View Active Topics          Latest 100 Topics          View Your Posts          Switch to Mobile

Moon Landing Hoax - Evidence, Logic and Common Sense

Discuss Conspiracies and Cover Ups - e.g. 9/11 Truth, JFK Assassination, New World Order, Roswell, Moon Hoax, Secret Societies, etc. whatever conspiracy floats your boat.

Re: Moon Landing Hoax - Evidence, Logic and Common Sense

Postby SydneyPSIder » 20 Dec 2012, 05:19

Arouet wrote:C'mon Syd! One topic at a time please!

Or we can drop it. Just throwing out various arguments all at once will guarantee a fruitless discussion and I'll be out. I'm trying to structure this here - otherwise it is indeed pointless.

What's pointless? I tihnk I indicated above I have decided to paste in the 'impossible' still and video evidence that pretty well proves fakery to any 'reasonable' person, under the legal definition.

You're free to number the more than two dozen problems I raised earlier in a list and allocate these pics to one of the numbers for treatment if you like.

The evasiveness of pseudosceps is noted.
SydneyPSIder
 
Posts: 1124
Joined: 10 Sep 2012, 18:24






Re: Moon Landing Hoax - Evidence, Logic and Common Sense

Postby Arouet » 20 Dec 2012, 05:30

SydneyPSIder wrote:The evasiveness of pseudosceps is noted.


I don't think I'm the one being evasive, I've said I'm happy to move onto that topic after we finish with the radiation issue. You have refrained from posting your thoughts on what I've written so far on that issue. Since you brought it up as an important point, I would think you would be interested in discussing it.

Now, perhaps you no longer think its an important point. If you now think that the radiation issue isn't really an issue, then I guess we can drop it and move onto the next.
User avatar
Arouet
 
Posts: 2544
Joined: 07 Aug 2010, 03:07

Re: Moon Landing Hoax - Evidence, Logic and Common Sense

Postby SydneyPSIder » 20 Dec 2012, 05:54

Foundering on any one point of evidence is enough to destroy the 'just trust us, we really went!!' Apollo case. I'm switching to the video/stills evidence point enumerated earlier because it's a lot easier to demonstrate and prove visually, emphatically and decisively. Again, your resistance to actually analysing the info we do have is noted. Yes, we know, NASA still has virtually no research on radiation effects on the astronauts travelling all the way to the moon and back, and that research awaits to be done for the 'next' manned mission to the moon by their own admission, so I think analysing radiation effects is a bit of a dead end. There is very little amassed info by NASA because, by a reasonable interpretation, NOBODY WENT SO THEY DIDN'T HAVE TO DO IT.
SydneyPSIder
 
Posts: 1124
Joined: 10 Sep 2012, 18:24

Re: Moon Landing Hoax - Evidence, Logic and Common Sense

Postby SydneyPSIder » 20 Dec 2012, 06:02

Image
NASA wrote:Scientist-Astronaut Harrison H. Schmitt is photographed standing next to a huge, split boulder during the third Apollo 17 extravehicular activity (EVA-3) at the Taurus-Littrow landing site on the Moon.


Apparently they sent one wacked-out stoner geo on the final 'mission', Apollo 17, Harrison Schmitt, who stumbled across this unusual rock, colloquially called the 'bear rock' by them I believe. Note the bizarre contrast between the well-defined texture of the rock and the way the middle ground and background seem very smooth, weathered and unbroken. Almost looks like a rock on earth taken in black and white and layered on some special effects, doesn't it? They did have colour cameras, of course, but you have to consider how much easier it is to do photographic fakery in B&W vs colour. The lighting in the foreground area looks like it's outside, quite natural and harsh, while the lighting on the middle and background looks muted, eerie and unnatural. The moon mountains always look more like they're lit from within. The harsh light and reflectivity of the foreground is not present in the middle ground and background, rather it's just muted and grey.

The only problem geologically with this picture is that split boulders such as the one shown are either caused by a boulder falling from a rocky crag, or ingress of moisture which later freezes and expands. Neither of these are possible on the Moon at that location.

Oh, wait, here's an 'exercise' or 'simulation' being done at Chezin Chotah all the way out in the rocky desert for some reason, apparently to get the astronauts conditioned to standing around on the moon in 1/6 G. Note the crew are congregating around a large split boulder shown just below centre of photograph, known as 'Tracy's Rock', which bears an uncanny resemblance to the 'bear rock' on the moon.

Image
Last edited by SydneyPSIder on 20 Dec 2012, 06:20, edited 3 times in total.
SydneyPSIder
 
Posts: 1124
Joined: 10 Sep 2012, 18:24

Re: Moon Landing Hoax - Evidence, Logic and Common Sense

Postby Arouet » 20 Dec 2012, 06:16

Hmmm, so when you posted this:

SydneyPSIder wrote:Why not discuss moon rocks and radiation evidence and physics reasoning and try to keep the thread on topic for a change, so you can get trounced the way you fear you will, with your zero evidential base.


was it just a bluff? And I called you on it and now its a dead end?
User avatar
Arouet
 
Posts: 2544
Joined: 07 Aug 2010, 03:07

Re: Moon Landing Hoax - Evidence, Logic and Common Sense

Postby SydneyPSIder » 20 Dec 2012, 06:26

Arouet wrote:Hmmm, so when you posted this:

SydneyPSIder wrote:Why not discuss moon rocks and radiation evidence and physics reasoning and try to keep the thread on topic for a change, so you can get trounced the way you fear you will, with your zero evidential base.


was it just a bluff? And I called you on it and now its a dead end?

Add in photo and video evidence to that list as I've been saying all along. You are reduced to nit-picking at hurried comments now? Suggests to me you're worried the video and photo evidence is your weakest point. e.g. wire flashes in video, astronauts falling down and levitating back up, flags waving in the breeze, etc. More to come of these, of course. As noted, the NASA 'evidence' only has to fail at one point to question the truth and trustworthiness of accounts of the entire set of missions. And if they're still faking evidence by Apollo 17, the very last of the missions, I think any reasonable person could safely assume they spared themselves the cost and risk of any genuine trips into space whatsoever.

The radiation evidence and research has already been posted. If you can find some convincing counter-evidence, please paste it in and do an analysis -- we're still waiting. For instance, NASA has recently indicated they have no good data or research on radiation levels in space or going through the van Allen belts and that work still needs to be done. Can you refute this? What happened to the research and data on radiation they MUST have gathered as an essential scientific measurement to test the safety of space travel? Or they just got in that rocket and went, without worrying about radiation, like a B-grade sci-fi flick from the 50s? After all, 'duty calls', doesn't it?

Interestingly, some 700-odd rolls of 'video' taken 'from the moon' have been accidentally 'taped over' by NASA. How do you think they could have let that happen to that historic and important footage? And what on earth would they be taping these days to go over the old footage?
SydneyPSIder
 
Posts: 1124
Joined: 10 Sep 2012, 18:24

Re: Moon Landing Hoax - Evidence, Logic and Common Sense

Postby Misha » 20 Dec 2012, 07:27

You know, Guys. In researching the Apollo program based on the books I have read, videos I have watched, and going back and forth wrestling with this issue, and along with my research on other questionable events in history, I am here. At this point in time if someone gave me a choice by putting a gun to my head on whether Apollo was real or hoaxed I would have to say hoaxed. Even if I was one in one hundred who believed so. Could I be wrong, sure. Do I think I am wrong, no. Am I willing to keep researching the subject and reevaluating, yes.

I have said it before. I get no pleasure one iota questioning the Apollo program. It sucks big time. However, I cannot live with myself if I am not intellectually and spiritually honest with what I believe to be huge problems in NASA's record concerning Apollo. Again, I am very eager and anxious to know the truth. There is always a price when one embarks on this endeavor.

It's my two cents, guys.
Misha
 
Posts: 438
Joined: 19 Aug 2012, 03:42

Re: Moon Landing Hoax - Evidence, Logic and Common Sense

Postby Arouet » 20 Dec 2012, 07:59

Sydney: you do realise that my posts on this topic are still in this thread right? When you misrepresent what someone says you should do so in a venue where its not so easy to show you false.

Now, I'm more than willing to continue down the radiation road, and once we're done turn to the picture road.

What I wanted to do was first see if we can agree on the questions, and whether White addressed the necessary questions (since you presented White as an authority on this).

This is my first time looking into this issue and I think it will serve us well to proceed in a logical manner.

So, if you really want to discuss this, please look at my posts above, and comment on what I've written so far. if you're not willing to do so on that topic (which you raised first and invited me to look into) why would I expect it to be different if I abandoned the radiation issue and turned to your pictures now. For what its worth, I intend to use the same methodology when looking into the other topics as well.


Misha: I have no horse in this race. I'm not american and wasn't alive when the shuttle launched. I think this is a good exercise for this forum, to try and tackle a relatively contained topic (unlike the monstrosity that is 9/11) and see if we can discuss these issues systematically and orderly, and in that way perhaps even have a shot at coming to some consensus (again, I don't expect that, but it's our best shot, imo).
User avatar
Arouet
 
Posts: 2544
Joined: 07 Aug 2010, 03:07

Re: Moon Landing Hoax - Evidence, Logic and Common Sense

Postby SydneyPSIder » 20 Dec 2012, 09:34

ha ha, very funny, Arou. The topic is 'Moon Landing Hoax - Evidence, Logic and Common Sense'. Enough said.

I can see you're anticipating a huge ass whupping on the facts, so you're trying to shut it down now, and prevent the pictorial evidence coming out. So let's talk about pics and videos, which is a big part of the evidence base, whereas, as you are well aware, discussion of 'radiation' concerns involve discussing research that's not yet been done by anyone. Even NASA admit they haven't even done the research in the present time.

'The document' that we've been presented with is some videos of rockets taking off, some videos of modules doing a 'splash down' in the ocean (surprisingly and suspiciously NOT superheated from re-entry), and a bunch of photos and videos that are either black and white or very blurry due to being re-transmitted from TV screen to TV screen for some reason, that are supposed to be pics of astronauts cavorting on the moon and doing strange and cryptic 'experiments' (but no experiments measuring potentially life-threatening radiation for some reason). Many of the colour pics that have come out have been released since 1990, in fact, not in the 60s and 70s -- in fact, so many that it was calculated the astronauts would have had to be taking one pic every 10 secs while on the moon on one particular mission. You would think only a myriad of professional photographers could fire at that rate! And it can be demonstrated that it was perfectly feasible to fake up the photos and videos using 60s technology.

So we examine 'the document' -- the pics and videos -- and find anomalies of features on the moon and strong evidence of fakery. Many more of the more clearcut and egregious examples of fakery are about to be posted in here.

We study the 'moon rocks' and find they marry with earth rocks, and DO NOT possess the same spectrographic signature as that found by a relatively independent ESA unmanned probe. Pseudosceps and govt agents posing as pseudosceps of course choose to disregard this totality of evidence that any genuine sceptic would be viewing with some concern.

Interestingly, although a treatment of 'radiation' has already been posted, you keep claiming to want to return to it. Requests for you to refute the evidence continue to go unanswered, but you keep complaining. What are you complaining about? Please go ahead and present your concerns about radiation while I go off and find some more dodgy pics and videos of the fake Apollo moon landings.

Note that the destruction of evidence and the passage of time are great ways to get off a crime. The govt and NASA have done all this with Apollo, JFK and 9/11. Just like a calculating murderer continually scheming and attempting to hide traces of the crime and deflect attention.
Last edited by SydneyPSIder on 20 Dec 2012, 09:56, edited 1 time in total.
SydneyPSIder
 
Posts: 1124
Joined: 10 Sep 2012, 18:24

Re: Moon Landing Hoax - Evidence, Logic and Common Sense

Postby Arouet » 20 Dec 2012, 09:52

SydneyPSIder wrote:ha ha, very funny, Arou. The topic is 'Moon Landing Hoax - Evidence, Logic and Common Sense'. Enough said.

I can see you're anticipating a huge ass whupping on the facts, so you're trying to shut it down now, and prevent the pictorial evidence coming out.


Are you being deliberately dishonest? Or do you honestly have no memory of what I posted or what you posted for that matter? YOU presented White's argument about radiation. YOU taunted me to look into the issue. And YOU, when I took you up on it, decided to do a 180 and suddenly say the radiation issue is not important.

Please go ahead and present your concerns about radiation while I go off and find some more dodgy pics and videos of the fake Apollo moon landings.


I've done so. Go read my posts, including the ones where I said I'd be happy to go into the picture issue after we're done with the radiation issue. I'll await your response - or will you continue to evade?. I'm not going to waste time looking into another issue when you can be expected to abandon the conversation the second I start looking into it and make posts about it.
User avatar
Arouet
 
Posts: 2544
Joined: 07 Aug 2010, 03:07

Re: Moon Landing Hoax - Evidence, Logic and Common Sense

Postby SydneyPSIder » 20 Dec 2012, 10:01

Arouet wrote:
SydneyPSIder wrote:ha ha, very funny, Arou. The topic is 'Moon Landing Hoax - Evidence, Logic and Common Sense'. Enough said.

I can see you're anticipating a huge ass whupping on the facts, so you're trying to shut it down now, and prevent the pictorial evidence coming out.


Are you being deliberately dishonest? Or do you honestly have no memory of what I posted or what you posted for that matter? YOU presented White's argument about radiation. YOU taunted me to look into the issue. And YOU, when I took you up on it, decided to do a 180 and suddenly say the radiation issue is not important.

Please go ahead and present your concerns about radiation while I go off and find some more dodgy pics and videos of the fake Apollo moon landings.


I've done so. Go read my posts, including the ones where I said I'd be happy to go into the picture issue after we're done with the radiation issue. I'll await your response - or will you continue to evade?. I'm not going to waste time looking into another issue when you can be expected to abandon the conversation the second I start looking into it and make posts about it.

Which page, date and time of post?

The radiation issue is extremely important, but harder to demonstrate and analyse, especially where the research has not been done. Most of what we have to go on is the evasiveness of astronauts who have no memory of significant radiation artifacts, contradicted by space shuttle astronauts who have seen artifacts at 400 miles, still well below the most serious belts. And the omission of radiation data logging and research by NASA on the missions suggests they weren't worried about radiation and safety, BECAUSE THEY KNEW THEY WEREN'T GOING TO SEND ANYONE.

I note that Dr James van Allen now contradicts himself and says it's safe, when queried explicitly on a moon landing hoax, whereas his earlier research strongly suggested it wasn't safe. Now contradicting Dr Allen's surprising new view is NASA itself, which wants to conduct radiation safety research before it sends anybody out anywhere into deep space and out of earth orbit for the first time in history. So NASA and the pseudosceps now want it both ways, apparently -- it was safe for the Apollo missions, but it's not safe now. Except it is. Except it's not. Interesting scientific world view you lot possess. I'll remind you once again, Arou, for the fourth time, the topic of the thread is 'Moon Landing Hoax - Evidence, Logic and Common Sense'.
SydneyPSIder
 
Posts: 1124
Joined: 10 Sep 2012, 18:24

Re: Moon Landing Hoax - Evidence, Logic and Common Sense

Postby Arouet » 20 Dec 2012, 10:35

Which page, date and time of post?


I start talking about it: Wed Dec 12, 2012 11:41 am

(ninja: can you turn on post numbering?)
User avatar
Arouet
 
Posts: 2544
Joined: 07 Aug 2010, 03:07

Re: Moon Landing Hoax - Evidence, Logic and Common Sense

Postby NinjaPuppy » 20 Dec 2012, 10:47

Arouet wrote:
Which page, date and time of post?


I start talking about it: Wed Dec 12, 2012 11:41 am

(ninja: can you turn on post numbering?)

I highly doubt it but I'll go look.
User avatar
NinjaPuppy
 
Posts: 4002
Joined: 28 Jul 2009, 20:44

Re: Moon Landing Hoax - Evidence, Logic and Common Sense

Postby really? » 20 Dec 2012, 11:32

Misha wrote:You know, Guys. In researching the Apollo program based on the books I have read, videos I have watched, and going back and forth wrestling with this issue, and along with my research on other questionable events in history, I am here. At this point in time if someone gave me a choice by putting a gun to my head on whether Apollo was real or hoaxed I would have to say hoaxed. Even if I was one in one hundred who believed so. Could I be wrong, sure. Do I think I am wrong, no. Am I willing to keep researching the subject and reevaluating, yes.

I have said it before. I get no pleasure one iota questioning the Apollo program. It sucks big time. However, I cannot live with myself if I am not intellectually and spiritually honest with what I believe to be huge problems in NASA's record concerning Apollo. Again, I am very eager and anxious to know the truth. There is always a price when one embarks on this endeavor.

It's my two cents, guys.

Ask this question of yourself. From the people working at NASA to the companies that built these rockets to the hundreds of sailors that watched the space capsule plunged into the ocean and fishing the astronauts out. How can thousands of people keep a secret ? The truth is right in front of your face.
really?
 
Posts: 1009
Joined: 06 Mar 2010, 20:58

Re: Moon Landing Hoax - Evidence, Logic and Common Sense

Postby NinjaPuppy » 20 Dec 2012, 11:50

really? wrote:Ask this question of yourself. From the people working at NASA to the companies that built these rockets to the hundreds of sailors that watched the space capsule plunged into the ocean and fishing the astronauts out. How can thousands of people keep a secret ? The truth is right in front of your face.

I don't think that anyone is questioning the space program, just the actual landing on the moon.
User avatar
NinjaPuppy
 
Posts: 4002
Joined: 28 Jul 2009, 20:44

PreviousNext

Return to Conspiracies / Cover Ups

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests