Originally posted by NavalFC
as far as the model moon..you mean to tell me you cant think of a single reason why scientists might want a 3d map of the moon> thats essentially what
the model is, 3D. another thing, the line "how can we be sure the moon landings are real"
what nonsense. The 3d model/map wasnt exactly to scale! not big enough for people to stand on! it is high res images pasted onto a ball!
The moon hoax idea has been destroyed time and time and time again, most recently by myth busters.
get real.
Mythbusters is the least scientific thing i have EVER seen on TV. "Mr. Wizard" would be VERY displeased. They use rough estimations of most of
their tests, using specifics only when safety is a concern. So much so that I can't watch it anymore without getting a massive headache.
I don't believe the landing was hoaxed, and clearly stated such. I would question why you even mention it, but that would also question your
integrity and that isn't where i want to go....yet.
Now...let me ask you: do you really think I implied that they put little men on that model? I think not.
What I was showing you is the extent that NASA may be willing to go to in their efforts to obfuscate. If i listen to the voice recordings from the
astronauts, it seems pretty obvious that THEY saw something up there. And, to be honest, i cannot buy those wierd looking, white blob mountains (that
all look nearly identical) that are in the surface images.
I would also point out that making a scale model replica of the moon (as it seems they did, given the images I posted) would make it MUCH easier to
hide any surface features that would show some level of civlized footprints on the lunar surface, as it would remove the actual lunar surface
altogether.
It is a "connect the dots" type of thing for me. The lunar models, the astronauts voice recordings, Gary McKinnon, and the expert analysis of one
Jack Arnesson....it all adds up for me.