Apollo Fakery? What's your opinion?

page: 2
8
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join

posted on Oct, 22 2012 @ 12:27 PM
link   
Two Different perspectives, second picture is also closer, as others have also said. As for going to the Moon, we KNOW they went. We also know some publications had pictures manipulated, and that NASA also 'touched up' pictures. But if you know they went to the Moon, frames that have been manipulated are another issue, and they are not proof of anything either way.




posted on Oct, 22 2012 @ 01:41 PM
link   
reply to post by ignorant_ape
 


Do you understand the concept of common sense ?



posted on Oct, 22 2012 @ 02:05 PM
link   
reply to post by H1ght3chHippie
 


ys i do - ground pressure ?



posted on Oct, 22 2012 @ 02:25 PM
link   
Well believe whatever you want but here's the litmus test.....

FOLLOW THE MONEY.....

1 season of appollo costed 100 billion dollars! That's your tax payer money. That's money that could have gone to schools, bridges, road work, social programs, contruction programs, job creation, and stuff that would actually benefit you.

Instead here's what you get....

You get told that this 100 billion dollars which you could buy entire countries for less money, went to give you about 12 epesodes of a grainy low res moon landing video. And telling you that this is what you're investment got you.

Like to take your girl to a movie including food you pay 50 bucks tops! And the movie is in HD is in 3D and the special effects are out of this world. So of course in the 70's they could at least make a grainly low res crappy moon walk simulation.

They filmed that for say 10 million. That means the other amount, (remember 1 billion is 1000 million) so that leaves 99,990 million. Now of course they spent money on R&D and building the saturn 5 etc which you can't fake so that's another say 200 million. That leaves you with 99,790 million left which vanished into thin air.

I could just imagine these elitists sitting back in there posh country estate palace's, sitting back soaking in some sun, sipping brandy and smoking cig's with the boys, as they're served by some buttler or french maid, and them talking like....

"you know what I find utterly astonishing is how niave the American slave class happens to be. I mean we took in almost 100 billion from that moon landing production. And they bought it hook line and sinker. What's even more remarkable is that even with all the gapping flaws in the production they still wanted to believe it actually happened to the point that they could care less about the 100 billion that went missing. It's simply amazing how easily this class of people can be tricked."

Like follow the money, no one has been able to answer the question..... where did that money go? All they say is "oh ya there was a lot of companies and research involved". Get real. There was not!!!!....

The rockets were already built. They already had the capability to orbit people around the earth. They already had the launchers, the bases, and most of the research had already been done. They already had life support, obitors, re-entry capsuls. so they might have done a minor upgrade here and there, and they had to build the saturn 5. Big deal. That's not that expensive. It's like telling a home builder who already has built many homes, okay we just need a larger one. They already have all the factories, building methods, materials, and infrastructure. It's not like they built the saturn 5 from scratch and they had no infrastructure in place.

We know TPTB lie. They lie'd to get people into war many many times as war is also big business. But they wouldn't lie about the moon landing? Come on, get real. They pocketed the money, gave the people a fake low resolution video filmed in the same studio that stanley kurbrick used to film 2001 a space oddessy, and then after 1 season of it, they pulled the plug on the show, and cut up the saturn 5, and made all the instructions on how they did it top secret.

Oh ya...... the other thing I just wanted to mention about photo's is how the backdrop in every photo has the same cut off horizon point. Beyond that is the backdrop they want for the scene, in the foreground is the movie studio floor. YOu blend the two to form the whole fake ground and sky effect.

watch....



Look lets face it, we all have our points of view. We're just here to debat what we believe. No one can ever be 100% certain of what happend. All you can do is interpret the facts. And maybe one day the truth will come out beyond all this back and forth. My biggest challenge is I know TPTB are theives, liars, evil, and have proven that time and time again. But now we're to believe that they came threw for us? That they didn't fake this to steal the 100 billion it cost? You got to be kidding me. Just way too many obvious flaws in the filming and photos. I'm sorry but my wager is on the idea that it was a fake.

edit on 22-10-2012 by r2d246 because: (no reason given)
edit on 22-10-2012 by r2d246 because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 22 2012 @ 02:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by ColonelSF

Originally posted by ManFromEurope
Next: Moondust and traces in the dust.
The dust of the moon will be caused to raise by walking on it.
It will not be blown away, as there is no atmosphere, therefore no wind on the moon.
Therefore it will settle around the steps of the walking person, the radius of its settlement depending on the force with which is was raised. The heavier parts will stay closer to the footstep, the lighter particles will be thrown away for a greater distance, leaving a smudged area around each footstep.
It is of no doubt for me that these dust-particles could cover the tracks of the moon-rover.

Then what do you say about this image? Where are the tire marks of the rover on the surface? But the footprints around are clearly visible? The rover is much heavier and therefore all the more reason for its tracks to be clearly etched on the surface. (Or was the rover lowered by crane?
)


Hackaday.com


The fender repairs you can see indicates this as Apollo 17. Apollo 16 had similar damage but wasn't repaired.



posted on Oct, 22 2012 @ 02:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by smurfy

Originally posted by ColonelSF

Originally posted by ManFromEurope
Next: Moondust and traces in the dust.
The dust of the moon will be caused to raise by walking on it.
It will not be blown away, as there is no atmosphere, therefore no wind on the moon.
Therefore it will settle around the steps of the walking person, the radius of its settlement depending on the force with which is was raised. The heavier parts will stay closer to the footstep, the lighter particles will be thrown away for a greater distance, leaving a smudged area around each footstep.
It is of no doubt for me that these dust-particles could cover the tracks of the moon-rover.

Then what do you say about this image? Where are the tire marks of the rover on the surface? But the footprints around are clearly visible? The rover is much heavier and therefore all the more reason for its tracks to be clearly etched on the surface. (Or was the rover lowered by crane?
)


Hackaday.com


The fender repairs you can see indicates this as Apollo 17. Apollo 16 had similar damage but wasn't repaired.


It's pausable that some of the scenes where the rover is driving around might have been filmed in some outdoor location. Some kind of desert scape at night.

If anyone could figure out where they filmed scenes where the rover is driving around at night it's James Bond...

See look.....at night that would be the perfect movie set for outdoor scenes.



just for added fun...




posted on Oct, 22 2012 @ 02:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by r2d246


Look lets face it, we all have our points of view. We're just here to debat what we believe. No one can ever be 100% certain of what happend. All you can do is interpret the facts. And maybe one day the truth will come out beyond all this back and forth. My biggest challenge is I know TPTB are theives, liars, evil, and have proven that time and time again. But now we're to believe that they came threw for us? That they didn't fake this to steal the 100 billion it cost? You got to be kidding me. Just way too many obvious flaws in the filming and photos. I'm sorry but my wager is on the idea that it was a fake.

edit on 22-10-2012 by r2d246 because: (no reason given)
edit on 22-10-2012 by r2d246 because: (no reason given)



So why go to the trouble of building all those Saturn 5s, researching and developing all the technology, all the training, all the thousands of man hours, employing all the nearly half a million of people involved...just to fake it?
It doesn't add up, they had the tech, they had the people, why not go? If it was radiation stopping us then the hell with going, the Russians weren't going either, nobody was, the race was over. If there was nothing else stopping us then why not just do it?? Don't say they were afraid of losing people, because they weren't, the astronauts on Apollo 11 gave themselves a 50/50 chance of pulling it off, they were dedicated and they had balls, they also had the best minds in the world backing them up.

This whole mantra of "the governments are liars" is not a justification for them having faked the landings, it was an international effort, there was much more than just "the government" involved. I'll ask you again r2, where are the witnesses out of all the people of the many different countries involved? But I guess you'll just ignore that as usual, won't you?

I posted this before, and I will again because your argument does not make sense.



Most of the people I've encountered on here who believe the landings were faked have not studied Apollo from any perspective other than "it was all a lie". And you r2 are no different, my wager is on the idea that you don't have a clue what you're talking about


edit on 22-10-2012 by seabhac-rua because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 22 2012 @ 02:50 PM
link   


What strikes me as odd, given this particular photograph, is the fact that the boot imprints appear to be much deeper than the rover tracks. Especially because the rover drove with an astronaut on top ...


If the moon was a flat and controlled surface, we could probably take this into consideration.
But,
due to the irregular aspect of the moon surface, dust kicked up by astronauts by hopping, and the behavior of moon regolith in vacuum, etc... the deeper aspect of the bootprints is a moot point IMO.



posted on Oct, 22 2012 @ 03:19 PM
link   
reply to post by seabhac-rua
 


That video is so funny! LOL But okay on a serious note, why is it always and I mean ALWAYS LIKE THIS....

Anything they want to debunk they just make fun of. And if they want us to believe something is fake they show it in a movie as fiction that way if anyone presents it as fact later on, the person will remember it in the movie and think, "no I saw that in the movies which is all fake" and so they have trouble realizing that it could be based on fact. It happens all the time. It's getting tiring already.

I do see the point though, maybe it wouldn't cost that much more to go all the way.

Okay here's the story I heard..... They were trying to go. All systems were go! for a moon landing. But then as they developed more and more technology costs kept escalating. Not only that but they started facing insurmountable obsticles. Meanwhile they were approaching the 10 year deadline. So the story I heard was Nikson consulted with a bunch of people, who told him "look we can fake the landing part, everything else will appear as real". And he gave that the green light to save money, so they could pocket some of it.

He had the war going on, the economy was in termoil, the oil embargo was on, there were so many problems that the last thing they needed was to lose a crew of space heros in a botched attempted to actually get there. What they needed were hero's that made it back. That would inspire future generations. Which was the whole point of the show. So they couldn't take the risk of going, have having one micro metero puncture the ship and have it end in tragity, which also would end funding pouring into the project. They needed that money cuz half of it or more was likely going to black opps and offshore accounts.

We all know they hated Kevin Trudeau for exposing a lot of stuff against big pharam.... so here's what he got.....



Political stuff..



edit on 22-10-2012 by r2d246 because: (no reason given)
edit on 22-10-2012 by r2d246 because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 22 2012 @ 03:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by rollsthepaul
You will have your answer, when you view Jay Wiedner's documentary "Kubrick's Odyssey". It can be obtained as a torrent. No need to guess.


Its my personal belief that something fishy had been going on during the Apollo project....Too many people got lethal "accidents", too many questionable photographs and hardware design.

The first landings were during an administration with a president who did cheat and had low moral and ethic standards. Nixon would without reserve lie and manipulate the US population for personal gain and satisfaction.

The masonic rituals and freemason members attached to the Apollo project. And not to forget the NAZI factor.

And then there is Kubrick....I am still asking myself why this man has the appearance of telling a second, hidden story underneat the movies he directed:

- Did he do it to make people doubt certain official facts...just for the fun of it, to be original as an artist while in reality there is no alternative version.

- Or does his work look that way but did Kubrick never intensionally and consciously try to create that illusion..... these alleged hidden stories underneat are the figment of the imagination.

- Or is it all true, did Kubrick have a strong sense of justice. Did he suffer moral conflicts and did he need very much to clear his conscience of what he encountered during his contact with the "elite" of this world?

The latter does in my logic make the most sense....But if true it would raise many other questions...it would mean an uncertain voyage into a dark smelly rabbithole.




edit on 22/10/2012 by zatara because: (no reason given)
edit on 22/10/2012 by zatara because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 22 2012 @ 03:41 PM
link   
I don't think a broom was handy to clear those tracks.
Thus total fraud but did a darn good job of it.
The illuminati know the impossibility of the trip and that it would never be
undertaken again since they are in control of what goes down with governments
to do. The Illuminati have the Tesla space ships and the free energy to keep
things rolling along they was they want.
edit on 10/22/2012 by TeslaandLyne because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 22 2012 @ 04:11 PM
link   
reply to post by r2d246
 


Yeah, but think about it, they had all the gear, so why not just(as it says in the video) "just pop over to the moon".

Do you honestly think that an elaborate hoax was feasible(I know you do, but I have to ask anyway). I mean in order to believe in a hoax you have to give zero credibility to the hundreds of thousands of scientists involved, and yet have complete faith in the(alleged) crazy b*stard who thought up the insane idea of faking the landings. Also, given the 'special effects' etc of the period, a hoax should be way way more evident, looking back we should definitely be able to see more evidence of fakery, but we don't, every single piece of fake landing evidence I've seen can be debunked. The credit you give the supposed creators of the alleged hoax is disproportionate, and simply saying the 'TPTB' or whoever could pull a stunt like this off because "they are liars and thieves" is just plain dumb, sorry.

Add to all this the fact that there are hoax proponents out there who deliberately lie and alter images to further their agendas, a fact that people like you simply ignore. And my money is squarely on the truth, they landed, six times, and each of these six times men from earth walked, hopped and skipped on the the moon, and you are welcome to believe in a fantasy if you want, because you plainly don't believe in looking at facts.


edit on 22-10-2012 by seabhac-rua because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 22 2012 @ 06:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by seabhac-rua
reply to post by r2d246
 


And my money is squarely on the truth, they landed, six times, and each of these six times men from earth walked, hopped and skipped on the the moon, and you are welcome to believe in a fantasy if you want, because you plainly don't believe in looking at facts.


edit on 22-10-2012 by seabhac-rua because: (no reason given)


Of course they went to the Moon, the evidence is there for anyone who truly wants to look, it is not a belief system. All the rest, dodgy pictures on the Moon, undisclosed Moon adventures, stylised panoramas are all up for grabs for that era, and perhaps even more so now.



posted on Oct, 22 2012 @ 07:09 PM
link   
reply to post by seabhac-rua
 


You say "pop over" like it's a stroll in the park?

It's not like that. Okay let me ask you?

- How did they keep the film from frying when it went threw the van allen belt?
- How did the keep the film from getting ruined in the extreme tempuratures?
- How did they go to the bathroom during the journey?
- How did a 2k CPU provide all the computing power to allow the lunar modual to complete every function in had to operate and do it timely enough to ensure pinpoint accuracy.
- How did these flimsy space suits keep them from freezing or burning up?
- how did they get the reverse thrusters to land the lander everytime like it was nothing, where on earth it was a complete failure.
- When the lander blasted off the moon why isn't there any dust or hardly any, when a thurst that powerful should raise a massive debree cloud?
- Why would they spend the supposed 7 billion to build the saturn 5 only to use it for the 4 or so years and then scrap it? why not sell it to a developing nation and recoup some of the costs? Or rent it out?

I mean there's a million questions, I could be here all day figuring out more and more. But I think the point is why didn't they go back? so if they didn't and the program was completely scrapped. Not sold, not rented, no nothing. Just completely scrapped, why would they do that? Unless they have something to hide. I mean even a dude who buys an old RV uses it a few times, doesn't like the gas milage, he doesn't burn up his RV after. He would sell it, rent it, or park it. They didn't do any of these. They scrapped it. Makes no sense. But if it was a scam then it would make perfect sense. Try and hide the body. cold case files are hard to solve with no evidence left to work with.
-



posted on Oct, 22 2012 @ 07:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by zatara

Its my personal belief that something fishy had been going on during the Apollo project....Too many people got lethal "accidents", too many questionable photographs and hardware design.



Sources and evidence please. Who "got lethal accidents"? What hardware design do you question?




The first landings were during an administration with a president who did cheat and had low moral and ethic standards. Nixon would without reserve lie and manipulate the US population for personal gain and satisfaction.



The Apollo program was well underway before Nixon came into office, do you suggest he called up NASA one day and told them "hey stop what you're doing, we're gonna get Stanley Kubrick to fake it in a studio"?? Yeah right!




The masonic rituals and freemason members attached to the Apollo project. And not to forget the NAZI factor.



What masonic rituals? Von Braun was one of the many German scientists brought to the US after WW2 as part of Operation Paperclip. The Russians also captured their share of German scientists during the closing moments of the war, so how come they didn't fake a landing?




And then there is Kubrick....I am still asking myself why this man has the appearance of telling a second, hidden story underneat the movies he directed:



Show me one credible non-speculative piece of evidence that demonstrates how Kubrick had anything to do with Apollo?




The latter does in my logic make the most sense....But if true it would raise many other questions...it would mean an uncertain voyage into a dark smelly rabbithole.




It's my honest opinion that people who go for half of what you ascertain to be true have their heads firmly inserted into that "dark smelly rabbithole" that is attached to their rear end.



posted on Oct, 22 2012 @ 07:31 PM
link   
reply to post by r2d246
 


R2, do you honestly think I could be bothered giving you, what is it? 7 or 8 science lessons??

Dude seriously, every question you asked has a solid answer rooted in sound scientific fact.

And for chrissakes, I for one know you wouldn't believe any of it because you are a hoax believer my friend, no amount of reasonable discourse would convince you of anything other than the almighty TPTB, or whoever you worship, faked it.

I'm posting on here to provide an argumentative rebuttal to your, and others, stance that the landings were faked, I am not here to enlighten you to basic things you should know about science and spacetravel if you are going to engage in a debate about those subjects.

Do some research outside of the lunatic fringe buddy.

Regards seabhac.


edit on 22-10-2012 by seabhac-rua because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 22 2012 @ 07:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by r2d246
- How did they keep the film from frying when it went threw the van allen belt?
- How did the keep the film from getting ruined in the extreme tempuratures?
- How did they go to the bathroom during the journey?
- How did a 2k CPU provide all the computing power to allow the lunar modual to complete every function in had to operate and do it timely enough to ensure pinpoint accuracy.
- How did these flimsy space suits keep them from freezing or burning up?
- how did they get the reverse thrusters to land the lander everytime like it was nothing, where on earth it was a complete failure.
- When the lander blasted off the moon why isn't there any dust or hardly any, when a thurst that powerful should raise a massive debree cloud?


Why should it fry going through the Van Allen belt?
Why should the film have been ruined?
answers.yahoo.com...
en.wikipedia.org...
en.wikipedia.org...
easy
Try watching the video of the takeoff, there is your answer



posted on Oct, 22 2012 @ 07:39 PM
link   
reply to post by r2d246
 


I mean there's a million questions,
The ones you've asked are trivial and have been answered many times.
But why not exert some effort of your own and do some research before asking any more?
edit on 10/22/2012 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 22 2012 @ 07:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by Phage

But why not exert some effort of your own and do some research before asking any more?



Unfortunately the chance of that ever happening is highly unlikely.

I would predict rejoinders similar to "yeah but who wrote the history books" and "top scientists work for the TPTB anyway"....and other such nuggets of you know what.



posted on Oct, 22 2012 @ 08:11 PM
link   
reply to post by r2d246
 
- How did they keep the film from frying when it went threw the van allen belt?
- How did the keep the film from getting ruined in the extreme tempuratures?
- How did they go to the bathroom during the journey?
- How did a 2k CPU provide all the computing power to allow the lunar modual to complete every function in had to operate and do it timely enough to ensure pinpoint accuracy.
- How did these flimsy space suits keep them from freezing or burning up?
- how did they get the reverse thrusters to land the lander everytime like it was nothing, where on earth it was a complete failure.
- When the lander blasted off the moon why isn't there any dust or hardly any, when a thurst that powerful should raise a massive debree cloud?
- Why would they spend the supposed 7 billion to build the saturn 5 only to use it for the 4 or so years and then scrap it? why not sell it to a developing nation and recoup some of the costs? Or rent it out?
But I think the point is why didn't they go back?


These questions and more can be found answered on this ATS thread

Young Aussie genius whipping NASA in Moon Hoax Debate!

This is an excellent compilation of HBs vs Apollo apologists.





top topics
 
8
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join