NASA Moon Landing Videos: Fake or Real?

The Earth is flat and we never went to the Moon , we are de-evolving.



Here's the video for those not wanting to download.

originally posted by: centarix

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: centarix

The short answer to all your questions is that the supposed transparency is due to different parts of the scene being present on different scans. In other words, if an astronaut is at point a on one scan, then moves to point b, the background visible at b when the astronaut was at a, will still be visible when the astronaut moves. When the scan catches up, it disappears, but by then the astronaut has moved again. This is why they always have ghostly outlines. The TV camera on Apollo 11 was a unique slow scan device.

Thanks for taking the questions seriously. If that is the case then I should be able to find a video where one of the workers is shuffling directly to the left of the screen as at 53:40 while he is facing the camera, correct? The clearest mark where you can see one of the ghosts is 53:40 where its obvious a ghost person starting at the flag position, facing the camera, then shuffles left half over half of the screen.

Yet, where in the whole video does any worker shuffle directly right or left by half of the screen while facing the camera? I looked through the whole thing and did not find such a shot. The left-shuffle is the clearest ghost image of any of them. So, where are the workers ever doing that?

I feel bad for being flippant now, the don is right that questioning everything is admirable.

It is, in fact, the scientific method.

It sounds like you are neither questioning an extralunar presence on the moon nor that it is ours.

I think you are inheriting a boat load of ire that you don't deserve.

I did contract work on all the 'Apollo Lunar Landing Missions'; and I know that we did in fact go to the Moon. With that said I may be seen as having a biased opinion, however there is hard scientific evidence that we went, as an example:

"The Laser Ranging Retro reflector experiment was deployed on Apollo 11, 14, and 15. It consists of a series of corner-cube reflectors, which are a special type of mirror with the property of always reflecting an incoming light beam back in the direction it came from. A similar device was also included on the Soviet Union's Lunakhod 2 spacecraft. These reflectors can be illuminated by laser beams aimed through large telescopes on Earth. The reflected laser beam is also observed with the telescope, providing a measurement of the round-trip distance between Earth and the Moon. This is the only Apollo experiment that is still returning data from the Moon. Many of these measurements have been made by McDonald Observatory in Texas. From 1969 to 1985, they were made on a part-time basis using the McDonald Observatory 107-inch telescope. Since 1985, these observations have been made using a dedicated 30-inch telescope. Additional measurements have been made by observatories in Hawaii, California, France, Australia, and Germany."

Is it not simple enough to prove that man has walked the moon? Can one not use a telescope to view the American flag that was planted there? Forgive me if I am wrong... and if I am... why?

originally posted by: AdmireTheDistance
Not this again. We went to the moon. The videos are real. Deal with it.

Err, no. 'WE' never went to the moon, someone else allegedly did so you have no first hand evidence to back up a claim like that and there is no question the videos are real, the question is where were they taken.

When President Kennedy first chartered the Moon landing program, a preliminary cost estimate of $7 billion was generated, but this proved an extremely unrealistic guess of what could not possibly be determined precisely, and James Webb used his judgment as administrator to change the estimate to $20 billion before giving it to Vice President Johnson.[80]

When Kennedy made his 1962 speech at Rice University, the annual space budget was $5.4 billion, and he described this cost as 40 cents per person per week, "somewhat less than we pay for cigarettes and cigars every year", but that the Moon program would soon raise this to "more than 50 cents a week for every man, woman and child in the United States".[18]

Webb's estimate shocked many at the time (including the President) but ultimately proved to be reasonably accurate. In January 1969, NASA prepared an itemized estimate of the run-out cost of the Apollo program. The total came to $23.9 billion, itemized as follows:[81]
Apollo spacecraft: $7,945.0 million
Saturn I launch vehicles: $767.1 million
Saturn IB launch vehicles: $1,131.2 million
Saturn V launch vehicles: $6,871.1 million
Launch vehicle engine development: $854.2 million
Mission support: $1,432.3 million
Tracking and data acquisition: $664.1 million
Ground facilities: $1,830.3 million
Operation of installations: $2,420.6 million.

The final cost of Apollo was reported to Congress as $25.4 billion in 1973.[82] It took up the majority of NASA's budget while it was being developed. For example, in 1966 it accounted for about 60 percent of NASA's total $5.2 billion budget.[83] A single Saturn V launch in 1969 cost up to $375 million, compared to the National Science Foundation's fiscal year 1970 budget of $440 million.[84]

In 2009, NASA held a symposium on project costs which presented an estimate of the Apollo program costs in 2005 dollars as roughly $170 billion. This included all research and development costs; the procurement of 15 Saturn V rockets, 16 Command/Service Modules, 12 Lunar Modules, plus program support and management costs; construction expenses for facilities and their upgrading, and costs for flight operations. This was based on a Congressional Budget Office report, A Budgetary Analysis of NASA's New Vision for Space, September 2004.[80] The Space Review estimated in 2010 the cost of Apollo from 1959 to 1973 as $20.4 billion, or $109 billion in 2010 dollars.[85]

en.wikipedia.org...

---- You think the US spent that much money to make a hoax? Get real, and deny ignorance. ----

Wooooo Love this topic, don't know why.... don't often get involved in it.
Just posting to mark the thread and so that I read it again.

Pretty much every conspiracy has plenty of evidence for and plenty against. Almost all can be "rubbished" by proof and facts.. but many still like to believe and can still point out fascinating things and discrepancies and irregularities.
ATS would be boring if we didn't still have the odd conspiracy thread... it can't all be doom and gloom and Trump and Immigrants and racism and sexism.

When I started reading this site many years ago, it was mostly about Area 51... like almost every thread.
Then came many other paranormal and conspiratorial topics and threads and slowly it got forums and boards and etc.
Now the conspiracy threads are fewer and farther between... it's kind of sad, this is the world now...everyone so cynical and jaded and just looking to fight with each other and side with their group or side or political persuasion or religious denomination.


We need another Hidden Hand or alien abductee or GL worker or member of the illuminati or time traveller.

It's been too long.

More scientific evidence we went to the Moon during the 'Apollo Lunar Landing Missions' by third party confirmation:

In 2008, Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency's SELENE probe observed evidence of the halo surrounding the Apollo 15 Lunar Module blast crater while orbiting above the lunar surface.[88] In 2009, NASA's robotic Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter, while orbiting 50 kilometers (31 mi) above the Moon, photographed the remnants of the Apollo program left on the lunar surface, and photographed each site where manned Apollo flights landed.[89][90] All of the U. S. flags left on the Moon during the Apollo missions were found to still be standing, with the exception of the one left during the Apollo 11 mission, which was blown over during that mission's lift-off from the lunar surface and return to the mission Command Module in lunar orbit; the degree to which these flags retain their original colors remains unknown.

en.wikipedia.org...

This rabbit whole has been covered up many time.
REAL.....

I don't know. Frankly, I have not been motivated to put any time into looking at it or thinking much about it. All of that stuff happened so long ago it's really just not a big deal to me either way.

I don't see what the point would have been of faking it when they obviously had the technology and the money to do it for real. The government is great at spending money just to say they did so I don't doubt they'd have burned a bunch of taxpayer loot just to say "Hey. Look. There's a guy on the moon and we put him there!".

The only thing I see as maybe a possibility is that something went wrong on the video side of things. Maybe they couldn't actually do the video stuff live for some reason and they faked it. Obviously it wouldn't have been good if they had to admit they faked the video or pictures or films or whatever. If they lied about ANYTHING in the immediate aftermath, they would have had to keep making up more lies and excuses for decades to keep it under wraps.

So I think it's possible there were some lies and coverups and likely, just plain mistakes that would have looked really bad at the time. I think they probably did go to the moon. Beyond that, I am not that motivated to speculate that much. Were there other top secret things going on in the background? Most likely. I mean if they DID go to the moon, it was the perfect opportunity for the intel agencies to do basically anything they could conceive behind the scenes. It was a massive budget and I'm sure they could hide some pretty interesting things within it. We know they have always been more than motivated to do such things so that's not hard to believe at all. If there was a lot of shady stuff going on in the background, it could very easily explain why the government just doesn't want to talk about the whole thing or get into any of the conspiracy theories.

Unless there's something huge behind the scenes (like extraterrestrials or something, which I doubt) I think we live in a very different world now and we have more important things to worry about than whether or not the moon landings were fake. Ever since 9/11 there has been a lot of weirdness going on and things have gotten so confusing I guess it's appealing to look back at simpler times when the questions were relatively straightforward.

I guess I'm trying to say I don't know if they were fake and I really don't care.

originally posted by: lunarcartographer
I did contract work on all the 'Apollo Lunar Landing Missions'; and I know that we did in fact go to the Moon. With that said I may be seen as having a biased opinion, however there is hard scientific evidence that we went, as an example:

"The Laser Ranging Retro reflector experiment was deployed on Apollo 11, 14, and 15. It consists of a series of corner-cube reflectors, which are a special type of mirror with the property of always reflecting an incoming light beam back in the direction it came from.

Thanks for adding your expertise to the discussion. What you are confident of is that equipment like the reflectors from Earth has gone to the moon. I am in full agreement that thousands of pounds of equipment from Earth is now on the moon including the reflectors and possibly even the lower LM is there on the moon as intended.

Whether man actually went to the moon is the side-story, and the point of this thread is deciding whether the video is real, not whether the moon landing is a hoax. The video could be fake while the moon landing was real. Not likely, but surely well within the realm of possibility, and I pointed out at least one reason that could be the case in the OP.

I see the video at the 54 minute mark and I see the worker jumping in a "kangaroo hop". Yet anyone can see that something on his pack is getting stretched upward faster than his acceleration. Watch the top of the workers pack at least ten times to be sure... its only a few seconds long of a clip. That ten seconds is when I decided to create this post. Look at the video at the 54:00 mark ten times, looking for the top of his pack stretch as if pulled by a wire. Then come back and tell me that I should have expected that to happen with or without a wire pulling him up. Tell me that makes total sense to you that his pack jerks upwards at the 54 minute mark in the video. That is my focus, the evidence.

originally posted by: lunarcartographer
More scientific evidence we went to the Moon during the 'Apollo Lunar Landing Missions' by third party confirmation:

In 2008, Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency's SELENE probe observed evidence of the halo surrounding the Apollo 15 Lunar Module blast crater while orbiting above the lunar surface.[88] In 2009, NASA's robotic Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter, while orbiting 50 kilometers (31 mi) above the Moon, photographed the remnants of the Apollo program left on the lunar surface, and photographed each site where manned Apollo flights landed.[89][90] All of the U. S. flags left on the Moon during the Apollo missions were found to still be standing, with the exception of the one left during the Apollo 11 mission, which was blown over during that mission's lift-off from the lunar surface and return to the mission Command Module in lunar orbit; the degree to which these flags retain their original colors remains unknown.

en.wikipedia.org...

If you really want to convince people who think man did go to the moon, then the focus surely must be on the *ONLY* main obstacle to getting there: the Van Allen belts. Last year project Orion collected lots of data on exactly how much radiation a person would be subjected to if they were not shielded. Well, how much?

I looked through the Orion articles on the subject, and did not find an answer. So, perhaps you can find an answer and then post it here as evidence that man did go to the moon. How much radiation would someone get on a trip to Mars as they passed through the Van Allen belt unshielded but not through the polar holes (which were not taken advantage of). Project Orion set out to answer that question among many. Yet, I didn't see an answer to that. Why? Maybe they are embarrassed to say because it would have made the Apollo missions violate the laws of physics? Please do let me know what you find.

a reply to: centarix

Except the Van Allen belts aren't impossible to go through. Apollo went through the thinnest part of the belts. Any deep space mission, such as going to Mars, will have to go through the main portions of the belts because of the trajectory they're required to take.

I'm unsure either way, but if the moon doesn't have an atmosphere and is in a vacuum, dust in a vacuum compacts and the astronauts boots would not leave imprints.

originally posted by: uktorah
I'm unsure either way, but if the moon doesn't have an atmosphere and is in a vacuum, dust in a vacuum compacts and the astronauts boots would not leave imprints.

The moon does have an atmosphere.

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: centarix

Except the Van Allen belts aren't impossible to go through. Apollo went through the thinnest part of the belts. Any deep space mission, such as going to Mars, will have to go through the main portions of the belts because of the trajectory they're required to take.

Okay, well then what would *Orion* data have to say about the exact radiation levels on the Apollo trajectories? If you say this, then you've got to be able to provide that data.

How many REM (Roentgen equivalent man) would be experienced by someone on the Apollo trajectory according to the latest data as provided by Orion?

originally posted by: Timely

originally posted by: greencmp
a reply to: stosh64

Before the texts were edited, it used to be called by its sanskrit name "The Milky Whey".

That would make us ... ' Curdish ' rebels ...

G,day mate
your a sick man

a reply to: centarix

Apples and oranges. That's like comparing my exposure in Pennsylvania standing outside to someone at ground zero in Fukushima.

The Orion didn't measure the Apollo trajectory, it stayed in the portions of the belts it would pass through.

I agree that there is probably equipment on the moon, but somewhere I seem to remember reading that the moon is reflective enough to bounce lasers off of without reflectors, so using that as conclusive evidence that men walked on the moon may be a bit of a stretch if that is in fact true. The reasons for 'possibly' faking the missions seem clear to me: a disaster would have been, well, disastrous. So much was riding on their success and there was Kennedy's goal of getting it done before the end of the decade... The propaganda value alone would have been worth making sure that the mission was a success in the eyes of the world even if it never actually happened.

My personal view is that SOME of the footage has been faked/altered/manipulated/withheld for various reasons. The footage I find most intriguing is that of the astronauts 'allegedly' faking an image of the moon by placing a transparent overlay in the window of the spacecraft, and some much less well-known footage of astronaut running around in circles kicking 'lunar?' material in an apparent attempt to obfuscate footprints. Why would they do any of this? Perhaps they had legitimate reasons, but I can't imagine them.

Faking the Moon Landing footage? (from Bart Sibrel)

originally posted by: uktorah
I'm unsure either way, but if the moon doesn't have an atmosphere and is in a vacuum, dust in a vacuum compacts and the astronauts boots would not leave imprints.

It does have an atmosphere, albeit titchy, it has dynamics, LROC photography has detected something like 26,000 surface changes, lunar ice, more than probably has a small molten core, possibly outgassings not thought to be a barbecue pit, all the things you might expect from a rocky platform subject to the push and pull of gravitational forces common throughout the inner solar system at least, experienced by all of all the planets' interactions.
You could try rubbing a couple of stones together, (not those ones) to see what happens.
Besides, Dust in a vacuum need not compact tangentially, it just bounces and goes...pretty much anywhere, same as a rock for that matter.
Trouble is we see too many documentaries of the past just showing worlds in direct collision, smashing into one another and making bigger, and bigger things..perhaps doing it all over again and not just a scraped fender, who knows, maybe the source of missing matter.