OK, enjoying this - more reasons it's the con of cons, trick of tricks and sleightiest sleights of hand ever.
1/ There may well be legit reasons for the pictures to look like they were done with a dodgy curtain from Aunty Mabel and some black and white paint but I don't know what they are. Look at the split between the ground and the mountainline it is great. It had me fooled till I saw the tea stains.
2/ The US flag on the underside of the lunar lunchbox is illuminated perfectly despite being in absolute pitch black that you'd need a 50inch plasma from fujistus to really appreciate. I know you played with those pictures NASA - you sprayed till you ran out of stars and stripe paint.
3/ Is the moon hot or is it cold? Who knows 'cos apparently wearing a full body oven glove protects from both hazards. Its so hot in the sun (so they say) that the mean temp is about 107 degrees celcius reaching a max of 123 degrees. You sweaty stinkers would have been cooked in your own juices I don't care if you pretended to carry a homemade fridge in your backpack - fridges don't work in space...
4/ Stars - where are you - no I don't mean the ones with moonscape or astronauts in them - they'd wash out the twinklers of course - no I mean the celestial lightshow that would astound us if you took some pics of the clear sky, you've got no smog, no atmospheric scattering of ground light and you just spend all your time taking perfect shots of each other you selfish gits. Let's be honest there was no point in taking any more than one shot of an astronaut since you all looked the same you muppets - give me Jupiter from the moon, Mars - they'd have looked awesome..no..another shot of a spacesuit..oh go on then.
5/ Dust, dust clouds of dust, I've had the misfortune to shovel ash from a fire and its like a dandruff blizzard. You guys bounce about all day and you don't scatter tons of fine particulate matter in fountains into the sky..ah of course that would obscure the pictures of boinging spacehoppers. Admit it - its just flour - no-one will hold it against you. As an aside - I love the footprint you made under the lander - how you must have chortled when you did that and lifted the lander over it - hehe everyone grab a landing strut.
6/ I have to agree though that there is absolutely no point in heading back to the moon , I mean how yesterday is that, you've got several hundred pounds of kiln cooked rubble (oops sorry moon rock) why on earth bother to head back - I mean once you've seen one crater you've seen them all. I agree with the converted here - there really is no point in reaching the moon, not even as a joint venture using current technology and as a shared earth uniting project, nah just fanny about with the space station that's much more inspiring.
Funky - I went to the moon and all I got were these lousy cataracts - D - you're marvellous when roused..grr.
Moon Landings - Real or Fake?
by Black Man 89 Replies latest jw friends
-
Qcmbr
-
horrible life
Qcmbr, I didn't know you had such a great sense of humor. Dry, just the way I like it.
-
knock knock
Qcmbr, I didn't know you had such a great sense of humor. Dry, just the way I like it.
Dry or half baked?
-
Qcmbr
Found out what happened to the Japanese moon surveyor - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SELENE - delayed (possibly having problems with some of the scale models ;) So by the end of this year or the next we'll be able to find out if its all true!! I expect to be able to look at GoogleMoon in full res - mind you they still haven't got full Earth coverage yet - my street is still apparently covered in a layer of wallpaper paste or its a top secret military establishment.
-
funkyderek
Qcmbr, I didn't know you had such a great sense of humor.
Neither did I. I feel a bit stupid now. I actually thought he was serious. In my defense, he apparently does really believe that Jesus went to America along with a lost tribe of Israel, so I assumed from that, that he also genuinely believed the wacky nonsense he's been spouting in this thread. It was only with his latest post where he ramped up the crazy another notch that I realised he must be having us on.
The biggest clue was that the photos, which he previously described as "David Bailey quality" now "look like they were done with a dodgy curtain from Aunty Mabel and some black and white paint". And "tea stains". Brilliant! I should have realised earlier as he had been similarly inconsistent in his previous post, but I put it down to the idiocy of the conspiracy theorist.
Qcmbr, I'm sorry. Your humour was just too subtle for me. Well done. The whole bit about pretending you think that because the sky is black, the moon should be dark is just too funny for words. I'm glad I realised you were taking the piss or I would have implied that you were unimaginably stupid and ignorant. And "fridges don't work in space" - gotta love that.
Oh, and the idea that they should have been taking pictures of Jupiter - first class craziness. All in all, a sublime parody of the sort of nonsense that rattles around the fringes of the Internet.
-
Caedes
Maybe they found that we were already there. Some say there was a worldwide flood. And they point to lots of evidence. They say men was more advanced than he is today. The reason the ark was made out of wood is because the trees were bigger before the flood than they are today. And wood is the best material to make a ship out of. Steel cracks under pressure if it is not tempered properly. Any ways the gods destroyed men before the flood. And now we live shorter lives and use less of our brains. At least thats a story thats out there.
1) And your evidence to back up your claim that we had already been to the moon before the Apollo missions is what exactly?
2) Idiots say that, because there is no scientific evidence to back up the bible myth of a worldwide flood. They point to "evidence" that has been thoroughly refuted.
3) Who says men where more advanced, and in what peer reviewed scientific journal?
4) Yes, there have been bigger trees in the distant past, trees in noah's day were the same size they are now.
5) Is that why modern ships are all made out of wood? Wood is a good material because it floats, but wood requires as much careful preperation as steel does, it also needs more experienced builders since it has differing strengths dependant on which direction you use it.
6) You only need to temper steel if the situation requires it and if you have done something to make it brittle in the first place i.e bend it, harden it etc Steel is not a brittle material and doesn't readily crack, it is a ductile material usually. Which is why modern ships are made out steel and not wood.
7) Your evidence for the statement that the "gods" have destroyed man before the "flood" is what?
8) No all evidence is that we are living longer lives, I can see some evidence that some of use don't use our brains fully but the idea that we only use a fraction of our brains is complete nonsense, although if you have some evidence to back up your claim feel free to present it.
9) Story is about right because you are awfully light on facts.
If you are going to make wild claims then you should have some serious evidence to back them up.
-
Abaddon
Blackman
why hasn't NASA been able to send a man to the moon since the 1970s?
'Hasn't been able' and 'Hasn't' are two different things. They could have, but lack of political will, public interest, and tangible benefit resulted in no money being allocated to it; in fact, I think the last three missions, 18, 19 ad 20, were cancelled as finding was reduced.
The whole space program seems to have taken several steps back in the last 30 years,
See above; no steps back per se, but although the computers now are incomparable to the jumped-up pocket calulators they flew Apollo, lack of consistent incremental development means that whilst mobile phones look incomparable to the first ones made, Orion is basically Apollo on steroids.
The dumb capsule re-entry mode is also very safe. The Shuttle has a 1% fail rate and NASA know another total loss would put back any pans they had. Apollo on steroids fufills the mission requirements with less risk and cost than something inniovative or bleeding edge.
looking over some of these moon landing conspiracy sites raised some great questions about the original one. What do you think?
I think you should spend time going over the moonlanding conspiracy de-bunking sites, that's what I think.
Warlock
Who knows? I do.
I bet not one skeptic of the moonlandings can go through the rebuffing of the conspiracists that are freely and easily available on line and show us where those rebutals of conspiracist nonsense are wrong.
darth frosty
Without being mean your post shows exactly how rigourous most people's research is
and who took all of the pictures of them landing and taking off from the moon?
First, please find me footage of a moon landing, as in the Lunar Module alighting on the surface of the moon taken FROM the moon. There is none. You know so little about it you make false claims out ofignorance rather than intenion to decieve.
Second, have you heard of things called remote controls and tripods? These devices would amazingly allow remote videoing of Lunar Module departures.
Now, why not actually read one of thew websites that rebuff the conspiracist nonsense? Surely it is embaressing making comments you wouldn't make had you spent five minutes checking your facts?
needproof
Anybody familiar with the Van Alan radiation belt?
Yes, are you familiar with Wikipedia? Check the references supporting the rebuff of the conspiracist position.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moon_landing_conspiracy#Ionizing_radiation_and_heat
The Moon is ten times higher than the Van Allen radiation belts. The spacecraft moved through the belts in just 30 minutes, and the astronauts were protected from the ionizing radiation by the metal hulls of the spacecraft. In addition, the orbital transfer trajectory from the Earth to the Moon through the belts was selected to minimize radiation exposure. Even Dr. James Van Allen, the discoverer of the Van Allen radiation belts, rebutted the claims that radiation levels were too dangerous for the Apollo missions. Dosimeters carried by the crews showed they received about the same cumulative dosage as a chest X-ray or about 1 milligray.[57] Plait cited an average dose of less than 1 rem, which is equivalent to the ambient radiation received by living at sea level for three years
Qcmbr
and half the reason is that it winds up purists like AlanF
'Purist?' Is this a new sciencephobic fantasists way of saying 'realist' or 'educated'?
PS, winding up blowhard fantasists is fun for me, don'tchakno? If the standard of cynicism displayed in your humour towards the evidence of the moon landings was applied to the evidence of Mormonism you would reject your religion. How's that for a punchline?
Don't worry, just winding you up
brinjen
You mean you never really looked for a convincing explanation... it took me five minutes, and I am sure there is nothing wrong with you that would stop you doing the same if you tried.
~
I cannot undersand how people believe rubbish like this.
The deceptively reasonable nature of the arguements, the careful selection of data and exclusion of other data, the demonstrable errors in claimed facts, the misrepresentation of data, the use of out-of-context quotes... the little thrill knowing you know something millions don't.
... that list of problems with and attractions of JW beliefs can be applied to most Conspiracy theories.
I cannot imagine how people here who figured out they were being deceived by a cult cannot see that Conspiracies like this are just more deception.
The moon-landing conspiracy and the 9/11 conspiracy theories both assume tens of thousands of people can keep a secret, that none would not be greedy or incautious enough to break the silence such conspiraciess require, that the planning of such massive conspiracies can be conducted flawlessly.
You may as well believe the universe flew out of my arse if you are that credulous. Sorry to be blunt, but sometimes things that are laughable should be laughed at even if hurts your ickle feelings; by all means, show what I've asked to be shown and prove me wrong.
Any of you conspiracy folk want to buy a fragment of the true cross?
-
horrible life
Some of you are soooo bad!!!!! Others, please consider the following:
Noah, tempered steel????
-
kenai
But if they were real, why hasn't NASA been able to send a man to the moon since the 1970s?
It couldn't have anything to do with that pile of cash visible from the moon they needed to get there in the first place, could it?
On the second thought how could have they landed on the moon since earth is flat and held by a giant turtle that goes all the way down, no room for tiny human craft to fly about without being smitten by a hungry turtle, there is shortage of flies in space too. Not to mention the need to penetrate through crystal spheres, that would have destabilized entire universe.
-
Brother Apostate
Can't be absolutely proven one way or the other.
Either way, it was a huge waste of money that could have accomplished something way better for humanity.
NASA is for the most part a huge burden to taxpayers and should be scrapped.
BA- Skeptic.
