Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Moon Hoax: Debunked! by Paolo Attivissimo

page: 3
10
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join

posted on Aug, 21 2012 @ 10:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by GunzCoty

It was on a documentary on (i believe) the history channel. there's no external light source on his camera. And sorry but the moon does not reflect enough light to overpower the sun when the sun is the back light. The moon reflects about the same as a road (black top) .


I really shouldn't need to point out the most obvious way the disprove that claim- go outside at night and look at how bright the moon is. FYI moon soil isn't black, it's gray.



Yes I'm quoting the manufacturer's words and he said his camera did not take the photos we have been shown.


You have not shown a source for that statement. On the other hand, I did my own 30 second Google search and found something similar that was presented on FOX. Here are the statements along with a point by point analysis showing the FOX presenter was just making things up.

Light on the moon- an analysis

Do any of those claims sound familiar?


I'm sorry you believe them.


It's not that I "believe" them as much as I know that if Bush couldn't keep hordes of journalists from tracking his outing a CIA agent back to him, Reagan couldn't keep Iran-Contra a secret, Nixon couldn't keep Watergate a secret, and if Obama/Holder couldn't keep Fast and Furious secret, then there's no way NASA could keep something so mind shattering huge as the discovery of alien life a secret. NASA isn't the military, and it requires the support of hundreds of civilians from the guys operating the satellite dishes to the network technicians doing the computer wiring in Mission Control to operate any space mission.


.

The way I look at it there is one of a few things going on.

#1 There is a country that has technology far beyond ours (USA) and is a threat to us.
#2 The government is reckless and has put many lives in danger testing our technology over heavy populated cities.
#3 There is a technology that is extraterrestrial.


It's number 2. The gov't is testing new gadgets and technology all the time, and more than once an accident occurred in or near populated areas. Did you know there's a fully functional hydrogen bomb lost in the silt off the coast of Georgia?

I'm not here to judge what you did or didn't see hovering over your house 'cause I wasn't there and I don't speculate on what "could" be. I'm here to comment on what is, and "what is" is that everything concernign the moon landings is entirely above board and easily researched, telling me right there that these moon conspiracies are based not upon sincere research, but the lack of it.




posted on Aug, 21 2012 @ 12:55 PM
link   
reply to post by GoodOlDave
 


#1 Black top is the road not the moon,(smh) and the road reflects light, just not enough to block out the sun's rays. I'm sure you could find out more about the manufacturer, remember I did not post a thread so I don't have to spend the time to look for this stuff to passifi anyone, and I don't know why you're talking about fox ,but okay.

The fact you think it's #2 (The government is reckless and has put many lives in danger testing our technology over heavy populated cities. ) negates your belief that the government and NASA would tell you anything. And if it was #2 then we need to put some of our government and NASA agents in prison for reckless endangerment, breach of national security, kidnapping (if abductions are true) animal cruelty (if cattle mutilations are true), and maybe murder for not using the technology to save lives they put in danger (war).



posted on Aug, 22 2012 @ 08:06 AM
link   
So wait, in 2012 self-proclaimed critical thinkers are still completely denying the possibility that the moon landing could have been faked?

I, myself, don't really believe they faked everything, but I also don't believe NASA has been completely honest. Jarrah White has some pretty convincing videos of many different NASA blunders which do illustrate they're not above changing record/case numbers and even modifying older pictures claiming they're recently taken/from another source.

Could someone also link to a video/site which explains how much radiation there is under the VanAllen belts and wether or not a human could survive this? I find it funny all this namecalling towards the hoax-believers when the large majority of believers (though I concider myself a part of this group) don't even understand the science behind the hoaxers claims.

I oftentimes see posts on ATS with people having extremely ridiculous theories or extremely flawed logic, but other than pointing out the flaws in their reasoning and logic, I would never resort to namecalling or insults. I've even seen the Mythbusters (Which I loved watching) call conspiracy theorists idiots, retarded, ignorant and many other names in the book. Why is this necessary?

I suggest watching Jarrah White's videos, if only for his "Re-" videos on people quoting his stuff out of context or misinterpretating them. If anything, his videos showed me that not all moan hoax believers are "dumb" (He has a masters in Physics I believe) and more importantly that there are just as many "idiots" on the "believer"-side as there are on the hoax-side.

Though from personal experience (browsing these forums), it seems that with the moon landing in particular, people immediatly resort to namecalling and flaming, no matter how critical (thought-through) the claims of hoaxers are. I've always wondered why this topic is concidered taboo by so many Americans. It might be a subconcious thing, years of indoctrination during the space-race years perhaps? I don't know...

Just saying, is all this namecalling really necessary? Can't you simply say: "you're wrong", post your evidence why he's wrong and leave it at that? There's plenty of other conspiracies where people, after years, still ask the same questions and they don't get greeted with a propor "f*ck you, you're an idiot", rather than a frustrated, but kind: "This has been asked many times before, evidence is here...-link-"

Why is the Moon landing such a sensitive, if not the most sensitive, subject?
edit on 22-8-2012 by Rendier because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 22 2012 @ 08:22 AM
link   
reply to post by theitalian
 


My congratulations to the author of this book; I'm glad someone has done so much research on this topic and is putting it all out in one convenient package. Personally, I won't be reading it because the pleasure I derive from Moon Hoax threads is the joy of figuring things out for myself!



posted on Aug, 22 2012 @ 08:35 AM
link   
reply to post by Rendier
 



So wait, in 2012 self-proclaimed critical thinkers are still completely denying the possibility that the moon landing could have been faked?


In order for the Moon landings to be faked, it would be necessary for that to be possible. This would involve an infrastructure nearly as large as the program itself, in addition to the actual program, which would need to be carried out in earnest in order to "sell" the hoax. Occam's Razor and all that.


I, myself, don't really believe they faked everything, but I also don't believe NASA has been completely honest. Jarrah White has some pretty convincing videos of many different NASA blunders which do illustrate they're not above changing record/case numbers and even modifying older pictures claiming they're recently taken/from another source.


I can say with absolute certainty that Jarrah White is a liar. This is not name calling, it is a proven fact:
www.abovetopsecret.com...


Could someone also link to a video/site which explains how much radiation there is under the VanAllen belts and wether or not a human could survive this? I find it funny all this namecalling towards the hoax-believers when the large majority of believers (though I concider myself a part of this group) don't even understand the science behind the hoaxers claims.


Check out the above link.


I oftentimes see posts on ATS with people having extremely ridiculous theories or extremely flawed logic, but other than pointing out the flaws in their reasoning and logic, I would never resort to namecalling or insults. I've even seen the Mythbusters (Which I loved watching) call conspiracy theorists idiots, retarded, ignorant and many other names in the book. Why is this necessary?


Neither would I, and the reason why sometimes eludes me. Frustration? Anger? Egoism?


I suggest watching Jarrah White's videos, if only for his "Re-" videos on people quoting his stuff out of context or misinterpretating them. If anything, his videos showed me that not all moan hoax believers are "dumb" (He has a masters in Physics I believe) and more importantly that there are just as many "idiots" on the "believer"-side as there are on the hoax-side.


Jarrah White does not have a Masters in physics. His videos are not only rubbish, they are annoying. He spends most of his time calling people who point out his errors names.


Though from personal experience (browsing these forums), it seems that with the moon landing in particular, people immediatly resort to namecalling and flaming, no matter how critical (thought-through) the claims of hoaxers are. I've always wondered why this topic is concidered taboo by so many Americans. It might be a subconcious thing, years of indoctrination during the space-race years perhaps? I don't know...


No, it is because the Moon Hoaxers are assaulting the integrity of the people who actually accomplished something astonishing with their lives.


Just saying, is all this namecalling really necessary? Can't you simply say: "you're wrong", post your evidence why he's wrong and leave it at that? There's plenty of other conspiracies where people, after years, still ask the same questions and they don't get greeted with a propor "f*ck you, you're an idiot", rather than a frustrated, but kind: "This has been asked many times before, evidence is here...-link-"


I do my best to avoid making things personal, but sometimes some people work very hard to start a slanging match.


Why is the Moon landing such a sensitive, if not the most sensitive, subject?


Because the Moon Hoax is founded on the assumption that human being are stupid, gullible and lazy.
edit on 22-8-2012 by DJW001 because: Edit to correct formatting. --DJW001



posted on Aug, 22 2012 @ 10:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by GunzCoty
reply to post by GoodOlDave
 


#1 Black top is the road not the moon,(smh) and the road reflects light, just not enough to block out the sun's rays. I'm sure you could find out more about the manufacturer, remember I did not post a thread so I don't have to spend the time to look for this stuff to passifi anyone, and I don't know why you're talking about fox ,but okay.


I'm not going to waste my time argung over the energy absorption capabilities of roads, dude. We both know it's a strawman argument- you're trying to change the subject in the hopes you can win an argument about some other topic to make it look like you won the original argument by proxy. I posted that link from Fox because it referenced the points you were trying to make and it was still enough to show you were incorrect. Plus, it was the only information I could post that was even relevent to what you were saying. It's patently obvious you're not going to do it.

FYi I know who made the camera; Swedish manufacturer Hasselblad. I find it odd that in 2009 Hasselblad did the exact opposite of what you're claiming they did by inviting Buzz Aldrin to their factory to celebrate the 40 year anniversary of the moon landing. Would you mind terribly explaining that?

Moon camera manufacturer Hasselblad honors astronaut of Moon landing anniversary


The fact you think it's #2 (The government is reckless and has put many lives in danger testing our technology over heavy populated cities. ) negates your belief that the government and NASA would tell you anything.


What the heck does that have to do with the moon landing?


And if it was #2 then we need to put some of our government and NASA agents in prison for reckless endangerment, breach of national security, kidnapping (if abductions are true) animal cruelty (if cattle mutilations are true), and maybe murder for not using the technology to save lives they put in danger (war).


What the heck does that have to do with the moon landing?



posted on Aug, 22 2012 @ 12:43 PM
link   
reply to post by DJW001
 


I found that post really informative, and I'm glad atleast some people are capable of linking/posting straightforward information without resorting to namecalling.

This still doesn't anwser some of the other stuff Jarrah brings up (LRO image quality for example), but it does prove that he has been wrong in the past.



posted on Aug, 22 2012 @ 03:49 PM
link   
reply to post by GoodOlDave
 


#1 It's not a straw-man argument it's just fact.

#2


What the heck does that have to do with the moon landing?
It had to do with what we have been talking about, and ultimately the landing and my 1st post.




make it look like you won the original argument by proxy.


What argument? I'm sorry do you feel you need to win something?
Ok you win the internet!

Now from reading your last post I can see there is no need to discus this any further.
Your right I'm wrong you win and such, and yes if there was a big rock the size of japan heading to earth, or aliens hell bent on hurting/helping us, or anything like that, Obama with a NASA official would be on TV telling everyone because the government and NASA would never lie.



posted on Aug, 23 2012 @ 10:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by GunzCoty
reply to post by GoodOlDave
 


#1 It's not a straw-man argument it's just fact.


If you're seriously claiming it's a "fact" that there's no ambient light on the surface of the moon then you are being intellectually lazy. Jeez, dude, just go outside and flipping look at it.


Now from reading your last post I can see there is no need to discus this any further.
Your right I'm wrong you win and such, and yes if there was a big rock the size of japan heading to earth, or aliens hell bent on hurting/helping us, or anything like that, Obama with a NASA official would be on TV telling everyone because the government and NASA would never lie.


It's not a matter of who's right or who's wrong that I'm concerned about. My concern is over your conclusion that NASA is lying about the moon landing over forty years ago, which according to your own words is based entirely upon your seeing a mysterious object in the sky you couldnt recognize, assumptions shown to be untrue, and interviews with mystery people you saw on television you aren't able to identify. Not exactly the scientific method, is it?

As for whether or not NASA would announce if aliens were about to invade the Earth, I'd think that announcement would be up to the aliens, not NASA.



posted on Aug, 24 2012 @ 02:37 PM
link   
reply to post by theitalian
 

The Italian, get to read about Andrew Basiago...it is far more interesting and you will find out why!



posted on Aug, 24 2012 @ 02:50 PM
link   
reply to post by DJW001
 


Here is the thread I forgot: Enjoy!
www.huffingtonpost.com...



posted on Aug, 25 2012 @ 11:27 AM
link   
reply to post by NinpheaAurora
 


Sicuramente, questo libro e' così bravo. Yes ! This book is a winner !



posted on Aug, 26 2012 @ 10:34 AM
link   
reply to post by JJayUtahh
 
Ma guarda un po' che bella sorpresa...anche tu parli italiano? Ci mancava un po' di vivicità su questo ATS! Ma dimmi, vivi nello Utah per caso?



posted on Sep, 8 2012 @ 10:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by Rendier

(He has a masters in Physics I believe)


I had to respond to this because it made me laugh rather uncontrollably Jarrah White is an arts student (he's been at it for a while, may have graduated by now, not sure) whos first video was actually a class project (in which he used his teacher as an "expert in photography" which she herself admitted was just a part she played for his video, Jarrah's first lie) If you watch his videos, it becomes very obvious that Jarrah doesn't even have a high school level understanding of physics (a hiking boot in a living room into a simulant is the same as lunar conditions or the whole bit with walking by a flag in his bedroom being the same as on the moon) He's either a rather intelligent young man who feeds on the delusional moon hoax crowd to make money off his youtube vids (he's got millions of views so i'm sure that adds up) or he legitimately believes what he says and is just a poorly educated, incredibly ignorant but unwaveringly passionate "true believer".



posted on Sep, 9 2012 @ 02:14 PM
link   
This reply is for those with an open mind to believe what they want, and allow other's to believe in what they want without being ridiculed for it.

The image below is of the Lunar Rover during the Apollo 11 Moon Landing. Where are the Tyre Tracks, all I can see is a dozen footprints around the Rover.



I don't believe we have been to the moon, and it's my right to add to this debate without getting flamed for it. I believe Stanley Kubrick directed the Moon Landing, with parts of the Moon Landing being filmed at Langley Air Force Base in Virginia, parts were filmed in Arizona and part of it in Hawaii.

You can either believe we have NEVER been to the moon now or wait until the disclosure in 2026 as President Lyndon Johnson wanted it so those involved in the Apollo scam would be long dead and gone, and no one alive to blame.

Why have we never been back to the moon in over 40 years?

Just for good measure, a Freudian Slip during the Apollo 8 mission:

"The horizon here is very very stark, the sky is pitch black and the EARTH or the moon rather, excuse me, is quite light".
-Bill Anders, live Apollo 8 telecast from lunar orbit, 24 December 1968.

FACT: In a TV interview with journalist Sheena McDonald back in 1994, the NASA Administrator, Dan Golden, (alias Dan Dare), openly admitted that mankind cannot venture beyond Earth orbit, until they can overcome the dangers of cosmic radiation. He managed to say this without any mention of the Apollo missions 25 years before, which supposedly went 250,000 miles outside Earth orbit.

FACT: Buzz Aldrin believes he has suffered brain damage as a result of his trip to the Moon. He knows darned well that he never went anywhere near the Moon, and so could not have suffered brain damage in the way he alleges. Aldrin was the only Apollo astronaut who went public, and talked about the Moon landings during the 70’s and 80’s. The guilt, remorse, and stumbling over awkward questions put to him by the media, have put an intolerable strain on him. His psychological damage is the result of keeping it bottled up for 40 years, instead of getting it off his mind. In Aldrin’s book “Return to Earth”, he makes a remark that all 6 of them have been made to look fools. Make of this what you will.

Even top astronomer's around the globe with hundreds of years of experience between them in the field of space research etc. know the Moon Landing's were faked, but they can't say anything otherwise NASA would retract their privillege of getting hold of invaluable data beamed back by the Hubble Space Telescope, so they have to go along for the ride and support this absurd hoax.

I could go on and on with this stuff, but I won't.

"A wise man makes his own decisions. An ignorant man follows public opinion."

You decide.

For those who may be interested, read all this data: www.scribd.com...

Tino1985.
edit on 9/9/12 by Tino1985 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 9 2012 @ 02:28 PM
link   
First 3 minutes of Apollo 11 Press Conference. These three men actually look really scared for their lives, why? If you went to the moon and came back, wouldn't you be "Over the Moon" (Trust me, that pun was intended, just couldn't help myself).

Neil Armstrong either;

A: Knows he's straight out lying and cant live with himself.
B: Has had his life threatened.
C: Or is totally wiped out with CIA mind control.

I'll go with B.

This is a very strange public conference, make of it what you will:



If you don't hear from me, the CIA have caught up with me and I'm lying in a ditch in the middle of nowhere. If that's the case, I'll see you all on the dark side of the moon.

Tino1985.


jra

posted on Sep, 9 2012 @ 04:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by Tino1985
The image below is of the Lunar Rover during the Apollo 11 Moon Landing. Where are the Tyre Tracks, all I can see is a dozen footprints around the Rover.


Firstly, you mean Apollo 17. Apollo's 11 - 14 didn't have Rovers.

Secondly, you've basically answered your own question. The footprints have covered them up. We're looking at the back side of the rover, which is where they kept all there tools and equipment, so they'd walk around that area a lot, kicking up dust and covering up the tracks in that immediate area.

Take a look at this photo: AS17-146-22348

You can see the rear end of the rover just on the left edge of the photo, with footprints all around it, then a short distance further, where the astronauts didn't walk over, you can see the tire tracks from the Rover.


I don't believe we have been to the moon, and it's my right to add to this debate without getting flamed for it.


Of course it's your right to believe and say what you want without getting flamed for it, but be prepared to have your beliefs/opinions challenged.



posted on Sep, 9 2012 @ 07:04 PM
link   
reply to post by jra
 


Now I feel like a donkey for NOT doing my research on the Lunar Rover thinking it was part of the Apollo 11 "mission". What an arse!

Credit given where credit due jra, I won't argue as I believe in a hearty debate


However, to me it doesn't look like the footprints have covered the tracks but that's my belief and I'll stick with it. I never knew they kept their equiptment on the back either, but trust me I'm learning alot as I'm doing nothing but research on the moon landing's and anything else that I find interesting, including the Ancient Alien hypothesis, but thats another story.

I'm being honest about the fact I didn't click on about the Rover being a part of Apollo 17, so thanks for pointing that out to me jra, a costly mistake I shant make again, trust me


Just hope what I've produced here can inspire other's who feel the same as I do and shares the same hypothesis, though being in a Hoax: Debunked! thread, I feel I may be in the eagles nest and way out of my depth


Tino1985.



posted on Nov, 27 2012 @ 01:55 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Nov, 27 2012 @ 04:10 PM
link   
reply to post by WWu777
 



New SMOKING GUN I found in Apollo photo! You can clearly see a WHITE CLOTH CANVAS placed over the dirt!


Please post this incriminating photo. All the rest of your points have already been debunked countless times. Just read the "Young Aussie Genius" thread you started and abandoned.





new topics

top topics



 
10
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join