Please Debunk The Moon Landing Hoax For Me...

page: 6
15
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join

posted on Sep, 5 2011 @ 08:32 AM
link   
20% of Americans don't believe we went to the moon?

Think about this then. The mean IQ is 100. That means somewhere around 50% of the population is anywhere from stupid to profoundly retarded. And yet many of them still manage to post on conspiracy websites.

I watched almost all the Apollo, and Gemini and Mercury, launches live when I could. I listened to Kennedy's "we will go to the moon" speech live. I watched the landing on the moon live. There were hours of video of the descent and walking on the moon, a motion we would have to fake with easily detected CGI today, and the ascent stage of the lander leave the moon. I grew up with a woman who was part of the team that wrote the software for the Apollo craft.

No one of the thousands of civilian and military personnel who would have to have been involved in any hoax has come forward in the last 40 years and said, "Yeah we faked it".

It is beyond doubt that we landed on the moon. If you still doubt we went it is a reflection on your intellect, education, and knowledge. Maybe instead of trying to prove an incontrovertible fact is hoax you would be better served by trying to address your own significant intellectual faults.




posted on Sep, 5 2011 @ 08:33 AM
link   
reply to post by pshea38
 



NASA, like the CIA, is a NAZI organisation.
Imagine for one second that these boys clubs are not out
for the public good. Now cast a different eye on ALL they have presented.


I think the source you cite would be offended by your using the word "Nazi" in a negative way.

www.geschichteinchronologie.ch...



posted on Sep, 5 2011 @ 08:35 AM
link   
So I suppose all these people lied about going to space? Also all the people involved in NASA, its just absurd to to think thousands of people are in on it and not one has every come forward.

en.wikipedia.org...

en.wikipedia.org...

As for not having the tech? Well we got our rocket technology form the Germans in WWII I bet if they wanted to at the time they could have reached space.

en.wikipedia.org...

EDIT: Here what NASA has to say about the moon hoax actually read it bub.

science.nasa.gov...

He makes a good point, why didn't the russkies fake the moon landing first?



edit on 9/5/2011 by Mcupobob because: cause



posted on Sep, 5 2011 @ 09:00 AM
link   
OP, wouldn't it make more sense for you to debunk the moon landing itself first before you demand people debunk the (assumed, and thats a big one) hoaxed moon landing? just a thought



posted on Sep, 5 2011 @ 09:03 AM
link   
I’ll answer a few of the questions in no particular order. But if you were to Google you could fine the same answers instead of belly aching about it.




The best thing would be is for a new manned mission to the moon. Then compare the results with the Apollo missions.


The Moon is a big dusty rock. We brought hundreds of pounds back with us.
There is nothing there that we need.
Should we stop all federal aid to college students to pay for more of the same?




ha ha ha, they were out walking around with soiled boots on...look at the pics, i'm not lying........the whole outside of the lunar landing mission their boots were soiled.....just sticking to their boots...i was laughing when i saw it because their boots were a mess and and the landing feet were sparkling clean you can eat off of them without getting any grit in your teeth.......


The boots were made from a clothy type of material not metal. Plus static electricity is a huge problem on the Moon (no water). Dust sticks everywhere. Google it.




What's always got me about this is the question of just how were we back then, able to stream the footage all the way back to earth from the moon.. also, who was holding the camera and how did it get enough power to operate?? Cameras back then were massive things.. and would have no doubt been very power hungry .. Things like this get me most confused about it all...

They were smart enough back then to mount the cameras so no one had to hold them. Also they were quite small (for back then) and only needed a few watts of power. Google the evolution of Apollo cameras.




#2. I saw a video recently where everything else in the video was extremely credible and I believed it 100%. This video also mentioned the moon landing was fabricated and when they said that it made me suddenly doubt the entire thing..until they said why. The money. The money spent on the Mission to land on the moon was diverted toward another project...a secret black ops project. Maybe HAARP, maybe it was CERN maybe STARWARS...maybe something we don't even know about. This however is the most plausible explanatin to me why it MIGHT HAVE BEEN faked.

They (TPTB) needed the money.

So who paid all those NASA and sub contractors employees? Google the total number of people employed for the Moon project. I think you will be surprised. The total percent of our GDP spent on the Moon project was staggering. When you see it you will understand why we stopped at Apollo 17. Google it.




The reasons we cant Google-Space view the stuff we left up there I believe... is covert. Spy stuff. We dont want anyone to know WHAT we left there...and where we left it.


No it's the limitation of optics. Simple physics of telescopes. Google it.

The youth today have always known high technology at their keyboard. Us older people have seen a slow and steady growth to the point we are now.
We accepted what we had seen related to the Moon project because it all made sense. None of the tech used at the time was so far ahead of what we could comprehend. So it was believable. The next step was not that much bigger than the last step. But also understand that people were not stupid or could not figure things out. Amateurs could actually see Apollo in Earth orbit. Amateurs could use their own telescopes and see Apollo traveling to the Moon. Amateurs used their own directional radio equipment and listened to Apollo.
Don’t forget the US and USSR were adversaries back then. Each side dissed the others political system. So if we faked it they would have been the first to cry foul.

You are all off from school today so Google it!



posted on Sep, 5 2011 @ 09:15 AM
link   
First off ,i like to say i would rather trust SOME and i mean SOME you tube video's over wikipedia's ,since wikipedia content can be modified at any time ...Usually it says something like this at the bottom (This page was last modified on.date..) .. Now , i believe also that the moon landing was faked as well .So a star for you Mr. Grassyknoll. Check out Buzz and Neil. Buzz is getting violent and Neil wont swear to it . Hmmmm
www.youtube.com...
www.youtube.com...



posted on Sep, 5 2011 @ 09:22 AM
link   
it's so simple, many times it's overlooked

the rocks, specifically big muley. yes the russians got tiny samples with a rover, but nobody has ever sent a rover to the moon big enough to bring home big muley. only a man could do that.

ham radios had to be aimed at the moon to pick up the communications.

the mcdonald observatory, to this day, shoots a laser off the mirror armstrong placed on the moon

so you have tangible, verifyable, independently corroborated physical evidence of that man was there, left something behind and brought something home

the hoax side has theories, and not very good ones at that

and if you are going to reply to this and say the US had a rover big enough for muley please post a pic of it, the dates it was launched, and where it was launched from. you would still need saturn rockets to get there, and they are expensive and loud and all accounted for, so don't embarass yourself and say the US "probably" had a rover


edit on 5-9-2011 by syrinx high priest because: (no reason given)
edit on 5-9-2011 by syrinx high priest because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 5 2011 @ 09:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by superman2012

Originally posted by PsykoOps
Yes humans are explorers. However there is only so little one can explore in a barren empty piece of rock and dust. You can send in your own spy sattellite if you care. Meanwhile the people who actually work in the area will keep using equipment they deem necessary for their mission. No point in having 0.0001m / pixel images of dust. Whatever conspiracy theorist believe or don't is irrelevant.
Keep on waiting


Yep, just rocks and dust right?

and here.

and here. uranium is quite abundant.

Uranium uses.


I'm sure those ores look so beatiful on photographs. I think I shall build my own spy satellite and make millions of the beatiful images....



posted on Sep, 5 2011 @ 09:37 AM
link   
reply to post by PsykoOps
 





I think I shall build my own spy satellite and make millions of the beatiful images


Good luck with that.

Ever seen The Astronaut Farmer? You would be red flagged trying to buy the materials......

Not to mention NORAD


Just kidding of course
edit on 5-9-2011 by liejunkie01 because: astronaut



posted on Sep, 5 2011 @ 09:44 AM
link   
Was not a corner reflector left on the moon? would not a sufficiently powerful laser aimed at that location on the moon produce a reflection observable by a telescope?
the problems are: diffusion of the laser beam, the efficiency of the reflector (how large was it?) and the sensitivity of the telescope/vid cam attached...
makes an easy report on youtube: fired laser at gmt xx:xx:xx, recorded result, here it is...
key question, is how powerful a laser is needed, and how tightly focused .
If the moon landing was a hoax, then it would also have to include landing that corner reflector.....



posted on Sep, 5 2011 @ 09:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by buster2010

Originally posted by superman2012
reply to post by CaDreamer
 


My grandparents also watched it, doesn't mean it is proof. While we respect our grandparents, unless they were there, they are not reputable sources. Sorry sport.


My uncle was on the deck of the ship that picked the capsule after it splashed down. When I talked to him about it he had no doubt we went to the moon.


it would be nice if we could count on someone's non doubts to tell us the truth, but, i can sit there and have no doubt about something i didn't actually see at all, but it doesn't make it true......
edit on 5-9-2011 by patternfinder because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 5 2011 @ 09:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by patternfinder

Originally posted by jheated5
reply to post by iNkGeEk
 


I suppose you are right, with the level of technology we have now we can replicate the moon landing on a hollywood set itself...



they were photoshopping just fine back then....theres a thread on this site that goes into detail about the techniques they had way back.....


Link to that please? Photoshop development started in 1987



posted on Sep, 5 2011 @ 10:07 AM
link   
on the corner reflector on the moon:

here we go, always google before you comment:

Targeting the mirrors and catching their faint reflections is a challenge, but astronomers have been doing it for 35 years. A key observing site is the McDonald Observatory in Texas where a 0.7 meter telescope regularly pings reflectors in the Sea of Tranquility (Apollo 11), at Fra Mauro (Apollo 14) and Hadley Rille (Apollo 15), and, sometimes, in the Sea of Serenity.

so this makes this makes the moon landing was a hoax a little more difficult to defend.



posted on Sep, 5 2011 @ 10:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by buster2010

Originally posted by superman2012
reply to post by CaDreamer
 


My grandparents also watched it, doesn't mean it is proof. While we respect our grandparents, unless they were there, they are not reputable sources. Sorry sport.


My uncle was on the deck of the ship that picked the capsule after it splashed down. When I talked to him about it he had no doubt we went to the moon.


I am sure he had no doubt, however, what are his credentials? Was he in the capsule? Did the astronots have moon stamps on their passports? I am sure your uncle is a very upstanding man, however, he was as caught up in the fever of moon landing as anyone else was...and no offence, your uncle is not a credible witness to me.



posted on Sep, 5 2011 @ 10:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by mysterioustranger
The reasons we cant Google-Space view the stuff we left up there I believe... is covert. Spy stuff. We dont want anyone to know WHAT we left there...and where we left it.

What kind of spy stuff could we have put on the moon? We already had imagery and electronic satellites, and we'd have communications intelligence satellites by 1970. Nothing placed on the moon could have improved upon what we were putting into orbit.



posted on Sep, 5 2011 @ 10:43 AM
link   
reply to post by wasco2
 





No one of the thousands of civilian and military personnel who would have to have been involved in any hoax has come forward in the last 40 years and said, "Yeah we faked it". It is beyond doubt that we landed on the moon. If you still doubt we went it is a reflection on your intellect, education, and knowledge. Maybe instead of trying to prove an incontrovertible fact is hoax you would be better served by trying to address your own significant intellectual faults.


If you would bother to read the entire thread, you would see that your points have been addressed. Again, if it is an incontrovertible fact, please provide your evidence instead of your anecdotes.



posted on Sep, 5 2011 @ 10:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by PsykoOps

Originally posted by superman2012

Originally posted by PsykoOps
Yes humans are explorers. However there is only so little one can explore in a barren empty piece of rock and dust. You can send in your own spy sattellite if you care. Meanwhile the people who actually work in the area will keep using equipment they deem necessary for their mission. No point in having 0.0001m / pixel images of dust. Whatever conspiracy theorist believe or don't is irrelevant.
Keep on waiting


Yep, just rocks and dust right?

and here.

and here. uranium is quite abundant.

Uranium uses.


I'm sure those ores look so beatiful on photographs. I think I shall build my own spy satellite and make millions of the beatiful images....


How do you think they found them sport?
The point being (guess I really have to explain it) is that there is a lot of money to be made on the moon. With either a staging point for further exploration, or from mining the REE and minerals there.

edit: I guess I should have put RME instead of REE.
edit on 5-9-2011 by superman2012 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 5 2011 @ 10:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by syrinx high priest
it's so simple, many times it's overlooked

the rocks, specifically big muley. yes the russians got tiny samples with a rover, but nobody has ever sent a rover to the moon big enough to bring home big muley. only a man could do that.

ham radios had to be aimed at the moon to pick up the communications.

the mcdonald observatory, to this day, shoots a laser off the mirror armstrong placed on the moon

so you have tangible, verifyable, independently corroborated physical evidence of that man was there, left something behind and brought something home

the hoax side has theories, and not very good ones at that

and if you are going to reply to this and say the US had a rover big enough for muley please post a pic of it, the dates it was launched, and where it was launched from. you would still need saturn rockets to get there, and they are expensive and loud and all accounted for, so don't embarass yourself and say the US "probably" had a rover


edit on 5-9-2011 by syrinx high priest because: (no reason given)
edit on 5-9-2011 by syrinx high priest because: (no reason given)


...again another example of not reading the whole thread. Already talked about earlier.



posted on Sep, 5 2011 @ 10:53 AM
link   
reply to post by GrassyKnoll
 


NASA will host a media teleconference at noon on Tuesday, Sept. 6, to reveal new images of three Apollo landing sites taken from the agency's Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter, or LRO.

Audio of the teleconference will be streamed live on the Web at: www.nasa.gov...



posted on Sep, 5 2011 @ 10:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by darkstar57
on the corner reflector on the moon:

here we go, always google before you comment:

Targeting the mirrors and catching their faint reflections is a challenge, but astronomers have been doing it for 35 years. A key observing site is the McDonald Observatory in Texas where a 0.7 meter telescope regularly pings reflectors in the Sea of Tranquility (Apollo 11), at Fra Mauro (Apollo 14) and Hadley Rille (Apollo 15), and, sometimes, in the Sea of Serenity.

so this makes this makes the moon landing was a hoax a little more difficult to defend.


Exept for this:

The Mythbusters are factually incorrect to claim that it is impossible to bounce lasers off the moon's bare surface, because MIT & the Crimean Astrophysical Observatory both succeeded in bouncing lasers off the moon and back to earth - without retro-reflectors - long before Apollo 11.

"Four years ago, a ruby laser considerably smaller than those now available shot a series of pulses at the moon, 240,000 miles away. The beams illuminated a spot less than two miles in diameter and were reflected back to earth with enough strength to be measured by ultrasensitive electronic equipment" - 'The Laser's Bright Magic', Thomas Meloy. NATIONAL GEOGRAPHIC Dec 1966

"SOVIET BOUNCES LIGHT BEAM OFF MOON IN A LASER TEST

Moscow, Nov 4 - A concentrated beam of light has been bounced off the moon and detected on earth by a Soviet observatory in the Crimea.

The feat, reported today by Tass, the Soviet press agency, duplicates an experiment conducted late last year by engineers of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

The superintensive beam was produced by a laser, a device that amplifies and focuses light. The principle is believed to have potential use in space communication and long - distance energy transmission.

The Soviet announcement said a laser had been installed a the focal point of the 100-inch reflector telescope at the Cimean Astraphysical (sic) Observatory." - THE NEW YORK TIMES, Nov 5 1963.





new topics
top topics
 
15
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join