Author Topic: Faking the moon landings  (Read 23078 times)

Offline molesworth

  • Earth
  • ***
  • Posts: 189
  • the curse of st custards
Re: Faking the moon landings
« Reply #75 on: May 04, 2018, 05:25:43 PM »
i liked the comment 'the people making the nuts a bolts wernt present on the set' lol. would it not have occurred to all these people that something dodgy was going on if they were asked to build a movie set and a huge vacuum chamber

There's also a good point that Jason made. We have evidence that a rocket was launched. We have evidence of a space ship operating in LEO. If you ask a bunch of engineers to build a space rocket, they are going to build a space rocket that works. If they can't, they're going to tell you they can't and then they are part of the hoax too.
And before long you have 400,000 people (plus the CIA death squads watching all of them) who want something like $100,000 a year each for life (conservative estimate).

That comes to something like 2 trillion dollars spent so far on covering up the "hoax".  It would definitely have been cheaper just to go to the Moon  ;D
Days spent at sea are not deducted from one's allotted span - Phoenician proverb

Offline Luke Pemberton

  • Uranus
  • ****
  • Posts: 1823
  • Chaos in his tin foil hat
Re: Faking the moon landings
« Reply #76 on: May 04, 2018, 05:28:30 PM »
That comes to something like 2 trillion dollars spent so far on covering up the "hoax".  It would definitely have been cheaper just to go to the Moon  ;D

Before I am beaten to it this time...  ;D

Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former - Albert Einstein.

I can calculate the motion of heavenly bodies, but not the madness of people – Sir Isaac Newton.

A polar orbit would also bypass the SAA - Tim Finch

Offline AtomicDog

  • Mars
  • ***
  • Posts: 340
Re: Faking the moon landings
« Reply #77 on: May 04, 2018, 05:39:01 PM »
God, I love British humor!

Sorry, I meant humour!
"There is no belief, however foolish, that will not gather its faithful adherents who will defend it to the death." - Isaac Asimov

Offline Count Zero

  • Mars
  • ***
  • Posts: 347
  • Pad 39A July 14,1969
Re: Faking the moon landings
« Reply #78 on: May 04, 2018, 05:56:13 PM »
Give me time to do some research (as in, rewatch From the Earth to the Moon and Apollo 13), and I'll do a column about it for the film site I write for.  But the short version is, yeah, dust and movement.  I suppose you could CGI the dust, though it's awfully expensive and time consuming for something only a handful of people care about.

(Sorry I'm late)  They actually tried this in the IMAX movie "Magnificent Desolation - Walking on the Moon in 3D".  They used a hard floor sculpted to look like an uneven surface, and CGIed the dust kicked by the actors' boots and their footprints.  "A" for effort, but "C-" for results - They couldn't produce anywhere near the number of particles required for each step, and the footprints lacked resolution, especially in the spray of ejecta around them.
"What makes one step a giant leap is all the steps before."

Offline Bryanpoprobson

  • Jupiter
  • ***
  • Posts: 698
  • Another Clown
Re: Faking the moon landings
« Reply #79 on: May 05, 2018, 12:30:41 AM »


“Or my little effort regarding pendulums”

To me it looks like there is a drought causing the bag to continue swinging, and the little maths lesson at the end doesn’t disprove this.


“Drought?” Taking account of the fact there is no atmosphere on the moon, let’s humour you and pretend there is. If there was a “draught” the bag would still have a periodicity closer to 1 swing per second in Earths gravity field. It is the period of the bag that proves it is in a reduced gravity field something that would be very hard to duplicate on Earth. Plus the lack of atmospheric drag is the reason the motion is not damped, which is indicative of it being in a vacuum.
"Wise men speak because they have something to say!" "Fools speak, because they have to say something!" (Plato)

Offline Obviousman

  • Mars
  • ***
  • Posts: 418
Re: Faking the moon landings
« Reply #80 on: May 05, 2018, 01:32:47 AM »
Stop interrupting Cambo's fantasies with annoying facts!

Offline smartcooky

  • Uranus
  • ****
  • Posts: 1662
Re: Faking the moon landings
« Reply #81 on: May 05, 2018, 02:16:02 AM »
i liked the comment 'the people making the nuts a bolts wernt present on the set' lol. would it not have occurred to all these people that something dodgy was going on if they were asked to build a movie set and a huge vacuum chamber

There's also a good point that Jason made. We have evidence that a rocket was launched. We have evidence of a space ship operating in LEO. If you ask a bunch of engineers to build a space rocket, they are going to build a space rocket that works. If they can't, they're going to tell you they can't and then they are part of the hoax too.
And before long you have 400,000 people (plus the CIA death squads watching all of them) who want something like $100,000 a year each for life (conservative estimate).

That comes to something like 2 trillion dollars spent so far on covering up the "hoax".  It would definitely have been cheaper just to go to the Moon  ;D

It would be much, much cheaper to just send the CIA hit squads to take out all the high profile Hoax Believers. After all, the Deep State Alphabet Soup Military Industrial Complex can do anything, right? How hard could it be to have The Blunder and his ilk meet with a series of unfortunate accidents?
► What you can assert without evidence, I can dismiss without evidence
► When you argue with idiots you risk being dragged down to their level and beaten with experience.
► Conspiracism is a shortcut to the illusion of erudition

Offline Abaddon

  • Saturn
  • ****
  • Posts: 1055
Re: Faking the moon landings
« Reply #82 on: May 05, 2018, 05:29:56 AM »
i liked the comment 'the people making the nuts a bolts wernt present on the set' lol. would it not have occurred to all these people that something dodgy was going on if they were asked to build a movie set and a huge vacuum chamber
And there is a massive hole in CTist thinking, if such it can be called.

There were some 400,000 people directly involved in the Apollo project. They would have to all be in on the hoax.

No, the CT nutter claims, only a few at the top would have to be in on it. (50-100 is the usual guess).

Really? Well in that case, the other 399,900 were also deceived and thus built the Apollo vehicles to spec, right? And if they built the Apollo hardware to go to the moon then what the hell was to stop them going to the moon?

Offline Jason Thompson

  • Saturn
  • ****
  • Posts: 1481
Re: Faking the moon landings
« Reply #83 on: May 05, 2018, 08:25:10 AM »
I'm not even going to bother addressing cambo's Apollo stuff because he has already stated nothing from NASA or a third party is admissible as proof, and all of science is wrong. However:

In a way it is, not because it’s fake science, but because it’s bad science. Take the dark matter theory, it’s possible they just got gravity wrong, and if that turns out to be the case, then Apollo and any other missions involving planetary orbits, sling shots and the likes, all go in the hoax bin.

This is absolutely not how science works. If gravity is 'wrong' in relation to dark matter, invoked to explain the apparent 'missing mass' on a galactic scale, that makes no difference to the equations (Newtonian or Einsteinian) used to determine the observed behaviour of objects on a planetary system scale. Having to redefine gravity to better explain the apparent missing mass in galaxies doesn't stop it from working on this scale, and certainly doesn't confine all of spaceflight beyond LEO to the 'hoax' bin.
"There's this idea that everyone's opinion is equally valid. My arse! Bloke who was a professor of dentistry for forty years does NOT have a debate with some eejit who removes his teeth with string and a door!"  - Dara O'Briain

Offline molesworth

  • Earth
  • ***
  • Posts: 189
  • the curse of st custards
Re: Faking the moon landings
« Reply #84 on: May 05, 2018, 08:39:05 AM »
This is absolutely not how science works. If gravity is 'wrong' in relation to dark matter, invoked to explain the apparent 'missing mass' on a galactic scale, that makes no difference to the equations (Newtonian or Einsteinian) used to determine the observed behaviour of objects on a planetary system scale. Having to redefine gravity to better explain the apparent missing mass in galaxies doesn't stop it from working on this scale, and certainly doesn't confine all of spaceflight beyond LEO to the 'hoax' bin.
Don't you understand - all of science is wrong!!  Apparently the Illuminati / lizard people / aliens have controlled all of human knowledge for millennia, convincing us with their wily equations that the Earth is a sphere, that gravity pulls things down, and that the Moon isn't made of cheese.

This ancient conspiracy was put in place to control the populace, and keep us from finding out the truth, since that would be a bad thing, because... erm... ah...  No, it's to keep us in our place and away from their precious MONEY!  Or something...

It's simple really :
  • Get sheeple to believe in silly science.
  • ? ? ? ?
  • PROFIT!!
Days spent at sea are not deducted from one's allotted span - Phoenician proverb

Offline Bryanpoprobson

  • Jupiter
  • ***
  • Posts: 698
  • Another Clown
Re: Faking the moon landings
« Reply #85 on: May 05, 2018, 08:45:39 AM »


In a way it is, not because it’s fake science, but because it’s bad science. Take the dark matter theory, it’s possible they just got gravity wrong, and if that turns out to be the case, then Apollo and any other missions involving planetary orbits, sling shots and the likes, all go in the hoax bin.

This is absolutely not how science works. If gravity is 'wrong' in relation to dark matter, invoked to explain the apparent 'missing mass' on a galactic scale, that makes no difference to the equations (Newtonian or Einsteinian) used to determine the observed behaviour of objects on a planetary system scale. Having to redefine gravity to better explain the apparent missing mass in galaxies doesn't stop it from working on this scale, and certainly doesn't confine all of spaceflight beyond LEO to the 'hoax' bin.

Absolutely, the two theories you mention being a case in point, relativity does not say that Newtonian physics or equations derived from Newton’s theories are wrong, but it does show why some observations of the universe are not exactly what you would expect from Newtonian physics in isolation.
"Wise men speak because they have something to say!" "Fools speak, because they have to say something!" (Plato)

Offline Jason Thompson

  • Saturn
  • ****
  • Posts: 1481
Re: Faking the moon landings
« Reply #86 on: May 05, 2018, 08:58:13 AM »
Absolutely, the two theories you mention being a case in point, relativity does not say that Newtonian physics or equations derived from Newton’s theories are wrong, but it does show why some observations of the universe are not exactly what you would expect from Newtonian physics in isolation.

This is something many HBs fail to understand. 'Science' is not some weird stuff done by men in white coats with nothing to do with the 'everyman' on the street. Newton's and Einstein's equations are not some obscure technobabble. You can literally apply them to anything you want to observe on a scale we can see without significant optical aid and see them work. I can use Newton's equations of motion to tell me how long a hammer will take to fall if I drop it, what path a ball will take if I throw it, how the Moon moves it its orbit, and when I should expect to see Mars in the sky. Whatever new theories may emerge from cosmology in regards to gravity on universal scale, it makes no odds to the methods used to calculate the trajectories of spacecraft.
"There's this idea that everyone's opinion is equally valid. My arse! Bloke who was a professor of dentistry for forty years does NOT have a debate with some eejit who removes his teeth with string and a door!"  - Dara O'Briain

Offline LunarOrbit

  • Administrator
  • Jupiter
  • *****
  • Posts: 813
    • ApolloHoax.net
Re: Faking the moon landings
« Reply #87 on: May 05, 2018, 11:54:03 AM »
“Stop it with the insults and attitude or you won't last long”

Noted.

I also want you to start using the quote feature, please. It makes your posts easier to read, and it also let's us know who you're talking to. It's pretty easy to do, you just wrap the quoted text inside opening and closing quote tags. Like this:

Code: [Select]

[quote]
Quoted text goes here.
[/quote]


You can cite the person you're quoting by adding "author=username" to the opening quote tag, like this:

Code: [Select]

[quote author=cambo]
Quoted text goes here.
[/quote]


There is even a button in the post editor to simplify it for you so that you don't have to manually type the quote tags. It looks like this:

Just highlight the text you want to turn into a quote and then click that button.

Quote from: cambo
“A tell - all book "I Worked on the Moon Hoax" with proof (secret photos, work orders, pay stubs) would make the author a lot of MONEY!”

You’ve been given a ton of money to stay quiet, where is your logic?

I hate to bring current day politics into this, but Stormy Daniels and Karen McDougal were given a ton of money to stay quiet, but they exposed their affairs with President Trump any way. Bribery doesn't guaranty silence if someone with more money comes along to entice you to speak.

You can deny or ignore all of the facts if you want, but you don't have logic on your side. If going to the Moon is impossible for some reason, NASA could have saved themselves a lot of money (and embarrassment) by just coming right out and saying so. Why was it necessary to fake it? To fool the Russians? But I thought the Russians were in on it too?

Quote
“As a matter of fact, cambo, why don't you write your proof of the moon hoax into a book and have a best seller? Don't you want to make a lot of MONEY!?”

What proof?

Exactly. You have no proof, so why should we take you, or your logically flawed argument, seriously? NASA says they went to the Moon, and they provided thousands of photos, hours of video and audio, and physical evidence like unflown spacecraft and Moon rocks to back up their claims. You have nothing but the greatest hits of Jarrah White that have been debunked for years.

Quote
“Serious question - how much money would it take to buy your silence for the rest of your life?  Think about it for more than a couple of minutes.  A hundred bucks?  A thousand?  A million?  A million a year?”

A couple of hundred grand would do me at my time of life, but for someone a lot younger, maybe five million.

And what if someone offered you $10 million to break your silence? Or what if, at the end of your life, you decided "hell, I don't need money anymore, so I'm going to throw a wrench in the machine and expose the hoax!"?

Quote
“How much money would the first person who could credibly expose the Apollo missions as a hoax make by comparison?”

What good is money if you are dead?

See my comment above regarding death bed confessions.

Quote
“And countless more who didn't work for NASA at the time of Apollo, but still have (or will have) the capability to expose the hoax.”

You know the answer to that one, but I’ll humour you. The people making the nuts and bolts weren’t present on the movie set.

Do you really think only the people present on the movie set would be capable of exposing a hoax like that?

If, for example, NASA claimed the Van Allen radiation didn't pose a risk when it really did, that would be a lie they can't control. They can't stop someone else 5 years, 10 years, 50 years, 100 years, or 500 years later from studying the radiation and discovering that NASA lied about it. They can't stop someone else from going to the alleged Apollo landing sites and discovering there are no footprints.

The hoax would be 100% guaranteed to fail eventually, and NASA would know that... so why do it? This is why the hoax theory fails the logic test, even if you ignore all of the other evidence that the Moon landings really happened.

Quote
“And this means that to continue to protect the hoax, new generations have to be made privy to the secret as older generations die off; so continues the possibility of exposure.”

By new generations, do you mean the sons, grandchildren and great grandchildren of the film crew and NASA’s top brass?

You're not thinking big enough. Why limit it to just the "friends & family" of people who worked for NASA? Why are they the only ones that you believe could expose the hoax?

Quote
Let the original hoaxers go to their graves...

Again, why do you believe the hoax would die with them? How do you stop other people with scientific curiosity, or commercial endeavors, from discovering the truth? And remember, the lie would have to be protected for the rest of time. It doesn't go away just because the original perpetrators have died.

Quote
“And as for the dusty sand, would you care to explain why the material on the ground looks and behaves like a cohesive powder - similar to flour or talcum powder?”

No it doesn’t, it looks like sand, you are only seeing what you want to see.

Have you never driven down a dirt road and left a mile long dust cloud behind you? That doesn't happen in the Apollo footage.
It suddenly struck me that that tiny pea, pretty and blue, was the Earth.
I put up my thumb and shut one eye, and my thumb blotted out the planet Earth.
I didn't feel like a giant. I felt very, very small.
- Neil Armstrong (1930-2012)

Offline nomuse

  • Jupiter
  • ***
  • Posts: 859
Re: Faking the moon landings
« Reply #88 on: May 05, 2018, 01:00:04 PM »
Did Magic Sand just come back?

Quick, someone prep the Special Radiation Ovens, let them know they're up next.

Offline gillianren

  • Uranus
  • ****
  • Posts: 1791
    • My Letterboxd journal
Re: Faking the moon landings
« Reply #89 on: May 05, 2018, 01:17:15 PM »
As it happens, I agree that 400,000 people wouldn't have had knowledge when making the Apollo missions that they were helping a fake, since those figures include people like "the people who made mission patches."  Mission patches for a fake mission would be exactly the same as mission patches for a real one!  On the other hand, I think about 100,000 people would have had the knowledge to be sure the missions they were working on were fake.  That's a lot of people to keep quiet.  I also agree that the alleged hundred people doesn't even include the people required to even approximate the Apollo footage, especially with 1969 technology.  Much less however many people it takes to fake all the other physical evidence, like rocks and soil samples and physical effects of space travel on astronauts.
"This sounds like a job for Bipolar Bear . . . but I just can't seem to get out of bed!"

"Conspiracy theories are an irresistible labour-saving device in the face of complexity."  --Henry Louis Gates