My simple question is....Why not go back if you really did 40 years ago? Iike come on, you spend billions going to bullshit countries, Why not spend it on going to the moon?? Make's me think.
If you're still not convinced, try typing these words on GOOGLE! (... Go and read up on the first site on the list that gives you GOOGLE!) ...... THE MOON LANDING HOAX ....
HOW TO WIN IN A COURT OF LAW ... WITHOUT A LAWYER!
Try typing these words on GOOGLE: ( APOLLO Research
Accepted the view, held by the Majority, named Is that NASA sent astronauts to the Moon and returned to Earth Them Safely - as reported by the space agency, as seen on TV and in the Apollo photos. )
Provate a digitare queste parole su Google: (APOLLO Research
Accettato il punto di vista, tenuto dalla maggioranza, è che la NASA chiama inviato astronauti sulla Luna e tornato sulla Terra in modo sicuro -. Come riportato dall'agenzia spaziale, come si vede in TV e nelle foto Apollo)
im a investigator on this stuff and what i think is they didn't do it and ill tell you why. When it was filmed in the 70s as you could see the flag was moving like air was hitting it. And I learned that the astronauts suits are 40 percent helium inside.so when they walk it looks like theres no gravity. Ill tell you this the goverment is tricking us to believe they change your minds that make you think wow. But they send secret missions on the moon that we never know about. Thats all I could say.
Besides, the best they could do to fake it would be Star Trek, the original series animations. The pictures they sent back and their camera sent much better pictures. The Van Helsing radiation belt isn't too bad.
There is gravity on the moon. Besides, the is moon dust which is like gravel. No gravity dosen't make things float on their own. It would require other movement.
@Darty105 About the gravity, you're wrong. There is gravity on the moon yes, but it's like six time smaller that the Earth's. Take this under consideration- if the Earth was the size of one cubic meter with the same mass you'd be squashed on the surface by the power of its gravity. So the moon has not that much mass to keep things as stable on its surface as the Earth because the moon's mass is 27% of that of Earth.
I never had any hope that men landed on the moon. I was setting in the school class rooom, just a child, 8 yrs old and all other kids and teachers where tripping and in awe about the landing, but my own heart new it was a lie. I tried telling others all my life was not true but a huge fake! Nasa did not have wireless tech and they used extention cords and plain walkie talkies for short distance's. The World was decieved big time! Finally all truth is coming out and I prayed it would.
there is no way we have ever made it to the moon. it is funny when people say we have even though we havent been back in over 50 years. sure we can put a robot their but never a person espicially in 1960. you have to remember they had radio contact on the moon. i can bareley get radio in my car 30 miles from a station and cell signal 50 miles from a tower. so how did they have radio contact 1million miles from earth in 1960! 30 years before this they were using morse code!
Apollo rockets and the moon landing were all to develop ICBM's...we never intended on going to the moon since Dr Allen discovered the radiation belts named after him...man has never traveled farther than 365 miles above the earth.
Common physics prove we never went anyplace but low orbit.
Apollo rockets and the moon landing were all to develop ICBM's...we never intended on going to the moon since Dr Allen discovered the radiation belts named after him...man has never traveled farther than 365 miles above the earth.
Common physics prove we never went anyplace but low orbit.
One of America's attempts to show the world that they are superior than their Communist Counterparts during the Cold War. I'm a capitalist btw and I am not proud of this lie that was suppose to fool us and our ideological opponents
Yes we put men on the moon. NASA isn't some superhumanly run out on its own organization doing what ever it wanted for the last 40 years. It's owned and payed for by the american taxpayer to the tune of billions of dollars and a public accounting ofice would have blown the whistle years ago. And as for the Politicians, they're very average men (& women) who don't lie very well because we spot them day afte day.
Nixon was probably the greatest liar to have lived but he couldn't stop Watergate.
One single question....How do you explain the fact that in 42 years they don't land to the moon anymore??? We have better technology than those days... I want to believe that they get to the moon, but that questions don't let me...
@Nottheone11 Easy, there's no point since there was nothing in it for us except in beating the Soviet Union back then. Just like how any other Nations didn't even bother to do it even today, it was a competition, Capitalism vs Communism back then. There is nothing on the moon that could have benefit us, otherwise you would see everyone going to the moon by now. The dollars have lost its value unlike back then, so costs vs. benefit would be a factor to consider.
@Nottheone11 Compare going to the moon to a drinking game, it was fun in the beginning, but after the game had ended there was no benefit except a hangover. Or in NASA case millions of dollars wasted, that's why all we been doing is launching satellites, it's cheaper and it can benefit us. What did we got out when we got to the moon? We won (that's great), and we got some moon rocks. If we didn't go to the moon then why haven't the other Nations take up the challenge and stick their flag on it?
Since we have the Van Allen radiation belts circling the earth, very intense radiation that will cause cancer in anyone who gets near it, I doubt it would've been possible to go to any moons. The inner Van Allen belt extends upward 10,000km, the outer belt, 47,000 km, so it's not as though they're like the belts we wear. Anyhow, I also read once that Buzz Aldrin punched a man in the face for asking him to swear he'd really gone to the moon.
@innerspace55 - And here's Dr James Van Allen's response to claims that it's impossible to pass through the belts NAMED AFTER HIM (and hence no-one knew more about the belts than he did); "The recent Fox TV show, which I saw, is an ingenious and entertaining assemblage of nonsense. The claim that radiation exposure during the Apollo missions would have been fatal to the astronauts is only one example of such nonsense". But hey, what would Van Allen know about the Van Allen belts? Right? ;-)
@MTMind2 you are uneducated..Van allen wrote articles telling of the deadly nature of the radiation belts named after him. Von Braun also wrote articles saying it was impossible in the 50's. Said it would take a spacecraft larger than the empire state building to get to the moon. you are really so gullible to think 1960 air-conditioning technology could work in deep space in direct sunlight? How? I have a bridge I would like to sell you as well....
@UNDERDOGTAHOE - Van Allen did not say it was impossible for men to pass through the belts, as confirmed by the quote from Dr Van Allen provided here. Radiation itself isn't deadly, just as heat itself isn't deadly, it's both INTENSITY and DURATION that can make them deadly. Von Braun did NOT say it requires a huge rocket to get to the moon, he initially PREPERRED that approach over that of a multi-stage rocket, but later accepted a muti-stage rocket was the better option. Learn your history :-)
@UNDERDOGTAHOE - "PREPERRED"? Where did I get that word from? :) Slight typo, it should have been "PREFERRED". But that's the point, Von Braun favoured the idea of building a huge rocket capable of going straight to the moon, landing there, and then taking off and returning to earth, the way you used to see in B movie sci-fi films during the 50s. He was completely against the idea of a multi-stage approach, but eventually he saw the wisdom of that idea & changed his mind (as great men do).
@UNDERDOGTAHOE Van allen also admitted that he got it wrong,what von braun wrote in the fifties proves nothing,ten to fifteen years later is a long time for advances in technology,dont forget the shuttle was on the drawing board in 1969 and flew in the eighties.
Broadcasters archive footage of the day do not have the gaps. The BBC don`t offer any as they were taped over, couldn`t have thought them that important. I was 3o at the time and I believed I was watching men "live" on the moon. If the broadcasters had told us then they were televising a film Nasa was showing them of this event. There would not have been Apollo 12. We were gullible in 1969 but not that gullible.
If the moon landings were "live" why were there no gaps in the radio transmissions?
The moon is a long way away. There would have been 2.6 seconds beteen Nasa talking and an astronaut`s answer to enable the radio wave to go all the way to the moon to them and there answer to come all the way back and that`s at the speed of light dont you know?
@gordewar Most of what you see here on YouTube is from edited footage from documentaries where the gaps were removed for continuity. The original transmissions have the gaps. Those of us who are old enough to have watched these historic broadcasts remember the gaps.
@Synthetrix - That's right, but despite that, and countless evidence in support of the moon landings, we still have people today who deny the moon landings happened due to a culture of denial and conspiracy theories. Many people prefer to believe fantasies over facts and will do anything to convince themselves that their fantasies are true. It's interesting that after 42 years, no hoax believer has managed to DEMONSTRATE how it's possible to fake the footage we see of astronauts on the moon.
@MTMind2 Yes. I challenge anyone to duplicate the videos of the Apollo 15-17 liftoffs from the lunar surface using only 1969-1972 technology. They could never do it.
@Synthetrix You know nothing about our true techologies in 196901972. Dont get mixed up between mass produced cheap shit for marketing and our real capabilities. The one thing that makes me wonder about the moon landing would be, how did they carry enough fuel to take off from earth, land on moon, take off again. Thats a lot of fuel. Van allen belt, it would take them 1 or 2 hours to pass through it all. Its not an easy task. Maybe they are the type of people who lie to make themself better.
@Synthetrix You know nothing about our true techologies in 196901972. Dont get mixed up between mass produced cheap shit for marketing and our real capabilities. The one thing that makes me wonder about the moon landing would be, how did they carry enough fuel to take off from earth, land on moon, take off again. Thats a lot of fuel. Van allen belt, it would take them 1 or 2 hours to pass through it all. Its not an easy task. Maybe they are the type of people who lie to make themself better.
Why don't we go back to the moon? Because we can not and never could get beyond the radiation belt. Some people choose to believe lies, no matter what.
@dallasquinley Gorgeous music !! I'm not a country music fan because today's country is really not country but you bring the classic sound into your music. Absolutely gorgeous!!
@dallasquinley - I expect your referring to the Van Allen radiation belts, named after Dr James Van Allen himself, hence no-one knew more about those radiation belts than he did, and yet he said about such claims, and I quote "The recent Fox TV show, which I saw, is an ingenious and entertaining assemblage of nonsense. The claim that radiation exposure during the Apollo missions would have been fatal to the astronauts is only one example of such nonsense". But hey, what does he know. ;-)
@TheFACTSRUS ,,,LOL , hey my dumbest fellow american ,, reality is always harsh ,,,,,,, american liars big big liars , , and this is a fact ,,, ,LIAR LIAR AMERICAN ASS ON FAIR ,,, :-D
@Asnadavid - All the scientific evidence supports the moon landings, none of the hoax claims holds up to scrutiny.
To fake a moon landing live in front of billions of people (including scientific geniuses) with signals beamed back from the Apollo craft and tracked by numerous countries worldwide (including USA's enemy of that time, the USSR) in a hoax requiring thousands of people to achieve, is more impressive than just landing a man on the moon! And do that successfully 6 times? No way! :-)
1.05 - the sunlight reflects off the moon's surface so it illuminates the underside of some objects
1.55 - a lot of the moon photos have been visibly altered to be more aesthetically pleasing for the public. the originals can still be seen, but the ones typically shown to the public are usually the enhanced ones
2.15 - there would be no blast marks - not enough force. and the stars cannot be seen in the same way they cant be seen in daylight on earth
@Glinkaism1 - I see, so THIS is the topic in question. Next time, respond to me within the topic (better still, respond to the points raised) instead of leaving a childish and insulting message on my channel together with an obscure private message, since I consider that to be immature behaviour. Seriously, how old are you? If you're older than 16, then it's time you acted your age.
@Glinkaism1 - I see, so THIS is the topic in question. Next time, respond to me within the topic (better still, respond to the points raised) instead of leaving a childish and insulting message on my channel together with an obscure private message, since I consider that to be immature behaviour. Seriously, how old are you? If you're older than 16, then it's time you acted your age.
NO NO NO!!! No man has ever gone to the moon. That only happens mythical shows like Star Wars.
Just use common sense. It's a miracle that planes land in Newark.
NASA, like the rest of the government, lies. They would do ANYTHING to keep the lies going so they can get big taxpayer bucks. And no-one can stop them because the so-called representatives of the people and the government itself is one huge megacastle that won't investigate.
This is the same government that keeps our country broke.
Every probe that has photo'd the moon in sufficient detail has only ever confirmed the details seen in the Apollo footage, including details we could have never known unless we'd been there. Lunar orbiters with even higher res cams are planned by numerous nations and Google's Lunar X-Prize competition means we'll see even more evidence over the coming years. :-)
The only thing we expect from the Apollo story is an official full scale investigation and justice for the murdered people and the fraud the moon hoax caused. Until then ,the LRO joke and any other spasmodic move can only be amusing to those who follow all this.
@MickeyMouseApollo - Again, moon orbiter surveys and photos is providing evidence that proves the landings were real, and it's not just LRO, it's the Japanese orbiter Kaguya (as seen in the video I posted) and many more to come from various nations around the world, including China, and soon private companies too. So tell me, when these others confirm the moon landings too, will they ALL be part of the conspiracy to you? So the whole world is lying? I guess you will stick to your fantasy. ;-)
OK.I think you have problem reading English but try again.
As it happens in this planet, no credible evidence exist to suggest the so called "Apollo moon landing"was anything but a military hoax. This fact also has been confirmed by all the researchers who took some of their time to investigate its supposed authenticity .Read what Bill Clinton wrote about the Moon Hoax .Maybe it's time you should start get use to it ,and stop bothering people with your fantasies.
@MickeyMouseApollo - Seems you have a problem with common sense. Moon hoax believers like yourself have yet to offer any evidence that the moon landings were fake, absolutely none, but feel if they shout loud enough then that makes it true :-) All the evidence shows the moon landings are real (as confirmed by recent orbiters and no doubt future orbiters). Moon hoax believers always resort to the simplistic claim that any evidence is a lie (as you did with LRO), so keep up your fantasies kid :-D
@MTMind2 The burden of proof is on NASA. "Hoaxers" , as you call them , don't have to prove anything because they're not making a claim to anything. They're simply stating they don't believe a claim.
You see, here we good people of earth are minding our own business on July 15 1969 and all of a sudden this big bohemoth bureaucracy comes along the next day making a claim that on any other day is pretty outrageous.
I would say the burden of proof lies on that bureaucracy
@mlmr11 - With all due respect, the moon landings were 'played out' in front of the whole world, it wasn't a secret or appear out of nowhere. All the evidence supports it, from the moon rocks and dust (distributed to laboratories all over the world). The photos and film alone showed the moon in ways NO-ONE predicted (they expected jagged terrain due to no atmosphere or rain to wear the surface, but meteors did that over billions of years). What do you expect, to be taken there in person? :)
@mlmr11 - The USSR, you know the enemy at the time, had a moon program too, but the failures of their N1 rocket meant they couldn't get a man to the moon. But they had their lunokhod rovers instead on the moon transmitting signals back to earth since 1970! Yes, whilst NASA were there! So the idea that USSR were somehow fooled is just nonsense. :)
Google 'LRO Apollo landings sites' for images of the equipment left behind by Apollo (no, not animations).They're nNot sharp yet, but soon will be :)
@MickeyMouseApollo the information gained during the build up to the apollo project, such as the interplanetary surveyors which recorded VAB radiation, is used by numerous other space agencies in the design of their unmanned spacecraft which have to endure this conditions. If they built their craft to these standards that the Apollo project said were required, assuming that these were all lies, then i think there would be complaints by these nations as billions of dollars is involved......
@MickeyMouseApollo but i guess they all just decided to get in on the conspiracy too, just to defend the honor of the USA, the russians love doing that, dont they?
@MickeyMouseApollo ....seriously? to compensate for the billions they would have lost if the spacecraft they made to cope with the standards informed by NASA failed due to more radiation than expected? u have problems in the head?
@Glinkaism1 - CGI in 1969? CGI only became realistic enough to use in movies since the 90s.
As for no evidence, google 'LRO Apollo' and watch the following;
/watch?v=SF0H79vp5uw
/watch?v=bpveN21EM9Q
Every probe that has photo'd the moon in sufficient detail has only ever confirmed the the Apollo footage, showing details we could have never known unless we'd been there. Lunar orbiters with higher res cams are planned by numerous nations, meaning we'll see even more/better evidence soon. :-)
This is one of the dumbest conspiracy theories for some idiotic reason still being espoused,
There has been so much scientific evidence to disprove these half baked claims. The people who still publicly persist in promoting this crap are attention seeking half wits who have probably been anally probed by aliens, in a previous life, while standing on the grassy Noll.
man fuck this bullshit, russians monitored the entire operation, why didn't they say it was a fake??? I tell you why, because they really DID go to the moon you fools.
If you think about it, you never seen a serious person sayin that shit we never went to the moon, just freaks from the youtube say that crap.
@2dorCJ91 Moron. First of all, lern how 2 rite gud. EDUCATED people start sentences with a CAPITAL LETTER, for starters. :)
Thus you are the fool. There is NO ACTUAL EVIDENCE that anyone landed on the moon. All we have are pictures and voice from ONE SOURCE. No other witnesses.
Russians looked at the same TV coverage, you fricking moron. And that TV coverage was actually a simulation done by NASA. And it was a poor simulation at that. Should have put more taxpayer money into the phony mopix!
@Glinkaism1 russians watched them with their own systems you fool, if you think they didn't, you are the biggest idiot in the world, and they admited they lost the moon race. Haven't you seen the mythbusters episode in wich they explain all these "evidences" about conspiration?
Dude, certain russians "monitored",mission and probably got paid to do so, if you look back, US was on the brink of loosing the race to the moon against the russians, well cus they were the firsts to put a man in orbit but they said that going to the moon was impossible. (mocking)"NOT FOR THE US" ... so they did this shit and guess what, "they won the race to the moon". NOW UNTIL SOMEONE EXPLAINS TO ME, HOW THE LUNAR MODULE LANDS AND NOT MAKES A CREATER. I'M ALL EARS.. WELL EYES LOL
The moon lander module didnt make a crater because the Moon lander was no longer quickly decelerating, so the descent engine only had to support the lander's own weight, which was lessened by the Moon's gravity and by the near exhaustion of the descent propellants. At landing, the engine thrust divided by the nozzle exit area is only about 1.5 PSI. so the thrusters would not kick up much dust or rock as they had very little force against the surface.
If you want proof that they went to the moon, then just look at the telescope photos taken from earth of the moon's surface. they clearly show the equipment left behind on the surface: the flag, the retroreflectors etc. even the footprint tracks can be seen.
these photos have been taken and verified by third-party organizations, as in not NASA or the US government.
@zezema535 There are no pictures that clearly show evidence of equipment left behind. There are only pictures with imposed animation of where they think the equipment is. If you call that clear evidence then we have a different standard of what clear evidence is and probably cannot continue a debate as such.
yes there are pictures, not taken from earth as i originally and mistakenly wrote, but taken from recent moon orbiters. Link - wwwdotnasadotgov/mission_pages/LRO/multimedia/lroimages/apollositesdothtml
@mlmr11 - Links entered in yt replies often have characters added by the system, so as before, replace 'dot' with '.', but also delete the two '-' chrs (one appears after pasting). Once done, the link works (excuse the pun but, it's not rocket science :)).
If you googled as I requested, you would have found it too.
So to add to up my last replies to you, NASA have provided ALL the proof needed (film, photos, samples, plans, broadcasts etc), it's for YOU to show that such the evidence is fake.
@MTMind2 Really ? I Just did as you suggested and wound up on NASA's "error page" saying "the page does not exist".
Look man , it's real simple , the burden of proof lies on the claimant. NASA claims to have landed on the moon. Based on all of the evidence they've put forth I simply do not believe this .
@mlmr11 - And yet I tried again and it worked, I also stated how you can get to that info via google. So to make it easier for you, google: 'LRO Apollo sites' and go to the first link. What's so difficult about that?
NASA have provided ALL the evidence needed to support the moon landings, therefore the burden of proof has been fullfilled, the fact that you're not satisfied is irrelevent, it's for you to prove that the evidence they've provided is fake, and you've yet to do so about ANY issue.
@MTMind2 First of all , anyone that has to capitalize their words in order to put emphasis on their point is , in my estimation , suspect. I usually detect a major liar in someone that does that and you're not going to be the first exception that I make.
Secondly , I had stated that photographic evidence is not sufficient proof . Pictures on the internet are not exempt from this rule.
It's simple , the burden of proof lies with NASA as they're the claimant. I simply don't believe their claim
@MTMind2 To satisfy my own morbid curiosity counter intuitive to my interest in time management I did a search on your suggestion.
As I suspected, my intuition whereas it applies to time management was correct.
My friend , I am not here to convince you of anything. You believe what you want and have a big fat cheeseburger to go with it. I'm not concerned with you at all.
My concern is my own view. I simply do not believe NASA's position is authentic.
@mlmr11 - Your objection to capitalization is amusing nonsense, that's more an example of using weak excuses to dismiss any arguments put forward by someone. And if photographic evidence (and I assume you apply that to film too) is not sufficient for you, then state exactly what evidence NASA is suppose to provide that would have been sufficient. It seems to me you've made up your mind and therefore no evidence would have been sufficient for you. So yes, you too believe what you want.
Also by shooting a laser at the retroreflectors on the moon, protons from the laser can be detected as they are reflected back, so that is even more proof that we were on the moon, otherwise who else put the retroreflectors there? and don't say aliens.
@diaphanoux They also said that the idea of aeroplanes was impossible as well, but we all know that to be wrong now. As times change, so does technology and therefore capabilities.
you really think the russians could be paid off, at the time they were the only rivals against the americans, and they wanted to beat them, so i doubt they would accept any amount of money to pretend to lose to their hated enemies. even if they were, i think that amount of money would have been noticed and revealed.
Dude, certain russians "monitored",mission and probably got paid to do so, if you look back, US was on the brink of loosing the race to the moon against the russians, well cus they were the firsts to put a man in orbit but they said that going to the moon was impossible. (mocking)"NOT FOR THE US" so they did this shit and guess what, "they won the race to the moon". NOW UNTIL SOMEONE EXPLAINS TO ME, HOW THE LUNAR MODULE LANDS AND NOT MAKES A CREATER. I'M ALL EARS.. WELL EYES LOL
@diaphanoux "US was on the brink of loosing the race to the moon against the russians"
No. By July 1969, the U.S. had a 2:1 advantage in manned spacecraft-hours in space, and a 4:1 man-hour advantage over the Soviets. The Saturn V flew 13 times without a loss of vehicle, whereas the Soviet N-1 was destroyed on all its four launch attempts.
"they said that going to the moon was impossible."
No, they didn't. Plain and simple. They even had a Moon program, with a lander tested in Earth orbit.
@diaphanoux "NOW UNTIL SOMEONE EXPLAINS TO ME, HOW THE LUNAR MODULE LANDS AND NOT MAKES A CREATER. I'M ALL EARS."
Why would you expect a crater?
The DC-X didn't make a crater on landing. The Soyuz doesn't make a crater on landing. Blue Origin's New Shepard doesn't make a crater on landing. Harriers and helicopters don't make craters. Please explain to me why the LM should and all these other VTOL air and spacecraft don't.
Well it is kinding to look a bit doutfull, and that is hard to comprehend and if this is a lie what else is being hidden from us poor dumb subserviant humans we must not let this happen we have got to make humanity be honest and stop the power of the dollar deciding who will live and who will only just live
@critchley3819 - But consider the 1000s of people needed to fake a moon landing, from mission control to so-called fake videos/photos, and yet after 42 years NO-ONE involved at any level has exposed it, not even those on their death bed with nothing to lose, not even the USSR where it would have been the ultimate propoganda in the fight of communism vs capitalism, not even scientist the world over including those examining moon rocks. Fake it once and get away with it = Luck, but 6 times??? :)
@MTMind2 Hi and thanks for your reply, I hope with every part of me that you are right,If this was a fake then our history is a lie. would you look at Dr Stevan Greer, Bob Dean and John Lear and let me know what you make of it ..brian.critchley@bigpond.com
This is only a heated subject because lefty agitators seek to diminish the U.S. impact on Western culture and incite the next generation to sedition. They don't give a flying solar flare in space whether the landings were real or not.
The surface of the moon is highly reflective. That's why we can see it at night and it is why Aldrin and the lower parts of the LEM were illuminated in the pictures. Sunlight causes parallel shadows on a flat surface. The moon's surface is far from flat. There are no stars because the pictures are being taken in daylight. The exposure of the camera would not pick up the dim stars. All hoax arguments vanish under science and logic. Check out the Mythbusters videos about the moon.
While there are people who believe in UFO's, there are also doubters who question the authenthicity of the landing on the moon. Further, there are non-religious people, but there are also those who are, so much so that they commited suicide thinking it was armageddon. As humans we are vulnerable to being brainwashed. It is only scienctific facts that invite us all. If the landing of the moon was a hoax, the USSR would have embarrassed us already. That's just one little justification.
NASA astronaut Brian O' Leary who was a science advisor on the Apollo mission: "I'm not 100% sure these men walked on the Moon".
Hasselblad engineer J.Lundberg ,made the Apollo cameras,when he saw the fake Apollo pictures :"I can't explain it ..so..maybe you should find Armstrong and ask him".
1) Moon surface is highly reflective. Go out on the night of a full moon and see. Cameras can adjust to shadow side of LM 2) Shadows are not alway parallel on lumpy surfaces 3) Some photos do show disturbance under the LM, but only 2600 lbs of thrust was used to land--far less than a helicopter. 4) Some version of "Man on the Moon" are edited for effect, but it is possible mounds can appear brighter. 5) Stars won't appear in daylight camera settings--ever.
its funny that during 1969 and while Nixon was president... man used to go to the moon a lot... now with a better technology they NEVER go there anymore... LOL that MOON thing was ALL FAKE... ''If u can't make it... FAKE IT'' .
@nickyrko Actually the reason that NASA do not go to the moon anymore is due to the fact that there is no real reason to do so, as all the tests and experiments were done in the early 70's. George W Bush wanted to return to the moon to build a base their, but after Obama got elected the funding was withdrawn. It costs a lot of money to go to the moon, so you only go there when you really need to. The moon landings were real, if they were fake then the Soviets would have proved it. But no.
@nickyrko These NASA proponents seem to get lost in the suspension of reality for the purpose of their fantasy. All you have to do is use critical thought to figure out that, at the very least, NASA's position is not completely authentic.
I don't know if they ever landed the Apollo on the moon or not. Their evidence would have you believe they did land. The problem with their evidence is that it's all subject to manipulation. I'm going to need more solid proof before I believe their claim.
FAKED for sure. A million mile round trip???? Give me a break. Total lie.
Where did they go to the bathroom? If they had to poop or pee in their suits the smell would have been unbearable. I can name a hundred other reasons why we didn't go there, if I need to.
@rog944 Visit Kennedy Space center in Florida, and ALL your doubts will go away. You will realise that if it was all a fake then the Soviets would have broken their necks to ridicule the USA, but no they could not because the Soviets tracked the Apollo missions on Radar. Plus every time a question is asked of NASA, they always fully explain themselves. And NASA can name 101 reasons why they did go to the moon between 1969 and 1972.
Im kinda on both sides cause I dont know if it was real or not... I mean these photos show fakeness but also we saw that huge spaceship go into space, It was gone for the amout of days it was up there, it came back down the way we saw it, to be honest The only thing to completely show me its true, is to get a photo from a satilite showing the american flag, or the lunar lander that I think is suppose to still be there???? or not I may be wrong
With technology of those years it was impossible to land on the moon.The ships had no protection against radioactivity. In space if you use 1 ton of fuel to reach a speed, you need 1 ton of combustble to stop. Thats mean they had to have 10 times the size of the ship only to fuel. If a man weighs 3 times less, because moongravity, moves 3 times faster, not slower. Without the protection of atmosphere, when day by the moon, the sun microwaves would have killed with or without space suits. FAKE.
Because the Cold War was a hoax to build up the military industrial complex for both America and the Soviet Union. They weren't really enemies. They helped each other with their space programs.
@IFlick You asked why why the Soviets wouldn't have pointed this out if we faked the man mooned landings. I gave you a reason. There are other reasons as well, such as right after Apollo 11 mission the USA gave massive quantities of grain to the Soviet Union who was in desperate need of it. Some call this a bribe to keep quiet about the Apollo missions, it very well could have been just that.
@TruthWillSetUFree911 Both the Chinese and the Indians have recently completed the total satallite mapping of the moon. There were the six lunar landing sites, just where they were supossed to be. Into the 1950's there were tens of thousands of Americans who believed the world was flat. Satallite imagery, global travel, nothing could convince them the world was round. Nothing ever did. They just died off.
@IFlick OK, show us the pictures then. Can they or NASA or anyone anywhere show us the pictures of the landing sites of the supposed first trip of humans to the moon? Do you believe NASA's story about copying over the original never aired on TV high quality videos of the manned moon landings because they wanted to save money?! Do you really believe such nonsense? If you do then you are a fool.
Of course it was fake, billions of dollars and everyone's job at NASA was on the line, they either went to the moon successfully, or made the average joe think they did, or they would all be out of jobs. Guess what? The world is full of LIARS! Nothing new.
The Mariana's trench example might hold some water if no man had dived below 50 ft in the 40 odd years since - thanks for outlining nicely how absurd the 239,000 miles to 300 statistic actually is.
@spacehopperballs, your argument is essentially this: "it's absurd despite the fact that I have not researched it."
Each of this film's objections is easily answered with logical, scientifically sound explanations--the same explanations that are all over the web for anyone who wants to listen to scientists. But, if you've already decided that science is bollocks, you get what you ask for. Enjoy.
My wife and I learned years ago that there were strange things going on this planet that directly affected our lives. Yet, despite the fact that we were directly affected by such things, we discovered that we were not entitled to know about it. It now appears that even Winston Churchill had a part in deciding what version of the truth we would be entitled to know. Why, then, should we even make the effort to believe what we are told is the truth, when the truth is filtered by politicians?
Sir! I do know what I am talking about. I don't read so called "internet experts". I have real first hand knowledge. I know that no man can go more than 500 miles off the surface of earth, that JFK was assassinated by a massive intelligence conspiracy, that the first photos from Mars showed normal brown dirt and blue skies, then within hours they colorized red all Marsian photos. I wish you good luck sir.
One more thing. They don't like to talk about it, but every animal, dog, cat, mouse, monkey we sent up into outer space came back DEAD because they received a "death dose" of radiation in outer space.
@alan48000 That's simply not true, you have no idea what you are talking about. Go read some real science and history and not a bunch of garbage by "Internet Experts" who can always prove "we never went to the moon", "The JFK murder was a conspiracy", "911 was an inside job", and "There is a Face at Cydonia"...
All of this is nonsense spouted by "internet research experts" that couldn't hold a 2nd shift job as a janitor at McDonalds.
9/11 was an inside job by those loyal to a foreign nation. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to know which nation I am talking about. It is the ONLY nation that benefited from 9/11.
Hi Spread, Since a physicist told me that term "death dose", I must assume that it is a technical term, but its not used often. It only takes 1 click of ionizing radiation to kill but you would never know if that click came from you sleeping in your bed 15 years ago or flying to New York at 33,000 feet a few years ago. The higher you fly the more chances you get of having a proton or electron knocked out of its proper orbit inside your body.
I have not read all the comments, but I want to put forth the following: We receive about 11.3 clicks or ionizing events every minute on average while we are on the surface of earth. When we fly at about 20,000 feet we get about 175 clicks and when we fly at about 33,000 we get about 500 clicks per minute. So, the farther off earth you go, the more radiation you get. When you travel outside the protective atmosphere (about 200 miles above earth), then you get death dose of radiation.
@bill99959 -- The only problem is that your "wires footage" video does not contain any actual wires.
And your "fake pics" video was created by a guy who was lying in almost every scene -- anyone with even basic knowledge of astronomy and simple mathematics can prove that he is lying.
You don't have to "believe" NASA. You can figure out for yourself how fake the "hoax evidence" actually is.
one thing is absolutrely certain: if we did go to the moon late '69-'72, we certainly have not been back. even tho the moon would be a perfect place for a space station or communications/ astronomy center. it would be the perfect place to stage missions to other planets.
and yet today, with all the newer technology and the space shuttle and orbiting space station, we have not even attempted another moon mission.
also, the extreme temps would have cooked the camera film. radiation belts ?!!
@nootaramus The Moon is way to far away for Humans to land on it. And if an x-ray at the Airport security scanner can ruin your camera film then how did theirs survive outside Earths magnetic field where the Sun emits more radiation than anything in our entire solar system? I am positive that all of the pictures of on the Moon were not taken on the moon.
@nootaramus -- The moon would actually be a fairly poor place for an astronomy center or for missions to other planets. Earth orbit is much better for a number of reasons. It costs a LOT to launch into a trans-lunar orbit.
And why would extreme temps "cook" anything? The moon is only about 1/3 warmer than Earth. Heat is transmitted mostly by infrared EM radiation. And white suits and silver colored space ships reflect infrared EM radiation. Why would they get excessively hot?
@timrocket2008 Where did you look? I found them, I even found logistical data from the Russians and that took less than five minutes. If you took some time to actually look at the evidence provided by reputable sources, you could figure this out instead of not looking and throwing accusations at complete strangers for your own ignorance.
Like I said, I can give you the links the the sources I sighted if you would like. Only if you stop throwing out baseless accusations and ask politely.
And all these sources have one thing in common: they don't include the Quindar Tones( those bleeps you hear in the NASA recordings) nor CapCom in Houston.
3. Professor Heinz Kaminski, Director of the Bochum Observatory in Bochum, Germany was able to provide confirmation of events and data independent of both the Russian and U.S. space agencies.
4. Even Larry Baysinger, who was a technician working at WHAS radio in Louisville, Kentucky was able to independently identify and record transmissions that occurred between Apollo astronauts while on the lunar surfa
I'm an aerospace engineer, and I can decisively say that this silly conspiracy theory has been conclusively put to rest. We have images taken recently from lunar orbiters that show the Apollo landing sites with the lunar descent stage--right where they're supposed to be. Additionally, scientists internationally have been using the laser reflectors set up by the Apollo astronauts for decades to gauge the distance between the Earth and the Moon with great accuracy.
@vongoddard That is absolute bullshit. I have every single image taken by the LRO and the resolution is so low, you can not make out anything to be recognizable. They even edited in arrows that point to nothing with descriptions. Yet we can see people and cars with Earth Sattelites which are 6 times further away than a satellite can be orbiting the Moon. So its total BS
Yes I do
justusreid 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@justusreid
You do know what makes gravity... right???
Oh My God.
Nuff said.
airtech4 1 week ago
Comment removed
airtech4 1 week ago
My simple question is....Why not go back if you really did 40 years ago? Iike come on, you spend billions going to bullshit countries, Why not spend it on going to the moon?? Make's me think.
4168033000 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
If you're still not convinced, try typing these words on GOOGLE! (... Go and read up on the first site on the list that gives you GOOGLE!) ...... THE MOON LANDING HOAX ....
HOW TO WIN IN A COURT OF LAW ... WITHOUT A LAWYER!
LEARN HOW TO KEEP YOUR PRIVACY
ettoremazza7 2 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Try typing these words on GOOGLE: ( APOLLO Research
Accepted the view, held by the Majority, named Is that NASA sent astronauts to the Moon and returned to Earth Them Safely - as reported by the space agency, as seen on TV and in the Apollo photos. )
ettoremazza7 2 weeks ago
Provate a digitare queste parole su Google: (APOLLO Research
Accettato il punto di vista, tenuto dalla maggioranza, è che la NASA chiama inviato astronauti sulla Luna e tornato sulla Terra in modo sicuro -. Come riportato dall'agenzia spaziale, come si vede in TV e nelle foto Apollo)
ettoremazza7 2 weeks ago
im a investigator on this stuff and what i think is they didn't do it and ill tell you why. When it was filmed in the 70s as you could see the flag was moving like air was hitting it. And I learned that the astronauts suits are 40 percent helium inside.so when they walk it looks like theres no gravity. Ill tell you this the goverment is tricking us to believe they change your minds that make you think wow. But they send secret missions on the moon that we never know about. Thats all I could say.
mark12130 2 weeks ago
@mark12130 they would die at 40% helium and it still wouldn't be enough to lift them
stewiee7999 1 week ago
It's because of the radio signal things like ham radios use that take advantage of no air in space or anything to slow the signal.
Darty105 1 month ago
Besides, the best they could do to fake it would be Star Trek, the original series animations. The pictures they sent back and their camera sent much better pictures. The Van Helsing radiation belt isn't too bad.
Darty105 1 month ago
There is gravity on the moon. Besides, the is moon dust which is like gravel. No gravity dosen't make things float on their own. It would require other movement.
Darty105 1 month ago
@Darty105 About the gravity, you're wrong. There is gravity on the moon yes, but it's like six time smaller that the Earth's. Take this under consideration- if the Earth was the size of one cubic meter with the same mass you'd be squashed on the surface by the power of its gravity. So the moon has not that much mass to keep things as stable on its surface as the Earth because the moon's mass is 27% of that of Earth.
890slay 3 weeks ago
It is a lie
justusreid 1 month ago
@justusreid After the 'no gravity' statement, I'm sure you're perfectly equipped to figure out this 'hoax.' Dang, NASA got caught.
hahahaha
airtech4 1 week ago
I never had any hope that men landed on the moon. I was setting in the school class rooom, just a child, 8 yrs old and all other kids and teachers where tripping and in awe about the landing, but my own heart new it was a lie. I tried telling others all my life was not true but a huge fake! Nasa did not have wireless tech and they used extention cords and plain walkie talkies for short distance's. The World was decieved big time! Finally all truth is coming out and I prayed it would.
RSMJ15 1 month ago
The flash again from the 15mp phone camera again.
I8uLUVm 1 month ago
ssss
SuperAndroidTV 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
I'm shocked. Maybe they went to the moon, but they had crappy pictures, or no pictures at all. So they fake the pictures, but the trip happened.
terablue12 2 months ago
I'm shocked. Maybe they went to the moon, but they had crappy pictures, or no pictures at all. So they fake the pictures, but the trip happened.
terablue12 2 months ago
there is no way we have ever made it to the moon. it is funny when people say we have even though we havent been back in over 50 years. sure we can put a robot their but never a person espicially in 1960. you have to remember they had radio contact on the moon. i can bareley get radio in my car 30 miles from a station and cell signal 50 miles from a tower. so how did they have radio contact 1million miles from earth in 1960! 30 years before this they were using morse code!
zxsk8zx 2 months ago
@zxsk8zx its about 250,000 miles. Not a million
TxStroke23 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Apollo rockets and the moon landing were all to develop ICBM's...we never intended on going to the moon since Dr Allen discovered the radiation belts named after him...man has never traveled farther than 365 miles above the earth.
Common physics prove we never went anyplace but low orbit.
TheJosh1111111111111 4 months ago
CT retards are a fucking joke
Spindry96 4 months ago
Apollo rockets and the moon landing were all to develop ICBM's...we never intended on going to the moon since Dr Allen discovered the radiation belts named after him...man has never traveled farther than 365 miles above the earth.
Common physics prove we never went anyplace but low orbit.
UNDERDOGTAHOE 4 months ago
One of America's attempts to show the world that they are superior than their Communist Counterparts during the Cold War. I'm a capitalist btw and I am not proud of this lie that was suppose to fool us and our ideological opponents
AimingFist 5 months ago 3
Yes we put men on the moon. NASA isn't some superhumanly run out on its own organization doing what ever it wanted for the last 40 years. It's owned and payed for by the american taxpayer to the tune of billions of dollars and a public accounting ofice would have blown the whistle years ago. And as for the Politicians, they're very average men (& women) who don't lie very well because we spot them day afte day.
Nixon was probably the greatest liar to have lived but he couldn't stop Watergate.
andschannll 5 months ago
One single question....How do you explain the fact that in 42 years they don't land to the moon anymore??? We have better technology than those days... I want to believe that they get to the moon, but that questions don't let me...
Nottheone11 6 months ago
@Nottheone11 Easy, there's no point since there was nothing in it for us except in beating the Soviet Union back then. Just like how any other Nations didn't even bother to do it even today, it was a competition, Capitalism vs Communism back then. There is nothing on the moon that could have benefit us, otherwise you would see everyone going to the moon by now. The dollars have lost its value unlike back then, so costs vs. benefit would be a factor to consider.
brbn93 6 months ago
@Nottheone11 Compare going to the moon to a drinking game, it was fun in the beginning, but after the game had ended there was no benefit except a hangover. Or in NASA case millions of dollars wasted, that's why all we been doing is launching satellites, it's cheaper and it can benefit us. What did we got out when we got to the moon? We won (that's great), and we got some moon rocks. If we didn't go to the moon then why haven't the other Nations take up the challenge and stick their flag on it?
brbn93 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
The moon missions were faked.
politicalforum (dot) com/moon-landing/190138-apollo-moon-missions-were-faked-studio (dot) html
Cosmored 6 months ago
Since we have the Van Allen radiation belts circling the earth, very intense radiation that will cause cancer in anyone who gets near it, I doubt it would've been possible to go to any moons. The inner Van Allen belt extends upward 10,000km, the outer belt, 47,000 km, so it's not as though they're like the belts we wear. Anyhow, I also read once that Buzz Aldrin punched a man in the face for asking him to swear he'd really gone to the moon.
innerspace55 7 months ago
Comment removed
MTMind2 7 months ago
Comment removed
MTMind2 7 months ago
@innerspace55 - And here's Dr James Van Allen's response to claims that it's impossible to pass through the belts NAMED AFTER HIM (and hence no-one knew more about the belts than he did); "The recent Fox TV show, which I saw, is an ingenious and entertaining assemblage of nonsense. The claim that radiation exposure during the Apollo missions would have been fatal to the astronauts is only one example of such nonsense". But hey, what would Van Allen know about the Van Allen belts? Right? ;-)
MTMind2 7 months ago
@MTMind2 you are uneducated..Van allen wrote articles telling of the deadly nature of the radiation belts named after him. Von Braun also wrote articles saying it was impossible in the 50's. Said it would take a spacecraft larger than the empire state building to get to the moon. you are really so gullible to think 1960 air-conditioning technology could work in deep space in direct sunlight? How? I have a bridge I would like to sell you as well....
UNDERDOGTAHOE 4 months ago
@UNDERDOGTAHOE - Van Allen did not say it was impossible for men to pass through the belts, as confirmed by the quote from Dr Van Allen provided here. Radiation itself isn't deadly, just as heat itself isn't deadly, it's both INTENSITY and DURATION that can make them deadly. Von Braun did NOT say it requires a huge rocket to get to the moon, he initially PREPERRED that approach over that of a multi-stage rocket, but later accepted a muti-stage rocket was the better option. Learn your history :-)
MTMind2 4 months ago
@UNDERDOGTAHOE - "PREPERRED"? Where did I get that word from? :) Slight typo, it should have been "PREFERRED". But that's the point, Von Braun favoured the idea of building a huge rocket capable of going straight to the moon, landing there, and then taking off and returning to earth, the way you used to see in B movie sci-fi films during the 50s. He was completely against the idea of a multi-stage approach, but eventually he saw the wisdom of that idea & changed his mind (as great men do).
MTMind2 4 months ago
@UNDERDOGTAHOE Van allen also admitted that he got it wrong,what von braun wrote in the fifties proves nothing,ten to fifteen years later is a long time for advances in technology,dont forget the shuttle was on the drawing board in 1969 and flew in the eighties.
arobekie 3 months ago
Broadcasters archive footage of the day do not have the gaps. The BBC don`t offer any as they were taped over, couldn`t have thought them that important. I was 3o at the time and I believed I was watching men "live" on the moon. If the broadcasters had told us then they were televising a film Nasa was showing them of this event. There would not have been Apollo 12. We were gullible in 1969 but not that gullible.
gordewar 7 months ago
If the moon landings were "live" why were there no gaps in the radio transmissions?
The moon is a long way away. There would have been 2.6 seconds beteen Nasa talking and an astronaut`s answer to enable the radio wave to go all the way to the moon to them and there answer to come all the way back and that`s at the speed of light dont you know?
gordewar 7 months ago
@gordewar Most of what you see here on YouTube is from edited footage from documentaries where the gaps were removed for continuity. The original transmissions have the gaps. Those of us who are old enough to have watched these historic broadcasts remember the gaps.
Synthetrix 7 months ago
@Synthetrix - That's right, but despite that, and countless evidence in support of the moon landings, we still have people today who deny the moon landings happened due to a culture of denial and conspiracy theories. Many people prefer to believe fantasies over facts and will do anything to convince themselves that their fantasies are true. It's interesting that after 42 years, no hoax believer has managed to DEMONSTRATE how it's possible to fake the footage we see of astronauts on the moon.
MTMind2 7 months ago
@MTMind2 Yes. I challenge anyone to duplicate the videos of the Apollo 15-17 liftoffs from the lunar surface using only 1969-1972 technology. They could never do it.
Synthetrix 7 months ago 4
@Synthetrix You know nothing about our true techologies in 196901972. Dont get mixed up between mass produced cheap shit for marketing and our real capabilities. The one thing that makes me wonder about the moon landing would be, how did they carry enough fuel to take off from earth, land on moon, take off again. Thats a lot of fuel. Van allen belt, it would take them 1 or 2 hours to pass through it all. Its not an easy task. Maybe they are the type of people who lie to make themself better.
benjyboba 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Synthetrix You know nothing about our true techologies in 196901972. Dont get mixed up between mass produced cheap shit for marketing and our real capabilities. The one thing that makes me wonder about the moon landing would be, how did they carry enough fuel to take off from earth, land on moon, take off again. Thats a lot of fuel. Van allen belt, it would take them 1 or 2 hours to pass through it all. Its not an easy task. Maybe they are the type of people who lie to make themself better.
benjyboba 5 months ago
@Synthetrix Theres a show called Fact or Faked . & They duplicated it . & They weren't even using modern technology , So . Who knows ?
angelbaby3689 5 months ago
Why don't we go back to the moon? Because we can not and never could get beyond the radiation belt. Some people choose to believe lies, no matter what.
dallasquinley 7 months ago
@dallasquinley Gorgeous music !! I'm not a country music fan because today's country is really not country but you bring the classic sound into your music. Absolutely gorgeous!!
mlmr11 7 months ago
@dallasquinley
no, because there is no reason worth the billions it costs to go there anymore, we've seen what we needed to see.
zezema535 7 months ago
@dallasquinley - I expect your referring to the Van Allen radiation belts, named after Dr James Van Allen himself, hence no-one knew more about those radiation belts than he did, and yet he said about such claims, and I quote "The recent Fox TV show, which I saw, is an ingenious and entertaining assemblage of nonsense. The claim that radiation exposure during the Apollo missions would have been fatal to the astronauts is only one example of such nonsense". But hey, what does he know. ;-)
MTMind2 7 months ago
lol, fools who believe that they really landed on moon ,,, lair lair ass on fire ,,, NASA , Fake
Asnadavid 8 months ago
@Asnadavid Said the brain dead paki homo to himself.
TheFACTSRUS 7 months ago
@TheFACTSRUS What ? What did you just say to yourself ?
mlmr11 7 months ago
@TheFACTSRUS ,,,LOL , hey my dumbest fellow american ,, reality is always harsh ,,,,,,, american liars big big liars , , and this is a fact ,,, ,LIAR LIAR AMERICAN ASS ON FAIR ,,, :-D
Asnadavid 7 months ago
@Asnadavid - All the scientific evidence supports the moon landings, none of the hoax claims holds up to scrutiny.
To fake a moon landing live in front of billions of people (including scientific geniuses) with signals beamed back from the Apollo craft and tracked by numerous countries worldwide (including USA's enemy of that time, the USSR) in a hoax requiring thousands of people to achieve, is more impressive than just landing a man on the moon! And do that successfully 6 times? No way! :-)
MTMind2 7 months ago
everything in the video is easily explained.
1.05 - the sunlight reflects off the moon's surface so it illuminates the underside of some objects
1.55 - a lot of the moon photos have been visibly altered to be more aesthetically pleasing for the public. the originals can still be seen, but the ones typically shown to the public are usually the enhanced ones
2.15 - there would be no blast marks - not enough force. and the stars cannot be seen in the same way they cant be seen in daylight on earth
zezema535 8 months ago
yes.
amor987654321 8 months ago
The Moby music is perfect.......I grew up believing man did go to the moon, but not anymore.............
DramaDon83 9 months ago
@DramaDon83 - Well, to each his own, as they say ;-)
MTMind2 9 months ago
@DramaDon83
OK I just have to ask:
What changed your mind?
Blahblobify 9 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Glinkaism1 - I see, so THIS is the topic in question. Next time, respond to me within the topic (better still, respond to the points raised) instead of leaving a childish and insulting message on my channel together with an obscure private message, since I consider that to be immature behaviour. Seriously, how old are you? If you're older than 16, then it's time you acted your age.
MTMind2 10 months ago
@Glinkaism1 - I see, so THIS is the topic in question. Next time, respond to me within the topic (better still, respond to the points raised) instead of leaving a childish and insulting message on my channel together with an obscure private message, since I consider that to be immature behaviour. Seriously, how old are you? If you're older than 16, then it's time you acted your age.
MTMind2 10 months ago
NO NO NO!!! No man has ever gone to the moon. That only happens mythical shows like Star Wars.
Just use common sense. It's a miracle that planes land in Newark.
NASA, like the rest of the government, lies. They would do ANYTHING to keep the lies going so they can get big taxpayer bucks. And no-one can stop them because the so-called representatives of the people and the government itself is one huge megacastle that won't investigate.
This is the same government that keeps our country broke.
Glinkaism1 10 months ago
This is 2011.Don't you think the fact we have not one photo of the Apollo "remains" on the Moon in 42 years is a little suspect?
MickeyMouseApollo 10 months ago
@MickeyMouseApollo - Google: "LRO Apollo" and read the links.
Also, watch the following;
/watch?v=SF0H79vp5uw
/watch?v=bpveN21EM9Q
Every probe that has photo'd the moon in sufficient detail has only ever confirmed the details seen in the Apollo footage, including details we could have never known unless we'd been there. Lunar orbiters with even higher res cams are planned by numerous nations and Google's Lunar X-Prize competition means we'll see even more evidence over the coming years. :-)
MTMind2 10 months ago
@MTMind2
The only thing we expect from the Apollo story is an official full scale investigation and justice for the murdered people and the fraud the moon hoax caused. Until then ,the LRO joke and any other spasmodic move can only be amusing to those who follow all this.
MickeyMouseApollo 10 months ago
@MickeyMouseApollo - Again, moon orbiter surveys and photos is providing evidence that proves the landings were real, and it's not just LRO, it's the Japanese orbiter Kaguya (as seen in the video I posted) and many more to come from various nations around the world, including China, and soon private companies too. So tell me, when these others confirm the moon landings too, will they ALL be part of the conspiracy to you? So the whole world is lying? I guess you will stick to your fantasy. ;-)
MTMind2 10 months ago
@MTMind2
OK.I think you have problem reading English but try again.
As it happens in this planet, no credible evidence exist to suggest the so called "Apollo moon landing"was anything but a military hoax. This fact also has been confirmed by all the researchers who took some of their time to investigate its supposed authenticity .Read what Bill Clinton wrote about the Moon Hoax .Maybe it's time you should start get use to it ,and stop bothering people with your fantasies.
MickeyMouseApollo 10 months ago
@MickeyMouseApollo - Seems you have a problem with common sense. Moon hoax believers like yourself have yet to offer any evidence that the moon landings were fake, absolutely none, but feel if they shout loud enough then that makes it true :-) All the evidence shows the moon landings are real (as confirmed by recent orbiters and no doubt future orbiters). Moon hoax believers always resort to the simplistic claim that any evidence is a lie (as you did with LRO), so keep up your fantasies kid :-D
MTMind2 10 months ago 17
@MTMind2 thank you for putting that retard in his place.
amor987654321 8 months ago
@MTMind2 The burden of proof is on NASA. "Hoaxers" , as you call them , don't have to prove anything because they're not making a claim to anything. They're simply stating they don't believe a claim.
You see, here we good people of earth are minding our own business on July 15 1969 and all of a sudden this big bohemoth bureaucracy comes along the next day making a claim that on any other day is pretty outrageous.
I would say the burden of proof lies on that bureaucracy
mlmr11 7 months ago
@mlmr11 - With all due respect, the moon landings were 'played out' in front of the whole world, it wasn't a secret or appear out of nowhere. All the evidence supports it, from the moon rocks and dust (distributed to laboratories all over the world). The photos and film alone showed the moon in ways NO-ONE predicted (they expected jagged terrain due to no atmosphere or rain to wear the surface, but meteors did that over billions of years). What do you expect, to be taken there in person? :)
MTMind2 7 months ago
@mlmr11 - The USSR, you know the enemy at the time, had a moon program too, but the failures of their N1 rocket meant they couldn't get a man to the moon. But they had their lunokhod rovers instead on the moon transmitting signals back to earth since 1970! Yes, whilst NASA were there! So the idea that USSR were somehow fooled is just nonsense. :)
Google 'LRO Apollo landings sites' for images of the equipment left behind by Apollo (no, not animations).They're nNot sharp yet, but soon will be :)
MTMind2 7 months ago
@MickeyMouseApollo the information gained during the build up to the apollo project, such as the interplanetary surveyors which recorded VAB radiation, is used by numerous other space agencies in the design of their unmanned spacecraft which have to endure this conditions. If they built their craft to these standards that the Apollo project said were required, assuming that these were all lies, then i think there would be complaints by these nations as billions of dollars is involved......
amor987654321 8 months ago
@MickeyMouseApollo but i guess they all just decided to get in on the conspiracy too, just to defend the honor of the USA, the russians love doing that, dont they?
amor987654321 8 months ago
@amor987654321
2000 million bushels of grain,a few million dollars and some Italian cars to davarits Brezhnev was enough.
MickeyMouseApollo 8 months ago
@MickeyMouseApollo ....seriously? to compensate for the billions they would have lost if the spacecraft they made to cope with the standards informed by NASA failed due to more radiation than expected? u have problems in the head?
amor987654321 8 months ago
NASA send wirenauts to the moon.
watch?v=23_QdAz2tfY
potrodsas 10 months ago
It´s hard to say for sure... and anyone being 100% convinced either way probably needs to learn a thing or two about being critical.
cefkaseph 10 months ago
It's only a paper moon over a CGI sky. Shot in a studio with actors who didn't take direction very well.
Glinkaism1 10 months ago
@Glinkaism1 - CGI in 1969? CGI only became realistic enough to use in movies since the 90s.
As for no evidence, google 'LRO Apollo' and watch the following;
/watch?v=SF0H79vp5uw
/watch?v=bpveN21EM9Q
Every probe that has photo'd the moon in sufficient detail has only ever confirmed the the Apollo footage, showing details we could have never known unless we'd been there. Lunar orbiters with higher res cams are planned by numerous nations, meaning we'll see even more/better evidence soon. :-)
MTMind2 10 months ago
This is one of the dumbest conspiracy theories for some idiotic reason still being espoused,
There has been so much scientific evidence to disprove these half baked claims. The people who still publicly persist in promoting this crap are attention seeking half wits who have probably been anally probed by aliens, in a previous life, while standing on the grassy Noll.
mrmatkilgore 10 months ago
man fuck this bullshit, russians monitored the entire operation, why didn't they say it was a fake??? I tell you why, because they really DID go to the moon you fools.
If you think about it, you never seen a serious person sayin that shit we never went to the moon, just freaks from the youtube say that crap.
2dorCJ91 10 months ago
@2dorCJ91 Moron. First of all, lern how 2 rite gud. EDUCATED people start sentences with a CAPITAL LETTER, for starters. :)
Thus you are the fool. There is NO ACTUAL EVIDENCE that anyone landed on the moon. All we have are pictures and voice from ONE SOURCE. No other witnesses.
Russians looked at the same TV coverage, you fricking moron. And that TV coverage was actually a simulation done by NASA. And it was a poor simulation at that. Should have put more taxpayer money into the phony mopix!
Glinkaism1 10 months ago
@Glinkaism1 russians watched them with their own systems you fool, if you think they didn't, you are the biggest idiot in the world, and they admited they lost the moon race. Haven't you seen the mythbusters episode in wich they explain all these "evidences" about conspiration?
2dorCJ91 10 months ago
@2dorCJ91
Dude, certain russians "monitored",mission and probably got paid to do so, if you look back, US was on the brink of loosing the race to the moon against the russians, well cus they were the firsts to put a man in orbit but they said that going to the moon was impossible. (mocking)"NOT FOR THE US" ... so they did this shit and guess what, "they won the race to the moon". NOW UNTIL SOMEONE EXPLAINS TO ME, HOW THE LUNAR MODULE LANDS AND NOT MAKES A CREATER. I'M ALL EARS.. WELL EYES LOL
diaphanoux 8 months ago
@diaphanoux
The moon lander module didnt make a crater because the Moon lander was no longer quickly decelerating, so the descent engine only had to support the lander's own weight, which was lessened by the Moon's gravity and by the near exhaustion of the descent propellants. At landing, the engine thrust divided by the nozzle exit area is only about 1.5 PSI. so the thrusters would not kick up much dust or rock as they had very little force against the surface.
zezema535 8 months ago
@diaphanoux
If you want proof that they went to the moon, then just look at the telescope photos taken from earth of the moon's surface. they clearly show the equipment left behind on the surface: the flag, the retroreflectors etc. even the footprint tracks can be seen.
these photos have been taken and verified by third-party organizations, as in not NASA or the US government.
zezema535 8 months ago
@zezema535 There are no pictures that clearly show evidence of equipment left behind. There are only pictures with imposed animation of where they think the equipment is. If you call that clear evidence then we have a different standard of what clear evidence is and probably cannot continue a debate as such.
mlmr11 7 months ago
@mlmr11
yes there are pictures, not taken from earth as i originally and mistakenly wrote, but taken from recent moon orbiters. Link - wwwdotnasadotgov/mission_pages/LRO/multimedia/lroimages/apollositesdothtml
zezema535 7 months ago
@zezema535 Classic misdirection. The link takes me on a trip to google "page not found" land
mlmr11 7 months ago
@mlmr11 - Links entered in yt replies often have characters added by the system, so as before, replace 'dot' with '.', but also delete the two '-' chrs (one appears after pasting). Once done, the link works (excuse the pun but, it's not rocket science :)).
If you googled as I requested, you would have found it too.
So to add to up my last replies to you, NASA have provided ALL the proof needed (film, photos, samples, plans, broadcasts etc), it's for YOU to show that such the evidence is fake.
MTMind2 7 months ago
@MTMind2 -
"So to add to up my last replies" ?
"to show that such the evidence" ?
.
Dam those typos! :D
MTMind2 7 months ago
@MTMind2 Really ? I Just did as you suggested and wound up on NASA's "error page" saying "the page does not exist".
Look man , it's real simple , the burden of proof lies on the claimant. NASA claims to have landed on the moon. Based on all of the evidence they've put forth I simply do not believe this .
mlmr11 7 months ago
@mlmr11 - And yet I tried again and it worked, I also stated how you can get to that info via google. So to make it easier for you, google: 'LRO Apollo sites' and go to the first link. What's so difficult about that?
NASA have provided ALL the evidence needed to support the moon landings, therefore the burden of proof has been fullfilled, the fact that you're not satisfied is irrelevent, it's for you to prove that the evidence they've provided is fake, and you've yet to do so about ANY issue.
MTMind2 7 months ago
@MTMind2 First of all , anyone that has to capitalize their words in order to put emphasis on their point is , in my estimation , suspect. I usually detect a major liar in someone that does that and you're not going to be the first exception that I make.
Secondly , I had stated that photographic evidence is not sufficient proof . Pictures on the internet are not exempt from this rule.
It's simple , the burden of proof lies with NASA as they're the claimant. I simply don't believe their claim
mlmr11 7 months ago
@MTMind2 To satisfy my own morbid curiosity counter intuitive to my interest in time management I did a search on your suggestion.
As I suspected, my intuition whereas it applies to time management was correct.
My friend , I am not here to convince you of anything. You believe what you want and have a big fat cheeseburger to go with it. I'm not concerned with you at all.
My concern is my own view. I simply do not believe NASA's position is authentic.
mlmr11 7 months ago
@mlmr11 - Your objection to capitalization is amusing nonsense, that's more an example of using weak excuses to dismiss any arguments put forward by someone. And if photographic evidence (and I assume you apply that to film too) is not sufficient for you, then state exactly what evidence NASA is suppose to provide that would have been sufficient. It seems to me you've made up your mind and therefore no evidence would have been sufficient for you. So yes, you too believe what you want.
MTMind2 7 months ago
@mlmr11 well then try replacing the ''dot''s with actual ............ dots
zezema535 7 months ago
@diaphanoux
Also by shooting a laser at the retroreflectors on the moon, protons from the laser can be detected as they are reflected back, so that is even more proof that we were on the moon, otherwise who else put the retroreflectors there? and don't say aliens.
zezema535 8 months ago
@diaphanoux They also said that the idea of aeroplanes was impossible as well, but we all know that to be wrong now. As times change, so does technology and therefore capabilities.
you really think the russians could be paid off, at the time they were the only rivals against the americans, and they wanted to beat them, so i doubt they would accept any amount of money to pretend to lose to their hated enemies. even if they were, i think that amount of money would have been noticed and revealed.
zezema535 7 months ago
@2dorCJ91
Dude, certain russians "monitored",mission and probably got paid to do so, if you look back, US was on the brink of loosing the race to the moon against the russians, well cus they were the firsts to put a man in orbit but they said that going to the moon was impossible. (mocking)"NOT FOR THE US" so they did this shit and guess what, "they won the race to the moon". NOW UNTIL SOMEONE EXPLAINS TO ME, HOW THE LUNAR MODULE LANDS AND NOT MAKES A CREATER. I'M ALL EARS.. WELL EYES LOL
diaphanoux 8 months ago
@diaphanoux "US was on the brink of loosing the race to the moon against the russians"
No. By July 1969, the U.S. had a 2:1 advantage in manned spacecraft-hours in space, and a 4:1 man-hour advantage over the Soviets. The Saturn V flew 13 times without a loss of vehicle, whereas the Soviet N-1 was destroyed on all its four launch attempts.
"they said that going to the moon was impossible."
No, they didn't. Plain and simple. They even had a Moon program, with a lander tested in Earth orbit.
roamingcroat 8 months ago
@diaphanoux "NOW UNTIL SOMEONE EXPLAINS TO ME, HOW THE LUNAR MODULE LANDS AND NOT MAKES A CREATER. I'M ALL EARS."
Why would you expect a crater?
The DC-X didn't make a crater on landing. The Soyuz doesn't make a crater on landing. Blue Origin's New Shepard doesn't make a crater on landing. Harriers and helicopters don't make craters. Please explain to me why the LM should and all these other VTOL air and spacecraft don't.
roamingcroat 8 months ago
Well it is kinding to look a bit doutfull, and that is hard to comprehend and if this is a lie what else is being hidden from us poor dumb subserviant humans we must not let this happen we have got to make humanity be honest and stop the power of the dollar deciding who will live and who will only just live
critchley3819 11 months ago
@critchley3819 - But consider the 1000s of people needed to fake a moon landing, from mission control to so-called fake videos/photos, and yet after 42 years NO-ONE involved at any level has exposed it, not even those on their death bed with nothing to lose, not even the USSR where it would have been the ultimate propoganda in the fight of communism vs capitalism, not even scientist the world over including those examining moon rocks. Fake it once and get away with it = Luck, but 6 times??? :)
MTMind2 11 months ago
@MTMind2 Hi and thanks for your reply, I hope with every part of me that you are right,If this was a fake then our history is a lie. would you look at Dr Stevan Greer, Bob Dean and John Lear and let me know what you make of it ..brian.critchley@bigpond.com
critchley3819 11 months ago
@algierssolija i too think that this landings were fake and were picturised in sector 51...... too shocking .... but true......
aaron00070 11 months ago
@aaron00070
Never tell your parents you think the Apollo missions were faked, they will cry when they realize how weird and stupid you are.
TheJomogogo 11 months ago
@aaron00070= If the Lunar Landings are fake, then I am Mars, the God of War.
vigo894 10 months ago
They did go to the moon.And if they didn't,who cares.
Summed up by meh..
legominifig8 11 months ago
This is only a heated subject because lefty agitators seek to diminish the U.S. impact on Western culture and incite the next generation to sedition. They don't give a flying solar flare in space whether the landings were real or not.
Purpleplanetar17 1 year ago
I live next to the space center and know many people that work on the space program. I've seen rockets launch. Get a life people
anticliche321 1 year ago
The surface of the moon is highly reflective. That's why we can see it at night and it is why Aldrin and the lower parts of the LEM were illuminated in the pictures. Sunlight causes parallel shadows on a flat surface. The moon's surface is far from flat. There are no stars because the pictures are being taken in daylight. The exposure of the camera would not pick up the dim stars. All hoax arguments vanish under science and logic. Check out the Mythbusters videos about the moon.
jtkirkfan2002 1 year ago
While there are people who believe in UFO's, there are also doubters who question the authenthicity of the landing on the moon. Further, there are non-religious people, but there are also those who are, so much so that they commited suicide thinking it was armageddon. As humans we are vulnerable to being brainwashed. It is only scienctific facts that invite us all. If the landing of the moon was a hoax, the USSR would have embarrassed us already. That's just one little justification.
dankaren95 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
But what do the experts say?
There is two of them here.
NASA astronaut Brian O' Leary who was a science advisor on the Apollo mission: "I'm not 100% sure these men walked on the Moon".
Hasselblad engineer J.Lundberg ,made the Apollo cameras,when he saw the fake Apollo pictures :"I can't explain it ..so..maybe you should find Armstrong and ask him".
watch?v=lOyYZIW0zvY
potrodsas 1 year ago
1) Moon surface is highly reflective. Go out on the night of a full moon and see. Cameras can adjust to shadow side of LM 2) Shadows are not alway parallel on lumpy surfaces 3) Some photos do show disturbance under the LM, but only 2600 lbs of thrust was used to land--far less than a helicopter. 4) Some version of "Man on the Moon" are edited for effect, but it is possible mounds can appear brighter. 5) Stars won't appear in daylight camera settings--ever.
It was no lie. Science works.
LunarTuner 1 year ago
its funny that during 1969 and while Nixon was president... man used to go to the moon a lot... now with a better technology they NEVER go there anymore... LOL that MOON thing was ALL FAKE... ''If u can't make it... FAKE IT'' .
nickyrko 1 year ago
@nickyrko Actually the reason that NASA do not go to the moon anymore is due to the fact that there is no real reason to do so, as all the tests and experiments were done in the early 70's. George W Bush wanted to return to the moon to build a base their, but after Obama got elected the funding was withdrawn. It costs a lot of money to go to the moon, so you only go there when you really need to. The moon landings were real, if they were fake then the Soviets would have proved it. But no.
spotswood4444 1 year ago
@nickyrko These NASA proponents seem to get lost in the suspension of reality for the purpose of their fantasy. All you have to do is use critical thought to figure out that, at the very least, NASA's position is not completely authentic.
I don't know if they ever landed the Apollo on the moon or not. Their evidence would have you believe they did land. The problem with their evidence is that it's all subject to manipulation. I'm going to need more solid proof before I believe their claim.
mlmr11 7 months ago
well i think its fake men land on the moon its just US wannted to win the cold war back than with Soviet so mad some fake photos
SopzYoshi 1 year ago
FAKED for sure. A million mile round trip???? Give me a break. Total lie.
Where did they go to the bathroom? If they had to poop or pee in their suits the smell would have been unbearable. I can name a hundred other reasons why we didn't go there, if I need to.
rog944 1 year ago
@rog944 What a moron. Man really did go to the moon, national geographic, history channel and naked science proved it. Dumbass...
hamoan66boi 1 year ago
@hamoan66boi congratulations! You've been brainwashed by the mass media!
rog944 1 year ago
@rog944 Ha its not called brainwashed if everything they talk about is correct. And I know you watch these channels so don't talk shit. =)
hamoan66boi 1 year ago
@hamoan66boi
+ reflector mirrors, a footsteps and about dozen flags on the moon also hold a strong argument.
1995magnus 1 year ago
@rog944 Visit Kennedy Space center in Florida, and ALL your doubts will go away. You will realise that if it was all a fake then the Soviets would have broken their necks to ridicule the USA, but no they could not because the Soviets tracked the Apollo missions on Radar. Plus every time a question is asked of NASA, they always fully explain themselves. And NASA can name 101 reasons why they did go to the moon between 1969 and 1972.
spotswood4444 1 year ago
Im kinda on both sides cause I dont know if it was real or not... I mean these photos show fakeness but also we saw that huge spaceship go into space, It was gone for the amout of days it was up there, it came back down the way we saw it, to be honest The only thing to completely show me its true, is to get a photo from a satilite showing the american flag, or the lunar lander that I think is suppose to still be there???? or not I may be wrong
Arcink 1 year ago
With technology of those years it was impossible to land on the moon.The ships had no protection against radioactivity. In space if you use 1 ton of fuel to reach a speed, you need 1 ton of combustble to stop. Thats mean they had to have 10 times the size of the ship only to fuel. If a man weighs 3 times less, because moongravity, moves 3 times faster, not slower. Without the protection of atmosphere, when day by the moon, the sun microwaves would have killed with or without space suits. FAKE.
25utherpandragon60 1 year ago
Its all Fake stupid ass people trying to lie to us!!! haha
randomchikka141 1 year ago
If we faked the moon landings, wouldn't the Soviets have pointed this out?
IFlick 1 year ago
@IFlick
Because the Cold War was a hoax to build up the military industrial complex for both America and the Soviet Union. They weren't really enemies. They helped each other with their space programs.
TruthWillSetUFree911 1 year ago
@TruthWillSetUFree911 It sounds like there's a conspiracy in your woodpile.
IFlick 1 year ago
@IFlick You asked why why the Soviets wouldn't have pointed this out if we faked the man mooned landings. I gave you a reason. There are other reasons as well, such as right after Apollo 11 mission the USA gave massive quantities of grain to the Soviet Union who was in desperate need of it. Some call this a bribe to keep quiet about the Apollo missions, it very well could have been just that.
TruthWillSetUFree911 1 year ago
@TruthWillSetUFree911 Both the Chinese and the Indians have recently completed the total satallite mapping of the moon. There were the six lunar landing sites, just where they were supossed to be. Into the 1950's there were tens of thousands of Americans who believed the world was flat. Satallite imagery, global travel, nothing could convince them the world was round. Nothing ever did. They just died off.
IFlick 1 year ago
@IFlick OK, show us the pictures then. Can they or NASA or anyone anywhere show us the pictures of the landing sites of the supposed first trip of humans to the moon? Do you believe NASA's story about copying over the original never aired on TV high quality videos of the manned moon landings because they wanted to save money?! Do you really believe such nonsense? If you do then you are a fool.
TruthWillSetUFree911 1 year ago
Of course it was fake, billions of dollars and everyone's job at NASA was on the line, they either went to the moon successfully, or made the average joe think they did, or they would all be out of jobs. Guess what? The world is full of LIARS! Nothing new.
TruthWillSetUFree911 1 year ago
The Mariana's trench example might hold some water if no man had dived below 50 ft in the 40 odd years since - thanks for outlining nicely how absurd the 239,000 miles to 300 statistic actually is.
spacehopperballs 1 year ago
The only time they NASA has claimed to have sent a man above low orbit is during apollo 40 odd years ago
What is there to research?
If someone hits you on the back of the head - you don't go to the library and get a book out.
You say "Ouch" Its not complicated.
The NASA narrative is absurd which is why all these nonsense about research and it being really complicated is put forward.
Bollocks
spacehopperballs 1 year ago
@spacehopperballs, your argument is essentially this: "it's absurd despite the fact that I have not researched it."
Each of this film's objections is easily answered with logical, scientifically sound explanations--the same explanations that are all over the web for anyone who wants to listen to scientists. But, if you've already decided that science is bollocks, you get what you ask for. Enjoy.
LunarTuner 1 year ago
My wife and I learned years ago that there were strange things going on this planet that directly affected our lives. Yet, despite the fact that we were directly affected by such things, we discovered that we were not entitled to know about it. It now appears that even Winston Churchill had a part in deciding what version of the truth we would be entitled to know. Why, then, should we even make the effort to believe what we are told is the truth, when the truth is filtered by politicians?
clemstevenson 1 year ago
Sir! I do know what I am talking about. I don't read so called "internet experts". I have real first hand knowledge. I know that no man can go more than 500 miles off the surface of earth, that JFK was assassinated by a massive intelligence conspiracy, that the first photos from Mars showed normal brown dirt and blue skies, then within hours they colorized red all Marsian photos. I wish you good luck sir.
alan48000 1 year ago
One more thing. They don't like to talk about it, but every animal, dog, cat, mouse, monkey we sent up into outer space came back DEAD because they received a "death dose" of radiation in outer space.
alan48000 1 year ago
@alan48000 That's simply not true, you have no idea what you are talking about. Go read some real science and history and not a bunch of garbage by "Internet Experts" who can always prove "we never went to the moon", "The JFK murder was a conspiracy", "911 was an inside job", and "There is a Face at Cydonia"...
All of this is nonsense spouted by "internet research experts" that couldn't hold a 2nd shift job as a janitor at McDonalds.
bibbler227 1 year ago
@bibbler227
9/11 was an inside job by those loyal to a foreign nation. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to know which nation I am talking about. It is the ONLY nation that benefited from 9/11.
TruthWillSetUFree911 1 year ago
Hi Spread, Since a physicist told me that term "death dose", I must assume that it is a technical term, but its not used often. It only takes 1 click of ionizing radiation to kill but you would never know if that click came from you sleeping in your bed 15 years ago or flying to New York at 33,000 feet a few years ago. The higher you fly the more chances you get of having a proton or electron knocked out of its proper orbit inside your body.
alan48000 1 year ago
I have not read all the comments, but I want to put forth the following: We receive about 11.3 clicks or ionizing events every minute on average while we are on the surface of earth. When we fly at about 20,000 feet we get about 175 clicks and when we fly at about 33,000 we get about 500 clicks per minute. So, the farther off earth you go, the more radiation you get. When you travel outside the protective atmosphere (about 200 miles above earth), then you get death dose of radiation.
alan48000 1 year ago
@alan48000
Is "death dose" a technical term?
And just how many "clicks" does it take to kill somebody? You should have told us in your post.
SpreadingtheMuse 1 year ago
Proof of wires and fake pics
w ww.youtube.com/watch?v=3Vrge-8F6rw
bill99959 1 year ago
@bill99959 -- The only problem is that your "wires footage" video does not contain any actual wires.
And your "fake pics" video was created by a guy who was lying in almost every scene -- anyone with even basic knowledge of astronomy and simple mathematics can prove that he is lying.
You don't have to "believe" NASA. You can figure out for yourself how fake the "hoax evidence" actually is.
nesokretep 1 year ago
w ww.youtube.com/watch?v=wdMvQTNLaUE
bill99959 1 year ago
one thing is absolutrely certain: if we did go to the moon late '69-'72, we certainly have not been back. even tho the moon would be a perfect place for a space station or communications/ astronomy center. it would be the perfect place to stage missions to other planets.
and yet today, with all the newer technology and the space shuttle and orbiting space station, we have not even attempted another moon mission.
also, the extreme temps would have cooked the camera film. radiation belts ?!!
nootaramus 1 year ago
@nootaramus The Moon is way to far away for Humans to land on it. And if an x-ray at the Airport security scanner can ruin your camera film then how did theirs survive outside Earths magnetic field where the Sun emits more radiation than anything in our entire solar system? I am positive that all of the pictures of on the Moon were not taken on the moon.
timrocket2008 1 year ago
@nootaramus -- The moon would actually be a fairly poor place for an astronomy center or for missions to other planets. Earth orbit is much better for a number of reasons. It costs a LOT to launch into a trans-lunar orbit.
And why would extreme temps "cook" anything? The moon is only about 1/3 warmer than Earth. Heat is transmitted mostly by infrared EM radiation. And white suits and silver colored space ships reflect infrared EM radiation. Why would they get excessively hot?
nesokretep 1 year ago
BULLSHIT We have tried to get the Data recordings and none of them have ANYTHING! BULLSHIT LIAR.
timrocket2008 1 year ago
@timrocket2008 Where did you look? I found them, I even found logistical data from the Russians and that took less than five minutes. If you took some time to actually look at the evidence provided by reputable sources, you could figure this out instead of not looking and throwing accusations at complete strangers for your own ignorance.
Like I said, I can give you the links the the sources I sighted if you would like. Only if you stop throwing out baseless accusations and ask politely.
CalicoVall 1 year ago
@CalicoVall Do you even know how to read Telemetry Data? Because its NOT text that you read on the internet.
My bet is that you don't even know what it is.
timrocket2008 1 year ago
ce and inside the command module itself.
And all these sources have one thing in common: they don't include the Quindar Tones( those bleeps you hear in the NASA recordings) nor CapCom in Houston.
I can send links if you are still interested. ^_^
CalicoVall 1 year ago
land at the same time.
3. Professor Heinz Kaminski, Director of the Bochum Observatory in Bochum, Germany was able to provide confirmation of events and data independent of both the Russian and U.S. space agencies.
4. Even Larry Baysinger, who was a technician working at WHAS radio in Louisville, Kentucky was able to independently identify and record transmissions that occurred between Apollo astronauts while on the lunar surfa
CalicoVall 1 year ago
I'm an aerospace engineer, and I can decisively say that this silly conspiracy theory has been conclusively put to rest. We have images taken recently from lunar orbiters that show the Apollo landing sites with the lunar descent stage--right where they're supposed to be. Additionally, scientists internationally have been using the laser reflectors set up by the Apollo astronauts for decades to gauge the distance between the Earth and the Moon with great accuracy.
vongoddard 1 year ago
@vongoddard That is absolute bullshit. I have every single image taken by the LRO and the resolution is so low, you can not make out anything to be recognizable. They even edited in arrows that point to nothing with descriptions. Yet we can see people and cars with Earth Sattelites which are 6 times further away than a satellite can be orbiting the Moon. So its total BS
timrocket2008 1 year ago