Was the landing on the moon a fake?

[Rogers]

Hey guys-- take a look at this! Maybe ol' THC's onto something after all!

You might have something there, Mac. The plane may have been involved in an early barium-seeding experiment carried out by the Illuminati for the forthcoming New World Order, and flew just a bit too high. Seems they've also started experimenting with more natural disperal mechanisms...

[deee757]

In responding to the most asked questions about the hoax (#10. Fluttering Flag: The American flag appears to wave in the lunar wind.
#9. Glow-in-the-Dark Astronauts: If the astronauts had left the safety of the Van Allen Belt the radiation would have killed them.
#8. The Shadow Knows: Multiple-angle shadows in the Moon photos prove there was more than one source of light, like a large studio lamp.
#7. Fried Film: In the Sun, the Moon's temperature is toasty 280 degrees F. The film (among other things) would have melted.
#6. Liquid Water on the Moon: To leave a footprint requires moisture in the soil, doesn't it?
#5. Death by Meteor: Space is filled with super-fast micro meteors that would punch through the ship and kill the astronauts.
#4. No Crater at Landing Site: When the Lunar Excursion Module (LEM) landed, its powerful engine didn't burrow a deep crater in the "dusty surface."
#3. Phantom Cameraman: How come in that one video of the LEM leaving the surface, the camera follows it up into the sky? Who was running that camera?
#2. Big Rover: There's no way that big moon buggy they were driving could have fit into that little landing module!
#1. Its Full of Stars!: Space is littered with little points of lights (stars). Why then are they missing from the photographs? )

Here is NASA's response
http://archives.cnn.com/2001/TECH/sp...oon/index.html



NASA should be giving us more information than that. I seen better rebuttals on this thread than NASA's effort.

[scorpion]

Landing was not a fake... but the images was

[Nooksack]

They recently had a Mythbusters o Discovery Channel that addressed the "Lunar Wind", "Light in the Dark side of the Lunar Lander", "Footprint", "Walking-on-the-moon Stop-Time theory" and "Multiple Light Source" conspiracy theories and they were actually able to debunk all of those myths. Additionally, they fired a laser from an observatory to the moon and got negative returns except at the one coordinate where the astronauts placed a sophisticated mirror array that returns light from any angle, proving that there is a man-made object on the moon.

It's a pretty good show anyways, but that was a particularly interesting episode.

[MacShreach]

Landing was not a fake... but the images was

(sigh)
1 Actually read this thread
2 Eat your hat
3 End of this exchange

[GinX]

In responding to the most asked questions about the hoax (#10. Fluttering Flag: The American flag appears to wave in the lunar wind.
#9. Glow-in-the-Dark Astronauts: If the astronauts had left the safety of the Van Allen Belt the radiation would have killed them.
#8. The Shadow Knows: Multiple-angle shadows in the Moon photos prove there was more than one source of light, like a large studio lamp.
#7. Fried Film: In the Sun, the Moon's temperature is toasty 280 degrees F. The film (among other things) would have melted.
#6. Liquid Water on the Moon: To leave a footprint requires moisture in the soil, doesn't it?
#5. Death by Meteor: Space is filled with super-fast micro meteors that would punch through the ship and kill the astronauts.
#4. No Crater at Landing Site: When the Lunar Excursion Module (LEM) landed, its powerful engine didn't burrow a deep crater in the "dusty surface."
#3. Phantom Cameraman: How come in that one video of the LEM leaving the surface, the camera follows it up into the sky? Who was running that camera?
#2. Big Rover: There's no way that big moon buggy they were driving could have fit into that little landing module!
#1. Its Full of Stars!: Space is littered with little points of lights (stars). Why then are they missing from the photographs? )

Here is NASA's response
http://archives.cnn.com/2001/TECH/sp...oon/index.html



NASA should be giving us more information than that. I seen better rebuttals on this thread than NASA's effort.

10. The flag was threaded with rods to try and force a fluttering appearance.
9. That's what full EVA Suits are for. How do you think astronauts on the Space Shuttle take their "space walks"?
8. From the surface of an object that has no atmosphere, has a highly reflective surface and has another astral body between it and the sun, that's going to happen.
7. Yes...those scientists down here on Earth could not have possibly made materials to withstand that kind of heat
6. Nope...you can leave a pretty good print in dry sand or soil...especially in a place that has one-sixth the gravity of Earth.
5. There are not sheets of "micro-meteors" covering the blanket of space. Ever hear of a thing called telemetry?
4. Why would it?
3. Hmm...yes...no such thing as automation....
2. Ever head of modular units?
1. For the same reason you don't see a sky full of stars while in the middle of L.A. but see zillions of them if you go up in the mountains: too much light.

Now, here's a little question that all these conspiracy lovers have yet to answer: Why the hell would we want to fake a moon landing? So NASA could get more money? Nonsense...they are already a government agency, the government would have to be in on it. To one-up our Russian comrades because the Cold War was on? Again, nonsense. If this really was a hoax, Russian scientists would have been able to spot this immediately...AND taken great delight in exposing that fact to EVERYONE.

So, again, I ask....why?

When you conspiracy lovers come up with rational reason for a fake moon landing, only then will I even consider you to possess rationality.

[deee757]

again, that's more information than NASA has provided, no matter how vague your answers were.

[xact]

The so-called "lunar rocks" are obvious fakes, as the moon is actually made of cheese:
http://uncyclopedia.wikia.com/wiki/I...e_of_cheese%3F

[MacShreach]

The so-called "lunar rocks" are obvious fakes, as the moon is actually made of cheese:
http://uncyclopedia.wikia.com/wiki/I...e_of_cheese%3F

ROFLOL

I was about to say something like "Jesus are you kidding--this thread still going on?"

But that made me laugh.

[deee757]

I think the cheese theory and the actual moon landing theory are running neck and neck