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 75 70.75%
No 20 18.87%
Not sure need to do more research. 11 10.38%
Voters: 106. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 16-05-2018, 09:05 AM   #801
Sabrina
Senior Member
 
Sabrina's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Posts: 461
Likes: 344 (215 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by truegroup View Post
Every single digital image is edited. They either enhance the contrast, the colours or the brightness. It is a totally cosmetic thing. In terms of Apollo...EVERY image ever scanned from the ORIGINAL positive films is available online in its raw unaltered format. Whatever argument you are making against the Moon landings is negated by that fact



All of them are lies, deception, ignorance or downright stupidity.



Read this: You are claiming he is a quality witness because he comes from NASA...yet he is labelling them as liars Do you see a flaw in his credentials?

Every organisation on the planet has thieves, liars, people who commit crimes His former employers do not guarantee his integrity. Why do you believe some bloke talking about aliens around bloody saturn



It's not what he did at NASA that is under scrutiny, it is the bullshit arseblowing he is doing now.



And his proof for this is where? Yet again a load of old shite with not a scrap of evidence.



Haven't any clue what he is even talking about. Any evidence?



This is 1969 to 72. Green screen was very shitty.



Says quite clearly .....colour enhanced.
So how do you choose who to believe at NASA when so many of their top people have whistleblowed?

Do you believe in them as an organisation? Trust everything they say and do?

Here we have someone who has proven to have completed quality work and has good credentials.
And has been saying the same story for over 30 years to us.
He left NASA because of their lies. As have many others.

What makes you trust someone's story and disbelieve someone else's?

Is it the size of the organisation?

My point is this....

If NASA the profit making PR run company shows you photos and tells you something you automatically believe it.

If someone else tells you something and shows you photos you'd automatically disbelieve it.

Is there any source apart from NASA that could come forward that you'd believe? What credentials would they have to hold to be trusted?

You automatically called this man names without even considering that he might actually know something.
So you prove you have a bias.

When David Icke was on Terry Wogan how did you react to his interview?

Only I recall saying to people 'let's listen to what he has to say and see if there is truth in it before you call him crazy'...and 'what if he is telling the truth?'

What did you say?.....I'm curious to know.....

Are you open minded ? Because there's no point in anyone debating with you if you refuse to even consider that people other than NASA may be qualified to give us information to review.

Last edited by Sabrina; 16-05-2018 at 09:12 AM.
Likes: (2)
Sabrina is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16-05-2018, 09:50 AM   #802
ianw
Senior Member
 
ianw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 3,855
Likes: 85 (58 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by truegroup View Post


This is 1969 to 72. Green screen was very shitty.


It wasnt that bad even back in 1933. Hands up anyone that saw the original and cried.

Obvious animation, tell tale clue there would be no curvature viewed from that elevation.




.
__________________
My definition of being a flatmooner is the apolow footage was filmed in a studio
ianw is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16-05-2018, 10:02 AM   #803
berten60
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 1,485
Likes: 490 (310 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sabrina View Post
.....

Are you open minded ? Because there's no point in anyone debating with you if you refuse to even consider that people other than NASA may be qualified to give us information to review.
Why are you not nagging at all those idiots that
as soon as they see NASA,cry "Fake"?
Likes: (1)
berten60 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16-05-2018, 01:23 PM   #804
oneriver
Senior Member
 
oneriver's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Ireland
Posts: 3,604
Likes: 2,533 (1,402 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by berten60 View Post
Why are you not nagging at all those idiots that
as soon as they see NASA,cry "Fake"?
Because NASA have a history of being economical with the truth, to put it mildly.
__________________
“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

Y Gwir Erbyn Y Byd ("Truth Against the World") - Druidic Motto
Likes: (2)
oneriver is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16-05-2018, 02:43 PM   #805
truegroup
Senior Member
 
truegroup's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Apollo Happened. Snap out of your dreamworld.
Posts: 15,776
Likes: 1,080 (843 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by oneriver View Post
Because NASA have a history of being economical with the truth, to put it mildly.
Circular reasonung. No they do not!

I keep saying this.....open a thread and show this "truth economy"

Don't "say the least" .....try the MOST!
__________________
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.
Likes: (1)
truegroup is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16-05-2018, 03:34 PM   #806
truegroup
Senior Member
 
truegroup's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Apollo Happened. Snap out of your dreamworld.
Posts: 15,776
Likes: 1,080 (843 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sabrina View Post
So how do you choose who to believe at NASA when so many of their top people have whistleblowed?
Absolutely anyone. The big proviso being that they provide some bloody evidence! What "top people"? What have sodding alienz got to do with Apollo?

Quote:
Do you believe in them as an organisation? Trust everything they say and do?
Mainly yes.

Quote:
Here we have someone who has proven to have completed quality work and has good credentials.
And has been saying the same story for over 30 years to us.
He left NASA because of their lies. As have many others.
No evidence in all that time. You'd think he could have got hold of some documents or pictures. But no. Bugger all.

Quote:
What makes you trust someone's story and disbelieve someone else's?
Evidence. His extreme claims require more than his word.

Quote:
My point is this....

If NASA the profit making PR run company shows you photos and tells you something you automatically believe it.
I automatically assess each thing on merit.

Quote:
If someone else tells you something and shows you photos you'd automatically disbelieve it.
Nope. Give an example.

Quote:
Is there any source apart from NASA that could come forward that you'd believe? What credentials would they have to hold to be trusted?
Well, this thread is about the bloody Moon landings....so how about all the other agencies that have supported this claim both implied and by picture evidence.

The credentials are irrelevant...evidence!

Quote:
You automatically called this man names without even considering that he might actually know something.
So you prove you have a bias.
YOU automatically believed him!! I see what I always see. Zero evidence.

Show me where I called him names! Do you even read what I post?

Quote:
When David Icke was on Terry Wogan how did you react to his interview?
I went out and bought the Truth Vibrations and had a decade of change. Weren't expecting that were you!

Quote:
Are you open minded ? Because there's no point in anyone debating with you if you refuse to even consider that people other than NASA may be qualified to give us information to review.
Are you?? Got any evidence that the missions were faked? Got any actual evidence from the arseblowers?

I can give you hundreds of things none of you people can honestly answer. The rocks. LROC. LRRR. The dust.
__________________
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.
Likes: (1)
truegroup is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16-05-2018, 06:30 PM   #807
hokuspokus
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 2,315
Likes: 368 (223 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by berten60 View Post
Why are you not nagging at all those idiots that
as soon as they see NASA,cry "Fake"?


You mean the 70.48% who responded to the poll who think moon landings are fake?

You remind of that sketch about bad drivers. The one who is going the wrong way
on a motorway and says " look at all these nutters driving the wrong way"
Likes: (2)
hokuspokus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16-05-2018, 07:16 PM   #808
truegroup
Senior Member
 
truegroup's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Apollo Happened. Snap out of your dreamworld.
Posts: 15,776
Likes: 1,080 (843 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by hokuspokus View Post


You mean the 70.48% who responded to the poll who think moon landings are fake?

You remind of that sketch about bad drivers. The one who is going the wrong way
on a motorway and says " look at all these nutters driving the wrong way"
Comedy gold. You reckon the people on this forum are a good yardstick for society?

There are some great truthers on this forum, genuine poeople who question, adapt, evolve their opinions. You certainly don't qualify and quite definitely none of the people I've argued with do either.

The appalling cowardice exhibited, with this total inability to accept counter evidence is the opposite of what a truther is supposed to be.

You troll threads like these, never debating properly and ignoring absolutely everything.

Here let me demonstrate.

Where did the Apollo rocks , core samples and soil come from? Geologists around the world say from the Moon. They say it is impossible for them to be from Earth or Meteorites

Now, run away........
__________________
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; 16-05-2018 at 07:16 PM.
Likes: (1)
truegroup is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16-05-2018, 09:04 PM   #809
Sabrina
Senior Member
 
Sabrina's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Posts: 461
Likes: 344 (215 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by truegroup View Post
Absolutely anyone. The big proviso being that they provide some bloody evidence! What "top people"? What have sodding alienz got to do with Apollo?



Mainly yes.



No evidence in all that time. You'd think he could have got hold of some documents or pictures. But no. Bugger all.



Evidence. His extreme claims require more than his word.



I automatically assess each thing on merit.



Nope. Give an example.



Well, this thread is about the bloody Moon landings....so how about all the other agencies that have supported this claim both implied and by picture evidence.

The credentials are irrelevant...evidence!



YOU automatically believed him!! I see what I always see. Zero evidence.

Show me where I called him names! Do you even read what I post?



I went out and bought the Truth Vibrations and had a decade of change. Weren't expecting that were you!



Are you?? Got any evidence that the missions were faked? Got any actual evidence from the arseblowers?

I can give you hundreds of things none of you people can honestly answer. The rocks. LROC. LRRR. The dust.
But as I've stated photo evidence is debunked on both sides as NASA edits theirs before we see them why believe their evidence over anyone elses?

NASA also have extreme claims don't they and all we have is their word and some edited photos. And if what you say is true an awful lot of people that worked for NASA are full of (your words)
'lies, deception, ignorance or downright stupidity'
'bullshit [email protected]'
I think that classifies as name calling.

So it is very relevant that we are taking the word of people that worked for NASA and give us the information about the Moon landings...
and you think so little of them as individuals but as a group you trust their 'word' and 'images'.

As far as I can see both sides have the same amount of evidence and the same people working for them....

Today's NASA top people are tomorrows whistleblowers - and I doubt if they can leave the office armed with evidence.

DI posted a huge list of moon landing hoax evidence...if you've debunked them all
then what do you think of him now?
Is he what you classify as the above type of person?

I haven't said I believed the whistleblowers just that I research before calling people stupid etc...
just because they mention aliens...

Last edited by Sabrina; 16-05-2018 at 09:07 PM.
Sabrina is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16-05-2018, 10:35 PM   #810
oneriver
Senior Member
 
oneriver's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Ireland
Posts: 3,604
Likes: 2,533 (1,402 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by truegroup View Post

Here let me demonstrate.

Where did the Apollo rocks , core samples and soil come from? Geologists around the world say from the Moon. They say it is impossible for them to be from Earth or Meteorites

Now, run away........
Ohhhhhh... You mean the rocks like the ones Neil boy was handing out?? LMFAO!

Quote:
'Moon rock' given to Holland by Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin is fake

A moon rock given to the Dutch prime minister by Apollo 11 astronauts in 1969 has turned out to be a fake.

Curators at Amsterdam's Rijksmuseum, where the rock has attracted tens of thousands of visitors each year, discovered that the "lunar rock", valued at £308,000, was in fact petrified wood.

Xandra van Gelder, who oversaw the investigation, said the museum would continue to keep the stone as a curiosity.

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

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/sci...n-is-fake.html
^^^ She is right though, it's a good story, just like most of what NASA tells us.

I think someone's knickers are going to need untwisting again soon...
__________________
“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

Y Gwir Erbyn Y Byd ("Truth Against the World") - Druidic Motto

Last edited by oneriver; 16-05-2018 at 10:40 PM.
Likes: (1)
oneriver is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16-05-2018, 11:56 PM   #811
truegroup
Senior Member
 
truegroup's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Apollo Happened. Snap out of your dreamworld.
Posts: 15,776
Likes: 1,080 (843 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by oneriver View Post
Ohhhhhh... You mean the rocks like the ones Neil boy was handing out?? LMFAO!



^^^ She is right though, it's a good story, just like most of what NASA tells us.

I think someone's knickers are going to need untwisting again soon...
I shake me head again at the moronic whackamole repetition.

Answered a dozen times.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mHALUGcEEiQ
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hGQhArtFqIM

It wasn't handed out by NASA. It was a gift from the Ambassador.

All the TINY FRAGMENTS of moon rock were given out in encased resin with gold engraved plaques and presentation mounts. They were given to heads of states not ex bloody prime ministers. The tree rock was admired previously by Drees and some generic gift card was somehow attached to it.

No I mean the rocks examined by literally thousands of geologists.

As I said....run away.
__________________
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; 16-05-2018 at 11:56 PM.
truegroup is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17-05-2018, 12:20 AM   #812
truegroup
Senior Member
 
truegroup's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Apollo Happened. Snap out of your dreamworld.
Posts: 15,776
Likes: 1,080 (843 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sabrina View Post
But as I've stated photo evidence is debunked on both sides as NASA edits theirs before we see them why believe their evidence over anyone elses?
Confirming my assertion....you really don't even read my bloody posts properly! I stated that ALL the Apollo pictures are online in their raw scan format without colour or contrast enhancements.

But so bloody what! You act as though enhancing a picture is some kind of fraudulent act. Bollocks is it.

Quote:
NASA also have extreme claims don't they and all we have is their word and some edited photos. And if what you say is true an awful lot of people that worked for NASA are full of (your words)
'lies, deception, ignorance or downright stupidity'
Your nonsensical off topic ramblings noted. What extreme claims do we only have "their word for"?

Quote:
'bullshit [email protected]'
I think that classifies as name calling.
Proving that you don't even know what name calling is. I am describing his ACTIONS...duhhhh.

Quote:
So it is very relevant that we are taking the word of people that worked for NASA and give us the information about the Moon landings...
and you think so little of them as individuals but as a group you trust their 'word' and 'images'.
A ridiculous and foolish non sequitur conclusion. Because I disbelieve a bloke talking about alienz without proof, you apply that crap to people who worked at NASA during the Apollo era

Quote:
As far as I can see both sides have the same amount of evidence and the same people working for them....
Evidence for what? Your short sighted observations are noted.

Quote:
Today's NASA top people are tomorrows whistleblowers - and I doubt if they can leave the office armed with evidence.
Case closed then. No evidence.

Quote:
DI posted a huge list of moon landing hoax evidence...if you've debunked them all
Yep. Where is thus "huge list"

Quote:
then what do you think of him now?
Is he what you classify as the above type of person?
I disagree with him. No idea if he is that type of person. Though when I met him he struck me as the kind of person who would not hang on to shite by his fingernails when it was shown to be wrong.

Are you?

Quote:
I haven't said I believed the whistleblowers just that I research before calling people stupid etc...
just because they mention aliens...
I didn't call anyone stupid. Your level of research is dodgy.

Any chance of some on topic posts? Got any evidence that takes longer than five seconds to dismantle
__________________
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.
Likes: (2)
truegroup is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17-05-2018, 01:23 PM   #813
Sabrina
Senior Member
 
Sabrina's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Posts: 461
Likes: 344 (215 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by truegroup View Post
Confirming my assertion....you really don't even read my bloody posts properly! I stated that ALL the Apollo pictures are online in their raw scan format without colour or contrast enhancements.

But so bloody what! You act as though enhancing a picture is some kind of fraudulent act. Bollocks is it.



Your nonsensical off topic ramblings noted. What extreme claims do we only have "their word for"?



Proving that you don't even know what name calling is. I am describing his ACTIONS...duhhhh.



A ridiculous and foolish non sequitur conclusion. Because I disbelieve a bloke talking about alienz without proof, you apply that crap to people who worked at NASA during the Apollo era



Evidence for what? Your short sighted observations are noted.



Case closed then. No evidence.



Yep. Where is thus "huge list"



I disagree with him. No idea if he is that type of person. Though when I met him he struck me as the kind of person who would not hang on to shite by his fingernails when it was shown to be wrong.

Are you?



I didn't call anyone stupid. Your level of research is dodgy.

Any chance of some on topic posts? Got any evidence that takes longer than five seconds to dismantle


Calling someone actions stupid is not what you do...you call anyone that doesn't agree with you stupid.
Attack the theories not the people.

NASA is a business - it was funded with billions to make it to the moon - there was immense pressure on to succeed.
Large corporations back then were rife for abuse and lies.

Scientists are all about proof but when funded by business people and governments and PR gets involved you start getting heavily 'sexed up' images - the average person isn't going to trawl through to find the original unedited versions.

They may well have got to the moon with seat of the pants one off productions - but they could have also faked it with that amount of money involved. People were not stupid back then and photo and video editing was around.
The scientists were clever enough to get people to the moon, the creatives were clever enough to fake it and the business was clever enough to cover up anything they didn't want you to see or know about.
No one was stupid back then.

When someone comes up with a stupid theory fair game...debunk it with physics. When someone that got into NASA (no mean feat) worked as a scientist there for a decade has a theory...and uses physics to support it...why also debunk and call him stupid? Possibly he saw something and interpreted it wrong but it could still be of value and interesting.
If there are things feeding off the rings around planets and giving off exhaust fumes - it may be alien life forms in a way we have not yet imagined - just because he says the word 'alien' doesn't mean he or his theories are stupid.

So when people that worked for NASA and other top organisations that require top level knowledge of that place tell us things are not quite right with these companies we should listen...
and interpret in our own way.
Just because there may have been a fake moon landing program doesn't mean they didn't get to the moon - it's possible there was a back up plan like that though - and would actually make sense.
If they spent the money on creating a fake moon landing as they didn't think the scientists could do it - the budget for the scientists would have been smaller - which would then make the seat of your pants tin foil productions
a lot of sense. It also would make sense as to why some images look fake and others real.

The moon rocks - loads were brought back - loads were stolen - and the ones that were recovered (mostly by NASA agents) turned out to mostly be fake.
Which may mean only a handful were not fake ( again sexing it up maybe?)
Possibly they only had the ability to bring a few back.

Either way - they are slightly different from meteorites as they have less oxygen - and the ones that Russia brought back were made the same.

So it looks like Russia can confirm that the moon rocks were real?

Well not really - since they recently wanted proof that the US landed on the moon that means they believe that it didn't happen - which means that they also may have fake moon rocks? Which means they think they also faked getting their moon rocks....Hmmmm? Hmmm? Hmmm?

Missing tapes, seat of your pants production space crafts, missing moon rocks, scientists whistleblowing...

One thing is for certain
Scientists plus government plus large business with a dash of advertising and marketing PR equals
a huge f....up....

You can't debunk that fact!

Last edited by Sabrina; 17-05-2018 at 01:28 PM.
Likes: (1)
Sabrina is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17-05-2018, 02:12 PM   #814
truegroup
Senior Member
 
truegroup's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Apollo Happened. Snap out of your dreamworld.
Posts: 15,776
Likes: 1,080 (843 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sabrina View Post
Calling someone actions stupid is not what you do...you call anyone that doesn't agree with you stupid.
Attack the theories not the people.
That is exactly what I did!!

Quote:
NASA is a business - it was funded with billions to make it to the moon - there was immense pressure on to succeed.
Large corporations back then were rife for abuse and lies.
Rubbish. The funds were spent on allocated companies. The accounts stack up. I have no doubt some buggers nicked a few quid, but your claim that something went on that means a hoax is utter drivel. There, did I attack your claim enough

Quote:
Scientists are all about proof but when funded by business people and governments and PR gets involved you start getting heavily 'sexed up' images - the average person isn't going to trawl through to find the original unedited versions.
IRRELEVANT!! The images don't need to be trawled through. They are available in one place. You totally ignored the point, address it, or withdraw your useless claim.

Quote:
They may well have got to the moon with seat of the pants one off productions - but they could have also faked it with that amount of money involved.
Coulda woulda shoulda. PROVE they faked it. The evidence says they went.

Quote:
People were not stupid back then and photo and video editing was around.
PROVE the photos were edited, explain why and explain why that shows a hoax. Your vague arm waving is not evidence.

Quote:
The scientists were clever enough to get people to the moon, the creatives were clever enough to fake it and the business was clever enough to cover up anything they didn't want you to see or know about.
No one was stupid back then.
Total bullshit. You know absolutely nothing about this subject. Even now they find it hard to fake low gravity because only one vector is affected by it...vertical, not horizontal. The rocks!

Quote:
When someone comes up with a stupid theory fair game...debunk it with physics. When someone that got into NASA (no mean feat) worked as a scientist there for a decade has a theory...and uses physics to support it...why also debunk and call him stupid? Possibly he saw something and interpreted it wrong but it could still be of value and interesting.
IT'S OFF TOPIC...alienz I don't need to debunk anything. His extreme claims require evidence.

Quote:
If there are things feeding off the rings around planets and giving off exhaust fumes - it may be alien life forms in a way we have not yet imagined - just because he says the word 'alien' doesn't mean he or his theories are stupid.
Nothing to do with Apollo, take it somewhere else!

Quote:
So when people that worked for NASA and other top organisations that require top level knowledge of that place tell us things are not quite right with these companies we should listen...

This happened recently, not in 1969-72. We should listen, then ask for evidence...duhhhh.

Take it somewhere else.

Quote:
Just because there may have been a fake moon landing program doesn't mean they didn't get to the moon - it's possible there was a back up plan like that though - and would actually make sense.
Prove there was such a plan.

Quote:
If they spent the money on creating a fake moon landing as they didn't think the scientists could do it - the budget for the scientists would have been smaller - which would then make the seat of your pants tin foil productions
a lot of sense. It also would make sense as to why some images look fake and others real.
The budget is the same

http://www.clavius.org/scale.html



Quote:
The moon rocks - loads were brought back - loads were stolen - and the ones that were recovered (mostly by NASA agents) turned out to mostly be fake.

I'll address the rest of your useless post later.
__________________
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.
Likes: (1)
truegroup is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17-05-2018, 02:47 PM   #815
Sabrina
Senior Member
 
Sabrina's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Posts: 461
Likes: 344 (215 Posts)
Default

Great I'll look forward to your copy and paste from NASA reply...
Sabrina is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17-05-2018, 03:45 PM   #816
ianw
Senior Member
 
ianw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 3,855
Likes: 85 (58 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by truegroup View Post

Total bullshit. You know absolutely nothing about this subject. Even now they find it hard to fake low gravity because only one vector is affected by it...vertical, not horizontal. The rocks!
So when a satellite is in orbit what is its vector? Is it not the force of gravity that that affects the vector?
__________________
My definition of being a flatmooner is the apolow footage was filmed in a studio
ianw is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17-05-2018, 03:49 PM   #817
truegroup
Senior Member
 
truegroup's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Apollo Happened. Snap out of your dreamworld.
Posts: 15,776
Likes: 1,080 (843 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sabrina View Post
The moon rocks - loads were brought back -
842lbs

Quote:
loads were stolen
A total fabrication. Whoever told you this, that you blindly believed is either mistaken or is lying. NASA gave away loads of tiny fragments in presentation format or as gifts to universities and such. These amounted to a couple of rocks. Some of these gifts have gone missing and it is nothing to do with NASA as they were given away.

Quote:
and the ones that were recovered (mostly by NASA agents) turned out to mostly be fake.
A 100% complete fabrication. A/ NASA were not involved in finding the fragments given as gifts B/ What stolen fragments of rock were recovered? C/ NONE of the lunar samples are fake.

Did you make that lie up or did you blindly believe someone else?

Quote:
Which may mean only a handful were not fake ( again sexing it up maybe?)
I cannot fathom how your brain works. There are thousands of peer reviewed reports that show the analysed samples were authentic. Your circular logic is frightening.

Quote:
Possibly they only had the ability to bring a few back.
They brought back 842lbs. What you claim to be possible is gibberish.

Quote:
Either way - they are slightly different from meteorites as they have less oxygen
Are you making this crap up!? The Apollo samples are diferent to meteorites in many ways. Apollo: There is no terrestrial weathering. There is very strong exterior Helium 3, ablated on meteorites. There are tiny craters formed from micro-meteiroid impacts. The solar isotopes have different content. And the oxygen isotopes are bloody identical!

Quote:
and the ones that Russia brought back were made the same.

So it looks like Russia can confirm that the moon rocks were real?
They are of similar nature from different areas We don't need the Soviets to confirm these are real! There are thousands of peer reviewed analyses which does that.

Quote:
Well not really - since they recently wanted proof that the US landed on the moon
My god, where the hell are you getting this nonsensical post from. It's one piece of bullshit after another!

Quote:
that means they believe that it didn't happen - which means that they also may have fake moon rocks? Which means they think they also faked getting their moon rocks....Hmmmm? Hmmm? Hmmm?
The Soviets do not doubt the landings They congratulated America, their samples are authentic. Tiny amount... from unmanned recovery. You read this crap somewhere didn't you

Quote:
Missing tapes,
You are either deliberately avoiding reading where I explained this dumb claim or you are trolling. The "missing tapes" are the BACKUP SSTV AND TELEMETRY TAPES. They are from ONE mission!! Apollo 11. Do you know what a backup is?

Quote:
. seat of your pants production space crafts,
Says who? You Your ignorance on this subject is as bad as any I have seen. Your whole post is astonishingly inept and wrong.

Quote:
missing moon rocks
Nope. Explained above

Quote:
, scientists whistleblowing...
And failing to provide any evidence whatsoever.

Quote:
One thing is for certain
Yep. You are clueless, out of your depth and have no trouble believing shite whilst struggling to believe actual facts.

Quote:
Scientists plus government plus large business with a dash of advertising and marketing PR equals
a huge f....up....
The only fuck up around here is your entire post. It really is one of THE most stupid things I've read on this thread.

Quote:
You can't debunk that fact!
You and facts are like shit and sugar lumps

Instead of quoting my entire post....then basically ignoring it....why not toddle off and read up on the subject....away from idiotic conspiracy shit!
__________________
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; 17-05-2018 at 03:55 PM.
Likes: (1)
truegroup is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17-05-2018, 03:52 PM   #818
truegroup
Senior Member
 
truegroup's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Apollo Happened. Snap out of your dreamworld.
Posts: 15,776
Likes: 1,080 (843 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sabrina View Post
Great I'll look forward to your copy and paste from NASA reply...
You are the one copying made up shit from idiot conspiracy sites. My posts are mainly my own words and knowledge.

Try not to be even more of a failure. And you wonder why I get irritated from people like you. You know less than nothing, because you seem to be indoctrinated with the opposite of what is true on this subject. Beyond epic fail.
__________________
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; 17-05-2018 at 03:59 PM.
truegroup is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17-05-2018, 03:57 PM   #819
truegroup
Senior Member
 
truegroup's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Apollo Happened. Snap out of your dreamworld.
Posts: 15,776
Likes: 1,080 (843 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ianw View Post
So when a satellite is in orbit what is its vector? Is it not the force of gravity that that affects the vector?
It is in freefall. Gravity is the same vertical vector
__________________
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 17-05-2018, 04:04 PM   #820
ianw
Senior Member
 
ianw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 3,855
Likes: 85 (58 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by truegroup View Post
Total bullshit. You know absolutely nothing about this subject. Even now they find it hard to fake low gravity because only one vector is affected by it...vertical, not horizontal. The rocks!
Quote:
Originally Posted by ianw View Post
So when a satellite is in orbit what is its vector? Is it not the force of gravity that that affects the vector?
Quote:
Originally Posted by truegroup View Post
It is in freefall. Gravity is the same vertical vector
So it is affecting both.
__________________
My definition of being a flatmooner is the apolow footage was filmed in a studio
ianw 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 08:17 PM.


Shoutbox provided by vBShout (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2018 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.