Lunarcy: NASA footage in the mouth (NIN 1 Ghost l) REMIX

[WhiteWeasel420]

Can't wait for the Moon Nazi's to get home. Auf Wiedersehen America >=3

[un4g1v3n1]

@WhiteWeasel420 The moon NAZI's never left the Earth....Too much radiation... ;)

[GUARDIANtrooper]

You have to be a fool if you can't see these clowns dancing around on wires...

[kyleruless]

I dont think mythbusters is a good thing to refer to when proving a point

[jenleex]

NASA say..thats NASA, say the problem they have to solve it Radiation, they need to protect those going ( returning ) to the moon and to other planets from Radiation, but why? they said they went to the moon and the crew are still fine none have died of radiation so they must have solved the problem back in 1969, so why are they trying to solve the problem NOW ?  NASA are telling you they never went to the moon, but still there are those that don't believe NASA.

[commodore64738]

MOON LANDING STUDIO JOB as well as 9/11 INSIDE JOB

[Amxd]

for fack sake... Before saying anything get your research done... The moon landing was not FAKED. 1rst ->The russians FOLLOWED apollo 11 from earth and ADMITED THE UNITED STATES SUCCESS. TRY MAKING A RUSSIAN ADMIT ANYTHING WITHOUT IT BEING TRUE...... 2nd -> MythBusters PROVED the conspiracy theory WRONG and even confirmed MAN MADE MATERIAL PLACE ON THE MOON. 3rd -> THINK WITH YOUR BRAIN, YOUR HUMAN, THE ONLY SPECIE ON EARTH WITH INTELIGENCE.......

[commodore64738]

The truth hurts you full idiot. Nasa nutters produced the best fiction film of it's time. Now enjoy your dad's cock.

[jetplane2006]

Where did they poop?

[whomcare]

In plastic bags that had an adhesive strip around the opening to stick it to the skin and prevent feces from escaping.

[jetplane2006]

Well they looked like some babies running around in their own poop!

I guess zero gravity has something to do with it, or perhaps they had an itch they couldn't scratch!

[un4g1v3n1]

Love the way you repeat moronic propaganda without looking it up to see how much of a lie it is!

Take a gander at Jarrah Whites videos which showed the mythbusters erroneous experiments...And the Russians didn't have the capacity to FOLLOW the Apollo missions...And how do you figure humans to be the only species with intelligence, when we are destroying our own habitat. That makes us the dumbest! Well, you and other PAN's would be in the VERY dumbest category!

[Easydollars]

You have to look at things from outside the box of sense perception and think with the brain. If you trust what you see with your eyes youll be fooled everytime. We know a magician can levitate and have a hoop go around him to prove there are no wires but we know its a trick. Same goes with the moon + a thousand

other reasons.

[Easydollars]

I agree, all done in a studio.

[un4g1v3n1]

Sorry Easy...

I shouldn't comment after I get off work....I'm so tired I can't even think straight.

[Easydollars]

Yeah, next your gonna tell me the moon is made of cheese. Its the biggest LIE ever perpetrated by

those low life Masons Satan worshippers. How dumb are we ???

[rogelead]

Ok besides the movie set stuff, why don't you think we went to the moon?

Other than, because its fake. Is it a religious thing? Or you simply don't think that it is possible?

On a side note ill tell you how you can tell there is no oxygen. Go outside and throw some dirt in the air does it fall strait down like it does without oxygen?

That doesn't prove that they actually went to the moon but you have to think why would they do that?

[BR177]

when the astronauts are walking on the moon you don't see any craters at all but when the LEM takes off you can se the whole area scattered with craters

[Easydollars]

Who or whats taking the pictures of the LEM when it takes off. ?????

[un4g1v3n1]

I'd imagine it was the camera operator on the fake moon set.

[rogelead]

They explain in another video, basicaly its on a timer. Before one of them enters the LEM he sets the timer on the camera for like 5 minutes. Then he gets in, and once they are ready to go the camera is already set to start rolling and pitch up.

[cadu1995]

watch?v=0XJFwcA7TOI

GRUMMAN MOON LANDINGS complete with Scott Carpenter,moon soil,lights,action,camera -roll em.

Great job on showing the LUNAR PUPETTES DRAGGED along by a string

[TheCrimsonSkull]

Look at those dirty rotten lying Freemasons!

"The Blasphemous Masonic/Illuminati Moon Landing HOAX"

watch?v=VMi18D0YHAY

[b6gm6n]

They took a golf-club right? but not a telescope? - any why the hell didn't they use a colour camera on the moon, plenty in flight on AP11 right? - i dunno, i really want to believe also, but i just can't... you just have to look at the situation at the time the dirty tricks the US government has pulled on us over the last 60 years and everything else, something just stinks... it's the eternal secret, when the US go's down, years later the truth will emerge

[un4g1v3n1]

Well, I wouldn't say the US is going down. Although, one day, if the public educates itself, a whole lot of bums are going to be prosecuted and put in the same jails they made money off of building in the first place. I think most of our government officials are wrongdoing. If they are not defending the constitution of the US, then they are guilty of supporting unconstitutional/unlawful legislation. Which means they haven't honored their oaths of office and need to be thrown out. Patriot Acts

[joshatkins94]

"years later the truth will emerge" Try months, or if you really hate the US government, 2012. LRO enters lunar orbit in August of this year. The Google Lunar X Prize should be won by 2012, 2014 at the latest. One of the X Prize bonus prizes is to rove up to the Apollo sites and take video and photographs. And, yes, they did take colour footage on the Moon - starting with Apollo 14.

[un4g1v3n1]

I don't hate our government. If the checks and balances are left alone, and the representatives represent the people instead of themselves, it can be quite effective. But as long as greed and desire to control others is our politicians credo, the system will be manipulated to accomodate their own agendas. At least that's how I see it!

[un4g1v3n1]

Don't forget about the feather and the hammer...That was so important. And now I'm thoroughly convinced. LOL

[joshatkins94]

I've got a question for all the hoaxers out there: At what point did the missions start being faked? Were Apollo 7 and 9 real Earth orbital missions. Did Apollo 8 and 10 actually go to the Moon and enter lunar orbit? Did NASA fake some Gemini missions? Or was it just the entire Apollo programmes that were faked? Or was it just the landings? It's a question none of the hoaxers have never answered - you always talk about the landings, but if Apollo 8 and 10 took place why not land?

[joshatkins94]

Typos: Apollo programme (not plural), none of the hoaxers have ever answered.

[un4g1v3n1]

Not one NASA mission has ever taken place above our protective Magnetosphere/VAB's. PERIOD. Any of the missions that claim to be below the Van Allen Belts, within Earths comfy magnetic shield, have at the very least, a potential of being real. 8, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, and 17 were all faked! Or else Apollo astronots are amazingly all supermen who are not affected by a wide array of radiation! I just don't remember seeing big S's on their shirts. Do you?

[joshatkins94]

Are you unable to accept that the pass through the Van Allen Belts were too short to cause health problems? Do you not believe that astronauts on the ISS for 6 months experience more radiation exposure than the Apollo astronauts? It's fact; you just have to accept it.

[un4g1v3n1]

Because you say something doesn't make it a fact. Facts have to be corroborated by third party sources. NASA had full control with no third party oversight. That means, they can lie and say whatever they want, and nobody can verify shit!  That doesn't make facts, that makes cases for CT claims. Six months on the ISS. Where they run for added protection everytime they go through the

SAA!!!

[un4g1v3n1]

I'm unable to accept made up time values for VAB transit, and lies about being able to skirt them, when they surround us completely. LIES are difficult to accept for truth seekers! Apollo astronauts should have been under ongoing evaluation for radiation effects of VAB, GCR, SPE, and Lunar surface radiation over the years. All the astronots should have had some sort of problems from all that radiation. But they never went, so why continue checking up on the radiation they endured!

[joshatkins94]

Actually a series of Apollo mission between 1968 and 1972 did just that. Being Mr. "Super knowledgeable about radiaion", you can do the calculations for us, and prove yourself wrong. Bear in mind that the ISS is in low Earth orbit, where there is roughly 1 krad of radiation per year.

[joshatkins94]

Thus, without protection, astronauts spending 6 months aboard the station experience 0.5 krads.

[Artifalia]

There we go, you go back to technical things, and I won't get into that because am not an engineer. And very wisely you tell me that I have no prove that they were masons, and you are right, there's no card membership in the free masonry, so no one can prove they belong to the club. But they were, and who knows, may be you are too, but you won't tell me, will you? Again, I don't need high tech, I just need to trust my feelings.

[joshatkins94]

So you say the rocks were faked - but what about the parts of Surveyor 3, which were determined to have been exposed to lunar conditions.

I'll also point all hoaxers to Wikipedia's article on the matter: en[.]wikipedia[.]org[/]wiki[/]­Apollo_Moon_Landing_hoax_theor­ies

It explains why the ascent stage propellant was invisible, among many other things.

[un4g1v3n1]

Surveyor 3 have internal organs?

[joshatkins94]

No, but the very purpose they recovered it was to see the effect of the Moon on man-made objects. It didn't need organs to be affected - it was directly exposed to a vacuum, on top of lunar regolith, subject to lunar radiation (it's mechanical, so could withstand more radiation than a human, and had a mission duration of 65 hours, i.e. no suit), and had traversed the surface of a celestial body with 1/6 gravity. There are many ways it could be affected.

[joshatkins94]

Yes, I've seen some. Look, closer. There are *some* stars. They're faint, but you can see them. Don't always? Well, it depends on your camera settings, and the environment - a lot of urban light pollution will probably reduce the number of stars you'll see. You said nothing about Yuri, no. But the Russians did take photographs, and they weren't covered with stars either.

commons[.]wikimedia[.]org[/]wi­ki[/]International_Space_Stati­on. Where's the stars?

[un4g1v3n1]

There you go! I've been waiting for that! Depends upon your camera settings. All they had to do was change the settings. The question josh is WHY? Why didn't they change the settings. Set up one camera for surface photos, the other for sky photos? They had all this planning, and all this money, but we can't get some snazzy pictures of the Earth, Mars, Venus, and the Stars? Come on!

[JokerisWebCams]

haha ;)))"You know, folks.."..this clearly is a video worth of 5 stars. "I'm a creep!!!".."I'm a nut-job!"..but anyways, this will be added to my favourites. :D

[un4g1v3n1]

Thanks Joker! Emotions run so deep on this subject. Gotta lighten up from time to time! Especially if your on the moon walk/skip/hopping along in neutron/gamma ray/x-ray radiation...LOL

[straydog02]

Awesome video buddy! .. Two thumbs up and five stars for the very needed comic relief!

LOL

[un4g1v3n1]

Thanks Stray.

Ya, I thought some dick cheese would spice the place up a bit! LOL! I laughed my damn ass off while I was making this thing. What a damn farce. I kept watching all this footage and thinking what a gullible kid I was back then. The funniest thing is all the people out there still refusing to see the ludicrous behavior, obvious fakery, and holding onto it like it's their last supper!

[greenmagoos]

Apparently the 'excuse' for the three Apollo 11 actor-nots behaving like that during the press conference is because they were dudes with the right stuff who weren't used to expressing their emotions and only ever used talk like 'roger dodger Houston'

Is Mike Collins having a laugh?

[un4g1v3n1]

Of all the astronots I thought would eventually break, it was Collins. He's so damn fidgity during the press conference. He's shifty. He looks like he went on stage after downing two beers. And then forgot to use the latrine. YOU JUST WENT TO, and RETUNED from the MOON! How do you feel? "10-51." How was it on the moon? "That was not our 10-20." Why not? "Too damn 10-29h!" So are you saying you didn't go to the moon?! "10-12, 10-12!!!"

[greenmagoos]

Collins looks and acts as if he's taken too many of those amphetamine pills flight pilots swallow to keep awake.

Seriously taken way too many of them.

[un4g1v3n1]

"Houston, I'm 10-50, hoping to get 10-51 as soon as possible!

[greenmagoos]

Either that or he's just totally embarassed at having to lie through his teeth.

Aye. That must be the reason's he is so fidegty and nervous.

[un4g1v3n1]

Do you know any body language experts? That would make a great vid! Give me a holler! I don't think it takes an expert though. I believe most people understand body language enough to determine if someone is lying or trying to sell us a lemon. If not consciously, then at that gut level. I believe embarassment mixed with anguish over doing what they were telling him to do, while his conscience struggled to tell the truth. It's in both his body language and cryptic referencing.

[joshatkins94]

I can't change your opinion about whether you thought they were lying - ultimately, you'll have to realize the truth for yourself.

But the Moon rocks - how did they fake them? Because they weren't Antarctic meteorites, as they would have become ionized upon atmospheric entry, which the Apollo rocks - protected by the spacecraft - did not. So were we handed them by an alien? I think that should be your reason, it's on the intelligence level of the hoaxers.

[krokus69]

Maybe they bought them from the Russians.??

[joshatkins94]

If you mean the unmanned Russian probes, then I can tell you they didn't. The Russian probes only returned tiny samples - 0.326 kg in total.

[un4g1v3n1]

Josh, if someone has lied to you, do you, continue believing them?

Just a question for you...

[joshatkins94]

When did NASA lie?

[un4g1v3n1]

Windley. LIAR Plait. LIAR ....and NASA lying in their own documents is on my list of videos yet to come! Stick around...It's going to get interesting...;)

I'm just saying, if your getting your information from clavius, bad astronomy, and wiki, your going to be beyond anyone's help.

[joshatkins94]

No, seriously, when did they lie? I'm looking forward to hearing one single incidence.

[un4g1v3n1]

Windley...Plait Liars

watch?v=3yQedoG1Jv8

[un4g1v3n1]

Your reasoning, I reason, is the reason, you can't be reasoned with! If you get to know one of the many 'hoaxers' out there, you'll find no lack of intelligence. You'll always find common sense! Rocks? Is that all I get for my thirty odd billion dollars of tax revenue josh? Give me something I can really cherish. PROOF. Telemetry would be great. Oops, that's been lost. How about technical manuals that show how the LEM and Rover worked. Ooops, lost as well. What a coincidence.

[joshatkins94]

I wasn't discussing if NASA spent your tax dollars well, although the advances in medicine and other innovations that result from the space programme are good reasons why.

I'm sorry if you're not content with the rocks, but they are real, and they were collect from the Moon, by NASA astronauts. Ask NASA. Like you said, it's your tax money. You'll be able to get the manuals from them, under the Freedom of Information Act. They'll also have the telemetry logs.

[joshatkins94]

"Ask NASA" Ok, that was out of context. Ask NASA for the manuals, I meant.

[un4g1v3n1]

More panner type reasoning...You need a break from clavius and bad astronomy...

Ask NASA? NASA has lied and covered so much up from the public. "They are real moon rocks, ask NASA if you don't believe me." This isn't proof. Proof would be a large group of independant scientists examining the 'rocks'. Did you believe in Santa? Was it because an authority figure told you so? Did you feel stupid for believing them? You don't have to feel stupid anymore. We were all told the same lie.

[joshatkins94]

"Ask NASA" Ok, that was out of context. Ask NASA for the manuals, I meant.

Large groups of independent scientists *did* examine the rocks. It's as simple as that.

[un4g1v3n1]

Did they have shielding on to protect themselves from the radiation? Did they use geiger counters to determine how radiactive they were? Where are these findings. Help a brother out, and watch /watch?v=OKB5u_VTt6M so you can understand a little bit more why their behavior was out of sync with their situation.

[joshatkins94]

Yes, they wore space suits.

[un4g1v3n1]

Space suits that did NOT shield them properly! Once you realize this simple fact, you can stop trying to protect your ego, and realize alot more truths that have been kept from you. Have you examined that Santa belief of yours lately?

[Artifalia]

A pile of rocks doesn't prove anything. And there's something else. If any reasonable person who knew that there's all this controversy in internet, why they don't show up to give us some clear proof that we went there. I'm also checking if my comments can be seen.

[joshatkins94]

Well, a pile of Moon rocks does.

[un4g1v3n1]

Do you see what Clavius has done to josh?

"So were we handed them by an alien? I think that should be your reason, it's on the intelligence level of the hoaxers."

You mock the intelligence of 'hoaxers'. You put 'people' into a nice little box, call them hoaxers (because they see Apollo as a fraud), and it's all okay. Assassignate their intelligence, logic, reasoning, research, or anything in order to attempt to sway others into believing NASA propoganda.

You need a Clavius break..

[joshatkins94]

Well frankly, when you consider the ludicrous hoax claims put forward - no stars, 'waving' flag, radiation harm, etc., it really does seem to sum up hoaxers' knowledge of science. The claims are based on entirely incorrect science. Cheap science - call it what you like - the debunkings are scientifically correct - and you can't argue with that. As Phil Plait said of Bart Sibrel's 'claims' "They're just wrong". It's that simple - they are incorrect.

[un4g1v3n1]

Wow. Plait said they're just wrong. Wow, that does it for me. Phil is GOD, he said it, must be true. If that is as critical as your thinking processes get, your in trouble. There you go again with that convenient 'hoaxers' box that helps you demean and dehumanize your fellow, conscious, thinking, reasoning brothers and sisters of the human race! No stars, waving flags, deadly radiation. I'd say those are really sound, solid clues pointing to scam, fraud, hoax!

[joshatkins94]

Well, that's the thing - they just are wrong. I needn't go beyond that - if you know the slightest about science, you'll know the claims are invalid. Look at ISS or Shuttle photos. There are no stars. Are you about to tell me the Shuttle is faked? Photos from probes - Voyager 1, etc. - don't have star. The flag wasn't waving, it was very light, and the astronauts moved it, causing motion. Watch the "Lunar Legacy" series for proof. 40 minutes is sped up to 2, with a crinkled but non-moving flag.

[un4g1v3n1]

Wrong, there have been stars, and even a plume photographed coming from the shuttle. Stars! If you watched are NASA artists idiots, you'll see two pictures with stars in them from Apollo. Why do you refuse to understand taking pictures of stars is not only possible, but should be done for pete's sake! And, ARMSTRONG & COLLINS straight lied in the press conference saying they couldn't see stars. WHAT A BIG FAT LIE!

[joshatkins94]

Please, give me a star-filled Shuttle image URI.

[un4g1v3n1]

It's not star filled, and you know it. But there are stars in it. Go...look...it's on several videos now. And two of the apollo videos with stars are at the tail of the are NASA artists idiots video.

[joshatkins94]

That's exactly my point, and *you* know it: I've told you repeatedly that Apollo images do have stars, but certainly aren't star filled. The same goes for Shuttle/ISS photos. Yet you're not alleging the Shuttle programme is faked.

[un4g1v3n1]

No, I am not alleging the shuttle program is fake. Funny, how you try to put words in my mouth. The simple truth is that STARS can be filmed. And all this hoo hah is a bunch of nonsense. You have not repeatedly told me that Apollo images have stars. Panners constantly tell the unwitting that stars were impossible to take pictures of, and that's why none are in the photos. Then ct's find pictures with some stars, and panners backtrack and double speak. Stop flip flopping!

[joshatkins94]

"No, I am not alleging the shuttle program is fake" No, you're not; that's exactly what I said: "Yet you're not alleging the shuttle programme is faked"

[un4g1v3n1]

No, but more and more photos from shuttle/ISS missions are outing Apollo and it's faked photos/videos. Reflections of the sun in their visors, topping the list for me. Apollo photos, videos, show reflections no where near close to being a sun's reflection. Spotlight reflection maybe. Sun, definitely not!

[joshatkins94]

Hmm, so when you said "No stars ... really sound, solid clues pointing to scam, fraud, hoax!", you actually were joking. You yourself have just admitted that a lack of stars is correct, and have started to list other 'reasons' why the photos from the Shuttle and ISS disprove those from the Apollo missions.

[Artifalia]

Joshatkins94, I'm a un4g1v3n1 friend, I've seen your channel, your vids about Apollo 13 press conference, if you forget about all these technical issues and analyze the astronauts speech you'll see that they lie. We have many evidences that the moon landing were hoaxes. We can talk about the frogs in the Armstrong footage or even the attitude of the astronauts being in "another world", that gives you more clues to detect that they were faking the moon landing, just trust your feelings.

[joshatkins94]

The Apollo 13 press conference videos aren't mine; they're on my favourites list.

[Artifalia]

Ok, then. Take a look at them again, this time with a critical eye. Listen to the last question, a woman does it. Don't you think is a stupid question to a crew that has been about to die in space? That's an example, but there are many. As you know, almost all the astronauts were free masons and military people, that is, people who know very well how to keep a secret.

[joshatkins94]

No, I think it's a humorous way to end a press conference. Bombarding the crew with technical questions probably didn't help them overcome the stress. And, btw, she was a reporter - not a NASA employee - so I really don't think that has anything to do with NASA faking the Moon landings.

[Artifalia]

Ok, but they go from technical things to..being a bachelor. They end up the conference talking about sex. Sex is used to make us forget. Now, analyze the reactions of, Neil and Michael Collins giving support to each other when they say that the saw no stars. When people are in the same team, like they were both free masons, they cover each other. We are seeing a mason team working together to cover up the hoax. Mankind hasn't felt the real joy of walking on the Moon, our feelings know that.

[joshatkins94]

Free masons? You have no proof of that; indeed you labelled the astronauts that as it made you sound good. You literally just made that up (unless you can prove otherwise). NASA doesn't employee reporters; they didn't choose to ask a question about Jack Swigert winning a bachelor award.

[TheCrimsonSkull]

"Free masons? You have no proof of that"

~joshatkins94~

HA HA HA HA ~~~ Oh yes we do pal.

The Entire NASA program is an Alchemical/Masonic PsychoDrama

"The Blasphemous Masonic/Illuminati Moon Landing HOAX"

watch?v=VMi18D0YHAY

[joshatkins94]

"Look, closer. There are *some* stars." Funny, so I have already told you.

[joshatkins94]

Wow!!! A Shuttle exhaust plume - clearly proves a faked Moon landing. You know I'm sure the SRBs & ET/SSMEs are rockets, so they should have exhaust plumes (and they don't have hypergolic propellants).

[un4g1v3n1]

No, your right. Hyperfolic propellants exhaust comes out red and smoky...Unlike the NOTHINGNESS that we see coming out of the fake LEM being pulled up by a crane in the Apollo footage!

[joshatkins94]

That would be hypergolic propellants, not hyperfolic.

So, let's analyse the bipropellants used on the LEM's ascent stage (and, incidentally, also on its descent stage): Aerozine 50 and Dinitrogen tetroxide. Now, Aerozine 50 is a half and half mixture of hydrozine and unsymmetrical dimethylhydrazine; a transparent gas and clear liquid, respectively. Dinitrogen tetroxide is also a transparent gas. Being a hypergolic bipropellant, they ignite without a spark, and - as hypergolics do - transparent.

[joshatkins94]

My point was that the Shuttle's propellants AREN'T hypergolic; so you see an exhaust plume. That really has nothing to do with this, though.

[joshatkins94]

No, he's not God, but he is correct. Ask any scientist or photographer.

[un4g1v3n1]

He's wrong...I can name many photographers that know he's full of it. Ask Rene. You could ask Bill Woods but I believe he's passed now.

[joshatkins94]

Yes, many. Although those that believe the photos are true encompass billions.

[un4g1v3n1]

Who never took the time to look at them closely. That's where the problem lies josh. It's like the word assume. When you assume the pictures are authentic, without really looking at them, you make an ass out of u and me...

[joshatkins94]

Well since I believe they weren't faked, I'm not assuming - I'm believing [the truth]. You assume they're not real, and you "lack of stars" claim is making you sound stupid. Seriously, it's not a claim that backs your argument, since the most amateur photographer can tell you there shouldn't be many stars there.

[un4g1v3n1]

Shouldn't be many....or none? What is it already? That's the problem here. Insist you can't take any. Ooops, they found some. Well, you can't take a picture of 'many' of them. Whatever! They could have took fantastic pictures of the stars from the moon! Hell, should have. But that's something you just can't fake. So they threw up a big black backdrop, filmed the thing, and have been avoiding, or lying about the stars ever since. Did you not listen to Collins and Buzz lie?

[greenmagoos]

Their is something quite noticeably odd about the behaviour of the Apollo 11 crew during the press conference.

I think 'guilt' would best describe the way they look and behave.

[un4g1v3n1]

Guilt would be the most accurate. I think distraught over the guilt is quite prevalent. These guys weren't happy about having to tell all those lies. That's for sure!

[joshatkins94]

If they were guilty, you'd think they'd want to forget it. So Al Bean wouldn't give up flying the Space Shuttle in order to paint tons of different paintings of the Apollo programme. And the other Apollo moonwalkers wouldn't continually do interviews and participate in documentaries as they do.

[un4g1v3n1]

Hey josh. You ever notice not one astronot really gives accounted details of what is was like on the moon! They never have! Not one of them. Because they can't! All they have to go on is pictures from satellites/probes/telescopes, just like you and me!

[joshatkins94]

Uh, in uncountable interviews the astronauts (for the record, astronots isn't a word, and no, it really isn't funny) recount the texture of the lunar surface, how it felt driving the rover in 1/6 gravity, what the orange soil looked like on Apollo 17, etc.

[un4g1v3n1]

UNCOUNTABLE INTERVIEWS? Please, does that mean you can count them because they never happened? I have yet to see one interview, where DETAILED ACCOUNTS of their time on the moon are given. This should have been the very first they did upon returning from the moon. Those detailed accounts would have made for manuscripts worthy of pulitzer prizes. NO MANUSCRIPTS OF THE DETAILED ACCOUNTS OF PERSONAL REFLECTIONS OF THE ASTRONOTS! Astronots is not funny, it's a crying shame!

[joshatkins94]

tinyurl [.] com [/] 2fcen

Watch the Gene Cernan interview. It's one of thousands. Google "Apollo astronaut interview".

[un4g1v3n1]

It's not an interview with detailed accounts...let's be real!

[joshatkins94]

You're proving yourself wrong. Notice how the astronaut is always moving the flag when it's 'waving'. For instance, at 00:43, the flag is being moved, so it's moving (there's this thing called the law of motion..). But then at 00:56, how the flag has ripples in it (it had just been moved), but it clearly not moving.

And what makes you think the Apollo 17 liftoff was faked? It was filmed by a camera in the rover, remotely controlled from Earth. You don't the propellant as it was an invisible gas.

[Artifalia]

We don't need your cheap science. We sing because only seeing the astronauts reactions it's enough for us to prove that this was all a big hoax. We believe in the human species, not in a firm called NASA.

[joshatkins94]

NASA's a federal government department, not a firm. I don't know what you meant by cheap science, as it's the truth. Rather than moaning about been disproved, give some proof - why were the landings faked? Because this video doesn't prove anything.

[Artifalia]

Even worst, if it's a federal department. Cheap science is childish science. You don't fool around in another celestial body, which is what they did. The prove is that NASA is a Nazi organisation which is part of the New World Order.

[joshatkins94]

I guess you're joking? You meant the proof, not prove, by the way. Comparing NASA to the Nazis is horrific and wrong, don't do it - it's not funny.

What's cheap science? It's the truth, you're not putting forth your reasoning as to why what I said is incorrect. Do that, and we can have an adult discussion.

[straydog02]

"NASA's a federal government department, not a firm."

NASA is a branch of the military industial complex, run and controlled completely by the US military.. Their claim of being a civilian organization is a lie.

"... give some proof - why were the landings faked? Because this video doesn't prove anything."

You're wrong.. This video proves that you have no sense of humor.. It wasn't done to

"prove" anything, except that the Apollo photography is a joke.

[un4g1v3n1]

Billions of dollars. Does that help motivate reasoning for the why. It isn't the only reason though. American citizens, and citizens of other free nations were in a state of panic over the Russian space program. People dug holes to hide in for christs sake. Faked Apollo missions were shown to the world to quell their fears, let them get a good nights sleep and keep their minds off that Viet Nam business with all those boys dying in a pointless war. It was all round good PR!

[joshatkins94]

Why did they get lots of highly-skilled test pilots, the best engineers, Wernher von Braun and his team, the best aerospace subcontractors, 5% the US federal budget. They had everything necessary to make the landings. So they did.

[un4g1v3n1]

Damn Josh, seriously. They had everything? They didn't have proper radition shielding. Don't try to sell me that lemon, cause as anyone who researches this issue comes to the same conclusion. We don't have radiation shielding sufficient to do the job, and may never have it. I think we will, once we are able to create, what earth has created to save her ass from the radiation. A magnetosphere around a craft, structure. Then we can safely transit to, and live upon the moon.

[joshatkins94]

They didn't live on the Moon. That's why we can't live upon the Moon now. They visited the Moon. The Constellation programme calls for stays as long as the ISS expeditions. That's where the problems start. It's a matter of months until you'll have to give up this conspiracy theory, as LRO enters lunar orbit in August. By 2012, you'll have absolutely no choice, as the X Prize rovers photograph the Apollo sites. Either get out of denial now, or enjoy the final few months of moon hoax enjoyment.

[un4g1v3n1]

Nice reply. After watching Apollo footage for years now, that is the exact same conclusion I came to Art! There is just absolutely no sense of danger in their voices or actions. A small rip in their costume and they would have died. Yet they jump on top of boxes, fall down, laugh about it all. Don't have the other actor check and see if his costume is okay. And all this is taking place on the harsh environment of the moon.

[joshatkins94]

With the exception of Jack Schmitt, they were all test pilots. They were used to danger, it was their job. They did mention being worried, however. I didn't see any boxes, so I can't help there. The fact is, if NASA wanted to fake it, you're right - they would have used actors. So why the hell did they get a bunch of test pilots? I wonder...

[un4g1v3n1]

Hi Josh! Proving myself wrong? Please. You just keep a firm hold on that flag excuse. Perhaps that will keep your patriotism from flapping in the wind. So, the propellant was an invisible gas? Mind telling us what that invisible gas was called? Hmmm? So much was invisible during Apollo eh? Stars, the Earth, a proper solar reflection, and a sense of the danger the astronots faced. Do you think that maybe, just maybe, the astonots were not happy scamming us and acted that way to alert us?

[joshatkins94]

I'm not American, so I'm not sure who's being patriotic.

I'll be glad to tell you the descent module propellant, it was a hybrid of Aerozine 50 and dinitrogen tetroxide.

I keep telling you, the camera exposure was too quick to photo the stars. Ever see many stars in Shuttle or ISS photos or even unmanned probes? No.

As far as I remember, the big, bright, blue, brown, and green thing up in the sky was the Earth. Perhaps it was Mars, or though I'm sure that's the red planet.

[un4g1v3n1]

If your going to use mockery then perhaps you could answer me a question or two. 1 the Earth is how many times larger than the moon. 2 how do you think the Earth would look rising on the horizon of the moon? Would it be like a harvest moon? Or perhaps larger? Then take another look at the Earth-rise pic. NOW SERIOUSLY, since you want to be so serious, does that look right?

Stars? They take pictures of stars on Earth. It's been possible long before Apollo. They could have taken them!!!

[joshatkins94]

So every single human spaceflight since Yuri Gagarin's flight has been faked? Because I don't see too many stars in those photos either. I'm talking about the Shuttle, ISS, Soyuz, Mercury, Gemini, and SpaceShipOne.

Stars actually don't always show up in Earth photographs: v=9YV2WEs0W5g.

[un4g1v3n1]

You keep saying "too many" So, you have seen some? "Stars actually don't always show up in Earth photographs?" Don't always? Do they or don't they? Speak straight brother...

I never said a word about Yuri.  Anyone who stayed well below the Van Allen belts, is worthy of being considered at least possible. Apollo, hoax, sham, fraud, lie used to bilk taxpayers, while putting on a good show to instill confidence in the free world that we wouldn't be speaking Russian any time soon. RADIATION

[un4g1v3n1]

Im still waiting breathlessly for the name of that propellant, that was invisible.

[joshatkins94]

I told you, Aerozine 50 and dinitrogen tetroxide.

[un4g1v3n1]

So, you have knowledge of the type of propellant. Can you source that please?

[joshatkins94]

It was from Wikipedia, but here's a link: nssdc[.]gsfc[.]nasa[.]gov[/]nm­c[/]masterCatalog[.do?sc=]1971­-008C.

[un4g1v3n1]

Do you work for NASA josh? Do tell...

[joshatkins94]

No, I live in the UK. It's on my profile page.

[un4g1v3n1]

Is your ego unable to accept that no man has set foot on the moon?

[un4g1v3n1]

Notice you avoided the proper solar relection portion, along with the 'invisible gas' explanation. Nice call!

[joshatkins94]

Can't seem to find your claim about solar reflection. Ask again, and I'll answer.

[un4g1v3n1]

Watch the lies are in your visor. I think, after you compare the way the sun should look in a visor, or picture taken from LEO on other missions, with the Apollo photos, you'll understand what I mean. That is a brilliant video. PUN intended! No spiking. Just blurry spotlight reflections.

[straydog02]

"Perhaps it was Mars, or though I'm sure that's the red planet."

Are you sure that Mars is really red? .. The first Mars photos showed an entire red landscape with a pink sky .. A real NASA special that was ordered up by NASA's top brass, two hours after the photos came in showing a brown landscape and a blue sky!

Which menas that NASA was caught deliberately altering the true color of the Mars photos.

Which also means they can't be trusted to tell the truth about ANYTHING!

[joshatkins94]

Do you mean the Viking photos? Give me a URI so I can see for myself, they sure didn't look red to me. Photos are often shown in false colour - look it up on Wikipedia - and there are perfectly legitimate scientific reasons for it.

[un4g1v3n1]

OMG josh? You are being absolutely pulled into the river of lies NASA shills have been planting into your oh so fertile, yet uncritical mind.  WAKE UP! Excuse after excuse that makes no sense as espouted by NASA Apollogists the web over! Give me something original. A rock solid piece of evidence that has been examined by independant press/science. Don't say photos or video, as that has already proven to be full of anomolies by more than one independant photographer.

[joshatkins94]

Wow, more than one. And debunked by millions more.

[un4g1v3n1]

Debunk is a term people who are full of bunk use to try to discredit reasonable doubts by people of reason. Debunking is NASA apollogists lame excuse for mental masterbation. It's an exercise in futility when it comes to Apollo. So many anomolies. Too little time. You were fooled. Get used to it.

[joshatkins94]

By the way, here's a video about stars in the Apollo 16 photos: v=9YV2WEs0W5g.

[un4g1v3n1]

I had to literally keep myself from laughing at that video. He avoids the same unavoidable question, they could have put a telescope on the moon. Why not? Easy answer. They never went!