Moon landings information

  • 82 Replies
  • 22326 Views
Moon landings information
« Reply #30 on: March 31, 2006, 12:49:42 AM »
You have to remember that the US and Russia were racing to get to the moon.  No one would have loved to prove the US moon landings as an elaborate hoax more than the Russians.  Wouldn't they have been able to expose it if it were faked??  That was one of the only reasons we went to the moon, to beat Russia to it.  And the Russians never seemed to even hint that the landings were fake.  They kept a close watch on our progess and were able to determine that the mission was legit.  So if they can accept the landings, why can't (some of) our own people?

Moon landings information
« Reply #31 on: March 31, 2006, 07:01:23 AM »
Quote from: "REcarl"
You have to remember that the US and Russia were racing to get to the moon.  No one would have loved to prove the US moon landings as an elaborate hoax more than the Russians.  Wouldn't they have been able to expose it if it were faked??  That was one of the only reasons we went to the moon, to beat Russia to it.  And the Russians never seemed to even hint that the landings were fake.  They kept a close watch on our progess and were able to determine that the mission was legit.  So if they can accept the landings, why can't (some of) our own people?

because some people refuse to belive anything there told -grim

*

Duke

  • 38
Moon landings information
« Reply #32 on: June 25, 2006, 03:27:04 AM »
America neither have landed on the Moon nor will in the near future. Either cause even now they don't have the technology or because they know that the Moon is artificially made by extraterrestrials.
f you can't make it, fake it.

Moon landings information
« Reply #33 on: July 08, 2006, 09:11:48 AM »
Just wait a moment.

According to the FAQ the moon is a spotlight.  Thus the moon landings must have been a hoax.  The moon is not a disk.  That is plain and simply not true, and you can see it for yourself.

Because the Moon's orbit is not a perfect circle but actually an ellipse, its spin and rotation don't exactly match up. This means that sometimes the spin lags behind the orbital speed, and sometimes it moves ahead. This in turn means that sometimes we can "peek" around a bit onto the far side of the Moon. This is called "libration".  This effect is small, and you need a telescope to see it, but it does occur.  I watch it happen every month.  You can see it happening here:  

http://www.nwgis.com/greg/images/libration.jpg

Now how could a 2-D spotlight do that?  Does it generate new craters and mountains around its edges at regular intervals?  I donít think so.  Granted, this doesnít discredit the Moon Hoax arguments, but it does discredit their initial hypothesis.
"The earth looks flat; therefore it is flat."
-Flat Earthers

"Triangle ABC looks isosceles; therefore . . ."
-3rd grade geometry student

Moon landings information
« Reply #34 on: July 08, 2006, 06:14:43 PM »
bah we landed on the moon.... the real conspiracy is that we made a moonbase and so did the russians, and that is where the cold war is still being fought!!!!.



ok total bollocks, but it would probably make a good computer game or TV show.

Moon landings information
« Reply #35 on: July 09, 2006, 11:35:35 AM »
the

Moon landings information
« Reply #36 on: July 09, 2006, 12:00:50 PM »
With a good pair of binoculars or a telescope, I can see satellites, saying that these do not exist is absolutly absurd,it would be like sayinwater doesnt exist, even though you see and use it every day... just like satellites
he man in black fled across the desert, and the gunslinger followed.

Advocatus Diaboli

Moon landings information
« Reply #37 on: July 10, 2006, 02:55:04 AM »
I have observed the night sky through telescopes and observatories (I completed four college astronomy courses requiring this), and I own two pair of powerful binoculars.  I have never seen an orbiting satellite.  

  However, I have seen obects which others wrongly interpreted as satellites due to their own prejudice with reguards to the interpretation of those objects.  I am not convinced of the existence of orbiting satellites as I have never seen them as I have indeed seen common things like water and earth.  Moreover, as NASA has a history of disseminating falsehhods like faked photographs which I have seen concrete examples of, I have good reason to doubt the existence of satellites.

  As far as I am concerned, the existence of orbiting satellites is science fiction material.

- Dionysios

Moon landings information
« Reply #38 on: July 10, 2006, 02:58:11 AM »
the

Moon landings information
« Reply #39 on: July 10, 2006, 03:03:08 AM »
Quote from: "REcarl"
You have to remember that the US and Russia were racing to get to the moon.  No one would have loved to prove the US moon landings as an elaborate hoax more than the Russians.  Wouldn't they have been able to expose it if it were faked??  That was one of the only reasons we went to the moon, to beat Russia to it.  And the Russians never seemed to even hint that the landings were fake.  They kept a close watch on our progess and were able to determine that the mission was legit.  So if they can accept the landings, why can't (some of) our own people?


  The Soviet space program was fake as well, and there were Russians who did not believe in this charade who were cognizant of the disinformation their government typically disemminated.  Also, there were and are americans who never accepted the moon landings propaganda either.

  The same community was behind the charade in both countries.  Unlike its Orthodox Christian predecessor, Soviet Russia came from the west including all its scientific institutions.  One will get a general idea from this from perusing Antony Sutton's three volume 'Western Technology and Soviet Economic Development:  1917-1965' published by Stanford University's Hoover Institute.  The point is that many scientific and technological (and financial) elements in both countries were cooperative and actually had the same sponsors rather than being at each others throats.

- Dionysios

Moon landings information
« Reply #40 on: July 10, 2006, 03:05:53 AM »
Quote from: "Dionysios"
Transmission from earth based tansmitters like radio antennas is the principle method used today to make radio transmissions, and "orbiting satellites" are an old myth from the 1950's.  


oh brother. I think i just have to give up on this part of the forum.

Did you ever realize that on the surface of a large sphere, the ground can look flat?

Moon landings information
« Reply #41 on: July 10, 2006, 04:29:26 AM »
i have seen the international space station with a pair of binoculars.... and i'm fairly sure it wasn't no plane.

Moon landings information
« Reply #42 on: July 10, 2006, 05:56:59 AM »
the

?

cadmium_blimp

  • 1499
  • funny, you thought I'd convert, didn't you?
Moon landings information
« Reply #43 on: July 10, 2006, 07:34:04 AM »
Dio, you don't believe that orbitting satelittes exist because you don't see them like you do water and such?  If you're going to be that skeptical of things, how can you be sure that any of this is even real?

I think the proper description of the space shuttle would be a space-faring glider.

Quote from: Commander Taggart
Never give up, never surrender!

Moon landings information
« Reply #44 on: July 10, 2006, 08:23:57 AM »
the

Moon landings information
« Reply #45 on: July 10, 2006, 10:38:56 AM »
I believe the moon landing was faked. Not because of the earth "conspiracy" but to make America look as if they were ahead in the space race.
img]http://img152.imageshack.us/img152/381/samuraichamplooie0.jpg[/img]
In Soviet Russia, Penguin makes You!

Moon landings information
« Reply #46 on: July 10, 2006, 12:00:19 PM »
the

Moon landings information
« Reply #47 on: July 10, 2006, 04:54:27 PM »
Dionysios, would it influence what your saying that you can follow the satellites with binoculars, have others see them, and track their movement in the sky.  I'm sure you could even get multiple pairs of binoculars and have a satellite viewing party if you so please?

- :twisted:
he man in black fled across the desert, and the gunslinger followed.

Advocatus Diaboli

Moon landings information
« Reply #48 on: July 10, 2006, 05:17:53 PM »
the

Moon landings information
« Reply #49 on: July 10, 2006, 05:19:06 PM »
I have seen satellites, and actually it was my older brother who pointed it out to me, we were trying to "watch birds" but ADD got ahold of us
he man in black fled across the desert, and the gunslinger followed.

Advocatus Diaboli

Moon landings information
« Reply #50 on: July 10, 2006, 09:42:54 PM »
the

?

RenaissanceMan

Moon landings information
« Reply #51 on: July 10, 2006, 10:38:24 PM »
Moon landings.

Ignoring every other detail... and there are many.. there is ONE shot that uniquivicably proves that the landings were not faked.

After the crew tooled about on the moon, a camera was left on the surface to record the take off of the LEM from it's base.

In full, stunning black and white, the engine fired, flamelessly blasting thousands of bits of detritis from the thin solar shielding as the LEM lifted off.

Each bit of detritus twisted and arced in the engine's invisible exaust. Thousands of them.

There was NO WAY IN HELL that scene could have been faked.

Moon landings information
« Reply #52 on: July 11, 2006, 01:05:50 AM »
Phil Plait, the pseudoscience debunking astronomer, has a page loaded with answers to the feeble "there was no moon landing" people. Mind you he IS an actual astronomer, unlike the raving lunatics that push the moon-hoax idea around.

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

Moon landings information
« Reply #53 on: July 11, 2006, 01:14:43 AM »
Quote from: "DrQuak"
bah we landed on the moon.... the real conspiracy is that we made a moonbase and so did the russians, and that is where the cold war is still being fought!!!!.



ok total bollocks, but it would probably make a good computer game or TV show.


See Battlezone. RTS/FPS game a few years old. It's premise is the US and USSR fighting out the cold war on different planets and moons in the solar system.

Moon landings information
« Reply #54 on: July 11, 2006, 04:21:17 AM »
Hmm one thing that i have always wondered about the moon landing is how did they get the camera down there before Armstrong went down the lander? was it on one of the landing struts or something? or did Buzz quickly jump out and back in to set up a tri pod? =)

Moon landings information
« Reply #55 on: July 11, 2006, 09:55:50 AM »
the

Moon landings information
« Reply #56 on: July 11, 2006, 12:58:42 PM »
LOL.

Same here. Just because you saw the rocket take off on camera, doesn't mean that's where the camera is, and that's exactly what's going on.

America was afraid that the communists got ahead in the space race. the USSR (which owns) launched Sputnik. America pissed their pants. Then America launched "Flopnik" I believe the real name was Vanguard. It exploded. The Soviets laughed at America.

Becuase the US didn't want to embarrass themselves again, they staged it in Dreamland. (Area 51)

Although I don't agree with the earth being flat, I do believe in illusions. Because you see footage of a rocket launching does not mean that rocket launched.

Just like in a videogame. You kill someone. Did you really pick up that gun and shoot the guy? No. You pressed a button. The button sends a signal to the game, which tells the gun to shoot, which then starts the enemy's dying animations if you hit him.

Same thing happens with government. To them, we're all just little AI scripts. They push a button, a movie starts. The movie shows us something that looks like it's real (just like a videogame) but it's not. Therefore, we think it is. Same thing goes with the pictures of a round earth. Just replace the word movie with picture.

I'm an RE believer, but I agree with the photographic evidence posibly being faked. Just as I agree with the moon landing being faked.
img]http://img152.imageshack.us/img152/381/samuraichamplooie0.jpg[/img]
In Soviet Russia, Penguin makes You!

Moon landings information
« Reply #57 on: July 11, 2006, 03:53:22 PM »
Quote from: "Mech Tau"


Exibit A: This is a new one for me. I don't have an answer, but I'm sure there is one. Besides, it is totally possible to have one lightsource and that be true. Or, how could it be true with multiple light sources?


Haven't looked at the rest, but as for this picture, if you look closely you'll see that there is a slight hill behind the guy farthest from the foreground. It's because of the rising ground that the shadow appears shorter. You can also see evidence of this in the way the shadow looks tilted. It's following the contours of the ground which isn't as flat as initial observation might lead you to believe.
'm not a flat earther. I just play one on TV.

Moon landings information
« Reply #58 on: July 12, 2006, 04:51:20 AM »
the

Moon landings information
« Reply #59 on: July 12, 2006, 04:57:40 AM »
the