Take Your Best Shot: The Moon Landings Were A HOAX!

page: 16
21
<< 13  14  15    17  18  19 >>

log in

join

posted on Dec, 25 2012 @ 06:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by hellobruce

Originally posted by kaptabs
Have you seen the footage from inside the craft, the astronauts having set up the camera against the inside glass of the window, showing the earth much smaller and far away. The astronauts essetially background noise giving a little commentary as they marvel at the scene, then the film rolls and they take away a piece if cardboard from the window showing the optical illuson as when the light fills the cabin, the astronauts are actually in and around, even infront if the camera, and with the cardboard gone the whole window comes into view and the earth fills the entire window?


No, care to show us this footage?


Yeah, is here.

10 minutes and quite commercial but it is what it is. It could be innocent in that it might be easier this way or wqhetver. You just reminded me with the ham radio thing as I was absolutely sure there knowledge of when that was OR there is a frame where the clock face can be seen which also has the date on but I may be wrong. Ill look further but analysis of the NASA fooage is here.




EDIT: Has this been debunked? Once again, the footage of the moon project that asks questions, really asks hard for me, Open Mind.

I could justify this if there was too much radiation as far as they claim to be out to take the footage, I would be agreeable to them perpetrating the ruse entirely to give more comfort to those invested so long as they definitely did touch down on the moon.

But if for example Radiation was issue enough to prompt the action here, one presumes the further you go the more radiation and the film in this particular camera would be too degraded, In turn does that mean the same for the Hasselblad, and other motion camera equipment also?

Would the cameras have worked? (Cannot Be Sure)

Would they have truly risked health? (Yesiirrree, Government would. Cold war time, all were expendble, still are)

Watch here @ 6.35 Armstrong tell the cameras they are 130,000 miles out when they are in Lower Earth Orbit.

Or, did they actually film this there so to guarantee footage in case they couldn't later, or indeed, knowing they couldn't.

All speculation of course!
edit on 25-12-2012 by kaptabs because: (no reason given)
edit on 25-12-2012 by kaptabs because: Spells, Lacking Perfection. OCD.




posted on Dec, 26 2012 @ 07:08 AM
link   
reply to post by kaptabs
 



Has this been debunked?


Yes, it has. Here is an excellent paper that addresses this claim and many similar issues:

www.scribd.com...



posted on Dec, 26 2012 @ 02:42 PM
link   
reply to post by kaptabs
 


The easiest way to debunk this is the simple fact that if they were in low earth orbit they'd be moving at around 25,000kph so you'd clearly be able to see the earth rotating beneath them, which you don't. Also, photographs taken at the same relative time show cloud formations that are identical to recorded meteorological records. As a last little bit of "evidence" (it's not evidence, just a personal rule) Everything Bart Sibrel says is a lie. Don't ever use the "evidence" of a man whose proof of a moon hoax is "God won't allow it".



posted on Dec, 27 2012 @ 02:37 AM
link   
reply to post by DJW001
 


not my best shot but think it was my friend' s. had a friend really into Lockerbie and Apollo and a few other "American problems" as she called them. she was and still is a math professor. we were at a party in Palo alto and some guys who were slamming her for being ignorant got all quiet when she seemed right there to prove to them Apollo 12 never got hit by lightning real , created or imagined because she had this folder with some papers in it showing how Tom Stafford contradicts himself when speaking on the topic. one minute he says the ship wasn't hit and later he said it was and then she had extensive weather reports to prove no lighting and on and on. but what was impressive was you never heard a peep from those guys again. after she showed and played the Stafford quotes they wanted no part any more. their reaction convinced me. that was maybe 10 years back.
edit on 27-12-2012 by gingerlee because: spellings



posted on Dec, 27 2012 @ 07:30 AM
link   
reply to post by gingerlee
 



not my best shot but think it was my friend' s. had a friend really into Lockerbie and Apollo and a few other "American problems" as she called them. she was and still is a math professor. we were at a party in Palo alto and some guys who were slamming her for being ignorant got all quiet when she seemed right there to prove to them Apollo 12 never got hit by lightning real , created or imagined because she had this folder with some papers in it showing how Tom Stafford contradicts himself when speaking on the topic. one minute he says the ship wasn't hit and later he said it was and then she had extensive weather reports to prove no lighting and on and on. but what was impressive was you never heard a peep from those guys again. after she showed and played the Stafford quotes they wanted no part any more. their reaction convinced me. that was maybe 10 years back.


Did your imaginary friend's "proof" go something like this?

www.abovetopsecret.com...

I suggest you continue to post gingerly, but never decisively, Patrick.



posted on Dec, 27 2012 @ 12:35 PM
link   
reply to post by DJW001
 


if your asking as to whether I think my friend posted here, the answer is a definite no. am I capable as she is? no. did she convince me Apollo was made up? yes in a way. I had a more organic view and approach. I thought it borderline plausible in a general scientific sense. she studied the thing like a kabbalah junkie zoharist nut with a Doctorate in math. she actually became well known to some degree locally here because did some very important work on the Lockerbie thing and that was how I met her many moons ago. your poster is infinitely more cynical than my friend and she used different materials. she used materials from the time of the launch newspaper interviews with Stafford and video clips of him explaining what happened in which he contradicted himself. when I wrote about her I was clear to give her the credit and emphasized the context. I say that because what really struck me so powerfully was the guys she was arguing with just stopped arguing like dead in their tracks. their ensuing silencer confirmed the truth of it all. to be honest I have never bothered to research Apollo like that on my own. waste of time. but I do believe it a hoax partly because people more capable than me have done lots of homework.



posted on Dec, 27 2012 @ 07:43 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Dec, 27 2012 @ 07:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by captainpudding
reply to post by kaptabs
 


The easiest way to debunk this is the simple fact that if they were in low earth orbit they'd be moving at around 25,000kph so you'd clearly be able to see the earth rotating beneath them, which you don't. Also, photographs taken at the same relative time show cloud formations that are identical to recorded meteorological records. As a last little bit of "evidence" (it's not evidence, just a personal rule) Everything Bart Sibrel says is a lie. Don't ever use the "evidence" of a man whose proof of a moon hoax is "God won't allow it".


Ok, I'll take your word on that. I don't know enough but I think I have heard that name before "Sibrel", and I can't get on board with people like that either.

"God wouldn't allow it" priceless. He doesn't allow an awful lot this God does he.

Seems his idea of a perfect world is close mindedness and survival of the fittest/richest just the way we find the Western World today funnily enough. It's almost as if the word of God was written as a perfect BluePrint for the globalists agenda? Fear authority, Feat the rule makers and be good boys and girls otherwise sooner or later I/we will make an example of you.

Seeing as God doesn't allow travel there did "Sibrel" have an opinion on why such things were created then? Presumably just for our convenience at night time I guess? Anyhow, now ill digress

If they were as far away from the earn as claimed 130000 miles I think Armstrong says (about half way?) any ideas why they needed to use the prop to make the earth appear so much smaller. seems like an pointless exercise to me ? Or have I misunderstood that also as I was allowing the comentary to lead me?
edit on 27-12-2012 by kaptabs because: Spelling



posted on Dec, 27 2012 @ 08:25 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Dec, 27 2012 @ 08:32 PM
link   
reply to post by kaptabs
 



If they were as far away from the earn as claimed 130000 miles I think Armstrong says (about half way?) any ideas why they needed to use the prop to make the earth appear so much smaller. seems like an pointless exercise to me ? Or have I misunderstood that also as I was allowing the comentary to lead me?


An excellent observation! Have a star. Sibrel counts on people being distracted by his narration and editing from asking themselves the pertinent questions. Here is a video dealing with the cardboard cutout allegation:




posted on Dec, 27 2012 @ 08:43 PM
link   
reply to post by DJW001
 


My opinion on this is that we went to the moon. The reason I have this opinion is becasue if we didn't go to the moon the russians would have known and told the entire world we we're full of $h*t.



posted on Dec, 27 2012 @ 08:45 PM
link   
Since the Moon Landing was during the Cold War and during the Space Race between the U.S. and Soviet Union...NASA was under great pressure to gain every possible Political Advantage of Propaganda such as pictures and video of the Moon bound U.S. Space Craft as it headed towards the Moon as well as away from it.

The Soviet Union watched and monitored the Apollo 11 Mission in an effort to gain any Political Propaganda advantage from any mistakes that the Americans might make. The Soviets tracked the Space Craft with their massive Radar Arrays and Radio Telescopes the entire way to the Moon and back.

Right here is one of the main proofs that the Mission was not a hoax. THERE IS NO WAY THE SOVIETS WOULD ALLOW A HOAX OF A MOON LANDING to be passed off as real if it were not.

The thousands of HAM Radio operators that tracked and triangulated the Space Crafts position also would never allow a hoax to exist.

The reality is that it was IMPOSSIBLE to fake the Lunar Landings given all the groups that carefully watched those events. It is also HARDER to fake the Lunar Landings than it would be to actually land on the Moon.

It is possible that in NASA's zeal to get the best pictures that some shots may have been doctored for Propaganda use...but to make the statement that the Landings were a Hoax is ridiculous.

Split Infinity



posted on Dec, 27 2012 @ 09:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by SplitInfinity

It is possible that in NASA's zeal to get the best pictures that some shots may have been doctored for Propaganda use...but to make the statement that the Landings were a Hoax is ridiculous.

Split Infinity


That was what I asked when I brought this point up originally.

When one first starts questioning things then its very easy to find reasons to justify that an event didn't happen or a claim of something true is actually a complete lie.

Owing that I am now wondering whether things wouldn't make more sense to go along with the said truth of something to see if it is just as easy to disprove/debunk all the pieces of "evidence" or "straws being clutched" so to speak that are presented to justify the potential of a conspiracy in the first place.

In this case I wondered if it might have been a case of something being done so suit the overall benefit, or indeed if this is a case where maybe even the very same but in addition to commentary with an agenda proves something completely in opposition with reality.

So, from this video, 5 years ago when truth as told by historical document equalled bad when placed against the mounds of evidence in favour of a conspiracy, many of which must equal good by proxy, I would have been quite comfortable being shot sighted enough to say this was proof positive of the moon landing not talking place after all look where they are, right by earth but they should be half way to the moon.

In reality I have no idea what the earth is supposed to look like, not would I back then have considered that there might be good reason to ensure such a shot of earth even if it meant being a little creative. It still asks the question of why they did feel the need to do this when they could have for a real shot according to the official story but then as I said above I'm not even sure what I am looking at as my mind is led into swing what the commentary wants me to see.

Above all, it is quite clear that this could never prove anything other than a video was shot of the earth at some point and it seems they wanted to make sure the shot looked exactly as originally planned, the reasons for which could be vast in number.

Anyway. Cool a discussion at last.



posted on Dec, 27 2012 @ 09:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by WhereIsReality
reply to post by DJW001
 


My opinion on this is that we went to the moon. The reason I have this opinion is becasue if we didn't go to the moon the russians would have known and told the entire world we we're full of $h*t.


Ah, but this leads you back to the biggest conspiracy.

That everything past, present and future is one big conspiracy.

I think the Russians were in on it brought to the states in the mid sixties in UFOs under the secret project

Code Name:

"PaperclipII, Forgo hassle use our spaceships Earth Morons"
edit on 27-12-2012 by kaptabs because: (no reason given)
edit on 27-12-2012 by kaptabs because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 27 2012 @ 09:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by DJW001
reply to post by kaptabs
 



If they were as far away from the earn as claimed 130000 miles I think Armstrong says (about half way?) any ideas why they needed to use the prop to make the earth appear so much smaller. seems like an pointless exercise to me ? Or have I misunderstood that also as I was allowing the comentary to lead me?


An excellent observation! Have a star. Sibrel counts on people being distracted by his narration and editing from asking themselves the pertinent questions. Here is a video dealing with the cardboard cutout allegation:



Well I guess there may be hope for my tiny little mind yet !




posted on Dec, 27 2012 @ 10:12 PM
link   
reply to post by kaptabs
 


One cannot underestimate the desire of NASA to get a spectacular shot for the public. I watched an interview of the Soviet Cosmonauts who unlike the rest of the USSR population were able to watch the Lunar Landing live on TV.

They described their feelings of pride when Armstrong stepped out onto the Lunar surface and how a few Cosmonauts had a tear in their eye even though it was an American who was walking on the Moon and not a Soviet.

When the Russian News Reporter asked them about this they said that this moment was for all Mankind and at the time it didn't matter that it was an American on the Moon. They also went on to say that they were embarrassed to hear people in this day and age think that the Lunar Landings were a hoax and that those people should be ashamed.

This was from former adversaries who realized just how big a moment in History this event was.

Split Infinity



posted on Dec, 27 2012 @ 10:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by SplitInfinityRight here is one of the main proofs that the Mission was not a hoax. THERE IS NO WAY THE SOVIETS WOULD ALLOW A HOAX OF A MOON LANDING to be passed off as real if it were not.


So, you are saying that you are an expert in Soviet Russia 1960-1980 time period and that you have some credible sources to back up what you just claimed?

I see Apollo cheerleaders use the "No Way the Soviets" argument but I haven't seen a single source. Ever.

It seems like to me that the "No Way the Soviets" argument is just a variation of the "No True Scotsmen". Isn't it?

What do you think?
edit on 12/27/2012 by SayonaraJupiter because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 27 2012 @ 11:14 PM
link   
reply to post by SayonaraJupiter
 


Are you kidding!? I am just...STUNNED at what you have just posted. I can't believe that you would even QUESTION my statement as it is common knowledge.

It is the equal to you asking me to prove there are 50 states in the United States.

Split Infinity



posted on Dec, 27 2012 @ 11:22 PM
link   
reply to post by SplitInfinity
 



I watched an interview of the Soviet Cosmonauts who unlike the rest of the USSR population were able to watch the Lunar Landing live on TV.


So let me get this straight....

You watched a video... of a Russian cosmonaut from 1969.... who watched an American astronaut walking on the moon.... and he believed that what he saw on the TV was for real. Who? Said what? Where did he say it? And when!

These are good concepts who, what, when, where and why that investigators should ask when they are checking out sources.

And that's why, when I am looking at the Apollo Mythology, I am always asking myself the question :
"Where was Richard Nixon and what was he doing?" Because that's my best shot.!





posted on Dec, 27 2012 @ 11:44 PM
link   
reply to post by SayonaraJupiter
 


Actually the video was on RT and I believe you can go on RT site and type in a search of that video as I watched it within the year. I was simply just remembering that video off the top of my head but if you really don't believe me...go right ahead and go to RT's website.

The way you dismiss the Moon Landing as you just stated...I am talking about a Cosmonaut in 69...it was this year...talking about watching a guy walk on the moon...is surreal to me. We are talking about the biggest event in Human History that is undeniable. The proof is also undeniable.

We bounce a laser off a mirror that the Apollo Astronauts left on the Lunar Surface. There are several Telescopes now other than the Hubble which can locate the various Lunar Lander Undercarriage Assemblies left on the Moon as well as the Lunar Rovers. You could take a trip to Hawaii and see them for yourself through one of the new scopes.

Split Infinity





new topics
 
21
<< 13  14  15    17  18  19 >>

log in

join