Did The Moon Landing Occur - Yes or No?
- Thread starter darksidZz
- Start date
Jeremyhfht
Registered Senior Member
The MOHRLOCKS are doing it again
Ad hominem, anyone?
Jeremyhfht
Registered Senior Member
technically we're ad-homing him, but only after we've refuted most of his stupidity.
He's not really refuted our refutations of HIS work, though.
He's not really refuted our refutations of HIS work, though.
Ok, someone is showing some sanity here.
Actually i dont depend on what my heart feels. If my heart feels something i confirm the feeling first before venturing in to the bewilderness, And nothing stops me then forth except reasoning.
So why i beleive NASA faked moon landings ?
The proof,
1) The cameras had no protection, so there cant be the images that we see today.
2) Theres a moon wind blowing flag video in the youtube.com, rest have been taken off the web. Speaking of the damage control. SO watch the "Funny thing happened on moon"
3) All three astronots resigned immediately after moon missions instead of basking in glory and making more of their years ahead.
4) Buzz Aldrin was angry and threatened Law suits when he was shown the fakery video that he was involved in; its in the "Funny thing happened on moon". Both f them are still on youtube, hope so.
5) Wires attached can be seen in two videos.
6) The movements of Astronots is consistent with ropes attached to make them lighter at feet.
7) The size of Saturn V was not consistent with the path of the moon trip they took.
8) The Astronots had no idea that Van Allen radiation belts show a display of lights even when eyes are shuts. This was known recently when shuttle went near them. So the radiation is lethal.
9) They never saw any stars and admitted not remembering any, a big mistake (a slip off). Nor did they took photos of beautiful mother Earth, which is impossible.
Any one looking up, it will be natural to take her snaps.
10) Alien foot prints (left by camera crew) can be seen in couple of photos.
11) And photo inconsistencies. Specially the last ones i posted.
12) No blast crater but small pebbles are clearly visible which didnt get blown off by the jet blast winds, how convenient.
13) Landers landing near previous probes.
14) Best of all, with no experience USA reached the moon and with lot of experience USSR failed. Hmm, Genetic superiority ?
etc etc
I'm bored, so I'll take the bait
It's an interesting picture, and reveals some of the limited thinking that casual conspiracists have.
The most obvious is their assumption that the apparent horizon is always at an elevation of zero. This would be true, of course, if the ground on the Moon was flat. But it's obviously not true if there are hills, mountains, valleys, and craters to contend with.
The second is their inability or unwillingness to think things through or do any kind of analysis. What is the apparent elevation of the Earth in this image? What should it be?
So let's see.
First, the apparent elevation in the image. The Earth is 12,500km across, and 384000km from the Moon, so it's angular size seen from the Moon is about 3 degrees (it varies a bit). In the image, the middle of the Earth is about nine Earth diameters away the horizon, or about 27°.
Next, the actual elevation based on when and where the image was taken.
The image is was taken on December 13, 1972 at 4:41 am GMT.
It is of Boulder 2 at Station 2 of the Apollo 17 mission, located at about 20°06'N 30°32'E. This location gives us an approximate elevation of 54°. There is an error of up to 4° in this figure which could be corrected using the date.
So, we find that the Earth is about half the distance from the horizon than you might naively expect it should be... So now we look at the topography of the site: http://history.nasa.gov/alsj/a17/LTO43D1S1(50)sm2.jpg
Given the coordinates (20°06'N 30°32'E) you can see that Station 2 is right by a large massif. The photo was taken looking South-East, along the side of the massif and above a spur. If you wanted, you could determine the elevation of the horizon from the topography... but I'm out of time.
Singularity:
You haven't done even the bare minimum of research on this, have you? I mean, the first thing most people might check would be Wikipedia. I've looked there and... guess what? There a debunking of almost all the points you have raised in this thread.
I'll bet you haven't even read it. I suggest you go educate yourself, so you don't continue to look stupid.
No idea what "protection" you imagine was required.
The flapping flag had just been planted, and had residual oscillations from its support.
Inconclusive.
Don't know about this supposed "fakery video".
Perhaps you're confusing pre-mission simulations with the actual missions. Who knows?
And also consistent with reduced lunar gravity.
Wrong.
No, it isn't.
Unverified.
False.
Debunked previously.
Debunked right at the start of this thread. Didn't you bother reading it?
Deliberate choice by NASA.
More money from the government. Better technology. Most experienced personnel.
You haven't done even the bare minimum of research on this, have you? I mean, the first thing most people might check would be Wikipedia. I've looked there and... guess what? There a debunking of almost all the points you have raised in this thread.
I'll bet you haven't even read it. I suggest you go educate yourself, so you don't continue to look stupid.
No idea what "protection" you imagine was required.
The flapping flag had just been planted, and had residual oscillations from its support.
Inconclusive.
Don't know about this supposed "fakery video".
Perhaps you're confusing pre-mission simulations with the actual missions. Who knows?
And also consistent with reduced lunar gravity.
Wrong.
No, it isn't.
Unverified.
False.
Debunked previously.
Debunked right at the start of this thread. Didn't you bother reading it?
Deliberate choice by NASA.
More money from the government. Better technology. Most experienced personnel.
Why are you asking me?
It should be about 55 degrees. It looks maybe 40 degrees (13 Earth diameters) above the hill behind the astronaut. The hill could easily be ten degrees (3 Earth diameters) high. It's hard to tell, because the camera seems to be tilted to the right.
It's been fun, Singularity. I can't even tell if you're serious or not anymore... I was sure you were pulling our collective leg, but now I'm worried that you really believe these things!
:bugeye:Singularity said:
You've posted several photos they took of Earth in this thread.
Here's an extract from an interview with a shuttle astronaut (http://www.spacestory.com/omni_part_1.htm):
Two things to note:
First, when you're busy doing a job, you don't necessarily remember to enjoy the scenery.
Second, the astronauts on the Moon weren't able to dark-adapt their eyes. The surface of the Moon is very bright (just look at it!), and their helmets were heavily tinted.
Thanks James R, u have done so much research that i am no match to u so i usually avoid confronting with.
Hmm, incredibly they forgot in Apollo 11. So after that they got the point it seems.
And theres not even the evening stars , how sad.
Hmm, But they did remember seeing the stars years after the first landing, wow.
Last edited:
Sorry, actually i am being hounded here by Mhorlocs hence the mistake, they all have the same tune.
http://sciforums.com/showpost.php?p=1365535&postcount=297
So U mean this image is covering 70 degrees vertically ?
Its possible if they had wide angle cameras. But then this Astronot should look compressed a bit.
It's been fun, Singularity. I can't even tell if you're serious or not anymore... I was sure you were pulling our collective leg, but now I'm worried that you really believe these things!
Now way i am serious, i am just testing the Morlocks ability to argue and till now its been pathetic, particularly of the name callers. Who cares if morons are being exploited by few, but that knowledge is essential because the life on this planets is in grave danger due to this attitude.
But U r best among them though with few fluctuations.
Ophiolite
Valued Senior Member
If you believe you have presented arguments containing even a scintilla of conviction, or substance, then you are in serious need of counselling.
This pretty much say's it all. Kiss the mod's ass and keep posting.
But the truth is, who cares?
paraphrase...should read:
'Oh James u are soo smart, if i am nice to u i can win your kindness and attack anyone else with impunity' - i am learning that sucking up is more important than integrity'
Last edited: