It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Bart Sibrel and all Apollo Moon hoax debunked here!

page: 1
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in


posted on Mar, 23 2009 @ 06:43 PM
Bart Sibrel and all his and others Apollo Moon Hoax claims
are completely factually debunked here at:

Also go to youtube and enter 'bart sibrel debunked' and find many videos debunking all his claims..

Did you catch when he was confronted on air by a caller about this video on you tube that proves he deliberately cheats by doctoring apollo clips on his movies?

He tried to weasel out of it by claiming he had never watched this and the other videos from that particular apollo flight, even though clearly the footage is on and doctored on his own video he sells! A bald faced lie!

posted on Mar, 23 2009 @ 06:45 PM
The direct link to the video that proves Bart Sibrel doctors actual apollo footage in his movies he sells...this is the you tube clip he denied on air of ever having watched the original footage..!!
go to youtube and enter EXPOSED - Bart Sibrel is Caught Cheating"
in the search bar

posted on Mar, 23 2009 @ 07:26 PM
post removed because the user has no concept of manners

Click here for more information.

posted on Mar, 23 2009 @ 07:29 PM
reply to post by krusty6

too late already been debunked in this thread

why start another one ?

posted on Mar, 23 2009 @ 07:59 PM
reply to post by Mozzy

That alleged coke can is debunked at clavius as well as many more claimed..There is TONS of factual science beyond the lunar laser reflector array..Simply google "apollo moon hoax debunked" and you will find many more sitee beyond Clavius..
Example the moon rocks thelmselves have been proven to be beyond faking..see this link:

posted on Mar, 24 2009 @ 08:06 AM
krusty, like i said, i'm not partial one way or another i just think it's an interesting read.

but i can tell you what you're going to hear. someone's gonna say "you don't need a manned spacecraft to collect rocks and place a mirror".

posted on Mar, 24 2009 @ 09:02 AM
reply to post by Mozzy

Um....yeah, actually Mozzy, you DO need a human hand to align the reflector (more than one, actually) properly.

AND, about 880 pounds (Earth weight) of Lunar soil and rock samples. Human eyes were needed....Apollo 16 and 17 had Astronauts who were also trained as geologists, so as to look for the interesting bits.

posted on Mar, 24 2009 @ 09:23 AM
i don't think what you're saying makes sense but i don't know.

for instance, how many telescopes across teh globe and in space orientate themselves on a daily basis by using electricity, gears, wiring, and a control panel? i don't think you've given this much thought.

but what do i know, maybe nasa sent up a couple of rednecks. i can just see billy bob trying to tuck his gut into his spacesuit as he lays down next to the mirror and then points his finger towards earth. then he says hey jimbo go stand over there. if i can see alabama right above your noggin then i think she's all lined up!

as far as collecting rocks, haven't you ever heard of a backhoe?

[edit on 24-3-2009 by Mozzy]

posted on Mar, 24 2009 @ 09:31 AM
reply to post by Mozzy

Well, if you're referring to my post, just answered your own question.

Think about it: Earth-based telescopes, etc, are controlled and operated by Humans. The reflectors placed on the Moon serve one accurately, through laser imaging, calculate the Moon's speed and distance.

As to soil samples that are meant to return....again, we're talking a robotic mission that has yet to be seen successfully. You can SAY that a robot can be sent to the Moon, scoop up some samples, and return....but it just ain't that easy, not with our current technology.

Not saying that Manned SpaceFlight is easy, because it's not. It's expensive, and complicated....but the best computer on Earth is between a Human's ears. AND, it only weighs about six pounds. THAT is the difference between robotics and Humans....and, that pesky bit about life support.....that is a complication, and a cost factor....

posted on Mar, 24 2009 @ 10:04 AM
i dont' think you want to consider any other options though. like i said, i don't really care if we've been to the moon or not but i'm not blind to the fact that humans operating a telescope from 50ft away is the same concept as operating a mirror a million miles away. it may have a few seconds of delay but so what? it would be very easy to drop a package off on the moon that is bottom heavy and then adjust the mirror by remote from earth. why is this hard to understand?

as far as the rock collecting part i dunno.maybe you're right and it can't be done without humans present. i really don't see how hard it would be to have a flight simulator with humans in it piloting the real deal with audio/visual attached.

the only difference would be that the humans aren't there for troubleshooting. that may be the reason why it's not feasable but from what i gather you're not even stating that.

posted on Mar, 24 2009 @ 10:14 AM
reply to post by Mozzy

Mozzy.....let's get our facts straight, and stop exaggerating.

You said '...a million miles away...'

I had to stop you right there....because, it is inaccurate, and leads to ridiculous claims, as the lie propogates.

This is probably how the 'Moon Landing Hoax' began, BTW.

The Moon is, on average, about 250,000 miles away. As is true in celestial mechanics, the orbit is not truly circular, it is an we use an average, just to get our minds focused.

The speed of light is 186,000 miles per second...(again, average) ...

Radio also travels at that same any 'remote' commands to a robotic probe must take that into account.

This means that the round trip time for a radio signal, to the Moon and back to Earth, is about 2 1/2 seconds. Doesn't seem long at first, but it is, when you're trying to remote control something.

EDIT for Mozzy....your last sentence was right on target!~!! Very good.
Humans CAN troubleshoot, on site. THAT is the key, especially as we venture farther out. YES, Human survivability is the key, and the greatest expense and hardest to predict. But, robotic probes, while cheaper, still require certain programming that attempts to anticipate every least, until new data can be uplinked by controllers on Earth...but it is a VERY slow process....not just because of Light-Speed limits!

Again, 'remote-control' across 'millions of milies'??? Nah....not unless we find a new way to exceed the speed of light.....

[edit on 3/24/0909 by weedwhacker]

posted on Mar, 24 2009 @ 10:28 AM
ok first of all, if you want to go and get nitpicky about what's 250,000 miles away and what's a million miles away i can do the same thing. i didn't say the mirror i was talking about was on the moon did i? there's no point in you taking apart a general example. that's really lame.

you might as well concede about the mirror because you know you lost that one hands down. it WOULD be easy and it WOULD be easier than sending humans to do it.

even with an average delay of 2.5/2 seconds you could easily have your ship start and stop and move at slow speeds once it reachs the proximity of the moon. 2.5 seconds (delay at maximum distance) would hardly be a challenge to overcome. if nasa can wait 2 weeks (excuse me if i'm not exactly correct) to send a ship to the moon and another 2weeks for it to come back then spending an extra hour or two to wait on signals would hardly matter.

even if humans were on the ship, there will STILL be delays in communications. not only the 2.5 seconds but also between the time it takes the to think about what they're gonna say, click buttons or whatever they do, and aslo when they waste words.

the best leg you have to stand on is the gathering rocks. that's all you've got. i say it wouldn't be any more difficult to have your remote controlled ship pause often while it's doing it's job so that you can catch up to real time and evaluate teh situation.

posted on Mar, 24 2009 @ 10:44 AM
reply to post by Mozzy

Mozzy....your post on March 23, at 20:36 EDT referred to Bart Sibrel and his 'Moon Landing Hoax' video, which is what this thread is about.

So, please don't write "I didn't say the mirrors were on the Moon...'

Come on, be adult here!!!

Or, if you cannot engage in an intelligent discussion, then please dis-engage.

EDIT for Mozzy.....before you go away in anger, I wanted to look at something in the last part of your last post. IF you listen to Apollo voice communication recordings, you will hear the time delay. Heck, you can hear it today!!! Certain satellite feeds from remote parts of the World to the Studio exhibit these delays, depending on the satellite they are using at the time.

A 'geosynchronous' communications satellite is at about 25,000 miles above the Equator....there is a noticable time-lag....

Anyone who doesn't understand this bit of science, will never get it.

[edit on 3/24/0909 by weedwhacker]

posted on Mar, 24 2009 @ 10:48 AM

You talk about a back hoe on a unmanned probe. You've seen the one they sent to Mars which had a lot of problems? Not to mention the problems with landing the craft etc.
This was 1969, where your mobile phone would outshine their best computers.
Try not to think what they can do now, and think of what they could do back then.
If this was all a hoax, the Russians would have got hold of it from an early stage as they would be watching all the events very carefully, not to mention all the staff, crew etc who would have had to keep secret what went on.

I think you'll find that humans are quite an intelligent species

posted on Mar, 24 2009 @ 10:53 AM
and now that i think about it. collecting rocks would be even easier than placing a mirror. think about it in order of weakest to strongest in comparison with the requirements.

humans are the most fragile, mirrors are second, equipment for collecting rocks is third.

sending humans into space would be the most difficult of the three by far.
to collect rocks with an unmanned spacecraft could easily go something like this.

standard rocket with 2piece pod.

1 piece carries a drill and a multipart explosive device that cannot detonate until activated.

2nd piece is a dumptruck with a lid that has launch capabilities.


rocket fires into space and launches the pod. no need for life support systems. just video capabilities and a rugged design to withstand a moderate impact. (which could be mitigated if necessary to avoid damaging the drill)

once at the moon the pod splits in two and the two pieces land approx 50-100 meters from each other.

pod 1 drills into a large rock or directly into the ground where a sample is wanted. explosive shape charges are then set in place.

pod 2 opens up it's dump truck lid ready to recieve it's might load.

pod 1 goes bang boom see ya later and sends debris flying over into the dumptruck.

pod 2 gets the frig out of dodge and crashlands on earth.

big deal...easy i could do it before breakfast.

posted on Mar, 24 2009 @ 10:54 AM
reply to post by weedwhacker

weed that made no sense at all. seriously who are you talking to?

posted on Mar, 24 2009 @ 10:57 AM
reply to post by Mozzy

Mozzy, I am trying to talk to YOUR posts....

I feel it is in error, since you seem to be unwelcoming to any actual facts.

This is well-played-out by your response.

'trolling' is a violation of ATS T&C, so I suggest you tread carefully from now on....

posted on Mar, 24 2009 @ 10:58 AM
reply to post by Daisy-Lola

daisy i'm well aware of that. i'm just rattling weed's cage because he seems so sure of something that there's no way he could have any direct knowledge of. people like him tag me as a "non believer" because they can't fathom how someone could refuse to choose a side.

posted on Mar, 24 2009 @ 11:00 AM
reply to post by weedwhacker

what fact would that be weed? that you enlightened us as to the speed of radio waves? what facts are you talking about? that we have moon rocks and that there's a mirror on the moon? wow that's so groundbreaking.

look you lost, there's no way you can win this argument by yourself. you don't know enough.

like i said, I DONT' CARE if we went to the moon or not. but it's gonna take a better person than you to convince me.

posted on Mar, 24 2009 @ 11:04 AM

Originally posted by Mozzy
reply to post by Daisy-Lola

daisy i'm well aware of that. i'm just rattling weed's cage because he seems so sure of something that there's no way he could have any direct knowledge of. people like him tag me as a "non believer" because they can't fathom how someone could refuse to choose a side.

Well....Mozzy....that amounts to the crime of 'trolling'.

I mean, to admit to 'rattling' someone's cage? Man, you're digging in deep here.....

As to whether or not I have 'direct' knowledge??? I daresay I have much, much more scientific knowledge than the average Bart Sibrel 'believer'....

Every one of Mr. Sibrel's so-called 'claims' have been sufficiently debunked. Yet, he still makes money, apparently, by his self-promoting BS.

<<   2  3  4 >>

log in