moon hoax information index.

Maybe if he can re-write it in a coherent manner,  but his brain is so badly scrambled by conspiracy theory,  I don't hold much hope.

Quote from: Rayzor on March 02, 2016, 04:40:12 PM

Maybe if he can re-write it in a coherent manner,  but his brain is so badly scrambled by conspiracy theory,  I don't hold much hope.

Strange because the scoreboard says you are being thrashed.

and now, because the page has turned, you are pretending to not be running away from your compartmentalisation = secrecy face plant 
Or are you still saying the poo bag guys were kept in the loop on the progression of the entire program 

Do you concede you were posting bollocks ?

or are you going to continue running and dancing ?

Quote from: Rayzor on March 02, 2016, 04:40:12 PM

Maybe if he can re-write it in a coherent manner,  but his brain is so badly scrambled by conspiracy theory,  I don't hold much hope.

Strange because the scoreboard says you are being thrashed.

Quote from: sceptimatic on March 03, 2016, 12:45:58 AM

In the 60's it was much easier to bullshit the population into believing anything, because the only info was all mainstream indoctrinated schooling from media sources.
All people had from that point was gossip by word of mouth and one hit wonder TV to gossip over. No play back options for 99%.

Flash Gordon and lost in space etc, were real to most. Well, real enough to believe anything was possible in their fictional space.

And yet all of the media produced in the 60's regarding the Apollo program (video, photographs etc) still stands up to intense scrutiny to this day without any problems whatsoever.

It's almost like they actually did go to the moon after all.......

Quote from: Mainframes on March 03, 2016, 02:04:34 AM

Quote from: sceptimatic on March 03, 2016, 12:45:58 AM

In the 60's it was much easier to bullshit the population into believing anything, because the only info was all mainstream indoctrinated schooling from media sources.
All people had from that point was gossip by word of mouth and one hit wonder TV to gossip over. No play back options for 99%.

Flash Gordon and lost in space etc, were real to most. Well, real enough to believe anything was possible in their fictional space.

And yet all of the media produced in the 60's regarding the Apollo program (video, photographs etc) still stands up to intense scrutiny to this day without any problems whatsoever.

It's almost like they actually did go to the moon after all.......

The Apollo lies were shown up under weak scrutiny. The intense scrutiny only added to the depth of how ridiculous it really was.
It was good for its time because nobody knew any different, nor could they play back. I suppose in the 60's nobody thought computers would be as popular as they are.
I think one supposed genius mentioned that computers would never take off. I bet they wish they hadn't.

Quote from: sceptimatic on March 03, 2016, 07:05:28 AM

Quote from: Mainframes on March 03, 2016, 02:04:34 AM

Quote from: sceptimatic on March 03, 2016, 12:45:58 AM

In the 60's it was much easier to bullshit the population into believing anything, because the only info was all mainstream indoctrinated schooling from media sources.
All people had from that point was gossip by word of mouth and one hit wonder TV to gossip over. No play back options for 99%.

Flash Gordon and lost in space etc, were real to most. Well, real enough to believe anything was possible in their fictional space.

And yet all of the media produced in the 60's regarding the Apollo program (video, photographs etc) still stands up to intense scrutiny to this day without any problems whatsoever.

It's almost like they actually did go to the moon after all.......

The Apollo lies were shown up under weak scrutiny. The intense scrutiny only added to the depth of how ridiculous it really was.
It was good for its time because nobody knew any different, nor could they play back. I suppose in the 60's nobody thought computers would be as popular as they are.
I think one supposed genius mentioned that computers would never take off. I bet they wish they hadn't.

Perhaps you could provide some examples of media that you think have failed scrutiny. Is suspect you may struggle to find any real examples.

Nah; I sincerely doubt anything would sway you. You're  not wired that way. If they hauled a stage prop up from the fake moon set with thick rope, you would say the rope was just a glitch in the film. You are one of many that will follow one route and never wanting to deviate, no matter what.

Perhaps you could provide some examples of media that you think have failed scrutiny. Is suspect you may struggle to find any real examples.

Here you go,
You must have missed it over the last four pages 
 

Quote from: feuk on March 02, 2016, 06:15:21 AM

Guys ? 

Quote from: feuk on March 01, 2016, 08:10:19 AM

Guys ? 
bottling it ?
Is this evasive behaviour compulsory to be a member of the moon landing congregation ?

Quote from: feuk on February 28, 2016, 01:05:56 AM

Guys ?
 

Quote from: feuk on February 26, 2016, 09:42:52 AM

Don't do a rayzor guys,
At least attempt to counter the evidence,
If you can.

Quote from: feuk on February 26, 2016, 06:47:26 AM

Quote from: sokarul on February 26, 2016, 06:33:58 AM

Everyone who knows people have walked on the moon?

Cool.....

Heeey have you seen the Apollo movies where sound is recorded during  excursions into the lunar vacuum ?

I heard the sound travelled inside the suits from the vacuum outside,
Or travelling through solids then travelling through the suits.
Trouble is sound is recorded in the vacuum where no physical contact occurs,
and the deafening noise of the engines never travelled through the LM onto the audio.

The plot thickens when we realise non of these phenomena happen in the vacuum around the ISS according to the audio record and eye witness testimony.

can that be true ?

Quote from: feuk on February 26, 2016, 05:59:29 AM

Quote from: feuk on February 26, 2016, 05:18:34 AM

Quote from: feuk on February 26, 2016, 02:08:41 AM

Just placing this here so globedebunker can find it easier.

Quote from: feuk on February 25, 2016, 12:14:29 PM

Quote from: GlobeDebunker link=topic=65666.msg1762244#msg1762244 date=1456429022

The defendants (in this case) have promoted investigation!! Haha! We have asked multiple times for proofs that the moon expedition was a hoax. Not speculative jibber-jabber. 'I think this should do that, or that should be doing this, but I have nothing to confirm these suspicions'

What happens when the prosecutor doesn't have any concrete evidence of the 'crime'?
The prosecution is dismissed. If the suspect is still convicted, then the system is corrupt.

Maybe you could explain how outside sounds are recorded on the audio of Apollo movies in the vacuum of space,
We have already had the idea sound vibrated through the contact hand with tools and this is transferred onto the recording,
Bit of a stretch and has never being recorded on any post Apollo space movie.

But more than this sound is recorded travelling through the vacuum of space when no physical direct contact is evident (discounting the flimsy "drum skin" excuse),
Tiny little metallic rattles, subtle and soft noise, even crunching regolith.
The example given was slamming compartment lids on the lunar buggy with no direct physical contact with the suit,

Sound travelling through solids was offered but is obviously not relevant to the situation, and has not being recorded in a vacuum since.

Any reasoning should be universal,
We do not see this with modern ISS excursions,     
eye witness testimony confirms hand held tools transfer  no sound in the vacuum of space inside the suit,
nor has it being recorded.

how is this possible ?
How can one set of evidence contradict the other ?

Already established facts -
Lunar atmosphere is the same as that surrounding the ISS according to the defendant, a vacuum.
both suits have the same design, a layered skin filled with air,
Tools are made from the same materials,
vehicles are made with the same material,
modern audio is better quality.

Go.....

Page 12   

Quote from: feuk on March 02, 2016, 06:13:40 AM

page 11 

Quote from: feuk on March 01, 2016, 08:01:36 AM

I see the running dancing one is still giving it the biggun,
claiming to have "studied" the maths and physics involved   

I smell bravo sierra,
must be his full nappy 

let the record show rayzor et al cannot even come up with an acceptable scientific constant that explains how sound travels in the Apollo movies "vacuum" 

Bunch of bottlers.


Page 10 

Quote from: feuk on February 28, 2016, 01:03:16 AM

Page 9 

Quote from: feuk on February 26, 2016, 05:58:19 AM

up to page 8  now 
 

Quote from: feuk on February 26, 2016, 05:17:24 AM

Page 7 now 
 

Quote from: feuk on February 25, 2016, 12:24:47 PM

Sixth page 

Quote from: feuk on February 25, 2016, 06:50:30 AM

Fifth page now,

Is running dancing rayzor still running and dancing ?
yup.

Quote from: feuk on February 25, 2016, 02:36:02 AM

Is running rayzor still running ?

Quote from: feuk on February 24, 2016, 05:35:28 AM

FAO running dancing rayzor

Oh Jesus *face palm*,
ahhhh ha ha ha ha ha ha ah ha ha ha.....

You got a direct response,,
Seems I will have to repeat myself veeeery slowly.

sound of hammering clearly audible because why ?
You claim the sound is travelling through his hand (clearly exclaimed in your post)

My response was how is sound travelling without direct contact on the Apollo excursions ?
clattering moon buggy compartment lids was one example,
Remember, you decided reptilian moon bases and a heavily choreographed dance number was the best response.

Added to this I also asked why sound does not travel through the hands of ISS manual labourers working in the vacuum,
(the post you are ignoring whilst claiming you answered it a week ago  )

And how sound does not propagate through solid hand held tools or the solid ISS whilst the observer is in the vacuum,
remember,
you gave examples of the observer being inside the air filled ISS,
Which is obviously unrelated to the subject.

Then you started your trip down memory lane pretending you elaborated on this obvious problem a week ago.

Let's try again....
I'm afraid your rather nasty insults, expletives, dance numbers and long distance running is only damaging your extremely tenuous logic and understanding.

(btw plagiarising phrases to repeat back to the original poster and the constant  repetition makes you sound like a bot,
let me guess, "beep, does not compute, beep"   )

Anyway, response please.

Quote from: feuk on February 24, 2016, 02:30:36 AM

Any chance of a response to the below ?
Or is more trolling,
more running,
more dancing your preferred debating style ?

Quote from: feuk on February 23, 2016, 06:41:14 AM

back for more my running dancing friend ?
Still proving you are full of it ?
Still struggling with the very basic science which you claim needs to be "dumbed down" for me ? 

Let me highlight your most obvious comprehension fails, and why your claims of understanding your own argument are hilarious internet slap stick   

firstly you claimed to be proving sound travels through the vacuum of space with your first link,
Which states
" Finally, inside the ISS there indeed is a very high level of noise pollution."
The word "inside" is what you appear to be misunderstanding.
unless you are claiming that it's a vacuum "inside" the ISS then that's an epic face plant.

Secondly you link to an article I have being quoting for over a week 
Which states,
" As an EVA is in progress, you can hear the spacewalkers bumping and clanging along as your crewmates translate on the exterior of your module."
The word you are misunderstanding here is "exterior", he is describing sound from inside the ISS,
unless you are claiming that it's a vacuum "inside" the ISS.

EVEN YOUR LINK (that I posted a week ago) DEBUNKS YOUR OWN ARGUMENT,
 
" It is true, however, that sound cannot travel in a vacuum so you do not hear things outside.  When you drive a bolt or tap a piece of equipment with a tool, you don't hear a thing.  "

OUTSIDE THE ISS running dancing rayzor, OUTSIDE IN THE VACUUM OF SPACE.

your (originally mine) link continues to demolish your false sense of understanding with,
" One interesting thing that happens is that when you put your crewmates in the airlock to perform an EVA and then shut the hatch, at first you can hear a bunch of clanging as their metal tools softly strike the other equipment, handrails, or the hull of the small airlock.  Then as you depress the airlock it still looks exactly the same through the hatch window.  But now the clanging sound is gone.  You can see their equipment bumping into stuff as before, but now it is silent."

I think the word you are struggling with here is "silent", even when the observer is inside the ISS.

there we have it,
Your inflated self image is in fact delusional idiocy,

That might sound harsh but I can only go on what you are posting,
Which clearly shows you are attempting to prove sound travels in a vacuum by quoting links that show sound travels through air.
sounds like internet slap stick idiocy to me.

I think this is where you claim to be "dumbing down" your misunderstanding of basic science and obvious struggles with the English language.

my spidey sense tells me you will begin an elaborate dance routine before running away shouting infantile insults over your shoulder,

all I ask is that you actually read and understand the links you are quoting, analyse the data and form a coherent factual explanation,
Please
 

Quote from: Mainframes on March 03, 2016, 08:41:24 AM

Perhaps you could provide some examples of media that you think have failed scrutiny. Is suspect you may struggle to find any real examples.

lets start with the audio where sound is recorded travelling through the lunar vacuum.

I can't be sure but I think this has being mentioned before   

Oh no. Looks like feuk has really lost it. Now he's just having conversations with himself.

Quote from: Mainframes on March 03, 2016, 02:04:34 AM

Quote from: sceptimatic on March 03, 2016, 12:45:58 AM

In the 60's it was much easier to bullshit the population into believing anything, because the only info was all mainstream indoctrinated schooling from media sources.
All people had from that point was gossip by word of mouth and one hit wonder TV to gossip over. No play back options for 99%.

Flash Gordon and lost in space etc, were real to most. Well, real enough to believe anything was possible in their fictional space.

And yet all of the media produced in the 60's regarding the Apollo program (video, photographs etc) still stands up to intense scrutiny to this day without any problems whatsoever.

It's almost like they actually did go to the moon after all.......

The Apollo lies were shown up under weak scrutiny. The intense scrutiny only added to the depth of how ridiculous it really was.
It was good for its time because nobody knew any different, nor could they play back. I suppose in the 60's nobody thought computers would be as popular as they are.
I think one supposed genius mentioned that computers would never take off. I bet they wish they hadn't.

Quote from: sceptimatic on March 03, 2016, 07:05:28 AM

I think one supposed genius mentioned that computers would never take off. I bet they wish they hadn't.

You might be thinking of Thomas Watkins Watson president of IBM,  who said  "I think there is a world market for maybe five computers." 

I've yet to see any evidence that the moon landings were faked,  all the evidence says that the moon landings were real.  If you have evidence, that the moon landings were faked, let's see it.

Quote from: sceptimatic on March 03, 2016, 07:05:28 AM

I think one supposed genius mentioned that computers would never take off. I bet they wish they hadn't.

You might be thinking of Thomas Watkins president of IBM,  who said  "I think there is a world market for maybe five computers." 

Although Watson is well known for his alleged 1943 statement, "I think there is a world market for maybe five computers," there is scant evidence he said it. Author Kevin Maney tried to find the origin of the quote, but has been unable to locate any speeches or documents of Watson's that contain this, nor are the words present in any contemporary articles about IBM.

Quote from: Rayzor on March 03, 2016, 05:39:53 PM

Quote from: sceptimatic on March 03, 2016, 07:05:28 AM

I think one supposed genius mentioned that computers would never take off. I bet they wish they hadn't.

You might be thinking of Thomas Watkins president of IBM,  who said  "I think there is a world market for maybe five computers." 

The problem with many such famous quotes is that there is no definitive evidence that he actually said it:

Quote from: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_J._Watson#Famous_misquote

Although Watson is well known for his alleged 1943 statement, "I think there is a world market for maybe five computers," there is scant evidence he said it. Author Kevin Maney tried to find the origin of the quote, but has been unable to locate any speeches or documents of Watson's that contain this, nor are the words present in any contemporary articles about IBM.

Oh no. Looks like feuk has really lost it. Now he's just having conversations with himself.

Quote from: feuk on March 03, 2016, 09:55:35 AM

Quote from: Mainframes on March 03, 2016, 08:41:24 AM

Perhaps you could provide some examples of media that you think have failed scrutiny. Is suspect you may struggle to find any real examples.

lets start with the audio where sound is recorded travelling through the lunar vacuum.

I can't be sure but I think this has being mentioned before   

Video link please.

Quote from: GlobeDebunker on March 03, 2016, 02:54:18 PM

Oh no. Looks like feuk has really lost it. Now he's just having conversations with himself.

That's normal for the little feucker, he is as dumb as a box of rocks, and hasn't realized everyone stopped reading his gibberish ages ago.

I've yet to see any evidence that the moon landings were faked,  all the evidence says that the moon landings were real.  If you have evidence, that the moon landings were faked, let's see it.

Quote from: feuk on March 03, 2016, 09:55:35 AM

Quote from: Mainframes on March 03, 2016, 08:41:24 AM

Perhaps you could provide some examples of media that you think have failed scrutiny. Is suspect you may struggle to find any real examples.

lets start with the audio where sound is recorded travelling through the lunar vacuum.

I can't be sure but I think this has being mentioned before   

Video link please.

Quote from: Mainframes on March 03, 2016, 03:37:21 PM

Quote from: feuk on March 03, 2016, 09:55:35 AM

Quote from: Mainframes on March 03, 2016, 08:41:24 AM

Perhaps you could provide some examples of media that you think have failed scrutiny. Is suspect you may struggle to find any real examples.

lets start with the audio where sound is recorded travelling through the lunar vacuum.

I can't be sure but I think this has being mentioned before   

Video link please.

Quote from: Mainframes on March 04, 2016, 02:03:37 AM

Quote from: Mainframes on March 03, 2016, 03:37:21 PM

Quote from: feuk on March 03, 2016, 09:55:35 AM

Quote from: Mainframes on March 03, 2016, 08:41:24 AM

Perhaps you could provide some examples of media that you think have failed scrutiny. Is suspect you may struggle to find any real examples.

lets start with the audio where sound is recorded travelling through the lunar vacuum.

I can't be sure but I think this has being mentioned before   

Video link please.

The needle appears stuck..
Reading problems ?
I repeat....

 To what ?
The Apollo movie series ?

I don't think that he's asking for the whole series, just the episode where the sound allegedly travels through a vacuum.

I don't think that he's asking for the whole series, just the episode where the sound allegedly travels through a vacuum.

Quote from: markjo on March 04, 2016, 06:07:42 AM

I don't think that he's asking for the whole series, just the episode where the sound allegedly travels through a vacuum.

There is no video showing sound travelling in a vacuum,  there might be some showing sound travelling through solid.  But the dumb little feuck doesn't understand that either.

So don't hold your breath.