Fake Moon Landings

[DarianF]

50 minutes ago, Ziggy Sawdust said:

It's not green cheese, but it might as well be.

The Dutch national museum has said that one of its prized possessions, a rock supposedly brought back from the moon by U.S. astronauts, is just a piece of petrified wood.

Rijksmuseum spokeswoman Xandra van Gelder, who oversaw the investigation that proved the piece was a fake, said the museum will keep it anyway as a curiosity.

"It's a good story, with some questions that are still unanswered," she said. "We can laugh about it."

 

 

 

One odd case, explained here:

 

http://www.moonhoaxdebunked.com/2017/07/98-how-come-moon-rock-donated-to.html

 

I suppose you're going to claim all these are wood as well?...

 

https://www.lpi.usra.edu/lunar/samples/

 

[Mr. Nice]

2 hours ago, Ziggy Sawdust said:

It's not green cheese, but it might as well be.

The Dutch national museum has said that one of its prized possessions, a rock supposedly brought back from the moon by U.S. astronauts, is just a piece of petrified wood.

Rijksmuseum spokeswoman Xandra van Gelder, who oversaw the investigation that proved the piece was a fake, said the museum will keep it anyway as a curiosity.

"It's a good story, with some questions that are still unanswered," she said. "We can laugh about it."

 

 

 

Spam spam spam spam spam.....lovely spam! Dear me, someone who cowardly has me on ignore fails to read one of the dozen or so rebuttals just on this forum alone. I used to coin a phrase for this and it is still totally relevant.... WHACKAMOLE!

 

Click grey arrow top right for those not sure how these other post links work.....

 

[DarianF]

2 hours ago, Mr. Nice said:

 

Spam spam spam spam spam.....lovely spam! Dear me, someone who cowardly has me on ignore fails to read one of the dozen or so rebuttals just on this forum alone. I used to coin a phrase for this and it is still totally relevant.... WHACKAMOLE!

 

Click grey arrow top right for those not sure how these other post links work.....

 

 

Meanwhile, they ignore all the properly documented samples: https://www.lpi.usra.edu/lunar/samples/#catalogues

[Luvapottamus]

Brighteon

 

Mike Adams Interviewed Bart Sibrel today.(video at link)

 

^^^^^

 

Very good interview worth watching.(brighteon link above)

 

What convinced me it was faked was a series of articles by Dave McGowan:

Wagging the moondoggie:

 

Wagging the Moondoggie | The Center for an Informed America

 

Personally, i'm still pro-space program.

 

I don't care if they faked it we should keep trying.

 I do care that they murdered people to conceal the fakery, that part matters.

 

THey didn't need to kill anybody and that needs to be exposed.

 

We will eventually figure out how to traverse the Van Allen belts.

 

So the fakery needs to be exposed in order to accomplish that.

 

I don't care about revenge or retribution. CIA needs to back away from worrying about it.

 

I don't care. We can do it if we stop pretending that we did it.

 

 

Edited March 18, 2022 by Luvapottamus

[Luvapottamus]

The main argument against a robust space program is this:

 

We can't afford to feed everybody so we shouldn't waste money on a space program.

 

My counter-arguement:

 

The MONEY doesn't leave Earth. When we send rockets out the money stays here.

 

Sadly that's why they murdered people doing the fakes.

 

Because they grifted  a lot of the money.

 

But we can afford to feed people and mount a space program.

 

The money doesn't go anywhere but into the pockets of engineers and other people trying to solve these challenges.

 

Then they spend it and it recycles throughout the economy.

 

We can solve hunger and space challenges at the same time.

 

The MONEY stays here.

 

LOL

 

 

 

 

[Mr. Nice]

1 hour ago, Luvapottamus said:

Brighteon

 

Mike Adams Interviewed Bart Sibrel today.(video at link)

 

^^^^^

 

Very good interview worth watching.(brighteon link above)

 

What convinced me it was faked was a series of articles by Dave McGowan:

Wagging the moondoggie:

 

Wagging the Moondoggie | The Center for an Informed America

 

 

 

 

Oh, I did a blog for that as well. His entire dialogue is ignorance, incorrect statements and his perverse bare assertion. From page 1 below most of his beginning is a wall of rhetoric, it starts about half way down:

 

WAGGING THE MOONDOGGIE PART 1 - DEBUNKED (waggingthemoondoggiedebunked.blogspot.com)

WAGGING THE MOONDOGGIE PART 2 - DEBUNKED (waggingthemoondoggiedebunked.blogspot.com)

 

I did two pages of his horseshit before I got totally bored. It was just the same thing over and over.

Edited March 18, 2022 by Mr. Nice

[Mr. Nice]

44 minutes ago, Luvapottamus said:

The main argument against a robust space program is this:

 

We can't afford to feed everybody so we shouldn't waste money on a space program. 

My counter-arguement:

The MONEY doesn't leave Earth. When we send rockets out the money stays here.

 

Nice strawman. The world has a robust space program, we just don't go the Moon as often and use a lot more far safer unmanned methods.

 

44 minutes ago, Luvapottamus said:

Sadly that's why they murdered people doing the fakes.

 

Well that's a big load of bollocks. Nobody was murdered and there were no "fakes".

 

44 minutes ago, Luvapottamus said:

Because they grifted  a lot of the money.

But we can afford to feed people and mount a space program.

The money doesn't go anywhere but into the pockets of engineers and other people trying to solve these challenges.

 

I spent ages crafting a good response about the expenditure and along you come and ignore it and make a provably wrong statement.

 

44 minutes ago, Luvapottamus said:

Then they spend it and it recycles throughout the economy.

 

 

I agree with that 100% - That's where it went with Apollo.

 

44 minutes ago, Luvapottamus said:

We can solve hunger and space challenges at the same time.

 

 

That's rather a largely inaccurate suggestion.

 

44 minutes ago, Luvapottamus said:

The MONEY stays here.

 

Most of it.

[Mr. Nice]

1 hour ago, Luvapottamus said:

I don't care if they faked it we should keep trying.

 I do care that they murdered people to conceal the fakery, that part matters.

 

 

We already went 6 times and nobody was murdered. There was no fakery and I can prove it. Try me with specifics.

Oh btw - Bart Sibrel is a lying lowlife.

 

 

1 hour ago, Luvapottamus said:

We will eventually figure out how to traverse the Van Allen belts.

 

Either straight through the centre with a more protected craft or what Apollo did, they took a wide angled trajectory around the outer edges of the belts.

 

 

 

1 hour ago, Luvapottamus said:

So the fakery needs to be exposed in order to accomplish that.

 

Come on then, what have you got? Have you ever, ever bothered to look for the endless debunks for any of it?

 

1 hour ago, Luvapottamus said:

I don't care about revenge or retribution. CIA needs to back away from worrying about it.

 

No idea what that is about.

 

1 hour ago, Luvapottamus said:

I don't care. We can do it if we stop pretending that we did it.

 

We don't need to pretend. We already did it 6 times. Now are you going to debate this? 

[Luvapottamus]

13 minutes ago, Mr. Nice said:

 

 

We already went 6 times and nobody was murdered. There was no fakery and I can prove it. Try me with specifics.

Oh btw - Bart Sibrel is a lying lowlife.

 

 

 

Either straight through the centre with a more protected craft or what Apollo did, they took a wide angled trajectory around the outer edges of the belts.

 

 

 

 

Come on then, what have you got? Have you ever, ever bothered to look for the endless debunks for any of it?

 

 

No idea what that is about.

 

 

We don't need to pretend. We already did it 6 times. Now are you going to debate this? 

I'd enjoy that. Let's debate it.

 

We're both pro-space exploration correct?

 

It seems I'm a Johnny come lately to the thread here. 

 

I'm pro-space program. but want to clear up the lies....

 

Your position:

 

????

 

Let's debate....

 

 

 

[Luvapottamus]

I'm confident we can repell/tunnel Van Allen Fields.

 

But we need truth in science.

 

We didn't do it yet did we?

 

LOL

[Mr. Nice]

22 minutes ago, Luvapottamus said:

I'd enjoy that. Let's debate it. We're both pro-space exploration correct? It seems I'm a Johnny come lately to the thread here. I'm pro-space program. but want to clear up the lies....

Let's debate....

 

There are no lies.

 

4 minutes ago, Luvapottamus said:

I'm confident we can repell/tunnel Van Allen Fields.

 

But we need truth in science.

 

We didn't do it yet did we?

 

LOL

 

Yes we did. I showed you the trajectory taken. Explain exactly why the shielding on the CSM was insufficient and explain why the trajectory provably taken (by photography and tracking) would cause danger.

[Mr. Nice]

  

1 hour ago, endfreemasonscum said:

 

 

 

Proof you are spamming the debunked to death hoax by numbers. This particular one, I reckon over the years, I have personally addressed about 50 times. It's like the longest game of Whackamole in history, with none of the moles able to learn a bloody thing.

 

Patrick Moore asked the astronauts something very specific. He asked them:

 

"I have two brief questions that I would like to ask, if I may. When you were carrying out that incredible Moon walk, did you find that the surface was equally firm everywhere or were there harder and softer spots that you could detect. And, secondly, when you looked up at the sky, could you actually see the stars in the solar corona in spite of the glare?"

  

Now Michael Collins who was part of the Solar Corona photography saw none and this is entirely expected! As for seeing stars in broad daylight, on the Moon, through 3 layers (infrequently 2) layers of visor - you need to dark adapt your eyes.

 

That section is proof that YOU don't listen and are easily led by others equally afflicted.

 

1 hour ago, endfreemasonscum said:

We know for certain that the above is fake as clouds do not stick in one place forever.

 

This is the DSCOVR sequence showing the Lunar transit from a million miles away! Clouds move at a local level and are seen to do so, but massive weather systems that we see on the globe move very slowly. Another total fail.

 

No wonder you aren't replying to any of my posts 

 

 

[Luvapottamus]

4 hours ago, Mr. Nice said:

 

There are no lies.

 

 

Yes we did. I showed you the trajectory taken. Explain exactly why the shielding on the CSM was insufficient and explain why the trajectory provably taken (by photography and tracking) would cause danger.

I might not be able to explain it today within academic standards as an engineer. Give me time I will later...

 

But I can profer my point of view as a mechanic.

 

Mylar doesn't completely help with the cell towers. I'm electrically hypersensitive, and mylar doesn't really help enogh.

 

When I buy a bag of doritos it's lined with mylar.

 

Why?

 

To keep the corn chips freash

 

How./why?

 

Well without the mylar they go bad from the radiation.....

 

.

 

[Mr. Nice]

2 minutes ago, Luvapottamus said:

Mylar doesn't completely help with the cell towers. I'm electrically hypersensitive, and mylar doesn't really help enogh.

 

Must we really do this apples and oranges straight out the gate? Microwave radiation in close proximity to a cell tower bears no resemblance whatsoever to space radiation - specifically the charged particles within the VAR.

 

2 minutes ago, Luvapottamus said:

When I buy a bag of doritos it's lined with mylar. Why? To keep the corn chips freash  How./why?

Well without the mylar they go bad from the radiation.....

 

Utter nonsense. The packaging is to stop moisture and atmospheric spoiling.

[DaleP]

It gets very confusing.... people who posts in FE are making posts in Moon thread as well....

 

23 minutes ago, alexa said:

 

 

Well done @alexa

This is huge. I reckon, he is sincere...true scientist, not like the modern counter part of fake scientists.

 

Everybody download this video before it gets removed.

[Mr. Nice]

16 minutes ago, DaleP said:

Well done @alexa

This is huge. I reckon, he is sincere...true scientist, not like the modern counter part of fake scientists.

 

Everybody download this video before it gets removed.

 

It's been around for 60 odd years, it's quite safe. This is huge? In what way? 

He basically contradicted everything she claims - the Earth is a sphere.

Edited March 24, 2022 by Mr. Nice

[DaleP]

On 3/18/2022 at 4:32 PM, Luvapottamus said:

I'm electrically hypersensitive, and mylar doesn't really help enogh.

 

Buy a kit from Dr Ibrahim. He sells a home kit including clearing plate for 5G, wifi radiation. You can ben bathed in radiation yet it will render unharmful. See the video below.

I understood what the geometric symbols are on the clearing plate so I printed out. It's been good ever since. I might still buy the kit one day though.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xJ59sOSmz3U

 

I was watching a video of an old man who is a member of secret organisation and he was talking about anti-aging and a topic of Moon came up.

He said if you can avoid Moon's ray/radiation then you can live a little longer. And a student asked how? He said to have a roof like this i.e. bent (to reflect).

Then Dr Ibrahim's symbolism made sense to me. Two different sources citing it.

 

[DaleP]

1 minute ago, Mr. Nice said:

 

It's been around for 60 years, it's quite safe. This is huge? In what way? 

He basically contradicted everything she claims - the Earth is a sphere.

I think you missed the point. This is a Moon thread!!

And the scientist says Moon is plasma so you can't land on it.

[Mr. Nice]

5 minutes ago, DaleP said:

I think you missed the point. This is a Moon thread!!

And the scientist says Moon is plasma so you can't land on it.

 

Uhuh. No, I didn't miss any point. Show me where his theory was proven. Clue: it never was.  

 

Surveyor landed 1 year later - his interview is absolutely absurd.

Edited March 24, 2022 by Mr. Nice

[DaleP]

1 minute ago, Mr. Nice said:

Surveyor landed 1 year later - his interview is absolutely absurd.

 

Hence the title of this thread. Fake moon landing....

[Mr. Nice]

1 minute ago, DaleP said:

Hence the title of this thread. Fake moon landing....

 

So you claim Surveyor is faked as well?  Show me where his theory was proven.

 

Now provide evidence for any fakery - 

List of artificial objects on the Moon - Wikipedia

[DaleP]

Just now, Mr. Nice said:

 

So you claim Surveyor is faked as well?  Show me where his theory was proven.

 

Now provide evidence for any fakery - 

List of artificial objects on the Moon - Wikipedia

Before you jumped to artificial objects or legitimacy of surveyor...... we need to first establish if we can land on the Moon.

[Mr. Nice]

16 minutes ago, DaleP said:

Before you jumped to artificial objects or legitimacy of surveyor...... we need to first establish if we can land on the Moon.

 

Nope. You need to substantiate the ramblings of your source.

 

It has craters. Meteors "land" on the Moon. The owner of this forum cites a seismic experiment on the Moon as proof that the Moon rang like a bell. 

 

 

Edited March 24, 2022 by Mr. Nice

[DaleP]

On 3/9/2022 at 9:15 PM, Mr. Nice said:

 

The very definition of "Really? Not this shite again".

 

You would never in a million years get the whole earth in a window from orbit. The deceptive movie ignores the middle TV transmission that shows the camera zooming out and the Earth disappears off to the side of the window!

 

So many people suck up this crap without checking it. Here is a video I did oh just 10 years ago. Not one hoax believer has ever acknowledged the absurdity of this claim:

 

 

 

You see, the key words are "half way to the Moon" and that's just a half story.

They didn't tell you the rest that they didn't actually go to the Moon for whatever reason in the end.

[DarianF]