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.


Hard Evidence against moon landing

page: 1
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in


posted on Apr, 1 2003 @ 06:27 AM
not sure if you people believe in it or not but just some reasons why im beggining to doubt it ever happened.
- USA flag seen flapping in 'apparent' wind
- in a non realesed, unedited photo shows two spot lights which are supposed to be the sun.
- foot prints on the moon are to deep and structured as the moon contains to little amount of water to hold such a shape.
- vast reports of tv production company in england mgm i think giving us goverment use of studio where astronauts were seen acting out moon landing days before 'launch'

im sure there are many more if you wish to add you evidence or feel free to contradict.

posted on Apr, 1 2003 @ 07:15 AM
These concepts have been debunked before. There's even a "bad science" website easily refuting all these points. (Can anyone remember the URL?)

One thing to remember about Apollo 11 (first landing)... they installed a laser reflection experiment (forget the actual name of the project) that involved the installation of a special mirror on the moon's surface. The experiment wasn't accomplished previously with automated landers because it required on-the-spot human intervention with final adjustments of the reflector.

Universities around the world are still using the reflector today.

[Edited on 1-4-2003 by William]

posted on Apr, 1 2003 @ 07:36 AM
NASA is insisting that a manned mission to Mars may be futile due to the intense solar radiation the astronauts would be exposed to. I can't imagine that Mars, having an atmosphere and being farther away from the Sun, can be any less dangerous (due to radiation) than going to the moon.

William, if you have a video of the moon landings try speeding them up. You might notice that the astronauts and the space jeep seem a lot less bouncy - and a whole lot more earthy.

Besides, have you seen the way those 'moon jeeps' move? Without gasoline? Considering the sucky nature of present-day battery-powered vehicles, I highly doubt they were electric...

Man has not been to the moon.


posted on Apr, 1 2003 @ 11:43 AM
why have they never went back again?

If they did go there why does it seam to be that the furthest they can really go ,manned is just out side our atmosphere.

Just interested in some thought on this.

posted on Apr, 1 2003 @ 11:45 AM
William, the site you're thinking of is the Bad Astronomy site (c'mon over -- it's pretty neat!):

And yes, guys, this has all been discussed before and most thoroughly debunked before, along with the "so why didn't we go back" discussion.

posted on Apr, 1 2003 @ 12:48 PM
hmm.. what about this.. what if (and that's a big if) they went to the moon, found something they didn't want to show, so they setup a stage to perform all of this on and everyone saw that footage and not the actual moon fotoage. this could explain a lot of the things that happened.. such as the flag flapping, the speed issues, the light issues (objects/people showing up perfectly in the shadows where it shouldn't have been visible), the modified images, etc etc... the only thing that tv special on the faked moon landings proved to me was this. i do believe that man has gone to the moon (and maybe the military is still going there, who knows..) but i just don't think we saw all of the actual footage from there. but hey, what do i know.. i wasn't alive back then.

posted on Apr, 1 2003 @ 04:22 PM
well byrd sorry for bringing up an old topic i mean there are alot of newbies on this site im sure they still would like to discuss it, we cant think of all new and recent things to discuss you know.

posted on Apr, 1 2003 @ 05:20 PM
well i read some theories that the moon (kingu) was actually a broken off piece of the earth (tiamat) and it made parts of the underground earth hollow.... there are so many thoeries that the 'landing' was made in a hollywood basement. i agree with ital that we did NOT like or want to expose what we saw when we went there, but i think the moon's other side may have something to do with it. if we DID go there and it was televised and pleasant, then why HAVENT we been back?

posted on Apr, 1 2003 @ 05:36 PM
the astronauts have said things about strange sights while on the moon, but have refused to go any further than that. maybe there is a base on the moon. i mean i don't know how many people on here believe UFOs are aliens from other solar systems, but if they are it would make sense for them to have a base somewhere close to Earth rather than flying back and forth every couple of days. and it would make sense that they did make a backup tape to show the public if anything was filmed there that showed too much. that would defeat the whole purpose of their alien coverup here.

posted on Apr, 1 2003 @ 07:27 PM
The moon has no atomsphere. No atomsphere means no wind. No wind means no flag flapping. Now flag flapping means fake landing.

posted on Apr, 1 2003 @ 07:40 PM
Illimatic you show great stupidity in that last statement. there you shall find all your answers, to why you (people who believe the moon landing is a hoax) are bafoons, and have no clue about reality (science//physics the work.)

A breif summary of such things you will learn.

*Even to this day we can not create a vaccum chamber large enough to hold a sound stage, and yet, in moon pictures we see the sand being kicked up and falling in a perfect parabloic arc, impossible if there is any atmosphere.

*You shall learn why the grid lines on the cameras fade in the light, making them look "not there" (simple photography)

*You shall learn that the flag is waving because as you move an object the energy will flow through it, it is also crinkled because the staff on Apollo 11 would extend all the way, other astronauts liked this and never full extended the staff.

*You will learn that there are no stars because of contrast.

*You will learn that there is lighting on the back sides of things (not possible without atmospheric scattering) because the surface of the moon is white and reflects light (duh).

Check it out, and be educated.

posted on Apr, 1 2003 @ 07:45 PM
The flag was seen flapping due the Astronauts 'forcing' and 'twisting' the flag into the moons surface.

Byrd, Will, lets re-open the discussion and call it a classic, heck, even make it a sticky thread once we've established a creditable argument.

An April Fools 'documentry' was on last night, featuring Donald Rumsfeld, Henry Kissinger, and other well established individuals, on the Topic of a staged Moon Landing. Gee was it good, they threw stanley kubrick in on it too. hahahaha.

posted on Apr, 1 2003 @ 08:48 PM
Remember, we nearing the end of the Cold War then, and Russia had the ability to track our spaceships just as we had the ability to track theirs.

So howcome, if it was faked, the Russians didn't scream to high heaven and show up with all the radar proof to put egg all over the faces of their most hated enemy, the US? This would have given a huge boost for their space program.

Why didn't the Chinese (who could also track spacecraft) speak up against the Evil US (this was during the Vietnam war, and they sure weren't cooperating with us)? Why wasn't there a peep out of England or Australia, for that matter?

If it was NOT true, all of those would have spoken up. American was quite unpopular and had many enemies that would have been delighted to see her shamed. Some of them were engaged in outright wars and other hostile actions against us. The fact that THEY didn't come forth with any proof means that yes, we really did it.

If we were faking it, our enemies of the Vietnam war have been the first to catch us.


posted on Apr, 2 2003 @ 12:03 AM
another good site for the uneducated (no offence, but i think this moon landing hoax is the dumbest thing)

posted on Apr, 2 2003 @ 02:44 AM
well actually the russians did object to it, they proved it was a hoax in less then 2 hours when they gathered as much infomation about it as they could. It was all documented and shown on SBS the other night.


posted on Apr, 2 2003 @ 03:24 AM
are you sure this wasn't some april fools joke? i'm talking with a aussie guy right now on icq and he's telling me about this program he watched about the moon landing stuff yesterday... yesterday being april 1st...

he said something about rumsfield and other officials saying that the moon photos were done in the MGM studios... that just makes it sound like some april fools joke to me.

posted on Apr, 2 2003 @ 02:11 PM
people say it was fake in part because the flag was flapping in the wind from what i take it? i didn't see any specials on tv or anything but this is what i gather. but if it was done in an mgm studio or a basement or something, why would it be flapping in the wind indoors? there's not wind indoors, that's more of an outdoors thing

posted on Apr, 2 2003 @ 07:19 PM

Originally posted by Lakini
well actually the russians did object to it, they proved it was a hoax in less then 2 hours when they gathered as much infomation about it as they could. It was all documented and shown on SBS the other night.

Yea, I watched the same thing, with people such as Henry Kissinger and the likes admitting to staging a moon landing in MGM Studios in England. While the credis where rolling, they were shown reading off scripts and we also got to see some bloopers. On the radio the next moorning I was told it was an April's Fools joke, because of the scripts.

Its funny how most basic evidence against the Moon Landing can be just as easily 'debunked'. Although there is stronger evidence to suggest other Moon Conspiracies.

posted on Apr, 2 2003 @ 07:22 PM
well i think that it is real, if we have aliens on this planet giving tecnology to the US goverment then a moon landing is prety much asured, since we have been in contact with the greys since before the first lunar landing and the theroy of grey ships escorting the apollo missions, to many theroys tie into this one to make this one false,

posted on Apr, 2 2003 @ 08:45 PM

Yes... yes they do...

new topics

top topics

<<   2  3  4 >>

log in