Moon Landing is a Fake

[musictomyears]

Jose, the question is not whether or not the Apollo hoax makes sense. WW2 didn't make any sense either, but it still happened. Rather than looking for meaning or reasoning behind the hoax, we should be asking one question only: Where does the evidence lead us?

I find it odd when people start to speculate about NASA's reasoning for perpetrating a hoax, before establishing whether or not it actually happened.

 

[valiens]

In Russia, moon lands on you.

Sorry. I have nothing real to add here as the only thing faked about the moon landing is the notion that it never happened.

 

[Rick Deckard]

Sorry. I have nothing real to add here as the only thing faked about the moon landing is the notion that it never happened.

That's very insightful - thanks.

 

[mike]

some say The rocks brought back from the Moon are identical to rocks collected by scientific expeditions to Antarctica.

but

Chemical analysis of the rocks confirms a different oxygen isotopic composition and a surprising lack of volatile elements. There are only a few 'identical' rocks, and those few fell as meteorites after being ejected from the Moon during impact cratering events. The total quantity of these 'lunar meteorites' is small compared to the more than 840 lb (380 kg) of lunar samples returned by Apollo. Also the Apollo lunar soil samples chemically matched the Russian Luna space probe’s lunar soil samples. In addition, unlike the Antarctic lunites, the rocks recovered from the moon do not exhibit the effects of atmospheric friction

the russians already had samples youd think they would scream blue murder if the american samples were faked

 

[Rick Deckard]

the russians already had samples youd think they would scream blue murder if the american samples were faked

Of course, no-one has yet raised the idea that the Apollo missions were really un-manned...

 

[BrandonD]

In Russia, moon lands on you.

Sorry. I have nothing real to add here as the only thing faked about the moon landing is the notion that it never happened.

You enjoy thinking that the purpose of your own abductions is to raise your spiritual awareness, and yet this spiritual upgrade doesn't seem to help you recognize when you're behaving just like the small-minded people who ridicule your own unconventional ideas.

Ideas are ideas, and when you casually shit on someone else's that is nothing other than the ego stroking itself. Listening to you describe the lofty purpose of your own abductions, I would've thought you'd be aware of this.

 

[Rick Deckard]

Ideas are ideas, and when you casually shit on someone else's that is nothing other than the ego stroking itself. Listening to you describe the lofty purpose of your own abductions, I would've thought you'd be aware of this.

I agree - I think some people forget what a discussion forum is about.

Personally, the only reason I participate here is to help me to get things straight in my head - I throw around ideas to see what sticks. I make statements and arguments, that I don't necessarily agree or support, just to see what sort of discussion will result.

I'm not here to try and change other people's minds or push one reality in front of another. I'm sculpting my own perception of reality - I'm chipping away and discovering new forms - it's a work-in-progress.

 

[pixelsmith]

i do the same thing rick, throw something out there and see what happens.

i listened to part of the paracast today and heard dB once again talk about the moon landing issue. he does not seem to understand that what many people here are disputing is the FAKED PHOTOS, NOT THE LANDING!!! it is very probable that the landing happened. it is also very probable no photos or videos made it back to earth. thus faked moon photos. why is it so hard to entertain that theory?

 

[Rick Deckard]

i do the same thing rick, throw something out there and see what happens.

i listened to part of the paracast today and heard dB once again talk about the moon landing issue. he does not seem to understand that what many people here are disputing is the FAKED PHOTOS, NOT THE LANDING!!! it is very probable that the landing happened. it is also very probable no photos or videos made it back to earth. thus faked moon photos. why is it so hard to entertain that theory?

It's obvious to me, that some of the photo's have been 'recreated' after the fact. That's not to say that they never went to the moon, just that they are presenting all the images as a 'true' record of the event when it's clear, to me at least, that some manipulation has occurred.

That raises the question 'what else have they manipulated'?

I think you should just accept that DB's mind is already made up on this issue and leave it at that. He's not stopping us talking about it and only responds when people are attacking him personally - that's only to be expected. In light of their declared positions on this matter, I don't think either David or Gene are suitable candidates for an 'impartial' Paracast episode on the subject, so it's fine by me that they would rather not cover the subject.

I know it's a cliche, but when I read the book '1984' my life was changed forever. I now realise that there are groups and organizations (inside and out of Government) who are actively involved in the manipulation of entire populations and so, for me, trusting what the authorities present as 'the truth' gets more difficult every day.

David mentioned PNAC on one of the latest podcasts - it's something I became aware of shortly after 9/11. This group were calling for a 'New Pearl Harbour' only six months before the 9/11 attack. This group is made of people who are close to Bush, Rumsfeld and Cheney. They were asking for a new democratic state in the middle-east that was 'sympathetic to American interests' but they were clear that the will of the American people would be against an attack in that area. What they wanted was an 'event' to ignite the people against the enemies of America. I guess they got it.

Is it really a coincidence that the article on the PNAC website that I'm referring to has been removed and the pages that used to be in the internet archive have been deleted right up to the end of September 2001?

Is it really just a coincidence that these same people have massive oil interests? Is it really just a coincidence that these same people have major shares in the very companies that manufacture the arms that are paid for by the US tax-payer and then dropped on Iraq? Is it really a coincidence that these same people have gold-plated contracts to supply the US soldiers in Iraq and to rebuild the country?

When I see manipulation and corruption of the truth on this scale why should I believe the official versions of the 'Moon Landings' or the 'Assassination of JFK'?

 

[Jose Collado]

Jose, the question is not whether or not the Apollo hoax makes sense. WW2 didn't make any sense either, but it still happened. Rather than looking for meaning or reasoning behind the hoax, we should be asking one question only: Where does the evidence lead us?

I find it odd when people start to speculate about NASA's reasoning for perpetrating a hoax, before establishing whether or not it actually happened.

Sorry...the video is called "Why the Apollo moon hoax makes no sense"

 

[musictomyears]

Jose, the question is not whether or not the Apollo hoax makes sense. WW2 didn't make any sense either, but it still happened. Rather than looking for meaning or reasoning behind the hoax, we should be asking one question only: Where does the evidence lead us?

I find it odd when people start to speculate about NASA's reasoning for perpetrating a hoax, before establishing whether or not it actually happened.

Sorry...the video is called "Why the Apollo moon hoax makes no sense"

Yes, I know. I was trying to say that evaluating whether or not hoaxing the Moon landings "makes sense" is a pointless exercise. You may think something makes no sense, but other people might disagree with you.

 

[musictomyears]

Is it really a coincidence that the article on the PNAC website that I'm referring to has been removed and the pages that used to be in the internet archive have been deleted right up to the end of September 2001?

Is it really just a coincidence that these same people have massive oil interests? Is it really just a coincidence that these same people have major shares in the very companies that manufacture the arms that are paid for by the US tax-payer and then dropped on Iraq? Is it really a coincidence that these same people have gold-plated contracts to supply the US soldiers in Iraq and to rebuild the country?

When I see manipulation and corruption of the truth on this scale why should I believe the official versions of the 'Moon Landings' or the 'Assassination of JFK'?

I guess most people don't care enough about any of this. Most people inside the US, never mind elsewhere, will never have heard of the PNAC. Most people don't understand how the world works, whether politically or in a practical sense. Remember Plato's allegory of the cave? It is just like that. Since most people haven't got a clue what is going on - and they don't want one either - it is quite easy to herd them around like cattle.

I find it disturbing how easy it was to pin 9/11 on a bearded caveman and Saddam, without any supporting evidence. The US government declared who the only suspects were and used baseless accusations (remember "yellow cake" and "mobile bio-weapons labs"?) for starting two major invasions and killing tens of thousands of people in the process - and they got away with it. Not only that, but many "democratically elected" governments around the world joined in with the madness.

I honestly believe that most people only care for "The Truth" as long as it is psychologically convenient.

 

[valiens]

In Russia, moon lands on you.

Sorry. I have nothing real to add here as the only thing faked about the moon landing is the notion that it never happened.

You enjoy thinking that the purpose of your own abductions is to raise your spiritual awareness, and yet this spiritual upgrade doesn't seem to help you recognize when you're behaving just like the small-minded people who ridicule your own unconventional ideas.

Ideas are ideas, and when you casually shit on someone else's that is nothing other than the ego stroking itself. Listening to you describe the lofty purpose of your own abductions, I would've thought you'd be aware of this.

Gee, good point, Brandon. Wait, sorry. Bad point. Ideas are ideas? So every idea is equal? And the "moon landing" is just an idea, not an actual event? Does it all depend on how you think about it, Brandon?

Sorry, but there is a difference in unconventional ideas (and conspiracy theories, for that matter). But when I see Edgar Mitchell in April I'll be sure to tell him his whole life was a lie because you wanted it to be.

 

[musictomyears]

I see Edgar Mitchell in April

You can ask him why astronauts don't see any stars when they fly around in space, or walk on the Moon.

 

[Gene Steinberg]

I see Edgar Mitchell in April

You can ask him why astronauts don't see any stars when they fly around in space, or walk on the Moon.

I know I shouldn't jump into this thread again, but I will anyway.

Forgetting the minor details in the photos that have some people up in arms, you have to consider the climate in the 1960s and 1970s. We went to the moon because the Soviet Union launched Sputnik in the 1950s and fueled the space race. We wanted to deliver on President Kennedy's promise to send men to the moon by the end of the decade of the 60s.

Now that could possibly inspire some to fake the landing when they couldn't make the deadline, but consider this: If you can find blatant holes in those photos and other evidence of the trip, what about the Russians? They would have known as well, and they would have exposed this grand scheme and embarrassed the U.S.A. on the world stage and gained the upper hand.

What did they really do but congratulate us?

Explain.

 

[musictomyears]

I know I shouldn't jump into this thread again

Why? Personally, I appreciate your input.

Forgetting the minor details in the photos

How could we forget the photos? They, plus the film footage, are the only pieces of evidence we have got. Discussing Apollo without analysing the photos would be pretty meaningless, since it would force us to rely on hearsay. The photos are part of NASA's official record. If they can't stand up to scrutiny, the believability of the entire programme goes out through the window.

It is also debatable what constitutes a "minor detail". If an astronaut appears illuminated by a spotlight, rather than by evenly distributed sunlight - is that a minor detail? If an astronaut appears to dangle from a wire rig - minor detail? If astronauts dwell in deep shadow areas, yet can't see any stars - minor detail?

To the contrary, those details are entirely consistent with what one would expect from artificial studio conditions, yet inconsistent with NASA's own descriptions of the conditions on Moon. In particular the claim that the astronauts could never see any stars is almost laughable, and comparable with the notion that one can't see any trees when travelling through the Black Forest. I am amazed that so many people should be prepared to swallow this turd.

If you can find blatant holes in those photos and other evidence of the trip, what about the Russians? They would have known as well, and they would have exposed this grand scheme and embarrassed the U.S.A. on the world stage and gained the upper hand.

What did they really do but congratulate us?

Explain.

Gene, I won't take the bait and discuss anything other than the tangible evidence. I think it is a serious fallacy to divert attention to the actions of other governments or "authorities". What do we know what their motivations are? Perhaps they have skeletons in their own closets, and would rather avoid public discussions about the goings-on in space. How would we know? It's all just speculation.

 

[BrandonD]

Gee, good point, Brandon. Wait, sorry. Bad point. Ideas are ideas? So every idea is equal? And the "moon landing" is just an idea, not an actual event? Does it all depend on how you think about it, Brandon?

Sorry, but there is a difference in unconventional ideas (and conspiracy theories, for that matter). But when I see Edgar Mitchell in April I'll be sure to tell him his whole life was a lie because you wanted it to be.

I didn't say every idea is equal, I didn't say that any astronauts are lying, I didn't say that anyone's life is a lie, those are all your own words. You've drawn ridiculous conclusions from my comments because you're currently stuck in the black/white part of your brain. But you're certainly free to build up a straw-man and take him down if that entertains you.

I was pointing out something else entirely, which you have entirely failed to grasp.

 

[mike]

Gene, I won't take the bait and discuss anything other than the tangible evidence. I think it is a serious fallacy to divert attention to the actions of other governments or "authorities". What do we know what their motivations are? Perhaps they have skeletons in their own closets, and would rather avoid public discussions about the goings-on in space. How would we know? It's all just speculation.

For me the russians and the then political situation are the proof we went.

Space Race = Race = Competition.

i just cant think of any competition where one player obviously cheats and wins and the other players (british have a long history of astronomy too) dont shout "Cheat" and expose the false win.
australia II didnt win the americas cup by hoaxing the new york yacht club.
the very fact that the winners of the space race had a serious competitor keeps the whole thing "honest" in my view

 

[valiens]

Gee, good point, Brandon. Wait, sorry. Bad point. Ideas are ideas? So every idea is equal? And the "moon landing" is just an idea, not an actual event? Does it all depend on how you think about it, Brandon?

Sorry, but there is a difference in unconventional ideas (and conspiracy theories, for that matter). But when I see Edgar Mitchell in April I'll be sure to tell him his whole life was a lie because you wanted it to be.

I didn't say every idea is equal, I didn't say that any astronauts are lying, I didn't say that anyone's life is a lie, those are all your own words. You've drawn ridiculous conclusions from my comments because you're currently stuck in the black/white part of your brain. But you're certainly free to build up a straw-man and take him down if that entertains you.

I was pointing out something else entirely, which you have entirely failed to grasp.

Some things actually are black and white. This whole moon hoax topic--that they never went--strikes me as completely absurd.

You know the Zapruder film was kept in a Time-Life vault. I don't trust Time-Life because they are a news front for the Establishment. I've learned not to trust the Establishment. so I'm thinking that the film was doctored to look like Kennedy was shot, but actually it just shows the parade in progress. Kennedy was never shot. He's living on an island with Elvis, Biggie, and Tupac.
I'll bet if I scrutinize the film long enough I'll find inconsistencies that support my idea.

So now I have this absurd idea and you'd better respect it or you're an arrogant bastard.

Maybe that. Or maybe I'm just wrong.

 

[musictomyears]

Proxy discussions about the space race or the Zapruder film push the real questions that surround Apollo into the realms of nebulous speculation. Diverting attention from the only verifiable evidence we have - photos and film - reflects an entirely unscientific approach. It is similar to arguing over the price of butter when the original question was: What is butter?

Besides: How do we know there ever was a genuine "space race"? In 1975, the joint Apollo-Soyuz mission betrayed no hint of animosities between the Russian and US space agencies. There are some pretty well informed people who argue that the "space race" was no more than friendly competition, and that right from the start information was exchanged freely between the two countries. One has to remember that during the cold war, both US and Russia needed bogey men for whipping their respective populations into a state of fear, which in turn helped with justifying burgeoning defence spending. What happened behind the scenes, and what was fed to the media, are two different things. A modern example for this type of manipulation would be the close business ties between the Bush and Bin Laden families, which the MSM hardly ever reports on.

However, none of this has anything to do with the Apollo images.