Why the Moon Landing COULDN'T Have Been Faked

  • 22 Replies
  • 6256 Views
*

rabinoz

  • 26528
  • +0/-0
  • Real Earth Believer
Why the Moon Landing COULDN'T Have Been Faked
« on: March 27, 2018, 02:02:01 AM »
A ;) not quite convincing proof ;) that "the Moon Landing COULDN'T Have Been Faked"!

Please excuse the levity etc, etc.

;) ::) Why the Moon Landing COULDN'T Have Been Faked, CollegeHumor ::) ;)
ADAM RUINS EVERYTHING
::) It's on the internet, of course it's true! ::)

*

nickrulercreator

  • 244
  • +0/-0
  • It's round. That much is true
Re: Why the Moon Landing COULDN'T Have Been Faked
« Reply #1 on: March 27, 2018, 07:16:24 AM »
Good video. He gets one thing wrong about the lighting. A million lasers (or however many) would not have been needed. It could have been done by shining many spotlights into a prism-type thing, which "combines" the lights, and then shines the light down on the set. I know, it's not super specific or technical, but that's the jist of it. This is how they did it in "From the Earth to the Moon." Of course, it doesn't work for immense sets, such as the last 3 landings, which have unbroken, continuous video of the astronauts driving the rover for a good mile-or-so.
he puts his penis in the mouth of the other one and FORCIBLY GIVES HER A BLOWJOB OF TRUTH and then his penis ERRUPTS IN AN EXPLOSION IF TRUTH and she is INSTANTLY DECAPITATED

?

dutchy

  • 2366
  • +0/-0
Re: Why the Moon Landing COULDN'T Have Been Faked
« Reply #2 on: March 27, 2018, 10:41:06 AM »
A ;) not quite convincing proof ;) that "the Moon Landing COULDN'T Have Been Faked"!

Please excuse the levity etc, etc.

;) ::) Why the Moon Landing COULDN'T Have Been Faked, CollegeHumor ::) ;)
ADAM RUINS EVERYTHING
::) It's on the internet, of course it's true! ::)
It all boils down to 'the technology to fake it wasn't available in 1969'
Hahahahahahahahahahaha
What a weak, stupid , moronic, ignorant and hilarious argument.
And i thought the pro Apollo fanclub is all about source and proof.
But let's play for a while ......

Q: Why couldn't they fake the footage ?
A The technology to fake it was not around yet !

Q You mean going to the moon and back and all dangers involved was in reach and faking what we saw on tv was impossible in 1969 ?
A Yes that's basically true !

Q And who claims we didn't have the technology to fake it ?
A NASA and uhhhh several lightening and film experts of the days !

Q But several price winning filmmakers and photographers claim the opposite,... not ?
A They are crazy shit and want to earn some dollars with hoaxy shit !

Q hmmmm could NASA have been more advanced without the general public in the know ?
A Yes , but what does it have to do with the topic ?

Q They could have faked it, if they had superiour camera's and technologies than what we assume ?
A I guess so ?

Q It boils down to what NASA was capable of.... right ?
A Indeed !..... and they could not have faked it in 1969 !

Q But only if they used the camera's and techniques mentioned in the catalogues and NASA textbooks !
A Yes .... and we know they could not have faked it with the equipment they had in 1969

Q NASA does not lie..... or would not lie about something when they indeed faked it ?
Iow they faked it, but still haven't told how ?
A Why would NASA do that , going to the moon is much more simple than what you suggest

Q never mind .....


*

rvlvr

  • 2148
  • +0/-0
Re: Why the Moon Landing COULDN'T Have Been Faked
« Reply #3 on: March 27, 2018, 11:00:33 AM »
All you have is your disbelief something like Apollo could have happened in the late 60s...

*

Crutchwater

  • 2151
  • +0/-0
  • Stop Indoctrinating me!
Re: Why the Moon Landing COULDN'T Have Been Faked
« Reply #4 on: March 27, 2018, 11:14:08 AM »
All you have is your disbelief something like Apollo could have happened in the late 60s...

It's really not even HIS disbelief, he's simply parroting what his conspiracy cult leader said in some YouTube conspiracy videos.

I will always be Here To Laugh At You.

?

dutchy

  • 2366
  • +0/-0
Re: Why the Moon Landing COULDN'T Have Been Faked
« Reply #5 on: March 27, 2018, 11:52:09 AM »
All you have is your disbelief something like Apollo could have happened in the late 60s...
Your little mantra is becoming boring and annoying......instead of discussing what i have to say.
I thought you were a little different than most ( in a positive way ), but time to reconsider and change my approach towards you.

?

dutchy

  • 2366
  • +0/-0
Re: Why the Moon Landing COULDN'T Have Been Faked
« Reply #6 on: March 27, 2018, 11:56:53 AM »
All you have is your disbelief something like Apollo could have happened in the late 60s...

It's really not even HIS disbelief, he's simply parroting what his conspiracy cult leader said in some YouTube conspiracy videos.
YouTube has lots of instrumental video's too !
Why don't you spend your time on some real guitar player giving you a detailed step for step video 'how to play basic Status Quo riffs' instead of checking out the likes of Eric Dubay all the time....so you can make snarky remarks over here.....

I'd say you have to sorten out your priorities !

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • 45134
  • +92/-135
Re: Why the Moon Landing COULDN'T Have Been Faked
« Reply #7 on: March 27, 2018, 12:38:42 PM »
All you have is your disbelief something like Apollo could have happened in the late 60s...

It's really not even HIS disbelief, he's simply parroting what his conspiracy cult leader said in some YouTube conspiracy videos.
YouTube has lots of instrumental video's too !
YouTube has lots of videos proving UFOs, Big Foot and ghosts are real too.
Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.
Quote from: Robosteve
Besides, perhaps FET is a conspiracy too.
Quote from: bullhorn
It is just the way it is, you understanding it doesn't concern me.

?

dutchy

  • 2366
  • +0/-0
Re: Why the Moon Landing COULDN'T Have Been Faked
« Reply #8 on: March 27, 2018, 12:49:11 PM »
All you have is your disbelief something like Apollo could have happened in the late 60s...

It's really not even HIS disbelief, he's simply parroting what his conspiracy cult leader said in some YouTube conspiracy videos.
YouTube has lots of instrumental video's too !
YouTube has lots of videos proving UFOs, Big Foot and ghosts are real too.
;D ;D I even saw a YouTube vid showing the inauguration of president Trump.
What i don't understand is that extreme fake news is still allowed on YouTube, but i do marvel over the virtual and augmented reality effects of our days.

It was crinchworthy but real in a very twisted way...... it was almost as if i was in a parallel universe.
I hope they do another one with president Elvis, looking forward  ! 8) 8)

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • 45134
  • +92/-135
Re: Why the Moon Landing COULDN'T Have Been Faked
« Reply #9 on: March 27, 2018, 01:13:56 PM »
All you have is your disbelief something like Apollo could have happened in the late 60s...

It's really not even HIS disbelief, he's simply parroting what his conspiracy cult leader said in some YouTube conspiracy videos.
YouTube has lots of instrumental video's too !
YouTube has lots of videos proving UFOs, Big Foot and ghosts are real too.
;D ;D I even saw a YouTube vid showing the inauguration of president Trump.
What i don't understand is that extreme fake news is still allowed on YouTube, but i do marvel over the virtual and augmented reality effects of our days.
Are you suggesting that YouTube should be a bastion of truth?  ???
Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.
Quote from: Robosteve
Besides, perhaps FET is a conspiracy too.
Quote from: bullhorn
It is just the way it is, you understanding it doesn't concern me.

?

dutchy

  • 2366
  • +0/-0
Re: Why the Moon Landing COULDN'T Have Been Faked
« Reply #10 on: March 27, 2018, 01:40:48 PM »
All you have is your disbelief something like Apollo could have happened in the late 60s...
ju

It's really not even HIS disbelief, he's simply parroting what his conspiracy cult leader said in some YouTube conspiracy videos.
YouTube has lots of instrumental video's too !
YouTube has lots of videos proving UFOs, Big Foot and ghosts are real too.
;D ;D I even saw a YouTube vid showing the inauguration of president Trump.
What i don't understand is that extreme fake news is still allowed on YouTube, but i do marvel over the virtual and augmented reality effects of our days.
Are you suggesting that YouTube should be a bastion of truth?  ???
We all do our selective shopping on YouTube and find conformation for whatever we like to confirm.
Now where is that vid with the inauguration of president Elvis ?,
I can only find a picture of president Elvis receiving that unsung hero who phoned with the astronauts on the moon to guide them through some difficult moon phases.


*

nickrulercreator

  • 244
  • +0/-0
  • It's round. That much is true
Re: Why the Moon Landing COULDN'T Have Been Faked
« Reply #11 on: March 27, 2018, 06:57:16 PM »
A ;) not quite convincing proof ;) that "the Moon Landing COULDN'T Have Been Faked"!

Please excuse the levity etc, etc.

;) ::) Why the Moon Landing COULDN'T Have Been Faked, CollegeHumor ::) ;)
ADAM RUINS EVERYTHING
::) It's on the internet, of course it's true! ::)
It all boils down to 'the technology to fake it wasn't available in 1969'
Hahahahahahahahahahaha
What a weak, stupid , moronic, ignorant and hilarious argument.
And i thought the pro Apollo fanclub is all about source and proof.
But let's play for a while ......

Q: Why couldn't they fake the footage ?
A The technology to fake it was not around yet !

Q You mean going to the moon and back and all dangers involved was in reach and faking what we saw on tv was impossible in 1969 ?
A Yes that's basically true !

Q And who claims we didn't have the technology to fake it ?
A NASA and uhhhh several lightening and film experts of the days !

Q But several price winning filmmakers and photographers claim the opposite,... not ?
A They are crazy shit and want to earn some dollars with hoaxy shit !

Q hmmmm could NASA have been more advanced without the general public in the know ?
A Yes , but what does it have to do with the topic ?

Q They could have faked it, if they had superiour camera's and technologies than what we assume ?
A I guess so ?

Q It boils down to what NASA was capable of.... right ?
A Indeed !..... and they could not have faked it in 1969 !

Q But only if they used the camera's and techniques mentioned in the catalogues and NASA textbooks !
A Yes .... and we know they could not have faked it with the equipment they had in 1969

Q NASA does not lie..... or would not lie about something when they indeed faked it ?
Iow they faked it, but still haven't told how ?
A Why would NASA do that , going to the moon is much more simple than what you suggest

Q never mind .....

Thinking. Do you even do it? Do you even try to understand the opposing viewpoint?
he puts his penis in the mouth of the other one and FORCIBLY GIVES HER A BLOWJOB OF TRUTH and then his penis ERRUPTS IN AN EXPLOSION IF TRUTH and she is INSTANTLY DECAPITATED

*

rabinoz

  • 26528
  • +0/-0
  • Real Earth Believer
Re: Why the Moon Landing COULDN'T Have Been Faked
« Reply #12 on: March 27, 2018, 08:15:57 PM »
A ;) not quite convincing proof ;) that "the Moon Landing COULDN'T Have Been Faked"!

Please excuse the levity etc, etc.

;) ::) Why the Moon Landing COULDN'T Have Been Faked, CollegeHumor ::) ;)
ADAM RUINS EVERYTHING
::) It's on the internet, of course it's true! ::)
<< blah, blah, blah >>
;) ;D Where's that wonderful dutchy sense of humour?  ;D ;) It's a total spoof.

How many emojis do I have to splatter over it to make that obvious!

*

Wolvaccine

  • EXTRA SPICY MODE
  • 25833
  • +3/-2
Re: Why the Moon Landing COULDN'T Have Been Faked
« Reply #13 on: March 27, 2018, 08:33:31 PM »
A ;) not quite convincing proof ;) that "the Moon Landing COULDN'T Have Been Faked"!

Please excuse the levity etc, etc.

;) ::) Why the Moon Landing COULDN'T Have Been Faked, CollegeHumor ::) ;)
ADAM RUINS EVERYTHING
::) It's on the internet, of course it's true! ::)

Your winking is creepy. Makes me not want to believe what you just put out.

Quote from: sokarul
what website did you use to buy your wife? Did you choose Chinese over Russian because she can't open her eyes to see you?

What animal relates to your wife?

Know your place

*

rabinoz

  • 26528
  • +0/-0
  • Real Earth Believer
Re: Why the Moon Landing COULDN'T Have Been Faked
« Reply #14 on: March 27, 2018, 09:41:53 PM »
[<< Irrelevant to what I have for your >>

Jarrah White: "Go away, Flat Earthers & Space Travel Deniers!"

?

dutchy

  • 2366
  • +0/-0
Re: Why the Moon Landing COULDN'T Have Been Faked
« Reply #15 on: March 27, 2018, 10:40:58 PM »
[<< Irrelevant to what I have for your >>

Jarrah White: "Go away, Flat Earthers & Space Travel Deniers!"
Great ! I see that my Q and A demonstrated how faulty your general reasoning is !!!
Furthermore everyone knows Jarrah White detests the notion of a flatearth.
For you to bring that up instead of answering my death on Q and A example says alot.

It is understandable Papa Legba treats you as his naughty dog.
Always nice to have him back and smell your fear towards your master.
Can't want for his arrival to correct you some more, because you are all over the place and someone has to direct you back to your bench !

?

dutchy

  • 2366
  • +0/-0
Re: Why the Moon Landing COULDN'T Have Been Faked
« Reply #16 on: March 27, 2018, 11:17:23 PM »
A ;) not quite convincing proof ;) that "the Moon Landing COULDN'T Have Been Faked"!

Please excuse the levity etc, etc.

;) ::) Why the Moon Landing COULDN'T Have Been Faked, CollegeHumor ::) ;)
ADAM RUINS EVERYTHING
::) It's on the internet, of course it's true! ::)
It all boils down to 'the technology to fake it wasn't available in 1969'
Hahahahahahahahahahaha
What a weak, stupid , moronic, ignorant and hilarious argument.
And i thought the pro Apollo fanclub is all about source and proof.
But let's play for a while ......

Q: Why couldn't they fake the footage ?
A The technology to fake it was not around yet !

Q You mean going to the moon and back and all dangers involved was in reach and faking what we saw on tv was impossible in 1969 ?
A Yes that's basically true !

Q And who claims we didn't have the technology to fake it ?
A NASA and uhhhh several lightening and film experts of the days !

Q But several price winning filmmakers and photographers claim the opposite,... not ?
A They are crazy shit and want to earn some dollars with hoaxy shit !

Q hmmmm could NASA have been more advanced without the general public in the know ?
A Yes , but what does it have to do with the topic ?

Q They could have faked it, if they had superiour camera's and technologies than what we assume ?
A I guess so ?

Q It boils down to what NASA was capable of.... right ?
A Indeed !..... and they could not have faked it in 1969 !

Q But only if they used the camera's and techniques mentioned in the catalogues and NASA textbooks !
A Yes .... and we know they could not have faked it with the equipment they had in 1969

Q NASA does not lie..... or would not lie about something when they indeed faked it ?
Iow they faked it, but still haven't told how ?
A Why would NASA do that , going to the moon is much more simple than what you suggest

Q never mind .....

Thinking. Do you even do it? Do you even try to understand the opposing viewpoint?
It's the answers in A.

Are you telling me that is an incorrect presentation of the opposing view ?
If i did present the opposing view correctly than your snarky remarks don't make sense .
If the A ( my opposing view) comments are faulty, please show me where and when.
I have read to long on both sides, not to understand the opposite arguments.
So who refuses to think here ?

*

rvlvr

  • 2148
  • +0/-0
Re: Why the Moon Landing COULDN'T Have Been Faked
« Reply #17 on: March 27, 2018, 11:38:22 PM »
Which one is the simpler, and hence more plausible, scenario:
1) Apollo happened just as described
2) It is all faked and the truth hidden under layers and layers of lies with over 400 000 people working on the program, and not one of them blowing the whistle even on their deathbed, no WikiLeaks or Anonymous to bare it for all the see (yet rebel thinkers are allowed to post videos and let the public know of said lies and and the conspiracy)

I'd go with option #1.

?

dutchy

  • 2366
  • +0/-0
Re: Why the Moon Landing COULDN'T Have Been Faked
« Reply #18 on: March 28, 2018, 12:06:05 AM »
Which one is the simpler, and hence more plausible, scenario:
1) Apollo happened just as described
2) It is all faked and the truth hidden under layers and layers of lies with over 400 000 people working on the program, and not one of them blowing the whistle even on their deathbed, no WikiLeaks or Anonymous to bare it for all the see (yet rebel thinkers are allowed to post videos and let the public know of said lies and and the conspiracy)

I'd go with option #1.
That is because you do not present a truthfull choice.
Why is it so hard to think outside the box ?
Please allow me to help you :

1 Apollo happened just as described and many nations, the scientific community and amatures worldwide support men's greatest achievements.
From the still functional laser, the recent Apollo lunar artifact satellite pictures ,the moon rocks ( different than moon rocks found on earth) and over 400.000 people supporting the landings because they were part of it and helped accomplish the whole adventure.

2 Apollo raises many questions .
 The astronauts gave press conferences so weird and without any emotion that should be part of such momentous event that everyone checking it out feels extremely ackward.
A linguistic expert of name analised some of it recently and came to the conclusion that Neil Armstrong did not go to the moon as most likely final conlusions.
Also they gave conflicting statements about how many stars ( if any ) could be seen in cislunar space..... from pitch black to ten times as bright and numerous.
That is to big of a difference to make sense whatsoever in whatever reality.

NASA destroyed up to 200.000 tapes of original Apollo 11 data and apart from their own catalogue propaganda we cannot test any of the equipment on functionality in 2018.
From the moonsuits created by a swimmingsuit company to the shielding to protect from radiation and solar flares

The astronauts were covered with dust ( Buzz claimed) but went in and out the LM .
Dust is one of the biggest thread for any moon mission as later info reveals .
But appearently the sturdy onboard technology did not suffer from the truckloads of dust brought back by the astronauts.
Buzz claimed they tried to shake some of it off with their inflexible gloves.

No live event was shown to the world as claimed, but a recorded screan projection.

From mini moons and crater landscapes to cranes and mountains.... all was there to make a perfect movie if it was not only used as test facility.

America suffered from internal riots and growing anti government sentiment during the Nam war.
This was the best way to bring back some national pride.....what a coincidence !

Since the Manhattan project America learned how to compartmentalise huge projects without the induvidual worker in the know.
You only need a few hundred to pull off whatever hoax thinkable in those pre internet times.

America used 2 GHz that amatures and the Russians could not track all the way to the moon , on the moon and back.

And the list is only in it's early stages,....... but you get the idea !
« Last Edit: March 28, 2018, 12:12:05 AM by dutchy »

*

rvlvr

  • 2148
  • +0/-0
Re: Why the Moon Landing COULDN'T Have Been Faked
« Reply #19 on: March 28, 2018, 12:18:42 AM »
https://www.theguardian.com/science/2009/jul/16/moon-landing-tapes-erased

The tape recordings, taken for backup, were an afterthought, Nafzger told reporters in Washington today.

"We all wish that somebody had said 'those tapes are special, let's pull them aside'," he said.

But a standard Nasa money-saving measure in those days was to reuse the 14-inch tape reels after several years in storage. Agency officials ultimately concluded that the original Apollo 11 tapes were buried among an estimated 350,000 that were recycled in the 1970s and 1980s and the data was lost for ever.


Seems they are not especially happy it happened as it happened.

EDIT: I did not know something like lunar dust is a worthy point to bring up. Nor why government running projects compartmentalized bears much meaning in this context. Even games companies can do that. "Astronauts without emotion"? Yeah that's it right there! Apollo proven to be a lie!

Come on, man. Oh, and who exactly made off with all the monies? Or was it someone else who said NASA is just a scam to make some people super rich?
« Last Edit: March 28, 2018, 12:27:40 AM by rvlvr »

*

rabinoz

  • 26528
  • +0/-0
  • Real Earth Believer
Re: Why the Moon Landing COULDN'T Have Been Faked
« Reply #20 on: March 28, 2018, 02:06:31 AM »
It all boils down to 'the technology to fake it wasn't available in 1969'
Hahahahahahahahahahaha
What a weak, stupid , moronic, ignorant and hilarious argument.
And i thought the pro Apollo fanclub is all about source and proof.
But let's play for a while ......
Why should I waste my time on answering every word you come out with? I post on more threads that just silly moon hoaxer stuff.

Quote from: dutchy
Q: Why couldn't they fake the footage ?
A The technology to fake it was not around yet !
The technology to go to the moon was based on ICBM technology and early manned space flights were on modified ICBM rockets/
But the technology to fake it all depends on the film and video technology of the day and that is quite unrelated.

Quote from: dutchy
Q You mean going to the moon and back and all dangers involved was in reach and faking what we saw on tv was impossible in 1969 ?
A Yes that's basically true !
Yes that's basically true!

Quote from: dutchy
Q And who claims we didn't have the technology to fake it ?
A NASA and uhhhh several lightening and film experts of the days !
Who are lightening experts? Never heard of them! Where do NASA claim that? But yes, lighting, film and video experts of the days would know far more than you.
Quote from: dutchy
Q But several price winning filmmakers and photographers claim the opposite,... not ?
A << stupid >>!
Where are the prize winning filmmakers and photographers of that day that claim the opposite?
Stanley Kubrick would have been the obvious choice, though his "2001: A Space Odyssey" was only released on 2nd May 1968.
And Moon Hoaxers even made a fake video that claimed that Stanley Kubrick did fake the films. Look!

Stanley Kubrick interview confesses to faking the moon landings!!! World Peace

EXCLUSIVE: Stanley Kubrick confesses to faking the moon landings in new INTERVIEW.

A filmmaker, T. Patrick Murray, interviewed Kubrick three days before his death in March 1999.
He signed an 88-page NDA not to divulge the contents of the interview until 15 years after his death.
"Shooting Stanley Kubrick"
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . [/center]
Siimply looking at the video proves it's a total fabrication! But it "hit the News", see MOON LANDINGS HOAX: Film shows Stanley Kubrick revealing historic event was 'FAKED'
Of course Snopes set the record straight, Lie Me to the Moon
Film director Stanley Kubrick did not admit in an interview that he helped NASA fake the U.S. moon landings.


As does his daughter:
Stanley Kubrick's daughter debunks moon landing conspiracy theory
'How can anyone believe that one of the greatest defenders of mankind would commit such an act of betrayal?'


Quote from: dutchy
Q hmmmm could NASA have been more advanced without the general public in the know ?
A Yes , but what does it have to do with the topic ?
"Could have" and "might be" seem favourite Flat Earther sayings! The translations seems to be, "I havn't a clue but try this fairy tale!"

Quote from: dutchy
Q They could have faked it, if they had superiour camera's and technologies than what we assume ?
A I guess so ?
See previous answer!

Quote from: dutchy
Q It boils down to what NASA was capable of.... right ?
A Indeed !..... and they could not have faked it in 1969 !
Says who? Those deceitful Hoaxers that made the hoax Stanley Kubrick confession video?

Quote from: dutchy
Q But only if they used the camera's and techniques mentioned in the catalogues and NASA textbooks !
A Yes .... and we know they could not have faked it with the equipment they had in 1969
See 2 answer above.

Quote from: dutchy
Q NASA does not lie..... or would not lie about something when they indeed faked it ?
Iow they faked it, but still haven't told how ?
A Why would NASA do that , going to the moon is much more simple than what you suggest
Again just your pure guesswork, but we've seen enough of your deceit before, why take any notice of your opinions now?

Idiot, no-one claims that "going to the moon is much more simple than what you suggest"!

Quote from: dutchy
Q never mind .....

Bye, bye, but I'm still waiting for your apology! And this is not an apology!
@ rabinoz
Apology ? For what ?
Me a deceiver ?

You speak in riddles my friend
Don't pretend innocence, Mr Dutchy! Look:
Flat Earth General / Re: Apollo Mission Preparation and Crew Training « on: Today at 01:10:45 PM »


Sorry for all the errors, but I have more important things to do than entertain the likes of you - like eating!
« Last Edit: March 28, 2018, 02:41:15 AM by rabinoz »

*

nickrulercreator

  • 244
  • +0/-0
  • It's round. That much is true
Re: Why the Moon Landing COULDN'T Have Been Faked
« Reply #21 on: March 28, 2018, 01:52:22 PM »
Apollo raises many questions .

No it doesn't.

Quote
The astronauts gave press conferences so weird and without any emotion that should be part of such momentous event that everyone checking it out feels extremely ackward.

Yeah, if you cherrypick the conference. " class="bbc_link" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">, https://www.quora.com/At-the-post-flight-press-conference-of-Apollo-11-why-did-Armstrong-Aldrin-and-Collins-look-so-perplexed-and-tensed

Quote
A linguistic expert of name analised some of it recently and came to the conclusion that Neil Armstrong did not go to the moon as most likely final conlusions.

Who is this then?

Quote
Also they gave conflicting statements about how many stars ( if any ) could be seen in cislunar space..... from pitch black to ten times as bright and numerous.
That is to big of a difference to make sense whatsoever in whatever reality.

Again, more cherrypicking. They said they couldn't see the stars on the surface. They COULD see them in orbit of the moon when on the night side, or in transport to the moon. This is expected.

Quote
NASA destroyed up to 200.000 tapes of original Apollo 11 data

Incorrect. Copies still exist, how do you think we have the data today? NASA erased the ORIGINAL versions. That's like saying if I take a photo, copy it onto my computer, then delete the original from my camera, I lost it forever.

Other data still exists in national archives, federal archives, and in NASA's archives (and on the internet of course).

Quote
apart from their own catalogue propaganda we cannot test any of the equipment on functionality in 2018.

Why not?

Quote
From the moonsuits created by a swimmingsuit company to the shielding to protect from radiation and solar flares

Why does this mean anything? The company still could have, and did, make a good suit.

Quote
The astronauts were covered with dust ( Buzz claimed) but went in and out the LM .

Correct.

Quote
Dust is one of the biggest thread for any moon mission as later info reveals .

Can i get a source?

Quote
But appearently the sturdy onboard technology did not suffer from the truckloads of dust brought back by the astronauts.

It wasn't "truckloads." Most of it stayed on the suits anyway, or on the floor of the LM.

Quote
Buzz claimed they tried to shake some of it off with their inflexible gloves.

And...?

Quote
No live event was shown to the world as claimed, but a recorded screan projection.

What's your proof for this claim?

Quote
From mini moons and crater landscapes to cranes and mountains.... all was there to make a perfect movie if it was not only used as test facility.

Proof?

Quote
America suffered from internal riots and growing anti government sentiment during the Nam war.
This was the best way to bring back some national pride.....what a coincidence !

That's not all it did.

Quote
Since the Manhattan project America learned how to compartmentalise huge projects without the induvidual worker in the know.[/quote

And yet TONS of information from the Manhattan Project was leaked to the Soviets.

Quote
You only need a few hundred to pull off whatever hoax thinkable in those pre internet times.

Incorrect, you'd need thousands.

Quote
America used 2 GHz that amatures and the Russians could not track all the way to the moon , on the moon and back.

Incorrect. The Soviets and amateur astronomers were perfectly capable of tracking Apollo, and they did.

Quote
but you get the idea !

Yeah, you're full of it.
« Last Edit: March 28, 2018, 01:54:17 PM by nickrulercreator »
he puts his penis in the mouth of the other one and FORCIBLY GIVES HER A BLOWJOB OF TRUTH and then his penis ERRUPTS IN AN EXPLOSION IF TRUTH and she is INSTANTLY DECAPITATED

*

rabinoz

  • 26528
  • +0/-0
  • Real Earth Believer
Re: Why the Moon Landing COULDN'T Have Been Faked
« Reply #22 on: March 28, 2018, 03:26:44 PM »

America used 2 GHz that amatures amateurs and the Russians could not track all the way to the moon , on the moon and back.

Incorrect! Again you have no idea what you are talking about!

NASA published all the frequencies and data needed and to claim that amateurs and the Russians could not track all the way to the moon is total idiocy.
Of course, one single amateur or receiving station could not track Apollo all the way because the earth rotates!

Stop claiming total Moon Hoaxer lies!

The Apollo missions were extensively tracked by numerous professional and amateur groups.
Read and find the description of NASA's data transmission protocols!
UNIFIED S-BAND TELECOMMUNICATIONS TECHNIQUES FOR APOLLO VOLUME 1 - FUNCTIONAL DESCRIPTION
by John H. Painter and George Hondros, Manned Spacecraft Center, Houston, Texas

And this too, if the noted communications "expert", ;D Ignoramus Dutchy ;D needs more detail, try:
APOLLO EXPERIENCE REPORT - S-BAND SYSTEM SIGNAL DESIGN AND ANALYSIS
Harold R. Rosenberg, Editor, Manned Spacecraft Center, Houston, Texas 77058[/b]


And you might read:
Quote from: Chris Graney
Eavesdropping on Apollo 11
The nearly forgotten story of how a radio amateur successfully detected transmissions from the first men to land on the Moon.


In July of 1969 a ham radio operator and amateur radio-astronomer by the name of Larry Baysinger, W4EJA, accomplished an amazing feat. He independently detected radio transmissions from the Apollo 11 astronauts on the lunar surface. Fortunately, his accomplishments were recorded by Glenn Rutherford, a young reporter for the Louisville (Kentucky) Courier-Journal. “Lunar Eavesdropping: Louisvillians hear moon walk talk on homemade equipment,” sporting Rutherford’s byline, appeared in the Wednesday, July 23, 1969 issue of that paper — front page of section B, the local news section (see Figure 1).
     

Figure 1
Larry at the receiver

Rutherford opened the Courier story with “Thanks to some homemade electronic equipment, including a rebuilt 20 year old radio receiver from an Army tank (see Figure 2) and an antenna made of spare pieces of aluminum, nylon cord and chicken wire (see Figure 3 and 4), a small band of Louisvillians was able to ‘eavesdrop’ Sunday (July 20) night on the American astronauts’ conversation directly from the moon.”

Figure 2, The Antenna
     
Figure 3, Antenna Design

The story discussed how Baysinger recorded 35 minutes of conversation from VHF signals transmitted between astronauts Armstrong, Aldrin and Collins (he did not attempt to pick up the encoded S-band signals from the main Moon-Earth communication link).1 These 35 minutes included the time during which President Richard Nixon transmitted a message of congratulations to the astronauts.

Rutherford’s story briefly mentioned how Baysinger had been previously successful in constructing a device to detect radio signals from Jupiter and in tracking and reproducing pictures transmitted from Earth-orbiting satellites. It briefly described the antenna used for the lunar eavesdropping project — a fully steerable 8 × 12 foot “corner horn” — and it briefly discussed the amazing sensitivity of the receiver, which Baysinger specially modified for the lunar eavesdropping project. Rutherford finished the story with “Needless to say, the receiver worked to perfection Sunday night.”
. . . . .
Lunar Eavesdropping Link
More information on Larry’s lunar eavesdropping, including some audio clips, can be found on Christopher Graney’s Otter Creek-South Harrison Observatory Web page, Lunar Eavesdropping In Louisville, Kentucky.

Read a lot more in: ARRL, the national association for Amateur Radio,

And from a more "professional" source!
Quote
The Bochum Radio Observatory, Germany
In the 1957 – 1975 period, the 20 metre parabolic antenna of the Bochum Observatory in (the then) West Germany was often in the news as it received transmissions from Russian and American space vehicles. The Director at the time, Professor Heinz Kaminski, was able to provide confirmation of events and data independent of both the Russian and US space agencies.

During the later Apollo missions, the observatory received and recorded some of the Field Sequential Color TV transmissions from the Lunar Rovers on the Moon, as well as biomedical data and voice.

The 20 metre Bochum antenna inside its radome, in 1972.
Photo: Bochum Observatory. With thanks to Thilo Elsner.
An independent recording of the Lunar Landing.
During Apollo 11, the observatory ‘listened in’ on the first lunar landing.

The present Director, Dr. Thilo Elsner, has provided a short audio recording of transmissions received from the Apollo 11 Lunar Module, Eagle, at the time of Lunar touchdown.
The Moon was just above the horizon at the time of the landing, but it was below the horizon for the first step. (See graphic below.)

Hear the Apollo 11 Lunar Landing
audio 430kb mp3 file.
In this stereo mp3 file, the recording made at Bochum is on
the right channel – and the NASA Net 1 recording (recorded
at Honeysuckle, but coming from Goldstone) is on the left channel.

Charlie Duke (Capcom in Houston speaking with the astronauts)
 – and the associated Quindar tones – are heard only on the left
channel (i.e. the NASA recording) since Bochum could only hear
the transmissions from the Moon – not those being transmitted
to the Moon from the tracking stations on Earth.

Bochum and Net 1 recordings synchronised by Colin Mackellar.

This graphic shows the side of the Earth visible from the Moon at the time
Eagle touched down on the lunar surface (2018GMT Sunday 20 July 1969).

As seen from Bochum, the Moon was at a low elevation and was setting.
NASA Manned Space Flight Network stations at Madrid and
Goldstone both tracked Eagle to the surface.

From: The Bochum Radio Observatory, Germany

Dutchy, you make up so many fabricated stories to support your silly claims!