Apollo Moon Landings a Hoax? Then Read This

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by FoosM

 

I did not know they changed magazines outside the LM.Thank you for informing me.
I notice Duke has his back to the Sun. Always a good idea when changing film.

Not really necessary with hassels. They have a good system for securing the magazines. You cannot detach the magazine untill the protective plate is in place.

Originally posted by 11I11
To be honest that picture isnt going to convince anyone in the hoax camp my friend. Personally I do not believe man landed on the moon. My reason?...... Just on the basis that the last time man apparently landed on the moon was 1972 and i cannot understand why we wouldnt have been back since.

This is because...

a) the Apollo missions were horribly, horribly expensive
b) we completed what we set out to do- beat the Russians to the moon- so there was no point in continuing to beat the Russians to tne moon
c) we were already hemmoraging money on the Vietnam war
d) and probably the most important reason; there wasn't anything on the moon to justify the cost of going there anymore.

Ironically, we had all the equipment- Saturn V rocket, orbital vehicle, LEM, trained astronauts, all of that- for an Apollo 18 mission but Congress pulled the funding so that NASA didn't have the money to get it off the ground. All this equipment is now collecting dust as museum displays and lawn ornaments.

Originally posted by borutp
reply to post by DJW001

 

What is your comment on this picture? Packaged rover but track are already on the ground?

Hmmm, the pic info says Mission:17. My guess is that is a later mission than Apollo 11 and the tracks are from a previous rover? Not sure but that would be my guess.


Or I could claim like all the detractors of the moon landing, PHOTOSHOP! IT MUST BE PHOTOSHOP CAUSE I CAN DO IT IN PHOOOOOTOOOOSHOOOOOOOOOOP!

reply to post by Frira


If you watched today news.You know that the moon landing aint a hoax,they found the footprints of ALL moonlandings. i mean, even thinking it is totally nuts.

reply to post by Frira


I dont think there are any out there that has So little grasp of reality that they actually think the moon landing is a hoax. For those who have knowledge and access to more than regular information,well they know that we not only have set foot on the moon but also .... and ......"581d"

They went to the Moon -- AND -- some of the photographs are fake; I cannot see the conflict

Firstly the astronauts would have practised and practised - and some of this would have been filmed, so that mistakes can be played back.

Secondly with all the eyes of the world on the moon landing and US really in the spotlight, it is rational to assume that NASA would have had a plan B if something went disastrously wrong. They would have plan B, C and D for any eventualities including cameras not working [due to the Van Allen belt radiation or moon dust] to finding aliens on the moon. So I would expect NASA to have some "stock" film up its sleeve if communication gets difficult.

Originally posted by DerbyCityLights
What is your comment on this picture? Packaged rover but track are already on the ground?

That's not the packaged rover. The rover was stored on the port side of the lander, on quadrant 1 (to the right of the ladder in this photo). This bag thing is on the starboard side, on quadrant 4 (left of the ladder). You can see something had been deployed from quadrant 1 from the junk lying on the ground on that side. The "something" was the lunar rover.

Without looking it up, I can see right away this bag thing is almost certainly the equipment package for the myriad scientific experiments they would do on the moon. By the time Apollo 17 flew, they were carrying all sorts of gadgets to the moon that weren't on earlier flights.

There are no "ladders" or "bags" or "rovers" visible in those pictures. There is absolutely nothing but fuzz.
But, the sheeple now have a new meme- "They did so go to the moon. There are pictures of the footprints!"
LOL

Originally posted by templar knight
Secondly with all the eyes of the world on the moon landing and US really in the spotlight, it is rational to assume that NASA would have had a plan B if something went disastrously wrong. They would have plan B, C and D for any eventualities including cameras not working [due to the Van Allen belt radiation or moon dust] to finding aliens on the moon. So I would expect NASA to have some "stock" film up its sleeve if communication gets difficult.

Please explain why Apollo 12 had little to no video beamed back to Earth after the astronauts mistakenly aimed the video camera at the sun and fried the thing, despite all the available video from Apollo 11. While you're at it, please explain why there was no moon video whatsoever from Apollo 13 after the command/service module went BOOM. That's about as much of an "eventuality" as an eventuality gets.

Originally posted by Archirvion
reply to post by Frira

 

If you watched today news.You know that the moon landing aint a hoax,they found the footprints of ALL moonlandings. i mean, even thinking it is totally nuts.

Ridiculous!

A footpath would take weeks to create. No 3 hr mission will create a solid footpath. An intermittent footpath maybe but a dark solid line on the moon's surface...PREPOSTEROUS!

I am trying to find out what the russians had to say about the moon landing any help please I have been using CQ with no luck and I dont read russian I only think their girls have cute accents?

Originally posted by templar knight
They went to the Moon -- AND -- some of the photographs are fake; I cannot see the conflict

Firstly the astronauts would have practised and practised - and some of this would have been filmed, so that mistakes can be played back.

That is fine to consider, but it is also an unnecessary speculation.

The ONLY reason to doubt the official photos is because someone speculated that they were faked-- not out of trying to reconcile conflicting data-- but simply out of idle musing.

Now, to support the theory that some are real and some are faked- then take the photos of known rehearsals and compare them with the photos claimed by NASA to be authentic moon photos. If you see the same craters and rocks of the rehearsal photos showing up in the official photos-- then you have something.

If you do NOT see the same terrain at the feet of the astronauts as you see in the rehearsal photos-- then you also have something-- a way to know that there remains NO evidence supporting the speculation and so that continuing to entertain the unnecessary speculation will be unproductive and without useful purpose (unless you are a science fiction writer).

Personally, I won't bother with such research, because (at a glance) I can tell the staged rehearsal landscape is a much grainier soil or a very different texture (I just now looked at some photos on one web site claiming they were from a rehearsal).

Originally posted by Kitilani

To be fair, we have pictures like that from Mars that I am sure will match up exactly when Japan maps that too.

Images like this?
Yes. Have you not seen them?

Not in the mid 1960's we didnt.
The conspiracy theory assertion is that when the "movie sets" were starting to be contructed (in time for the 1969 "landing"), the secret agency making them already had images of the surface so good that it took until 2008 for the Japanese to be able to recreate them with the SELENE mission.

So with a single sentence, you've instantly created hitherto unknown yet more secret orbital probes, more secret technology, more secret workers, more secret launches and more secret radio telemetry.
All with amazing technology capable of taking those images and height data and recreating backdrops as seen from the ground.
Well done.

I'm still waiting for a response on why at the height of the cold war and space race the USSR didnt call us out if we quote unquote didnt go. Seems to me like the hoax believers cant come up with a good answer or any answer for that matter.

Yes, we went to the moon. Does that mean we didn't use fake pictures for the public? As JFK said "we are going to the moon not because it is easy, we are going there because it is very very hard". (something like that) I would recommend that all of you watch the documentary "Kubricks Odyssey" In it you will find out that Kubrick was hired to use his set from the movie "2001 a space odyssey" to take fake pictures. The set was built with political dollars. It was not about hoaxing at all. It was about if something went wrong while we were up there. It was about being in complete control of this major and very important event. Stanley Kubrick cried when they took down the set, it was nearly 2 years after the completion of his movie.

After watching Kubricks Odyssey let me know what you think.

Here's your proof man has been to the moon!


From the Mythbusters of all people!

I honestly think the faking of the moon landing is a hoax!

Oh!And go see Apllo 18!Good movie!

There is more proof that came out yesterday, NASA has released pictures of tracks from the moon from the rover, and trash, but why now>?

reply to post by Cecilofs

Its entirely possible that they did everything but get to the moon.
What specifically do you think stopped them? What possible technical problem would there be to prevent them from going to the moon once all of that hardware was in orbit? You do understand that the biggets part of the job is getting into earth orbit, don't you?
The math for that flight is available. Perhaps we should find it so that you can debunk it?

reply to post by Illustronic

they had to be encoded to a transmittable language for airing on TV
Yes, that was not done electronically. There was a picture tube that included a persistant phosphor on which the slow-scan was played; and, there was an image tube and lens system facing it. Those components were enclosed in a lightproof box. The slow-scan electronics displayed the image at that rate, and the TV imaging tube operated according to broadcast specs. There were no "signal converters" in those days since digital electronics was very young. No ADC/DACs were available that could keep up with a video signal.

Originally posted by Brotherman
I am trying to find out what the russians had to say about the moon landing any help please I have been using CQ with no luck and I dont read russian I only think their girls have cute accents?

In 1970, Neil Armstrong of Apollo 11 (and the first man to walk on the moon) was invited to go to the Soviet Union and speak at the 13th annual conference of the international committee on Space Research, plus the gave him a tour of the Yuri Gagarin cosmonauts training center. They referred to him as the "Czar of the ship".

I'd say they celebrated the moon landing just like everyone else (except the Chinese- Chairman Mao never met a grudge he didn't like).