So the moon landing was faked!

Glaucus · 20 Jan 2013 at 17:55

Matt82 said:
if the fine dust would have been blown away exposing rock, why are there still foot prints?

http://imageevent.com/afap/spaceandscience/apollo11?p=41&b=-1&m=-1&c=4&w=2&s=1&n=1&l=0&z=9

It wouldn't be blowen away.

Blowen away by what?
There's two things,well three things depending on mission.

1) rockets are low powered and throttled back and switched off
2) there is no atmosphere to carry particles, also gas produced by the rockets is pretty much nothing, there's little to carry dust, other than mavity.
3) some of the missions were not the best landings and had sideways momentum.

Castiel · 20 Jan 2013 at 17:55

I always find it amusing when the same people who deny the moon landings happened also suggest that the Apollo Astronauts saw UFOs and encountered Aliens, both in transit and on the surface.

Tibbz2 · 20 Jan 2013 at 17:57

Nevermind

Blue160 · 20 Jan 2013 at 17:58

Duff-Man said:
Apart from anything else, the trajectory of the dust kicked up as astronauts move around on the moon is consistent with lunar mavity in a vacuum.

I like these small facts which are completely incompatible with the conspiracy theories. If any of the guys who think it was faked would like to explain how this is possible I'd be fascinated to hear it.

dowie · 20 Jan 2013 at 18:00

Flukester said:
Tech simply was not there IMHO. This is my belief and of no less merit than anyone else's. No one here actually knows better either which is the lol factor.

anyone capable of logical thought knows better tbh...

your belief does have less merit than others - because its unfounded and completely wrong

dowie · 20 Jan 2013 at 18:01

oli collett said:
For all those close minded SHEEP who can't see how obviously fake this whole thing is, here's a clear breakdown of the footage which demonstrates how obviously fake it is:
http://pigeonsnest.co.uk/stuff/nasa-fakes-moon-landing.html

brilliant

gillywibble · 20 Jan 2013 at 18:04

aardvark said:
hardly - you could be rubbish at your job

Thank you, that genuinely made me smile

SexyGreyFox · 20 Jan 2013 at 18:05

doofer said:
Do you have Satellite TV? You know it's not a huge Studio Complex up in space right?

Or mebbe it is.....?

You are missing the point.
I have a motorised satellite dish so I've just been watching football on 13E but a bit later I will move it to 1W to pick up what I want.
That means I will have to move it across the sky 14 deg to pick the satellite up I want which is exactly what Ham Radio enthusiasts had to do although they were moving their 'dishes' in fractions of degrees all the way to the moon and back.
If they had left their 'dishes' in one place and hear all the transmission then they know it would be faked.

Anyway, the Russians said America did it and that is proof enough.

Theophany · 20 Jan 2013 at 18:05

oli collett said:
For all those close minded SHEEP who can't see how obviously fake this whole thing is, here's a clear breakdown of the footage which demonstrates how obviously fake it is:
http://pigeonsnest.co.uk/stuff/nasa-fakes-moon-landing.html

This is genius.

SexyGreyFox · 20 Jan 2013 at 18:07

Castiel said:
I always find it amusing when the same people who deny the moon landings happened also suggest that the Apollo Astronauts saw UFOs and encountered Aliens, both in transit and on the surface.

No because Magick and Lysander believe we landed on the Moon but it is inhabited by Aliens etc.

dowie · 20 Jan 2013 at 18:09

gillywibble said:
Fine. I will put something together and report back. However, I doubt very much whether it will change your mind because as I said previously, the brain simply does not want to disbelieve something that was once believed.

that is the very problem you and other conspiraloons suffer from tbh...

doofer · 20 Jan 2013 at 18:11

Dimple said:
You are missing the point.

No, you are. The TV Satellites are kept in a stationary orbit so you don't have to keep moving your dish to receive them if they decided to move those satellites you'd have to track them just the same with your dish, it still doesn't mean there's a huge studio complex up in space with people working there...

SexyGreyFox · 20 Jan 2013 at 18:16

doofer said:
No, you are. The TV Satellites are kept in a stationary orbit so you don't have to keep moving your dish to receive them if they decided to move those satellites you'd have to track them just the same with your dish, it still doesn't mean there's a huge studio complex up in space with people working there...

I've completely lost what you are on about.
Are you denying that Ham Radio enthusiasts aimed their receivers from launch all the way to the Moon a fraction of a degree at a time following Apollo 11?
Or are you saying that technology was already available in orbit that would make the Ham Radio enthusiasts think they were tracking Apollo 11 and pointing their aerials a bit at a time was pointless?
I don't know what you're trying to say.

csmager · 20 Jan 2013 at 18:19

doofer said:
No, you are. The TV Satellites are kept in a stationary orbit so you don't have to keep moving your dish to receive them if they decided to move those satellites you'd have to track them just the same with your dish, it still doesn't mean there's a huge studio complex up in space with people working there...

So you're arguing they sent something to the moon purely to relay signals from a studio on earth that was faking the landing?

The complexity of some of the theories out there ends up sounding more difficult than actually doing it in the first place!

Sliver · 20 Jan 2013 at 18:33

Buzz Aldrin once punched a guy in the face for accusing him of not going to the moon. Personally, I'd like to see all conspriacy nuts receive a knuckle sandwich. Clearly facts and evidence does not sway them, so maybe a swift left hook or a kick in the twins might wake them up. :rolleyes:

doofer · 20 Jan 2013 at 18:38

csmager said:
So you're arguing they sent something to the moon purely to relay signals from a studio on earth that was faking the landing?

No, I'm saying that you don't need a 'Manned' spacecraft to send 'Live' signals back to Earth, which is why I used the Satellite TV as an example, so his 'Proof' that his Grandpa followed them on his HAM radio was not infallible is all.

csmager · 20 Jan 2013 at 18:40

doofer said:
No, I'm saying that you don't need a 'Manned' spacecraft to send 'Live' signals back to Earth, which is why I used the Satellite TV as an example, so his 'Proof' that his Grandpa followed them on his HAM radio was not infallible is all.

Yes, but to do that you've have to send something to the moon to relay signals, as I suggested. Else the radio operators would know it wasn't where it was meant to be.

You've then got the problem that if you don't land it, it's going to go out of range as it orbits the moon.

Kenai · 20 Jan 2013 at 18:42

csmager said:
Yes, but to do that you've have to send something to the moon to relay signals, as I suggested. Else the radio operators would know it wasn't where it was meant to be.

You've then got the problem that if you don't land it, it's going to go out of range as it orbits the moon.

And if you can send an unmanned craft up easily enough... the only real hurdle is giving astronauts a suitable atmosphere to survive. Something we've been doing with submersible vehicles for a long long time before going to the moon.

ots3go · 20 Jan 2013 at 18:42

5 star thread!

Keep it up 'nutjobs'.

.

RDM · 20 Jan 2013 at 18:44

doofer said:
No, I'm saying that you don't need a 'Manned' spacecraft to send 'Live' signals back to Earth, which is why I used the Satellite TV as an example, so his 'Proof' that his Grandpa followed them on his HAM radio was not infallible is all.

So they sent an unmanned ship to the moon transmitting as it went, landed it there, had it transmit back to earth, had mission control following a script when replying to them, then launched the unmanned ship remotely, had it transmit on the way back and then picked it up from the ocean when it landed and pretended to take some astronauts out of it? Sounds plausible...