Did The Moon Landing Occur - Yes or No?

[Jeremyhfht]

This is a very "simplistic" topic. More like a cess pool for half-minded conspiracy theorists.

Anyone proficient in using google, or even filming, knows that the moon landing can't be discerned as "fake" from the footage. Also the fact that NASA has released a BOOK on the footage alone, which rebuttals key points. All of which in line with the reality of what the moon is (or would be) like. Which is in line with the footage.

Overall: There's a high chance it did happen. Either way, NASA is a team of VERY ADVANCED SCIENTISTS. It wont be found out as a "conspiracy" by your random super-fat imbecile that thinks he knows how the world works. It wont mess up if it decides to fake something. The few hundreds of scientists on the project sort of ensure that.

To give a more educated reason for even doubting the landing: The technology at the time was extremely lacking. NASA was lucky. Immensely so. The only reason NASA hasn't planned more manned-space missions, is that they now fully know the extent of the danger. Not very willing to rely on blind-luck anymore, either.

 

[Singularity]

Yup, it's so risky they post everywhere they can, and keep posting and none have died yet. Woo-woo.....

And does this make me a woowoo ?

http://sciforums.com/showpost.php?p=1361059&postcount=195

Or did u realize that u r a cattle and nothing more; like a battery in the movie Matrix,

your life is a shame.

 

[Oli]

Once again you show a marvellous, almost impossible, lack of understanding.
The point was that the people who are "risking their lives" post all over, not YOU. All you do is parrot crap that others have come up with, get shown you are wrong, due to your ineffable stupidity, and move onto another so-called fact without acknowledging that you were wrong.
That is what makes me say you're a woo-woo.
What actually makes you a woo-woo is your credulous idiocy, lack of knowledge of physics, engineering, astronautics and other topics which you comment so frequently on with no basis in reality, and consistently fail to correct, and the comfort you take in the "knowledge" that anyone who bothers to think is "cattle for the Illuminati" (who, by the way, do NOT exist: GeoffP's lizard invasion notwithstanding, of course).

 

[Singularity]

U mean Donald Rumsfield is a WooWoo ?

I am just repeating what he has said in this video,

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7RXrKRuNvNU&mode=related&search=

ie. If the video is still online.

 

[Oli]

U mean Donald Rumsfield is a WooWoo ?

Depends. If he actually said it in the context that the video CLAIMS he did, the yes, he is a woo-woo. But the editing is done so that the interviewees could have been talking about anything at all..

I am just repeating what he has said in this video,

QED: you repeat what others say, without considering source, feasibility, credibility or anything else. If it suits your credulous, uninformed agenda, because you WANT to believe that crap, then you accept it.
It's strange how you "question"* science but don't apply the same level of doubt to the things you want to be true.

* I say "question" but you don't do that either: you make some ridiculous insupportable statement, e.g.

Thats all possible only with auto pilot, even then its very difficult in zero G and that kinda alien environment.

and leave it at that - no explanation of why you believe that, just your own stupid prejudices.

 

[orcot]

Also the fact that NASA has released a BOOK on the footage alone

Do you have a link on that?

Annyway the most obvious proof for the apollo landings are in the independed observations

 

[Singularity]

Do you have a link on that?

Annyway the most obvious proof for the apollo landings are in the independed observations

Hi Orkot,

there is nothing new in that link, all the tracking they talk about is not good proof. If i want to fake it then i will retransmit recordings from the craft to the earth.

BTW that Oli can learn a lot from your attitude, I hope he/she matures someday.

 

[Singularity]

Bart sibrel...

So the same person who wilingly says he saw UFO's is greatly offended when you call the lunar landing a hoax. (that's his opinion not mine)

...

Its shows that he is a compulsive liar. He lies about the UFO and the Landings (from my point of view).

 

[Singularity]

actualy singularity you chould think your post a bid more through. I'm not going to make you gues how far the horizon is but here on earth a average person that's 1M70 can see 4.7 km far the moons radius is 0.273 times earth so I gues 1.28km chould be a good bed. Aftherall the horizon can't be everywhere like in bolivia

Nice pic, but this pic is not a land pic, things have to get smaller as we look further.

The below pic has an man made shiny object placed very near the horizon; and u forgot the huge spotlight, the entire surface should be lit with uniform brightness.

 

[Singularity]

...
It's strange how you "question"* science but don't apply the same level of doubt to the things you want to be true.

What did u say about this NASA pic, i cant remember.
Or did u ignore it on purpose for your illuminati agenda ?

* I say "question" but you don't do that either: you make some ridiculous insupportable statement, e.g. and leave it at that - no explanation of why you believe that, just your own stupid prejudices.

U know what , your problem is that u focus less on the problem and more one me, so i suggest u reconsider your career in science.

 

[orcot]

but this pic is not a land pic

No it is ectualy on land (bolivian salt dessert or something) beatiful you have to see it if you can.

The below pic has an man made shiny object placed very near the horizon

I see rocks and even if the've left stuff there

And abouth the picture with the 2 astronauts look at the shadows of the right legs (from your side it's the left one) of the most right astronaut. You will notice a unfilled hap in the shadow you may also notice the surprisenly low ress on this pic?

 

[Jeremyhfht]

Before this madness continues, I'd like to make a point that there are many "conspiracy theorists" out there that are literally making photo's up.

If I could post links, I would, as I know of a website which almost perfectly mimic's JPL's. Simply so the guy would make other websites to discredit NASA.

Kind of ironic. The real conspiracies lie with the conspiracy theorists!

Actually, let me get around that stupid link barrier for just a moment (to prove my case):
marsrovers.
jpl.nasa
.gov/

For the real JPL website, google "JPL".

 

[Singularity]

Before this madness continues, I'd like to make a point that there are many "conspiracy theorists" out there that are literally making photo's up.

If I could post links, I would, as I know of a website which almost perfectly mimic's JPL's. Simply so the guy would make other websites to discredit NASA.

Kind of ironic. The real conspiracies lie with the conspiracy theorists!

Actually, let me get around that stupid link barrier for just a moment (to prove my case):
marsrovers.
jpl.nasa
.gov/

For the real JPL website, google "JPL".

http://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/a12/a12.DPphoto.jpg

http://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/a12/a12.DPphoto.jpg
:shrug:

 

[Jeremyhfht]

and...there's supposed to be some point to that picture?

Btw, that also appears to be a fake NASA website. NASA is NASA.GOV not HQ.NASA.GOV.

It would appear, sir, you've been scammed by another fake placed conspiracy-attraction website. No need to feel ashamed, they duplicate the NASA websites almost perfectly. I'd nearly fall for if it wasn't for the fact I have fingers, and can use search engines.

 

[Singularity]

and...there's supposed to be some point to that picture?

Btw, that also appears to be a fake NASA website. NASA is NASA.GOV not HQ.NASA.GOV.

It would appear, sir, you've been scammed by another fake placed conspiracy-attraction website. No need to feel ashamed, they duplicate the NASA websites almost perfectly. I'd nearly fall for if it wasn't for the fact I have fingers, and can use search engines.

So u mean this is a fake site or r u implying in a secret code that the whole of nasa is Fake .

http://www.nasa.gov/centers/hq/home/index.html

 

[Singularity]

Lets see if u can spot http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/History/apollo.html

Above Link within this one http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/apollo/index.html

Seems like illuminati has their enemies within.

Resistance is alive and Kicking !

 

[Oli]

What did u say about this NASA pic, i cant remember.

Actually I said nothing about that picture - one picture, provenance unkown, says nothing one way or the other.

Or did u ignore it on purpose for your illuminati agenda ?

The ever-present cry of the woo-woo, if you don't agree with my half-baked uninformed speculation then you "work for them".

U know what , your problem is that u focus less on the problem and more one me, so i suggest u reconsider your career in science.

Focus on you? Hardly, just trying to correct your Insufferable Idiocy. You ARE the problem.
"Career in science" - another unwarranted assumption on your part...

 

[Janus58]

The below pic has an man made shiny object placed very near the horizon; and u forgot the huge spotlight, the entire surface should be lit with uniform brightness.

Once again, you are letting your "common sense" lead you astray.

Even though the surface is uniformly lit by the sun, it would not appear to be a uniform brightness as seen form the vantage of the camera. The sun is behind the astronaut in the photo and the surface is irregular, the sun is also at a low angle. You are going to have highlights and shadows. As you look further into the distance, your sight line becomes more parallel to the surface.
As this happens, more and more of the highlit portions of the bumps are hidden on the opposite side of the bumps themselves and you see a higher porportion of the shadows. The surface looks darker. IOW, even though the angle at which the sun hits the surface doesn't change with distance, your viewing angle does.

Also, the astronaut is standing between two bumps in the surface, so you see highlit Areas on either side of him, plus some radiosity effect( where light striking him is reflected to light the ground near him.

The bright object in the background is just a rock that sticks up high enough and has a fairly vertical surface facing to the right.

 

[Jeremyhfht]

So u mean this is a fake site or r u implying in a secret code that the whole of nasa is Fake .

Wow, you are mindless. It's obvious I called the website fake. The real website is NASA.GOV. Anything else is an imitation made by people attempting to ruin NASA's credibility.

 

[D H]

Wow, you are mindless. It's obvious I called the website fake. The real website is NASA.GOV. Anything else is an imitation made by people attempting to ruin NASA's credibility.

Amazingly, singularity is correct in this regard (legitimacy of XXX.nasa.gov web sites). JPL is jpl.nasa.gov, NASA Headquarters is hq.nasa.gov, Johnson Space Center is jsc.nasa.gov, and so on.

Jeremy, the Mars page you posted is a real JPL web page. What makes you think it is phony?