The Apollo Moon Missions Were Faked

[David C]

Sometimes anti-establishment pundits say things they obviously don't even believe because they've either been threatened, or bribed. Look at what James Van Allen says in this article.
http://www.buzzcreek.com/grade-a/MOON/articles1.htm

After he started working for NASA, he changed his stand.

No he didn't, the incoming data from his first experiment was inaccurate. After 40 more missions, he had a better idea. Science evolves.

Some people even think that some of them may be sleeper agents; look at Noam Chomsky's position on 9/11's having been an inside job.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BhrZ57XxYJU

He's no moron and he's surely seen the proof.
He knows it was an inside job and he's saying it wasn't.

The psychic spammer are you? He says it wasn't an inside job, because it wasn't. He is smart enough to see why.

The government seems to have a way of getting to these people.

Paranoid BS, to prop up your stupid argument. People who you previously relied on, dispute other crap of yours, so you have no recourse but to make this BS argument.

No matter what else that guy says, the anomalies in the Chinese spacewalk that he pointed out are simply too clear for you people to obfuscate and your success rate in swaying the viewers who actually look at them is probably close to zero.

I've actually yet to see a single person agree with you, so that is closer to 100% than zero, d'ya think?

Well, your credibility is shot.

When an idiot assesses my credibility based on an idiotic test, the conclusion is flawed.

The only people you're going to sway with your tactic of using rhetoric is the people who don't take the time to look at the proof. There's really no more point in talking to you as you obviously don't even believe your own arguments.

Yeah, run away from debate again when you get your backside kicked........

http://sciforums.com/showpost.php?p=2949522&postcount=135

Here's a partial summary of the Apollo-hoax proof.

And here is where your wall of spam is taken apart .....

http://debunking-a-moron.blogspot.co.uk/

The people who say Apollo happened also say that the Chinese spacewalk was real so there's really no point in wasting time talking to them. If any serious posters come along, I'll come back and debate with them.

No you won't, you'll just spam your crap again and avoid the difficult questions.

 

[Awoken]

Hey fat freddie, you're getting ripped up here royally on this topic, but hat's off to.

I've looked into this briefly, but I almost wonder if they used the moon landings to launder money to fund who knows what, the vietnam war was going on. Get man to the moon (and on the moon), film what you can, then improvise what you can't, sell it to the public, funding rolls in and funnel it to other areas.

Ah conspiracy theories, I love em.

 

[Trippy]

So Freddy.

What is it about the Shenzhou 7 mission, precisely, that you believe was faked?

 

[Believe]

Perfect

http://xkcd.com/1074/

 

[spidergoat]

Can we start a fund to send FatFreddy into space?

 

[Awoken]

Can we start a fund to send FatFreddy into space?

does he actually have to make it to space or can we just make an honest effort?

 

[spidergoat]

You know, one of those space tourism packages. I don't know if they orbit or not.

 

[Hercules Rockefeller]

http://xkcd.com/1074/

Mouseover text:

Ok, so Spirit and Opportunity are pretty awesome. And Kepler. And New Horizons, Cassini, Curiosity, TiME, and Project M. But c'mon, if the Earth were a basketball, in 40 years no human's been more than half an inch from the surface.

 

[Torbis101]

I believe the moon landing was a fake. And ofcourse the USA is 'proud' of it ... they live & survive on 'EGO', even if it is something made up or created.

They have covered this story up VERY well. & as far as I can gather, the truth will probably never be revealed.

If there is so much to learn by landing on the moon, why haven't they been up there since? Answer: because if they tried to go up there nowdays with all our advanced technology & all, it will be once & for all proven that they didn't.

 

[Edward M. Grant]

If there is so much to learn by landing on the moon, why haven't they been up there since?

Because Apollo cost nearly $200,000,000,000.

 

[AlexG]

And we discontinued the Saturn rocket.

 

[youreyes]

The OP topic was faked by the conspiracists.

 

[river]

wouldn't the Russians have said something by now ?

boy this is getting old

 

[Edward M. Grant]

wouldn't the Russians have said something by now ?

The Russians are part of the conspiracy, silly.

 

[Grumpy]

Apollo 14

Apollo 12

The tracks made in 1969 by astronauts Pete Conrad and Alan Bean, the third and fourth humans to walk on the Moon, can be seen in this LRO image of the Apollo 12 site. The location of the descent stage for Apollo 12’s lunar module, Intrepid, also can be seen. Conrad and Bean performed two Moon walks on this flat lava plain in the Oceanus Procellarum region of the Moon. In the first walk, they collected samples and chose the location for the lunar monitoring equipment known as the Apollo Lunar Surface Experiments Package (ALSEP). The ALSEP sent scientific data about the Moon’s interior and surface environment back to Earth for more than seven years. A surprising detail of the ALSEP is visible in the image: a bright L-shape marks the locations of cables running from ALSEP’s central station to two of its instruments. These instruments are probably (left) the Suprathermal Ion Detector Experiment, or SIDE, which studied positively charged particles near the Moon’s surface, and (right) the Lunar Surface Magnetometer, or LSM, which looked for variations in the Moon’s magnetic field over time; these two instruments had the longest cables running from the central station. Though the cables are much too small to be seen directly, they show up because the material they are made from reflects light very well. In the second Moon walk, Conrad and Bean set out from the descent stage and looped around Head crater, visiting Bench crater and Sharp crater, then headed east and north to the landing site of Surveyor 3. There, the astronauts collected some hardware from the unmanned Surveyor spacecraft, which had landed two years earlier. The two astronauts covered this entire area on foot, carrying all of their tools and equipment and more than 32 kilograms (roughly 60 pounds) of lunar samples. Photo by: NASA/GSFC/Arizona State University

Read more at: http://phys.org/news/2011-09-lroc-images-sharper-views-apollo.html#jCp

Pictures are worth a thousand words. Denying the reality of the lunar landings is not rational, it is wack.

Grumpy

 

[youreyes]

you know the amazing thing is that the new LRO satellite HD imagery, you can trace the rover's path by yourself...it is a bit hard to find. But the exhilirating feeling of finding it, is worth every second. Here is the Apollo 16 mission, just click in to zoom in at 0.5 m/pixel: http://wms.lroc.asu.edu/lroc/roi_mosaic_detail/7876

The rest of mosaics of regions of interest on Lunar surface are here: http://wms.lroc.asu.edu/lroc/roi_mosaic_select

take time to appreciate the beauty of the Moon.

 

[darksidZz]

Honestly I'm not sure what to believe, but I find it highly unusual the US wouldn't go back and start developing moon bases and other forms of technology to colonize the moon, I see no real sense to not doing this. Helium 3 is there and we could learn to mine it + other minerals, also just the gains for astronomy would be worth it, we could put a fantastic telescope on the dark side of the moon. Hell perhaps there's cool shit there?

I'd just have thought we'd build a mission to colonize by now, and you say it's expensive but really they spent tons on war and it got us nowhere, they've wasted more money on wars than it would've cost to go back and build moon bases so wtf, sounds fishy to me.

 

[origin]

Honestly I'm not sure what to believe, but I find it highly unusual the US wouldn't go back and start developing moon bases and other forms of technology to colonize the moon, I see no real sense to not doing this.

You have got to be kidding! There is tremendous pressure to spend even less on space exploration than we currently are, good luck asking to expand spending by 10X.

Helium 3 is there and we could learn to mine it + other minerals, also just the gains for astronomy would be worth it, we could put a fantastic telescope on the dark side of the moon. Hell perhaps there's cool shit there?

What would be the point of mining He3? I beleive you mean that at telescope on the far side of the moon would be cool, there is no dark side of the moon (appologies to Pink Floyd).

I'd just have thought we'd build a mission to colonize by now, and you say it's expensive but really they spent tons on war and it got us nowhere, they've wasted more money on wars than it would've cost to go back and build moon bases so wtf, sounds fishy to me.

The only thing fishy is how incredibly naive you are.

 

[Trippy]

there is no dark side of the moon.

It's all dark.

 

[Grumpy]

darksidZz

Honestly I'm not sure what to believe, but I find it highly unusual the US wouldn't go back and start developing moon bases and other forms of technology to colonize the moon

There is absolutely no reason to colonize the moon, nor are manned missions needed. Robots could do anything we need to do there like mining or observation. Our efforts out to be concentrated in orbit and on Mars. All Mars missions should be one way, there are thousands of older scientists that would climb over each other to go there permanently. Send robots to prepare habitats, greenhouses and to make O2 beforehand and since one way trips need much less in weight they could take much more supplies to make Mars self sustaining. I'd go tomorrow.

Grumpy