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: 2271
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 (1-77) not displayed.
.
.
.
#78. To: buckeroo (#77)
Sounds like fun.
I have way too much fun on this forum. The intellectual acumen and political alias and silly dogma run wild!
“Gold is the money of kings; silver is the money of gentlemen; barter is the money of peasants; but debt is the money of slaves.”
LOL OI has done a lot of research into banned archeology. I'm not sure I agree with his ideas on monuments on the moon etc but I don't discount it out of hand either. I have too much respect for him and his IQ to do that plus it is just too plausible.
Are you saying his "considered opinion" is inarguable?
“Gold is the money of kings; silver is the money of gentlemen; barter is the money of peasants; but debt is the money of slaves.”
they must have left all those rolls of film they shot in the glove box.
LOL no I don't think that is what I said but hey if it works for you...
I believe that what he said was that the landings were real but some of the supporting material had been faked. That is exactly what I said. However, Bucky don't read too well. And it is not a final answer. It is a hypothesis which seems to account for all the data. Some of the photos are undeniably legit. Some of the photos are very questionable. So, the hypothesis is that NASA in order to prevent "disturbing" data into the public domain "dummied" some of the shots. That is what has led to the "Moon Mission was a hoax" i.e., that both camps are right and both are wrong.
"An education isn't how much you have committed to memory, or even how much you know. It's being able to differentiate between what you know and what you don't. ~ Anatole France
I am confident that is what you meant .... why are you so willing to prostrate yourself at the feet of OI?
“Gold is the money of kings; silver is the money of gentlemen; barter is the money of peasants; but debt is the money of slaves.”
LOL are you sure it's his feet?
Oh, I see now ... it is his "considered opinion" .... BTW, where is it?
“Gold is the money of kings; silver is the money of gentlemen; barter is the money of peasants; but debt is the money of slaves.”
I believe that what he said was that the landings were real but some of the supporting material had been faked. That is exactly what I said. However, Bucky don't read too well. And it is not a final answer. It is a hypothesis which seems to account for all the data. Some of the photos are undeniably legit. Some of the photos are very questionable. So, the hypothesis is that NASA in order to prevent "disturbing" data into the public domain "dummied" some of the shots. That is what has led to the "Moon Mission was a hoax" i.e., that both camps are right and both are wrong. Yes, sorry. You didn't say they were fake, you said, well what you said. You come across kinda like you're stoned and just want to give a people a hard time on a Saturday night sometimes, buck. ;-)
He must have something to base his opinion on, but he didn't present any evidence for it. I think our government is a bunch of idiots that can't even get a mulit-year well planned false flag operation to work right. Fooling the vast majority of Americans we went to the moon to keep the taxpayer dollars coming in wouldn't have been too hard for NASA to do considering many Americans thought we were being invaded by martians in a radio broadcast and panicked. People trust their talking heads on TV and radio more than they trust their own two eyes and common sense. That is why Americans are enslaved to the elite bankers of the world. They have way too much trust of established "authority" figures.
God is always good!
I should take the time some day to do up a master reference post from different sites around the web. However, in a nutshell, NASA has been caught "jiggering" photographic data on multiple occasions, and there are some sharp people on the web who have caught them, and have the expertise to show what manipulations were done to the photos. However, not tonight - I'm pooped. I have been doing a stem to stern cleaning of my humble pad and rearranging everything to be more efficient and create more space.
"An education isn't how much you have committed to memory, or even how much you know. It's being able to differentiate between what you know and what you don't. ~ Anatole France
Where is the data to back-up any of the otherwise publick and scientific recordings being anything other than "fake." Surely, you can offer more than an opinion or a post agreeing with "considered opinion." Then again, maybe not.
“Gold is the money of kings; silver is the money of gentlemen; barter is the money of peasants; but debt is the money of slaves.”
Hey Bucky? Can you spell ass. Sure you can. See, wasn't that easy?
"An education isn't how much you have committed to memory, or even how much you know. It's being able to differentiate between what you know and what you don't. ~ Anatole France
Good GOD, ALMIGHTY! It's GOOGLE WARS!!!!!!
“Gold is the money of kings; silver is the money of gentlemen; barter is the money of peasants; but debt is the money of slaves.”
Organization is the key to efficiency. Good night. buckeroo, if I thought it would be productive I'd post some evidence to you.
deleted
That must be another "considered opinion" right here on this very forum. This is a totally incredible experience that is causing my entire being to say, "yea".
“Gold is the money of kings; silver is the money of gentlemen; barter is the money of peasants; but debt is the money of slaves.”
“Gold is the money of kings; silver is the money of gentlemen; barter is the money of peasants; but debt is the money of slaves.”
Come again good buddy.
"Satan / Cheney in "08" I think he meant they said it negated the 1/6 gravity of the moon. The back packs weighed approx. 100 pounds which would have felt like 16 2/3 pounds on the moon. But, their enitre body weight would have felt like only 1/6 of that on Earth enabling a 200 pound man to feel like a 33 pound man on the moon with the same amount of strength. So, they should have been able to jump very high if they wanted too. They should have been able to push themselves back up with very little effort if they fell down without even using their legs. But, of course they couldn't do that becasue they were on Earth.
God is always good!
And my thought is that no, because they (and they were), in addition to the 100 lb back packs, in highly constrictive - pondorous even, pressure suits. Not gym shorts. I do so understand your skeptcticism. Seeins as the gov has been so quick to lie on many issues. In my POV, yes the gov. needs a internal revolution, an external revolution if that doesn't work, but for all that the US put several ships on the moon and Kudos for us for that accomplishment. Kennedy was a coverup - the Moon landing was not. Wheather or not it was worth it is a different ?. The US spent itself to death in Vietnam during this same time. Some historians say that the US moon shot shocked the world that the USA could have achieved such a race remarkable event, as in human race, event- that it was worth the billions invested. I don't know - IIRC the US was fighting a flawed war in Vietnam at the time.
"Satan / Cheney in "08" The evidence says the moon landings were fake. It took me a long time to accept this, but I can't ignore the evidence anymore. No man went to the moon, then, or since then.
God is always good!
ROTFL .. RickyJ .. get a life.
“Gold is the money of kings; silver is the money of gentlemen; barter is the money of peasants; but debt is the money of slaves.”
Not only that we people are curious creatures in that we feel more comfortable in an orderly environment and when it is disorderly seek to bring order - except for those poor individuals who are pscyotic. I find that I am more productive in an orderly environment simply because it eliminates the dissonance of disorder. It creates a feeling of stability. Concur. Bucky is just interested in being obstreperous. Evidence is merely a distraction to be ignored. It conflicts with his preferred world view and so makes his head hurt. He doesn't want to be confused with the facts.
"An education isn't how much you have committed to memory, or even how much you know. It's being able to differentiate between what you know and what you don't. ~ Anatole France
I haven't had an opportunity to view your "considered opinion" just yet. When is this information going to be made publick beyond the fact that you think the moon landings were faked?
“Gold is the money of kings; silver is the money of gentlemen; barter is the money of peasants; but debt is the money of slaves.”
deleted
I could continue to post evidence but it would not do any good. Not sure you why you hate science so much but to each his own I guess. I do find it sad though.
No, it is you who hate science because it exposes your lies. Science is not about lies dude. You know nothing about science, you just know how to lie.
God is always good!
You are saying this to a working scientist in his own field with over 30 years of experience. Something a friend of mine used to post comes to mind. You fit this bill in total. ______________________________ "In the history of the world, only a tiny fraction of all the people who ever lived have had the opportunity to ask highly qualified scientists direct questions, and learn from their wisdom. Happily, because of the internet, it was possible for people from all walks of life to converse directly with all sorts of scientific experts; we have had physicists, microbiologists, mathematicians, astronomers, and chemists, to specify but a few, roaming these threads, and eager to explain what they know and how they know it to virtually anyone willing to ask an intelligent question. But there is another segment of people on these threads who, instead of asking these learned folks intelligent questions and thus expanding their knowledge and understanding, insist instead upon bludgeoning them with their ignorance, and questioning the patriotism, honesty, and intellect of people who have dedicated their lives to the pursuit of scientific knowledge. I submit that such people are not here to learn anything, but are in fact interested in quite the opposite. I submit they are here to interfere with the dissemination of scientific knowledge that they find offensive. They don't want other people to ask the experts questions and learn from them; no, they are here to attack the experts and cast doubt upon their wisdom, in the desperate hope that others will turn away and not listen to them. IMHO that is why the same people show up over and over again parroting the same refuted diatribes and misinformation, and spewing the same bogus out-of-context quotes designed specifically to disrupt the dissemination of scientific knowledge. That's why the same people show up over and over again misrepresenting what scientific theories and laws are, despite having had it explained to them 1720th time; they are here to instill confusion and spread their ignorance, not to disseminate knowledge. The experts [who were once] here on these threads ought to be revered and thanked for sharing with us their insights and explanations of the natural world around us; instead scorn is heaped upon them and their knowledge by the belligerently ignorant. I submit that these purveyors of unknowledge should be treated for the intellectual disruptors that they are. They stare stared the best opportunity any of us will ever have to gain more insight and understanding in the eye, and spit spat in the faces of those who offer and have the knowledge to help make that a reality. Behold, I give you the belligerently ignorant, the intellectual Luddites of our time. Know them for the anti-knowledge disruptors they are." _______________________________________ Don't call me a liar again. Doc
Hi Rick, 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. I have looked at all the contrary evidence against a moon landing and have found the physics wanting. The US put a number of men on the moon, it was a huge acheviment, so far a nearly worthless endeavor but a huge Hoo Haa for the US.
"Satan / Cheney in "08" Doc I agree. Call me confused, ill informed, crazy, but Liar implies intentional misinformation. And this is incorrect.
"Satan / Cheney in "08" Revered???? Really??? Only a fool would espouse such.
My friend said it I didn't. I do not want to be revered. But the general gist of the post spelling out what a fool RickyJ is is still spot on IMHO.
Scientists in general (many - not all) have lied (intentionally) or been dishonest about countless things. Independant critical thinkers are wise to this and much credibility has been lost on the part of Scientists. This is not the fault of the independant thinkers in general. I'd write more, but I think you get the gist.
You are not talking to one of those.
Then you have a friend that is a fool. Only a weak and insecure person would ever consider such, weak physically, spiritually, intellectually and or morally. Respect can be earned by anyone, reverence is for fools. re·vere 1 (r-vîr) tr.v. re·vered, re·ver·ing, re·veres To regard with awe, deference, and devotion.
Not the ones I deal with daily. Most are dedicated to finding answers and furthering man's knowledge.
Not a fool, just passionate. He is very bright (rocket science bright BTW) and is one fine human being. Unfortunately this discussion has shifted from my post to my friend.
Comments (119 - 171) not displayed.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/LatestIsn't that a bit like a circle jerk?
"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
#79. To: farmfriend (#78)
#80. To: buckeroo (#79)
"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
#81. To: farmfriend, Original_Intent (#80)
I have too much respect for him and his IQ to do that plus it is just too plausible.
#82. To: christine, Eric Stratton (#40)
doncha believe it? all that footage was lost. ;)
The best gun to have, is the gun you have, when you need a gun.
#83. To: buckeroo, Original_Intent (#81)
Are you saying his "considered opinion" is inarguable?
"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
#84. To: farmfriend, buckeroo, wudidiz (#74)
Isn't he the guy that sez something about the moon landings being faked?
#85. To: farmfriend (#83)
#86. To: buckeroo, Original_Intent (#85)
why are you so willing to prostrate yourself at the feet of OI?
"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
#87. To: farmfriend (#86)
#88. To: Original_Intent, buckeroo (#84)
Isn't he the guy that sez something about the moon landings being faked?
"The trouble with people is not that they don't know but that they know so much that ain't so." ~ Josh Billings
#89. To: buckeroo (#81)
(Edited)
Are you saying his "considered opinion" is inarguable?
#90. To: wudidiz, farmfriend (#88)
(Edited)
#91. To: wudidiz (#88)
#92. To: buckeroo, wudidiz (#91)
#93. To: Original_Intent (#90)
I should take the time some day to do up a master reference post from different sites around the web.
#94. To: Original_Intent, buckeroo, farmfriend, all (#90)
However, not tonight - I'm pooped. I have been doing a stem to stern cleaning of my humble pad and rearranging everything to be more efficient and create more space.
"The trouble with people is not that they don't know but that they know so much that ain't so." ~ Josh Billings
#95. To: IRTorqued, All (#82)
#96. To: wudidiz (#94)
... if I thought it would be productive I'd post some evidence to you.
#97. To: buckeroo (#96)
"The trouble with people is not that they don't know but that they know so much that ain't so." ~ Josh Billings
#98. To: wudidiz (#97)
#99. To: Eric Stratton (#95)
yet we're supposed to believe that in it was this ridiculous weight that negated the atmosphere delta;
#100. To: tom007 (#99)
#101. To: RickyJ (#100)
(Edited)
But, of course they couldn't do that becasue they were on Earth.
#102. To: tom007 (#101)
Kennedy was a coverup - the Moon landing was not.
#103. To: RickyJ (#102)
No man went to the moon, then, or since then.
#104. To: wudidiz, buckeroo, farmfriend, all (#94)
Organization is the key to efficiency.
buckeroo, if I thought it would be productive I'd post some evidence to you.
#105. To: Original_Intent (#104)
He [buckeroo] doesn't want to be confused with the facts.
#106. To: tom007 (#99)
#107. To: RickyJ (#68)
(Edited)
#108. To: Dr_Tron (#107)
#109. To: RickyJ (#108)
No, it is you who hate science because it exposes your lies. Science is not about lies dude. You know nothing about science, you just know how to lie.
#110. To: RickyJ (#108)
(Edited)
#111. To: Dr_Tron (#109)
Don't call me a liar again.
#112. To: Dr_Tron (#109)
The experts [who were once] here on these threads ought to be revered
#113. To: Cynicom (#112)
Only a fool would espouse such.
#114. To: Dr_Tron, Original_Intent, Cynicom, Tom007, RIckyJ, christine, Itistoolate, all (#109)
"The trouble with people is not that they don't know but that they know so much that ain't so." ~ Josh Billings
#115. To: wudidiz (#114)
Scientists in general (many - not all) have lied (intentionally) or been dishonest about countless things.
"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
#116. To: Dr_Tron (#113)
My friend said it I didn't. I do not want to be revered.
#117. To: wudidiz (#114)
Scientists in general (many - not all) have lied (intentionally) or been dishonest about countless things.
#118. To: Cynicom (#116)
(Edited)
Then you have a friend that is a fool.
.
.
.