I found out something about my fiance and her family and I don't know what to do...

Because that technology to do that hasn't been invented yet.

The set would be an exact replica of a part of the moon (not yet photographed) and the size of Chester, I think somebody may have noticed the Americans building that in the desert (plus the winds on earth would ruin everything).

And this isn't possible? Who is to say this was filmed outside in the first place? If they have the ability to launch a shuttle into the space, I wouldn't be surprised at what else they can achieve.

Not to mention the affects of lunar mavity are practically impossible to reproduce convincingly on earth for the duration demonstrated in the videos.

Again, how do you know that they wasn't capable of such things? Also if we had never been to the moon before, how do you know that everything acted exactly how it would have done on the moon?

I'm not saying they didn't go to the moon but, I also think it is a possibility that they didn't go on that occasion.

Defending the moon landing is no worse then those defending the hoax. IMO we don't have clear cut evidence to suggest 100% that the landing happened without casting any doubt. If we did, everyone would accept this as truth.
 
I know for a fact that no human has been higher than 400 miles above earth's surface. I also know for a fact that nasa is a fraud.

Tis true.

It's called the Van Halen Belt.

You can get through it cos of the secret DLR object that karate kicks anything.

23Avu8H.jpg
 
Defending the moon landing is no worse then those defending the hoax. IMO we don't have clear cut evidence to suggest 100% that the landing happened without casting any doubt. If we did, everyone would accept this as truth.

There is an overwhelming amount of evidence that we did go, check out the link I posted regarding third-party evidence that has been collected throughout the decades.

In contrast, there is pretty much zero credible scientific evidence suggesting we didn't go.

So realistically, you can't put both attacking and defending the moon landings on even remotely the same level, since one of them does have publically available empirical evidence and one does not.
 
Last edited:
Even if i showed you evidence you won't believe it. Even once NASA is closed down because of the past and present fraud's people will still believe they went to the moon lol

Your dedication and unswerving looniness are only two of the reasons that you are a forums gold standard poster :D

Never change, champ.

p.s. Did you ever get a date with that Pret a Manger server who had to change branch location because you were bothering her so much?
 
My childrens grandad on their mothers side firmly believes the moon landings were faked. I try not to get pulled into the "debate" so just nod sagely.

Can anyone honestly believe that something like that could be successfully faked and kept quite for so long. That is far harder to believe IMO.

Believing the moon landings were faked is in a similar vane to believing a well known middle class couple killed their eldest child and faked a kidnapping.
 
[FnG]magnolia;28438397 said:
Your dedication and unswerving looniness are only two of the reasons that you are a forums gold standard poster :D

Never change, champ.

p.s. Did you ever get a date with that Pret a Manger server who had to change branch location because you were bothering her so much?

Did you watch apollo zero yet?
 
Defending the moon landing is no worse then those defending the hoax. IMO we don't have clear cut evidence to suggest 100% that the landing happened without casting any doubt. If we did, everyone would accept this as truth.

What on earth are you on about?

People say the same about Evolution, yet we know its true.... because of the evidence we have.

Another example: We know 9/11 was carried out by 19 middle eastern men, yet thousands believe it was a conspiracy carried out by the US governement, so because lots of people think that we should say 'Oooh who knows then'?

Your point is really really silly.
 
Last edited:
What on earth are you on about?

People say the same about Evolution, yet we know its true.... because of the evidence we have.

Just because one source says we have been to the moon, then suddenly everyone has to believe this? What if in the next 50 years, NASA admit that they faked the first moon landing? It's good to keep an open mind, especially when some of these facts can't be proven to be 100% undeniable proof we visited the moon.

If everyone believed in everything we are told, we could be lied to in the face all the time.

EDIT: Not getting into 9/11 and I too have suspicions on that. Sure they carried the attacks out, but other things also don't add up to say the Gov wasn't involved in some way or another.
 
What on earth are you on about?

People say the same about Evolution, yet we know its true.... because of the evidence we have.

Another example: We know 9/11 was carried out by 19 middle eastern men, yet thousands believe it was a conspiracy carried out by the US governement, so because lots of people think that we should say 'Oooh who knows then'?

Your point is really really silly.

I think his point is that your two later points in this post, whilst widely accepted, are unproven (or perhaps unprovable) if you take into account those who do not believe them to be true.

It's basically: "I choose to insert my [x] reality which means your [y] reality is wrong" but the genius of it is that it works both ways and this, chaps, is why the internet was born - so that subjective opinion could be stated as fact and no one changes their stance (echo chamber!) because why would you?
 
And this isn't possible?

No it isn't.


Who is to say this was filmed outside in the first place?

Moon landing skeptics, unless of course they want to argue it was filmed indoors, in the largest man made structure ever erected, which was built to house the set (which was created via magic as we still don't have the technology to do it) and that the structure was never seen by anyone or foreign spy satellites...


Also if we had never been to the moon before, how do you know that everything acted exactly how it would have done on the moon?

Because scientists know how the physics of reduced mavity works, also more people/probes/rovers have been to the moon since.


I'm not saying they didn't go to the moon but, I also think it is a possibility that they didn't go on that occasion.

Well I suppose if you ignore all the facts/evidence then yes it might be, just like it's also possible to jump out the window and fly like superman if again you ignore the facts/evidence.


Defending the moon landing is no worse then those defending the hoax.

Yes it is, it's the same as people telling mothers they shouldn't vaccinate their children because god will keep them safe.


IMO we don't have clear cut evidence to suggest 100% that the landing happened without casting any doubt.

True, but magic/aliens aside, we do have clear cut evidence to suggest 100% that the landing happened without casting any reasonable doubt.


If we did, everyone would accept this as truth.

No they wouldn't because some people have a preconceived disposition to believe in conspiracy theories no matter how silly they are or how overwhelming the truth is, it's just how some people work. Example: I once saw a 9/11 nut who had been backed into a corner on his "fire can't weaken steel" argument claim that blacksmithing couldn't be proven to be real and we have no way of knowing for sure how medieval people really made their swords.
 
Last edited:
These threads always end the same where those who follow the alternative view seek to elevate their own understanding because they spent more time researching on the Internet and are more logical because they doubt everything. Most WILL grow out of it and look back and laugh at their own beliefs because most do and those that don't tend to be lonely or emotionally contrary in their personalities.

Yea but arguments are never something to conclude anything so are pointless points to try and refute, a waste of energy and constantly batting out the "you can't PROVE it" is a clear example of yea but arguments.
 
These threads always end the same where those who follow the alternative view seek to elevate their own understanding because they spent more time researching on the Internet and are more logical because they doubt everything. Most WILL grow out of it and look back and laugh at their own beliefs because most do and those that don't tend to be lonely or emotionally contrary in their personalities.

Yea but arguments are never something to conclude anything so are pointless points to try and refute, a waste of energy and constantly batting out the "you can't PROVE it" is a clear example of yea but arguments.

Yeah, but you're obviously fooled by THEIR lies, the LIES we READ about in the MAINSTREAM media which only SHEEPLE would fall for etc etc etc
 
Back
Top Bottom