PopularFX
Home Help Search Login Register
Welcome,Guest. Please login or register.
2017-03-30, 15:41:04
News: Forum TIP:
The SHOUT BOX deletes messages after 3 hours. It is NOT meant to have lengthy conversations in. Use the Chat feature instead.

Pages: [1] 2 3
Author Topic: Did we go to the Moon  (Read 3233 times)
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1241
I know some here will be saying right now-to them selfs-->not another !did we go to the moon ! thread.

Well in the light of EMdevices thread on the flat earth,and how NASA,and the American government has lied to us,i think it time that we (as a group) that pride our self's on looking at well presented evidence to prove claim's being made by other's,can put this one to bed.

Although the above is true in most cases,i have seen first hand how !some! put aside logic,and forget about presented proof when it come's to the !apparent! moon missions. It would seem that there need to believe in something so great out weighs any evidence presented that go's against that need to believe.

So-as a group that requires proof to back up claim's,are we able to come to a conclusion as to weather or not man did go to the moon. Has NASA and the American government pulled of the biggest hoax in human history?. If they did,then what are the ramifications of this hoax,and what would the world think of the American government and NASA if the moon missions were found to be a hoax?. Would this lead to a very tainted 9/11 outcome?. We know that the American government has produced red flag events before to achieve there objective-->well try anyway.

So i guess that this is your chance to have your say--present your evidence for both against and for the moon landings. What evidence is there that we went to the moon?. As far as i can tell,it is !because we seen it on television!. Do you have more than this to show proof of NASA's and the American government's claim that we went to the moon?.

It would seem that as the years pass,both NASA and the government are doing a good job at shooting them self in the foot on this one. So lets start at the bottom-a close look at the suit's worn by the Apollo 11 moon walkers.
Not to long ago,the Smithsonian Institution ran a kickstarter fund raising campaign to raise money to preserve Neil's original apollo 11 space suit. They raised over $719.000,and achieved there goal.
https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/smithsonian/reboot-the-suit-bring-back-neil-armstrongs-spacesu

But in doing so,they also(probably unknowingly) bought to light a serious problem--that being some clear pictures of Neil's original suit worn on the apollo 11 mission. So lets have a look at the problem.

Below is a picture of a foot print,and the boot that made that !apparent! foot print on the moon-->picture 1.
I would like you to pay careful attention "not only to the foot print left on the moon by the boot",but also the boot it self. Then in picture 2,we have a very clear image of what is !suppose to be! Niels original suit that is to be preserved.
Dose any one see the problem here?

So dont take my word for it-go and dig up all the images you can from any site(even NASA's own archive site),and see if you find anything different to the tread pattern(foot print) that is depicted as being left on the moon,and the actual boot tread pattern of Neil's original suit that he was !apparently! wearing during the moon mission.
This was actually noted by NASA,who were quick to add some strap on tread's for the boots on the suit. All changes were made after they realized there over sight.
   
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2327
Would it be possible to actually "see" the lunar module on the moon surface with a telescope ?
I can not imagine why not ??

Somebody must have a pic somewhere ?

There is a scientist that I visited a few years back who had a magnet motor claim , he was on the team which designed the suits.
It would be a bit of a trip to go see him again ,might try to call ...but that would be an awkward conversation to say the least.
I
I was at gruman Aerospace and saw the lunar module being built by tons of highly skilled fellows
My father in law and uncle where part of that project at a management level.

I have to say I have seen sooo many things on the net on different topics claiming things to be true which
Were total fabrications .

It would be an amazingly expensive hoax...and towards what goal ??
Tens of thousands of highly paid people for a few decades building this thing all over the country ??

Talk about a big con....
What's the pay off ?







   
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1241
Would it be possible to actually "see" the lunar module on the moon surface with a telescope ?
I can not imagine why not ??

Somebody must have a pic somewhere ?

There is a scientist that I visited a few years back who had a magnet motor claim , he was on the team which designed the suits.
It would be a bit of a trip to go see him again ,might try to call ...but that would be an awkward conversation to say the least.
I
I was at gruman Aerospace and saw the lunar module being built by tons of highly skilled fellows
My father in law and uncle where part of that project at a management level.

I have to say I have seen sooo many things on the net on different topics claiming things to be true which
Were total fabrications .

It would be an amazingly expensive hoax...and towards what goal ??
Tens of thousands of highly paid people for a few decades building this thing all over the country ??

Talk about a big con....
What's the pay off ?

Here is where the bullshit really starts to flow Chet.
Below is a picture of heathrow from a satellite that orbit's the earth at around 200 mile's. It has to deal with the earths atmosphere as well,but look how clear the image is-->and at 200 miles up. The picture is from Digitalglobe's world view 3 satellite,and it can resolve down to 35cm O0

Here is the best we get from NASA,and it is from there Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter (LRO) at a distance of only 25 miles. Dose any one actually believe this crap?.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PTeM4ZqEKR4
   
Sr. Member
****

Posts: 297
Would it be possible to actually "see" the lunar module on the moon surface with a telescope ?
I'm not too sure about this but I think the answer involves Dawes Limit.
   

Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2883
tExB=qr
recovered lunar satellite photos:
http://www.cnn.com/2014/07/30/world/hackers-nasa-lunar-photos/

8500 moon photos recently went online:
http://www.motherjones.com/mixed-media/2015/10/every-photo-taken-apollo-moon-missions-are-now-online

EDIT:
private space exploration project:
http://www.space.com/28064-private-moon-drilling-mission-crowdfunding.html
The Lunar Mission One project is designed to land a probe on the moon that is capable of drilling
at least 65 feet (20 meters) below the lunar surface, and hopefully reach a target depth
of 328 feet (100 m) inside the moon.
The probe will bore down to unexposed rock and draw up core samples to transport back to Earth.

They plan to get to the moon by 2024:
http://www.space.com/27807-private-moon-mission-lunar-one.html

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lunar_Mission_One
« Last Edit: 2016-01-12, 16:47:09 by Grumpy »
   

Hero Member
*****

Posts: 518
Some pretty "shoddy" research there, TinMan.



I think the boot COVERS used for the actual walking about on the moon were probably left behind there. You don't want all that alien dust inside your tiny cramped cabin, after all. Don't you leave your galoshes in the mud room when you come in from a walk in the rain, or do you just wear them on into the kitchen and bedroom?



There is a big difference between mapping/widefield cameras and the pinpoint spy cameras that are in Earth orbit, but nevertheless the Apollo landing sites have been clearly imaged by the mapping cameras on the LRO.


You know... I don't see a single _person_ in your Heathrow "satellite" image. That proves it's just a fake picture of a toy layout with miniature models. Doesn't it?


---------------------------
"The easiest person to fool is yourself" -- Richard Feynman
   

Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2883
tExB=qr
cool video of Apollo 17 mission and article on possible private mission in 2017:

http://www.space.com/30720-moon-express-private-lunar-launch-2017.html
   

Hero Member
*****

Posts: 518
The photograph of Armstrong's _complete_ suit was taken well _before_ the launch of the Apollo 11 mission. Funny how they were so clever back then, to include the boot covers. Or maybe those were photoshopped in.

How can you possibly argue with someone who will simply tell you that all your evidence is faked?  Well, that silly strategy works both ways. The Heathrow image is obviously faked since it doesn't contain any people -- anyone who has ever been to an airport knows that there are always lots of people walking around on the ramp, parking airplanes, fueling, handling luggage, security, etc. but there are no people in that image. Therefore it's fake and doesn't tell you anything about the capabilities of the (fake) satellites circling the Earth.

Seriously.... flat earths, hollow suns, stars not visible from space, NASA fakery.... sometimes I wonder about you people. You must be just doing the wind-up, because I can't believe that you lot are so deficient in critical thinking skills, research ability, and general knowledge.


---------------------------
"The easiest person to fool is yourself" -- Richard Feynman
   

Sr. Member
****

Posts: 355
The photograph of Armstrong's _complete_ suit was taken well _before_ the launch of the Apollo 11 mission. Funny how they were so clever back then, to include the boot covers. Or maybe those were photoshopped in.

How can you possibly argue with someone who will simply tell you that all your evidence is faked?  Well, that silly strategy works both ways. The Heathrow image is obviously faked since it doesn't contain any people -- anyone who has ever been to an airport knows that there are always lots of people walking around on the ramp, parking airplanes, fueling, handling luggage, security, etc. but there are no people in that image. Therefore it's fake and doesn't tell you anything about the capabilities of the (fake) satellites circling the Earth.

Seriously.... flat earths, hollow suns, stars not visible from space, NASA fakery.... sometimes I wonder about you people. You must be just doing the wind-up, because I can't believe that you lot are so deficient in critical thinking skills, research ability, and general knowledge.

Ditto, I once thought there were intelligent people here too, it just goes to show you how much of this BS is spread around out there and the fools that believe it. Obviously everything we know has been faked, probably the faked moon landing was faked as well.
Room


---------------------------
"Whatever our resources of primary energy may be in the future, we must, to be rational, obtain it without consumption of any material"  Nicola Tesla

"When bad men combine, the good must associate; else they will fall one by one, an unpitied sacrifice in a contemptible struggle."  Edmund Burke
   

Sr. Member
****

Posts: 308
Ahh the boot covers, lol. When I first  looked at the smooth boot soles I wondered if they would use some kind of magnetic boot soles with treads due to the sections of the suit soles that look different, then I scroll down and sure enough there they are in Tinsels post. Common sense should allow us to consider some kind of treaded boot covers maybe with a magnetic component to make them stay on better.

My questions are. Can the Lunar module or any other man made objects be seen on the moons surface ?
And even if the first landing with Armstrong was faked but they actually did land on the moon in later missions, does it really matter that they may have faked the first landing ?

I say with a powerful enough telescope the equipment should be visible, and it doesn't matter if the first landing was faked but some of the later landings were real.

Personally my opinion means little as I have not done any research into the issue because I could not care less about it. We can forget all about the moon landings even happening and not be missing much useful information. There are more important things to think about.

We all know our governments lie to us and are very corrupted. There is ample evidence to show the world is mostly run by the elite bankers and corrupted evil people with agenda's not for humanity in general.

..
   

Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1126
Quote from: Room3327
Ditto, I once thought there were intelligent people here too, it just goes to show you how much of this BS is spread around out there and the fools that believe it. Obviously everything we know has been faked, probably the faked moon landing was faked as well.
Room

Indeed, there are intelligent people who participate
in this amazing forum.  Wouldst thou and thy friend
TK be placing thyselves upon a pedestal?

Doubting the veracity of "official sources" is a
characteristic of those who seek TRUTH and it
is also a trait of a sane mind.

Gullibility is a terrible waste of the human mind.
Judging those who may disagree with your beliefs
to be less than intelligent says much about your
own.


---------------------------
“When an honest man realizes that he is mistaken, he will either cease being mistaken or cease being honest.” –Anonymous
   
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1241
I recently watched this video that I thought was pretty good. 

http://youtu.be/vPRyo4cSESQ

The duplicate Apollo 16 scenes are a great proof of falsification, but so is the bag that falls at same rate as on earth, awesome!  (Around minute 32:20)

Anyway there are a lot of arguments the evidence NASA presented is problematic, I.e photos and videos, etc, but that could be argued that it was to hide the true nature of the moon from the competition.  Supposedly now they have images taken from orbit showing the sites.  That's like trusting a liar when he says, ok now I'm not going to not lie to you anymore.  Well, too late, our faith has been shuttered.  We need independent confirmation now!  I think they should defund NASA and privatize everything.  Things may progress faster and cheaper at the same time.

EM

Loved the video EM. And the music playing in the back ground in the LEM--what happened to no sound in a vacuum ?-or maybe the LEM was pressurized ?. And wire's that can be clearly seen holding up the moon walker's lol-even lifting them back up when they fell lol.
   
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1241
Ahh the boot covers, lol. When I first  looked at the smooth boot soles I wondered if they would use some kind of magnetic boot soles with treads due to the sections of the suit soles that look different, then I scroll down and sure enough there they are in Tinsels post. Common sense should allow us to consider some kind of treaded boot covers maybe with a magnetic component to make them stay on better.

My questions are. Can the Lunar module or any other man made objects be seen on the moons surface ?
And even if the first landing with Armstrong was faked but they actually did land on the moon in later missions, does it really matter that they may have faked the first landing ?

I say with a powerful enough telescope the equipment should be visible, and it doesn't matter if the first landing was faked but some of the later landings were real.

Personally my opinion means little as I have not done any research into the issue because I could not care less about it. We can forget all about the moon landings even happening and not be missing much useful information. There are more important things to think about.

We all know our governments lie to us and are very corrupted. There is ample evidence to show the world is mostly run by the elite bankers and corrupted evil people with agenda's not for humanity in general.

..

The biggest problem looking from earth with telescopes is the heat haze-even on cold crisp(good seeing) night's,at high magnification you can still see heat haze. I find that once i go above 250x on my 12 inch Dob,the haze kicks in badly.

But this is not the problem,as the LRO is quite capable of high res pic's--but it seem's only in area's they want you to get a clear picture of-such as the one's posted below-->all from NASA's own site.

Another interesting video--seems the tracks from the rovers  just vanish C.C
Oh-and the US gov to introduce no fly zone's near the landing site's lol. Wonder why. C.C

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qc2kijG8YdY
   

Sr. Member
****

Posts: 355
I'm thinking we need some more fake and misleading topic headings i.e.:

ISIS is being faked,  U.S. soldiers are pretending to be ISIS.

Christians are pretending to be Islamic to give islam a bad name.

The Sun does not exist, it has been faked by zionists.

CIA guilty of building a atom bomb in Iran against Iyatolla's wish's.

We've been lied to again, the Moon is an Alien spaceship.

Ghandi was a secret CIA agent, faked it all.

Mother Teresa ran a bordello pretended to be holy.

Putin pretending to fight ISIS while slaughtering millions of christians.

Free energy being stopped by U.S. They have many known ways to do it.


Anyone want to pick one and we'll start a new thread to debate it scientifically and at length.  I'm sure if we think about it we can come up with many more, being reality has nothing to do with it, and I don't want anyone snickering, this is serious stuff. So lets get to work!


 


---------------------------
"Whatever our resources of primary energy may be in the future, we must, to be rational, obtain it without consumption of any material"  Nicola Tesla

"When bad men combine, the good must associate; else they will fall one by one, an unpitied sacrifice in a contemptible struggle."  Edmund Burke
   
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1241
The photograph of Armstrong's _complete_ suit was taken well _before_ the launch of the Apollo 11 mission. Funny how they were so clever back then, to include the boot covers. Or maybe those were photoshopped in.

How can you possibly argue with someone who will simply tell you that all your evidence is faked?  Well, that silly strategy works both ways. The Heathrow image is obviously faked since it doesn't contain any people -- anyone who has ever been to an airport knows that there are always lots of people walking around on the ramp, parking airplanes, fueling, handling luggage, security, etc. but there are no people in that image. Therefore it's fake and doesn't tell you anything about the capabilities of the (fake) satellites circling the Earth.

Seriously.... flat earths, hollow suns, stars not visible from space, NASA fakery.... sometimes I wonder about you people. You must be just doing the wind-up, because I can't believe that you lot are so deficient in critical thinking skills, research ability, and general knowledge.

Here you go TK--watch from 9 minute's on for some nice clear satellite pics--with people,from 700km"s
Now are you telling me that we can get clear images of objects as small as people from 700km up,but cant get a clear image of something much larger at only 25km's up lol.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qr3YrmTOQaY


Brad
   

Sr. Member
****

Posts: 355
Indeed, there are intelligent people who participate
in this amazing forum.  Wouldst thou and thy friend
TK be placing thyselves upon a pedestal?

Doubting the veracity of "official sources" is a
characteristic of those who seek TRUTH and it
is also a trait of a sane mind.

Gullibility is a terrible waste of the human mind.
Judging those who may disagree with your beliefs
to be less than intelligent says much about your
own.

I should clarify myself, I am not saying all members here are less then truly intelligent, only some. The most intelligent people rarely comment or say anything, guys like Point99, Peterae, ION, Physicsprof, just to name a few, we have many, but guys like you and some others are giving this forum a bad name.

I am certainly not on a pedestal, I have very little standing here or respect, but that allows me to say things that many others are thinking without them getting the BS I do and believe me when I say I am not the gullible one here, yes some people are endowed with more intelligence then others sorry, that is just the way it is reality if you will.  I would recommend you start looking at reality, soon I hope.
 


---------------------------
"Whatever our resources of primary energy may be in the future, we must, to be rational, obtain it without consumption of any material"  Nicola Tesla

"When bad men combine, the good must associate; else they will fall one by one, an unpitied sacrifice in a contemptible struggle."  Edmund Burke
   

Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1097
Whatever you think, this is some very clever analysis of the Apollo imagery.
   

Group: Administrator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2581
It's not as complicated as it may seem...
Clever perhaps, but is his method rigorous?

And one example only?
   
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1241
I should clarify myself, I am not saying all members here are less then truly intelligent, only some. The most intelligent people rarely comment or say anything, guys like Point99, Peterae, ION, Physicsprof, just to name a few, we have many, but guys like you and some others are giving this forum a bad name.

I am certainly not on a pedestal, I have very little standing here or respect, but that allows me to say things that many others are thinking without them getting the BS I do and believe me when I say I am not the gullible one here, yes some people are endowed with more intelligence then others sorry, that is just the way it is reality if you will.  I would recommend you start looking at reality, soon I hope.

I see you named Physicsprof as one who you deem highly intelligent-and i agree. Now why dont you ask him about the moon landing and maybe 9/11 while you are at it.

It would seem to me that the truth is something that scares you,and you would prefer to live the lie,as it's what you feel more comfortable with. We cant go to the moon now,so how was is possible back in 1969?. There are several NASA employees(including astronauts) that have admitted we do not have the techknowledgey to go to the moon today--so we certainly did not go in 69.
   
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1241
Whatever you think, this is some very clever analysis of the Apollo imagery.

Nice find verpies,although i feel it will fall on deaf ears.
As i said in my opening post,there are those that insist evidence must be provided when making a claim of such caliber. But it would seem that when it comes to the so called !moon landings!,then the need to believe outweighs the need for evidence. The only evidence that man went and walked on the moon,is what was seen on television,and the provided photograph's from NASA--no photographs from any other source other than NASA.
   
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1241
NASA engineer admits they can't get past the Van Allen Belts

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NlXG0REiVzE
   
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1241
Canadian Astronaut Chris Hadfield Blunder On BBC About Going To The Moon


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-pp1KoW5-mQ
   
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1241
Moon Landing 1969 vs Scientific Evidence

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H8ZzFemBUJQ
   
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 505
Hahaha

Oh yes, they went to the moon just like 12 arabs bowled down the WTCs and ISIS is not a Saudi financed terror group.

Take the cost of actually going to the moon, less the cost of faking it and you have millions of reasons to fake it.
Man just look at the reentry capsule and raise you hands on who would like to go next.

Look you guys. We cannot fix this and should just stop wasting damn time, so much time on crap. These are not our problems, they are the worlds problems and we cannot fix them so better we stick to what we are good at and that is, working towards OU.

None of this is helping our benchworks.

wattsup



---------------------------
   

Group: Administrator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2581
It's not as complicated as it may seem...
Canadian Astronaut Chris Hadfield Blunder On BBC About Going To The Moon


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-pp1KoW5-mQ

What did he say after that? Seems the clip was cut off.
   
Pages: [1] 2 3
« previous next »


 

Home Help Search Login Register
Theme © PopularFX | Based on PFX Ideas! | Scripts from iScript4u 2017-03-30, 15:41:04