Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


- - - - -

Moon Hoax with a twist


  • Please log in to reply
73 replies to this topic

#31    MID

MID

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 14,490 posts
  • Joined:06 Aug 2005
  • Gender:Male

  • ...The greatest error is not to have tried and failed, but that in trying, we did not give it our best effort.

Posted 10 May 2009 - 06:53 PM

TK0001 on May 9 2009, 09:27 AM, said:

Never thought of that. That's pretty sad.




A certain amount of poignancy attached to that image I agree...

I think when we actually get to an Apollo site and photograph it, there will be ample evidence of age and "weathering" present in the artifacts.  After all, approaching 500 cycles of temperature swings in the 500 degree F range will definitely, all by itself, do some major deterioration work on fabrics, foils, insulators, and such things as those...




#32    MID

MID

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 14,490 posts
  • Joined:06 Aug 2005
  • Gender:Male

  • ...The greatest error is not to have tried and failed, but that in trying, we did not give it our best effort.

Posted 10 May 2009 - 06:57 PM

Obviousman on May 9 2009, 09:48 AM, said:

Why do people like Turbo et al refuse to make their positions known on this thread? Perhaps it may be that they do not want to be held to a position, to allow them to change positions as required when evidence arises that makes their opinion untenable.



I think it's because answers to your questions will involve posting something that they can't take back in the future.  Answering your questions involves a commitment to the future, whereas current HBs are merely speculating, and creating all sorts of untenables about a past they don't understand.

If they commit to answering...as I mused they might, they'll all be kaput when they're proven wrong.
It's much safer to argue about the past which has already happened and which is not understood by them than to project their skewed mindsets into the future.


Given what Turb persists in doing on the Moon hoax thread...I'd be willing to bet he's not willing to put his cards on the table here...for obvious reasons.


#33    Godsnmbr1

Godsnmbr1

    The Bee's Knees

  • Member
  • 2,317 posts
  • Joined:11 Jul 2008
  • Gender:Male

  • There's someone in my head
    but it's not me

Posted 10 May 2009 - 08:40 PM

So just to clarify, you guys are 100% certain that the moon landings were not a hoax, right?  Absolutely no room for doubt, correct?

Remember, we are all just acting out a grand old game here, where we agree to forget who we really are, that in the remembering, that we may find each other again, and know that we are One. That All of Life, is One.

#34    MID

MID

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 14,490 posts
  • Joined:06 Aug 2005
  • Gender:Male

  • ...The greatest error is not to have tried and failed, but that in trying, we did not give it our best effort.

Posted 10 May 2009 - 10:59 PM

Godsnmbr1 on May 10 2009, 04:40 PM, said:

So just to clarify, you guys are 100% certain that the moon landings were not a hoax, right?  Absolutely no room for doubt, correct?



Yes God.
100% certain.  No doubt about it.
This of course is the view of someone with some experience and knowledge concerning the matter.

Pragmatically, although it would seem on the surface to be untenable, there is in fact room for doubt among some people.  
As I've indicated before, there's a generation and a half of people who grew up post-Apollo, during the intense educational decline that followed it, and during a period where no mandate was provided, and nothing quite so compelling and far-reaching as Apollo happened.

...indeed, Apollo is generally mentioned in history books as a paragraph or two, mentioning Neil Armstrong as the first man on the Moon, and little more.

There is doubt among some.  Some of us attempt to quiet those doubts by providing the requisite knowledge to fill in the gaps that produce such doubt.  But there certainly is room for doubt when the requisite knowledge is absent.

There isn't any once that knowledge is gained, and understanding takes place.

Edited by MID, 10 May 2009 - 11:05 PM.


#35    Godsnmbr1

Godsnmbr1

    The Bee's Knees

  • Member
  • 2,317 posts
  • Joined:11 Jul 2008
  • Gender:Male

  • There's someone in my head
    but it's not me

Posted 11 May 2009 - 02:03 AM

MID on May 10 2009, 10:59 PM, said:

Yes God.
100% certain.  No doubt about it.
This of course is the view of someone with some experience and knowledge concerning the matter.

Pragmatically, although it would seem on the surface to be untenable, there is in fact room for doubt among some people.  
As I've indicated before, there's a generation and a half of people who grew up post-Apollo, during the intense educational decline that followed it, and during a period where no mandate was provided, and nothing quite so compelling and far-reaching as Apollo happened.

...indeed, Apollo is generally mentioned in history books as a paragraph or two, mentioning Neil Armstrong as the first man on the Moon, and little more.

There is doubt among some.  Some of us attempt to quiet those doubts by providing the requisite knowledge to fill in the gaps that produce such doubt.  But there certainly is room for doubt when the requisite knowledge is absent.

There isn't any once that knowledge is gained, and understanding takes place.


You, my friend, are absolutely hilarious.  


Remember, we are all just acting out a grand old game here, where we agree to forget who we really are, that in the remembering, that we may find each other again, and know that we are One. That All of Life, is One.

#36    Obviousman

Obviousman

    Spaced out and plane crazy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,569 posts
  • Joined:27 Dec 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:South Coast, NSW, Australia

  • "Truth needs no defence. Nobody - NOBODY - can ever take the footsteps I made on the surface of the Moon away from me."
    Gene Cernan, Apollo 17

Posted 11 May 2009 - 07:30 AM

Godsnmbr1 on May 11 2009, 06:40 AM, said:

So just to clarify, you guys are 100% certain that the moon landings were not a hoax, right?  Absolutely no room for doubt, correct?


Correct - no doubt whatsoever.

All the engineering evidence is that the craft were capable as performing the tasks required.

We have telemetry and voice data from the journeys.

We have radar tracking of the spacecraft from multiple sources.

We have photographs of their missions.

We have lunar samples which could not be created on Earth.

And we have the 12 men who have told us of their fantastic experiences.

A quote you should ponder:

"Truth needs no defence. Nobody - NOBODY - can ever take the footsteps I made on the surface of the Moon away from me."
Gene Cernan, Apollo 17

I have no doubts whatsoever.




#37    mrbusdriver

mrbusdriver

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,495 posts
  • Joined:19 Dec 2007

Posted 11 May 2009 - 03:43 PM

Godsnmbr1 on May 10 2009, 08:03 PM, said:

You, my friend, are absolutely hilarious.


I've seen a lot of arguments for a hoax, and every one of them is wrong, either by lack of knowledge of how Apollo worked, lack of science education, gross generalizations and faulty logic, or just blind allegience to the party line. There is no credible data supporting a hoax.

I'm amazed how HBs argue about radiation when all they know is that Chernobyl killed folks. They argue hardware and can't differentiate the CM fron the SM. Theyb argue about the "distance" to the Moon without realizing that it was the last ten seconds of the SIVB burn that really got them there.

Know the subject you argue, waving your arms doesn't cut it.


#38    MID

MID

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 14,490 posts
  • Joined:06 Aug 2005
  • Gender:Male

  • ...The greatest error is not to have tried and failed, but that in trying, we did not give it our best effort.

Posted 12 May 2009 - 12:51 AM

Godsnmbr1 on May 10 2009, 10:03 PM, said:

You, my friend, are absolutely hilarious.




I have been known to be so on occassion...


But you'll have to define hilarious in this context.




#39    shaka5

shaka5

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,016 posts
  • Joined:29 Aug 2008
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:brooklyn

  • I always call people fools for wanting to learn the hard way....When I'm really the fool for tryna teach 'em

Posted 21 May 2009 - 09:08 PM

ah man, i 4got all bout this thread....the video i saw on that i stated they couldnt even control, with the astronaut stating "someone is gonna get killed" was a documentary, it wasn't on youtube at all, this was about 4 - 5 years ago, i seriously can't remember if it was on tv or the computer i saw it at.

go to the fake moon landing thread on this site and you'll see tons of people stating that the radiation is not enough to harm you, i read it so much. i'm at work now, bout to get outta here, i'll return hopefully 2morrow and try to find more info on that for ya

Side note : whats all this still about not trusting ANY video on youtube??...i've recorded real life experiences and posted it there, i didn't fake any of the videos..honestly, thats where i'd post any video i have or would take...where else am i suppose to put it so know would think whatever i recorded wasn't fake or a joke?

I have less compassion than the average human.

#40    mrbusdriver

mrbusdriver

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,495 posts
  • Joined:19 Dec 2007

Posted 22 May 2009 - 03:56 PM

shaka5 on May 21 2009, 03:08 PM, said:

Side note : whats all this still about not trusting ANY video on youtube??...i've recorded real life experiences and posted it there, i didn't fake any of the videos..honestly, thats where i'd post any video i have or would take...where else am i suppose to put it so know would think whatever i recorded wasn't fake or a joke?


No, to say all YouTube videos are unreliable would be ...unreliable. However, when a video comes along making extraordinary claims, it must be studied carefully. A youtube video is a poor format for accurately presenting all the supporting data, calculations, etc. Toss together some carefully selected scenes, put on some really moving music, some figures, calculations and quotes, and you can make almost anything seem likely...even when it's totally erroneous.

The evidence for the Moon landings is voluminous, but usually not as entertaining as a video. And evidence shows it's pretty easy to sway opinion with music, hypothetical questions, and the right pictures, even when they totally misrepresent reality. (Edit...Dark Side of te Moon video is a classic example...a total spoof that still today some think is a hoax documentary...)

Edited by mrbusdriver, 22 May 2009 - 03:59 PM.


#41    MID

MID

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 14,490 posts
  • Joined:06 Aug 2005
  • Gender:Male

  • ...The greatest error is not to have tried and failed, but that in trying, we did not give it our best effort.

Posted 24 May 2009 - 05:29 PM

shaka5 on May 21 2009, 05:08 PM, said:

Side note : whats all this still about not trusting ANY video on youtube??...i've recorded real life experiences and posted it there, i didn't fake any of the videos..honestly, thats where i'd post any video i have or would take...where else am i suppose to put it so know would think whatever i recorded wasn't fake or a joke?



While people do in fact post some good things on youtube, and while there's nothing to prohibit anyone from posting what they like there...that's the problem as pertains to "evidence" oriented videos which seek to prove silliness, such as an Apollo Moon landing hoax, etc...

Youtube requires nothing but an author to post a video.  There's no peer-review, no scientific corroboration, no references, no research, nothing at all involved with the process, and, as has been shown clearly, multiple times regarding the nonsense videos, they're full of junk, supposition, lack of knowledge and any real research, and generally, are humorous.




#42    Obviousman

Obviousman

    Spaced out and plane crazy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,569 posts
  • Joined:27 Dec 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:South Coast, NSW, Australia

  • "Truth needs no defence. Nobody - NOBODY - can ever take the footsteps I made on the surface of the Moon away from me."
    Gene Cernan, Apollo 17

Posted 07 August 2009 - 03:56 AM

Well, nearly 4 months and so far I have only got one person to sorta answer the questions I posed.

Why?

Still very telling that Turbo has not posted in this thread, considering he is the leading "no moon landing" advocate on the board that I am aware of.


#43    postbaguk

postbaguk

    Conspiracy Theorist

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 977 posts
  • Joined:17 Aug 2006

Posted 07 August 2009 - 12:37 PM

View PostGodsnmbr1, on May 10 2009, 09:40 PM, said:

So just to clarify, you guys are 100% certain that the moon landings were not a hoax, right?  Absolutely no room for doubt, correct?

When asked this question, I generally say I'm 99.99% certain the moon-landings happened, and that I would be prepared to bet my house they happened. Of course, this gets twisted around by some people to say "Ah, so why do you have doubts then?". I don't have doubts. But unless I actually went there, how can I be 100% certain that others did? How can I be 100% certain Hillary climbed Everest? Amundsen reached the South Pole? Bleriot flew over the channel? There's far more evidence to support Apollo, yet no-one seriously doubts those other human achievements. Why? Probably because they didn't involve the 'lying US GovernmentTM'. There's also little money to be made fostering the idea that Bleriot faked his flight across the channel, unlike the Apollo hoax.

It's really easy to fake a mission to the moon. I flew there yesterday. It was cool. Faking the Apollo missions is a different kettle of fish entirely. Difference with Apollo is the absolutely voluminous amount of data in the form of photos, film, TV, rock samples, soil samples, core samples, live tracking and comms data, and plenty of other evidence that in my opinion would have been impossible to fake so incredibly well. If you take the time to properly study the Apollo photographic record alone (getting on for 20,000 images), it quickly becomes apparent that they simply cound not have been taken on some "cheesy moon-set with painted backgrounds", as some suggest.


#44    behaviour???

behaviour???

    Saru's Slave

  • Member
  • 6,763 posts
  • Joined:26 Oct 2008
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:UAE

  • Its is when aspirations come in toe with destiny, are great men manifested

Posted 07 August 2009 - 01:02 PM

It is clear that how blatantly  it reveals that they cannot even built a system that they have already did?
Thanks
B???

Posted Image


#45    mrbusdriver

mrbusdriver

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,495 posts
  • Joined:19 Dec 2007

Posted 07 August 2009 - 01:22 PM

View Postbehaviour???, on Aug 7 2009, 07:02 AM, said:

It is clear that how blatantly  it reveals that they cannot even built a system that they have already did?
Thanks
B???

Can't?...or "won't"? It takes oodles of money to design and build an operational spacecraft and booster, not to mention the massive infrastructure to build, support, and fly it. None of the Apollo manufacturing infrastructure remains, aside from buildings and (heavily modified) assembly and launch facilities.
They are in the early stages of Constellation, which has far different mission requirements than Apollo.

Meanwhile, this government is spending money wildly on clunkers and such, with no mandate to supply a lot of cash for a trip to the Moon or beyond...the national will is not there, and you can't buy that with money.

The nation hasn't decided it wants to go back to the Moon. When it does, then we will.





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users