Moon Landing is a Fake

[Rick Deckard]

What are the top 5 pieces of evidence that human beings landed on the moon during the apollo program?

1. NASA say they put a man on the moon - therefore it must be true
2. (See point 1)
3. (See point 2)
4. (See point 3)
5. (See point 4)

That is an exhaustive list of the evidence.

Despite the pathetic attacks by the so-called skeptics (who don't appear to be at all skeptical about anything - they just 'know' what is and isn't true), the moon landings are in my 'grey' basket. They did send probes to the moon in the early sixties, so it is *possible* that they combined real probe mission data materials with staged moon landings.

Like I said before, we won't really know for sure until it is *independently* verified by a non-allied country.

 

[Aaron LeClair]

A.LeClair, posting links to a bunch of debunking sites and videos doesn't answer the specific questions I raised in my earlier posts. I am not going to link to my posts again, if people wish to ignore them, that's entirely their prerogative.

I don't need to answer your questions in order to post links.

Answers to your questions aren't found at any of the sites I linked?

 

[cottonzway]

Reading this thread lowers my IQ. I was happy to see it locked down and sad to see it re-opened.

 

[Rick Deckard]

Reading this thread lowers my IQ. I was happy to see it locked down and sad to see it re-opened.

I'm waiting to hear to the declaration of 'blasphemy' - I think several people have come close to saying it...

I just don't get it - why do people do people get so irritated by this? Why do you feel the need to criticise others for looking at the claims that it was hoaxed? If you're convinced of the moon landings authenticity, then that's fine, you've no need to participate in this discussion because all you can do is parrot the official story, which we are all aware of, so repeating it is wasted effort.

There are so many things that just don't add up - UFO's, JFK, 9/11 and the WMD in Iraq are the obvious ones, so why must we 'tippy-toe' around the anomalies in the Apollo record?

If you're comfortable with the authenticity of the Apollo mission, then why not focus your energies elsewhere rather than stirring up bad feelings with those who might still have doubts?

 

[cottonzway]

It's because those other examples you listed caused great harm to our country. Look, even if the first landing was fake (I don not happen to think that) what HARM has it caused the American people? It's not having our president murdered in public or our country compromised in every sense of the way either.

It's not like people have not like others haven't been to the moon. So in reality what would it prove if the "moon landing" was fake? That our lying government lied again? Anyone who has reasonable thinking skills knows we are lied to about many things. In this case though I don't think that is the case and even if they did it did not cause death or a police state in this country. It's not a WORTHY cause to take up IMO because the end result will do nothing unlike the other issues you mentioned. Also the FACT that man has been on the moon so it's not a matter of lying that it has happened.

All I am saying is it is wasted energy that can be put to good use for things that effect us. I'm saying all this even suggesting that this COULD be legit that we did not go there the first time and I don't believe that. Even if I did it caused no harm and nothing will come of it.

 

[Rick Deckard]

It's because those other examples you listed caused great harm to our country. Look, even if the first landing was fake (I don not happen to think that) what HARM has it caused the American people? It's not having our president murdered in public or our country compromised in every sense of the way either.

It's not like people have not like others haven't been to the moon. So in reality what would it prove if the "moon landing" was fake? That our lying government lied again? Anyone who has reasonable thinking skills knows we are lied to about many things. In this case though I don't think that is the case and even if they did it did not cause death or a police state in this country. It's not a WORTHY cause to take up IMO because the end result will do nothing unlike the other issues you mentioned. Also the FACT that man has been on the moon so it's not a matter of lying that it has happened.

I agree with a lot of what you say - it doesn't matter to me personally, whether they did or they didn't go; it's academic, but if someone comes along and says they have proof that they didn't go then I want to see it - all the stuff I've seen so far has been 'interesting' but not conclusive and it never will be.

I would feel a whole lot better if the 'space race' was a global effort and not the domain of America - I know that's not gonna happen any time soon because of the questionable things that America has done in recent times and the subsequent degradation of their relationship with the rest of the world.

I have to disagree with you on the importance of a successful moon landing - the winner of the 'race to the moon' could claim of the crown of 'most powerful country on the planet' - which is exactly what America did. It was also a 'morale booster' for a country fighting a war they couldn't win and a lot of economic prosperity resulted from the 'greatest technical achievement in human history'. In the eyes of the people the moon landings made America great again and I fully understand that this is why questioning the achievement might not go down too well with everyone...

...but, what really interests me is the bigger picture. Can such things be hoaxed? Would a government dare to lie to it's people and the rest of the world on such a scale? Does the benefit outweigh the risk? For a long time, I ruled out that possibility - but now, with access to the internet and it's ability to bypass media 'control', we get to see that the official stories of so many recent events are so woefully lacking in so many important areas that I find it hard not to question the official story of any major event.

What I find most disappointing is being labelled a 'flat-earther' for daring to contemplate that the historical record may have been distorted for political gain. I've been called the same for examining the claim that solar activity is a more likely cause than human-CO2 for Global Warming - two people have expressed outrage that I 'don't believe in Global Warming' - which is ridiculous; I'm questioning the 'officially accepted' cause of Global Warming (CO2) not whether Global Warming is real.

I keep saying this, but I'll repeat it again - this is a discussion forum. It's about throwing ideas around and seeing what sticks. You will agree with some opinions and disagree with others - but at the end of the day, apart from a few bruised egos, no-one get's hurt.

 

[Farside]

I agree with a lot of what you say - it doesn't matter to me personally, whether they did or they didn't go; it's academic, but if someone comes along and says they have proof that they didn't go then I want to see it - all the stuff I've seen so far has been 'interesting' but not conclusive and it never will be.

I would feel a whole lot better if the 'space race' was a global effort and not the domain of America - I know that's not gonna happen any time soon because of the questionable things that America has done in recent times and the subsequent degradation of their relationship with the rest of the world.

I have to disagree with you on the importance of a successful moon landing - the winner of the 'race to the moon' could claim of the crown of 'most powerful country on the planet' - which is exactly what America did. It was also a 'morale booster' for a country fighting a war they couldn't win and a lot of economic prosperity resulted from the 'greatest technical achievement in human history'. In the eyes of the people the moon landings made America great again and I fully understand that this is why questioning the achievement might not go down too well with everyone...

...but, what really interests me is the bigger picture. Can such things be hoaxed? Would a government dare to lie to it's people and the rest of the world on such a scale? Does the benefit outweigh the risk? For a long time, I ruled out that possibility - but now, with access to the internet and it's ability to bypass media 'control', we get to see that the official stories of so many recent events are so woefully lacking in so many important areas that I find it hard not to question the official story of any major event.

What I find most disappointing is being labelled a 'flat-earther' for daring to contemplate that the historical record may have been distorted for political gain. I've been called the same for examining the claim that solar activity is a more likely cause than human-CO2 for Global Warming - two people have expressed outrage that I 'don't believe in Global Warming' - which is ridiculous; I'm questioning the 'officially accepted' cause of Global Warming (CO2) not whether Global Warming is real.

I keep saying this, but I'll repeat it again - this is a discussion forum. It's about throwing ideas around and seeing what sticks. You will agree with some opinions and disagree with others - but at the end of the day, apart from a few bruised egos, no-one get's hurt.

O come on, no proof has panned out eather way. o wait we did not land on mars!!!! news flash its a moot point really, the government did what it had to do, if it was fake i could really careless, we landed robots on mars! i think that is far more cooler then landing on the moon. if we cheated to win that fine with me, it not like the gov has not do it befor. but i think it did happen you can go on think what you think but you.

Global Warming i really dont care if it real or not, would it hurt people to just try to live healther lives. plue it think we might be seeing a poler shift(no proof)

 

[Rick Deckard]

O come on, no proof has panned out eather way. o wait we did not land on mars!!!! news flash its a moot point really, the government did what it had to do, if it was fake i could really careless, we landed robots on mars! i think that is far more cooler then landing on the moon. if we cheated to win that fine with me, it not like the gov has not do it befor. but i think it did happen you can go on think what you think but you.

Global Warming i really dont care if it real or not, would it hurt people to just try to live healther lives. plue it think we might be seeing a poler shift(no proof)

Bye bye - *click*

 

[BrandonD]

Here's a demonstration to show just how easy it is:

If someone were to ask me "What do you consider the top 3 pieces of evidence to support the landing at Roswell of something "otherworldly"?", I would probably answer:

1) The initial acknowledgement as a "flying saucer" by highly trained military officials
2) Eyewitness testimony
3) Analysis of debris supposedly taken from the Roswell wreckage contains "off-world" elements.

Look how easy that was. I don't consider myself a Roswell expert by any stretch of the imagination, but according to me, those are the top 3 pieces of evidence to support the Roswell ufo story. People don't like doing this sort of thing (speaking from their own knowledge) because it places their knowledge of a subject "out on the line" for others to criticize. People would much rather shout at others from the bleachers where it's safe.

But I generally consider myself among friends here, among people who are willing to play with ideas and aren't simply interested in intellectual swordfighting.

I'd guess that most people would argue that the pieces of evidence I cited for Roswell are not strong enough to convince a jury in a court of law. I'd be inclined to agree with this, and I'd also be inclined to say that the pieces of evidence that man landed on the moon during the apollo programs are of equal or lesser strength. The only difference is mass concensus, what the average person already believes.

As someone said, no lives are on the line regarding the moon landing, so there's no reason for any of us to be so serious about it. I have no crusade to "prove" the fake moon landings, I'm just interested in actually hearing why people are so convinced that they happened, because I'm personally not convinced.

 

[Rick Deckard]

Okay, I'll have a go...

1. The development of the hardware - rockets, simulators, space suits etc...
2. The rockets taking off and the capsule splashing down
3. The photos and videos taken by the crew
4. The moon rocks
5. The testimony of all involved and the difficulty of 'keeping a secret'

...but it's the journey of three men to the moon and back that is being examined - the pro-apollo group always emphasize the 5 points above, but those things don't actually prove that they ever went to the moon. It just proves they spent a lot of money attempting to do it.

We all have different levels of acceptable evidence/proof. There seems to be a group of people that take the official version of all events as 'gospel', but challenge every other version. They never scutinize the official account but attack anyone who dares to question it. They call themselves 'skeptics'. I call them a joke.

 

[pixelsmith]

this video series makes very good points. i like part 6. it talks about why the camera used on the moon could not have even functioned.

 

[pixelsmith]

i would LOVE to hear DB's comments on this video.

 

[Aaron LeClair]

i would LOVE to hear DB's comments on this video.

That vid is one that is being used to prove low G, not the hoax claim. See the description comments and title. "watch the low gravity
you cant fake this." and "Excellent Moon Landing PROOFS".

 

[musictomyears]

I'm just interested in actually hearing why people are so convinced that they happened, because I'm personally not convinced.

Yeah... I know.

I have taken part in discussions on Apollo in various places, and the arguments were exactly the same as here. The faithful never bother with arguing the finer points, but resort to generalisations, and often slander. To my mind, it is a perfect example of how the media controls the minds of the public. Simply repeat a falsehood over and over again, and it becomes a truth - no need for verification. NASA said they landed on the Moon, the astronauts said they landed on the Moon, and the general populus is happy and believes it - regardless of hair-raising inconsistencies in the official record.

175 posts into this thread - and the Apollo believers still didn't even look at the links to the images I posted earlier. Interesting, isn't it?

 

[BrandonD]

Okay, I'll have a go...

1. The development of the hardware - rockets, simulators, space suits etc...
2. The rockets taking off and the capsule splashing down
3. The photos and videos taken by the crew
4. The moon rocks
5. The testimony of all involved and the difficulty of 'keeping a secret'

Thanks for playing the devil's advocate on this one Deckard, it's funny that none of the "believers" gave it a shot. It takes all of 5 minutes. Ok here are my responses to those particular pieces of evidence:

The numbers 3,4, and part of 5 can be accepted as evidence, but the remaining ones are not evidence.

#1 Development of hardware does not constitute proof. The current research and development of technology to make an aircraft completely invisible does not constitute proof that we've successfully made an aircraft completely invisible. One can reaonably ask "what is the proof that this technology functions as it is presumed to?" and the response would be "photographic and testimonial evidence". So #1 is contained within #3 and 5 and is not a piece of evidence on its own.

The "rockets taking off and the capsule splashing down" does not constitute evidence either because this in itself is nothing material. One can reasonably ask, "what is the proof that the rocket took off and the capsule splashed down?" and the response would be "photographic and testimonial evidence". So #2 is contained within #3 and 5 and is not a piece of evidence on its own.

Also, the frequently stated "difficulty of keeping a secret" as evidence is just ludicrous. This idea is 100% speculative opinion. As in the above examples, if you have to provide evidence for your evidence, then... it's not actually evidence.

It is just so bizarre to me that people can't take logical steps on this subject. Anyone who has studied the UFO subject with any degree of seriousness can see that our leaders have lied to us about things of great importance, and thus history and the nature of our world is not necessarily exactly as it has been told to us. Faced with this realization, I think it is perfectly reasonable to take ideas that are assumed to be true and re-assess them.

This makes sense to most people, and they will agree with this in words, but certainly not in practice. I see all these people who are presuming to be "skeptics" and "rationalists" and are actually just religious defenders of the western world-view. As they say, nothing keeps a man more ignorant than another man telling him he is a genius.

An interesting observation of mine: if the public at large appears to be violently/religiously opposed to the re-assessing of something that is assumed to be true (ie, 9/11), then this generally lends weight to the possibility that there is some deception going on.

 

[Tommy Allison]

I really could give a damn whether or not we landed on the moon. What I DO care about, is all that NASA footage from those days that went missing. Anyone remember the recent news where ungodly amounts of NASA footage simply disappeared, and NOBODY seems to know where it all went to?

I myself only care about one thing. What they SAW up there in space, that we earthbound types can't verify. I know for a fact that several astronauts saw things that were unearthly in space, intelligently piloted things, and yet we here on earth can't be told anything for fear of riling up the earthchimps on this planet.

This planet has by far and away the most paradoxial population of people in the universe. How is it that we could be so hopeful that there is life outside of this planet, and yet at the same time dismiss anyone who claims it exists?

 

[Rick Deckard]

@BrandonD - you and I have a similar view.

@Tommy - I really find it hard to believe that such a large amount of data and materials from 'the biggest event of the 20th century' can go missing. The 'skeptics' will say it's incompetence - I would say that the 'skeptical' stance ought to be that it's more likely that NASA is hiding something...

...especially when the same people who don't question NASA's motives are quite happy to accept the idea of a worldwide cover-up of the UFO reality.

 

[cottonzway]

If people just say "OK, I agree" can we move past this and focus on more imporant issues at hand?

 

[musictomyears]

...especially when the same people who don't question NASA's motives are quite happy to accept the idea of a worldwide cover-up of the UFO reality.

Good one. You are right, this has to be the most startling inconsistency in the mindset of a great number of Apollo believers.

 

[BrandonD]

If people just say "OK, I agree" can we move past this and focus on more imporant issues at hand?

I actually started laughing when I read your post, because you're probably right.