i think the 1969 moon landings were done in a movie studio

a reply to: OneBigMonkeyToo

those photos are a bit of a stretch, given today's technology, should be able to get a better photo than that, even send a probe drone to get coordinates and some video footage, as it circles around each object...

Doubt NASA get near the funding it would, if it could just prove they actually did land there, having to outsource now to SpaceX ...

Stanley Kubrick involved in the program...

NASA could send proboe and confirm and be back in business again and salvage their reputation..as maybe they are fine with it being a question in peoples mind, like what really happened to those buildings on 911.

a reply to: dojozen

utter bollox

to cite a REAL biblical concordance :

cite

why are hoax believers such gulible chumps ?

a reply to: EmmanuelGoldstein

did you really write such a long post just to say in the end you are a flat earther?
i admire your bravery

a reply to: dojozen

there are several photographs sof the flag on every apollo mission from 11 ~ 17 [ A13 excluded ] - in the apollo photo archive

why do you reject them ?

and having rejected them - why do you demand new pics - are you REALLY going to accept new pics - when you refuse to accept the entire ALSJ photo record ???????????????????

i smell a troll

a reply to: ignorant_ape

okay, was wrong on that one, was top of the search results in google, sorry about that.

a reply to: ignorant_ape

post the best one's up here, read in google, said was not any...as maybe google ai is taking over.

is there a reason not able to post them here in this thread or link to them, if unable to post here?

Is that bridge safe to cross?

Got to admit, they were lying about Vietnam...plausible for sure that it could be hoax...

Again, why not send a probe to verify...NASA not able to do it without a hefty price tag...let's ask Musk...sure he would be glad to do it, if NASA would allow it.

a reply to: eriktheawful

Ah the old ownership is nine tenths of the law argument . Let's not go off topic, I forgive you anyway , you great lummocks, happy christmas .

The veracity of any claim does not rely on the failings of arguments made against that claim .
The veracity of any claim relies solely on whether there is truth to it .
It's like a cheating wife saying "I didn't" because she knows the husband can't prove it , except by logical conclusion via deductions . She accuses him of having a deluded lack of faith of course , standard practice .
Ergo
just because he can't prove the truth outright , doesn't mean she 's not lying . She is trying to escape the consequences by randomizing the order of concurring truths , and denying legitimate methods , which only furthers justified suspicions .

If the police interviewed you , when you were hiding something , you wouldnt get away with relying on that kind of blustering . A lawyer would take you to the cleaners

As far as the pendulum 'evidence' goes, they would have had the ability to slow down the footage by 2.5 times ( a rather convenient mathematical ratio don't you think ? ) and asked the actors to speed up their movements for the short clip . Simples . Though I'm sure you'll tell me it's not .

The trouble is that lack of footage however : discussing that detail of (for the most part) its loss would be staying on topic .
The only footage easily available is provided to youtube by a film archivist from the era who worked in the tv industry , or other short clips which survived for whatever reason . I'm going to postulate that the reason nasa say they lost it is because since 2008 they don't want it to be seen . The complete footage hasnt been lost at all , but it is policy to cover up the now worse than useless , positively damning , evidence of fakery which is the footage itself .
The same damning evidence that they didnt even have the tech to fake it properly , let alone get to the moon (and back) .
What's your response to that ?

a reply to: dojozen

Again, why not send a probe to verify...NASA not able to do it without a hefty price tag...let's ask Musk...sure he would be glad to do it, if NASA would allow it.

It costs several hundred million dollars to send a probe to the moon, even for Elon Musk. There's no reason to send a probe just to get pics of the flags, which wouldn't be believed anyway most likely. And camera technology isn't like in the movies. They wouldn't be able to see every detail of the flag from orbit.

The "tapes" in question, those alleged to have been lost or erased are believed now to have been erased intentionally during a shortage of data tape in the 80's. This was standard practice, if you needed a tape to record new material, did not have new blank tape, then you reused old tape to record new footage.

Also, one must remember that while the event was broadcast live, there was still a delay which started with the conversion of the format used, SSTV or slow scan television format the cameras used by the Apollo 11 team to the standard NTSC format used by American broadcasters. When the question first arose of what happened to those original SSTV format tapes, NASA formed a team to attempt to find them. The best they came away with was Super 8 footage taken of the monitors in Australia displaying the live SSTV footage as it was received from the Apollo 11 cameras. This footage is still better as far as quality than the converted NTSC footage we usually see now.

The NASA team concluded that the original tapes that was used to record the SSTV footage were most likely recorded over at some point but not definitive as the footage could be in some warehouse somewhere and could one day be discovered. Certainly a poor judgement decision but hindsight is 20/20. I believe there is more evidence we did go to the Moon, an extremely perilous mission during those years and still the same today which explains why we have not returned when the same results discovered then can be achieved with the better technology we have today with probes, telescopes, space station. Not to mention today's price tag which would be exorbitant today.

en.m.wikipedia.org...

a reply to: DJMSN

Satellites go up all the time and to send something to go verify it and suggest it cost prohibitive due to budget or something other reason financially, does not sound like the reason.

NASA loosing funding and not being able to afford to verify they landed on the moon...while true it might be, still think it would be in NASA's best interest to verify for everyone and not have their credibility called into question.

They did not have money for new tape, lol, they should just be dissolved,..if that is the best they can do and turns out they did fake it..though they are not the one's to blame, it would have been the one's who put them up to it.

a reply to: dojozen

I can understand it happening. Some guy, maybe a contractor, maybe just some guy on an average salary, maybe he (or she) came in to work one day hungover, wanted to get a tape, and though, hey lets use this one.

Contrary to what many people think (and I don't mean yourself here), government agencies aren't all populated with geniuses who work like clockwork, they're just people like everyone else, who sometimes make mistakes and do dumb things.

a reply to: Zaphod58

oh yeah the old , exposure thingy... I find it kind of fishy that they never even tried to solve that problem (11 missions) ... Is it absolute impossible to see the stars from the moon ? I guess not well ? , yep , exposure big problem so no stars , eleven missions or so... whooaaa NASA cant fix exposure problems....

a reply to: RedRobbin

You can take a strong telescope and look for yourself. Or are all the things that man put on the moon just projections? lol come on man.

a reply to: frenchfries

There's nothing to "fix". They weren't there to take pictures of stars, they were there to do other things. Not to mention that they would have had to lean back slightly to take pictures of them, which in that suit would have been uncomfortable at best.

a reply to: dojozen

The landings have been verified by multiple satellites, from multiple nations. Features from the mission that match up perfectly to where the astronauts were, and what they did have been seen by pretty much every probe sent to the moon that took pictures. You're not going to get a picture that shows the stars and bars on the flag, but the pics we have verify that we were there.

a reply to: dojozen

Dude, you just come off as being biased, only being spoon fed by debunked biased YouTube videos made for a target paranoid audience, and ignorant.

You say it is all lies with no
specific example of a lie with no provided evidence?

There is evidence of the landings sites from other countries. It is exspensive to launch probes. You need to stop with the Hollywood physics and A-Team crap. And why would other countries want to center around researching the nature of the moon by exsploring areas already disturbed by man. When those countries already verified the moon landings while they happened ? By actually tracking and telimitry? To play into your paranoid fantasies?

originally posted by: frenchfries
a reply to: Zaphod58

oh yeah the old , exposure thingy... I find it kind of fishy that they never even tried to solve that problem (11 missions) ... Is it absolute impossible to see the stars from the moon ? I guess not well ? , yep , exposure big problem so no stars , eleven missions or so... whooaaa NASA cant fix exposure problems....

That is just how film and exsposure work. Metering on something that is bright is going to result in under exposing relatively dim objects. Metering on the stars would result in washed out images of the astronauts.

Sorry 1960’s photography and filming are not the magical process you want them to be with real physical limitations.

a reply to: Zaphod58

so why exactly where they on the moon , exploring taking pictures ? 11 missions and no-one wanted to see stars from the moon , not a single scientist in the world... Take a long pipe , no atmospheric scattering , and no difuse light .. and voila we have a crystal clear picture from a distant star or galaxy... Why not ? it (persononthemoon) IS fishy , I mean I have a very hard time to believe any of it. The moon is of utmost strategic importance but not a single country in the world has built a moonbase after 40 years.

a reply to: dojozen

To be blunt. Why is all the evidence of “fake” moon landings actually misconceptions? With no actual fact or science?

Like ignoring the fact the van allen belts are more narrow in places?

a reply to: frenchfries

One, can you prove no effort was taken to picture the stars.

Two, it would be mostly the same night sky as seen from the eart.

Three, the focus was to explore the moon. The equipment taken to the moon was to explore the moon. Not the same night sky as seen from earth.