Poll: Was the Moon Landing a Hoax?

[Moretorque]

Maybe someone can post a poll about this. I think the idea what the moon landing was a hoax is probably the craziest idea I have seen posted on this site. Anyway, anyone sane here may enjoy this video about how our space program has progressed.

You'll believe anything, you believe most of the white convert Jews are genetically of Gods tribe don't you?

[Moretorque]

Here's a video you may have missed, wherein Neil Armstrong makes things as clear as he can

Neil Armstrong had never looked comfortable, ever since the Apollo 11 mission. And no, I don't believe that it's just pure shyness.

Pretty much, anyone I knew, if he'd landed on the moon, would feel relaxed, at least relying the stories, w/o fanfare or excitement, esp if one's not a drama queen. I mean cmon, it's a significant achievement, not a Scarlett Letter to hide from.

Neil, on the other hand, looks like a kid, who'd never been taught to lie, spew lies for much of his adult life for the sake of Natl Security. Seriously, he's probably the most depressed, national hero out there.

Something about Neil in all the interviews never looked right to me either, I have never really investigated this because to me it is small potatoes to what they are doing now as far as lies go and how they will affect the future of humanity..

It would not surprise me in the least if it was faked. I still love a Saturn V launch however.

[Winston]

[Winston]

Maybe someone can post a poll about this. I think the idea what the moon landing was a hoax is probably the craziest idea I have seen posted on this site. Anyway, anyone sane here may enjoy this video about how our space program has progressed.

You mean start a poll in this thread to see how many here believe the Apollo moon landing was a hoax? Sure ok. We can try that for fun.

The space program has not progressed. We cannot get to the moon today because they cannot pull the same hoax again. It would be too easy to detect it with modern technology. If it had progressed, then we'd have a space station on the moon by now and daily flights there. The moon missions are the only time in recorded history that technology has gone backwards.

Btw, if you think it's a crazy idea that the moon landing was a hoax, check this out.

On my last show on The New American Dream Radio Show, I mentioned the white carpet layer behind the astronaut in a famous Apollo photo. If you want to see it here is the link to it:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/c ... 001114.jpg

Double click on the image to zoom in. Then look behind him. You will see a big white cloth fabric overlayed on dirt. You can even see the creases between the cloth and the dirt.

Here is a zoom up of the white cloth layer over the dirt.



Also, above that cloth, you will see a distinctive line between the foreground and the background. That line is indicative that the background is a fake WALL, not a real background. Let me know if you are able to see it.

Moreover, if you look to the left of the astronaut (from your vantage point), you will see tire tracks from the lunar rover leading up to the white cloth layer and disappearing under the cloth.

Thus, those are three highly suspicious things indicating that this was a studio shot.

[Winston]

Fschmidt and everyone:

Ok I turned this thread into a poll about the moon landing hoax. Cast your vote above at the top!

[Winston]

Winston, I concur about the Moon conspiracy and the possibility that the highly decorated veteran pilot Gus Grissom was assassinated because he was going to go public back in '67.

On the other hand, a spacecraft on the way to the Moon, assuming it can hit 25K miles/hr to escape the Earth's gravitational force, does not need its over-thrusters running continuously to reach the Moon. That part is Newton's first law... an object in motion, stays in motion, unless acted upon by another force.

The problem, however, is that this object then slows down, forms an orbit around the Moon, and then sends off a lander, which lands perfectly. And then, the two ships re-attach, and then, break off from the Moon's escape velocity, to get back to Earth. That's where I have serious doubts that such a logistical feat could be pulled off by simple thrusters in an early computer era machinery without some defect, misfiring, or even a miscalculation somewhere, without a supercomputer on Earth verifying all the parameters. Realize, robotic satellites to the Moon have not returned to Earth. If the two crafts (orbiter and lander), missed by a simple fraction of a foot, the lander and the orbiter may have collided and the mission would have been over right there and then. Thus, I'm skeptical of the mission.

And yes, the radiation belts and all is another issue which has never been addressed properly.

2 questions:

(1) Is it possible that manned moon landings WOULD have been feasible, if we had just taken our time to overcome the challenges? I.e. is it possible that we resorted to fakery only because we were in a hurry?

(2) Obviously the "moon rocks" collected by U.S, are fake (and everyone in the elite knows that, otherwise they would be worth more than diamonds, coveted by oligarchs everywhere). But I read that the Russians DID succeed in returning some moon rocks to earth on an early unmanned mision. What do you think?

Well here's the funny thing about the moon rocks. At first, scientists said that they are of a different composition than that of the Earth. But then they changed their mind and said that they are the same composition as of the Earth. They've used that argument to back up the "whack theory" that the moon came out of the Earth when a giant planetary body collided with the Earth.

During my road trip, I went to the Space Museum at Alamogordo, New Mexico. They had a moon rock on display there in a glass case. The guy on the floor told me that the moon rock has the same composition as the Earth. So I guess that's their official position now, which means that they are not proof of the moon landings after all.

[Jester]

Well here's the funny thing about the moon rocks. At first, scientists said that they are of a different composition than that of the Earth. But then they changed their mind and said that they are the same composition as of the Earth. They've used that argument to back up the "whack theory" that the moon came out of the Earth when a giant planetary body collided with the Earth.

Yeah, sounds right, when a rock hits a ball of slush, the slush usually forms two perfect spheres.

Actually, "whack" theory is a good name for it.

During my road trip, I went to the Space Museum at Alamogordo, New Mexico. They had a moon rock on display there in a glass case...

The guy on the floor...

No heavy security like at Van Cleef and Arpel's in New York? It's just there in a glass case? Hmmm. If that's a piece of the MOON isn't it rarer than any diamond? Why hasn't there been a "heist"?

...told me that the moon rock has the same composition as the Earth. So I guess that's their official position now, which means that they are not proof of the moon landings after all.

Kind of like, they're lettin us down easy....

[Jester]

Neil, on the other hand, looks like a kid, who'd never been taught to lie, spew lies for much of his adult life for the sake of Natl Security. Seriously, he's probably the most depressed, national hero out there.

I guess this is the big sad lesson from our hollow victory in the Cold War: if you adopt the means of the enemy (in this case lying), you too lose your soul.

[Winston]

Well here's the funny thing about the moon rocks. At first, scientists said that they are of a different composition than that of the Earth. But then they changed their mind and said that they are the same composition as of the Earth. They've used that argument to back up the "whack theory" that the moon came out of the Earth when a giant planetary body collided with the Earth.

Yeah, sounds right, when a rock hits a ball of slush, the slush usually forms two perfect spheres.

Actually, "whack" theory is a good name for it.

During my road trip, I went to the Space Museum at Alamogordo, New Mexico. They had a moon rock on display there in a glass case...

The guy on the floor...

No heavy security like at Van Cleef and Arpel's in New York? It's just there in a glass case? Hmmm. If that's a piece of the MOON isn't it rarer than any diamond? Why hasn't there been a "heist"?

...told me that the moon rock has the same composition as the Earth. So I guess that's their official position now, which means that they are not proof of the moon landings after all.

Kind of like, they're lettin us down easy....

Yeah I don't know how they would explain that. I guess they would say that when a planet smashes into two parts, as they orbit the sun, they eventually become spheres? lol. They can invent any reason for anything.

That alleged moon rock was not just encased in ordinary glass. The glass was thick and had many gadgets around it, and was probably protected by an alarm system. There was a staff member there to watch the area too. I have some photos of it if you want to see it. It just looks like a little black piece of rock.

Jester, did you see the smoking gun photo I posted earlier? And the zoom up of it? Can you see the two distinct lines I was talking about? One showed the white carpet layer placed over the dirt. The line above it showed the point at which the fake backdrop intersected with the foreground. Both lines are distinct and visible. Do you see them? Scroll up.

[Zionosis]

A lot of the conspiracy stuff has been discredited if you have a science education.
For example the Camera's didn't pick up the stars because of the bright lunar surface, If you understand how camera's work you would know this.

The different direction shadows is also not strange if you understand how perspective works.

The cross hairs on the pictures were not behind the objects but just not visible because of the extreme light of the object that was in the picture.

The non thermal protection in the suits is not needed. You need to remember how conduction works in science. A human would not actually freeze in a vacuum since thermal energy needs molecules to move.
This is why vacuum flasks exist and are the best insulators.


But if you really think about it and if it was a hoax. These things that are discredited easily could be in fact conspiracy stuff that the government created to just discredit the whole skepticism about it being real.


That being said there are a few things that just seem a bit fishy to me. There is a picture of a day where they are meant to be in a totally different site but you can see the land is actually the same.

There are also a few other things that seem a bit fishy.
I am not entirely sure what to make of it.

[Paloaltoguy]

Why was my follow up post deleted? So much for freethought without politically correct censorship lol

[fschmidt]

Why was my follow up post deleted? So much for freethought without politically correct censorship lol

It wasn't deleted. It's here:

viewtopic.php?t=23797

[PeterAndrewNolan]

Okay, all I do is ask them why we haven't been to the moon in 40 years and the standard reply is pretty much been there done that. This just baffles me that a lot of people think like this. Do yall share the same opinion?

What is passed off as the moon landings are mostly fake. The Illuminati have the ability to go to the moon in other craft other than that which was depicted. The whole Apollo program seems to have been a psyop to create a false "competition" during the "cold war"....just keep everyone working to defeat the "enemy".

[PeterAndrewNolan]

A lot of the conspiracy stuff has been discredited if you have a science education.
For example the Camera's didn't pick up the stars because of the bright lunar surface, If you understand how camera's work you would know this.

The different direction shadows is also not strange if you understand how perspective works.

The cross hairs on the pictures were not behind the objects but just not visible because of the extreme light of the object that was in the picture.

The non thermal protection in the suits is not needed. You need to remember how conduction works in science. A human would not actually freeze in a vacuum since thermal energy needs molecules to move.
This is why vacuum flasks exist and are the best insulators.


But if you really think about it and if it was a hoax. These things that are discredited easily could be in fact conspiracy stuff that the government created to just discredit the whole skepticism about it being real.


That being said there are a few things that just seem a bit fishy to me. There is a picture of a day where they are meant to be in a totally different site but you can see the land is actually the same.

There are also a few other things that seem a bit fishy.
I am not entirely sure what to make of it.

Oh come on...it takes less than 30 minutes to figure out it was at least in PART a hoax. You just have to look at the photographs that were published by NASA themselves and know what you are looking for.

[Winston]

Here William Cooper exposes the moon hoax and explains in detail that if the astronauts were really on the moon, they would have been able to jump a lot higher than one foot off the ground in the Moon's 1/6 gravity of the Earth, yet they never did and NASA has no explanation.