Jump to content

Fake Moon Landings


SovereigntyOfMan
 Share

Recommended Posts

6 minutes ago, DarianF said:

 

Yes. NASA promotes flat earth theory constantly LOL

 

Apollo fraud proponents (AFPs) and their counter intelligence misinformation agents (CIMA) push flat earth. They often pretend to talk about apollo fraud and then push flat earth. This is basic stigmatisation through association. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, SimonTV said:

 

Apollo fraud proponents (AFPs) and their counter intelligence misinformation agents (CIMA) push flat earth. They often pretend to talk about apollo fraud and then push flat earth. This is basic stigmatisation through association. 

 

Show me

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, SimonTV said:

Did I say that? Don't think I did. 

 

People are easily manipulated, they are fed fake data and some even base their whole career around fake data. Many are so deep in to the fraud, that even if they were presented with evidence to the contrary they would be unable to comprehend it. 

 

I went up and placed a cow on mars and here is the data. Prove me wrong. 

Exactly , the moon landings are fake ,prove me wrong, this has a familiar ring

 

Oh ,and yes you did say it

Edited by peter
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, SimonTV said:

 

Your argument is a silly contradiction. On the one hand you are saying the engine moves dust so fast that it doesn't leave any dust behind on the lander, yet at the same time you claim that it doesn't create a creator.  You would have to leave your logic at the door to believe that one, no matter how complicated and convoluted the evidence appeared to be. 

 

There is not a  contradiction. Underneath lander from images is no loose dust and scouring marks. On Apollo 11 Neil Armstrong talks of this. You are copying this debunked claim and pretending it is yours. I give you web page and of course you haven't read it.

Clavius: Vehicles - the blast crater

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, SimonTV said:

 

Here we go. Ignore the evidence, double down and accuse of flat earth. It is like you guys have a checklist. 

 

I have not ignored any evidence. NASA has 25 billion for Apollo and many contractor bills all accounting for this funds.

You say ISS and space travel are all faked, usual main claim from mad flat earth people. Fake ISS and space travel is one step below on the crazy ladder. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, SimonTV said:

 

If I had to ask you to prove to me that there are reflectors on the moon what would you say? 

 

I would say that Russia has mobile reflector found by Lunar reconnaissance camera. I would say for 50 years observatories fire lasers and get exact figures - only possible if there is reflectors on the surface. I would say for third time I ask you to reply to my post properly!

 

False statement. Bounces back from surface lasers are very random in return because of surface uneven. Also, very strong lasers are needed for this to work. With reflectors, less power on laser and always exact same return time.

 

I suggest that you have only picked information from the poor source and not the accurate one. 

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, SimonTV said:

 

Apollo fraud proponents (AFPs) and their counter intelligence misinformation agents (CIMA) push flat earth. They often pretend to talk about apollo fraud and then push flat earth. This is basic stigmatisation through association. 

 

What a load of honk!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, SimonTV said:

 

WOW 50 years, you make it sound so extravagant, it is probably a few data files, big deal. 

 

You are very ignorant of the enormous amount of data from ALSEP experiments from the surface. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Doctor What said:

 

I would say that Russia has mobile reflector found by Lunar reconnaissance camera. I would say for 50 years observatories fire lasers and get exact figures - only possible if there is reflectors on the surface. I would say for third time I ask you to reply to my post properly!

 

False statement. Bounces back from surface lasers are very random in return because of surface uneven. Also, very strong lasers are needed for this to work. With reflectors, less power on laser and always exact same return time.

 

I suggest that you have only picked information from the poor source and not the accurate one. 

 

 

 

The measureents are extremely precise. Only explained by reflectors. The hoaxer nuts would have you believe lasers are bouncing off random rocks. lol.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/7/2021 at 3:49 PM, DarianF said:

 

For some reason youtube recommended this video to me today. So I checked if there were any threads on the moon landings.


At 05:54 the presenter (a complete prat) describes the computer:


"It weighed only 32 kg"

"It consumed only 55 watts"

"It occupied only 1 cubic foot"

"In an era where computers occupied entire rooms, consumed vast amounts of power, and required huge amounts of cooling, I think those three numbers are truly remarkable."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/25/2021 at 3:35 AM, oz93666 said:

 Bottom line Apollo was faked , absolutely no doubt ... they just couldn't risk failure with the whole world watching.

A few years before the alleged moon landings the US Navy organised a descent to the deepest part of the ocean.

 

At 10:37 in the BBC documentary they say:


"Only a few officers and scientists knew about the risky mission, which was launched in January 1960 from the Western Pacific island of Guam."


"Guam in those days was kind of a backwater. It was just right for us because we were trying to do this project sort of out of sight, because we weren't too sure it was gonna work."

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tbahrgt0uzo

 

Was landing on the moon not a risky mission? Were they sure it would work?

 

(Embedding the video is 'forbidden')

Edited by bryan
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, bryan said:

For some reason youtube recommended this video to me today. So I checked if there were any threads on the moon landings.


At 05:54 the presenter (a complete prat) describes the computer:


"It weighed only 32 kg"

"It consumed only 55 watts"

"It occupied only 1 cubic foot"

"In an era where computers occupied entire rooms, consumed vast amounts of power, and required huge amounts of cooling, I think those three numbers are truly remarkable."

 

When designing the electronics for Apollo NASA knew they had to use whizzo modern technology. They had a choice between using DTL integrated circuits or the more risky undeveloped TTL technology. Luckily for my career as an electronics engineer they chose TTL. Which is how something full of vacuum tubes that was the size of a house became a nice lightweight box stuck in a corner.

 

Teflon is not the only thing NASA gave us!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, bryan said:

Was landing on the moon not a risky mission?

 

Of course, as are many things that have never been done before. So the Moon landings were a series of missions not just a one off and that required making and testing dozens of modules, rockets and especially required getting the AGC  software right.

 

https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL-_93BVApb59FWrLZfdlisi_x7-Ut_-w7

 

Enthusiasts refurbish a unit and demonstrate it was quite capable of doing what it was supposed to do.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This may be a stupid question but I've always wondered, if Neil Armstrong was the first man on the Moon then who filmed him climbing down the ladder from the outside of the craft?

 

moon-landing_kindlephoto-1173557687.jpg.77c1dad78d8758ed9767b1f9300fba7f.jpg

Edited by Seconal
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Seconal said:

This may be a stupid question but I've always wondered, if Neil Armstrong was the first man on the Moon then who filmed him climbing down the ladder from the outside of the craft?

 

moon-landing_kindlephoto-1173557687.jpg.77c1dad78d8758ed9767b1f9300fba7f.jpg

 

It was a camera mounted on the descent stage of the lander.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Seconal said:

This may be a stupid question but I've always wondered, if Neil Armstrong was the first man on the Moon then who filmed him climbing down the ladder from the outside of the craft?

 

moon-landing_kindlephoto-1173557687.jpg.77c1dad78d8758ed9767b1f9300fba7f.jpg

 

It's not a stupid question. Here's some more info:

 

"The Westinghouse camera was stored for flight in the lunar module’s Modular Equipment Stowage Assembly (MESA), a compartment near the ladder that Armstrong climbed down to reach the Moon’s surface. To activate the camera, he pulled on a handle that in turn released the door to the MESA. Engineers attached the camera upside down to secure it to the door, and tilted at an 11-degree angle because of how the door rested in its final position."

https://airandspace.si.edu/stories/editorial/how-we-saw-armstrongs-first-steps

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanx. It always looked odd that a camera was mounted outside the craft as if it was there throughout the entire flight.

 

It took ten years of a nations treasure to put a man on the moon. Obviously they practiced on Earth in full gear and obviously they filmed it.

 

There's a good movie called 'Moonwalkers', its about Kubrick, Nixon and the filming of the faked landing. Its a fun movie, stars Harry Potters ginger mate and Hell Boy.

 

moonwalkers-banner.jpg.f61f407ad79fefc454a313b7488a74dc.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, serpentine said:

 

Of course, as are many things that have never been done before. So the Moon landings were a series of missions not just a one off and that required making and testing dozens of modules, rockets and especially required getting the AGC  software right.

 

https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL-_93BVApb59FWrLZfdlisi_x7-Ut_-w7

 

Enthusiasts refurbish a unit and demonstrate it was quite capable of doing what it was supposed to do.

 

 

You've totally ignored the point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Seconal said:

Thanx. It always looked odd that a camera was mounted outside the craft as if it was there throughout the entire flight.

 

It took ten years of a nations treasure to put a man on the moon. Obviously they practiced on Earth in full gear and obviously they filmed it.

 

There's a good movie called 'Moonwalkers', its about Kubrick, Nixon and the filming of the faked landing. Its a fun movie, stars Harry Potters ginger mate and Hell Boy.

 

moonwalkers-banner.jpg.f61f407ad79fefc454a313b7488a74dc.jpg

 

I've been meaning to watch that. Thanks for the reminder. 👍

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They can't go back because they destroyed the technology, yet the technology was used to improve life on earth.

 

Quote

 

The U.S. government spent roughly $26 billion (about $260 billion in today's dollars, according to one estimate) between 1960 and 1972 to hire contractors and subcontractors who employed hundreds of thousands of people to create and improve on technology that led us to the moon and back.

 

While some of that tech has stayed within the space industry, a lot of it has trickled down to the public. There's a huge list of the stuff. NASA has an entire department dedicated to cataloging it all.

 

 

https://www.npr.org/2019/07/20/742379987/space-spinoffs-the-technology-to-reach-the-moon-was-put-to-use-back-on-earth?t=1615841156139

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...