Why the Moon Landings Could Have Never EVER Been Faked: The Definitive Proof

reply to post by MrN9k

IMO if this was done the vast majority of those who doubt the moon landings would be convinced.

How is it that you can speak for the "vast majority" of the 5% of Americans who are "unsure?" How many of them do you suppose would understand the nature of the experiment?

reply to post by DJW001


I think that there are many people who are far more intelligent than both you and I who question the moon landings.

Your suggesting that all "hoaxers" are the same, stupid and ignorant of science is to be honest a little offensive. There are many intelligent people who question the moon landings, and many of those have done vast amounts of research into this.

Suggesting that it's not possible to convince people is also ridiculous. Give people proof and they will believe. Many people do not believe now because all the "proof" can be debunked. I will spare you the debunking of your points... I'm sure you know them already.

However the experiment I'm suggesting could not be debunked.

Actually you would only have to convince those who are pushing the "moon hoax agenda". If you did that their followers would follow.

What would happen if Richard Hoagland (and other similar "hoaxers") said "Um. Sorry guys, I went to NASA and they proved to me that we went to the moon with this experiment..."

I think that would help things... I wonder why it has never happened...

reply to post by MrN9k

What would happen if Richard Hoagland (and other similar "hoaxers") said "Um. Sorry guys, I went to NASA and they proved to me that we went to the moon with this experiment..."

Actually, Hoagland says the Moon landings occurred. He just claims that the astronauts were mind wiped to forget what they saw there. Not a lot of people pay much attention to him anymore though.

reply to post by Phage


Arguing the toss about exactly what Hoagland believes means nothing and is pointless.

I think you understand my point, and why I made it.

I'm glad that you accept and agree with everything else I have said.

reply to post by MrN9k

Arguing the toss about exactly what Hoagland believes means nothing and is pointless.

You didn't seem to think so when you posted what you did. If what Hoagland believes is pointless why bring it up? Oh, I get it. When shown that your argument was wrong, you reject it and quickly change the subject.

I'm glad that you accept and agree with everything else I have said.

I don't.
I don't think there are many very intelligent people who genuinely question the Moon landings.

Many people do not believe now because all the "proof" can be debunked.

Only by displaying ignorance about the missions.

reply to post by Phage


The discussion seemed to be going very well about the one experiment, the swinging ribbon (and I thought that was an accident - or portrayed as an accident to write in a neutral voice - and not an actual experiment). MrN9k, a new member, correctly points out that this one experiment alone could blow a hole in the "hoaxers" arguments, so it would be worth it to him and others to see the experiment performed. NASA may already have tested this, nobody here knows for sure. MrN9k also points out that there is a higher percentage of young people who disbelieve the moon trips (I think that's because of general cynicism in government, in trusting authority, and in actually seeing many things that society thought was "one way" turn out to be entirely the "other way"). A good discussion going on here, maybe you can discuss the proposed experiment itself, which would add a lot to the direction this thread has taken. Thanks.

EDIT: Hoagland. Yeah, Hoagland knows the U.S. had moon missions, he was working with NASA at the time. What he goes on about is that he believes that he has proof that there are ancient or recent or alien structures on the moon, and that NASA won't go back because they are either covering it up or are in cohoots with the aliens running the place. He is very entertaining.

reply to post by Aleister

I love experiments.
Go for it.

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by Aleister

 

I love experiments.
Go for it.

Well, I'm not the one interested in doing it, I've just enjoyed the discussion and realize from experience that MrN9k would be a valuable contributor here. You've likely seen the video being discussed, and why duplicating it or not duplicating it in the conditions described in this thread would be a punch in the gut for the hoaxers overall arguments. For that reason it seems to be a worthwhile discussion and if you'd like to give a good analysis of it that would be fun. And if you think it may be a way to go, please offer a suggestion of who to email at NASA to get the best answer about MrN9k's idea.

reply to post by Aleister

I don't know anything about the structure of NASA or who to contact for such a project.

Personally, I'm completely satisfied that the Moon landings occurred as presented. This is based partly on the fact that I watched a lot of it happen but mostly on the research that I've done since. I should point out that most of that research was spurred by the hoax claims. I found that each one of them has been completely resolvable. I have also learned a lot of really interesting stuff (unrelated to the hoax claims) about the program that I had been unaware of before.

Bottom line, I don't really care that people think it didn't happen but I like following the arguments. Unfortunately, I haven't see a new argument in some time.

reply to post by Phage

Arguing the toss about exactly what Hoagland believes means nothing and is pointless.
You didn't seem to think so when you posted what you did. If what Hoagland believes is pointless why bring it up? Oh, I get it. When shown that your argument was wrong, you reject it and quickly change the subject.

You know you are onto something when people stop attacking what you are saying and start trying to attack the individual delivering the message...

I did not say that "what Hoagland believes is pointless". Please try to understand my point and why I mentioned him. He has influence in the conspiracy community and he and others like him could change the opinions of others who hold similar views.

I'm glad that you accept and agree with everything else I have said.
I don't.
I don't think there are many very intelligent people who genuinely question the Moon landings.

Then you are wrong. Check the figures. Depending on who you ask the figures vary but whichever data you use the fact is that a significant number of the population question the moon landings. They are not all just a small bunch of idiots. If they were, this forum would not be here.

Try en.wikipedia.org... for more information.

When you have read that please stop suggesting that only a very small number of people question the moon landings.

Many people do not believe now because all the "proof" can be debunked.
Only by displaying ignorance about the missions.

No comment... That's your opinion and you are entitled to it. I spent years looking at this, and I hold a different view to you. I guess that makes me an idiot also...
...
Again... My point is simple. There is a simple experiment which could be performed to test if the NASA pendulum experiment was done on the moon or not... So far as I know it's not been done. I wonder why no one has...Perhaps they have...

reply to post by MrN9k

They are not all just a small bunch of idiots. If they were, this forum would not be here.

I'm not sure about your last statement but I didn't say it was a small bunch of idiots.

When you have read that please stop suggesting that only a very small number of people question the moon landings.

I didn't say that.

I guess that makes me an idiot also...
...

I didn't say that.

reply to post by Phage


Great. I'm glad that you agree that there are a large number of intelligent people who question the moon landings.
...
I have no wish to get into further he said/she said nonsense. That appear pointless.

My point has been made. All the best.

reply to post by MrN9k

However the experiment I'm suggesting could not be debunked.

You want proof of 1/6 G in a vacuum? How about this:

reply to post by captainpudding

the videos are posted right throughout this thread, the first page even has a couple. in one of them there is no shadow, in a different one there is at least one shadow from a person in the footage. i wouldnt call it an anomaly, just something i found it weird, and wanted to know why. if nobody can explain why, no big deal

reply to post by DJW001


That's a good video. Much better than the one which suggested that doing the pendulum experiment on the earth when not in a vacuum had any relevance whatsoever.

I agree that when the speed is adjusted to %41 (or whatever it was) the movements of the astronauts do not look "right". To me this is the best evidence I have seen, however I'm going to need more than this. To me the way the guys move on the moon at "normal" speed also looks "wrong", so I'm not sure. I can't make a judgement based on that. There are so many other outstanding questions (which I will not bore you lot with I'm sure you know em all by now) that I'm going to reserve judgement for a while longer.

I'm hoping that someone will suggest who I should e-mail at NASA about the experiment I suggested. Sounds like fun that...

Originally posted by Aleister
reply to post by Phage

 

EDIT: Hoagland. Yeah, Hoagland knows the U.S. had moon missions, he was working with NASA at the time.

Just want to point out that Hoagland never worked with NASA, in the sense that he makes it out to be. What happened was that at the time NASA arranged lectures for its employees, and at a suggestion from one of the employees Hoagland was invited to deliver a couple of talks. Hoagland has been riding this little credential like a high horse since then, saying that he worked for NASA.

Hoagland is a self-appointed expert on everything, but he has no scientific background whatsoever (working as a space museum curator doesn't count). He wouldn't be considered with any seriousness by a space agency.

Originally posted by MrN9k
reply to post by Phage

 

Great. I'm glad that you agree that there are a large number of intelligent people who question the moon landings

It's remarkable how you can steer the conversation your way by getting people in defensive mode and then turning their arguments on their head. Debating with moon hoaxers is really an awkward business.

Originally posted by MrN9k
reply to post by DJW001

 

To me the way the guys move on the moon at "normal" speed also looks "wrong", so I'm not sure. I can't make a judgement based on that. There are so many other outstanding questions (which I will not bore you lot with I'm sure you know em all by now) that I'm going to reserve judgement for a while longer.

You will reserve your judgement for as long as you live. One experiment by NASA will not persuade the hoax believers or doubters. There will always be something else that will need to be proven or debunked, always something else that looks "wrong". It's a merry-go-round.

It's probably been said a couple (dozen) times on this thread but I'll add my two cents to at least some of the pages of nonsense I saw mixed with decent points or even more to look into....maybe.

Some people talk about "faking it" or 'Moon Landing', and don't talk as it it was plural. It wouldn't have been faking one thing, it would have been faking several trips, in their entirety. Assuming that could be the case? The world saw the Saturn V's go up...and crews of aircraft carriers saw them come back from landing in the ocean. They went somewhere in the intervening time while Russia, at least, tracked their progress and activity with their own equipment. There would have been so much to fake and get right to have never been busted in a concrete way, actually GOING there as advertised becomes the easier of the things to have done.

They had hidden tech back then...but not wizardry like digital editing for computers capable of doing it. This was in the day where the real fast computers still measured by the % of rooms they took up. Terrain following radar and autopilot was the type of cutting edge thing in the 60's, as I understand it.

Oh well... I'm a believer because it happened. Kinda like I believe the Ocean is wet but don't need thrown into it for the point to be accepted on some degree of faith.

reply to post by wildespace


Wow. You really don't like Hoagland. I'm not his greatest fan, but his stuff about 19.5 is interesting. I also think that many people who might be labelled "hoaxers" claim that Hoagland is a shill putting out dis-info.. He certainly is an interesting character. I watched an Art Bell show once which he did and he completely stole all the material in it from Jordan Maxwell. If you know his talk on the Masons, the Nazis, and the magicians.... He stole all that from Jordan Maxwell... Jordan told him it in confidence and then Hoagland went on live radio and blurted it all out to make himself look good...

So... No need to attack Hoagland. Don't worry. As Jordan would say. I have done my homework. Well some of it anyway.

Hoagland is however IMO one of the most, if not the most influential person out there who is currently questioning the moon landings. That is why I mentioned him.

Originally posted by Kryscent
in one of them there is no shadow, in a different one there is at least one shadow from a person in the footage. i wouldnt call it an anomaly, just something i found it weird, and wanted to know why.

I haven't looked at the videos (i'm not sure which ones you're referring to exactly), but it's likely to do with the angle of the Sun relative to the camera.

If you have the Sun shining behind the camera. All the shadows will be pointed away from the camera and more likely to be hidden from the camera's perspective. Where as if the Sun is in front or shining from the side. The shadows will be much more visible.

That's the only explanation I can think of.