why NASA couldn't get a better actor.
They couldn't just hire any actor.  They had to chose from among the experienced pilots that were available.  It would  pretty hard to find someone who can both pilot large planes and lie with a straight face after a stunt like the faked moon landings.

*

sooyeah

  • Guest
Did we land on the moon?
« Reply #109 on: 29/12/2007 14:51:41 »
What does everybody think of the astronauts' behavior at the press conference?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-RcKLAo62Ro

Well I think it's obvious they went, look at them hoping around all smiles, that guy joyfully dancing on the table. I think we'd all act like that if we had been to the moon.

"Heres Jane eating a cup cake, and this is little tommy searching through the sock draw. Dont you just love the smell of freshly washed socks"

*

Offline Andrew K Fletcher

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 2331
  • KIS Keep It Simple
    • View Profile
Did we land on the moon?
« Reply #110 on: 31/12/2007 19:04:28 »

[diagram=308_0]
Science is continually evolving. Nothing is set in stone. Question everything and everyone. Always consider vested interests as a reason for miss-direction. But most of all explore and find answers that you are comfortable with

*

Offline rosalind dna

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 2019
    • View Profile
Did we land on the moon?
« Reply #111 on: 31/12/2007 22:29:11 »
I remember seeing this Moon Landing on the morning it happened at 4am. As a
teenager too. So fake it's not
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=RMINSD7MmT4
Rosalind Franklin was my first cousin and one my life's main regrets is that I never met this brilliant and beautiful lady.
She discovered the Single DNA Helix in 1953, then it was taken by Wilkins without her knowledge or agreeement.

*

Offline Karen W.

  • Moderator
  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *****
  • 31662
  • "come fly with me"
    • View Profile
Did we land on the moon?
« Reply #112 on: 31/12/2007 23:03:49 »
I watched it with my grandma we were up all the day before and all night watching... It was awesome!

"Life is not measured by the number of Breaths we take, but by the moments that take our breath away."

*

Offline Cosmored

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • 60
    • View Profile
Did we land on the moon?
« Reply #113 on: 02/01/2008 20:50:11 »
Quote
I remember seeing this Moon Landing on the morning it happened at 4am. As a
teenager too. So fake it's not
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=RMINSD7MmT4 [nofollow]

Look at the part of the video you posted where the astronaut is bouncing along.

At around the 21 minute mark of this video the above footage from Apollo 11 can be seen played at double speed.
http://video.google.es/videoplay?docid=4135126565081757736&q=apollo [nofollow]

It looks just like movement in earth gravity.  They just used fifty percent slow-motion to do Apollo 11.

Look at the movements in the first six seconds of this clip.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wdMvQTNLaUE [nofollow]

They are noticably different from the Apollo 11 footage.  They used a combination of support wires and a slow motion that was a little faster than fifty percent in the later missions.

*

Offline rosalind dna

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 2019
    • View Profile
Did we land on the moon?
« Reply #114 on: 02/01/2008 20:58:10 »
Quote
I remember seeing this Moon Landing on the morning it happened at 4am. As a
teenager too. So fake it's not
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=RMINSD7MmT4

Look at the part of the video you posted where the astronaut is bouncing along.

At around the 21 minute mark of this video the above footage from Apollo 11 can be seen played at double speed.
http://video.google.es/videoplay?docid=4135126565081757736&q=apollo

It looks just like movement in earth gravity.  They just used fifty percent slow-motion to do Apollo 11.

Look at the movements in the first six seconds of this clip.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wdMvQTNLaUE

They are noticably different from the Apollo 11 footage.  They used a combination of support wires and a slow motion that was a little faster than fifty percent in the later missions.

I did watch that video and 6 others from YouTube before deciding on the least
blurriest one. Yes it's slow motion but the videos and TV technology was hardly
as defined as today's is now. but they were all part of the Cold War's space
race. It is documented as such.
Edit at 22.36   But the reason that the astronauts were bouncing along was because there is no
gravity or oxygen on the moon or the rest of space.
« Last Edit: 02/01/2008 22:38:38 by rosalind dna »
Rosalind Franklin was my first cousin and one my life's main regrets is that I never met this brilliant and beautiful lady.
She discovered the Single DNA Helix in 1953, then it was taken by Wilkins without her knowledge or agreeement.

*

Offline Andrew K Fletcher

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 2331
  • KIS Keep It Simple
    • View Profile
Did we land on the moon?
« Reply #115 on: 03/01/2008 11:07:29 »
Take away air / atmosphere resistance and reduce gravity and objects / astronauts should experience more velocity with very little force, which leaves the question how come everything is in slow motion?

Apply more resistance, say in a swimming pool and then you can expect the opposite and a slow motion reaction to a force.

So the dust at the feet of the astronauts would be propelled a great distance at a high velocity, yet it does nothing of the kind.

As I have stated before. A journey in micro-gravity of some 4.5 days in a very restricted space with no gravity would render their legs useless and requiring some serious rehabilitation in order to get them working. How come the astronauts got out of the casual and were able to act as if they had just got out of a chair? This could not happen according to NASA’s own research on the effects of gravity and human physiology.

And when they got back from the moon after Eight and a half days of microgravity? Yet little mention about their state of health was mentioned?

Astronauts orbiting the Earth are not even far enough away from the Earths gravitational pull but are merely counterbalancing it with the speed of their rotation around the Earth. Yet this has a serious detrimental impact on human physiology and is well documented.

Now time has moved on it has become clear that there are some serious questions about the credibility of the video evidence relating to the lunar landings.
Science is continually evolving. Nothing is set in stone. Question everything and everyone. Always consider vested interests as a reason for miss-direction. But most of all explore and find answers that you are comfortable with

*

Offline rosalind dna

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 2019
    • View Profile
Did we land on the moon?
« Reply #116 on: 03/01/2008 16:46:13 »
Actually it has been mentioned since that the state of the astronauts or cosmonauts health was badly affected and their nerves also bone marrow had begun
to crumble.
When they get off the rockets, they have to taken away on wheelchairs.
Think quite how badly any astronuats would be affected if or when they ever go
to Mars. I guess that they'd die out there.

But you can't equate the weightless of a swimming pool to being in a rocket where
there is not gravity at all. But the oxygen on the rockets is artificial whereas
the oxygen in a swimming pool is natural.
Rosalind Franklin was my first cousin and one my life's main regrets is that I never met this brilliant and beautiful lady.
She discovered the Single DNA Helix in 1953, then it was taken by Wilkins without her knowledge or agreeement.

*

Offline Bored chemist

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 8851
    • View Profile
Did we land on the moon?
« Reply #117 on: 03/01/2008 18:02:58 »
Cosmored
"They couldn't just hire any actor.  They had to chose from among the experienced pilots that were available.  It would  pretty hard to find someone who can both pilot large planes and lie with a straight face after a stunt like the faked moon landings"
The idea that you would need an actor who can fly misses the point. If it's faked then it didn't fly. Why get a pilot when what you need is an actor?
Nasa could have got decent actors so why did they put up with those (frankly rather poor) speakers unless it was because they were the best pilots?

Does this "But the oxygen on the rockets is artificial whereas
the oxygen in a swimming pool is natural" actually mean anything?
Please disregard all previous signatures.

*

Offline rosalind dna

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 2019
    • View Profile
Did we land on the moon?
« Reply #118 on: 03/01/2008 20:55:30 »
I have found these links to the 1968 Apollo 11 - moon landings' astronauts
biographies.
In the late '60s, the TV were much smaller and the screens also cameras to us
the viewers was jerkier, like a badly held DVD homemade film.
Another thing, how could the astronauts bring home "moon rock" if they'd not
been there as it's been scientifically tested.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/july/21/newsid_2635000/2635845.stm
http://www.nasa.gov/worldbook/armstrong_neil_worldbook.html
http://www.jsc.nasa.gov/Bios/htmlbios/aldrin-b.html
http://www.jsc.nasa.gov/Bios/htmlbios/collins-m.html
http://www.jsc.nasa.gov/Bios/htmlbios/lovell-ja.html

Rosalind Franklin was my first cousin and one my life's main regrets is that I never met this brilliant and beautiful lady.
She discovered the Single DNA Helix in 1953, then it was taken by Wilkins without her knowledge or agreeement.

*

paul.fr

  • Guest
Did we land on the moon?
« Reply #119 on: 04/01/2008 07:54:48 »
BC, i hope you have some bandages handy! I hear brick walls can play havoc with ones head.

*

Offline Bored chemist

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 8851
    • View Profile
Did we land on the moon?
« Reply #120 on: 04/01/2008 17:34:53 »
You may be right paul, but I'm still waiting for a sensible answer from cosmored.
Please disregard all previous signatures.

*

paul.fr

  • Guest
Did we land on the moon?
« Reply #121 on: 05/01/2008 00:04:06 »
You may be right paul, but I'm still waiting for a sensible answer from cosmored.

i once waited for a bus, and after quite a while 3 came along at once. so you never know.


They are noticably different from the Apollo 11 footage.  They used a combination of support wires and a slow motion that was a little faster than fifty percent in the later missions.

are we talking about the Apollo missions, or an episode of thunderbirds?
hay, does anyone have a picture of Lady penelope?

*

Offline Cosmored

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • 60
    • View Profile
Did we land on the moon?
« Reply #122 on: 07/03/2008 14:09:18 »
The documentary "What Happened on the Moon" is back online. It's the best moon-hoax video I've ever seen.

Part 1
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-3622009579385499503 [nofollow]

Part 2
http://video.google.es/videoplay?docid=-3186616594425246748 [nofollow]

It usually doesn't stay online for very long so watch it fast; I've seen it go on and offline twice before.

*

Offline Cosmored

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • 60
    • View Profile
Did we land on the moon?
« Reply #123 on: 27/04/2008 13:53:55 »
Here's the latest piece of evidence I've come across.

Start watching this clip at he 50 second mark.

http://es.youtube.com/watch?v=I_CMgqitv98 [nofollow]

Collins' jacket moves the way things move in gravity even though they were supposed to be in zero-gravity.

*

Offline Cosmored

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • 60
    • View Profile
Did we land on the moon?
« Reply #124 on: 10/05/2008 22:46:32 »
Here's something I just came across.  Look at the way the corners of the jacket the woman astronaut is wearing behave in zero-gravity.

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=TejsnPThmd4 [nofollow]
(first 10 seconds and last 30 seconds)

It's pretty different from the way the corner of Collins' jacket behaves.

http://es.youtube.com/watch?v=I_CMgqitv98 [nofollow]
(50 second mark)

*

Offline Bored chemist

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 8851
    • View Profile
Did we land on the moon?
« Reply #125 on: 11/05/2008 14:31:22 »
"Collins' jacket moves the way things move in gravity even though they were supposed to be in zero-gravity." It moves rather oddly compared to anything in normal gravity.


"The way the corners of the jacket the woman astronaut is wearing behave in zero-gravity."

"It's pretty different from the way the corner of Collins' jacket behaves."

Some people might realise that the jacket of the man who is running on a treadmill will move differently to the jacket of a woman who is standing still.

On the other hand some people will atribute that difference to the notion that the whole of the apollo programme was faked.

Personally, I only think one of those interpretations is rational.


Please disregard all previous signatures.

*

Offline Cosmored

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • 60
    • View Profile
Did we land on the moon?
« Reply #126 on: 11/05/2008 14:56:09 »
Quote
Some people might realise that the jacket of the man who is running on a treadmill will move differently to the jacket of a woman who is standing still.
The corner of Collins' jacket swings back and forth like a pendulum even though the jogging would cause it to go up.  Notice how the corners of the woman astronaut's jacket stand straight out--they don't hang.  There's no identifiable force making the corner of Collins' jacket stay down except for gravity.
I know they had the technology to get into low earth orbit then but the footage shows they were in gravity.  Evdidently they faked some of the footage of their being halfway to the moon.

There's other evidence of faked zero-gravity footage.

Click on this link below and go down about a third of the way until you see this.

http://ocii.com/~dpwozney/apollo3.htm [nofollow]
(excerpt)
---------------------------------------------------------
APOLLO 9: Dave scott performs Extra Vehicular Activities LAVA # : LV-1998-00030.mov
The astronaut is unusually flexible compared to today's shuttle astronauts on EVAs; the Apollo suit does not appear to have bearings at the joints like the space shuttle extra vehicular suits. The experimental thermal samples flutter and follow non-linear curved paths, as if under the influence of or affected by atmospheric drag and turbulence.
---------------------------------------------------------

This clip may have been filmed on earth.  Maybe they were trying to save money.

There's lot's of other footage that proves it was a hoax such as this.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n1UEv2PIzl4 [nofollow]

The hoax is pretty well proven; it's just interesting to see how they did all the details.

*

paul.fr

  • Guest
Did we land on the moon?
« Reply #127 on: 13/05/2008 14:56:34 »
Yawn

*

Offline neilep

  • Withdrawnmist
  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • 20602
    • View Profile
Did we land on the moon?
« Reply #128 on: 13/05/2008 15:10:35 »
Yawn

Agreed !!


How do we know that all the evidence that supports the hoax theories are not hoaxes themselves ??

I believe that all the hoax material are also hoaxes !!...so there !
Men are the same as women, just inside out !

*

paul.fr

  • Guest
Did we land on the moon?
« Reply #129 on: 13/05/2008 15:38:25 »
So the hoax is, itself a hoax! The clever barstewards!
Although, if you watch the following clip, you will be convinced that the spaceship is made of NASA plastic

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=GONeqPxh4d4

*

Offline neilep

  • Withdrawnmist
  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • 20602
    • View Profile
Did we land on the moon?
« Reply #130 on: 13/05/2008 15:53:01 »
So the hoax is, itself a hoax! The clever barstewards!
Although, if you watch the following clip, you will be convinced that the spaceship is made of NASA plastic

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=GONeqPxh4d4


That's real !!...it is convincing but we all know that star trek is fact...it was the first ' reality tv ' program !

Men are the same as women, just inside out !

*

Offline Bored chemist

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 8851
    • View Profile
Did we land on the moon?
« Reply #131 on: 13/05/2008 19:57:59 »
"The corner of Collins' jacket swings back and forth like a pendulum even though the jogging would cause it to go up. "
Oh goody! from conspiracy theory to anti gravity effect of jogging.
Jogging causes the whole body to move back and to. The bloke's jacket is attached to him so it follows his movements.
Where's the conspiracy? His jacket is conspiring with his torso?
Please disregard all previous signatures.

*

Offline Andrew K Fletcher

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 2331
  • KIS Keep It Simple
    • View Profile
Did we land on the moon?
« Reply #132 on: 14/05/2008 08:20:28 »
Can anyone give an explanation why the cross hairs from the camera are located behind objects in NASA's photographs?

Personally, I cannot think of any possible explanation other than the photographs were edited to include the objects as an afterthought.

What about the obvious other light sources casting shadows and illuminating objects and astronauts when they should have been silhouetted  by the light from the sun?

Again IMO the only explanation other than they took the film crew to the moon with them is that the photographs were taken with multiple light sources. One of these light sources can be clearly seen in the visor of the astronaut. One could argue that this light was in fact the sun but this would make nonsense of the direction of the shadows.

The same landscape is used in several locations supposed to be miles apart, yet are a perfect match when superimposed over each other.

Either the script was wrong during the editing, or the location was identical

Why was there no blast crater and no blast dust settled on the feet of the landing craft?

 for there not to have been a crater or blast dust on a very dusty surface shown clearly as the astronauts moved around, they would either have to have cleared the dust off and filled in the crater, or there was no pressure from the craft to affect a cause.

Why is there no exhaust evidence on take off from the moons surface? Either the craft was operating a giant spring to launch itself, or it was producing some antigravity force that does not disrupt the dusty surface of the lunar landscape.

Is it possible that the United States Government could mislead the whole of the country and the majority of the world that were capable of receiving television and radio at the time, into believing something that simply was not true?

This one is perhaps the easiest to explain. The Allied Iraq invasion was perpetrated after the President of The United States went on the record and publicly announced that Sadam had weapons of mass destruction. He was backed up by Prime Minister Tony Blair, and supported by the majority of his senators and our Members of Parliament. We were also told that Sadam was amassing a huge army again, even though Sadam Denied all allegations and had even allowed UN inspectors to search for any alleged weapons. For the record. None where found!

Mass graves were mentioned. Could these have been from the first bush Senior onslaught, which I believe was justified given the unprovoked attack on Kuwait.

After we began watching what unfolded, the World looked on and saw that Sadam did not even have an air force, his armoured tanks were virtually non existent and his remaining army were disillusioned and terrified by the onslaught of two of the worlds greatest military powers unleashing their own High tech weapons of mass destruction on predominantly unarmed civilian men women and children on the Streets of Baghdad. While the media supported the whole unfolding campaign. So yes it is highly plausible that the United States Of America and Great Britain can and frequently do mislead the majority of people!
Science is continually evolving. Nothing is set in stone. Question everything and everyone. Always consider vested interests as a reason for miss-direction. But most of all explore and find answers that you are comfortable with

*

Offline Bored chemist

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 8851
    • View Profile
Did we land on the moon?
« Reply #133 on: 14/05/2008 19:49:11 »
Mr Bush didn't have to convince anyone about the WMD. He ordered the war because he wanted to (or rather the military did).
A lot of us here in the UK didnt't and don't accept that the war was (or is) just. Many of us knew that the search for WMD was still going on when the US (and the 51st state) unilatterally and unlawfully started a war. We were never asked about it because most of us would have said "no".
So there's no real evidence that messers Bush and Blair fooled anyone much. On the other hand it's very rare to vote out a head of state during a war.

Even if you say that, at the time, a majority of the population thought that Saddam had WMD, just a short while later they stopped believing this when, for example, it emerged that part of the evidence was some student's homework.
A goverment could fool the people- but not for long. Thruth will out. If the moon landings were fake someone would have blabbed by now. They have not. To me that's one of the more convincing bits of evidence.

(BTW, please look at earlier posts in this thread and at the sites cited for answers to the questions about shadows, cross hairs etc.)
Please disregard all previous signatures.

*

Offline Andrew K Fletcher

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 2331
  • KIS Keep It Simple
    • View Profile
Did we land on the moon?
« Reply #134 on: 15/05/2008 09:39:05 »
Was he trying to say "One small step for man, One giant leap of faith for mankind?
Yep....what he said was 'One  small step for man, one giant leap for mankind'...when he should have said...'one small step for A man, one giant leap for mankind'......I mean tcch!! tcch!!......it's not as if he was under any pressure or anything !!!!!

Quote
You think they couldn’t fake a sky full off stars. If they wanted to fake a moon landing and thought that they needed stars in the sky that would have been one of the easiest part of the scam to pull off. However if you could see stars then it would be fake.

With all of the budding astronomers way back in the 1960's they would have had to have been pretty damned accurate painting stars on the photograph as this would have provided concrete evidence one way or another. Much better to leave the stars out! One insignificant error in star position would have thrown the whole programme into orbit.

It was argued that a reflector was in place on the moon so we had to have been there. Another argument was that Russians were listening in. Could a transmitter have been placed on the lunar surface in an unmanned landing to send transmissions back to Earth? I believe this is a possibility. Why would the Russians have built listening devices to hear transmissions from the Lunar Surface?
Quote
Do you really think all of those at mission control, plus the Astronauts, ground crew...and not to mention the wives could have kept silent all those years?

Hell yeah, if people you know around you have been talking and suddenly met an untimely end, one might think it is not wise to put ones own life in danger.

RE: Ohm’s analysis: Can we be sure the rocks were from the lunar surface. Meteors are found in many of the world’s deserts and have unknown origins.
Quote
Conspiracy in the Scientific Community? On a Worldwide scale?
You might be able to gag the military and make politicians do what the government says but gagging all the Scientists, technicians and engineers in Nasa and around the work?

One only has to look at the recent drug cartel frauds to see that a cover up in the scientific community is not even improbable, but highly plausible. Take Rosalind’s post on the double helix, and the scientist that advocated aspirin as a cure for cancer, How on earth did thalidomide get through the controls?  If you think scientists are without fault then it is you that is being foolish.

http://es.youtube.com/watch?v=UIw06kd--is&feature=related

A lie told often enough becomes the truth.
Vladimir Lenin
Science is continually evolving. Nothing is set in stone. Question everything and everyone. Always consider vested interests as a reason for miss-direction. But most of all explore and find answers that you are comfortable with

*

lyner

  • Guest
Did we land on the moon?
« Reply #135 on: 15/05/2008 16:07:19 »
It's amazing that the probability of someone believing in this conspiracy seems to be inversely proportional to their knowledge of basic Science and Engineering.
Of all the possible conspiracy theories that there have ever been, this is the most loony. Even just the evidence of amateur and professional radio astronomers about where and when they managed to get radio signals from the mission tells you that the craft couldn't have been in low Earth orbit or on the ground. This was a highly public affair. Vast amounts of information were available and have always been. Unlike in many other coverups, there were legions of both disinterested and hostile observers, many of them being very well informed.
It's hard to know where to start in debunking the objectors.
Moderately high speed dust would go miles if it were disturbed. If you land a hard piece of ground you wouldn't expect a 'crater' and the shape of a crater in dust would be nothing like what you'd expect on Earth.
If you take many photographs with hard shadows you will see that they are by no means parallel because of the distortions introduced even with a standard lens - it's all to do with 'projections'. Shadows appear to spread out, curve and even point inwards because not all surfaces are horizontal, parallel or flat.
How would you expect to get the stars (Very dim) exposed on film without seriously over exposing the nearby objects (full sunlight with not a hint of cloud)? For pictures of the sky, they would have had to land near the terminator and walk to where it was dark or point directly into the sky, away from the Sun, to avoid serious flare.

All the other failed coverups which have been quoted have actually been rumbled (that's how we know of them) despite involving relatively few perpetrators / observers.

Is there any record of a 'whistle blower' being assassinated / committing suicide? That's one possible sign of a really serious coverup but I haven't heard of it. I get the feeling that NASA are pretty sure of their bona fides.

*

paul.fr

  • Guest
Did we land on the moon?
« Reply #136 on: 15/05/2008 16:23:30 »
if we never went to the moon then where did all the cheese come from? Does the speed of sound travel through cheese at the same rate it travels through the moon? i think we should be told.

*

Offline skeptic

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • 38
    • View Profile
Did we land on the moon?
« Reply #137 on: 15/05/2008 18:15:19 »
if we never went to the moon then where did all the cheese come from? Does the speed of sound travel through cheese at the same rate it travels through the moon? i think we should be told.
The sound IS the cheese. I cut it and I'm sorry. I couldn't help myself.
-JESOPH-

*

Offline Kryptid

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • 642
    • View Profile
    • http://www.angelfire.com/sc2/Trunko
Did we land on the moon?
« Reply #138 on: 16/05/2008 10:01:49 »
Quote
There's lot's of other footage that proves it was a hoax such as this.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n1UEv2PIzl4

The hoax is pretty well proven; it's just interesting to see how they did all the details.

This is easily refuted on two counts. One: The fact that the flag waves is due to the momentum imparted to it from the astronauts handling it. Since there's no air on the Moon, there's no resistance to keep the flag from waving a bit after it has been messed with. Check this out: http://skepticwiki.org/index.php/Moon_Hoax:Purported_Mistakes#The_.22Waving.22_Flag

Two: Assuming that NASA did hoax the video, there is no way that they would have forgotten to take the wind into account. They would have filmed it in a location where there was no wind, such as a well-sealed building. Any institution of people intelligent enough to build rocket ships and hoax a Moon landing would realize that a flag blowing in the wind would blow their cover. If the idea of wind slipped their mind, then how could they cover up such a hoax for so long without slipping up and letting it get out?

Quote
Of all the possible conspiracy theories that there have ever been, this is the most loony

I wouldn't say that. The most bizarre one I can think of is the one embraced by the Flat Earth Society, which proposes that the Earth really is flat but that a gigantic conspiracy perpetuated by an unseen one-world government is covering it up by making people believe that it is round. They seriously believe that, too. I've talked with them.
« Last Edit: 16/05/2008 10:03:29 by Supercryptid »
----
Jesus is coming soon. Be prepared for him.

*

lyner

  • Guest
Did we land on the moon?
« Reply #139 on: 16/05/2008 21:44:24 »
Well, yes but there are only a few of those 'loonies' and I have a strange feeling that, like Morris Dancers, they are only doing it to annoy. They had you fooled, too!

*

Offline skeptic

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • 38
    • View Profile
Did we land on the moon?
« Reply #140 on: 17/05/2008 20:53:17 »
Quote

There's lot's of other footage that proves it was a hoax such as this.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n1UEv2PIzl4 [nofollow]

The hoax is pretty well proven; it's just interesting to see how they did all the details.


 Saying that a youtube video proves something is a hoax has got to be the mother of all oxymorons!
-JESOPH-

*

Offline Bored chemist

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 8851
    • View Profile
Did we land on the moon?
« Reply #141 on: 18/05/2008 14:28:18 »
Anyone saying things like "One only has to look at the recent drug cartel frauds to see that a cover up in the scientific community is not even improbable, but highly plausible."

has missed the point.

Those frauds got found out.

Decades after the moon landings there has been no real evidence of their falshood. Nobody has come forward and said "OK it's a fair cop- we faked them"
It would have been perfectly possible to fake them (though I'm not sure how they persuaded the Russians to play along) but, by now the holes in the story would have shown up.
Notwithstanding the fact that some people don't understand photography, no holes have been found.

"A lie told often enough becomes the truth.
Vladimir Lenin"
Yeah, sure, look what happened to him.
Please disregard all previous signatures.

*

lyner

  • Guest
Did we land on the moon?
« Reply #142 on: 18/05/2008 21:40:29 »
I agree. We could have expected at least one deathbed confession or some crazed outbreak from a minion who had been suppressed by 'the conspiracy' all his life and decided to risk assassination in order to put us all right.

btw, which is the lie? Was it that they did land or that they didn't land?

*

Offline turnipsock

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • 586
  • Beekeeper to the unsuspecting
    • View Profile
Did we land on the moon?
« Reply #143 on: 18/05/2008 22:20:16 »
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=hTKedyQQkZQ

Has somebody posted this already?
Beeswax: Natures petrol tank sealant.

When things are in 3D, is it always the same three dimensions?

*

Offline skeptic

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • 38
    • View Profile
Did we land on the moon?
« Reply #144 on: 19/05/2008 20:10:42 »
Anyone saying things like "One only has to look at the recent drug cartel frauds to see that a cover up in the scientific community is not even improbable, but highly plausible."

has missed the point.

Those frauds got found out.

Decades after the moon landings there has been no real evidence of their falshood. Nobody has come forward and said "OK it's a fair cop- we faked them"
It would have been perfectly possible to fake them (though I'm not sure how they persuaded the Russians to play along) but, by now the holes in the story would have shown up.
Notwithstanding the fact that some people don't understand photography, no holes have been found.

"A lie told often enough becomes the truth.
Vladimir Lenin"
Yeah, sure, look what happened to him.

They lost me when they deemed it a hoax because it didn't resemble Star Trek or some other made-for-television space program. Hollywood already faked it and had the resources they needed to convince us it was real.
-JESOPH-

*

Offline skeptic

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • 38
    • View Profile
Did we land on the moon?
« Reply #145 on: 20/05/2008 01:54:46 »
I have a friend that does not believe we landed on the moon.  He says this because there are no stars in the backgroud of the pictures that were taken while up there on the moon.  Does anyone know why that is?

Quite clearly it´s because they faked the video. and could´nt add in the stars as it would have been 1. too dificult and 2. Allowed people who understood astrology to prove it was fake.

The reason we dont see stars on the earth during the day is because we have an atmosphere.
The moon doesn´t have an atmosphere, some may contend it has a small one, either way the atmosphere doesnt glow a bright colour during the daytime and block out the stars; like the earths does!

O.K all put your helmets on and duck! Someone will no-doubt start throwing mud!

Gene Roddenberry had no problem putting stars in the sky. The only reason NASA photos look fake is that they don't resemble what the public assumed it would look like. Here's mud in your eye! [;D]
-JESOPH-

*

Offline Cosmored

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • 60
    • View Profile
Did we land on the moon?
« Reply #146 on: 25/05/2008 15:53:42 »
Quote
This is easily refuted on two counts. One: The fact that the flag waves is due to the momentum imparted to it from the astronauts handling it. Since there's no air on the Moon, there's no resistance to keep the flag from waving a bit after it has been messed with. Check this out: http://skepticwiki.org/index.php/Moon_Hoax:Purported_Mistakes#The_.22Waving.22_Flag [nofollow]

Two: Assuming that NASA did hoax the video, there is no way that they would have forgotten to take the wind into account. They would have filmed it in a location where there was no wind, such as a well-sealed building. Any institution of people intelligent enough to build rocket ships and hoax a Moon landing would realize that a flag blowing in the wind would blow their cover. If the idea of wind slipped their mind, then how could they cover up such a hoax for so long without slipping up and letting it get out?
You're explaining the flag being planted on Apollo 11 and the clip I posted was from Apollo 15.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n1UEv2PIzl4 [nofollow]
(2 minute 35 second mark)

In this clip the flag had stopped moving when the astronaut walked by it.  Tell us what you think of this particular clip.

*

Offline Bored chemist

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 8851
    • View Profile
Did we land on the moon?
« Reply #147 on: 25/05/2008 17:40:09 »
"Tell us what you think of this particular clip"
I think the comments posted below it talking about static, or ground transmitted vibration look eminently reasonable.
Why would NASA have been dumb enough to publish it if it were a threat to the conspiracy they sought to maintain?
Please disregard all previous signatures.

*

lyner

  • Guest
Did we land on the moon?
« Reply #148 on: 26/05/2008 11:39:21 »
It's strange that the majority of those who seem to be 'pro conspiracy theory' are also 'against established Science'.
Is this just 'attention-seeking' bahaviour, I wonder? The stronger the evidence, the more vociferous is the objection.
Imagine basing a serious scientific theory on clips from Utube and expecting it to be accepted or to be the basis of a successful technology.

*

Offline Bored chemist

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 8851
    • View Profile
Did we land on the moon?
« Reply #149 on: 26/05/2008 13:49:50 »
"Imagine basing a serious scientific theory on clips from Utube and expecting it to be accepted "
 Is that why my research grants get turned down?
Please disregard all previous signatures.