0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
jayweidner.comDescription: DVDs, videos, books and articles concerned with alchemy, shamanism, the apocalypse, the transformation and transmutation of the human race and our true potential as human beings. Among the subjects discussed are Stanley Kubrick and his film 2001: A Space Oddyssey, J R R Tolkien, Peter Jackson and The Lord of the Rings, The Alchemy of Time, The Ka, the Ba and the Kabbalah, The God Star and much more. The books that Weidner has written include Mysteries of the Great Cross at Hendaye, A Monument to the End of Time and his DVD Secrets of Alchemy.
Possibly a valid point, but should we assume that because the photos might have been faked, the mission didn't happen. It may not have happened, but to draw one conclusion from the other is not scientific reasoning. At best it is conjecture - at worst, conspiracy theory.
...Satellites orbit the moon and take legit pictures of it to this day, you can see the various moon landing sites ...
Just because some photos were faked dosn't mean that the missions didn't happen.
... work of OLEG OLEYNIK, Ph.D.
After 1999 Oleg left the Phystech department to pursue an independent career. From 1999 to 2012 - Oleg Oleynik organized non-state research on humanism on the Web, founded a School, a College, and a University with academic degrees.
... you should insist that "nobody interact with him" ...
He is a truth seeker
... he posted it to get opinions on his theory not to get ridiculed...
Oleyniks proof:... Despite a slight offset of the camera, the mountains are moving, which contradicts the condition of distant mountains.
Where is the evidence that the difference in the two camera positions was "slight" ?[ from the change in the direction of the sun , minutes have elapsed between the exposures ]
Apollo 15 photos parallax photos are only centimeters or 10's of centimeters apart, not hundreds of feet.
... a camera shift of not more than 20 cms ...
From 1999 to 2012 – Oleg Oleynik organized non-state research on humanism on the Web, founded a School, a College, and a University with academic degrees.
As SS explained, we know as a fact that men went to the moon because Apollo 11 placed corner reflecting mirrors on the surface of the moon and from that moment we've been able to bounce laser beams off the moon. It'd be impossible to do that otherwise.
Russians were monitoring radio signals from the astronauts orbiting the moon. If they weren't then the Russians would have pointed it out to the entire world.
Sorry but we've been to the moon, no question about it. Those of you who claim otherwise should be ashamed of yourselves.
Quote from: PmbPhy on 09/02/2015 05:33:08Sorry but we've been to the moon, no question about it. Those of you who claim otherwise should be ashamed of yourselves.He has more than that to be ashamed of, see his posts in Chat section and get the measure. Next he'll be telling us that Einstein's theories are wrong, just 'Jewish Physics' as the Nazis called it. You would be branded a white Jew, just like Heisenberg for promoting those same theories!
We sent a robot there and were able to convince tens of thousands of scientists to lie for the last 40 years. Yah! Right!
We didn't send a man to the moon to place a mirror there.
-----------------Q: Why do prominent astronomers like Sir Bernard Lovell and Patrick Moore support the Moon landings if they were faked?A: Scientists and astronomers around the globe know full well that the Moon missions were faked, but rely on NASA to gain access to the vital data beamed back to Earth from the Hubble space telescope. They cannot slag off NASA otherwise NASA would deprive them of this essential information, which they so much require.---------------------------------------------
Let me explain why you are unlikely to get answers to your posts here and in chat (9/11 and holocaust denying).Folks who join and participate here do so for fun and are looking for interesting topics. They have day jobs or other interests so limited time... ...I suggest you do your homework, look them up and study them carefully. If you are still not convinced read them again until you understand the issues. Also read the books you were recommended so you can understand basic physics. If you then return as a genuine seeker of truth rather than a convert with an agenda, you might find people who are willing to answer one or two technical questions you cannot understand. However, remember that this is not a site for religious, political, or ideological spamming.Apologies to everyone for long post. This is my last post on this topic, I'm off for newer more interesting items!
Despite a slight offset of the camera, the mountains are moving, which contradicts the condition of distant mountains.
Thus, based on the above examples, this study concludes that the Apollo 15 photographic record does NOT depict real lunarscapes with distant backgrounds located more than a kilometre away from the camera.
Conclusion:These pictures were, without doubt, taken in a studio set – up to 300 metres in size. A complex panorama mimicking the lunarscape shows degrees of movement, such as horizontal and vertical changes to give an impression of imaginary distance to the objects and perspective.
Lunar lift off from Apollo 17....Zoom out, and then pan upwards....You could not pull that off using todays technology ...
... doing it from a distance of 250,000 miles away over 45 years ago is impossible.
... then consider the experiments that were left on the moon.For example several Apollo missions left a triangular mirror reflectors on the moon for laser observatories to measure the distance from the earth to the moon it's called "laser ranging" If your such a firm believer that nothing ever landed on the moon then go to one of these laser observatories and ask them to point their laser at the moon mirror and see if the laser is reflected back or not, that way you'll know for shore.
Quote from: KubricksOdysseyDespite a slight offset of the camera, the mountains are moving, which contradicts the condition of distant mountains.And what about that photo makes you think that it had to be a mountain far away rather a nearby hill?
Split boulders are only formed by falling from a high rocky crag or from expanding freezing moisture ...
Quote from: KubricksOdyssey on 03/07/2015 05:12:33Split boulders are only formed by falling from a high rocky crag or from expanding freezing moisture ... The "only" bit is not true : it could have been ejected from a meteor-impact and split apart on landing.Here's a high-res version of that same boulder-image but without the headache-inducing anaglyph 3D colours ... https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Moon-apollo17-schmitt_boulder.jpg
Hard science analysis of Apollo photos reveals they are not genuine.
Split boulders are only formed by falling from a high rocky crag or from expanding freezing moisture.Neither of those are possible on the moon.
Quote from: KubricksOdyssey on 03/07/2015 05:12:33Split boulders are only formed by falling from a high rocky crag or from expanding freezing moisture.Neither of those are possible on the moon.According to www.space.com:"When sunlight hits the moon's surface, the temperature can reach 253 degrees F (123 C). The "dark side of the moon" can have temperatures dipping to minus 243 F (minus 153 C)."Obviously, temperature ranges like that could stress a rock enough to crack it. Or, maybe it just got hit by a small meteor travelling at high speed.Are you aware of the fallacy known as "confirmation bias"?
The insanity in all this moon landing conspiracies is that there were about 400,000 people involved in going to the moon and 20,000 companies and research institutions. Not to add that it all cost 150 billion in adjusted dollars. To spend that kind of money merely to give an impression that we went to the moon is insane. To assume that 400,000 people can keep their mouth shut is also insane.
Didn't they play golf on the Moon in one of the later missions?
We had some rough patches a decade or two ago, but America is still in the game, running some some highly successful space missions from time to time. Perhaps a quick, easy fix to this would be to send an unmanned probe to the Moon and have it explore previous alleged landing sites, beaming back live footage to Earth of the analysis as it went. You know, making a cast of an astronaut's footprint, scraping some metal filings off a spacecraft remnant, collecting soil samples containing rubber particles, finding a golf ball, checking the lunar laser ranging equipment for fingerprints, that sort of thing. That would go viral for sure, and maybe even lead to renewed interest in space exploration, which might in turn lead to increased budget allotments for space exploration, and a new shuttle.
Nothing you said there makes the flag anomaly go away."Apollo 15 flag, facing air resistance; proving the fraud of alleged manned moon landings."
The moon landing photos were staged. The recent analysis in aulis.com under Apollo/Moon and titled: Scientific Analysis of Apollo images, proves it. How can otherwise the errors mentioned in the article, be explained? Any ideas?