Moon Landings Faked? (and all other space mission fakery)

[onesmallstep]

Re: Partial Summary of Apollo Hoax Evidence

Do you suppose that preparations have begun to hoax the missions to an asteroid and Mars?

Since no one knows what an asteroid looks like up close, I guess they could hoax it using almost anything. Maybe one of the old sets from Lost in Space is still available. They could even re-use one of the rubber monsters to enhance the excitement factor.

Oh the pain...the pain.

 

[Mee_n_Mac]

Re: Partial Summary of Apollo Hoax Evidence

Just the fact that the Clavius site is there is circumstantial evidence that Apollo was a hoax.

Why this is the kind of clear, logical thinking that's so desperately lacking in today's society. I wonder how many other mysteries can be put to bed using similar logic ? Now I can sleep well at night knowing the rockets I personally saw at Cape Canaveral back in the 60's were all fakes.

 

[MeteorWayne]

Re: Partial Summary of Apollo Hoax Evidence

There is no way I am going to read a single thread you posted! The reason is that after reading the first line in your OP coffee shot out my nose - so I am ticked off, and won't play!

This is in the wrong place anyway it should be in the apollo hoax thread already droning on and on and on.....

It has been so merged....

 

[CalliArcale]

Re: Partial Summary of Apollo Hoax Evidence

Since no one knows what an asteroid looks like up close, I guess they could hoax it using almost anything. Maybe one of the old sets from Lost in Space is still available. They could even re-use one of the rubber monsters to enhance the excitement factor.

Actually, they got quite good images from the NEAR-Shoemaker probe, which was the first spacecraft to soft-land on an asteroid. Looked very dusty. Hayabusa got good images too, and though it's going to try to return to Earth soon, it seems rather over-optimistic to hope that it actually collected any material. Dawn should be pretty exciting too, as it visits the two largest main-belt asteroids: Vesta, and the dwarf planet Ceres. Phobos-Grunt should also be useful, as Phobos is believed to be a captured asteroid.

So though nobody's set foot on an asteroid, we do have a fairly good idea of what they should look like. They seem to be rather moonlike, actually.

 

[MeteorWayne]

Re: Moon Landings Faked?

Gaspra:

http://neo.jpl.nasa.gov/images/gaspra2.jpg

Ida and Dactyl:

http://neo.jpl.nasa.gov/images/ida2.jpg

Mathilde:

http://neo.jpl.nasa.gov/images/mathilde1.jpg

Eros:

http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/planetary/mi ... _eros.html

Eros Movies:

http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/planetary/mi ... _anim.html

Eros Descent Movie (12.8 Mb Quicktime)

http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/planetary/mi ... _anim.html

The final image shows objects afew inches across.

 

[StrikeEagle]

Re: Moon Landings Faked?

I heard that it is really fake. The Soviet Union is the country who first reached space(including the first dog on space) and who put the pressure on the United States. The USA surpasses that and claimed that they reached the moon with evidence of videos, moon rocks, etc. to defend their claim but I still dought it so I wanna know the true story about it.

 

[Smersh]

Re: Moon Landings Faked?

I heard that it is really fake. The Soviet Union is the country who first reached space(including the first dog on space) and who put the pressure on the United States. The USA surpasses that and claimed that they reached the moon with evidence of videos, moon rocks, etc. to defend their claim but I still dought it so I wanna know the true story about it.

Hi and welcome to Space.com.

If it was faked, why didn't the Soviet Union blow the whistle then and say it was faked? Don't forget, they were monitoring the moon landings very closely.

 

[Kerberos]

Re: Moon Landings Faked?

I heard that it is really fake. The Soviet Union is the country who first reached space(including the first dog on space) and who put the pressure on the United States. The USA surpasses that and claimed that they reached the moon with evidence of videos, moon rocks, etc. to defend their claim but I still dought it so I wanna know the true story about it.

Hi StrikeEagle

It's true that there are a lot of unanswered questions and problems with the official Moon-landing story, but you will have a hard time getting straight answers here. Space.com is controlled by NASA, and as a result, follows the party line while crushing honest scientific dissent. There are a few science types on here who will give you trustworthy info, but you will have to be careful not to be tricked by the disinformation spread by the Moon-landing believers and NASA employees.

 

[JonClarke]

Re: Moon Landings Faked?

It's true that there are a lot of unanswered questions and problems with the official Moon-landing story...

Lie #1. The truth is there are very few unanswered questions and no problems with the "official MNoon-landing story"

but you will have a hard time getting straight answers here.

Lie #2. The truth is there are a whole lot of people who will do there best to give you straight answers or will refer you to places where you can get them

Space.com is controlled by NASA...

Lie #3. The truth is that SDC is not controlled by NASA.

and as a result, follows the party line....

Lie #4. The truth is SDC does not follow a party line.

while crushing honest scientific dissent.

Lie #5. the truth is that honest dissent is never crushed here, especially when it is well informed. Of course nonsense and lies generally get the treament they deserves

There are a few science types on here who will give you trustworthy info...

Finally, some truth. Except there are more than a few science types here.

, but you will have to be careful not to be tricked by the disinformation spread by the Moon-landing believers and NASA employees.

Lie #7. The truth is that NASA employees (of which there are a handful here) and Moon landing believers (or which there are many) do not spread disinformation but the truth of humanitry's greatest endeavour.

 

[JonClarke]

Re: Moon Landings Faked?

I heard that it is really fake. The Soviet Union is the country who first reached space(including the first dog on space) and who put the pressure on the United States. The USA surpasses that and claimed that they reached the moon with evidence of videos, moon rocks, etc. to defend their claim but I still dought it so I wanna know the true story about it.

No Stike Eagle, it was not fake. Rather it was the greatest human achievement of the 20th century. Perhaps of all centuries.

If you want to know more, read Andrew Chaikin"s A Man on the Moon, watch the DVD In the Shadow of the Moon where many of the astronauts tell it in their own words. Look at the detailed record at http://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/, read the responses to the the specific claims of hoax believers at http://www.clavius.org/and http://www.badastronomy.com/index.html . if you are in the US go to Johnson Space Center in Houston or the Smithsonian in Washington where much of the hardware is preserved.

if you do this will will discover the more people know the less likely they are to disbelieve the fact that we went to the Moon. On one side you have engineers, scientists, historians, eyewitnesses, administrators, investigative journalists. On the other you have a few woo woos haunting the internet or people who want you to buy their books.

 

[Kerberos]

Re: Moon Landings Faked?

See what I mean, StrikeEagle? Instead of honest debate, the NASA sycophants resort to slander and obfuscation. I suspect that JonClarke is being financially compensated for his efforts here.

If you really want to know the truth, go back in this thread and read all the troubling questions and problems raised by the intellectually honest people here that the True-Believers and NASA apologists have yet to answer.

 

[JonClarke]

Re: Moon Landings Faked?

See what I mean, StrikeEagle? Instead of honest debate, the NASA sycophants resort to slander and obfuscation. I suspect that JonClarke is being financially compensated for his efforts here.

It is only slanmder if it is not true. You wrote a pack of lies.

If you really want to know the truth, go back in this thread and read all the troubling questions and problems raised by the intellectually honest people here that the True-Believers and NASA apologists have yet to answer.

Those "troubling questions and problems" hacve been dealt with over and over again here and on other boards. There is no substance to them.

It is the hoax proponents who have displayed utter ignorance of facts and duplicity.

 

[Kerberos]

Re: Moon Landings Faked?

How much is NASA paying you to sell your soul, Jon?

 

[BurgerB75]

Re: Moon Landings Faked?

I think it's easier to believe that Kerberos isn't real and is just a program written to respond with the same nonsense over and over again. Fewer people to bribe than all of NASA.

 

[Mee_n_Mac]

Re: Moon Landings Faked?

How much is NASA paying you to sell your soul, Jon?

Please stop trying to get Jon's goat. I already have it.

K, thx.

 

[Smersh]

Re: Moon Landings Faked?

And a very nice goat it is too. Perhaps we'll see a thread started in Freespace now by Doublehelix or Starsinmyeyes entitled "Lolgoats."

 

[drwayne]

Re: Moon Landings Faked?

There's a party line here? My grandmother had one of those, many years ago, but I didn't think the phone
service folks did that any more.

 

[Smersh]

Re: Moon Landings Faked?

Hmmm ...

:lol:

 

[onesmallstep]

Re: Partial Summary of Apollo Hoax Evidence

Since no one knows what an asteroid looks like up close, I guess they could hoax it using almost anything. Maybe one of the old sets from Lost in Space is still available. They could even re-use one of the rubber monsters to enhance the excitement factor.

Actually, they got quite good images from the NEAR-Shoemaker probe, which was the first spacecraft to soft-land on an asteroid. Looked very dusty. Hayabusa got good images too, and though it's going to try to return to Earth soon, it seems rather over-optimistic to hope that it actually collected any material. Dawn should be pretty exciting too, as it visits the two largest main-belt asteroids: Vesta, and the dwarf planet Ceres. Phobos-Grunt should also be useful, as Phobos is believed to be a captured asteroid.

So though nobody's set foot on an asteroid, we do have a fairly good idea of what they should look like. They seem to be rather moonlike, actually.

Uhhh....You do know that I was being totally and utterly sarcastic??? :?

 

[onesmallstep]

Re: Moon Landings Faked?

How much is NASA paying you to sell your soul, Jon?

Whatever they're paying Jon, I demand the same plus a nickle more....I mean, look at my user name....that's gotta be worth something. :mrgreen:

Seriously, I don't believe these moon hoax people are worth one single second of serious rebuttle time. Let them believe what they want...I won't waste any time out of my life trying to change their mind.

Never argue with a fool. People might not be able to tell the difference---Author unknown, attributed to Mark Twain

Or, if you prefer:

Never argue with a fool, they will lower you to their level and then beat you with experience---Woody Allen

 

[kelvinzero]

Re: Partial Summary of Apollo Hoax Evidence

Since no one knows what an asteroid looks like up close, I guess they could hoax it using almost anything. Maybe one of the old sets from Lost in Space is still available. They could even re-use one of the rubber monsters to enhance the excitement factor.

Actually, they got quite good images from the NEAR-Shoemaker probe, which was the first spacecraft to soft-land on an asteroid. Looked very dusty. Hayabusa got good images too, and though it's going to try to return to Earth soon, it seems rather over-optimistic to hope that it actually collected any material. Dawn should be pretty exciting too, as it visits the two largest main-belt asteroids: Vesta, and the dwarf planet Ceres. Phobos-Grunt should also be useful, as Phobos is believed to be a captured asteroid.

So though nobody's set foot on an asteroid, we do have a fairly good idea of what they should look like. They seem to be rather moonlike, actually.

Uhhh....You do know that I was being totally and utterly sarcastic??? :?

hehehe.. on this forum you can never rely on that... sort of like a conversation with my family really.

Personally I thought they were more potatolike than moonlike.

 

[freya]

Re: Moon Landings Faked?

The Moon. I point it out to my 2 year old daughter. She sees it. I see it. She recognises it. She tells me it is white in colour. Soon she will be able to share the special moment when she first looks through a telescope (I'm building her one, a 5" reflector) and this most distant but familiar world becomes a place to explore.
Growing up as I did, during the Apollo project, having my Dad describe to me that there was no air there, that those live television pictures where showing craters??? And then one day, I purchased a department store 50mm refractor off a friend for $10, banged it on the Moon (only 30X, single glass lens and several optics in the barrel, it was a terrestial telescope) and was staggered, the Moon of Apollo was 'REAL'. Since then I have mapped and observed the Moon in intricate detail, to magnifications of upto 800X in extreme detail. I've picked out the craters 'COLLINS' 'ARMSTRONG; and 'ALDRIN' that sit at the northern edge of the Sea of Tranquility. I've picked out Hadley Rille, followed it's course around Mount Hadley. (Apollo 15).
Enough of this. Get out of your armchair and look.
Moon landing doubters are not alone. When Gallileo was demonstrating the telescope to Vatican clergy 400 years ago, there were those who where convinced, that what they were seeing with their own eyes, was rather a trick, drawn by a demon. Gallileo recanted the Sun centered Solar System, crescent Venus, Sunspots, moons of Jupiter and all, at the risk of having his toes licked by flames of purification.
Gaz

 

[dreamer45]

Re: Moon Landings Faked?

I believe there is plenty of evidence to back up that the moon landings are real. therefore i beleive so.

 

[tom_hobbes]

Re: Moon Landings Faked?

I lack the patience required to slog through fifteen pages of this stuff but just in case anyone else hasn't made the obvious point...

In my humble opinion as someone very involved in image production and manipulation for many years, just in terms of the images and footage alone, leaving aside the really technical stuff, the wealth of telemetry data, the sheer waste of actually building the phony rockets and so forth, the technology required to fake the moon landings convincingly in the late 1960's and 70's would have far exceeded that required to actually go there. It's a small but somewhat decisive point.

What's more, I don't even think it could be done today. It would still be easier to go to the moon than to fake it, today!

 

[Kerberos]

Re: Moon Landings Faked?

It seems the SIS is in on the hoax, too.