Faked images from our trip to the moon?

reply to post by Tonosama


Ahh yes, my favorite rock of all!

Some Apollo images show anomalous features such as strange rocks or mountains. Moon-hoax proponents have used several of these features as evidence of fraud.

Possible evidence: An Apollo 16 photograph shows a rock with the letter “C” on it (Figure 8). Some think that a stagehand carelessly forgot to remove the label from this “stage prop” on the scene of the lunar-photo-faking.

Response: The original negatives of the image show no such “C.” It is therefore more likely that a small hair or fiber was on the paper when the original print was made.

Source

all these moon hoax theories are fun and all, but they all seem to rely on the believers never bothering to actually check the claims.

All of this crap about no stars in the moon photos is total bunk. I can see a whole bunch of stars right next to those red stripes!

so if it was all faked how do we explain the thousands of people who watched the rockets leave earth after the astronauts boarded it. Where did that rocket go and how did they fake it?

oh ya i remember, we invented perfect holograms that can be projected onto thin air in order to trick the entire world into believing things than aren't true.
get real

I would say all the actual PROOF that we DID land on the moon outweighs this turning flag theory about a million times, find some REAL evidence

That C rock makes me laugh, if it was a fake rock with a C printed or stamped onto it do you really think it would look like it was scratched on by a 2 year old. More likely to be a fossil of a worm or parasite IMO than a engineered rock to fake the moon landing

are there no satelite images of the surface of the moon that shows what the astronauts left behind?

reply to post by dashdespatch


yes there are lots

here a just a few
moon landing images

reply to post by GummB


thanks for that. this means they did go doesnt it?

Originally posted by dashdespatch
reply to post by GummB

 

thanks for that. this means they did go doesnt it?

It depends who you are.
No--if you believe anything you read on the internet
Yes--if you have faith in mankind

reply to post by dashdespatch


Resolutions are just too poor, even the Japanese satellite orbiting the moon right now doesn't have the clarity to show anything more than faint paths, indistinguishable objects casting shadows, and stuff like that but strangely these things are exactly at every Apollo landing site. Those crafty NASA people scurried up there and placed cardboard cutouts before the surveyor got there, like they did during WW II making dummy tanks and stuff to fool the Germans of a battle front. The dummy 'moon-buggy' itself set them back a few bucks.

A problem is we see Google maps and such with great resolution in certain areas of interest but those are the images from airplanes, and not satellites.x

reply to post by TKDRL


Um, am I the only person here that looked at the photos?

The flag is pointed appropriately. All angles and shadows are in the right perspectives on the photos in the OP.

Don't get me wrong. I'm not a debunker. I'm highly doubtful that we've set foot on the moon. But, the photos presented in the Opening Post are not good example of any hoax by NASA.

Please explain to me where the flag is pointed away from the lander. In the photos the flag is pointed in the same direction.

reply to post by Arkahn


how did all that debris get there if somebody didnt leave it there. i suppose the skeptics will say the were sent to the moon on unmanned craft

reply to post by Illustronic


fair enough but who created the faint paths and placed the indistinguishable objects?

Originally posted by loves a conspiricy
Its Bull without a doubt. Theres NO way we ever went to the moon.
Think about this.....the shuttle goes 400 miles and requires SRB and 1.7 million KG of fuel.....how far is the moon? 240,000 miles or so.....how did a rocket get there and back with so little fuel??

OMG. Are you not familiar with how the Apollo uses it's thruster to "slingshot" capitalizing on the gravataional pull?

Illustrated here by grizzle in another context:



Slingshot Theory Explained

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/9a83904a1aed.jpg[/atsimg]

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/e120e797a55d.png[/atsimg]

The first picture the flag is pointing away from that tinfoil contraption, the second picture it is pointing at it. At least that is what it looks like to me.

That tinfoil looking thing looks so fake when you compare it to modern space equipment. It looks like something a bored nerd would build in their basement to put on their cosplay website

reply to post by dashdespatch


What debris, can you actually make something out in those pictures ??

Are you sure they are just not "eyelashes" or "dust" ?

first off .. apologies as i havent read the whole thread (i can see a few of you huffing and puffing) but ive got a possibly easy question to ask about the flag on the moon. If there is no air or wind of some kind (i dont know how solar winds would affect the flag) but the moon has a slight bit of gravity, why doesnt the flag slowly float down like you see flags on flag poles in windless areas. Was the flag designed to be rigid? Excuse me for my stupidness

reply to post by TKDRL


The tent i have i use for camping looks more stable than that contraption in that picture.

reply to post by ThePeaceMaker


I believe they said there is some kind of spring in the top of the flag holding it rigid.

reply to post by TKDRL


Dude thats called perspective. Haven't you gone to school?

reply to post by GrinchNoMore


you can definitly see some debris on the apollo 14 pics

reply to post by mr10k


I am not sure you understand what perspective is.....