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.


Ultimate evidence on NASA faking Moon landings (VIDEO)

page: 12
<< 9  10  11    13 >>

log in


posted on Nov, 29 2009 @ 04:54 PM
eghad, anyone who still thinks the moon landing were faked are demonstrating their ignorance and stupidity.

We landed on the moon.
There is tons of evidence that we did.
The flag is still there.

and the BEST response to anyone who says otherwise, is demonstrated by Buzz Aldrin

posted on May, 11 2010 @ 01:45 AM
ROFL, I found this thread sort of by accident. I'm still amazed that the video I created as a "social experiment" back in 2007 continues to fool hoax believers, but then again, if you want to believe something badly enough, I suppose you will find a way.

If anyone has any questions about the video in the original post, I will do my best to answer them. Rest assured that it IS a fake.



posted on May, 11 2010 @ 12:30 PM
reply to post by rudbrps

Rest assured that it IS a fake.

Glad you've come forward (?)

Hey!! Here's an idea...would you care to contact ATS staff, and let them know?

They could then decide where best to stasch this thread...which proper forum, that is!


posted on May, 11 2010 @ 08:56 PM
Thank you that was extremely enlightening!

If you want to know why I heard it was because the moon is occupied and then theres the "Earths on quarantine" theory. In ancient texts aliens casually walked into the picture. Where are they now?

Thank you for your time.

posted on Aug, 29 2010 @ 11:44 PM

off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


posted on Aug, 30 2010 @ 04:38 AM
reply to post by IX-777

Great post! It's very nice. Thank you so much for your post.

watch free movies online

posted on Dec, 20 2010 @ 12:57 PM
Here are some videos debunking the debunkers and people from sites such as Bad Astronomy and Clavius, Myth Busters, etc - whom all are obvious NASA sponsored to try keep the lie going. But here is the ultimate evidence, finally put together in a series of videos that will show without any doubt that NASA faked a lot of footage, video, space programs, moon landings, and so on.

Various moonhoax series by Jarah White

For a short introduction including a couple great videos check this page:

Since there are several hundred videos so far, I am still looking through them, but they are extremely well made with the guy whom have produced them conducting various scientific experiments and research to back up his evidence against the debunkers.

I'll embed a couple of the ones that are already on the one page I linked to above:

Here is a direct link to the "MoonFaker Series", one of several series on the moon and space hoax and NASA faking presented in the original post's youtube channel. The following link starts with first video in that series and will play each next video automatically:

MoonFaker series

Related playlists:

"Wires & Slow Motion"



"Apollo 1"

And finally a nice couple photos showing the Mountain on Earth in Hawaii they used as the background in some of those hilarious "moon photos".

Notice below, the photo of Buzz Aldrin posing in front of the SAME mountain they jumped around and took photos of on "The Moon", with the same two hills to the right of it and everything. The chances for finding and actually being around a mountain on the Moon that is completely identical, is as said, ASTRONOMICAL at best. It is ludicrous to believe this is just "chance" and "coincidence", this is the gun with the most smoke in the whole NASA SCAM MOON HOAX.

Buzz Aldrin and his Mountain with two hills in NASA training grounds in Hawaii:
(Scroll to right and left with bar below the image to see all)

On Moon, with SAME identical mountain and two hills:
(Scroll to right and left with bar below the image to see all)

And yes again, this is the same mountain that keeps reappearing in the most ridiculous photos allegedly taken on the Moon. The Moon photo is taken slightly more from the left so that the two hills on right are seen more clearly but it is rather obvious the same 3 hills (or Mountain and 2 small hills, whatever you like)..

So what they clearly have done here is to take a photo of that mountain and hills in the training ground here on Earth and just good old "cut and paste" into the background of the "moon photos".

The ground area is also very similar as you can see but obviously the most striking and revealing here is The Hill.
edit on 20-12-2010 by pleiadiantalk because: (no reason given)

edit on 20-12-2010 by pleiadiantalk because: (no reason given)

posted on Dec, 20 2010 @ 04:12 PM
reply to post by pleiadiantalk

Ffs, check out the young aussie genious thread. This guy is a liar and has absolutely no sense of reality. Read all of it before you post this #"¤%/&%

posted on Dec, 20 2010 @ 05:18 PM
Regarding the White videos, and his claims, I can only comment on the few videos I have seen, and those seem legitimate to me and explains things in a good and proper way including actual other experts of various related fields interviewed and taking part of some and not only himself.

Also, regardless of White, what do you think of the nice Hawaiian vacation photo and "moon mountain" of Buzz above?

posted on Dec, 20 2010 @ 05:30 PM
reply to post by flylead
doesn't he state that its him in the video(the guy that made the video) picking up trash?I believe this is a fake

posted on Dec, 20 2010 @ 05:47 PM
I did read about it being a fake, the clip you refer to, but I heard it was a different angle than any of the official videos released by NASA, which again makes one wonder where the person would get this clip from in the first place. It has also been said that he was forced to say it was a fake, or that others pretended to be him and said it was a fake. Hard to know, but check this one, I am not saying this one is real because I do not know, but if it is a proven fake I would love to know whom made it, how they made it, where, etc considering it is VERY professional and similar to the "real" deal. Also read the report / analysis of the video linked below it:

Report / Analysis:

Remember 2010: Space Odyssey - the Stanley Kubrick movie, made before they went to the Moon. It was pretty good too in terms of special effects and such, for that time. In fact it has been speculated by some that Kubrick was hired and involved to help fake the whole project - and obviously with the extra money and resources of NASA the quality of the fake moon landing would be increased and look more real.

Here is some info and material on that, note that it is 4 pages with links to the next pages on bottom of page:

Also, it does not really matter if the first "trash picker" video is fake, as the rest certainly is not since they are mostly verified authentic NASA videos, public domain. Hope you checked all the other videos in this thread too - and remember that hilarious Hawaii / Moon mountain vacation photo above with Buzz Aldrin & the NASA team.

Remember the nice Mythbusters episode too, they showed us how easy it is to actually fake the moon photos and make it look almost identical to the so called "real thing". As far I am concerned their episode only strengthened the evidence on how moon photos by NASA were faked.

posted on Dec, 20 2010 @ 11:54 PM
Some more mountains, hills and background laughs:

As you probably know, the LM was stationary at the same point the whole time and did not move or change position in any way. So then how is the above possible, complete exact same background yet it is obvious to anyone with some photographical (or common sense) experience that the background view and orientation should have changed some as well. Not to even mention the next hilarious two photos again of the LM, suddenly the mountains have grown ENORMOUS all over the place around it!:

Also, I have not mentioned it yet, since it is one of the most common issues talked about by the "moon hoax believers", that is the shadows. It is said that the Earth is SO incredible bright from up on the Moon that it cast really strong light thus making two light sources, the other being the Sun, which "explains" the shadow issues (multiple shadows cast by one object, shadows going in different directions, etc). Then, well take a look at this photo clearly showing the Earth not that bright at all in fact not much more bright than the Moon looks from Earth - I would go a stretch and say it actually looks WEAKER than Moon looks from Earth:

And now this photo is allegedly the Sun seen from the Moon:

Now, it does NOT take a genius to understand that the extreme intensity of the "Sun" shown there, compared to the Earth above, would COMPLETELY blend away ANY of the light and thus shadows coming from the Earth! At best, any shadows cast from Earth-light would be extremely weak and barely noticeable at best. Try put on a candle in a dark room, and light up a flood light in a different part of the room, and see yourself how many shadows you get..

So lets look at the shadows and if it seems plausible that they are the way they are in the photos if the above is true (Only light source is the Sun, with slight Earth light at best):

And do you REALLY think a photo like the below would be possible without a rather strong extra light source? The sun is clearly in front of the camera and the LM here - yes the BACK of the LM is COMPLETELY illuminated and clear while it should have been in complete SHADOW and darkness from that STRONG sun light!

I know, the "lunar soil" is so INCREDIBLY shiny that it lights up the WHOLE LM - How CONVENIENT! What bullocks I say. And look at how the center of the photo straight on the LM is in a direct SPOTLIGHT

posted on Dec, 23 2010 @ 03:31 PM
Here is what I can only call an undeniable proof on artificial lighting used

The rover close to the camera has its shadow going directly downwards to the camera, but the astronaut a bit further up in the background has the shadow goring straight to the LEFT! Clearly indicating a light source very close - exactly as I described in my post a bit back where I did some experiments in my room with a light source right above me and had shadows going in different directions depending on where I was located in the room and my placement towards the light. This is simply just impossible with only a natural sun as the light source, it can't be done, not on two objects like this so close together.

The light is clearly seen straight above in the center as well, proving exactly what I am saying, the astronaut is further up and to the left of this light source thus also making his shadow go to the left of the light, while the rover is closer to the camera having the light source in its back and thus getting the shadow towards the camera. Only an artificial light (LAMP) will be able to do this!

edit on 23-12-2010 by pleiadiantalk because: (no reason given)

posted on Dec, 23 2010 @ 05:05 PM
Strange that no one have comments to these rather significant findings. Not even any debunkers trying to rip things apart

posted on Dec, 23 2010 @ 05:31 PM
reply to post by pleiadiantalk

Here's what I call perspective in a wide angle shot. Nice try thought

posted on Dec, 23 2010 @ 05:48 PM
the only problem is that they did not take the photo with a "wide angle" lens or "fish eye" lens for that matter as many have suggested. Doing so would also distort the rest of the image and not only the shadows by the way. Look up the Hasselblad cameras they used and you will see it is impossible to get a photo like the above without artificial light. Heck - even the Manager of the space programs at Hasselblad, whom CREATED these cameras specifically FOR the moon mission says he does not know how such photos could be taken without artificial light. That alone should speak for itself.

posted on Dec, 23 2010 @ 05:54 PM
As a note, the image above was taken from Magazine 134/B (Color) EVA-1, EVA-3, Frames 20376-20532 , and all photos were taken with the same camera and lens and on the same film. The originals are here:

If your "wide angle" lens theory was correct, the same anomaly would show itself on all other photos taken on the same film as well, but it does not. Here is an example that looks "correct" since the light comes from the left on all objects:

That photo was taken from the exact same camera and film as the one in question and makes it clear that no "wide angle" lens was used.

posted on Dec, 23 2010 @ 06:02 PM
That is exactly where the perspective comes into play. Keep trying

posted on Dec, 23 2010 @ 06:03 PM
And to make sure, here is the actual Calibration chart of Apollo 17's Magazine 134/B (Hasselblad) - the one used for the photos above.

It is rather obvious that it was not a "wide angle" lens at all.

60mm Carl Zeiss Biogon lens was used.

posted on Dec, 23 2010 @ 06:06 PM
60mm on a medium format camera is on the wide side actually. So what else you have?

new topics

top topics

<< 9  10  11    13 >>

log in