• NEW! LOWEST RATES EVER -- SUPPORT THE SHOW AND ENJOY THE VERY BEST PREMIUM PARACAST EXPERIENCE! Welcome to The Paracast+, eight years young! For a low subscription fee, you can download the ad-free version of The Paracast and the exclusive, member-only, After The Paracast bonus podcast, featuring color commentary, exclusive interviews, the continuation of interviews that began on the main episode of The Paracast. We also offer lifetime memberships! Flash! Take advantage of our lowest rates ever! Act now! It's easier than ever to susbcribe! You can sign up right here!

    Subscribe to The Paracast Newsletter!

Moon Landing is a Fake

  • Thread starter Thread starter stitcherman
  • Start date Start date

Free episodes:

Its all an alien publicity stunt to get us used to the idea a bio form can travel the lonely reaches of space

regardless of which reality you beleive (for the record i think we went there, if there had been any shred of proof we didnt the russians or chinese would have screamed it loud and proud and the race for real estate would be on again)
you get the gestalt

men in space

most of the planet is now of the "mindset" that there is nothing unusual at all about travelling in space

100 years ago most people would have told you it was impossible and laughed at you thinking you mad if you'd described the space station.

i watched a good documentary aired on free to air tv on monday
has some excellent UFO references
Apollo 11 the untold stoy
google video has a copy


the USA put a flag on the moon for the same reason everyone else had down the pages of history, if it could be proved they didnt their competitors would do so and be busting a gut to get theirs there "first"

as i said it doesnt matter if you think they got there or not, you got the real point, a species need not be planet bound if it has the technology to travel in space
 
i read that transcript... Look like a lot of people think it is a hoax... I sure hope it was because that was fucking horrible. Poor people.
 
dB... you indicated NASA withheld information about the transcript. i guess that is not lying... i stand corrected... lol. whatever dude.
 
ok now that we have that line of BS solved, what about the wire suspension rigging on the moon?... lmao..
 
only a spectator could consider it a hoax

if you had to spend YOUR money to build the largest rocket the planet has ever seen, not once but many times, launch them with considerable risk if they blow up on the pad, if you spent all that money, surely you would then go to the moon. you wouldnt waste YOUR money on a PR stunt like that. why would anyone else

if they wanted to fake it one or two "trips" would have done the job, the money that was spent was overkill for a PR stunt, but about right for actually going there not once not twice but many times each of them involving the launch of a very large expensive rocket
 
pixelsmith said:
here you go dB. use your photoshop skills on some of the photos at this site.
Geocities has shut down

LMAO!! i love the cardboard construction and the one legged astronot... geez...

I'm less than convinced about the first two pictures - in the picture ('on the Moon') the rover has wire tyres and in the second picture (in front of the bus) the rover has regular pneumatic tyres (pressurized tyres wouldn't be needed in the Moon's 1/6 gravity and would be under enormous strain in a near-vacuum).

Just an observation...
 
mike said:
if you had to spend YOUR money to build the largest rocket the planet has ever seen, not once but many times, launch them with considerable risk if they blow up on the pad, if you spent all that money, surely you would then go to the moon. you wouldnt waste YOUR money on a PR stunt like that. why would anyone else

if they wanted to fake it one or two "trips" would have done the job, the money that was spent was overkill for a PR stunt, but about right for actually going there not once not twice but many times each of them involving the launch of a very large expensive rocket

I think that's a poor argument - you're speculating about their motives for going to the moon, how much that ought to cost and what they would and wouldn't do. It's your opinion and nothing more.
 
Rick Deckard said:
I think that's a poor argument - you're speculating about their motives for going to the moon, how much that ought to cost and what they would and wouldn't do. It's your opinion and nothing more.

your prob right on all counts, but its my opinion we went and brought rocks back from the moon, im also of the opinion theres more to the story specifically an ET aspect, which may or may not explain some of the anomalities people seem to find in the "evidence" we did not.

as for motives a good predictor of future behavior is past behaviour.
traditionally having a representitive of your people stick its flag in new territory is a proclamation of ownership or sovereignty over said territory ,and in my opinion other nations with a vested interest in claiming said sovereignty would if it were in any way possible to prove it were fake, have done so for obvious reasons, maybe the chinese will do just that.
only time will tell
 
Rick Deckard said:
pixelsmith said:
here you go dB. use your photoshop skills on some of the photos at this site.
Geocities has shut down

LMAO!! i love the cardboard construction and the one legged astronot... geez...

I'm less than convinced about the first two pictures - in the picture ('on the Moon') the rover has wire tyres and in the second picture (in front of the bus) the rover has regular pneumatic tyres (pressurized tyres wouldn't be needed in the Moon's 1/6 gravity and would be under enormous strain in a near-vacuum).

Just an observation...

These are not "wire tyres", but regular rubber tyres with a ribbed profile and grooves on their sides.
 
out of interest, did any of the australian scientists working on the comunications link via the radio telescope at parkes ever come forward and say the signals were coming from anywhere other than where they should be ?
 
David Biedny said:
Did you know that NASA now admits that the Challenger crew were alive when the crew compartment hit the water? They hid that for twenty years!


Actually, my buddy Chuck Farnham and I knew about that sad reality over 13 years ago, a friend of ours in NASA sent us - covertly - the transcript from inside the cabin, those poor folks knew they were gonna die and the transcript is intensely chilling. We had it posted on our VERY popular website - The Surfing Monkey - for years. You can probably track that page down on Thewaybackmachine on archive.org.

So if NASA has admitted to faking moon shots, I'd like to see the corroborating statement/s from them. Educate us.

dB

Okay, David--if I can prove that NASA lied about the moon photos (even ONE), Does that mean that you will do a show on it?

(I had no idea they actually had a transcript... I would love to see that.)
 
pixelsmith said:
here you go dB. use your photoshop skills on some of the photos at this site.
Geocities has shut down

LMAO!! i love the cardboard construction and the one legged astronot... geez...

I don't have to use Photoshop skills here - the actual facts will suffice.

The "cardboard construction" is not the actual internal structure of the LM. What you're seeing are thermal panels, designed to insulate the LM. They did indeed get bashed a bit by spaceflight, but they're not the "inner skin" of the ship, and their crumpling did not compromise structural integrity. Here's the original image on NASA's site:

Photo-as16-122-19533

If you look to the right of the upper area of the LM in the hi-res image, you'll see the reflection of the antenna in the window of the command module, where the picture was shot from.

That lunar surface, the lighting, scale, everything in that picture is exactly what you'd expect to see in a real photo of a LM above our moon. No question in my mind. Believe what you want.

dB
 
musictomyears said:
These are not "wire tyres", but regular rubber tyres with a ribbed profile and grooves on their sides.

Well, I can't determine that they're regular tyres from that image - it's too low res. I assume you have a link to a higher res image?
 
mike said:
out of interest, did any of the australian scientists working on the comunications link via the radio telescope at parkes ever come forward and say the signals were coming from anywhere other than where they should be ?

According to Bill Kaysing, his guy at Goldstone wasn't getting any telemetry at all:

So, Bill Kaysing, nobody ever landed on the moon, right, Bill?
"That is absolutely correct. I will stake my life on it, and I have many, many, many people who will support this view with technical information, including a man who as at the Goldstone tracking station during all of the Apollo flights and he is absolutely convinced that they were faked.

What, exactly, brought him to this decision?
Well, he realized that all of the input to the Goldstone tracking station came from NASA in Washington. Well, that certainly made it convenient for them to fake any communications that they wished. In other words, they were not picking up data from Apollo on its way to, or on the moon, or on its way back. They were getting communications from NASA Greenbelt in Washington, DC, which had complete control of all the communications."

And here are his credentials, according to him (along with some reasons he thinks we didn't go):

Bill Kaysing, can you give your background of your involvement in the space program and what the official government line is about people landing on the moon?
"I was for seven years head of technical publications for the Rocketdyne Research Department at the Propulsion Field Laboratory in the Simi Hills, that's near Kenoga Park, California, and during that time I had top-secret clearance and Atomic Energy Commission (A.E.C.) clearance and of course I was in on all of the top secrets about the development of Mercury and Gemini and, of course, Atlas, and, eventually, Apollo. And my experience as a technical writer led me to believe that a lot of the things that the aerospace industry and NASA preferred to have done, were never done. And they were not as successful as they pretended to be. [As to the second question,] the government claims that the reports of astronauts and photographs and some rocks prove that we went to the moon and my feeling is that some photos and some people who have been under military pay or military jurisdiction all their lives and some rocks don't prove a thing. In fact, there is so much contrary evidence to going to the moon, such as solar and cosmic radiation, micro meteorites, the temperature on the moon, the fact that the astronauts never reported how magnificent the stars were or they never showed a picture of the crater that should have been dug underneath the lunar lander - it goes on and on. I have hundreds of pieces of information that any really intelligent person could review and then decide for themselves."
 
Back
Top