Moon Landing is a Fake

[musictomyears]

mike, I don't know why you make this so difficult for yourself. Did you think the argument through? I pointed out that by 1975, Russia and the US were engaged in public, joint missions. In order to make such missions work, both sides must have co-operated on high-tech space programmes for several years. Russian and American engineers didn't suddenly wake up one morning in 1975 and decide they wanted astronauts and cosmonauts to shake hands in space. Indicators are that there was as much co-operation as there was competition. Perhaps there was no incentive for the Russians to expose a hoax - perhaps certain elements of their own space programmes weren't genuine either. It is my understanding that both blocks were also well aware of the UFO reality, and that co-operation would be essential for successful space exploration.

You need to get over the idea that the world, and world politics in particular, operate in the way the mass media wants us to believe. To give you an example, the secret services of several nations co-operate on a daily basis, often across the cliched political dividing lines of west vs. east, or democratic vs. dictatorship. Politics is a game that revolves around power and control, not ideology. Ideologies are merely tools for steering the uneducated masses into certain directions. I don't know how old you are, but I can assure you that with age this fact will become increasingly obvious to you.

Anyway: Interesting video you posted there. It might contain genuine information, it might be deliberate disinformation. Who knows.

 

[musictomyears]

What did they really do but congratulate us?

Explain.

Gene, did any of the arguments put forward by Rick Deckard and me make sense to you?

 

[valiens]

Again, I'm really struck by the disconnect here when you guys are so right with real hoaxes like Meier.

The lunar module reflects light. A lot of it. He's standing in a small crater. Put these two things together and you get a lighting effect not unlike what we're looking at. How is that incorrect? Someone show me where that answer makes less sense than the whole thing was a giant lie.

Do you think we'll be seeing astronaut deathbed confession tapes? How about anyone at NASA?

Right. There was no space race. There was no Cold War. There's actually been peace on earth since the dawn of Man, it's just that the Secret Government has been keeping it from us.

No, of course politics don't work the way the mainstream media would have us believe. But actually, the way it worked during the Cold War was Russia on numerous occasions saying, "We want to stop this Cold War. It's killing our economy." And America saying, "Mmmmm...not so much. It's kinda our economy."

THAT is the lie of the Cold War--that we wanted to stop it--not that it didn't exist. That scientists worked together through it is not exactly a red flag. There was (and probably still is) a sense that science was above the political climate of the day. And music, for that matter. Billy Joel, if you'll recall, played there years before the Wall fell. These aren't examples of how there was never a Cold War, they are examples of what the term "Cold" means. It's, like 50% less warry, or something.

 

[mike]

all from wikipedia

After World War II, the United States and the Soviet Union became involved in a Cold War of espionage and propaganda. Space exploration and satellite technology could feed into the Cold War on both fronts. Satellite-borne equipment could spy on other countries, while space-faring accomplishments could serve as propaganda to tout a country's scientific prowess and military potential. The same rockets that might send a human into orbit or hit a specific spot on the Moon could send an atom bomb to a specific enemy city.
or
Commercial Space Race
Another kind of space race may differ in nature from the original Soviet-American competition, as it could occur between commercial space enterprises
or
The Soviet Union was completely unprepared to beat the US in the space race

Americans landed on the Moon in 1969. The success of the Apollo program was not only a remarkable technical achievement. This achievement proved the political predominance of the United States of America. The Soviet leadership realized that fact perfectly. The USSR was the only country that did not air the live broadcast of the first ever moonwalk.
Russian Buddhists stand against the Taleban’s acts of vandalism in Afghanistan

there WAS a space race, and the russians did and still do have the ability to prove they didnt loose it / havent lost it yet.

but they didnt/dont

why ?

 

[mike]

Involvement of the Soviet Union
A primary reason for the race to the Moon was the Cold War. The Soviets, with their own competing Moon program and a formidable scientific community able to analyze NASA data, could be expected to have cried foul if the USA tried to fake a Moon landing[13], p. 173, especially as they themselves had been unsuccessful in their own man-on-the-Moon program. They would have scored enormous status in the eyes of the rest of the world by doing so.



Bart Sibrel said, in response, that "the Soviets did not have the capability to track deep spacecraft until late in 1972, immediately after which, the last three Apollo missions were abruptly canceled."[88]

However, the Soviet Union had been sending unmanned spacecraft to the Moon since 1959.[89] and "during 1962, deep space tracking facilities were introduced at IP-15 in Ussuriisk and IP-16 in Evpatoria (Crimean Peninsula), while Saturn communication stations were added to IP-3, 4 and 14",[90] the latter having a 100 million km range.[91]

again i am of the opinion that the soviets had the "means and motive" to expose a hoax had one been perpetrated, that they havent convinces me that on the "balance of probibility" we went

 

[mike]

sorry folks im on fire one more

Academic work
In 2004, Drs Martin Hendry and Ken Skeldon at Glasgow University were awarded a grant to investigate 'Moon Hoax' proposals.[110]

In November of that same year, they gave a lecture at the Glasgow Science Centre where the top ten lines of evidence advanced by hoax proponents were individually addressed and refuted



i think if i had to bet my house on it, id go with the good Drs here

if anyone here with a doctorate whos been given a grant by the UK based Particle Physics and Astronomy Research Council or similar ,can provide evidence it was a hoax go right ahead.

 

[musictomyears]

1. You guys can believe whatever you want.

2. Stop referring to Wikipedia or some other flawed "authority". Use your own senses. I'm not here to discuss the opinions of people who don't post on this forum. If I want to know more about the ideas proposed by a particular astronomer, for example, I read his book.

3. I said earlier that it is a big mistake to get bogged down in discussing what the Russians should have, or would have, or might have done. This thread proves me right, again. The fundamental argument is about the photo and film material that was allegedly shot on the Moon. There are serious anomalies in those images. I don't care for speculation. Perhaps NASA did send people to the Moon, however the images we all know don't appear to depict such an event. That's all I'm prepared to discuss.

If you can accept the idea that, the further you go into space, the less you can see stars (all of which are suns), go forth and be happy. If you expect to find wire rigs on the Moon to help you with jumping around, enjoy the ride.

It seems that, regardless of how many times one posts links to videos and pictures, some people just don't understand the nature of the argument. Ah well.

 

[mike]

damn rooshins aside, if its ok for you to

"posts links to videos and pictures, "

as evidence to further your argument the moon missions were hoaxed.

why cant i then post the results of Drs Martin Hendry and Ken Skeldon at Glasgow University 's study onto the top ten lines of evidence advanced by hoax proponents and their subsequent debunking of said lines of evidence.

in a court these are called expert witnesses and their testimony holds great weight

saying you refuse to discuss this or that argument i may put forward would be like a court case where only the prosecution gets to give evidence. it doesnt work that way

the evidence these Drs could give on the defenses behalf would in a court of law defeat your argument which is based on hearsay and poor forensics, all of which can be demonstrated by the defense.

i also think its a grave dishonour to direct towards some of the bravest people our species has ever seen.
how sad for Mr Armstrong to have walked on a moon, only to die on a planet where such mindless ignorance could still hold sway in the minds of the educated

 

[Rick Deckard]

i also think its a grave dishonour to direct towards some of the bravest people our species has ever seen.
how sad for Mr Armstrong to have walked on a moon, only to die on a planet where such mindless ignorance could still hold sway in the minds of the educated

Ah, but they would never have gotten there without the help of the Nazis...

BTW, this idea that the establishment investigates charges made against it's own actions and finds 'no conspiracy' is getting old. It's like when the tobacco industry funds 10 studies into the affects of smoking and publishes the ones that are inconclusive and forgets about the ones that are detrimental to it's business. Same with mobile phone and pharmaceutical companies. If you've got enough money you can 'prove' anything or at least create enough FUD to discredit your opposition.

 

[mike]

now Mr Decker you are being mind numbingly obtuse

The UK based Particle Physics and Astronomy Research Council comissioned two scottish Drs to research the matter.

it doesnt get any more independant that that

to suggest this UK based science council is somehow corrupt is clutching at straws

might i suggest you look into their findings in detail and in doing so free yourself of the ignorance in which you seem to enjoy wallowing .

that knowledge might help you avoid insulting the brave men and women of our space program and the intelligence of the majority of people who know it did take place

they debunked the top 10 ten examples put forward by the hoax claimers, the very examples you use to prove it was hoaxed have been debunked

be warned though if you do track down the report you will feel so very very embarrassed with yourself once you are done

 

[valiens]

So no one wants to address the 50% sunlight reflection/moon crater thing, eh? It's all got to remain a giant mystery, is that it? What happens if it's not? When did this issue become a sacred cow?

 

[Rick Deckard]

now Mr Decker you are being mind numbingly obtuse

The UK based Particle Physics and Astronomy Research Council comissioned two scottish Drs to research the matter.

it doesnt get any more independant that that

to suggest this UK based science council is somehow corrupt is clutching at straws

might i suggest you look into their findings in detail and in doing so free yourself of the ignorance in which you seem to enjoy wallowing .

Right...you don't think that they would be committing 'professional suicide' if they arrived at any other conclusion? Who's funding their research? Who's gonna be employing them in future? You don't think any of that matters?

that knowledge might help you avoid insulting the brave men and women of our space program and the intelligence of the majority of people who know it did take place

Why are you even putting forward the official story? We all know what that is - why do you feel the need to repeat it? This thread (and forum) is about discussing ideas that fall outside the accepted 'reality'. I have no idea who you are and therefore you have no more credibility with me than anyone else.

they debunked the top 10 ten examples put forward by the hoax claimers, the very examples you use to prove it was hoaxed have been debunked

I think you're confusing me with someone else - I haven't been putting forward anything to support the 'hoax theory'. I am undecided - if you read the thread, you might realise that.

be warned though if you do track down the report you will feel so very very embarrassed with yourself once you are done

I should embarrassed because I dare to question 'established' truth?

Good grief. What's the weather like up there on your high-horse?

 

[mike]

It was compulsory watching at school, i saw it live

i guess you had to be there

yes NASA lied, if you watch the link i posted about apollo 11 youd see the escape tower assembly on top of the CC was a placebo. if something went wrong 3 men were going to die.

apart from the fiscal argument ive already proposed, i still cant see why you would risk 6 flights to the moon to create a hoax when 3 would have done the job cheaper and with less risk of blowing 9 astronaughts to kingdom come.

i guess im not that cynical that i beleive the people in charge would do such a thing

my voice in the court of public opinion is no louder or greater than any other voice, its just one voice no more no less

and the weather like the view is remarkably clear thanks for asking

 

[Rick Deckard]

It was compulsory watching at school, i saw it live

How do you know it was live? The TV crews were not allowed a direct 'live' feed from the mission - they had to film the main screen in the control centre. If the landings were genuine then it would be prudent for NASA to set-up a delay in case something 'unexpected' happened. It would also give them the opportunity to play a pre-recorded tape in place of a 'live' transmission, but we all know that isn't the case because we have full confidence that organisations such as NASA, always give a full and true picture to the general public...BAAAAAAAAA.

 

[mike]

Moonwalk.[66]
4. Parkes supposedly provided the clearest video feed from the Moon, but Australian media and all other known sources ran a live feed from the United States.

While that was the original plan, and, according to some sources, the official policy, the Australian Broadcasting Commission (ABC) did take the transmission direct from the Parkes and Honeysuckle Creek radio telescopes. These were converted to NTSC television at Paddington, in Sydney. This meant that Australian viewers saw the Moonwalk several seconds before the rest of the world.[67] See also The Parkes Observatory's Support of the Apollo 11 Mission, from "Publications of the Astronomical Society of Australia" (The events surrounding the Parkes Observatory's role in relaying the live television of man's first steps on the Moon were portrayed in a slightly fictionalized 2000 Australian film comedy The Dish.)

the transmission was taken direct from an australian RT and converted here in sydney for domestic viewing "live"

you didnt see it live, we did
your argument and rationale only make sense from the geographic isolation in which you are thinking, thinking outside america and taking into consideration the data as a whole your last question goes out the window
what you may or may not have seen as an american on american tv of an american space centre at houston, is not the the be all and end all of the reality.



i guess you had to be there, or perhaps here

 

[Rick Deckard]

Moonwalk.[66]
4. Parkes supposedly provided the clearest video feed from the Moon, but Australian media and all other known sources ran a live feed from the United States.

While that was the original plan, and, according to some sources, the official policy, the Australian Broadcasting Commission (ABC) did take the transmission direct from the Parkes and Honeysuckle Creek radio telescopes. These were converted to NTSC television at Paddington, in Sydney. This meant that Australian viewers saw the Moonwalk several seconds before the rest of the world.[67] See also The Parkes Observatory's Support of the Apollo 11 Mission, from "Publications of the Astronomical Society of Australia" (The events surrounding the Parkes Observatory's role in relaying the live television of man's first steps on the Moon were portrayed in a slightly fictionalized 2000 Australian film comedy The Dish.)

the transmission was taken direct from an australian RT and converted here in sydney for domestic viewing "live"

Cool - I'll have to look into that source and find out where I read to the contrary...another hole closed (hopefully).

 

[mike]

no worries mate,
i can recommend the movie "the dish" and although it uses comedy to keep the story of what is essentially a long wait moving, it provides a good snapshot of the australian mindset at the time and in relation to the event. they took it very seriously and were very proud of their smallest of parts, in what they saw as the largest of accomplishments

walking into an old boys reunion of the Parkes moon landing team today and asking if they faked it.. well it would be a lot safer to ask buzz. a lot safer

and maybe thats why im passionate about it, because for the theory to stand ,the australian scientists have to be the villains in the plot
they would have had to have been in on it and lying about it

that or stupid

 

[Rick Deckard]

no worries mate,
i can recommend the movie "the dish" and although it uses comedy to keep the story of what is essentially a long wait moving, it provides a good snapshot of the australian mindset at the time and in relation to the event. they took it very seriously and were very proud of their smallest of parts, in what they saw as the largest of accomplishments

Well, if true, they took one hell of a risk broadcasting live - I quick scan of my 'official' Apollo landing books failed to reveal anything to the contrary, so I therefore have a suspicion that the claim about the live feed is made in several of the 'hoax' documentaries. Oh well.

Anyway, let me restate my stance just to be clear - my whole interest in this subject was borne from my frustration with the apparent lack of progress in space travel since the Apollo landings. I think it's a crying shame that we (the human race) appear to have taken the foot off the gas pedal when it comes to manned exploration of our solar system.

I know about all the offered explanations for this, the main one being 'lack of funds and interest', but it does ring alarm bells in my mind when people start claiming that NASA couldn't go back to the moon if they wanted to because they've 'forgotten' how they got there in the first place.

I do think that some of the Apollo images have been 'staged' - possibly in the interest of 'sales'. NASA do appear to be 'tinkering' with the red signal in the Mars rover pictures (making the Mars sky less 'blue'), so it's not something that I would rule out. That doesn't mean the whole thing was faked, just that the photographic record may not be a 100% true reflection of actual events. You could argue, that technically, no photograph can be a true reflection of an actual event due to the nature of the technology - but that's a different argument.

I do find it puzzling that NASA has gone for a manned mission to Mars rather than establishing a base on the moon first - although, like I've stated elsewhere, there now appears to be a 'gold rush' on for the mining rights to the Helium-3 isotope in the Moons soil.

So, when people start offering alternative versions of events around the Apollo landings, I'm interested in what they have to say. But, like DB has stated in the past, when you try to hold the middle ground (like I'm trying to do) and ask questions on both sides of the arguments, you get twice as much grief.

My preferred hypothesis is that they probably did go to the moon and that the US military probably hi-jacked the technology once a landing had been achieved and that it's likely that manned space exploration has continued 'in the black'. NASA then continued the 'public facing' space program with diminished funding.

At the end of the day, when another nation (not allied to the US) lands a man on the moon, I'll be a whole lot 'happier' with the situation. BUT, if it is ever revealed that some or all aspects of the landings were faked for whatever reason (political or otherwise), then I am prepared to accept that. It wouldn't be such a huge shock to my system.

I still think it's healthy to question the 'established' facts of any event - just reading the 9/11 Commission Report tells me, that someone, somewhere, IS manipulating facts in a truly fundamental way. Of course, the internet offers a veritable minefield of conflicting 'truths' and picking your way across to safety on the other side, is a tricky task, to say the least.

This thread died a long time ago, I think I'll give it rest now.

 

[pixelsmith]

very well stated Rick!

 

[Rick Deckard]

very well stated Rick!

Thank you - I do try my best and very occasionally, I manage to get my point across!