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

[andrew_t1000]

Re: Moon Landings Faked?

Aldrin WAS threatened!
That fool (MrT voice) repeatedly laid hands on him!
That snippet is just the money shot!

I've seen a few interviews with Aldrin talking about his Korean War days.
NOW that is gold!
Especially the part where he talks about the first deployment of sidewinders.

I would love to get to the Moon, make a cast of Aldrin's boot print, attach it to a Louisville Slugger, put it in a nice box with a glass front and a small plaque that says,
"In case of conspiracy nutters, Break glass"

I know some of you think it's weird an Australian is this rabid about moon hoaxers, but as I've said before we here in the Great Southern Land take great pride in the part we took in the moon landings.
There is an Australian movie called "The Dish", which has become a cult classic here.
"The Dish" is the Parkes Radio Telescope, we received the TV feed of the first steps on the moon.

I hate repeating myself, but I risked the wrath of my parents by wagging school to go watch and listen to the transmission, live, in a ham operators radio shack.
I was 7, it warped my wee little brain and got me even more interested in space, astronomy, electronics, engineering, model rockets and aircraft.
My Dad hated me having an interest in space, still does.
But if there is some big conspiracy, I've never been invited to any of the meetings!

Recently the "missing" footage of the moon landings, the very footage all the nutters say NASA was destroyed, was recently found in a basement of Perth University.

I met the crew of Apollo 9 here in sleepy ol' Adelaide and got to speak to Rusty Schweickart and the rest of the crew for a while.
Now I realise not all bad guys have handle bar moustaches and gnash their teeth, I can tell you now I've never met a nicer bunch of guys, there is no possible way they would have been part of a massive deception like these idiots rave about.

As for resorting to violence, well sometime a blokes gotta do what a blokes gotta do, regardless of the consequences.
The level of anger here in Australia over that creep goading Aldrin into snotting him would surprise most of the members here.

 

[SpeedFreek]

Re: Moon Landings Faked?

Unfortunately, Kerberos, who used to be a valuable member here

Actually, I think Kerberos is a hoax. None of his posts actually happened, but (for reasons known only to the gnomes of Zurich) we are supposed to believe they did. The evidence in this thread was planted, after the fact.

 

[Yuri_Armstrong]

Re: Moon Landings Faked?

I'm not seeing a lot of honest answers here to the very good questions that some people have asked in this thread. All I see is people attempting to justify violence against anyone who disagrees with them. You need to do better.

Okay, what questions have not been thourougly explained, not only by the knowledgable people here, but also by the countless available internet resources, documentaries, and TV shows remain to be answered?

Sibrel wasn't just "disagreeing" with him, he was deliberately antagonizing him. You can see this when he turns to the camera man and says "did you get that?"

Also I saw "the dish" too, it's quite a good movie.

 

[Quantum11]

Re: Has anyone else seen this video?

Great video...

I clicked on this one...and check it out...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wd6ekSYpt9w&playnext=1&videos=wQG5bHB2LyA

With the guy reaching to grab the corner of the flag to keep it from appearing to blow in a wind....and the question about the LIGHTING....along with what appears to be a spotlit set, rather than a sunlit lunar surface, it's no wonder the hoax proponents keep going crazy about Apollo.

 

[Quantum11]

Re: Nasa Beter Prove The moon Landing

I am in the middle on the belief of Americans men on the moon. There is good evidence both ways. ........

Actually there is not any good evidence to suggest the landing was faked that has not already been debunked. Please show us if you feel differently.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wd6ekSYpt9w&playnext=1&videos=wQG5bHB2LyA

Well...Watch NASA's own evidence, listen to the astronaut ask if the LIGHTING is decent? Why would anyone ask that on a sun-lit lunar surface?

And tell me why the lighting appears to be from a spotlight...This is NASA's own evidence, not some hoax nut's evidence.

I mean, can't anyone else here see the lighting fall off? :roll: And the HOT SPOT OF LIGHT. Add the comment from the astronaut and it doesn't look very good at all for them!

 

[MeteorWayne]

Re: Moon Landings Faked?

Post moved to the proper forum.

 

[ZenGalacticore]

Re: Moon Landings Faked?

Yep. NASA was too stupid to keep the "wind effect" of the air-conditioners from showing up on camera.

Of course, simple air-conditioned suits were beyond the technology of 1969. Even though we had fairly advanced scuba gear, and air-conditioned VW Beetles at the time.

That's the 1/6th gravity effect with a human applying force to it, bozo!

 

[Quantum11]

Re: Moon Landings Faked?

I was in the hospital the other day for some tests. The young man who was performing the CAT scan procedure got to talking about tv shows and somehow we ended up on the 40th anniversary of the first moon landing. I tried to describe to him just how exciting that was. He smiled and said he'd heard that it might have been faked and he said that with all seriousness and I am not making this up!!! I told him that with a $24 billion budget NASA could have done something far more realistic looking. He said he'd heard from "... a few people" that it was all phony. Kid was in his-mid '30s. :?:

Hey Jim,

A guy that probably has many contacts with medical friends doing medical radiation tests, probably has a different idea on what should have happened to Apollo astronauts during their time in highly radioactive space. People with just low-dose treatments experience loss of nerve-functions from 10 to 30 years later. We don't see that in any of the Apollo astronauts.

This is the one issue, that really makes it look like a fake. Van Allen himself, on the discovery of the radiation belts alone, called space a sea of deadly radiation. When you look at his research, you'll see the fact he submitted that manned space flight would require adequate shielding. From the shielding experts I've had a chance to communicate with honey-combed aluminum is not considered adequate shielding. As a matter-of-fact, they continue to submit the idea that adequate shielding has yet to be developed. The following article seems to support that idea!

http://www.space.com/missionlaunches/080331-radiation-shielding.html
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/6567709.stm

Add to all this the following challenge some moonguy at YouTube, has placed, that I've yet to see answered by anyone in the space, or radiation community.

http://www.youtube.com/user/un4g1v3n1

The search for truth about Apollo, begins and ends in space. Deadly, radioactive, truth awaits the open-minded.

I invite any solar/astro physicist or space radiation expert, to explain the relative excellent health the Apollo astronauts enjoy/ed after journying into what Van Allen called a sea of deadly radiation.

I also invite you to look at the data for major solar flares, and tell me why NASA, and it's 'space experts' keep saying Apollo astronauts were lucky not to have encountered any major solar flares, otherwise they'd be dead. Because there the EDIT fug EDIT they are. ftp://ftp.ngdc.noaa.gov/STP/SOLAR_DATA/ ... I55_80.TXT

Now how about you guys do some explaining?

And can you explain why NASA would lie about this simple MAJOR SOLAR FLARE FACT in their:
BIOMEDICAL RESULTS OF APOLLO
SECTION II CHAPTER 3
RADIATION PROTECTION AND INSTRUMENTATION
by J. Vernon Bailey Lyndon B. Johnson Space Center

And then there is this video series called MoonFaker: Radioactive Anomolie

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9xlKooAbKpM

 

[SpeedFreek]

Re: Has anyone else seen this video?

With the guy reaching to grab the corner of the flag to keep it from appearing to blow in a wind....

You have a flagpole, with a horizontal bar on top, making an L shape with the flag tethered to it along two edges, leaving only one corner of the flag hanging free. You have a guy twisting or rotating the flagpole as he attempts to drive it into the ground, using a combination of a "drilling" motion back and forth, and then banging the flagpole from above.

You have low gravity and a vacuum, where once something starts moving, it tends to carry on moving for a lot longer than it would on Earth.

Of course the corner of the flag will be waving back and forth. Anything that makes the corner move will have an effect that is far greater than the same effect would be on Earth.

Of course, if they are trying to film it, they want to stop the flag from moving. How might they stop the oscillations in the flag? They can wait for the pendulum-like effect to slow down by itself, which would take a whole lot longer than it would on Earth, or they can simply grab the corner.

and the question about the LIGHTING....along with what appears to be a spotlit set, rather than a sunlit lunar surface, it's no wonder the hoax proponents keep going crazy about Apollo.

It is interesting how the sunlit lunar surface can look like that:
http://www.xmission.com/~jwindley/manmoon.html
(The rest of the page after Fig 1, Note C

Also, whenever you are taking a photo or a film, you need to make sure the scene is lit well. If the scene is too dark the film won't show much, and if the scene is too bright, the resulting image will look overexposed. You have to take advantange of the natural lighting and adjust the camera, or the position of the camera, to suit. The subject of the photo will naturally be concerned that he is being shown in the best light, even if the only light is coming from the sun.

 

[SpeedFreek]

Re: Moon Landings Faked?

"The recent Fox TV show, which I saw, is an ingenious and entertaining assemblage of nonsense. The claim that radiation exposure during the Apollo missions would have been fatal to the astronauts is only one example of such nonsense."

Dr. James Van Allen

 

[frodo1008]

Re: Moon Landings Faked?

Good Grief, we try to educate one group of these "Moon Hoax" Trolls (or idiots, take your pick) and along comes another!

Can someone here go out and obtain those wonderful pictures from the latest moon orbiting surveillance satellite. The pictures that clearly show the Apollo equipment still on the moon?

I know that the the "Moon Hoax" characters are going to complain that they too are faked, but as I said either Trolls or idiots, take your pick :x :x :x :x :x :x

 

[Yuri_Armstrong]

Re: Nasa Beter Prove The moon Landing

I am in the middle on the belief of Americans men on the moon. There is good evidence both ways. ........

Actually there is not any good evidence to suggest the landing was faked that has not already been debunked. Please show us if you feel differently.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wd6ekSYpt9w&playnext=1&videos=wQG5bHB2LyA

Well...Watch NASA's own evidence, listen to the astronaut ask if the LIGHTING is decent? Why would anyone ask that on a sun-lit lunar surface?

And tell me why the lighting appears to be from a spotlight...This is NASA's own evidence, not some hoax nut's evidence.

I mean, can't anyone else here see the lighting fall off? :roll: And the HOT SPOT OF LIGHT. Add the comment from the astronaut and it doesn't look very good at all for them!

It's called a sense of humor. Things can get pretty tense up there so astronauts tend to make jokes to relieve some of the pressure.

Now tell me, if you really believe that they did not land on the moon, then where did they go when the Saturn V's lifted off? Why would we have faked the landings 6 times in a row? Why can we see the equipment that they left behind? Before making your points about radiation you have to answer all of these too, as they play a part in your moon hoax theory.

 

[Kerberos]

Re: Moon Landings Faked?

Those are very good points by Quantum11, and I would like to see some honest explanations.

 

[Smersh]

Re: Moon Landings Faked?

Those are very good points by Quantum11, and I would like to see some honest explanations.

Well it seems to me that SpeedFreek and Yuri have explained the points raised by Quantam11 honestly and very well so far. In any case, they are all points that have been explained plenty of times before here and elsewhere in the past.

One problem with these moon "hoax" debates is that we just keep going round and round in circles ...

 

[Yuri_Armstrong]

Re: Moon Landings Faked?

Those are very good points by Quantum11, and I would like to see some honest explanations.

The moon hoaxers are the ones who are claiming that we did not in fact land on the moon. By that logic, they must account for every single piece of evidence so far that explains why we landed on the moon. Quantum mentioned something about the Van Allen radiation belts, but Van Allen himself rebuked the idea that the radiation was too dangerous for the astronauts:

The spacecraft moved through the belts in about four hours, and the astronauts were protected from the ionizing radiation by the aluminium hulls of the spacecraft. In addition, the orbital transfer trajectory from the Earth to the Moon through the belts was selected to minimize radiation exposure. Even Dr. James Van Allen, the discoverer of the Van Allen radiation belts, rebutted the claims that radiation levels were too dangerous for the Apollo missions. Plait cited an average dose of less than 1 rem, which is equivalent to the ambient radiation received by living at sea level for three years. The spacecraft passed through the intense inner belt and the low-energy outer belt. The astronauts were mostly shielded from the radiation by the spacecraft. The total radiation received on the trip was about the same as allowed for workers in the nuclear energy field for a year.
The radiation is actually evidence that the astronauts went to the Moon. Irene Schneider reports that thirty-three of the thirty-six Apollo astronauts involved in the nine Apollo missions to leave Earth orbit have developed early stage cataracts that have been shown to be caused by radiation exposure to cosmic rays during their trip. However, only twenty-seven astronauts left Earth orbit. At least thirty-nine former astronauts have developed cataracts. Thirty-six of those were involved in high-radiation missions such as the Apollo lunar missions.

Anyone with five seconds and access to google can figure out that the moon landings were real. You are being irrational if you truly think they are fake.

 

[MeteorWayne]

Re: Moon Landings Faked?

No, he is now a troll...

 

[Kerberos]

Re: Moon Landings Faked?

The moon hoaxers are the ones who are claiming that we did not in fact land on the moon. By that logic, they must account for every single piece of evidence so far that explains why we landed on the moon. Quantum mentioned something about the Van Allen radiation belts, but Van Allen himself rebuked the idea that the radiation was too dangerous for the astronauts:

No, the Moon landing believers are making an extraordinary claim. The burden of proof is on them.

 

[MeteorWayne]

Re: Moon Landings Faked?

You are testing my patience. We can ban trolls, you know....

 

[Kerberos]

Re: Moon Landings Faked?

That could be a possible conflict of interest in this thread.

 

[MeteorWayne]

Re: Moon Landings Faked?

Please define and support that. It is not a request. It is a demand.

Moderator Meteor Wayne

 

[Kerberos]

Re: Moon Landings Faked?

A conflict of interest is a situation in which a public official's decisions are influenced by the official's personal interests, Wayne.

 

[MeteorWayne]

Re: Moon Landings Faked?

That's not an answer. What are you accusing me of?

Tick, tick, tick.....

 

[Kerberos]

Re: Moon Landings Faked?

I'm not accusing you of anything, Wayne. But it would help if you didn't refuse to make full disclosure of any relationship you may or may not have to NASA's enforcement division.

 

[MeteorWayne]

Re: Moon Landings Faked?

Since I have no such relationship, your accusation is unfounded. I have nothing to do with NASA, I am just more intelligent than the average vegetable.

 

[frodo1008]

Re: Moon Landings Faked?

Kerberos, perhaps if you were talking about the military, then you might just have a possible point. But to my knowledge NASA does not have such a division, and you could not possibly be so stupid as to not know that!

The only enforcement that I remember NASA having all the way back to the 1960's was a very good Quality Assurance Program which saw to it that the various hardware contractors actually were making the hardware that NASA demanded they make. In other and more simple words, they were seeing to it that the taxpayer actually got what the taxpayer was paying taxes for!

And that enforcement only had one major power. That was if the hardware was unsatisfactory the contractor not only did not get paid for it, but the entire contract could be taken away and another contractor given the job!

So just why would MW or any other purely voluntary MOD ever be in such an organization?

Your continuing habit of saying such things about those that simply disagree with your position is really quite despicable, and you should stop and think before making such unsubstantiated accusations. Try to remember that it is always best to make sure that your brain is in gear before placing your hands on the keyboard!

Take it as kindly advice.