Why I believe the Moon landings may have been faked

Again, NASA's fatal mistake was to change speeds of the 'lunar' environment, after Apollo 11...

In hindsight, it was arrogance for them to think they'd get away with it, forever.


They were caught, without a doubt. No excuses hold up - not even close.

It is still denied.

It is simply ignored, as if the problem never existed, at all.


It does exist.

originally posted by: choos

originally posted by: turbonium1

Right, that's why wires pull you up 15 feet above the ground, hold you there, floating in mid-air, for 10 minutes, and gently set you down to ground again...it's called "inertia"!!

If that's not complete and utter BS, then nothing is!

I suggest you research how wires are used for these effects on humans, before you bleat any more of this gibberish.

looking at your comment you have no idea what inertia is.. you are describing low gravity not inertia

im talking about the changes in direction ie. left to right
maybe this explaination will help you:

Definition of INERTIA for Kids. 1. : a property of matter by which it remains at rest or in motion in the same straight line unless acted upon by some external force.

And what do you think wires would be, then??

Need I spell it out for you, or is it clear as day?

Yes, wires would be the 'external force'.

I've been telling you this, over and over again..but you are obviously living in denial.

a reply to: turbonium1

You actually believe these delusional fantasies, don't you?

As I see it, they had a problem with simulating a 1/6 g environment realistically.

They knew what 1/6 g looked like, from the 'Vomit Comet'.

But to simulate a 1/6 g environment over such a grand scale - was not so easy.

It didn't matter, though. Nobody knew what true 1/6 g actually looked like, at that time. Only NASA knew it.

So they could pretend what 1/6 g looked like, and they did. We didn't know any different!!

And most people still don't know any different, sadly...

True 1/6 g can now be seen in many online videos - it is nothing at all like the Apollo version is. As most people still believe it is.

originally posted by: AdmireTheDistance
a reply to: turbonium1

You actually believe these delusional fantasies, don't you?

No, I do not believe it the Apollo fantasy, in any way.

I'm only trying to explain to others why they shouldn't believe in that delusional fantasy.

a reply to: CB328

The excuse that moon rocks go missing because people are naturally thieves doesn't wash as an excuse on a site like ATS;
you'd think with their geological value they would at least have some minimal security or at least chain of custody logs audits etc.

Why is that do you think?

Why are we bombing the moon...they say its to find water vapour...however

rense.com...

Almost every book about our solar system claims it is nearly a perfect vacuum. So how does water behave when exposed to a reduced atmosphere? The speed it evaporates (sublimates) is in proportion to the amount of atmosphere present. If a window blows out of a plane at 50,000 ft. water and blood will boil. And that's not even in a very good vacuum.

And here's what it all comes down to ­ water disappears completely in a vacuum. Therefore, the idea of NASA finding water on the Moon by exploding a bomb in a vacuum on the Moon is utterly ridiculous. Heat from the bomb combined with the vacuum will flash-evaporate any trace water so fast it cannot not be measured. No two ton bomb has ever exploded without generating tremendous heat, and this heat will blind infrared sensors. Long before the sub-lunar surface cools off to take a reading, any water will be long gone. So the idea of using a bomb to find water is wrong on many levels.

a reply to: TheConstruKctionofLight

why havent we been back to the moon...heres an interesting take...

www.ufodigest.com...

On the way to the moon, Apollo 11, traveling at better than 25,000 mph, was passed by a craft that was going at an incredible speed. News of this slipped out, with NASA downplaying it and claiming that it was some sort of natural phenomenon. This wasn't an isolated event, but rather a warning that they shouldn't continue on with their mission. Their encounters were just beginning.

According to a former NASA employee Otto Binder, unnamed ham radio operators with their own VHF receiving facilities bypassed NASA's broadcasting outlets and picked up the following exchange:

NASA: Mission Control calling Apollo 11...

What's there?

Apollo11: These "Babies" are huge, Sir! Enormous!

OH MY GOD! You wouldn't believe it!

I'm telling you there are other spacecraft out there,

Lined up on the far side of the crater edge!

They're on the Moon watching us!

Were we warned off the moon as many claim? There is no conclusive proof either way. One thing that we do know for certain is that for 40 years NASA found the idea of returning to the moon a joke, clinging with an absolute dead grip the Space Shuttle. Almost overnight, NASA admitted that the shuttle was a mistake and stepped forth with a bold new plan and rocket to return us to the moon, which they can't build fast enough. Did someone invite us back?

a reply to: TheConstruKctionofLight

Most of the water found on the moon is locked away either in crater that don't receive light or inside rocks themselves.

What I suggest you do is not read any garbage published on rense.com but read the actual scientific papers.

Once again I have to point out that NASA is not the only organisation researching space, and that other nations' probes are looking at the moon and have found the chemical signatures of water.

Explosions are not the only method of looking for the chemical signatures of water, or any of the hydroxyl variants that count as water.

a reply to: TheConstruKctionofLight

This story is a lie.

It never happened.

It was made up.

Aliens have never warned us off or invited us back. The only reason is money.

originally posted by: turbonium1
As I see it, they had a problem with simulating a 1/6 g environment realistically.

They knew what 1/6 g looked like, from the 'Vomit Comet'.

But to simulate a 1/6 g environment over such a grand scale - was not so easy.

For 'not so easy' read a) impossible and b) wasn't done. They were on the moon. Prove they weren't instead of throwing out grandiose and false claims.

It didn't matter, though. Nobody knew what true 1/6 g actually looked like, at that time. Only NASA knew it.

You just said they knew. Apparently you know enough to claim that NASA's film and TV footage isn't right. Make your mind up.

So they could pretend what 1/6 g looked like, and they did. We didn't know any different!!

Apart from you, with your massive understanding of science, engineering and physics.

And most people still don't know any different, sadly...

True 1/6 g can now be seen in many online videos - it is nothing at all like the Apollo version is. As most people still believe it is.

Show us a video and explain to us exactly what is different.

I am off to see James Lovell this afternoon. He has been in orbit round the moon twice. Prove he didn't.

originally posted by: turbonium1
And what do you think wires would be, then??

Need I spell it out for you, or is it clear as day?

Yes, wires would be the 'external force'.

I've been telling you this, over and over again..but you are obviously living in denial.

it seems you get denser every year..

you are clueless to what i am hinting at.. i am not talking about them bouncing up and down..

i am talking about their change in directions.. when the video is sped up 2x they change directions stop and move too fast

the "wires/ropes" will not help them change direction it is only suspending a large portion of their mass and that is all.. the wires/ropes will infact make it more difficult for them to change direction of motion, to start moving forward and to stop moving all because of inertia.

a reply to: onebigmonkey
I am off to see James Lovell this afternoon.

Can you "C" if he knows Ralph Rene ?

Exhibit C - Bill Kaysing vs Jim Lovell

Exhibit C - Bill Kaysing vs Jim Lovell

originally posted by: Misinformation

Can you "C" if he knows Ralph Rene ?

Exhibit C - Bill Kaysing vs Jim Lovell

Exhibit C - Bill Kaysing vs Jim Lovell

the part i find hilarious is the part where Bill Kaysing says himself that he was inspired by a HEROIN ADDICT to make something up such as "we never went to the moon"

a reply to: choos
he was inspired by a HEROIN ADDICT

typical propagandist ploy , use substance abuse too discredit the opposition, and yet fail too correspondingly apply those standards ...

originally posted by: Misinformation

typical propagandist ploy , use substance abuse too discredit the opposition, and yet fail too correspondingly apply those standards ...

oh yea just ignore the part where the "grandfather of the moon hoax" was pretty much spoonfed the idea, by a drug addict no less, to make up something outrageous to say about the government, such as the moon landing hoax..

basically, Bill Kaysing has pretty much admitted to making it all up..

and also, what has those drunks astronauts got to do with anything??
and i dont know what a video of buzz aldrin has to do with what you are trying to say.
perhaps i should post a video of [insert moon hoax theorist name] and title it as [insert moon hoax theorists name] drunk while making video and maybe it will mean something to you?? (regardless of if he/she was drunk)

originally posted by: choos

you are clueless to what i am hinting at.. i am not talking about them bouncing up and down..

i am talking about their change in directions.. when the video is sped up 2x they change directions stop and move too fast

the "wires/ropes" will not help them change direction it is only suspending a large portion of their mass and that is all.. the wires/ropes will infact make it more difficult for them to change direction of motion, to start moving forward and to stop moving all because of inertia.

Talk about clueless!!

Have you ever seen Peter Pan performed live on stage, either in person, or in a video clip?

If not, I suggest you look at a clip of it...

They use wires/harnesses to 'fly' the actors above the stage.

Not just up/down in one spot. All across the stage, to and fro, in any direction, within a split second...


You think wires can't do anything but lift someone up and down, don't you?

originally posted by: onebigmonkey

For 'not so easy' read a) impossible and b) wasn't done. They were on the moon. Prove they weren't instead of throwing out grandiose and false claims.


Apart from you, with your massive understanding of science, engineering and physics.


Show us a video and explain to us exactly what is different.

I am off to see James Lovell this afternoon. He has been in orbit round the moon twice. Prove he didn't.

I've shown you the proof, but you choose to ignore it, as usual.

You've seen Apollo 11's speed is slower than the other Apollo missions, which is clearly impossible to do, if the astronauts were all moving around on the actual moon...

In the same environment, they would all be moving around at the SAME speed....correct?

Sure.

Why don't you address the problem, for once??

Here's a source which proves that wires/harnesses would, indeed, work for the Apollo 'moon walks' ...

en.wikipedia.org...


A change in direction, using a wires/harness system, just like I told you...

Seems no Apollo-ites want to argue on the speed change problem...

To move at two different speeds cannot be done, if they were actually on the moon....as we all know.

If the missions were filmed 'live', on the moon, as claimed, and transmitted to Earth, and was then shown 'live' on our TV sets, as claimed...the astronauts would all move/walk/etc. AT THE SAME SPEED!

If any mission(s) were not shown as actual speed, or if all missions were not shown at the actual speed, it would have been mentioned, at the time. It was never mentioned, at the time, or in 45+ years since then...

They DOCUMENTED all the Apollo 'lunar surface' footage as genuine, as correct. The entire process was documented, from start to finish. The cameras used were all known, film speeds were all known, transmission processes were all known, and so forth...

They specifically mentioned one of the Apollo 11 cameras as being a 'slow-scan' camera, within their documents.


It is beyond any excuses, and you know it..