moon hoax information index.

  • 1150 Replies
  • 208377 Views
?

Master_Evar

  • 3381
  • Well rounded character
Re: moon hoax information index.
« Reply #60 on: February 03, 2016, 09:27:20 AM »
Is it just me, or is this thread a "bit thin on the ground" by way of proof for the (alleged) moon landings?

Thought so.

Edit: apart from the tired assertions (not evidence) from the likes of mikeboy: "but, but, meeeeeeeelions of people would have been in on the conspiracy" tripe.

Actually, I thought the exact opposite. There is not any proof that the "alleged" moon landings are fake. While, on the other hand, there have been several photos posted of people standing on the moon. Are we reading the same thread?

Because you see photos of men standing on the supposedly moon, is all it take to convince you we went there? If I showed you a picture of a unicorn standing next to one of those men, would you believe that unicorns must live there if NASA told you so?

False analogy. We know there is space. We know the moon exists. We know spave travel is possible. We have evidence we sent men to the moon.
Unicorns = nothing.

I think my analogy is a good one. I agree there is something in the sky we call the moon. As far as space travel and whether we sent people to the moon is pure conjecture based on one single fact, NASA says so. If NASA shows us pictures of unicorns and say they live on the moon and these pictures prove it, Why would you NOT believe them? You believe everything else they say.

This depends on. If those kind of pictures where suddenly dropped on us out of nowhere right now, no one would believe it, maybe a few people would. However, if those pictures were released back then with all the other pictures, then most people would believe it. The world would also be a bit different. Back then, CGI/Photoshopping was awful, so there's no way the unicorns could be faked in a realistic way. This would lead to increased funds (or at least sustained) for more moon missions,a s it would mean that life could form and develop on such barren celestial bodies as our moon. It would also show that large organisms could survive in high radiation environments(much higher than earth, but the space suit is more than enough to protect. Mostly solar radiation I'm talking about), without any atmosphere, and they could live on feeding on moon dust. Probably, they would be capable of photosynthesis as well. Millionaires and billionaires would fund further research to develop a safe way to transport tourists from and to the moon, with a cost-effective vehicle. One of these creatures would probably be killed back then, so that it could easily be brought back to earth. Some (at least one) live ones could probably have been taken back to earth by now. In this case, I would believe that there are unicorns on the moon.
Math is the language of the universe.

The inability to explain something is not proof of something else.

We don't speak for reality - we only observe it. An observation can have any cause, but it is still no more than just an observation.

When in doubt; sources!

*

Yendor

  • 1676
Re: moon hoax information index.
« Reply #61 on: February 03, 2016, 10:35:14 AM »
Is it just me, or is this thread a "bit thin on the ground" by way of proof for the (alleged) moon landings?

Thought so.

Edit: apart from the tired assertions (not evidence) from the likes of mikeboy: "but, but, meeeeeeeelions of people would have been in on the conspiracy" tripe.

Actually, I thought the exact opposite. There is not any proof that the "alleged" moon landings are fake. While, on the other hand, there have been several photos posted of people standing on the moon. Are we reading the same thread?

Because you see photos of men standing on the supposedly moon, is all it take to convince you we went there? If I showed you a picture of a unicorn standing next to one of those men, would you believe that unicorns must live there if NASA told you so?

False analogy. We know there is space. We know the moon exists. We know spave travel is possible. We have evidence we sent men to the moon.
Unicorns = nothing.

I think my analogy is a good one. I agree there is something in the sky we call the moon. As far as space travel and whether we sent people to the moon is pure conjecture based on one single fact, NASA says so. If NASA shows us pictures of unicorns and say they live on the moon and these pictures prove it, Why would you NOT believe them? You believe everything else they say.

This depends on. If those kind of pictures where suddenly dropped on us out of nowhere right now, no one would believe it, maybe a few people would. However, if those pictures were released back then with all the other pictures, then most people would believe it. The world would also be a bit different. Back then, CGI/Photoshopping was awful, so there's no way the unicorns could be faked in a realistic way. This would lead to increased funds (or at least sustained) for more moon missions,a s it would mean that life could form and develop on such barren celestial bodies as our moon. It would also show that large organisms could survive in high radiation environments(much higher than earth, but the space suit is more than enough to protect. Mostly solar radiation I'm talking about), without any atmosphere, and they could live on feeding on moon dust. Probably, they would be capable of photosynthesis as well. Millionaires and billionaires would fund further research to develop a safe way to transport tourists from and to the moon, with a cost-effective vehicle. One of these creatures would probably be killed back then, so that it could easily be brought back to earth. Some (at least one) live ones could probably have been taken back to earth by now. In this case, I would believe that there are unicorns on the moon.

You realize I was using absurdity to prove  absurdity don't you? I wasn't serious about Unicorns living on the moon. I guess It could be a culture clash between us. I don't want to offend you, But because of your name being Master, you're not one of those stuffy members of academia are you?

Ecthelion has already said I was rude and GlobeDebunker said I was a psychopath. So, I'm sorry If I appear that way.

Back to the moon thing. Wait, Rayzor wanted to open it up to other nations too. So, I will draw you attention to the article below. I'm not saying I necessarily believe it, but it does sound about right. 

http://worldnewsdailyreport.com/chinese-lunar-rover-finds-no-evidence-of-american-moon-landings/ 
"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act."
                              George Orwell

?

frenat

  • 3752
Re: moon hoax information index.
« Reply #62 on: February 03, 2016, 10:41:50 AM »

http://worldnewsdailyreport.com/chinese-lunar-rover-finds-no-evidence-of-american-moon-landings/ 

so a rover that landed in one part of the Moon has found nothing from Apollo that landed in different parts.  And that proves what exactly?

From a comment on that article, "I can go to the middle of the Mohave Desert and not find any traces of Walt Disney World. Does that mean Walt Disney World does not exist?"


?

Master_Evar

  • 3381
  • Well rounded character
Re: moon hoax information index.
« Reply #63 on: February 03, 2016, 10:48:09 AM »
This depends on. If those kind of pictures where suddenly dropped on us out of nowhere right now, no one would believe it, maybe a few people would. However, if those pictures were released back then with all the other pictures, then most people would believe it. The world would also be a bit different. Back then, CGI/Photoshopping was awful, so there's no way the unicorns could be faked in a realistic way. This would lead to increased funds (or at least sustained) for more moon missions,a s it would mean that life could form and develop on such barren celestial bodies as our moon. It would also show that large organisms could survive in high radiation environments(much higher than earth, but the space suit is more than enough to protect. Mostly solar radiation I'm talking about), without any atmosphere, and they could live on feeding on moon dust. Probably, they would be capable of photosynthesis as well. Millionaires and billionaires would fund further research to develop a safe way to transport tourists from and to the moon, with a cost-effective vehicle. One of these creatures would probably be killed back then, so that it could easily be brought back to earth. Some (at least one) live ones could probably have been taken back to earth by now. In this case, I would believe that there are unicorns on the moon.

You realize I was using absurdity to prove  absurdity don't you? I wasn't serious about Unicorns living on the moon. I guess It could be a culture clash between us. I don't want to offend you, But because of your name being Master, you're not one of those stuffy members of academia are you?
Yes, I realized that you tried that. However, fact is that there are photos of people on the moon, originating from pre-CGI/Photoshop ages, and none of them have unicorns in them. And my point was, if you missed it, was that what we think is absurd might not be absurd. If unicorns actually existed on the moon (and they discovered it back then), we wouldn't think of it as absurd right now.
Math is the language of the universe.

The inability to explain something is not proof of something else.

We don't speak for reality - we only observe it. An observation can have any cause, but it is still no more than just an observation.

When in doubt; sources!

*

Yendor

  • 1676
Re: moon hoax information index.
« Reply #64 on: February 03, 2016, 11:17:18 AM »

http://worldnewsdailyreport.com/chinese-lunar-rover-finds-no-evidence-of-american-moon-landings/ 

so a rover that landed in one part of the Moon has found nothing from Apollo that landed in different parts.  And that proves what exactly?

From a comment on that article, "I can go to the middle of the Mohave Desert and not find any traces of Walt Disney World. Does that mean Walt Disney World does not exist?"

Quote from the Chinese guy,  “We expected to find evidence at Mare Imbrium,” advised Chow Ming Gau, Astronomer from Ganamede China Observatory, “This was an exploration site of the Apollo 15 mission in August of 1971. What we have found is that the moon's surface was smooth with no evidence of disturbance.”

How about what World renowned Russian nuclear engineer Yury Ignatyevich Mukhin says.

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act."
                              George Orwell

Re: moon hoax information index.
« Reply #65 on: February 03, 2016, 11:21:43 AM »
Is it just me, or is this thread a "bit thin on the ground" by way of proof for the (alleged) moon landings?

Thought so.

Edit: apart from the tired assertions (not evidence) from the likes of mikeboy: "but, but, meeeeeeeelions of people would have been in on the conspiracy" tripe.


Actually, I thought the exact opposite. There is not any proof that the "alleged" moon landings are fake. While, on the other hand, there have been several photos posted of people standing on the moon. Are we reading the same thread?

Because you see photos of men standing on the supposedly moon, is all it take to convince you we went there? If I showed you a picture of a unicorn standing next to one of those men, would you believe that unicorns must live there if NASA told you so?
Is your only argument the idea that we've all been lied to? Because I think someone lied to you when they told you that we've all been lied to.
« Last Edit: February 03, 2016, 11:44:36 AM by GlobeDebunker »

To fall into the belief of a flat Earth is to deny YOUR OWN cognizance.

?

frenat

  • 3752
Re: moon hoax information index.
« Reply #66 on: February 03, 2016, 11:39:35 AM »

http://worldnewsdailyreport.com/chinese-lunar-rover-finds-no-evidence-of-american-moon-landings/ 

so a rover that landed in one part of the Moon has found nothing from Apollo that landed in different parts.  And that proves what exactly?

From a comment on that article, "I can go to the middle of the Mohave Desert and not find any traces of Walt Disney World. Does that mean Walt Disney World does not exist?"

Quote from the Chinese guy,  “We expected to find evidence at Mare Imbrium,” advised Chow Ming Gau, Astronomer from Ganamede China Observatory, “This was an exploration site of the Apollo 15 mission in August of 1971. What we have found is that the moon's surface was smooth with no evidence of disturbance.”

How about what World renowned Russian nuclear engineer Yury Ignatyevich Mukhin says.
Mare Imbrium is an area of many hundreds of square miles.  Apollo 15 landed in the SouthEast and the chinese rover landed in the North.  On Google Moon it appears there is a mountain range and hundreds of miles separating the two sites.
Your quote is not from the page linked. 

A search for "Yury Ignatyevich Mukhin" comes up with a former newspaper editor/conspiracy theorist.  The only reference I can find to him being a nuclear engineer is on the site you linked or sites that quote that site.  It appears those credential are false. From what I've found of his writings he has nothing different from many other hoax believers.  Even if he is an engineer it appears he offers nothing new to the table.  So why should I care?

Re: moon hoax information index.
« Reply #67 on: February 03, 2016, 11:54:06 AM »

http://worldnewsdailyreport.com/chinese-lunar-rover-finds-no-evidence-of-american-moon-landings/ 

so a rover that landed in one part of the Moon has found nothing from Apollo that landed in different parts.  And that proves what exactly?

From a comment on that article, "I can go to the middle of the Mohave Desert and not find any traces of Walt Disney World. Does that mean Walt Disney World does not exist?"

Quote from the Chinese guy,  “We expected to find evidence at Mare Imbrium,” advised Chow Ming Gau, Astronomer from Ganamede China Observatory, “This was an exploration site of the Apollo 15 mission in August of 1971. What we have found is that the moon's surface was smooth with no evidence of disturbance.”

How about what World renowned Russian nuclear engineer Yury Ignatyevich Mukhin says.

So, you're telling me that when China sends a rover to the moon, but finds nothing of the earlier moon expeditions, it is believable? I thought nothing has ever left our atmosphere (according to FET).

...yet another FE theorize-r that can't even adhere to his/her own logic

To fall into the belief of a flat Earth is to deny YOUR OWN cognizance.

*

Yendor

  • 1676
Re: moon hoax information index.
« Reply #68 on: February 03, 2016, 01:01:59 PM »
Is it just me, or is this thread a "bit thin on the ground" by way of proof for the (alleged) moon landings?

Thought so.

Edit: apart from the tired assertions (not evidence) from the likes of mikeboy: "but, but, meeeeeeeelions of people would have been in on the conspiracy" tripe.


Actually, I thought the exact opposite. There is not any proof that the "alleged" moon landings are fake. While, on the other hand, there have been several photos posted of people standing on the moon. Are we reading the same thread?

Because you see photos of men standing on the supposedly moon, is all it take to convince you we went there? If I showed you a picture of a unicorn standing next to one of those men, would you believe that unicorns must live there if NASA told you so?
Is your only argument the idea that we've all been lied to? Because I think someone lied to you when they told you that we've all been lied to.

Very profound.
"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act."
                              George Orwell

*

Yendor

  • 1676
Re: moon hoax information index.
« Reply #69 on: February 03, 2016, 01:06:18 PM »

http://worldnewsdailyreport.com/chinese-lunar-rover-finds-no-evidence-of-american-moon-landings/ 

so a rover that landed in one part of the Moon has found nothing from Apollo that landed in different parts.  And that proves what exactly?

From a comment on that article, "I can go to the middle of the Mohave Desert and not find any traces of Walt Disney World. Does that mean Walt Disney World does not exist?"

Quote from the Chinese guy,  “We expected to find evidence at Mare Imbrium,” advised Chow Ming Gau, Astronomer from Ganamede China Observatory, “This was an exploration site of the Apollo 15 mission in August of 1971. What we have found is that the moon's surface was smooth with no evidence of disturbance.”

How about what World renowned Russian nuclear engineer Yury Ignatyevich Mukhin says.
Mare Imbrium is an area of many hundreds of square miles.  Apollo 15 landed in the SouthEast and the chinese rover landed in the North.  On Google Moon it appears there is a mountain range and hundreds of miles separating the two sites.
Your quote is not from the page linked. 

A search for "Yury Ignatyevich Mukhin" comes up with a former newspaper editor/conspiracy theorist.  The only reference I can find to him being a nuclear engineer is on the site you linked or sites that quote that site.  It appears those credential are false. From what I've found of his writings he has nothing different from many other hoax believers.  Even if he is an engineer it appears he offers nothing new to the table.  So why should I care?

My quote isn't? I'll look into it.

This is what I found on Yuri Mukhin.
Yuri Ignatievich Mukhin (b. 1949), Russian opposition politician, publicist, writer, engineer, metallurgist, manager, and inventor. Author of the books "The Moon affair of the USA" (2006)[213] and "A Moon affair" (2009),[82] and the film "Maximum lies and nonsense" (2010).[214] In his works, he examines the differences between the Soviet and US lunar soil found out by Western researchers, refutes the NASA defenders' arguments, and accuses the US government for plundering the taxpayers' money for the Moon programme. Mukhin states that the Politburo of the CPSU Central Committee was blackmailed by the USA that if the USSR denounces the Moon hoax, the US will denounce the Soviet partocracy before his people, revealing that Khrushchev had killed Stalin and Beria.

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act."
                              George Orwell

*

Yendor

  • 1676
Re: moon hoax information index.
« Reply #70 on: February 03, 2016, 01:21:02 PM »

http://worldnewsdailyreport.com/chinese-lunar-rover-finds-no-evidence-of-american-moon-landings/ 

so a rover that landed in one part of the Moon has found nothing from Apollo that landed in different parts.  And that proves what exactly?

From a comment on that article, "I can go to the middle of the Mohave Desert and not find any traces of Walt Disney World. Does that mean Walt Disney World does not exist?"

Quote from the Chinese guy,  “We expected to find evidence at Mare Imbrium,” advised Chow Ming Gau, Astronomer from Ganamede China Observatory, “This was an exploration site of the Apollo 15 mission in August of 1971. What we have found is that the moon's surface was smooth with no evidence of disturbance.”

How about what World renowned Russian nuclear engineer Yury Ignatyevich Mukhin says.

Quote
So, you're telling me that when China sends a rover to the moon, but finds nothing of the earlier moon expeditions, it is believable?
I don't believe they sent a rover to the moon, but you should. After all, they should have better technology then we did in 1969. They say the cell phones they make have more computer power then the computer back in 1969. They should be able to find an old map laying of where we landed landed and played around collecting rocks, they were some expensive rocks too.
Quote
I thought nothing has ever left our atmosphere (according to FET).
...yet another FE theorize-r that can't even adhere to his/her own logic
I'm don't believe I ever said that. I don't think we went to the moon.




"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act."
                              George Orwell

*

legion

  • 1593
  • You are in my VR
Re: moon hoax information index.
« Reply #71 on: February 03, 2016, 01:49:47 PM »
This depends on. If those kind of pictures where suddenly dropped on us out of nowhere right now, no one would believe it, maybe a few people would. However, if those pictures were released back then with all the other pictures, then most people would believe it. The world would also be a bit different. Back then, CGI/Photoshopping was awful, so there's no way the unicorns could be faked in a realistic way. This would lead to increased funds (or at least sustained) for more moon missions,a s it would mean that life could form and develop on such barren celestial bodies as our moon. It would also show that large organisms could survive in high radiation environments(much higher than earth, but the space suit is more than enough to protect. Mostly solar radiation I'm talking about), without any atmosphere, and they could live on feeding on moon dust. Probably, they would be capable of photosynthesis as well. Millionaires and billionaires would fund further research to develop a safe way to transport tourists from and to the moon, with a cost-effective vehicle. One of these creatures would probably be killed back then, so that it could easily be brought back to earth. Some (at least one) live ones could probably have been taken back to earth by now. In this case, I would believe that there are unicorns on the moon.

You realize I was using absurdity to prove  absurdity don't you? I wasn't serious about Unicorns living on the moon. I guess It could be a culture clash between us. I don't want to offend you, But because of your name being Master, you're not one of those stuffy members of academia are you?
Yes, I realized that you tried that. However, fact is that there are photos of people on the moon, originating from pre-CGI/Photoshop ages, and none of them have unicorns in them. And my point was, if you missed it, was that what we think is absurd might not be absurd. If unicorns actually existed on the moon (and they discovered it back then), we wouldn't think of it as absurd right now.

You wouldn't find it absurd, I agree. That doesn't mean it is not absurd. At least we know who and what you will believe (with no evidence).
"Indoctrination [...] is often distinguished from education by the fact that the indoctrinated person is expected not to question or critically examine the doctrine they have learned".

?

frenat

  • 3752
Re: moon hoax information index.
« Reply #72 on: February 03, 2016, 01:54:37 PM »

http://worldnewsdailyreport.com/chinese-lunar-rover-finds-no-evidence-of-american-moon-landings/ 

so a rover that landed in one part of the Moon has found nothing from Apollo that landed in different parts.  And that proves what exactly?

From a comment on that article, "I can go to the middle of the Mohave Desert and not find any traces of Walt Disney World. Does that mean Walt Disney World does not exist?"

Quote from the Chinese guy,  “We expected to find evidence at Mare Imbrium,” advised Chow Ming Gau, Astronomer from Ganamede China Observatory, “This was an exploration site of the Apollo 15 mission in August of 1971. What we have found is that the moon's surface was smooth with no evidence of disturbance.”

How about what World renowned Russian nuclear engineer Yury Ignatyevich Mukhin says.
Mare Imbrium is an area of many hundreds of square miles.  Apollo 15 landed in the SouthEast and the chinese rover landed in the North.  On Google Moon it appears there is a mountain range and hundreds of miles separating the two sites.
Your quote is not from the page linked. 

A search for "Yury Ignatyevich Mukhin" comes up with a former newspaper editor/conspiracy theorist.  The only reference I can find to him being a nuclear engineer is on the site you linked or sites that quote that site.  It appears those credential are false. From what I've found of his writings he has nothing different from many other hoax believers.  Even if he is an engineer it appears he offers nothing new to the table.  So why should I care?

My quote isn't? I'll look into it.

This is what I found on Yuri Mukhin.
Yuri Ignatievich Mukhin (b. 1949), Russian opposition politician, publicist, writer, engineer, metallurgist, manager, and inventor. Author of the books "The Moon affair of the USA" (2006)[213] and "A Moon affair" (2009),[82] and the film "Maximum lies and nonsense" (2010).[214] In his works, he examines the differences between the Soviet and US lunar soil found out by Western researchers, refutes the NASA defenders' arguments, and accuses the US government for plundering the taxpayers' money for the Moon programme. Mukhin states that the Politburo of the CPSU Central Committee was blackmailed by the USA that if the USSR denounces the Moon hoax, the US will denounce the Soviet partocracy before his people, revealing that Khrushchev had killed Stalin and Beria.
Pretty much what I said.

And you ignored the fact their landing site was miles away from Apollo 15.

Re: moon hoax information index.
« Reply #73 on: February 03, 2016, 02:02:21 PM »

http://worldnewsdailyreport.com/chinese-lunar-rover-finds-no-evidence-of-american-moon-landings/ 

so a rover that landed in one part of the Moon has found nothing from Apollo that landed in different parts.  And that proves what exactly?

From a comment on that article, "I can go to the middle of the Mohave Desert and not find any traces of Walt Disney World. Does that mean Walt Disney World does not exist?"

Quote from the Chinese guy,  “We expected to find evidence at Mare Imbrium,” advised Chow Ming Gau, Astronomer from Ganamede China Observatory, “This was an exploration site of the Apollo 15 mission in August of 1971. What we have found is that the moon's surface was smooth with no evidence of disturbance.”

How about what World renowned Russian nuclear engineer Yury Ignatyevich Mukhin says.

Quote
So, you're telling me that when China sends a rover to the moon, but finds nothing of the earlier moon expeditions, it is believable?
I don't believe they sent a rover to the moon, but you should. After all, they should have better technology then we did in 1969. They say the cell phones they make have more computer power then the computer back in 1969. They should be able to find an old map laying of where we landed landed and played around collecting rocks, they were some expensive rocks too.
Quote
I thought nothing has ever left our atmosphere (according to FET).
...yet another FE theorize-r that can't even adhere to his/her own logic
I'm don't believe I ever said that. I don't think we went to the moon.

No, you didn't have to actually type the words "someone has been to the moon", but you did imply it.

You used one account of being on the moon to deny another. If you don't believe China ever sent a rover to the moon (and failed to encounter previous moon exploration), then how can that be evidence that we (USA) have not been to the moon?

To fall into the belief of a flat Earth is to deny YOUR OWN cognizance.

*

feuk

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 570
  • ^ hmmmmm
Re: moon hoax information index.
« Reply #74 on: February 03, 2016, 03:25:52 PM »
Is it just me, or is this thread a "bit thin on the ground" by way of proof for the (alleged) moon landings?

Thought so.

Edit: apart from the tired assertions (not evidence) from the likes of mikeboy: "but, but, meeeeeeeelions of people would have been in on the conspiracy" tripe.

yup, the evidence appears to be intangible and vapour like.

I did notice very early on a plea for hoax evidence in a desperate attempt to change thread subject matter.

Hands up who thinks it strange that the mission disciples are so reluctant to proudly post their most compelling piece of evidence.

Makes you think (or not).
"How can I help but see what is in front of my eyes? Two and two are four."
"Sometimes, Winston. Sometimes they are five. Sometimes they are three. Sometimes they are all of them at once. You must try harder. It's not easy to become sane."

*

feuk

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 570
  • ^ hmmmmm
Re: moon hoax information index.
« Reply #75 on: February 03, 2016, 03:31:15 PM »
no one wish to comment on the US / SOVIET space bromance ?

http://www.nasa.gov/50th/50th_magazine/coldWarCoOp.html

Even the official history and players make interesting reading.
       Roald Z Sagdeev former Soviet space scientist along with wife Susan Eisenhower ( president Eisenhowers grangdaughter) explain.

 Despite the continued space competition between the United States and U.S.S.R., Khrushchev sent Kennedy a letter raising the possibility of space cooperation on a modest level after John Glenn became the first American to orbit Earth on Feb. 20, 1962. That led to two rounds of discussions between NASA’s Deputy Administrator Hugh Dryden and Soviet academician Blagonravov. An agreement led to the opening of cooperation in three areas: 1) the exchange of weather data from satellites and the eventual coordinated launching of meteorological satellites; 2) a joint effort to map the geomagnetic field of Earth; and 3) cooperation in the experimental relay of communications. This link became a primary forum for subsequent U.S.-U.S.S.R. interaction on space.

 In the early 1970s, the Nixon administration sought to reduce U.S.-Soviet tensions, and launched a major effort to reach a strategic arms limitation breakthrough, as well as new cooperation in space. In 1970, during a meeting with Keldysh, U.S. Academy of Sciences President Philip Handler mentioned an American movie starring Gregory Peck and Gene Hackman called Marooned, in which Soviet cosmonauts helped rescue three U.S. astronauts stranded in Earth orbit. Handler suggested the United States and U.S.S.R. develop a mutually com-patible docking system that would make possible such rescues, as well as non-emergency space dock-ings. This imaginary movie scenario touched a chord within space communities on both sides, which already had experienced emergency situations in real life. Talks led to the Apollo-Soyuz Test Project docking mission of 1975, which developed compatible rendezvous and docking systems still in use today, and the establishment of a few topical working groups in different space science and applications disciplines.
 
          " You know,” I responded, “we have a silent gentleman’s agreement to share responsibilities in space". 

the article and it's authors whilst obviously maintaining the cold war narrative give the impression space was the basis for a continental bromance,                           

Silent gentlemens agreements sound strange, don't they ?


   

"How can I help but see what is in front of my eyes? Two and two are four."
"Sometimes, Winston. Sometimes they are five. Sometimes they are three. Sometimes they are all of them at once. You must try harder. It's not easy to become sane."

*

Rayzor

  • 12193
  • Looking for Occam
Re: moon hoax information index.
« Reply #76 on: February 03, 2016, 04:30:13 PM »
no one wish to comment on the US / SOVIET space bromance ?

The United Nations has treaties and articles regarding space activities.   The Soviets and the United States are both signaturies to the agreement.

PDF is here.
http://www.unoosa.org/pdf/publications/STSPACE11E.pdf

I don't think you'd call it a romance,  more like an agreement not to extend the cold war into space.   

Although,  the Russians, the Chinese and the USA all have satellite destruction capabilities.   In the event of a hot war,  the space based assets will surely be a high value target.




« Last Edit: February 03, 2016, 04:50:21 PM by Rayzor »
Stop gilding the pickle, you demisexual aromantic homoflexible snowflake.

Re: moon hoax information index.
« Reply #77 on: February 03, 2016, 06:32:40 PM »
Is it just me, or is this thread a "bit thin on the ground" by way of proof for the (alleged) moon landings?

Thought so.

Edit: apart from the tired assertions (not evidence) from the likes of mikeboy: "but, but, meeeeeeeelions of people would have been in on the conspiracy" tripe.

yup, the evidence appears to be intangible and vapour like.

I did notice very early on a plea for hoax evidence in a desperate attempt to change thread subject matter.

Hands up who thinks it strange that the mission disciples are so reluctant to proudly post their most compelling piece of evidence.

Makes you think (or not).

Those 3 pictures posted relatively early on and your absolute failure to provide any rational argument as to how the photos are faked was plenty of evidence for me.

I thought this thread was the "moon hoax information index"
Edit: ....not the "prove landing on the moon wasn't a hoax" index
« Last Edit: February 03, 2016, 06:37:13 PM by GlobeDebunker »

To fall into the belief of a flat Earth is to deny YOUR OWN cognizance.

?

Master_Evar

  • 3381
  • Well rounded character
Re: moon hoax information index.
« Reply #78 on: February 03, 2016, 09:43:55 PM »
This depends on. If those kind of pictures where suddenly dropped on us out of nowhere right now, no one would believe it, maybe a few people would. However, if those pictures were released back then with all the other pictures, then most people would believe it. The world would also be a bit different. Back then, CGI/Photoshopping was awful, so there's no way the unicorns could be faked in a realistic way. This would lead to increased funds (or at least sustained) for more moon missions,a s it would mean that life could form and develop on such barren celestial bodies as our moon. It would also show that large organisms could survive in high radiation environments(much higher than earth, but the space suit is more than enough to protect. Mostly solar radiation I'm talking about), without any atmosphere, and they could live on feeding on moon dust. Probably, they would be capable of photosynthesis as well. Millionaires and billionaires would fund further research to develop a safe way to transport tourists from and to the moon, with a cost-effective vehicle. One of these creatures would probably be killed back then, so that it could easily be brought back to earth. Some (at least one) live ones could probably have been taken back to earth by now. In this case, I would believe that there are unicorns on the moon.

You realize I was using absurdity to prove  absurdity don't you? I wasn't serious about Unicorns living on the moon. I guess It could be a culture clash between us. I don't want to offend you, But because of your name being Master, you're not one of those stuffy members of academia are you?
Yes, I realized that you tried that. However, fact is that there are photos of people on the moon, originating from pre-CGI/Photoshop ages, and none of them have unicorns in them. And my point was, if you missed it, was that what we think is absurd might not be absurd. If unicorns actually existed on the moon (and they discovered it back then), we wouldn't think of it as absurd right now.

You wouldn't find it absurd, I agree. That doesn't mean it is not absurd. At least we know who and what you will believe (with no evidence).

Because unedited photos (Pre-CGI/Photoshop), samples of unicorns being brung to earth and shown to the public, etc. is not evidence, right? Did you even read the scenario in which I would believe it? I can't say that it WOULD happen that way, but if it DID happen that way I'd probably believe it. I cannot say for certain though, because it didn't happen. I have not seen a real whale, only photos and I know lots of other people have. Doesn't that count as evidence either?
Math is the language of the universe.

The inability to explain something is not proof of something else.

We don't speak for reality - we only observe it. An observation can have any cause, but it is still no more than just an observation.

When in doubt; sources!

Re: moon hoax information index.
« Reply #79 on: February 03, 2016, 10:14:00 PM »
yup, the evidence appears to be intangible and vapour like.

Google for the (supposed) actual footage from the moon landings. Select any photo or video you like.

I did notice very early on a plea for hoax evidence in a desperate attempt to change thread subject matter.

I didn't ask for evidence, I asked for your theory. If I don't know what theory exactly I am supposed to compare the evidence against, how the hell am I supposed to know which piece of evidence is compelling? I cannot "prove" anything in a vacuum (no pun intended).

Hands up who thinks it strange that the mission disciples are so reluctant to proudly post their most compelling piece of evidence.

You have free hand to select whatever pieces of evidence you find most suspect. I find it strange that you haven't used that opportunity.

Your attempt at "winning the argument" is way too transparent. Someone is going to post a piece of evidence, you will come up with a halfway reasonable argument for why this single piece of evidence could possibly be a fake, and then claim that since their most "compelling piece of evidence" was not beyond reasonable doubt (as if any single piece of evidence could possibly be), clearly they are wrong and you have proven the hoax. But it doesn't work that way. You have to come up with an explanation for any and all observations regarding the moon landings, and then we can figure out what piece of evidence would be decisive proof that one of the theories was wrong.
« Last Edit: February 04, 2016, 12:58:15 AM by Ecthelion »

*

feuk

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 570
  • ^ hmmmmm
Re: moon hoax information index.
« Reply #80 on: February 04, 2016, 05:21:36 AM »
Quote from: GlobeDebunker link=topic=65666.msg1754936#msg1754936

Those 3 pictures posted relatively early on and your absolute failure to provide any rational argument as to how the photos are faked was plenty of evidence for me.

I thought this thread was the "moon hoax information index"
Edit: ....not the "prove landing on the moon wasn't a hoax" index

 :)
Let's be clear.
I started this thread asking for believers to put up what they think is the most compelling piece of supporting evidence.
Another poster put up some images,
fair play to him, slightly off topic, but I'm relaxed over such things.
 
       

Feel free to reread my opening post,
Contribute or move along.

What do you believe is the most convincing peice of moon landing evidence ?
Maybe you have not really thought about it,
 
I would be interested to hear your thoughts.
« Last Edit: February 04, 2016, 06:55:00 AM by feuk »
"How can I help but see what is in front of my eyes? Two and two are four."
"Sometimes, Winston. Sometimes they are five. Sometimes they are three. Sometimes they are all of them at once. You must try harder. It's not easy to become sane."

*

feuk

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 570
  • ^ hmmmmm
Re: moon hoax information index.
« Reply #81 on: February 04, 2016, 05:47:41 AM »
yup, the evidence appears to be intangible and vapour like.

Google for the (supposed) actual footage from the moon landings.
I didn't ask for evidence, I asked for your theory. If I don't know what theory exactly I am supposed to compare the evidence against, how the hell am I supposed to know which piece of evidence is compelling? I cannot "prove" anything in a vacuum (no pun intended)
You have free hand to select whatever pieces of evidence you find most suspect. I find it strange that you haven't used that opportunity.

Your attempt at "winning the argument" is way too transparent. Someone is going to post a piece of evidence, you will come up with a halfway reasonable argument for why this single piece of evidence could possibly be a fake, and then claim that since their most "compelling piece of evidence" was not beyond reasonable doubt (as if any single piece of evidence could possibly be), clearly they are wrong and you have proven the hoax. But it doesn't work that way. You have to come up with an explanation for any and all observations regarding the moon landings, and then we can figure  out what piece of evidence would be decisive proof that one of the theories was wrong. 
 


what exactly is the problem ?
     
What do you believe to be the most compelling piece of moon landing evidence ?
   
you demand I produce a conspiratorial theory,
that's not how this thread rolls.

I'm asking you for the cream of evidence,
The one that has YOU convinced.

Feel free to refuse,
or claim it's impossible without a prompt for me,

I really don't understand the outrage and difficulty surrounding this simple request.

No thumb screws or threats,
post up or move along.

Hope that helps  :)
 
"How can I help but see what is in front of my eyes? Two and two are four."
"Sometimes, Winston. Sometimes they are five. Sometimes they are three. Sometimes they are all of them at once. You must try harder. It's not easy to become sane."

Re: moon hoax information index.
« Reply #82 on: February 04, 2016, 08:51:30 AM »
what exactly is the problem ?

Well, the problem is that I think your method makes no sense. Your clearly intend this thread to provide proof for the theory that the moon landings were a hoax - it's right in the title. Instead of actually providing information on the moon hoax, you ask others to supply single pieces of evidence to the contrary, but what's the point of that? That would only be useful if you had posted a theory and then asked for compelling proof that falsifies it.

The problem is that if you take the evidence and then come up with the theory, you can easily tailor the theory around the evidence. You simply come up with a different explanation for every objection. It's a trick used all too often in discussions like this, but it doesn't actually prove anything. I think that should be pointed out.

Re: moon hoax information index.
« Reply #83 on: February 04, 2016, 09:13:36 AM »
yup, the evidence appears to be intangible and vapour like.

Google for the (supposed) actual footage from the moon landings.
I didn't ask for evidence, I asked for your theory. If I don't know what theory exactly I am supposed to compare the evidence against, how the hell am I supposed to know which piece of evidence is compelling? I cannot "prove" anything in a vacuum (no pun intended)
You have free hand to select whatever pieces of evidence you find most suspect. I find it strange that you haven't used that opportunity.

Your attempt at "winning the argument" is way too transparent. Someone is going to post a piece of evidence, you will come up with a halfway reasonable argument for why this single piece of evidence could possibly be a fake, and then claim that since their most "compelling piece of evidence" was not beyond reasonable doubt (as if any single piece of evidence could possibly be), clearly they are wrong and you have proven the hoax. But it doesn't work that way. You have to come up with an explanation for any and all observations regarding the moon landings, and then we can figure  out what piece of evidence would be decisive proof that one of the theories was wrong. 
 


what exactly is the problem ?
     
What do you believe to be the most compelling piece of moon landing evidence ?
   
you demand I produce a conspiratorial theory,
that's not how this thread rolls.

I'm asking you for the cream of evidence,
The one that has YOU convinced.

Feel free to refuse,
or claim it's impossible without a prompt for me,

I really don't understand the outrage and difficulty surrounding this simple request.

No thumb screws or threats,
post up or move along.

Hope that helps  :)

Oh, ok. Bye then. I came here to debate the "index of information" on the "moon hoax".

Edit: Let's analyze your motive for creating this thread. You said you wanted the most compelling evidence of the expedition to the moon. If you really want to find what the most compelling evidence is; go to google and type "mission to the moon" in the 'search' field. I am confident that you will find more than ample information to satisfy your needs. It is beyond practicality for a known fact to be proven when so much information can readily be found on the subject at any one point in time.
« Last Edit: February 04, 2016, 09:24:01 AM by GlobeDebunker »

To fall into the belief of a flat Earth is to deny YOUR OWN cognizance.

*

Son of Orospu

  • Jura's b*tch and proud of it!
  • 37834
  • I have artificial intelligence
Re: moon hoax information index.
« Reply #84 on: February 04, 2016, 09:54:51 AM »
Edit: Let's analyze your motive for creating this thread. You said you wanted the most compelling evidence of the expedition to the moon hoax.

I fixed that for you.  You're welcome.

Re: moon hoax information index.
« Reply #85 on: February 04, 2016, 10:23:59 AM »
Edit: Let's analyze your motive for creating this thread. You said you wanted the most compelling evidence of the expedition to the moon hoax.

I fixed that for you.  You're welcome.

Now you're putting words in my mouth, and not just figuratively, but literally. I know what you're trying to do there. My sentence had more contextual meaning than you apparently understood. OP wants someone to provide evidence that the expedition to the moon was real and not a hoax. So, my sentence was correct in nature from the get-go.

To fall into the belief of a flat Earth is to deny YOUR OWN cognizance.

*

Son of Orospu

  • Jura's b*tch and proud of it!
  • 37834
  • I have artificial intelligence
Re: moon hoax information index.
« Reply #86 on: February 04, 2016, 10:30:28 AM »
Edit: Let's analyze your motive for creating this thread. You said you wanted the most compelling evidence of the expedition to the moon hoax.

I fixed that for you.  You're welcome.

Now you're putting words in my mouth, and not just figuratively, but literally. I know what you're trying to do there. My sentence had more contextual meaning than you apparently understood. OP wants someone to provide evidence that the expedition to the moon was real and not a hoax. So, my sentence was correct in nature from the get-go.

Maybe you might consider making a thread in the debate forum, if your only purpose is to start a debate?  Just a suggestion. 

*

feuk

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 570
  • ^ hmmmmm
Re: moon hoax information index.
« Reply #87 on: February 04, 2016, 10:43:15 AM »
Lol.

What is the most compelling piece of evidence that convinced YOU that man went to the moon.

Don't be scared guys,

surely you should be proud and all to eager to share the single most compelling evidence that makes YOU a believer.
"How can I help but see what is in front of my eyes? Two and two are four."
"Sometimes, Winston. Sometimes they are five. Sometimes they are three. Sometimes they are all of them at once. You must try harder. It's not easy to become sane."

*

MaNaeSWolf

  • 2623
  • Show me the evidence
Re: moon hoax information index.
« Reply #88 on: February 04, 2016, 11:46:11 AM »
Quote

Lol.

What is the most compelling piece of evidence that convinced YOU that man went to the moon.

Don't be scared guys,

surely you should be proud and all to eager to share the single most compelling evidence that makes YOU a believer.

Actually never really thought of it until I heard people saying the that there was a conspiracy video proving it was all faked.
I watched and read the various conspiracy theories, and died a little inside. You must literally know zero physics/ science to believe in the conspiracies, especially if you watch the videos. Google has been invented, its not so hard to learn why (for example) there are no stars in the back ground of pictures of the astronauts. Speak to a photographer, or do an experiment.

So the piece of evidence that convinced me that man has been to the moon, was that I looked at the counter evidence.
If you move fast enough, everything appears flat

Re: moon hoax information index.
« Reply #89 on: February 04, 2016, 12:35:08 PM »
Edit: Let's analyze your motive for creating this thread. You said you wanted the most compelling evidence of the expedition to the moon hoax.

I fixed that for you.  You're welcome.

Now you're putting words in my mouth, and not just figuratively, but literally. I know what you're trying to do there. My sentence had more contextual meaning than you apparently understood. OP wants someone to provide evidence that the expedition to the moon was real and not a hoax. So, my sentence was correct in nature from the get-go.

Maybe you might consider making a thread in the debate forum, if your only purpose is to start a debate?  Just a suggestion.

Why are you quoting me to make this statement?

"I will allow this thread to mature nicely and let your evidence pile up for a bit."
-feuk (OP)

This is an implication that this thread will become a debate.

But back to the conversation at hand (before you 'forget' your 'education' and we have to start all over again)...
What say you about perpendicular magnetic flux lines and such?!


Edit: text in red was meant for another thread.
« Last Edit: February 04, 2016, 01:08:04 PM by GlobeDebunker »

To fall into the belief of a flat Earth is to deny YOUR OWN cognizance.