NASA moon landing 1 of 5 conspiracy fraud hoax scam 1969-1999

Part 1 of 5. Channel 4 (in Britain) broadcast this in 1999, the 30th anniversary of the supposed 1969 landing, about ten years ago; I rediscovered a videotape. About 50 minutes. This is an introduction to the subject. I've known for years NASA faked this & was shocked that some people still don't know. I've added a few 'ten years after' notes, notably on David Percy and Marcus Allen. The speakers were a bit of a mixed bag, and it seems unpaid. In part 1 they discuss the background, after which David Percy gets into his photographic stride.

In this segment Matthew Williams refers to 'certain structures on the moon', by which I presume he means the artefacts generated by extreme digital processing of images.

It struck me this late-night chat format was a precursor to 'Big Brother' - which took another step, having participants who knew nothing of anything. Channel 4 also did 'Space Cadets', a real-life faked scenario which was quite amusing. Kudos to Channel 4 - as far as I know it's the only British TV look at this conspiracy/fraud. I'm hoping they don't mind this! They have programmes on youtube.com/shows - look for 4oD (=Four on demand). [Oct 2010 - I just found another site has put this TV programme before]

I've just found something very sad - Randi (the magician - I don't know if he's in fact particularly sk illed in that) addressing a crowd at NASA! The USA's 'skeptics' groups always shy away from serious topics - NASA, AIDS, 9/11, Holocaust, Jewish 'holy books' etc...

There may be copyright restrictions - the videos may be blocked in some countries. I don't know of any - but it happens now and then.

Category:

Science & Technology

Tags:

• Armstrong
• Aldrin
• Armageddon
• Steve
• Quayle
• NASA
• fraud
• hoax
• conspiracy
• theory
• scam
• lies
• moon
• landing
• lunar
• landings
• Kennedy
• Percy
• Bennett
• Allen
• Channel
• nexusmagazine
• Apollo
• 1969
• 1999
• Shenzhou
• seven
• spacewalk
• chinese
• orbit
• 2008
• program
• mission
• expo
• travel
• astronaut
• phony
• phoney
• fabricate
• false
• lie

[ZigSputnik]

British broadcasting at its lowest point. These people should be utterly ashamed. I just hope they all got back to their respective lunatic asylums and weren't allowed to roam the streets after the recording. Truly shameful.

[rerevisionist]

@ZigSputnik - you need psychiatric help.

[mooninquirer]

I like David Percy and Mary Bennett ( watch their very thorough documentary ----- google : WHAT HAPPENED ON THE MOON )

What I don't like about this TV show is the inclusion of people who are into the "paranormal" That seems to discredit the normal skepticism that everyone should feel about it, based on science, government fraud, and obvious behavior of lying.

It is the other way around ---- the astronauts and NASA say UFOs as space aliens were seen on the moon or the trip to the moon

[rerevisionist]

@mooninquirer - Yes, I agree; however this programme was broadcast just after an entire series, going on for weeks, which included quite a few astronomers, 'astronauts', supposed experts in things like the cold war etc. I think if Channel 4 had announced an entirely serious programme, they'd have got a lot of flak. Also a lot of serious people are cowards - there must be physicists and biologists and engineers who could have appeared but were too chicken....

[wonnthree]

the U.K. has more conspiracy theorists than America could ever dream of..however..there issome decrepitude in the lunar landing and the wonderful starched flag when there is no wind on the moon

[971QKE]

The host of this program seem to only have two brain cells, and one is occupied looking for the other one.

[nesokretep]

@rerevisionist -- And as far as the fuel capacity of the lunar ascent module is concerned, I'll just ask a very simple question:

Have you even bothered to figure out the fuel tank volume that would be required to carry 5,000 pounds of fuel? How big across would a cylindrical or sperical tank need to be for that much fuel?

[nesokretep]

@rerevisionist -- There are TWO ways that rockets designed for launch into and/or travel through space can be steered. Neither of them require "fins."

Some rockets vary the thrust vector by moving the main rocket nozzle.

Some rockets steer by using separate thrusters to push the body of the rocket in the desired direction.

Both methods can use either automated gyroscopic guidance systems or manual control. Gyroscopic "autopilots" have been around since way before space rockets.

[nesokretep]

@rerevisionist -- So you will leave as an epitaph your statement that implies that "fins" are needed to guide a rocket?

Yes. That is a fitting epitaph not only to ignorance about rocket guidance systems but your stubborn ambition to NOT understand anything about the subject.

[rerevisionist]

@nesokretep - I'm not even bothering to reply. I'll leave your moronic comments as a sort of epitaph.

[nesokretep]

@rerevisionist -- If you look at the published drawings of the ascent module you will see fuel tanks that are adequate for holding 5,000 pounds of fuel. Do the math. It's simple.

And your statement that there was "no way to guide the thing up" is one of the most ignorant things I have ever seen posted on YouTube. Of course there was. Rockets launched into space never depend on fins for guidance.

See if you can figure it out before you post anything else that makes you look silly.

[nesokretep]

@mooninquirer -- Why does David Percy leave very significant facts, such as the abundant availablity of natural light, and the unevenness of the lunar surface, out of his so-called "analysis?"

He is either quite ignorant, or else he is expecting his audience to be.