Fox TV Special - Did we land on the moon?

I was browsing around the internet and found that someone uploaded Fox's moon landing special onto Google Video. Take a look. Some of the expert interviews are interesting.

Summary:

"Fox TV network aired a program called "Conspiracy Theory: Did We Land on the Moon?'', hosted by Mitch Pileggi. The program was an hour long, and featured interviews with a series of people who believe that NASA faked the Apollo Moon landings in the 1960s and 1970s. The biggest voice in this is Bill Kaysing, who claims to have all sorts of hoax evidence, including pictures taken by the astronauts, engineering details, discussions of physics and even some testimony by astronauts themselves. The program's conclusion was that the whole thing was faked in the Nevada desert. According to them, NASA did not have the technical capability of going to the Moon, but pressure due to the Cold War with the Soviet Union forced them to fake it."

Click Here.

Goodie!

And here is a web site dedicated to refuting the claims of a moon landing "hoax".

http://www.badastronomy.com/bad/tv/foxapollo.html

Bad: Right at the beginning, they have a disclaimer:

    The following program deals with a controversial subject. The theories expressed are not the only possible explanation. Viewers are invited to make a judgment based on all available information.

Good: The last thing the writers of this program want the viewers to do is make an informed decision. If they did, they would have given equal time to both sides of this controversy. Instead, the vast majority of the time is given to the HBs, with only scattered (and very vague) dismissive statements by skeptics. So the available information is really only what they tell you. Of course, there are a lot of websites talking about this. I have a list of them on my own site.

I've seen it. It's pathetic, much like any fox special. Not alot of fact, but a whole lot of "Oh my god! Did we REALLY land on the MOON?!".

And here is a web site dedicated to refuting the claims of a moon landing "hoax".

http://www.badastronomy.com/bad/tv/foxapollo.html

I don't know why that website claims that the show didn't play fair. They clearly did. On side hand we had experts pointing out discrepancies with the footage and images. In response we saw the NASA apologists mumbling "it's all a coincidence!" The NASA critics in the Fox special are pretty much saying the exact same thing that guy on that badastronomy website is saying.

Identical backgrounds, the expert interviews, a NASA Safety Inspector accidentally killed by a moving train just before he publishes his 500 page report outing the Apollo Program fro the fraud it was, it 's clearly not all a coincidence.

Quote

And here is a web site dedicated to refuting the claims of a moon landing "hoax".

http://www.badastronomy.com/bad/tv/foxapollo.html

I don't know why that website claims that the show didn't play fair. They clearly did. On side hand we had experts pointing out discrepancies with the footage and images. In response we saw the NASA apologists mumbling "it's all a coincidence!" The NASA critics in the Fox special are pretty much saying the exact same thing as that guy on that badastronomy website.

Identical backgrounds, NASA Safety Inspector and his family accidentally killed by a moving train just before he publishes his 500 page report criticizing the Apollo Program, it all adds up.

Woah, wait you're ACTUALLY beleiving the fox special? Jesus.. i didn't think you were THAT dumb. My god man...

There is PLENTY of good evidence showing that we haven't been on the moon, and there is no visual confirmation thus far to prove it.. PLEASE USE THAT AND NOT A SPECIAL THAT WAS MADE BY FOX TO GET RATINGS!!! This is the wrong source for information.. Fox is SKEWED!

There is PLENTY of good evidence showing that we haven't been on the moon, and there is no visual confirmation thus far to prove it..

Yeah, I know that already. What's your point?

PLEASE USE THAT AND NOT A SPECIAL THAT WAS MADE BY FOX TO GET RATINGS!!! This is the wrong source for information.. Fox is SKEWED!

Sure they are. 

Quote

There is PLENTY of good evidence showing that we haven't been on the moon, and there is no visual confirmation thus far to prove it..

Yeah, I know that already. What's your point?

Quote

PLEASE USE THAT AND NOT A SPECIAL THAT WAS MADE BY FOX TO GET RATINGS!!! This is the wrong source for information.. Fox is SKEWED!

Sure they are. 

Well that only means that you're a fool. More of a fool than I thought you were. Next you'll be calling it the Sexbox  dumbass

Well that only means that you're a fool. More of a fool than I thought you were. Next you'll be calling it the Sexbox  dumbass

Fox Network airs a show demonstrating that NASA to be a conspiracy. Your only response is "FOX IS A CONSPIRACY!!!"

Do you realize how dumb that makes you look?

Quote

And here is a web site dedicated to refuting the claims of a moon landing "hoax".

http://www.badastronomy.com/bad/tv/foxapollo.html

I don't know why that website claims that the show didn't play fair. They clearly did. On side hand we had experts pointing out discrepancies with the footage and images. In response we saw the NASA apologists mumbling "it's all a coincidence!" The NASA critics in the Fox special are pretty much saying the exact same thing that guy on that badastronomy website is saying.

Identical backgrounds, the expert interviews, a NASA Safety Inspector accidentally killed by a moving train just before he publishes his 500 page report criticizing the Apollo Program, it clearly not a coincidence.

Well, like for the crosshairs, these pictures are old.  White in old photographs leeches over black.  Notice how the crosshairs are always behind white objects?  Aha!

All in all, the special used faulty science.  For example the shadows.  I remember while I was watching, I think it was the second photograph, I completely disagreed with the angles.  The shadows looked straight in the second photo.

Quote

Well that only means that you're a fool. More of a fool than I thought you were. Next you'll be calling it the Sexbox  dumbass

Fox Network airs a show demonstrating that NASA a conspiracy. Your only response is "FOX IS A CONSPIRACY!!!"

Do you realize how dumb that makes you look?

No, I think she was saying that Fox was just trying to get ratings.  They dramatized the entire show; it was basically a part entertainment show with a little bit of some interesting things to speculate on.

Quote

Well that only means that you're a fool. More of a fool than I thought you were. Next you'll be calling it the Sexbox  dumbass

Fox Network airs a show demonstrating that NASA to be a conspiracy. Your only response is "FOX IS A CONSPIRACY!!!"

Do you realize how dumb that makes you look?

Please quote to me where I indicated that it was a conspiracy? I said they're skewed.. and a shitty network among other things.

You're telling me you believe everything you see on TV. Do you realize how dumb that makes you look?

Quote from: Tom Bishop on April 10, 2008, 11:00:34 AM

Quote

Well that only means that you're a fool. More of a fool than I thought you were. Next you'll be calling it the Sexbox  dumbass

Fox Network airs a show demonstrating that NASA a conspiracy. Your only response is "FOX IS A CONSPIRACY!!!"

Do you realize how dumb that makes you look?

No, I think she was saying that Fox was just trying to get ratings.  They dramatized the entire show; it was basically a part entertainment show with a little bit of some interesting things to speculate on.

Exactly! I ... wait, wtf.. she?!

Well, like for the crosshairs, these pictures are old.  White in old photographs leeches over black.  Notice how the crosshairs are always behind white objects?  Aha!

Sure, some of the photos can easily be explained away. I don't particularly like the crosshair thing as a proof either. However, we must take all of the evidence against the moon landings we do have and consider whether it's truly reasonable to conclude that all of these discrepancies are a result of optical illusions. It's easy enough to explain away one discrepancy, but why should there be so many discrepancies at all if man had truly landed on the moon?

Not to mention that after these discrepancies are found, NASA goes and edits them out of their pictures. Remember the "C" rock? After that came out NASA went and edited it out of their pictures.

Original:


Closeup:


NASA edit: http://spaceflight.nasa.gov/gallery/images/apollo/apollo16/hires/as16-107-17446.jpg

Why would NASA feel the need to airbrush out discrepancies after they are publicized if they truly have nothing to hide?

Omg! That SOO proves its a conspiracy...

...That C just looks like an imperfection in the film, especially as it's browner then the surrounding rock.

Omg! That SOO proves its a conspiracy...

Unless you can tell me how an English letter of the alphabet got etched into a rock on the moon's surface, I don't see any other possibility than a conspiracy.

On the very same picture there are also two different light sources.

...That C just looks like an imperfection in the film, especially as it's browner then the surrounding rock.

An imperfection which looks exactly like a letter of the alphabet? Okay, sure, I could see that. Maybe. But why would NASA edit it out of the raw images?

Quote

...That C just looks like an imperfection in the film, especially as it's browner then the surrounding rock.

An imperfection which looks exactly like a letter of the alphabet? Okay, sure, maybe I could see that. But why would NASA edit it out of the raw images?

Quote from: Kill-9 on April 10, 2008, 11:27:44 AM

Omg! That SOO proves its a conspiracy...

Unless you can tell me how an English letter of the alphabet got etched into a rock on the moon's surface, I don't see any other possibility than a conspiracy.

Not to mention, from that very same picture there are two different light sources.

The c could be anything. it could b e an anomaly on the negative,  a string, a hair, dust, an imperfection in the film, cosmic rays, magic, a weather baloon... take your pic. I mean what the fuck do you THINK it means? Why write "C" on a rock? for shits and giggles?

The light sources in that picture are not too far off, and definatly not as far off as you are indicating. There's also the fact that 2 light sources requires... well.. 2 shadows.

And not to mention the fact that pictures don't indicate any kind of proof, according to you.. so why do you keep linking them tom? Hm?

An imperfection which looks exactly like a letter of the alphabet? Okay, sure, maybe I could see that. But why would NASA edit it out of the raw images?

There may have been a bit of stuff stuck to the first scan, so they scanned it in again without the weird little thing in the way. Perhaps they just wanted to try and avoid conspiracy theorists start going on about how the mark must be some kind of reference letter, thus 'proving' the moon landing was staged.

I was browsing around the internet and found that someone uploaded Fox's moon landing special onto Google Video. Take a look. Some of the expert interviews are interesting.

Summary:

"Fox TV network aired a program called "Conspiracy Theory: Did We Land on the Moon?'', hosted by Mitch Pileggi. The program was an hour long, and featured interviews with a series of people who believe that NASA faked the Apollo Moon landings in the 1960s and 1970s. The biggest voice in this is Bill Kaysing, who claims to have all sorts of hoax evidence, including pictures taken by the astronauts, engineering details, discussions of physics and even some testimony by astronauts themselves. The program's conclusion was that the whole thing was faked in the Nevada desert. According to them, NASA did not have the technical capability of going to the Moon, but pressure due to the Cold War with the Soviet Union forced them to fake it."

Click Here.

Yes lets believe things that we see on the Fox TV network, the same station that plays the Simpsons and Family Guy, if it's on there it must be true. Second the description you wrote yourself says that this Kaysing guy CLAIMS to have evidence of the hoax. I can CLAIM that I'm Superman buit that doesn't make it true. And think about how serious FOX was about this, they got a guy from the X-FILES to host it, as in someone from a show about bullshit itself. This was just a ratings ploy by FOX, nothing else. 

.....14 days.

And not to mention the fact that pictures don't indicate any kind of proof, according to you.. so why do you keep linking them tom? Hm?

The letter C stamped on a rock, the multiple light sources.  It all seems kind of fishy to me.

In that particular image there's even an artificial division between the lunar landscape and the immediate study area.

Cropped: http://i31.tinypic.com/244a49k.jpg

Does any one else notice the subtle line which bisects the image horizontally? The rocks and shadows all seem to abruptly disappear. It almost appears as if the background is artificial.

In that particular image there's even an artificial division between the lunar landscape and the immediate study area.

Cropped: http://i31.tinypic.com/244a49k.jpg

Does any one else notice the subtle line which bisects the image horizontally? The rocks and shadows all seem to abruptly disappear. It almost appears as if the background is artificial.

It looks like the crest of a hill to me...

Quote

And not to mention the fact that pictures don't indicate any kind of proof, according to you.. so why do you keep linking them tom? Hm?

The letter C stamped on a rock, the multiple light sources.  It all seems kind of fishy to me.

In that particular image there's even an artificial division between the lunar landscape and the immediate study area.

Cropped: http://i31.tinypic.com/244a49k.jpg

Does any one else notice the subtle line which bisects the image horizontally? The shadows and rocks all seem to abruptly disappear. It almost appears as if the background is artificial.

Tom.. thats cause he section of ground he is on is raised.. 

Look at the left part of the photo, it even LOOKs like a drop off... I'm also not here to prove we did land on the moon. I'm just hoping you use better evidence. There is plenty the fox special didn't cover... and that it got wrong too.

If the US moon landing was a fake, then why didn't the Russians fake a moon landing too?  After all, their space program is just as fake as ours.

Tom.. thats cause he section of ground he is on is raised.. 

Suuuure it was.

And I bet NASA astronaut Gus Grissom put that lemon against the module window during the Apollo 1 test run because he really liked lemons.

And I bet that shortly before publishing his 500 page report outing the Apollo program, former NASA safety inspector Thomas Baron and his immediate family decided to commit group suicide together by parking their sedan on a train track.

And lets not forget how former NASA astronaut James Irwin conveniently died of a heart attack right after contacting the media to schedule an interview to personally confess that the Apollo missions were a sham.

It's all a mix of illusions, coincidences, and the Fox TV conspiracy skewing the facts, isn't it?

And lets not forget how former NASA astronaut James Irwin conveniently died of a heart attack

Well, it wasn't very convenient for him

Quote

Tom.. thats cause he section of ground he is on is raised.. 

Suuuure it was.

And I bet NASA astronaut Gus Grissom put that lemon against the module window during the Apollo 1 test run because he really liked lemons.

And I bet that shortly before publishing his 500 page report outing the Apollo program, former NASA safety inspector Thomas Baron and his immediate family decided to commit group suicide together by parking their sedan on a train track.

And lets not forget how former NASA astronaut James Irwin conveniently died of a heart attack right after contacting the media to schedule an interview to personally confess that the Apollo missions were a sham.

It's all a mix of illusions, coincidences, and the Fox TV conspiracy skewing the facts, isn't it?

Okay, I'll admit those deaths do look suspicious.  But seriously Tom, you have no excuse to ignore the evidence we presented.  The website presented earlier has rather good rebuttals of all the issues brought up during the Fox program, and even includes a few easy to perform experiments and provides links to the data sources.

You can argue for the Moon Landing Hoax all you like, but it's really hard to take you seriously when you refuse to accept that the Fox special may have overblown a few things just for some shock ratings.

You believe NASA is entwined in some massive conspiracy to make people think Earth is round and that space travel is impossible.  Is it too hard to think that maybe Fox decided to exaggerate some of their findings to boost the ratings for their special?

EDIT: And regarding the horizontal line in the photo, it does look like it's a drop off.  You can see on the left side of the full picture that some of the rocks are sunk below the 'line'

Quote

Tom.. thats cause he section of ground he is on is raised.. 

Suuuure it was.

And I bet NASA astronaut Gus Grissom put that lemon against the module window during the Apollo 1 test run because he really liked lemons.

And I bet that shortly before publishing his 500 page report outing the Apollo program, former NASA safety inspector Thomas Baron and his immediate family decided to commit group suicide together by parking their sedan on a train track.

And lets not forget how former NASA astronaut James Irwin conveniently died of a heart attack right after contacting the media to schedule an interview to personally confess that the Apollo missions were a sham.

It's all a mix of illusions, coincidences, and the Fox TV conspiracy skewing the facts, isn't it?

Wow... you're just some crazy crackpot...

The C on the rock looks a lot like an eyelash that fell on film while it was copied.

It NASA was going to label a rock, why not put it in readable font, something like:

If this doesn't convince RE'ers it was fake, nothing will.