Go Back   David Icke's Official Forums > Main Forums > The Universe / UFOs / IFOs / Crop Circles

View Poll Results: Do you think the Apollo Lunar landings are fake?
Yes 55 68.75%
No 18 22.50%
Not sure need to do more research. 7 8.75%
Voters: 80. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 15-06-2017, 01:53 PM   #641
ianw
Senior Member
 
ianw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 3,670
Likes: 59 (39 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by truegroup View Post
Hey Ian.......

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-hTRz8IAINM

Big old "soundstage" huh

Evenly lit, distant hills not getting any nearer, broad daylight black skies. Done in the early 70s and faultless.

How did they do that then? Did they land on the flat moon* and go round in straight lined circles


*Ianw believes the Earth is a sphere but the moon is flat
Apolo is looking flat. Maybe the distant hills not getting any closer has something to do with it.
How far are those hills, 2 miles.
ianw is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15-06-2017, 02:43 PM   #642
truegroup
Senior Member
 
truegroup's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Apollo Happened. Snap out of your dreamworld.
Posts: 15,238
Likes: 912 (712 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ianw View Post
Apolo is looking flat. Maybe the distant hills not getting any closer has something to do with it.
How far are those hills, 2 miles.
I have nothing further to say until you respond properly. I make carefully informed large posts....you come back with nonsense and ignore most of it. Anyone would think you were doing this to wind me up. The film footage is on the moon. Dark sky.....the WHOLE massive area for miles and miles lit up with even single shadows. Apollo has a double L.

Now once again how the hell is that possible. On a scale of 1 to 10 how ridiculous is it to compare 1971 footage to a 2004 video with all the recent advances in special effects.....and it still looks shit and fake!!

Irony....the video uses Apollo 17 pictures taken on the moon as it's backgrounds
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jay Windley
Never underestimate the power of the Internet to lend unwarranted credibility to the colossally misinformed.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sts60
The funny thing is that such credophiles see themselves as sharp-eyed piercers of the veil, too sophisticated to be taken in by fakery. But they fall for almost anything that feeds into their convictions.
An analysis of Apollo Landing Sites. Debunk: To expose the falseness or hollowness of an idea or belief.
truegroup is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15-06-2017, 03:30 PM   #643
ianw
Senior Member
 
ianw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 3,670
Likes: 59 (39 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by truegroup View Post
I have nothing further to say until you respond properly. I make carefully informed large posts....you come back with nonsense and ignore most of it. Anyone would think you were doing this to wind me up. The film footage is on the moon. Dark sky.....the WHOLE massive area for miles and miles lit up with even single shadows. Apollo has a double L.

Now once again how the hell is that possible. On a scale of 1 to 10 how ridiculous is it to compare 1971 footage to a 2004 video with all the recent advances in special effects.....and it still looks shit and fake!!

Irony....the video uses Apollo 17 pictures taken on the moon as it's backgrounds
I asked how far away are the hills if you dont want to say thats OK it most prob dont help your case,
but please dont crack on you make carefully informed large posts on this page there is a youtube link and thats it.
The rest is about 100 characters of opinion the rest pure rant.
ianw is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15-06-2017, 04:11 PM   #644
truegroup
Senior Member
 
truegroup's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Apollo Happened. Snap out of your dreamworld.
Posts: 15,238
Likes: 912 (712 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ianw View Post
I asked how far away are the hills if you dont want to say thats OK it most prob dont help your case,
Nothing I say to you has any point whatsoever. I could isolate the picture...the orientation....a lunar map and narrow it down to the inch. You'd just gibber on about something else and ignore it. I don't give a crap what you think tbh....You're a flat mooner and that makes you a nailed on crank.

Quote:
but please dont crack on you make carefully informed large posts on this page there is a youtube link and thats it.
Which is it blind or dishonest? A bit of both probably. My first post in response to your Amerikaspam was much more than a link.....but then again you cowardly ignored it didn't you.

Quote:
The rest is about 100 characters of opinion the rest pure rant.
Piffle. You have not the slightest clue what to do when I kick your sorry butt.....you just take the thread down a cul-de-sac of bewilderment

Note to anyone watching....he cannot answer my post and explain how the film footage was shot with dark sky etc.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jay Windley
Never underestimate the power of the Internet to lend unwarranted credibility to the colossally misinformed.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sts60
The funny thing is that such credophiles see themselves as sharp-eyed piercers of the veil, too sophisticated to be taken in by fakery. But they fall for almost anything that feeds into their convictions.
An analysis of Apollo Landing Sites. Debunk: To expose the falseness or hollowness of an idea or belief.

Last edited by truegroup; 15-06-2017 at 04:12 PM.
truegroup is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-07-2017, 12:52 PM   #645
lunarrover1969
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2016
Posts: 269
Likes: 29 (20 Posts)
Default

The reason there are so many moon hoax people is because NASA are liars and covered up all the alien artifacts they have found so people are suspicious about it all.

You know where I stand on it all.

They went to the moon then covered up the alien secrets. NASA and Brookings report people had to cover it up because civillisation would collapse if the people found out, just look how nutters go on cos they believe in an imaginary man on a cloud called God.......
lunarrover1969 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-07-2017, 04:55 AM   #646
spock
Senior Member
 
spock's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Vulcan
Posts: 2,551
Likes: 327 (242 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ianw View Post
I asked how far away are the hills if you dont want to say thats OK it most prob dont help your case,
but please dont crack on you make carefully informed large posts on this page there is a youtube link and thats it.
The rest is about 100 characters of opinion the rest pure rant.

Not as far away as you may think.
I'm sure these hills are in Hawaii.



spock is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-07-2017, 04:57 AM   #647
spock
Senior Member
 
spock's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Vulcan
Posts: 2,551
Likes: 327 (242 Posts)
Default

To infinity.… and beyond!





Ok.
Let's aim for infinity.
But Hawaii is still cool.
spock is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-07-2017, 08:36 AM   #648
truegroup
Senior Member
 
truegroup's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Apollo Happened. Snap out of your dreamworld.
Posts: 15,238
Likes: 912 (712 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by spock View Post
Not as far away as you may think.
I'm sure these hills are in Hawaii.
Ahhhh the old comedy "looks like therefore it is" routine. Now you have a big problem because ...

a) You have equidistant hills either side of it. Not showing up in frickin' Hawaii You have a hill to the right that isn't on the lunar pictures.
b) The soil is grey not volcanic black.
c) It is broad daylight in the Apollo video and pictures, yet the sky is black.
d) You don't think any of the locals would have noticed the 2 white space-suited men bounding about.
e) Their motion when sped up with those mountains visible, looks ridiculous.

I bellow with laughter at you telling us that you are sure about this

Answer the points raised. Confirm how sure you are.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jay Windley
Never underestimate the power of the Internet to lend unwarranted credibility to the colossally misinformed.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sts60
The funny thing is that such credophiles see themselves as sharp-eyed piercers of the veil, too sophisticated to be taken in by fakery. But they fall for almost anything that feeds into their convictions.
An analysis of Apollo Landing Sites. Debunk: To expose the falseness or hollowness of an idea or belief.
truegroup is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-07-2017, 11:30 AM   #649
spock
Senior Member
 
spock's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Vulcan
Posts: 2,551
Likes: 327 (242 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by truegroup View Post
Ahhhh the old comedy "looks like therefore it is" routine. Now you have a big problem because ...

a) You have equidistant hills either side of it. Not showing up in frickin' Hawaii You have a hill to the right that isn't on the lunar pictures.
b) The soil is grey not volcanic black.
c) It is broad daylight in the Apollo video and pictures, yet the sky is black.
d) You don't think any of the locals would have noticed the 2 white space-suited men bounding about.
e) Their motion when sped up with those mountains visible, looks ridiculous.

I bellow with laughter at you telling us that you are sure about this

Answer the points raised. Confirm how sure you are.

Come on man. We all need a laugh.


How sure am I?
I can't prove anything Truegroup, me owl sausage.

But I can introduce doubt.
And once doubt starts to creep in.
Certainty disappears.

Sureness slips away.




Until you get to this level of doubtfulness.
That Apollo misssions look like a comedy of errors.
spock is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-07-2017, 11:32 AM   #650
spock
Senior Member
 
spock's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Vulcan
Posts: 2,551
Likes: 327 (242 Posts)
Default

How sure are you?




Of course.
You don't doubt anything.
Which makes me question your validity.



But I still love you brother.
spock is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-07-2017, 02:28 PM   #651
truegroup
Senior Member
 
truegroup's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Apollo Happened. Snap out of your dreamworld.
Posts: 15,238
Likes: 912 (712 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by spock View Post
I can't prove anything Truegroup, me owl sausage.

But I can introduce doubt.
And once doubt starts to creep in.
Certainty disappears. Sureness slips away.
You haven't introduced doubt, you made a ridiculous claim and failed to respond to my post.

Quote:
Until you get to this level of doubtfulness.
That Apollo misssions look like a comedy of errors.
No they don't, you just have a very poor observational, logic and critical thing system.

Now answer my points to "introduce doubt" properly

And one of you people succeeds in introducing even one thing that casts doubt, then you can start offering some damn proof!
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jay Windley
Never underestimate the power of the Internet to lend unwarranted credibility to the colossally misinformed.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sts60
The funny thing is that such credophiles see themselves as sharp-eyed piercers of the veil, too sophisticated to be taken in by fakery. But they fall for almost anything that feeds into their convictions.
An analysis of Apollo Landing Sites. Debunk: To expose the falseness or hollowness of an idea or belief.

Last edited by truegroup; 10-07-2017 at 02:29 PM.
truegroup is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-07-2017, 02:31 PM   #652
truegroup
Senior Member
 
truegroup's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Apollo Happened. Snap out of your dreamworld.
Posts: 15,238
Likes: 912 (712 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by spock View Post
How sure are you?

Positive based on all evidence. Unlike you I've seen every claim, debunked and not a sensible explanation for how any of the rocks, motion, telemetry, pictures were faked. Go and look at the link in my signature.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jay Windley
Never underestimate the power of the Internet to lend unwarranted credibility to the colossally misinformed.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sts60
The funny thing is that such credophiles see themselves as sharp-eyed piercers of the veil, too sophisticated to be taken in by fakery. But they fall for almost anything that feeds into their convictions.
An analysis of Apollo Landing Sites. Debunk: To expose the falseness or hollowness of an idea or belief.
truegroup is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25-09-2017, 02:56 PM   #653
oneriver
Senior Member
 
oneriver's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Ireland
Posts: 3,195
Likes: 2,171 (1,192 Posts)
Default

Don Petit of NASA says we can't get back to the moon, because "we destroyed that technology"!!! LOL

Also, he says they can't recreate the technology because "it would be too painful to rebuild"... yet in the same sentence he says they want to get to Mars..?

NASA, always good for a laugh.

__________________
“Have you also learned that secret from the river; that there is no such thing as time?" That the river is everywhere at the same time, at the source and at the mouth, at the waterfall, at the ferry, at the current, in the ocean and in the mountains, everywhere and that the present only exists for it, not the shadow of the past nor the shadow of the future.” ? Hermann Hesse, Siddhartha

http://www.thedivinesecretgarden.com/tdsg-access.html

Last edited by oneriver; 25-09-2017 at 02:57 PM.
Likes: (1)
oneriver is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25-09-2017, 03:54 PM   #654
truegroup
Senior Member
 
truegroup's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Apollo Happened. Snap out of your dreamworld.
Posts: 15,238
Likes: 912 (712 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by oneriver View Post
Don Petit of NASA says we can't get back to the moon, because "we destroyed that technology"!!! LOL

Also, he says they can't recreate the technology because "it would be too painful to rebuild"... yet in the same sentence he says they want to get to Mars..?

NASA, always good for a laugh.
It is so very painfully obvious what he is referring to. To use old technology is a crazy idea. To build a Saturn V, or an old Command Module etc. is a ludicrous thing to do.

Whilst they still have all the blueprints for posterity, using them is a waste of time. Safety standards for space travel are massively more stringent for one thing.

None of the equipment exists except in science museum displays....ya know....destroyed

https://www.reddit.com/r/space/comme...o_back_to_the/

"It's sort of like how we couldn't just start cranking out Model T's tomorrow. We destroyed the factories and machinery to make those a long time ago. Of course, we could build back up to it, but we would design the factories in a more modern way.

Similarly, the old Apollo equipment, supply chains, and even many of the people from that time just aren't around anymore. "



"This is a ridiculous argument. We could go back quite quickly and easily. The problem is NASA and the government would never allow it at the risk level tolerated during the Apollo-era.

You think we're doing all this testing because we forgot how to fly rockets and build capsules? No, we're doing it because the safety standards are orders of magnitude greater than they were 50 years ago.

"

I don't even know what the problem is....NASA are developing crafts for long distance and duration travel. To land on the Moon, you require a lander like the LM, to land on Mars you would need something completely different.

To GO BACK TO THE MOON, as he said, we would need to develop a whole series of specific technology to do so. You can't use all the old stuff. This requires research, development, testing and a bespoke space program.

Conspiracy shite, always good for nothing!
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jay Windley
Never underestimate the power of the Internet to lend unwarranted credibility to the colossally misinformed.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sts60
The funny thing is that such credophiles see themselves as sharp-eyed piercers of the veil, too sophisticated to be taken in by fakery. But they fall for almost anything that feeds into their convictions.
An analysis of Apollo Landing Sites. Debunk: To expose the falseness or hollowness of an idea or belief.

Last edited by truegroup; 25-09-2017 at 04:15 PM.
truegroup is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25-09-2017, 04:35 PM   #655
oneriver
Senior Member
 
oneriver's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Ireland
Posts: 3,195
Likes: 2,171 (1,192 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by truegroup View Post
It is so very painfully obvious what he is referring to. To use old technology is a crazy idea. To build a Saturn V, or an old Command Module etc. is a ludicrous thing to do.

Whilst they still have all the blueprints for posterity, using them is a waste of time. Safety standards for space travel are massively more stringent for one thing.

None of the equipment exists except in science museum displays....ya know....destroyed

https://www.reddit.com/r/space/comme...o_back_to_the/

"It's sort of like how we couldn't just start cranking out Model T's tomorrow. We destroyed the factories and machinery to make those a long time ago. Of course, we could build back up to it, but we would design the factories in a more modern way.

Similarly, the old Apollo equipment, supply chains, and even many of the people from that time just aren't around anymore. "



"This is a ridiculous argument. We could go back quite quickly and easily. The problem is NASA and the government would never allow it at the risk level tolerated during the Apollo-era.

You think we're doing all this testing because we forgot how to fly rockets and build capsules? No, we're doing it because the safety standards are orders of magnitude greater than they were 50 years ago.

"

I don't even know what the problem is....NASA are developing crafts for long distance and duration travel. To land on the Moon, you require a lander like the LM, to land on Mars you would need something completely different.

To GO BACK TO THE MOON, as he said, we would need to develop a whole series of specific technology to do so. You can't use all the old stuff. This requires research, development, testing and a bespoke space program.

Conspiracy shite, always good for nothing!
Ah, I get it, we could go back to the moon, but 'health and safety'..ok then.
__________________
“Have you also learned that secret from the river; that there is no such thing as time?" That the river is everywhere at the same time, at the source and at the mouth, at the waterfall, at the ferry, at the current, in the ocean and in the mountains, everywhere and that the present only exists for it, not the shadow of the past nor the shadow of the future.” ? Hermann Hesse, Siddhartha

http://www.thedivinesecretgarden.com/tdsg-access.html
Likes: (1)
oneriver is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25-09-2017, 05:16 PM   #656
serpentine
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 3,421
Likes: 789 (495 Posts)
Default

In that short clip Don doesn't say that they of course they could make better more modern technology to do the job but that would require a huge budget and he'd be making a statement his paygrade couldnt keep.

The ISS is approaching the end of it's useful life but there are long term ideas that involve putting a space station in low or high Moon orbit with a even longer view to going to Mars.

If the Sun repeats a sequence of firing flares at Earth to get our attention followed by a flare aimed at Mars it will be Her way of telling us we can't go there. (dodgy text computer readouts a la Space Odyssey are so 1980's
serpentine is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25-09-2017, 05:36 PM   #657
truegroup
Senior Member
 
truegroup's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Apollo Happened. Snap out of your dreamworld.
Posts: 15,238
Likes: 912 (712 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by oneriver View Post
Ah, I get it, we could go back to the moon, but 'health and safety'..ok then.
No...you don't "get it".

We've already been on short duration missions. To go back is a proposed longer stay issue and different challenges. Someone has to stump up the money to solve the safety issues for radiation exposure of months rather than a couple of weeks. Someone has to stump up the money to do the development...testing and build of lunar specific crafts...docking mechanisms....appropriate training... reconnaissance etc.

p.s. why did you quote my whole post and then do a pissy one liner and ignore most of it?
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jay Windley
Never underestimate the power of the Internet to lend unwarranted credibility to the colossally misinformed.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sts60
The funny thing is that such credophiles see themselves as sharp-eyed piercers of the veil, too sophisticated to be taken in by fakery. But they fall for almost anything that feeds into their convictions.
An analysis of Apollo Landing Sites. Debunk: To expose the falseness or hollowness of an idea or belief.

Last edited by truegroup; 25-09-2017 at 05:42 PM.
truegroup is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26-09-2017, 05:32 AM   #658
tracertong
Restricted Profile
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Posts: 70
Likes: 88 (36 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by truegroup View Post

We've already been on short duration missions. To go back is a proposed longer stay issue and different challenges. Someone has to stump up the money to solve the safety issues for radiation exposure of months rather than a couple of weeks. Someone has to stump up the money to do the development...testing and build of lunar specific crafts...docking mechanisms....appropriate training... reconnaissance etc.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FMW-3xz6GCQ
Likes: (1)
tracertong is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26-09-2017, 09:28 AM   #659
truegroup
Senior Member
 
truegroup's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Apollo Happened. Snap out of your dreamworld.
Posts: 15,238
Likes: 912 (712 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tracertong View Post
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BbnWith5_I8
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jay Windley
Never underestimate the power of the Internet to lend unwarranted credibility to the colossally misinformed.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sts60
The funny thing is that such credophiles see themselves as sharp-eyed piercers of the veil, too sophisticated to be taken in by fakery. But they fall for almost anything that feeds into their convictions.
An analysis of Apollo Landing Sites. Debunk: To expose the falseness or hollowness of an idea or belief.
truegroup is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 27-09-2017, 09:44 PM   #660
sokath his eyes uncovered
Senior Member
 
sokath his eyes uncovered's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Draco
Posts: 420
Likes: 104 (77 Posts)
Default

I can't believe this argument is still raging on

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=MK6TXMsvgQg
__________________
I'm only human..... On the outside.
sokath his eyes uncovered is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 02:10 AM.


Shoutbox provided by vBShout (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2017 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.