Moon Landing Hoax - Evidence, Logic and Common Sense

[SydneyPSIder]

[Arouet]

[SydneyPSIder]

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]

[Arouet]

[SydneyPSIder]

[Misha]

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.

[Arouet]

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).

[SydneyPSIder]

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.

[Arouet]

[SydneyPSIder]

[Arouet]

[NinjaPuppy]

[really?]

[NinjaPuppy]