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: 2102
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
#1. To: All (#0)
bad = bag. I checked it before I posted it too. Sometimes I swear little gremlins change my post after I post it. LOL!
God is always good!
Let's go back to the moon and find out.
I give up. If it's not the bad dropping, what is it?
We are told by NASA and scientists that the moon has virtually no atmosphere. With no atmosphere there is nothing to propagate vibrations through space commonly know as sound waves. Yet, you can hear the bag the astronaut is trying to change clear as a bell. This was suppose to be happening on the moon, not Earth. So, it would be impossible to hear such sound with nothing to propgate the vibrations to the astronaut's microphone located next to his mouth. Notice, you don't even hear them breathing, so hearing a bag in a vaccum by only touching it with your gloves would be impossible.
God is always good!
That would prove nothing other than the fact that it is possible for man to go to the moon. It would not prove man actually went to the moon in 1969. The recent "lost" original moon footage made me think something is very wrong at NASA. I checked it out further and now I am covinced they faked the whole thing.
God is always good!
Another observation: while they are prancing around, a significant amount of dirt and dust is being kicked up. Compare and contrast that observation with the abject lack of a dust crater or a dust cloud in, on and around the luner landing module. That just doesn't compute.
TRAITORS TO AMERICA AND BRAINWASHED IDIOTS SUPPORT AND DEFEND ISRAEL. TO HELL WITH ZIONISTS AND THIER AMERICAN FRONTS: AIPAC/PNAC/ADL/JPCA/NAACP/CFR/FEDERAL RESERVE/NWO/SPLC/JINSA/ACLU/FPI/CHRISTIAN ZIONISTS/AEI/FEDERAL MEDIA/HOLLYWOOD, et. al.
Where ever they are, they are operating in a vacuum. Notice that no dust lingers in the air (or lack thereof) at all.
Obama's health care plan shall be written by a committee whose head says he doesn't understand it, passed by a Congress that hasn't read it, signed by a president who smokes and has no birth certificate, funded by a treasury chief who did not pay his taxes, overseen by a surgeon general who is overweight and financed by a country that is nearly broke. What could possibly go wrong? - buckeroo Your argument is that the sound of the bag should not be heard because of the vacuum of space. But .... The bag is a sort of a rucksack attached to the spacesuit of one of the astronauts, so any jiggling of the bag would jiggle his spacesuit and what you are hearing is the rattling of his spacesuit fabric via his own helmet's microphone. Nothing incongruous about this. By the way, timing the speed of the dropping objects, including the kangaroo hops and the kicked-up dust, shows that they are positively in a much weaker gravity field than on earth.
True, and see post 7 about the dust. This video convinces me more that they were indeed on the moon.
Obama's health care plan shall be written by a committee whose head says he doesn't understand it, passed by a Congress that hasn't read it, signed by a president who smokes and has no birth certificate, funded by a treasury chief who did not pay his taxes, overseen by a surgeon general who is overweight and financed by a country that is nearly broke. What could possibly go wrong? - buckeroo 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.
No that is not the case here. Even after he gets the bag off and he starts to open it you can hear it clearly. That is not a space suit making that noise or you would hear it every time they moved and especially when they fell down. That was a distinct noise created by a bag, not a spacesuit.
God is always good!
First of all, I didn't hear a bag drop. Second, in order to simulate 1/6 gravity, the recording would have had to be done in slow motion, and the audio would have been voiced over at normal speed. The ambient sounds from suit action and so forth sound completely natural to me and coordinate well with the voices. I have no dog in this fight except insofar as the propagation of these sorts of stories generates the impression that all unconventional stories on the internet are out there in La-La Land.
Not again, sigh...
I don't see how. NASA themselves said that the Lunar landing module's thrusters were not heard due to there being no atmosphere on the moon. That is despite the fact that they would have created much more vibrations in their spacesuits than a simple rustling of a bag would. Yet nothing was heard from them. But the bag you can hear loud and clear. I think you are not looking at this video with a critical eye, or you don't understand why it is this couldn't be made on the moon.
God is always good!
Sorry, sounds are not propagated through a vaccum. They are not in a vaccum. The bag has given away that they are not on the moon.
God is always good!
Sorry but the microphones contained within the spacesuits picked upped the vibrations as sound; the microphones are not outside the spacesuits in other words.
“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.”
Sorry, but the thrusters of the lunar module produced much more vibrations, yet they made no sound according to NASA. I told you the microphones are by their mouths, why you think the microphones are outside the suit is beyond me.
God is always good!
Ricky - Since you are so close to GOD, can you ask him to help you accurately read posts on the Internet? I sense you either have a condition with myopia or maybe Benign Fasciculation Syndrome.
“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.”
That would prove nothing other than the fact that it is possible for man to go to the moon. It would not prove man actually went to the moon in 1969. The recent "lost" original moon footage made me think something is very wrong at NASA. I checked it out further and now I am covinced they faked the whole thing. I think the one possibility that gets overlooked is that both are TRUE Yes we did go to the Moon. And Yes some of the video footage released to the public is fake. But why both? If they went to the moon why not release the footage taken there and eliminate the possibility that someone would catch on? It finally hit me why. There was something, or things, which the elites running the show did now want people to see e.g., that there are surface structures, artificial constructed structures, on the moon. This recognition did not occur to me overnight and is the result of lots of little pieces of information that began to come together much as the picture in jigsaw puzzles forms - piece by piece - and you can generally get a good idea of the puzzle picture long before all the pieces are assembled. Some of the details might be yet missing but you know what the picture is about. The direction that I come from this goes back, again, to my interest in Archaeology and the awareness of what Michael Cremo (co-author of "Forbidden Archaeology") calls the "Knowledge Filter". The way the Knowledge Filter works is that data, evidence, which does not fit the popular, and officially preferred, theories of human origins and the history of civilization, as taught in colleges and universities, is discarded, derided, or ignored. Then take into account "The Brookings Report" which was generated for NASA back in 1959-1961 which had as one of its key conclusions that the discovery of artifacts from an advanced civilization would be very disruptive to our current society - that knowledge and awareness of such would upset a lot of apple carts and possibly cause an inferiority complex among scientists in particular. Back in the 1990's Richard Hoagland did a presentation at the U.N. which was videoed, and which I have a copy of, wherein he demonstrated several things: 1. That there appear to be remnants of ancient structures on the moon - verrrrrrry ancient, and he has the photographs (gotten directly from NASA's own archives and through some of his "contacts" at NASA). 2. Some of the photos appear to have been "adjusted" to remove "inconvenient" details. 3. The photos appear to show some very LARGE structures - reminiscent of Paolo Solari's "Arcology" concept - massive structures that are an entire city in one building. 4. NASA has lied, and lied repeatedly, about what they have found and, at the top, acted to bottle up the information and prevent it from becoming public. So, rhetorical question, if you had structures that you wanted to investigate with the moon landings, but did not want awareness and knowledge of them loose into the public mind, what might you do to accomplish both goals? Produce phony films purporting to be the moon, for public consumption, while keeping the films of "inconvenient" evidence of a prior civilization hidden. The "why" again goes back to the massive, and pervasive, Psychiatric manipulation of what the general public is allowed to "know" and thus are able to see, think, and talk about. It helps to create the hive-like society being created if people are kept, generally, ignorant and unaware of things which raise questions as to who and what we are, and ultimately may have come from. If you want an ant hive society you don't want the ants questioning the hive. There is a lot more to this but that's the "thumbnail"
"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
Second, in order to simulate 1/6 gravity, the recording would have had to be done in slow motion, and the audio would have been voiced over at normal speed. The ambient sounds from suit action and so forth sound completely natural to me and coordinate well with the voices. I have no dog in this fight except insofar as the propagation of these sorts of stories generates the impression that all unconventional stories on the internet are out there in La-La Land. See my above, but the short answer is that we had both valid and invalid staged footage. Where the footage did not show "things" we are not supposed to see the originals have been released. Where they did show things, and to prevent the possiblity, staged footage was shot and released.
"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
You are a nut_case.
“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.”
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. Not only that - we HAD other Saturn V components that could have been assembled into further missions - they were destroyed. The short answer, along with my reasoning why I believe it to be the case, is that someone (or one's): A. Do NOT want us venturing back to the moon. B. We have already been back via the "Black Space Program" of which little tiny snippets have leaked to suggest very strongly that one exists. Again it goes back to controlling information and thus controlling what people think or can even think about. As I have commented before the scale of the mind/information control in our current society is simply beyond comprehension for most people - they have been conditioned not to look, ask, or question. This particularly so among those under 40. The control of the schools, and there curriculum, was really only cemented into place in the early to mid 70's. Going back to other pieces in the puzzle - it is likely that we have had the means to reach the moon, and very likely Mars and the outer planets, since the late 70's. Again it is conjecture based on little snippets I've picked up over time so if asked to prove the conclusion I cannot, but I can justify it.
"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
You are a nut_case. Because someone ventures an opinion, based on evidence, with which you disagree does not make them a "nut case". It does suggest though that you are a thoroughly mind controlled robot incapable of sifting through the evidence and thinking for yourself. GOOD BOY! Nowwwwwww - Speak! Roll over boy! Atsa a good boy.
"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
That comment isn't an opinion .... that is an authoritive pile of BS and you know it. And, you can't prove your own "opinion."
“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.”
The moon landing was as real as Jim Traficant's hair.
And Yes some of the video footage released to the public is fake. Considering the pictures we have got through probes and the robots on Mars I don't think anyone really doubts we have got machines there. But getting live people there is a different story and much more difficult considering the raidiation they would have to been subjected to in the very lightly shielded spacecraft and space suits. Alluminum would actually increase the radiation according to experts so it wasn't a shield at all, but rather an amplifier of radiation. As far as there being structures on the moon. I don't know about that and see no reason for that to be the case. There could be structures there, but I see no evidence of that anywhere. That would be one secret that would be almost impossible to keep even under threat of death. The much more simpler explanation is that they faked the moon landings for M-O-N-E-Y.
God is always good!
deleted
deleted
deleted
Another nut_case on the forum. Amen- Buckeroo “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.”
Obviously didn't happen.
deleted
deleted
It's all "political". These kind of "fabricated" events are "fabricated" by incumbant politicians in an effort to get 'em re-elected.
What money? These people have all the money they need. They have as much as they want in the "Black Budget". No, this is about power and information control to maintain that power. As well we really do not know what technology is available EXCEPT what we are told is available and by best estimates of those who watch the Black Technology Development what is released for the public to know, at any given time, is at least 20 years behind real capabilities. So, and I think it likely, that those capsules had more radiation shielding than was let on. Doing the entire Moon Program by fraud would have been virtually impossible. Too many really really bright people, and ethical ones, were on the inside. However, a small group could be kept quiet about what was actually up there. No, what makes more sense is a parallel hidden space program using technology and systems not in the public domain. I think it likely that we had the capability to reach, without rockets, the moon and at least the inner planets out through Mars for at least 20 years if not longer. There are several reasons to suspect that. The level of funding for the Black Budget - which while a closely guarded number is one that is estimated in the hundreds of billions. The slip of tongue reported in Aviation Week, made by Senators Jay Rockefeller and Ron Wyden Senators'' Comments Suggest Existence Of Secret Space Program, which revealed the existence of the Black Budget Space Program. The article is still on the website but appears to have been severely "scrubbed" from what was reported in the original but nevertheless the cat was let out of the bag. Tying into this is the English Hacker who broke into Pentagram files which showed officer transfers and command changes on unknown U.S. Ships. The inference being that this is part of the black program i.e., a secret "Space Navy". Sightings have been made, all over the U.S., of Triangular craft flying at unreasonalbly slow speeds for their size and shape. This ties to, probably renamed since it leaked, Project Aurora which was the development of advanced "aircraft" which rumors suggest have hypersonic capability as well as possible limited "anti-gravity" systems. The cryptic, apocryphal, comment attributed to John Northrup (founder of Northrup Aviation) reportedly made at a small side group to a Dinner Party "We have the Stars and they won't let us go". Who the "they" is, is one of the unknowns. Then factoring in the "Brookings Report", the photographs of apparent structures (which do exist in the NASA PHOTOS and because you personally have not looked at them does not mean they do not exist or have disappeared). NASA being caught repeatedly manipulating and withholding photographs of the Moon and Mars. Examples would be the contrived color shift on mars photographs, toward the red end of the spetrum, to cover up the existence of plant life on Mars, and to degrade the image of "The Face" (wherein they cut the gray scale and the number of scan lines in the published photos from Mars Surveyor). The "mysterious" silence of key probes, etc., ... As well is the widespread use of the media to create disinformation, control knowledge flow and dissemination, and to control the public perception via what they are allowed to know, and what you "know" determines what you see (with credit to James Burke). No, I think labeling the whole moon missions a "hoax" is the fraud and a Red Herring to distract and lead away from what manipulations were actually done and why.
"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
That comment isn't an opinion .... that is an authoritive pile of BS and you know it. And, you can't prove your own "opinion." Yes, it is my opinion, my considered opinion formed over the last 20 years of following the operations of government, and how they really operate, and to what ends. By controlling what people know, dumbing down the schools, and generally disabling large segments of the population via drugs, both legal and illegal, the populace from their psychotic point of view is kept under control. You're a great example of it. You think the approved thoughts within the designated box. Polly want a cracker? Congratulations.
"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
What aim does the US government have in fooling the people about the space program? Can you lay any claim ... outside of your "considered opinion" that the US government in concert with NASA and BILLIONS of dollars transferred to private industry can pull a hoax off of this magnitude? The US government doesn't have enough brains or wherewithal to perform the talent you profess. But you have enough brains so suggest that the US government does. How about that, nut_case.
“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.”
Oh c'mon. Everyone knows the moon is made from green cheese and the aliens abducted all the astronauts before they even left the Earth's orbit. Gee Whiz..... get a life as opposed to arguing about something that you can't substantiate or support by rational debate from a passionate perspective or factual content.
“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.”
Also, did you note the rate of speed at which the bag dropped to the ground. That looked like earth gravity, not moon gravity.
Check out my blog, America, the Bushieful.
doncha believe it? all that footage was lost. ;)
"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.
ROTFL ... Didn't you notice the moonwalkers hoping and skipping and jumping as though they were on romper room?
“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.”
Flapdoodle. You are hearing artifacts in the audio transmissions. We went to the Moon. I personally worked with the Apollo folks and know some of the astronauts. IMHO it is a slap in the face to America to deny one of its great achievements. Here are just a couple of “proofs” we went to the moon: Extremely directional dish antennas were used for communications. 1/2 power = .04 deg beam width. In other words you had to be pointing directly at the target (landing site) not just the Moon. Also a transponder to bounce a signal from the Earth to the Moon and back giving the appearance of being there would not work as well. There would have been a pesky time delay twice as long (speed of light and distance) as predicted that you could not eliminate. Can’t violate physics. Also other countries monitored the transmissions from the Moon- nuff said. Anything flown, thrown, or even the dust being kicked up follows perfectly ballistic arcs. This is most evident in the lunar rover videos. You can see the plumes of dust falling in a perfectly ballistic arc. No sound stage could ever fake this. (Nor could we build a vacuum chamber large enough (even today) for the rovers. Again there is that pesky thing called physics that shows everything moving in 1/6 g. We cannot fake that. We can create 1/6th g by controlled falling (i.e.; the Vomit Comet), however, that is a pretty short lived phenomenon before you hit the ground.
They did:
Was that an original post by your own resources?
“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.”
Ummm... No. Everything you see is consistent with a lunar landing. We went to the Moon in 1969-72. I lament the fact we have not been back since. :-(
Yea. If I cut and paste I will quote and source the original - anything else is plagiarism. Good to see you. :-)
Too kewl. You have an arsenal of awesome some personal time on this web-chat forum. I want to be the first to say, thank_you ... you are a breath of fresh-aire. Keep kicking ass.
“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.”
You are being way to kind. I just wish I had more time to post. A little background: I have worked with either the military or the American space program (I float between em) closing in on 40 years now - GACK getting old!!. Went to school, worked with NASA then served 12 years active duty (USAF) in the 70s, returned to NASA, completed graduate school, went back to the DoD after 9/11 - felt like the right thing to do even though it was a pay cut. Now I am a guest professor teaching astrophysics at a major university while still working for the DoD (USAF Space Command).
Ever hear about that nasty guy, "Mr.Root" ... I am not that person.... I swaer.
“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.”
Senior moment here. Scratching head in vain - who is Mr Root? LOLOLOL!
Fascinating thread. I was employed by NASA right out of college, worked at the Manned Space Center in Texas.
"Satan / Cheney in "08" You could just click on my nick to understand all my own dialog.
“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.”
Gads, I didn't even think of that. Another senior moment. Gack! Grins - I get it now. LOL!
Sweet! I was at the Cape and JPL. Did only TDYs to JSC.
JPL .... WOW, now I think that would have quite interesting. I stayed at NASA for about a year, was dismayed by the waste of most of it, at least what I saw in building 1, and left to work for Conoco. I have no doubt, from what I did see there, that the US got mooned.
"Satan / Cheney in "08" America is far more worthy than a government pushing wars around the world based upon our historical foundations. Meanwhile, we have incredible god-damned contemporaneous, mother-fuckers in government attempting to use Americans as some sort of political gossip concerning the CORE, called the US Constitution about our PERSONAL rights and freedoms.
“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.”
Agree totally. I am appalled at this administration. Carter redux X10. 3 (possibly 7) more years of this is very very scary.
I understand totally. :-(
What happened to America? Tell this Internet chat channel your perspective. Don't hold back......
“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.”
Honestly, all this is too much for me today. I like your perspective and your answer(s), OI. Interesting thread. I keep an open mind and hope to never stop questioning.
Oh sure.
“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.”
There are great benefits and advantages to being reasonable, sensible, inquisitive and open-minded, my friend.
And just how does your comment apply to Mr. Original_Intent? Isn't he the guy that sez something about the moon landings being 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.”
No it isn't Dr. Tron. Care to explain how we can hear the bag being rustled but can't hear the thrusters of the lunar landing module? Which do you think produced more vibrations for the space suits of the astronauts? I am not surprised you say you worked for NASA and claim we went to the moon. What else would a person from NASA do? Tell the truth? LOL!
God is always good!
And they shut up pretty quick when Grissom and other astronauts critical of NASA and their claim of working toward getting a man on the moon were killed in "accidents". Good people can be intimidated by fear of death and loved ones to keep quiet. This is how the elite have kept secrets for decades, they control the press and kill those who reveal the truth after they riducule them as crack pots in the press and tarnish their reputations.
God is always good!
Flapdoodle? LOL! Yeah, must be artifacts in the transmissions, how else could NASA exaplain it? Tell the truth. LOL!
God is always good!
No you can't. So why do you lie about the bag not producing the noise when it is clear that is exactly what is happening. Admit the truth, it will do you good. Why live a lie for the rest of your life?
God is always good!
You think the USA governemnt, CIA, Mossad can create such advanced space ships and yet can't even properly carry out a false flag like 9/11? I highly doubt it. They are supremely imcompetent, their only power is fear through intmidation and assainations. Once the "little" people lose their fear of them, their time will be up. Education is the only way. It won't be easy to reverse a lifetime of propaganda and brainwashing in enough people, but it is the only hope to stop them.
God is always good!
deleted
deleted
deleted
And just how does your comment apply to Mr. Original_Intent? He is those things. Something close to that.
I believe that what he said was that the landings were real but some of the supporting material had been faked.
Oh. Just because of his "considered opinion" 'eh?
“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 find OI to be very well read and informed.
Yeah, but outside of his suggestions for and about his own "considered opinions" ... where are those opinions beyond a post stating his own considered opinions? Isn't that a bit like a circle jerk?
“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.”
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.
Passionate??? I would disagree. Any human looking for anything beyond earned respect has a character flaw, likewise any human revering another human has a character flaw. The lesser man is the one that reveres. Fear, love, hate and respect are totally normal human traits, inherent to all of us, reverence is not, it is the result of ones own weakness, whether giving or desiring.
I am not going to continue to argue for or against someone who is not here. However, my post stands on its own merit. You can nitpick a single word out of it all you want but the general gist is still valid.
You are not talking to one of those. I'll take your word for it. Nothing personal to Dr. Tron, but there seems to be at least one anomaly with the moon landing. What about Global warming for instance? Nasa has some things to say about that. Does Dr. Tron concur with Nasa about global warming?
Why did the hammer and feather take twice as long to hit the deck as the bag that fell in the first vid? And from approx the same height?
Your entire post is carried by one word...revere... On it lies your entire argument foundation. The word revere has always been known for its negative connotation, one of human weakness, another is the word idolize, again not a human trait. Seekers of such, fortunately are few, givers are legion. Earned respect, voluntarily given is one thing, universal respect for a title, position etc is yet another human failing. One does his best, accepts what is given, to go forth seeking is shameful.
Global warming is occurring. The cause OTOH is the sticky wicket. There are natural cyclical variations in the Earth's mean temperature over long periods of time. Will we see another ice age? IMHO, absolutely; in our lifetimes - nope. Is global warming the dire threat looming over us and assuring that we are doomed? Again IMHO (and this is a layman’s view - I am not nor have ever been a climate scientist) we are not. Over my slightly less than 60 odd years of existing on this planet, I have seen many predictions of looming disasters. E.g., Y2K, nuclear war, overpopulation, mass starvation, meteors, comets, cats and dogs sleeping together, etc. Is global warming an issue we need to look at rationally? - Yes. Run around like Chicken Little? -No.
I looked at both vids very carefully. "G" appears to be the same for both events. One had already accelerated by the time we started counting (i.e. bounced out. And the other accelerated from a standstill. slow the vids down and look at the two falls. You will see what I am saying.
I will be off for a while. Feel free to hammer me in the meantime. ;-)
"Scientists" have even lied about being scientists to make a buck. You will find money is more important to many so-called scientists than the truth. Of course in many professions it is the same way. The buck means more than integrity to most. NASA is a joke, they killed Grissom, a true astronaut and lover of science, not a actor like Armstrong and the rest that claimed to land on the moon, just to make money. More and more are realizing the NASA landings on the moon were faked. You just don't lose original footage of such an event. You copy the heck out of it and store the originals in a fort knox type facility. They were on Earth, where I don't know and don't care. The bag gave them away 100%.
God is always good!
Thank you.
Doc The truth hurts doesn't it. It shouldn't for you though, because you tend to ignore it when there is no money in it for you. You are a pitiful little NASA apologist that lies for a few peunuts they cast your way. You are lowest of the low, a defender of the elite for practically nothing. Even the elite laugh at you.
God is always good!
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.
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.
#2. To: RickyJ (#0)
Were the moon landings faked?
#3. To: RickyJ (#0)
"The trouble with people is not that they don't know but that they know so much that ain't so." ~ Josh Billings
#4. To: wudidiz (#3)
(Edited)
I give up. If it's not the bad dropping, what is it?
#5. To: PaulCJ (#2)
Let's go back to the moon and find out.
#6. To: RickyJ (#4)
#7. To: wbales (#6)
while they are prancing around, a significant amount of dirt and dust is being kicked up.
Let me get this straight.
#8. To: RickyJ (#4)
(Edited)
#9. To: Shoonra (#8)
The bag is a sort of a rucksack attached to one of the astronaut's spacesuit, so any jiggling of the back jiggles his spacesuit and what you are hearing is the rattling of his spacesuit fabric via his own helmet's microphone.
Let me get this straight.
#10. To: Critter (#9)
This video convinces me more that they were indeed on the moon.
#11. To: Shoonra (#8)
The bag is a sort of a rucksack attached to one of the astronaut's spacesuit, so any jiggling of the back jiggles his spacesuit and what you are hearing is the rattling of his spacesuit fabric via his own helmet's microphone.
#12. To: RickyJ (#0)
#13. To: randge (#12)
#14. To: Critter (#9)
(Edited)
This video convinces me more that they were indeed on the moon.
#15. To: Critter (#7)
(Edited)
Where ever they are, they are operating in a vacuum.
#16. To: RickyJ (#15)
The bag has given away that they are not on the moon.
#17. To: buckeroo (#16)
(Edited)
Sorry but the microphones contained within the spacesuits picked upped the vibrations as sound; the microphones are not outside the spacesuits in other words.
#18. To: RickyJ (#17)
#19. To: RickyJ, PaulCJ, christine, TwentyTwelve, Wudidiz, Lod, all (#5)
Let's go back to the moon and find out.
#20. To: randge (#12)
First of all, I didn't hear a bag drop.
#21. To: Original_Intent (#19)
And Yes some of the video footage released to the public is fake.
#22. To: belmontconservative, Critter (#10)
This video convinces me more that they were indeed on the moon.
#23. To: buckeroo (#21)
And Yes some of the video footage released to the public is fake.
#24. To: Original_Intent (#23)
And Yes some of the video footage released to the public is fake.
#25. To: RickyJ (#0)
#26. To: Original_Intent (#19)
Yes we did go to the Moon.
#27. To: PaulCJ (#2)
#28. To: RickyJ (#5)
#29. To: wbales (#6)
#30. To: Eric Stratton (#27)
There are more inconsistencies with the moon landings than there are for 9/11.
Dear GOD - Please give me strength to kick the asses of teenie-tiny-butt-wipers on the Internet.
#31. To: Eric Stratton (#29)
was obviously not real
#32. To: buckeroo (#30)
#33. To: sizzlerguy (#31)
#34. To: Eric Stratton (#33)
FedGov
#35. To: RickyJ, PaulCJ, christine, TwentyTwelve, Wudidiz, Critter, Lod, randge, all (#26)
(Edited)
The much more simpler explanation is that they faked the moon landings for M-O-N-E-Y.
#36. To: buckeroo (#24)
And Yes some of the video footage released to the public is fake.
#37. To: Original_Intent (#36)
Polly want a cracker?
#38. To: Eric Stratton (#32)
If brains were dynamite, you wouldn't have enough to blow your nose.
#39. To: RickyJ (#4)
Notice, you don't even hear them breathing, so hearing a bag in a vaccum by only touching it with your gloves would be impossible.
#40. To: Eric Stratton (#33)
For example, where'd they keep that car?
#41. To: Arator (#39)
That looked like earth gravity, not moon gravity.
#42. To: RickyJ (#4)
Yet, you can hear the bag the astronaut is trying to change clear as a bell. This was suppose to be happening on the moon, not Earth.
#43. To: Eric Stratton (#33)
How come not one picture, not one, of them reassembling the damn thing once they got up there? They seemed to have felt that all kinds of other trivial sh!t was important enough to photograph, but none of that.
#44. To: Dr_Tron (#42)
#45. To: Eric Stratton (#29)
The only people believing this are the sheople and the America-Uber-Alles crowd.
#46. To: buckeroo (#44)
(Edited)
Was that an original post by your own resources?
#47. To: buckeroo, all (#44)
Let's add this to the mix -
#48. To: Dr_Tron (#46)
Yea. If I cut and paste I will quote and source the original.
#49. To: buckeroo (#48)
Too kewl. You have an arsenal of awesome some personal time on this web-chat forum. I want to be the first to say, thank_you ... you are a breath of fresh-aire.
#50. To: Dr_Tron (#49)
#51. To: buckeroo (#50)
Ever hear about that nasty guy, "Mr.Root"
#52. To: RickyJ (#0)
#53. To: Dr_Tron (#51)
#54. To: buckeroo (#53)
You could just click on my nick to understand all my own dialog.
#55. To: tom007 (#52)
I was employed by NASA right out of college, worked at the Manned Space Center in Texas
#56. To: Dr_Tron (#55)
#57. To: Dr_Tron (#54)
#58. To: buckeroo (#57)
#59. To: tom007 (#56)
stayed at NASA for about a year, was dismayed by the waste of most of it, at least what I saw in building 1
#60. To: Dr_Tron (#58)
#61. To: Original_Intent, all (#19)
"The trouble with people is not that they don't know but that they know so much that ain't so." ~ Josh Billings
#62. To: wudidiz (#61)
I like your perspective and your answer(s), OI.
#63. To: buckeroo (#62)
"The trouble with people is not that they don't know but that they know so much that ain't so." ~ Josh Billings
#64. To: wudidiz, Original_Intent (#63)
There are great benefits and advantages to being reasonable, sensible, inquisitive and open-minded
#65. To: Dr_Tron (#45)
Ummm... No. Everything you see is consistent with a lunar landing.
#66. To: Original_Intent (#35)
So, and I think it likely, that those capsules had more radiation shielding than was let on. Doing the entire Moon Program by fraud would have been virtually impossible. Too many really really bright people, and ethical ones, were on the inside.
#67. To: Dr_Tron (#42)
(Edited)
Flapdoodle. You are hearing artifacts in the audio transmissions.
#68. To: Dr_Tron (#42)
Can’t violate physics
#69. To: Original_Intent (#35)
#70. To: christine (#40)
#71. To: Dr_Tron (#43)
#72. To: Dr_Tron (#45)
#73. To: buckeroo (#64)
There are great benefits and advantages to being reasonable, sensible, inquisitive and open-minded
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
#74. To: buckeroo, wudidiz, Original_Intent (#73)
Isn't he the guy that sez something about the moon landings being faked?
"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
#75. To: farmfriend (#74)
#76. To: buckeroo (#75)
Oh. Just because of his "considered opinion" 'eh?
"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
#77. To: farmfriend (#76)
#78. To: buckeroo (#77)
Isn'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.
#119. To: Dr_Tron (#118)
(Edited)
Not a fool, just passionate.
#120. To: Cynicom (#119)
Fear, love, hate and respect are totally normal human traits, inherent to all of us, reverence is not, it is the result of ones own weakness, whether giving or desiring.
#121. To: farmfriend, Dr. Tron (#115)
Scientists in general (many - not all) have lied (intentionally) or been dishonest about countless things.
"The trouble with people is not that they don't know but that they know so much that ain't so." ~ Josh Billings
#122. To: Dr. Tron, All (#121)
...there seems to be at least one anomaly with the moon landing.
"The trouble with people is not that they don't know but that they know so much that ain't so." ~ Josh Billings
#123. To: Dr_Tron (#120)
You can nitpick a single word out of it all you want but the general gist is still valid.
#124. To: wudidiz (#121)
What about Global warming for instance? Nasa has some things to say about that.
#125. To: wudidiz (#122)
Why did the hammer and feather take twice as long to hit the deck as the bag that fell in the first vid? And from approx the same height?
#126. To: All (#125)
#127. To: wudidiz (#114)
Scientists in general (many - not all) have lied (intentionally) or been dishonest about countless things.
#128. To: Dr_Tron (#126)
"The trouble with people is not that they don't know but that they know so much that ain't so." ~ Josh Billings
#129. To: Dr_Tron (#109)
Don't call me a liar again.
#130. To: RickyJ (#127)
"The trouble with people is not that they don't know but that they know so much that ain't so." ~ Josh Billings
#131. To: wudidiz, Dr. Tron, RickyJ (#130)
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