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.


Young Aussie genius whipping NASA in Moon Hoax Debate!

page: 21
<< 18  19  20    22  23  24 >>

log in


posted on May, 2 2010 @ 03:43 PM
I've come into this discussion quite late in the day and no doubt nearing it's end but I did want to spend some time looking at the videos that the guy put up on youtube. I've got to say it was yet another, in a very long list, of headlines that promised more than it delivered. A lot of this young mans time seemed to be spent on mud slinging which grew tedious. While I understand he would want to counter accusations he unfortunately ended up just doing what he accused his detractors of doing. I was looking for the "genius" that the headline promised and found none. I did find someone who spent a lot of time making videos for youtube but very little well thought out science to back up his claims. Maybe I've only seen a "bad" selection of videos (I've watched about 8) but if there are ones that live up to the headline I'd like someone to point them out.

Credit to him for effort though.

posted on May, 2 2010 @ 03:54 PM
reply to post by Byteman

No information has been released concerning the mapping of the neutron radiation found on the moon.

Even the sage of debunkers, Phage, has agreed.

The best that anyone could do is the previously mentioned avatar, and that was to give me "preliminary" reports concerning the sum total of radiation emitted by the moon over an entire day.

NOTHING is available that shows the specifics of where the radiation is located on the surface of the moon.

I would suggest a bit more research before you post next time.

You are attempting to validate your point with dates and....


You want to know why?

Because nobody knows what the data is.

posted on May, 2 2010 @ 04:03 PM
Photography During Apollo

This site talks about Photography During Apollo ...

posted on May, 2 2010 @ 04:13 PM

posted on May, 2 2010 @ 04:18 PM

Originally posted by K J Gunderson

So, we built bigger and better proves than the SU did. Really trying to tell me that you believe we were able to get people to the moon and back when no one else could but there is no way we could have just sent bigger and better automated devices?

Can you or JRA offer anything that would make that any more than an opinion?

Do you have photo's of these robotic probes from America that returned Lunar samples?

Any proof that these American Lunar robot sample return probes exist?

If you don't, then your assertion that we sent robotic sample return probes is just an opinion.

If you can prove that we sent robotic probes to the Moon, and they returned samples then do so. Otherwise, you're just trying to obfuscate the issue with irrelevant minutiae.

Originally posted by K J Gunderson
Really? Ones you witnessed first hand? Perhaps you have seen the results and compared with your notes from when you did the same experiments when you were on the moon?

Oh, I see. You claim that American robotic probes went to the Moon and returned samples, with NO PROOF.

But you expect others to bring extraordinary evidence.


Originally posted by K J Gunderson
"ERM?" What the hell is an erm? Was the question too hard? I simple asked how Russia obtained their soil and rock samples. I am pretty sure you know this one. Why is it causing you to stroke out and say things like "erm?"

Look, I am simply asking questions. I have not told anyone they are lying, wrong, full of crap. I have not declared anything fake or real. I am asking questions. If my questions toss such a wrench into your system, I would suggest moving on.

How mature. Do you regularly accuse people of medical maladies, in order to "win" your little argument points?

Really, you should just hold the insults until your ready to stop your own hypocrisy.

You are not "just asking questions". You are making spectacular claims, and demanding unreasonable proof. You have already claimed that American robotic lunar sample return robots, did the whole Lunar rock return job. You have defacto, declared the Apollo missions fake.

Again, you are not "just asking questions". You seemingly cannot even determine when you are or aren't "just asking questions", your ability to "toss such a wrench" into anyone's argument is suspect at best.

Originally posted by K J Gunderson
If you are just looking to argue in favor of the moon landings, you are dealing with the wrong person. If you cannot answer my questions, that is fine. Move along. If your own words are going to keep tripping you up as you try to argue with me because I dare ask something, please move along.

If you think that you can actually make sense when you responde to me, I would love to hear your answers. I am not looking to convince anyone anything or be proven right or wrong. I am just asking questions. So far they really seem to have bothered you to the point of contradicting yourself in order to get all "Erm"y with me. Relax.

"Dealing with the wrong person"...really?
So you're the Master Apollo debater?
How's that?

Your whole argument is based on an assumption that because samples have been gotten by probes, that NASA must have done the same thing.

Arguments based on assumptions, mean jack squat.

Why don't you prove your American Lunar Robotic sample return probes actually exist, before you try and disprove Apollo?

Is my asking for proof of these probes, tripping you up?

BTW, no one can prove negatives. So every time you ask someone a question like "Can you prove Russia could not have been fooled?" or "Can you prove Russia and the US were not in on it together?" you are unfairly asking someone to do something impossible.


Is that the tactic of the Master Apollo debater?

posted on May, 2 2010 @ 04:29 PM
Are there still people beating this dead horse?The "Moon Hoax" fanatics seem to be distracting from what the real question should be.Why did we spend all that money,risk all those astronauts lives simply to collect dirt and rocks from a "dead,lifeless,uninhabitable" planet?I can understand going there once and saying "there is nothing here,time to move on" but we went back a few more times to build up our inter-galactic rock collection apparently.Come on people,focus.

posted on May, 2 2010 @ 04:33 PM
reply to post by Josephus23

If no one knows what the data is, then that also means that YOU DO NOT KNOW what the radiation levels were.

That also means that YOU CANNOT SAY FOR SURE, that the Apollo Astronauts would have been exposed to lethal levels of radiation.

So, again...your argument that Apollo Astronauts would have been exposed to lethal radiation has had the air let out of it. using your own points against you.

BTW, Lunar Neutron Maps that you claim don't exist.



Various Lunar Neutron maps and assorted Neutron data

Gee, this means you have to stop claiming that we have no data on the Lunar surface NEUTRON radiation. We have had maps for at least a decade.

posted on May, 2 2010 @ 04:34 PM
reply to post by Josephus23

So where are the tapes.

you need to start doing some more research.
The Newly found original version of the broadcast can be found here:

NASA Releases Restored Apollo 11 Moonwalk Video A team of Apollo-era engineers who helped produce the 1969 live broadcast of the moonwalk acquired the best of the broadcast-format video from a variety of sources for the restoration effort. These included a copy of a tape recorded at NASA's Sydney, Australia, video switching center, where down-linked television from Parkes and Honeysuckle Creek was received for transmission to the U.S.; original broadcast tapes from the CBS News Archive recorded via direct microwave and landline feeds from NASA's Johnson Space Center in Houston; and kinescopes found in film vaults at Johnson that had not been viewed for 36 years.

and while at it, you can also find clips from the 16mm footage here:

[edit on 2-5-2010 by hateeternal]

posted on May, 2 2010 @ 05:03 PM
reply to post by Josephus23

The neutron radiation is produced by cosmic rays striking the surface. The radiation is produced wherever and whenever cosmic rays strike the surface. That would be...everywhere and all the time on the surface. Cosmic rays come from every direction and strike everywhere. LEND has shown that neutron radiation levels on the Moon are not lethal in the short term (or even the longer term).

Come on, still waiting for an explanation of those "pockets" of radiation, or why you believe there are any. Why would any particular area receive more cosmic rays than any other area?

[edit on 5/2/2010 by Phage]

posted on May, 2 2010 @ 05:20 PM
Thanks WWu777

Great opening presentation I found his videos entertaining,he sure goes into depth with his research.

NASA has some good explaining to do on some of his findings


posted on May, 2 2010 @ 05:37 PM
Twelve pages ago, I asked the people that believe that we never went to the moon a question: why couldn't we have done so? What prevents us from achieving this using the technology at our disposal?

Nobody even made an attempt at answering my question. This is information that I would really like to have, and it would help me understand this movement a lot better... it might even help the ATS community take your claims more seriously.

If anyone representing this movement could please respond to this post, I'd really appreciate it. Thanks.

posted on May, 2 2010 @ 05:49 PM
Just out of curiosity, has this young genius refuted any of these Earth based images of the Apollo missions?

I've heard it argued that they simply stayed in their parking orbit for a week. Don't you think amateur astronomers would have noticed that? And why wait until Apollo 11 to start the fakery? Apollo 8 went to the Moon but didn't land. Why not pretend Apollo 8 landed? Was the hoaxed film still at the Photomat? And if NASA is so big on keeping secrets, why admit to the Apollo 1 tragedy? Couldn't they just pretend it never happened (like the Soviets used to do)?

posted on May, 2 2010 @ 05:52 PM
I'm still on the fence with this one. I'm just thinking why would they fake landing on the Moon 6 times?

The Moon seems to be important and I bet that if the Apollo missions didn't land, TPTB would've still had people land on the Moon in top secret projects.

posted on May, 2 2010 @ 06:04 PM

Originally posted by The Parallelogram
Twelve pages ago, I asked the people that believe that we never went to the moon a question: why couldn't we have done so? What prevents us from achieving this using the technology at our disposal?

Nobody even made an attempt at answering my question. This is information that I would really like to have, and it would help me understand this movement a lot better... it might even help the ATS community take your claims more seriously.

If anyone representing this movement could please respond to this post, I'd really appreciate it. Thanks.

The Parallelogram
BTW I like your user name, opposite sides opposite angles.

You said People representing this movement you make it seem like a cult,

I asked the people that believe that we never went to the moon a question: why couldn't we have done so?

It is not about we could not of traveled to our lunar neighbor, that is not the issue.
The conflicting evidence is with too many faked NASA images,the proof is there.

So no need to answer your second question?



posted on May, 2 2010 @ 06:09 PM
reply to post by Josephus23

Josephus, you have yet to provide any evidence for your aguement other than to say "lack of data means i am right". On the other hand we can say that people landed on the Moon, we have video of that landing and every other argument that says they didn't land on the Moon that this aussie kid provided has been thoroughly disproven. As they landed and survived it seems that the radiation isn't deadly if exposed for a short period of time.

Your argument that they didn't land on the Moon is we don't have accurate readings of the radiation or there may be isolated pockets of extreme radiation. Using your method of forming an argument i could quite easily say that the Moon landings wee not possible due to isolated pockets of deadly rock people. I have the same amount of evidence as you do.

You have then been provided data from the LEND project which mapped the nautron radiation and your response is that this isn't good enough for you, that it could be fake. Well then i can call nearly any theory false by saying the data is fake.

[edit on 2-5-2010 by ImaginaryReality1984]

posted on May, 2 2010 @ 06:31 PM

Originally posted by Josephus23
2) Saying that the moon landings must be true because the data sent back from the moon landings tells me that they are true is CIRCULAR REASONING.

Circular reasoning.

This is not debatable.

Let me get this straight, you're stating that the gathering of evidence to prove an action or event is circular reasoning? I don't know if I am missing your point here but you should either correct my mistake on this or take a close look at what it is that you are trying to say. The usage of evidence from an event to try and disprove said event is more likely circular reasoning, the way I see it you got it backwards.

If circular reasoning is considered false and we are to accept what you state that by collecting and presenting evidence from the NASA Moon landings that these mission were in fact real as circular reasoning then nothing can be proven. Any evidence collected from an event to prove said event would then be false... Is that what your are claiming?

I agree with you that this is not debatable. My point is how can one use supposed unreliable evidence from the Apollo missions to debunk the LRO images and vise versa? Information derived from both of these missions are NASA missions. If NASA is going to lie about something as big as the Moon landings don't you think they would also lie about the LRO images? It is illogical to both accept and deny that both these missions went to the Moon and took pictures just to try and prove a point, or rather disprove a point.

This illogical coarse of action leads to a lot of nonsense which detours away from any reasonable understanding. Like I previously stated, one must either accept or deny these images.

At some point we need to either accept the information from NASA as legitimate or dismiss it all as false.

I get the feeling from reading your recent posts that you are missing the point here. Your arguments are failing because of your hypocritical stance. You are making circular arguments while accusing others of making circular arguments, your accusations of certain individual's 'ad hominem' attacks are 'ad hominem' attacks.
Case in point in a reply to another member;

Yours, however, is yet another attempt to derail my attention and smear me with another ad hominem attack.
You guys resort to the same tired tactics when someone confronts you and corners you in using your OWN information.

Can you not see the hypocrisy here?
I would like to end with a bit of good advice, "Treat others as you wish to be treated".

[edit on 5/2/2010 by Devino]

posted on May, 2 2010 @ 06:34 PM
I believe they went to the moon, but I think there is enough evidence that they were 'hiding' something or something is just not right. Some of the points raised have not been refuted properly.

posted on May, 2 2010 @ 06:57 PM
reply posted on 2-5-2010 @ 02:50 PM by Josephus23

Originally posted by jaffo
I can't believe that people still try and say we did not go to the moon. We have pictures of the landers. We have samples we brought back. We have independent corroboration of outside agencies. We went. Many times. Get over it. And seriously, a little basic research before you waste anyone else's time please...

Argument ad hominem.

PROVE my information wrong.

Prove that my points make no sense.

I seem to have more critical thinkers on this thread agreeing with me than not, and I think that it is freaking some folks out.

AT NO POINT did I attack you personally so stop crying about ad hominem every time someone points out that you are a broken record with nothing backing your opinions. You have been proven wrong and shown to be using poor logic and even more poorly researched facts repeatedly and yet you keep insisting that people are attacking you and not proving you wrong. You keep shrieking over and over that we 'did not map the neutron radiation until 1999' as though it proves we didn't go to the moon. It proves no such thing. It proves NOTHING other than the fact that we were willing to take risks in getting to the moon and planting our flag. That's all it proves, pal. Nothing more and nothing less. Again, quit crying about people attacking you every time someone points out that you CONTINUALLY ignore posts with citations to legit sites. You ignore photographic evidence. You ignore independent evidence. You ignore everything that is posted in response to your continued posting of the same lame information. YOU HAVE BEEN SHOWN PROOF POSITIVE OVER AND OVER AGAIN. Stomping your feet and screaming 'NUH UH!' at the top of your lungs is not debating or arguing or providing proof of your theory, it's just a waste of everyone's time. YOU are the one making the extraordinary claim and YOU are the one who bears the burden of proof. For crying out loud, even India took photographs of our landers. What more do you want?!

[edit on 2-5-2010 by jaffo]

[edit on 2-5-2010 by jaffo]

[edit on 2-5-2010 by jaffo]

posted on May, 2 2010 @ 07:35 PM
What is truly sad....does anyone know yet?

This thread, in only the last two days, has gone on for a bunch of, two....

I didn't need to read all of the posts...because I can guess the content, of most. "New" people, coming along, reading this for "the first time", or whatever...but jumping on this bandwagon, because it seems to be the ... gee, what is the proper word, nowadays? "Hip" is outdated, as is "cool", I suppose....

"VIRAL" is the best description, and maybe will resonate with the generation that is most prevalent in this "belief".

And, most disheartening of all, is the "FLAG" count! I am astonished, and dismayed....not that the "FLAGS" matter in the slightest, but it's the concept that is dismaying.....

WHAT has happened to ATS??

Sorry, that needed to be asked, and is not meant to distract from THIS thread, but is still a general query, and a problem that is pervasive throughout the Internet.

STUPIDITY!!! Not in the pejorative sense, ( of course...
) but in the sense that, at the core of ATS, has been for many years the motto, we all know what it is. The denial of ignorance IS a vaunted goal, yet it seems to be failing in its endeavor.

THIS thread (and SO many like it) is proof positive of that failure.

IGNORANCE is taking over....and whether it is a trolling maneuver, with [snickering] behind the keyboard isn't the point, because those who may not RECOGNIZE such tactics will, in the main, take away what they read at face value, sometimes.

AND, that is truly, truly sad. the "VIRAL" comment above noted, these things will be read, and will sometimes be repeated, by those who stumble along, read a thread like this, and come away with the worst possible impression --- a FALSE impression, and then they may leave thinking they have been "educated", but in fact they have been misled. Worse, they have been infected....YES, I said infected with the virus of STUPIDITY!

Is the entire post, above, a "rant"? I suppose so. I also happen to believe, and firmly think, it needed to be said. If for no other reason than to interrupt this nonsense, and (hopefully) plead for some sanity to take over.

SANITY, in the terms of going out, doing yourselves a favor, and LEARNING! Go outside, OFF the Internet, for a while. There are great sources of learning besides the Web.

I am passionate about these topics, because it pains me to see such drivel being spread, via the Internet. And, I'm not some "old dude" raving about technology --- I embrace technology, I welcome it. WHEN it is used properly.

I happen to also be a big fan of what is happening today, with technology. I see it as an outgrowth of the people of MY generation, ...(in case you're wondering, I am born of the "Sputnik" era. Look it up...) ...who grew up with Science Fiction stories, and thought "How could I build this"? The cell-phone, i-Phone, i-Pod, and even the i-Pad are just a few examples, but not the entire story. (I only used them, not to advertise for Apple, BTW).

Thanks for letting me vent, a little. I earnestly wish it gets through to some who happen to read it......

[edit on 2 May 2010 by weedwhacker]

posted on May, 2 2010 @ 07:50 PM

It takes six of you guys to attempt and refute my questions.

This is soooooo hilarious.

You see gentlemen, the difference between you and I is that I do not take this personally.
Whereas, obviously I struck a nerve.

I have ceased my posts but yet 6, that is right, count 'em, SIX of you want to continue the exact same, tired, old arguments that in no way refute my point.

I will let what I have said stand while I laugh at the amount of "enemies" that I have made.

I get the feeling that more people will leave this thread with questions than answers.


new topics

top topics

<< 18  19  20    22  23  24 >>

log in