MSNBC Debates Moon Landing Hoax (2002)

What is your evidence the photos were faked?

I have books with collections of photos from Apollo. And I see no flaws.
I've heard many claims, but none have stood to scrutiny.
What real experts? Bart Sibrel? David Percy?
I give you the example of Project Jennifer; a big, secret operation by the CIA to raise a sunken Soviet sub. A big ship was needed, the Glomar Explorer.
Well, this turned out to be the worst kept secret of the Cold War. The press caught on to what the real mission of the ship was about, and published it.

Let me make myself more clear...

IF you take the artifacts within the moon pictures as non-speculatory evidence that the man faked the photos, you're a moron....

I don't care about 9/11

I have seen very impressive footage which made me feel like there's something wrong...

It might have been an inside job, but so far, the only theories indicating that it was so, comes from colorful sites.... made by paranoid people...

I'm not touching 9/11...

But I know that optics and occam's razor would help you see the issues within the moon photos...

IF you have original work... SHARE WITH US... just don't talk as if you knew something that couldn't be understood by us...

Now.. if your sources are hoax sites... And I think they are (since you haven't talked about them), then STFU.....

The landings were real and the photos are alright... some are off.. some have optical artifacts...

If you take the artifacts as non-speculatory evidence, you're a moron....

@breeknow First off, I'm no gullible human you waste of spunk.

Secondly, like I fucking said - I do NOT believe the moon landing itself was faked.

There is however good EVIIIIDEEENCE that the imagery itself was faked for clarity.

And when I say EVIDENCE, I mean just that so stop going on popular consensus and thinking you can just call it fiction and get away with it.

I'm not talking about speculation, theories or guesswork fucker.

@breeknow I couldn't give two fucks in the case of the moon landing anyway but with say... 9/11, it's very dangerous and... The TV man says anyone who apposes the Government's view is "nuts" enough time and brainwashed fools who get their opinions from FOX and CBS begin to believe it.

I suppose you think the still unexplained nano-thermite in the steel and debri of all three WTC Buildings is evidence that "doesn't exist" too?... Fool.

You really think we haven't browsed the hoax sites... don't you??
I have read most of the stuff on these sites..

I have a newsflash for you...
These sites are the "fan fiction" sites of science...

As Plaid put it: "It's completely wrong. It's just based on evidence that doesn't exist."
In other words.. FICTION!!!

If you take them seriously, you're gullible as hell...


Maybe you should "do a little diagram" ahahHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAH AH

Sure, sure...
Would you mind then sharing with us WHERE you find this information? Nobody is asking you to teach anyone...
Let us know WHERE you find this stuff...

I have a feeling you read up on every little single hoax site...
Those are not valid sources, therefore you couldn't teach us what's written there if you tried...

You're gonna have to do better than repeat what fictious websites tell you...

Your logic is pretty bad...
Go grab an astrophysics book... start there...

@thirdclass2006 Plenty of flaws, go look into it yourself, it's not upto me to teach you.

And if the footage really was faked then why would "real experts" 'say' that if it was a scandal lmao. That's the fucking point of a scandal.

Same reason no "expert" let loose about the Atomic Bomb project with Einstein for years or how the Watergate scandal was kept underwraps for years.

It's not hard. Doesn't take everyone, just a handful at the top.