An End To The Moon Conspiracy!

Hey bigbrain
Please be kind enough to explain how the mirrors ended up on the moons surface, and why the USSR (the US’s arch enemy at the time) did not report to the world that the Apollo mission did not leave orbit, for they would have known from their radar and by triangulating the radio transmissions.

Well, "bigbrain," I've tried to respond to your comments with patience and hard data, but all you do is spew insults and nonsequiturs.

I'm tempted to exorciate you for your apparent ignorance, but I'm beginning to suspect (from the tone of your posts) that you might be suffering from a physiological or psychological malfunction of some type.

Either way, it makes me sad that you denigrate those who dedicate their lives to pushing human accomplishment beyond the boundaries of our atmosphere and out into the solar system in search of knowledge.

www.youtube.com...

in that video, if the lander they used is any way similar, then where in the Apollo mission videos of them landing, moving around, is the exhaust coming out of the nossels when they maneuver?

iv seen lots of vids never seen any with any type of exhaust coming out . even when the new shuttled spins it shoots out compressed air or something of the sorts, you see it. but when they went to the moon nothing not one bit of smoke, particles, nothing.

show me.

[edit on 12-4-2007 by thedangler]

this moon clip is amusing

www.youtube.com...

[edit on 12-4-2007 by golddragnet]

OK yet again I will post my question.
How did these mirrors get on the moon?
physics.ucsd.edu...

And why didn’t the USSR tell the world that the Apollo mission never went to the moon?
The Russians could tell and they would have told the world if the American gov faked it.
So no more little rants or funny vids answer these questions please

The early Lunar Landing Training Vehicles exploded



NOBODY, EXCEPT A RAVING MAD, WOULD HAVE GONE TO THE MOON WITHOUT TESTING ON THE EARTH THE AIRCRAFT HE WOULD HAVE USED TO LAND.

The powerful technology of NASA jockers

Originally posted by Mr Mxyztplk
...
why didn’t the USSR tell the world that the Apollo mission never went to the moon?
...

A LIAR DOESN'T GIVE THE LIE TO ANOTHER LIAR

Originally posted by bigbrain
The early Lunar Landing Training Vehicles exploded

Ya, and from them we developed better landers.

NOBODY, EXCEPT A RAVING MAD, WOULD HAVE GONE TO THE MOON WITHOUT TESTING ON THE EARTH THE AIRCRAFT HE WOULD HAVE USED TO LAND.

You do know that having all caps is the internet form of yelling right?
So please STOP YELLING AT ME!!!

A LIAR DOESN'T GIVE THE LIE TO ANOTHER LIAR

Ummm… listen I don… I have no ide…. WHAT???
What the heck are you talking about?
That makes no sense. What does that even mean?

A liar doesn't unmask the lies of another liar

A lire would unmask the lies of another lire if the lire’s hated each other, as the US and USSR did. It was called the cold war. Nasty business it was

Another explanation is easiest: NASA jockers swindled Russians too.

Why don't you want to understand?

If 3 LLTVs in the beginning exploded, all the more reason NASA buffoons would have had to test LEM on the earth because pilots, in case of danger, couldn't catapult out.

www.youtube.com...

Have you seen two spot lights on the left?

Originally posted by bigbrain
If 3 LLTVs in the beginning exploded, all the more reason NASA buffoons would have had to test LEM on the earth because pilots, in case of danger, couldn't catapult out.

The LLTV's made hundreds of flights. The ones that were destroyed were due to mechanical issues, nothing to do with the design itself being bad. The LM wouldn't work on Earth, it's designed for landing on the moon (thus the name "Lunar Lander"), they tested it in Earth orbit on Apollo 9, and then in Lunar orbit on Apollo 10 and then they did a test landing on Apollo 11. There is no other way to test the LM besides landing it on the Moon.

www.youtube.com...

Have you seen two spot lights on the left?

Those are lens flares www.hq.nasa.gov...

EDIT: More examples

www.hq.nasa.gov...
www.hq.nasa.gov...

Still think those are spotlights?

[edit on 14-4-2007 by jra]

Originally posted by jra
...
There is no other way to test the LM besides landing it on the Moon.
...


What a gross mistake.
It would have been sufficient to put a more powerful engine.

BUT, DOING THAT, ALL THE PEOPLE WOULD HAVE

SEEN THAT LEM COULD NOT STAY VERTICAL

IN HOVERING







[edit on 14-4-2007 by bigbrain]

no blast crater?
no exhaust?
no problem....

somethings a miss.

You have yet to explain how the mirrors ended up on the moon.
And do really think that NASA swindled the USSR? How?
I don’t see how that would be possible, NASAS would have had to infiltrate Russia’s radio network and the USSR’s air defense network. To say the least that is highly unlikely but if you have any evidence I’m more then happy to take a look at it.

USSR and US cooperated much, much more than people new.

Those mirrors, for the hundreth time, if they really are there (no proof) could have been put there by an unmanned vehicle.

Isn't this boring already?

Nobody was on the Moon...not nearly. Ever.

Get it? Still not?

Let me try again: nobody was ever, ever on the Moon, close to Moon, orbiting the Moon, planning to orbit the Moon, landing on the Moon, nothing. Ever.

It is all a cheap, cheap story, that only worked due to the ignorance of the people. It does not work any more.

Get it?

[edit on 14-4-2007 by swimmer]

Originally posted by swimmer
USSR and US cooperated much, much more than people new.

So you’re saying that the cold war was faked? Why? And why would they then end the “cold war”? if it worked so well for55 years why would they cancel it?

Those mirror, for the hundredth time, if they really are there (no proof) could have been put there by an unmanned vehicle.
Edited by Mr Mx- spelling errors.

They are there. They are used to this day.
Since it is you who claims that they were placed by an unmanned mission the burden of proof is on you, what unmanned mission put them there?

Isn't this boring already?

No this is still really funny to me.

Let me try again: nobody was ever, ever on the Moon, close to Moon, orbiting the Moon, planning to orbit the Moon, landing on the Moon, nothing. Ever.

Then you should have no problem disproving it.

It is all a cheap, cheap story, that only worked due to the ignorance of the people. It does not work any more.
Get it?

Prove it.

Originally posted by thedangler
no blast crater?
no exhaust?
no problem....

somethings a miss.

Why would you expect a blast crater? The thrust blew away lots of dust, but the surface is still very solid. The Harrier jet puts out more thrust then the LM and you don't see it making blast craters in the ground. And if I remember correctly, they cut the thrust before they touch down (about 6ft I think).

The LM used N2O4/Aerozine 50 for fuel. It creates very little visible exhaust on Earth, let alone in space. Just look up rockets that use this fuel. The Titan rockets for Gemini used that fuel, the Chinese Long-March rockets use a similar fuel.

Originally posted by swimmer
USSR and US cooperated much, much more than people new.

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Do you have access to sources of information that the average person doesn't? Could you share that source?

Those mirrors, for the hundreth time, if they really are there (no proof) could have been put there by an unmanned vehicle.

So if you believe unmanned vehicles could get there, why not people? Electronics are more easily damaged by radiation than people are. So why don't you think they can't land on the Moon. The radiation for a short stay isn't an issue. So what is the problem?

Let me try again: nobody was ever, ever on the Moon, close to Moon, orbiting the Moon, planning to orbit the Moon, landing on the Moon, nothing. Ever.

It is all a cheap, cheap story, that only worked due to the ignorance of the people. It does not work any more.

Right... except that most people still believe we went. And no engineers or scientists anywhere in the world have found any flaws in the data that's all publicly available.

Explain, please: how can pilot catapult

out from this ridiculous old crock if

over him there is a rigid structure and

under him there is a stool used in prehistory?

Maybe because if you bothered to LOOK, the section over his head was OPEN, and the frame was AROUND him.

DON'T SAY THINGS THAT SMELL CRAP

Don't you see the rigid structure above the pilot?
















[edit on 15-4-2007 by bigbrain]