The MOON HOAX

If NASA faked the moon landings, does the agency have any credibility at all? Was the Space Shuttle program also a hoax? Is the International Space Station another one? Do not dismiss these hypotheses offhand. Check out our wider NASA research and make up your own mind about it all.

The MOON HOAX

Postby antipodean on October 30th, 2009, 9:56 am

ULTIMA1 @ Oct 30 2009, 08:35 AM wrote:
godzilla 4 Oct 30 2009, 08:30 AM wrote: I agree with Simon that debating this subject detracts from looking at the heaps of evidence (and common sense) that prove there were no manned moon flights 40 years ago. I think it is a great place to deposit those heaps for all to see. I vote we use this thread for research and discussion of the fakery of the events without getting bogged down with any posters who choose for whatever reason to argue that the moon missions were real events.


You do know that several other countries were involved in trackng and were watching the Apollo missions. If the moon landings were faked why didn't countries like Russia blow the whistle on us?

Are you trying to say that other countries were involved in a conspiracy with us?


Why blow the whistle when you can carry on getting a nice little earner through blackmail.

& if the Soviets accused NASA of faking the moon landings, they would have simply been accused of having sour grapes and spreading propaganda.
antipodean
Member
 
Posts: 573
Joined: October 20th, 2009, 2:53 am

Postby SmokingGunII on October 30th, 2009, 10:32 am

I had already pre-empted the "reflector" argument and should have done the same with the "Why didn't the Russians blow the whistle?" claim. This is all the believers have left to cling to.

Next, they'll be pointing out the golf ball in NASA's high resolution photos that Simon posted. :blink:
SmokingGunII
Member
 
Posts: 557
Joined: October 23rd, 2009, 10:34 am

Postby hoi.polloi on October 30th, 2009, 10:43 am

November 29,2009

Admin. message:

While editing this thread - shit happened. We managed to save most of the post onto this new MOON HOAX thread. Some of the first posts were lost.
hoi.polloi
Administrator
 
Posts: 4787
Joined: November 14th, 2010, 8:24 pm

Postby hoi.polloi on October 30th, 2009, 11:09 am

:D hahaha

Check out this Space Today Online guy's resume!

http://www.uncp.edu/home/acurtis/Course ... essor.html



Academic Specialities:

Mass Communications:

Mass media, print media, broadcast and electronic media, computer-mediated communication, international communications, allied media professions, communications technology
Journalism, newspaper, magazine, broadcast, books, photojournalism, publishing
Broadcasting, radio, television, videography
Public relations, media relations, publicity, advertising
Internet, Second Life, World Wide Web, social networks, global information networks
Multimedia production, CD-ROM, DVD, PowerPoint
New Media, 3D virtual reality worlds, social networks, machinima, blogs, wikis, digital storytelling, podcasts, social bookmarking, content sharing, tag clouds, YouTube, Flickr, Facebook, MySpace, Digg




(Machinima is a buzzword for recording ambient portions of video games in order to create movies. An example would be a recording of Super Mario jumping in place for hours ... sadly, that is a real example. Reminds me of when cheap-ass artists print their stuff on inkjet printers and needed a fancy word for it, so they called it "Gicl?e" lol :lol: )



Other fields of study:

Political science, social sciences
Astronomy, space science, history of science, physical sciences
Academic research methods, quantitative and qualitative research in social sciences, scholarly research via the Internet, World Wide Web, Second Life, podcasts, blogs, CD-ROM databases
Interpersonal communication, dyadic, small and large group, speech, interviewing, non verbal
Writing forms, essay, creative, business, Writing Across the Curriculum
Technology and society, technology in education, instructional technology


hoi.polloi
Administrator
 
Posts: 4787
Joined: November 14th, 2010, 8:24 pm

Postby ULTIMA1 on October 30th, 2009, 3:38 pm

SmokingGunII 4 Oct 30 2009, 10:32 AM wrote: I had already pre-empted the "reflector" argument and should have done the same with the "Why didn't the Russians blow the whistle?" claim. This is all the believers have left to cling to.

Next, they'll be pointing out the golf ball in NASA's high resolution photos that Simon posted. :blink:


Still waiting for your evidnece that debates the relfectors being placed on the moon by the Apollo missions.

Other links about the relfectors placed on the moon.

http://physics.nist.gov/News/Update/940718.html
One of the space program's longest-running experiments -- and one with a NIST connection -- celebrates its 25th anniversary this month by continuing to return data. During their pioneering moon landing on July 20, 1969, the Apollo 11 astronauts set up a laser reflector to make precise measurements of the distance between the Earth and moon. The still-operational experimental station reflects a powerful laser pulse aimed at it from telescopes on Earth. By measuring how long the pulse takes to return to Earth (the round trip takes about 2.5 seconds), scientists have defined the Earth-moon distance to within 2.5 centimeters (1 inch). The reflector was designed primarily by James Faller of the Joint Institute for Laboratory Astrophysics, operated cooperatively by NIST and the University of Colorado. It consists of a briefcase-sized aluminum panel studded with 100 corner reflectors (the corners of precision-ground glass cubes that have been cut off at 45 degree angles), each about 3.8 centimeters (1.5 inches) across. When a ray of light enters the cut-off surface, it is internally reflected from the three sides of the corner, exits the cut-off surface parallel to its entry path and then returns to its source. The same principle is used in bicycle reflectors. The Apollo 14 and 15 missions delivered two other Faller-designed reflectors, including one with 300 cube corners. All three reflectors are targeted almost nightly by scientists at observatories in Texas and France.

http://www.govexec.com/dailyfed/0302/031102nj1.htm
NIST laser reflectors left on the moon by Apollo missions have made it possible to determine the distance between the Earth and the moon to better than an inch.
ULTIMA1
 

Postby simonshack on October 30th, 2009, 3:41 pm

ULTIMA1 @ Oct 30 2009, 06:53 AM wrote:Two other arrays from the Soviet Union and France were delivered to the Moon aboard unmanned Lunakhod missions launched from the Soviet Union.

Because the Soviet Moon probe Lunakhod 2 was not manned, its retroreflector was not placed as carefully on the lunar surface as when the Apollo astronauts were able to aim their retroreflectors toward Earth. As a result, its bigger mirror reflects a weaker laser echo than the smaller Apollo reflectors.

Also if the moon landings were faked the Russians would have been the first to blow the whistls on us since they were watching everything we were doing.



"Lunakhod"? Was it not "Lunokhod" ? Oh...never mind.


This 8-wheeled Russian kettle speedily delivers some yummy goulash to your very doorstep ! :lol: :lol: :lol:

"the LUNOKHOD"

Image
http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap990109.html


Perhaps that's why the Russians hold their tongues tied about the moonlies, da?
They want to keep the lunar goulash-recipe for themselves !

And this is it's more impressively-named American counterpart :
"the LUNAR-LASER-RANGING-RETROREFLECTOR"

Image
Of course, it appears to be hovering over the lunar surface - only because everything is much lighter on the moon, stupid ! :angry:

In Italy, when you're about to tell a new joke, you say :
"La sai l'ULTIMA ? " (Have you heard the last one?) :D

I dearly hope our new member "ULTIMA1" has told his last joke... B)
http://www.septemberclues.info
simonshack
Administrator
 
Posts: 6362
Joined: October 18th, 2009, 9:09 pm
Location: italy

Postby ULTIMA1 on October 30th, 2009, 3:42 pm

Still waiting for your evidnece that debates the relfectors being placed on the moon by the Apollo missions.

Since the Russians were in a space race with us if the moons landing were faked they would have jumped on it, along with other countries that were watching.

Also all the Saturn V rockets used for the Apollo missions are all accounted for, if the moon landings were faked then there would be extra Saturn Vs left around.
ULTIMA1
 

Postby godzilla on October 30th, 2009, 3:55 pm

simonshack @ Oct 30 2009, 07:41 AM wrote:
ULTIMA1 4 Oct 30 2009, 06:53 AM wrote:Two other arrays from the Soviet Union and France were delivered to the Moon aboard unmanned Lunakhod missions launched from the Soviet Union.

Because the Soviet Moon probe Lunakhod 2 was not manned, its retroreflector was not placed as carefully on the lunar surface as when the Apollo astronauts were able to aim their retroreflectors toward Earth. As a result, its bigger mirror reflects a weaker laser echo than the smaller Apollo reflectors.

Also if the moon landings were faked the Russians would have been the first to blow the whistls on us since they were watching everything we were doing.



"Lunakhod"? Was it not "Lunokhod" ? Oh...never mind.


This 8-wheeled Russian kettle delivers some yummy goulash to your very doorstep ! :lol: :lol: :lol:

"the LUNOKHOD"
Image
http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap990109.html


Perhaps that's why the Russians hold their tongues tied about the moonlies, da?
They want to keep the lunar goulash-recipe for themselves !


In Italy, when you're about to tell a new joke, you say :
"La sai l'ULTIMA ? " (Have you heard the last one?) :D

I dearly hope our new member "ULTIMA1" has told his last joke... B)


After looking at that picture (and other Russian pics I've seen) I would say there's a good chance the Russian government was paid to be in on the scam.

Goulash! :lol:
"It's not a matter of what is true that counts but a matter of what is perceived to be true." - Henry Kissinger
godzilla
Member
 
Posts: 179
Joined: October 18th, 2009, 10:43 pm

Postby ozzybinoswald on October 30th, 2009, 3:57 pm

ULTIMA1 @ Oct 30 2009, 03:42 PM wrote: Still waiting for your evidnece that debates the relfectors being placed on the moon by the Apollo missions.

Since the Russians were in a space race with us if the moons landing were faked they would have jumped on it, along with other countries that were watching.

Also all the Saturn V rockets used for the Apollo missions are all accounted for, if the moon landings were faked then there would be extra Saturn Vs left around.


For somebody who joined seeking "911 truth" you seem to only want to be insistently annoying and in an unrelated arena.

Now, maybe you don't get this, but there is a level where "enemy" nation states are nothing but theater for the audience.

You were at 911movement weren't you?
ozzybinoswald
Member
 
Posts: 288
Joined: October 20th, 2009, 12:52 pm

Postby ULTIMA1 on October 30th, 2009, 4:00 pm

ozzybinoswald 4 Oct 30 2009, 03:57 PM wrote:
ULTIMA1 4 Oct 30 2009, 03:42 PM wrote: Still waiting for your evidnece that debates the relfectors being placed on the moon by the Apollo missions.

Since the Russians were in a space race with us if the moons landing were faked they would have jumped on it, along with other countries that were watching.

Also all the Saturn V rockets used for the Apollo missions are all accounted for, if the moon landings were faked then there would be extra Saturn Vs left around.


For somebody who joined seeking "911 truth" you seem to only want to be insistently annoying and in an unrelated arena.

Now, maybe you don't get this, but there is a level where "enemy" nation states are nothing but theater for the audience.

You were at 911movement weren't you?


Whats me being involved in 9/11 facts got to do with the moon landings facts?

I do reseasrch, send E-mails and file FOIA requests to find facts and evidence, being 9/11 or moon landings is no different.
ULTIMA1
 

Postby simonshack on October 30th, 2009, 4:22 pm

ULTIMA1 4 Oct 30 2009, 03:00 PM wrote:
I do reseasrch, send E-mails and file FOIA requests to find facts and evidence, being 9/11 or moon landings is no different.


Ok,

let's hear about them - on the appropriate threads.
Give up this one and show that you are no clown.

The moon hoax is serious matter now (since fake imagery is now also used for staging terror attacks) - and this thread is for intelligent discussion about it. What you've posted here so far is nothing else than the excruciatingly silly and worn-out set of pseudo-arguments and outright hogwash spouted by the longstanding horde of moon-landing gatekeepers.

Please imagine this forum as a spaceship in which all useless and decayed material must be jettisoned to prevent contamination.
http://www.septemberclues.info
simonshack
Administrator
 
Posts: 6362
Joined: October 18th, 2009, 9:09 pm
Location: italy

Postby brianv on October 30th, 2009, 5:09 pm

I'm trying not to waste time on the moonie nonsense - there are bigger fish to fry! Just remember that the "reflectors" argument just about falls apart when one learns that NASA (and Russia) were bouncing lasers off the surface of the moon in 1962 before any of the A-Pile-O crap - which all coincidentally happened during the HOAX-CREATED Vietnam war all under one Nixon!

Gulf of Tonkin *cough*

Oh yes - how come the moonies never mention the Lunar Rovers that were left behind on the moon or the 1960's Remote-Controlled Motorised Cameras in a Lead Boxes left there to film the Loony Landers taking off with studio precision?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Obd_jTO66-0

PS Why didnt the Russians "blow the whistle"?

Because they are guilty of the same!! Same as 9/11? Why didnt they blow the whistle there? Google Russian Apartment Block Bombings - which kicked off the Fake Chechen Al-Quida War!
brianv
Member
 
Posts: 3861
Joined: October 18th, 2009, 11:19 pm

Postby Thrifty on October 30th, 2009, 7:57 pm

hoi.polloi 4 Oct 19 2009, 11:59 AM wrote:Why does NASA have a fascination with the moon?



NASA first told the JFK administration back in the early 60's that they could do a major "first" to beat the Soviets after losing the race to put the first satellite and man in orbit. With unmanned craft now making little news and doing less to get those big checks written by Congress, more attention to the moon will get the more money.

hoi.polloi 4 Oct 19 2009, 11:59 AM wrote: Why was the latest "moon bombing" vessel named after a sheep herder?



Are you talking about the Centaur stage that crashed into the moon while being watched by the LCROSS? I was not aware that the centaur had anything to do with sheep herding.

hoi.polloi 4 Oct 19 2009, 11:59 AM wrote:Could it be that our engagement with the moon is little else but an enormous distraction while billions of taxpayer dollars go to the rich?



It seems that much of the dollars spent on the space program does serve to enrich the corporations that make the hardware. I would like to see it spent in better ways.
Thrifty
Member
 
Posts: 11
Joined: October 29th, 2009, 5:01 pm

Postby Thrifty on October 30th, 2009, 8:04 pm

D.Duck 4 Oct 19 2009, 02:09 PM wrote:Most people that understand the radiation in the "Van Allen Belt" knows that nobody went to the moon in 1969 and if you take a good look at the moon lander you will understand why.



I always chuckle when I think of the movie Capricorn 1. Using a barely shielded little thing like the LM or any craft like it is not going to be enough to get us to Mars or to anywhere in space that is months away. We do not even need solar flares to make the journey radiologically hazardous.

The VA belts are not even a big deal compared to the rest of the trip. Zipping through them at 25000 mph limits the dose, but then what next? No chemically powered rocket will make the trip to Mars short enough, and once they get there, the radiation does not cease. The only way to shield once the landing is made is to burrow in and let the Martian soil be the shield. The Martian atmosphere is too thin to effectively brake a landing space craft, but dense enough to make it burn up during entry. It doesn't do much for radiation protection either. The technological hurtles are astounding. While it would be interesting to go there, I for one would not pay for it.
Thrifty
Member
 
Posts: 11
Joined: October 29th, 2009, 5:01 pm

Postby Thrifty on October 30th, 2009, 8:09 pm

SimonJCP @ Oct 23 2009, 01:00 PM wrote: They had to distract everyone from their crusade in Asia.


Then they failed miserably. Had they succeeded, then the blank checks to NASA and their subcontractors would have continued to flow. The planned ambitions for an orbiting space station and lunar colony were much more grandiose than the itty bitty Skylab they eventually managed to sent into orbit with missing parts.
Thrifty
Member
 
Posts: 11
Joined: October 29th, 2009, 5:01 pm

Next

Return to Apollo, and more space hoaxes

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests