So the moon landing was faked!

In reference to the schematics and workings of the computer, 'The Delirious Data Subsystem of the LM', how can you accept that is evidence, when you cannot possibly understand how it should or even did work? I certainly wouldn't be able to. Interesting that you'd reference that as fact.

I'll have to watch more and respond.

EDIT: Same with 'The computer of Apollo had no memory'. That awful music makes that almost impossible to watch. :p
 
Last edited:
alexthecheese said:
In reference to the schematics and workings of the computer, 'The Delirious Data Subsystem of the LM', how can you accept that is evidence, when you cannot possibly understand how it should or even did work? I certainly wouldn't be able to. Interesting that you'd reference that as fact.

I'll have to watch more and respond.
Click to expand...

It doesn't tell you anything. I was going to post the same. How on earth can you give that as evidence.
Who even made the video? Way expertise did they have, what understanding of the computer system do they have.
 
Excellent post Gillywibble. I must admit that some of what you posted does seem credible. I'll just wait to see what the other side comes up with.
 
3) unusual lighting?
He can't explain it? Really?
This is yet another common myth. It's been debunked a million times.
Regolith is ~9% reflective. There is no atmosphere and moon is in direct sunlight. The moon gets an enormouse amount of sun light, combine that with the high reflectivity of regolith and there isn't unusual lighting at all.
 
Glaucus said:
It doesn't tell you anything. I was going to post the same. How on earth can you give that as evidence.
Who even made the video? Way expertise did they have, what understanding of the computer system do they have.
Click to expand...

Well the same can be said about 95% of NASA claims. That is the beauty of saying you went to the moon. Nothing verifiable and there is such scope to hide behind intellectual obscurity it realy will take experts to prove them wrong, which proves difficult when NASA snatch up all the experts before they have a chance of proving them wrong.
 
Glaucus said:
It doesn't tell you anything. I was going to post the same. How on earth can you give that as evidence.
Who even made the video? Way expertise did they have, what understanding of the computer system do they have.
Click to expand...

It seems to me that most conspiracy believers place far too much trust in the conspiracy theorists; that they are experts in their field (rocket science, astronomy, photography, phsyics - pretty much every field of science), that they are a match for those that work at NASA, that they are without bias; and they choose not to understand for themselves, but to rely on others to craft evidence and bring it to them on a plate with a Youtube video with dodgy music, by people with no particular talent for creating Powerpoint slides. ;) :p
 
groen said:
Well the same can be said about 95% of NASA claims. That is the beauty of saying you went to the moon. Nothing verifiable and there is such scope to hide behind intellectual obscurity it realy will take experts to prove them wrong, which proves difficult when NASA snatch up all the experts before they have a chance of proving them wrong.
Click to expand...

Why would you choose to believe one guy perhaps sitting in his basement, where you have no idea of his qualifications, over thousands of scientists with credible backgrounds?

There must be something about conspiracy believers that makes them want to believe. It's amazing to see you've just stumbled across another conspiracy theory right before our very eyes.
 
13 why robots?

Have you really asked that?
They are cheaper and lighter. You don't need life support, be it oxygen, food, water or the other dozen aspects of human life support.
Humans also aren't practically good at exploration either, we are not fitted with spectrographs or all the other high technology exploration tools needed for today's scientific exploration.
Think of the cost of sending humans for years instead of days and how many supplies that would need.
Opportunity on mars has survived for over 10 years and is still exploring.
That's a lot off food, water and oxygen needed. Let alone mental issues.

As for 18 years. What do you expect, once the projects been disabled, we don't exactly have stuff ready to launch.
Nasa is now building a heavy lifter, that is for deep space exploration, you can't just design and build these things in a matter of months.
You don't just keep millions of tons and millions of feet of tooling equipment and spare parts.
Not even rolls Royce for out of date aero plane engines keep spare parts or the tooling needed to make them.
 
Last edited:
groen said:
Well the same can be said about 95% of NASA claims. That is the beauty of saying you went to the moon. Nothing verifiable and there is such scope to hide behind intellectual obscurity it realy will take experts to prove them wrong, which proves difficult when NASA snatch up all the experts before they have a chance of proving them wrong.
Click to expand...

Nothing verifiable, you mean other than radio signals, photos of the moon landing sites in the last few years from several moon satelites, by multiple space agencies.
The multiple videos showing lunar mavity and the fact many people have tried recreating them, including CT, by either using wires or slowing the tapes down and no one can match the astronaught a movements.

No, no evidence at all :rolleyes:
 
gillywibble said:
The following as far as I’m concerned have not been successfully debunked. If any of them have been, then please link to the research because I have not seen it.
Click to expand...
It wouldn’t surprise me to find out some of the photos or videos are edited or fake but that does not mean the entire thing is. It could be they just wanted to some fake shots that look really good for PR reasons.

Anyway quick question for those that do not believe we have been to the moon. If we have not been to the moon then how did the retroreflectors equipment get there? Which we know is real as it has been used by tons of different people in different counties. The equipment has been tested and proven real by armatures to professionals. That alone is 100% proof we have been to the moon.

To prove we have not been to the moon you need to explain away the evidence that we have been there. How do you explain all the equipment on the moon if we have not been there?
 
If you were brought up believing the earth was flat, all your science, all your equations would have this taken in to account as fact. If one day you were told it was round, you would have to rethink all your science. This is a similar with the apollo. People just trust nasa and their science without question (a lot of people). But i do think that one day some great astro physicist is going to become a sceptic due to some aspect, be it the moon phases, the propulsion, the cooling systems, the lack of stars in ANY nasa picture since the 50s and so on. That they will go about proving them wrong, it may take an expert to prove the expert liar at nasa wrong. Especially when they just come up with a new lie every time.

The more i look in to it, the less i only doubt Apollo. The more i look in to it, the more i doubt the ISS, mars, all the probes...
 
Last edited:
groen said:
Well the same can be said about 95% of NASA claims. That is the beauty of saying you went to the moon. Nothing verifiable and there is such scope to hide behind intellectual obscurity it realy will take experts to prove them wrong, which proves difficult when NASA snatch up all the experts before they have a chance of proving them wrong.
Click to expand...
The retroreflectors equipment left on the moon can be used by anyone with the right equipment and doesn’t need professionals. The equipment left on the moon is perfectly verifiable by lots of people all over the world. How do you explain that?

The ISS you can see on a clear day with the naked eye. How can you think that is fake?
 
Last edited:
groen said:
If you were brought up believing the earth was flat, all your science, all your equations would have this taken in to account as fact. If one day you were told it was round, you would have to rethink all your science. This is a similar with the apollo.
Click to expand...

No it's not and that is probably the worse analogy covering how science works I've ever heard.

Science does not come from being told thing and just accepting them, it comes from analysing experiments and being able to make predictions that hold true every time.

groen said:
People just trust nasa and their science without question (a lot of people).
Click to expand...

You mean like almost every respected astro-physicist on Earth, most of whom have no connection to NASA.

groen said:
But i do think that one day some great astro physicist is going to become a sceptic due to some aspect, be it the moon phases, the propulsion, the cooling systems, the lack of stars in ANY nasa picture since the 50s and so on. That they will go about proving them wrong, it may take an expert to prove the expert liar at nasa wrong. Especially when they just come up with a new lie every time.
Click to expand...

Why do you keep making this up as NASA experts versus the rest of the world? It's actually pretty much every respected scientist in the world and sane people against bat**** insane conspiracy nuts making silly Youtube videos.
 
16)
The buggy didnt alway leave tracks, as can be seen from several off these photos. Despite dust coming of the wheels, so you can see it is in motion and simply hasn't been dropped there. So that whole video is once again been debunked for ages and isn't a smoking gun at all.

http://www.marsanomalyresearch.com/evidence-reports/2010/192/moon-fakery-3.htm

(I'm well aware that site, sees it as fakery, but the pictures are nicely clumped together, and shows that the buggy didnt alway leave tracks.) also how can his explanation be true?
Sanitised scene with dust coming of the wheels. If its in motion how can it be sanitised? The sanitizer would be in the photograph.
 
Last edited:
10, is not proof of anything, you are just reading into it, your own viewpoint.
How about a simple explanation, that he's just done the best most amazing thing he will ever do in his life and he knows the chance of him ever doing anything remotely similar is nill.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom