See other Science/Tech Articles
Title: Were the moon landings faked?
Source:
NASA
URL Source: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AK2Fy85VyRg&feature=related
Published: Oct 17, 2009
Author: NASA
Post Date: 2009-10-17 00:54:11 by RickyJ
Keywords: None
Views: 2196
Comments: 171
Watch this video and see if you can tell what is very wrong if this was actually filmed on the moon as NASA says it was. Hint: It is not the bad dropping, but that is suspect too for supposedly taking place on the moon.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Comments (1-130) not displayed.
.
.
.
#131. To: wudidiz, Dr. Tron, RickyJ (#130)
that's my feeling at this point. the loss of the "original" film is very, very, very suspicious. does anyone know if there is film showing the lunar module reconnecting to the mothership to get the astronauts back to earth?
"This Act (the Federal Reserve Act, Dec. 23rd 1913) establishes the most gigantic trust on earth. When the President (Woodrow Wilson) signs the Bill, the invisible government of the Monetary Power will be legalised... The worst legislative crime of the ages is perpetrated by this banking and currency Bill."--Charles Lindbergh, Sr.
I believe they did it (the hoax) to beat the Russians-demoralize them. In terms of keeping it secret really no problem because the astronuts were all ex servicemen officers. Handpicked men who would keep a secret because of national security. These men were the cream of the crop...men with excpetional ideals. The stealth fighter was being assembled in the late 70's and not announced to the public until the early 1990's. How did they keep all those 1000's of citizen assembly line workers quiet??? If the US came out now and said the moon landing was fake the credibility of our gov't would be nill--might actually start a revolution within the country. Hence the Nasa comment that we will not be able to go back to the moon for another 15-20 years. My opinion on the moon landing?? 65-70% we went there. 30-35% I have some doubt- not sure.I was at 100% at one time but seeing what my gov't can do or would do makes me unsure at this point.
I don't, but am interested to see it. Any suggestions where I could look for it?
I doubt it. People don't care about the moon landings like NASA hoped they would. Even when they were faking them people grew bored with them. Not too many would give a crap if it was all faked. Our popualce has been succefully dumbed down to be more interested in the latest rap songs and video games to even notice or care about the non-stop lies that are being fed to them on a daily basis.
God is always good!
That and many other points the so-called "moonbats" made in the past got me to look at it again. I really didn't want to believe NASA made this up, but I wanted to know if there was any concrete proof out there that they faked to moon landings and now I know there is. You can't hear a bag being shaked and rustled with only gloves and a space suit to do the transmission of the vibrations. If that were the case then we should have heard the lunar lander's thrusters on desent, but they were consicuposly silent. NASA says it's becasue the moon has no atmosphere, that's why we didn't hear it. So they can't now claim we heard a bad being rusteled with only goloves to do the transmission. You need a atmosphere for sound waves to propagate. They don't transmit through thick material like the astronats were wearing very well. Many spelling errors I know, but I hope you can understand what I am trying to say here.
God is always good!
I agree. Call me confused, ill informed, crazy, but Liar implies intentional misinformation. And this is incorrect Oh, it is definitely not incorrect when said about "Dr. Tron". He has the same MO of the 911 government stooges. Exactly the same. You can believe what he says about something just as much as you can believe the devil about God. I don't know where the government finds these people. I suspect many are not even Americans.
God is always good!
Good morning pip-squeak. Still brain impaired I see. Care to attempt to refute my arguments about antenna beam width and ballistic arcs upthread? Will be quite humorous to see you try.
Well Rick, I disagree, but how the hell NASA could have lost the most valuable film footage is beyond me.
"Satan / Cheney in "08" I am moving up in the world. Grins. First is was just a liar, now I am the devil incarnate. You OTOH are a fool. Instead of asking questions you just ridicule what you cannot hope to understand.
Thanks for the support. It actually means a lot to me. It is shocking how much hate RickyJ has for me. Oh well, can't please everyone. Remember what was lost was a video tape of the TV coverage. However, there are copies. Remeber this was only Apollo 11. There were 5 more landings with plenty of footage. Also any footage take on the moon is still with us.
It was just the video feed from Apollo 11. see my above post. There were 5 other landings. Here ya go on the docking after ascent from the lunar surface.
ah, ok. i wasn't aware of that.
"This Act (the Federal Reserve Act, Dec. 23rd 1913) establishes the most gigantic trust on earth. When the President (Woodrow Wilson) signs the Bill, the invisible government of the Monetary Power will be legalised... The worst legislative crime of the ages is perpetrated by this banking and currency Bill."--Charles Lindbergh, Sr.
honestly, you'd think that with all the money NASA had for these missions, they'd have had enough for plenty of clean new tapes. ;)
"This Act (the Federal Reserve Act, Dec. 23rd 1913) establishes the most gigantic trust on earth. When the President (Woodrow Wilson) signs the Bill, the invisible government of the Monetary Power will be legalised... The worst legislative crime of the ages is perpetrated by this banking and currency Bill."--Charles Lindbergh, Sr.
You are a piece of living shit and will burn in hell forever. Enjoy your pitiful little life dude, it's all you got!
God is always good!
Do not believe a word Dr.Tron says, he is lying to you. It was indeed the original footage that was lost. http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home...e/Article/200806413537349 NASA has lost the original footage of man's first steps on the moon.Neil Armstrong's historic moment was seen by 600 million people in July 1969, but according to NASA the original tapes have been mislaid in their vast archive. www.rumormillnews.com/cgi....cgi?noframes;read=151652 NASA said Tuesday it was launching an official search for more than 13,000 original tapes of the historic Apollo moon missions. Everything from all 11 missions from launch to splashdown is on the videos. What's missing are the never-before-broadcast clear original videos, not the grainy converted pictures the world watched on television. The tapes aren't lost, says the NASA official in charge of the search. But he doesn't know where they are. The original video, taken directly from the moon and beamed to deep space network observatories in Australia, has never been seen by the general public or even NASA officials
God is always good!
"Hundreds of military and government witnesses have gone on record claiming a major cover-up around UFOs" It's UFOs now? ROTFLMAO Again, they are the original tapes of "TV" transmitted back to Earth. The real science was not the TV vids BTW. And indeed I have personally degaussed original raw telemetry wideband mag tape to be used over again.
I didn't think you had the nads to try and refute my arguments. And I was correct. BTW, doesn't your bible say "do not judge lest ye be judged"?
OK, I posted this video because it finally woke me up that NASA never went to the moon. I am kind of dumbfounded that no one here seems to think it is that big of a deal that this bag is supposedly producing sound waves in a no atmosphere environment relative to Earth. To me this is MAJOR evidence that the moon landings were faked. I thought it would be for many others here too, but I guess I was wrong. Not wrong about the moon landings being faked or this being MAJOR concrete evidence that the moon landings were fake, but wrong that the current posters here would think the same.
God is always good!
Stooge, you are wasting time talking to me. You might influence others, but I know who you are, so forget about it liar.
God is always good!
Hey Arator! I want to apologize to you for thinking you were nuts for thinking we didn't go to the moon before. Also it appears just you and another poster on this thread think the bag producing noise on the moon is a big deal. That tells me that our nation has been more dumbed down than I though it was. This is freedom site, people here are smarter than the average bear, and still very few seem to recognize proof when they hear it and see it. Really sad.
God is always good!
It may be as you say. It may not. I have seen a lot of "evidence" that is easily explained by not so common knowledge of space physics, which I am not an expert in in any means, but do have a little understanding of. Do you have knowledge of the physics of sound waves? That's all you need to see and hear that the posted video could not have been made on the moon.
God is always good!
If they really went to the moon, they wouldn't have lost the original footage. You just don't lose something like that. Or copy over it. LOL! I think another nation will really get to the moon before NASA ever does.
God is always good!
I just reread your post. There is no such thing as "space physics". The same laws of physics apply on the moon just as they apply on Earth.
God is always good!
You are correct, there is no 'space physics" Physics try's to be universal. Kinda the point of the emperical effort. What I was referring to was the unique enviroments that, say the surface of the moon would present the observer, that would be be dramatically different from the usual enviroment of the earth. I have not looked at the videos in ? ( am remodeling my house right now) - but I surmise that part of the ? was something like a booster fired and sound was recorded by the astronauts internal devices? And this should not have transmitted sound because of a vacuum. A combustion event would produce a disturbance in a vacuum because it is introducing an high intensity explosive chemical vapor into the vacuum that would naturally impact and rattle the area around them. A chemical explosion in a vacuum will have deformational force in a vacuum. It has to. Where would the products of combustion go? They have to dissipate in an isentropic - meaning an equal volumetric expansion.` If you were to hit a tuning fork in a vacuum, there would be no "sound". If you were to lit a fire cracker (that had an internal oxidizer) and it exploded even in a moon like vacuum, a distance away there would a compression wave of energy. I am as suspicious as you or anyone v. the US gov.
"Satan / Cheney in "08" Yeah, and if you watch the videos of the rovers you will see the dirt being kicked up and then remain the in the air on a video claimed by NASA to be from the moon. Of course that couldn't have been done on the moon since the moon has no air to speak of.
God is always good!
who did they leave behind to zoom out the shot and pan up with the blast off? I's gots ta know!
deleted
You have one of those? Sorry, couldn't resist.
We are talking government here. You would think it would have been archived but like I said government...
He owns it and it is hair, so it is real hair, just not his natural hair. For years I thought the "moon-bats" were taking drugs or something saying we didn't go to the moon. Only recently when NASA said they lost the original footage and I went to a museum to see one of the command modules from Apollo up close did I start to have some doubts that they went to the moon. But with this video I no longer have doubts. You can't hear sound in a vacuum and that bag is being rustled and you can hear it like it was here on Earth being rustled. The idiots at NASA were wise enough to degrade the video footage being broadcast to the public, but fortunately for us forgot to fix the audio.
God is always good!
"To the moon, Alice", who said it?
bump
Please don't believe the bone heads quoted in this vid. The simulator LLV-1 that Armstrong crashed was because of a helium pressurant loss to the attitude control jets and the LLRV also used a jet engine to simulate 1/6th g. The LEM on the moon could not and did not use jet engines. All the footage you see is real, however, it is edited quite cleverly and their conclusions (the nuts quoted in the vid) are pure crap and have been debunked many times over. BTW, you won't see a rocket exhaust on the moon because of the fuel/oxidizer used and there is no atmosphere. Also: "The dust around the module is called regolith and is created by ejecta from asteroid and meteoroid impacts. This dust was several inches thick at the Apollo 11 landing site. The regolith was estimated to be several meters thick and is highly compacted with depth. In an atmosphere, we would expect a rocket engine to blast all the surface dust off the ground for tens of meters. However, dust was only removed from the area directly beneath the Apollo landing engine. The important observation here is "atmosphere". Powerful engines set up turbulence in air which lifts and carries dust readily, far beyond the engine itself. However, in a vacuum, there is no air to disturb. Only the actual engine exhaust's direct pressure on the dust can move it." "Hydrazine (a fuel) and dinitrogen tetroxide (an oxidizer) were the Lunar Module propellants, chosen for their reliability; they ignite hypergolically – upon contact– without a spark. Hypergolic propellants happen to produce a nearly transparent exhaust. Hypergolic fuels are also used by several space launchers: the core of the American Titan, the Russian Proton, the European Ariane 1 through 4 and the Chinese Long March, and the transparency of their plumes is apparent in many launch photos. The plumes of rocket engines fired in a vacuum spread out very rapidly as they leave the engine nozzle (see above), further reducing their visibility. Finally, most rocket engines use a "rich" mixture to lengthen their lifetimes. While the excess fuel will burn when it contacts atmospheric oxygen, this cannot happen in a vacuum." The people in the vid were spouting crap. Also Ralph Rene calling himself a scientist is a fraud. Here is some of the other crap Ralph Rene has spouted: 1) Einstein's Theory of relativity is not valid 2) That the Earth has no Equatorial bulge 3) That Newton's law of universal gravitation is erroneous 4) That Pi is equal to 3.146264[8] I know for an absolute fact all of four of the above are pure BS since I personally work with those everyday of my life. Doc
It was the camera on the Lunar Rover pointing back at the LM.
thank you for that information. i enjoy reading both sides of this debate.
NASA's explanation is that because there is no atmosphere on the moon no sound was produced from the rockets. They are correct that no sound outside the LEM would have been produced on the moon. But on the video I posted you can clearly hear the bag being rustled. Some say it isn't the bag but the space suit you hear being rustled. But if that were the case then we would have heard some noise on their descent since the astronaut's suits would have been shaken much more by the rocket engines than when the astronaut tried to remove the bag. Yet on their decent you hear nothing but their voices, no vibrations from their suits being shaken by the rockets can be heard. Also when the bag is taken off and he starts to open it you hear the exact same sound! Which shows that it was indeed the bag producing the noise, whereas if they were on the moon it wouldn't have produced any noise.
God is always good!
Jackie Gleason Threatening to punch your wife then was considered funny. The truth one say will be revealed about the moon landings and 9/11. Faking the moon landings seems harmless enough until you realize that it embolden them to fake the terror attacks of 9/11 and start the current wars. It demonstrated the power of broadcast TV to get people to believe what they want them to believe. 9/11 was done in broad daylight in NYC and they still got away with it because they controlled the media. It would have been much easier to fake the moon landings, with the moon being 250,000 miles away from any eyewitness, than the terror attacks of 9/11.
God is always good!
Mr. Gleason is correct, sir. You go back further than you look :P
The debate is over. Landing sites imaged from lunar orbit:
Can't find the recent moon pages, but this one will do nicely with its many interesting angles including that aluminum is a radiation (?) magnifier. I trust everybody's familiar with the outstanding "SBPDL" blog CLICK HERE: Stuff Black People Don't Like ......with its fantastic race reality books down the right margin? Just noticed there's one on our subject: He insists the moon walks were real but agrees with our thesis that the space program clashed too much with PC to go on with ("The US Government neutered NASA by forcing a much different mission upon the space agency: diversity and the promotion of blacks"). Next thought.... we've made love with the Russkies over the International Space Station since 1998, but they've never sent people to the moon -- is that right? 'Twould seem more than feasible with all the stealing of secrets that's gone on.
Yeah, I don't know. It's hard to for me to put a finger on it. Hard to ascertain what to believe about the moon landing at this point. Makes my brain hurt.
#132. To: buckeroo, original intent (#37)
(Edited)
What aim does the US government have in fooling the people about the space program?
#133. To: christine (#131)
does anyone know if there is film showing the lunar module reconnecting to the mothership to get the astronauts back to earth?
"The trouble with people is not that they don't know but that they know so much that ain't so." ~ Josh Billings
#134. To: belmontconservative (#132)
If the US came out now and said the moon landing was fake the credibility of our gov't would be nill--might actually start a revolution within the country.
#135. To: christine (#131)
that's my feeling at this point. the loss of the "original" film is very, very, very suspicious.
#136. To: tom007 (#111)
Don't call me a liar again. Doc
#137. To: RickyJ (#129)
You are a pitiful little NASA apologist that lies for a few peunuts they cast your way.
#138. To: RickyJ (#136)
#139. To: RickyJ (#136)
You can believe what he says about something just as much as you can believe the devil about God
#140. To: tom007 (#138)
Well Rick, I disagree
#141. To: christine (#131)
the loss of the "original" film is very, very, very suspicious
#142. To: Dr_Tron (#140)
Remember what was lost was a video tape of the TV coverage.
#143. To: Dr_Tron (#140)
NASA did not lose other Apollo missions' videos because they weren't stored on the type of tape that needed to be reused, Nafzger said.
#144. To: Dr_Tron (#137)
#145. To: christine (#143)
(Edited)
#146. To: RickyJ (#145)
From your link:
#147. To: RickyJ (#144)
You are a piece of living shit and will burn in hell forever. Enjoy your pitiful little life dude, it's all you got!
#148. To: All (#0)
(Edited)
#149. To: Dr_Tron (#146)
#150. To: Arator (#39)
(Edited)
#151. To: tom007 (#110)
Hi Rick,
#152. To: belmontconservative (#10)
What I don't understand is we first went to the moon in 9 years...now Nasa say's it will be 15-20 years before we can go back?? Heck all the R&D is done why so long?? Heck dust off the old Saturn 5 blueprints and just build another and throw some new computers on it and go.
#153. To: tom007 (#110)
(Edited)
I have seen a lot of "evidence" that is easily explained by not so common knowledge of space physics
#154. To: RickyJ (#153)
#155. To: wbales (#6)
Another observation: while they are prancing around, a significant amount of dirt and dust is being kicked up.
#156. To: Eric Stratton (#95)
The best gun to have, is the gun you have, when you need a gun.
#157. To: IRTorqued (#156)
#158. To: wudidiz (#130)
Makes my brain hurt.
"Greenhouse gases do not act as a blanket around the earth and they do not keep the atmosphere warm. ... greenhouse gases emit more radiation than they absorb and this ongoing radiation loss tends to cool the atmosphere at between 1C and 2C per day, a fact known for more than 50 years. And yet we continue to get the simplistic explanation that greenhouse gases warm the atmosphere and so more greenhouse gases will warm the atmosphere more. No wonder the public is taken in!" --William Kininmonth, meteorologist , 1791
#159. To: tom007 (#138)
but how the hell NASA could have lost the most valuable film footage is beyond me.
"Greenhouse gases do not act as a blanket around the earth and they do not keep the atmosphere warm. ... greenhouse gases emit more radiation than they absorb and this ongoing radiation loss tends to cool the atmosphere at between 1C and 2C per day, a fact known for more than 50 years. And yet we continue to get the simplistic explanation that greenhouse gases warm the atmosphere and so more greenhouse gases will warm the atmosphere more. No wonder the public is taken in!" --William Kininmonth, meteorologist , 1791
#160. To: Jethro Tull (#25)
The moon landing was as real as Jim Traficant's hair.
#161. To: RickyJ (#160)
#162. To: All, Video--A Realistic Look at the LEM (#160)
#163. To: christine (#162)
FAKE SHAM FRAUD HOAX
"If you love wealth more than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, depart from us in peace. We ask not your counsel nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains rest lightly upon you and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.”—Samuel Adams 
#164. To: christine (#162)
#165. To: IRTorqued (#156)
who did they leave behind to zoom out the shot and pan up with the blast off? I's gots ta know!
#166. To: Dr_Tron (#164)
#167. To: christine (#162)
(Edited)
Bill Kaysing: "How would it be possible to hear astronaut's voices against the background of a running rocket engine."
#168. To: Jethro Tull (#161)
"To the moon, Alice", who said it?
#169. To: RickyJ (#168)
#170. To: Jethro Tull (#169)
#171. To: christine (#40)
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest