NASA LIES and other musings....

[Kingster]

Haha sorry I find it all too tedious to bother watching videos.

I guess the conversation went something like this back in the 60s

Hey like dude we should go to the moon man.

Yeah we should, but like hey dude we can't really do that can we?

No but like we could fake it man!

Totally awesome dude! I have a 120 billion dollar fake moon landing budget so I say let's do it!

Yeah but like maybe we we need to blow up a few astronaut dudes along the way man you know make it look real.

Totally dude. And we we need to like fake it at least 6 times man and pay all those Astro dudes never to tell.

Yeah and pay the Russians off too man as they would know for sure that we didn't go.

Awesome!

[Mulder]

Its fascinating to compare the views of people on here and on the interweb, the one's who agree/sympathise with a theory stay quiet and watch from the fringes, the one's who feel that their cozy world view is being threatened go on the offensive. `The only difference on here is the lack of offensive language, otherwise the responses are broadly the same. The people who are the most vociferous almost never look at any of the material as if just looking at it is toxic.

 

For years we all get drip fed these images from space, the ISS the Mars Rover the Russians, Chinese etc and we take it for granted that its real because its on Sky News or CNN and they never lie do they? Unfortunately the media is owned/controlled by the same people who want to perpetuate the lie so unless you make the conscious decision to look beyond the 'facts' that you are presented with you will always fall back on your long held beliefs and lash out at anything that contradicts them.

 

One of my videos appears to show a NASA astronaut supposedly in space let slip that he is actually on earth not far from the student who was asking him a question. Why are people so quick to believe one video from NASA that supports their world view and then reject a video from the same organisation when something opposes that view?

 

It's interesting too that the Apollo hoax is one of the least contentious that I could have presented, I am certain that you couldn't handle the debate on 911 so I will keep that one off here, at least for now.

 

Any psychologists on here, you could write a pretty good thesis on the whole conspiracy debate on the web!

 

Spooky

[DonPeffers]

Pity no one has been to the Moon since December 1972--I remember when we could go every 6 months; even for a drive and a game of golf.

 

To quote Dale Carnegie 

 

“A man convinced against his will 

Is of the same opinion still”

[dombanks]

Anyone for popcorn?

Can't I get gin with it?

[Mark (smokey mow)]

how long does dawn last on the moon?

Spooky

quite a lot longer than on earth as the moon rotatation on its axis is 28 times slower than that of the earth. If Dawn last's 15 minutes on earth then it'll last for 7 hours on the moon.

[Kingster]

Well the Internet is full of tin foil hat conspiracy theorists. Just not sure what place it has here? Is there some evangelical urge or desperate need to convert Westfield owners to the fold?

Or is this an attempt to wind Scott up?

I for one like the pretty pictures NASA provide fake or not.

[Blatman]

If the NASA moon landings were faked, why didn't/haven't the Russians exposed them as fake? 

I'm ready for the answer to be that the Russians and the USA are conspiring to keep the secret, but why?

And if the Russians "know" they were faked, surely the Chinese and North Korea know as well. Why would they miss such a massive opportunity to discredit their biggest enemy/competitor/whatever? Or are they all in it together? What do they gain by keeping the secret?

 

Unfortunately the media is owned/controlled by the same people who want to perpetuate the lie

Ah the age old "the media is controlled" beloved of conspiracy theorists everywhere. Again, there are MILLIONS of journalists out there. Some of them must be sitting on this "well known truth". Why not expose it and set the record straight? What is it that makes every single one of them keep the "secret"? 

[Kingster]

One thing that I'd wonder, if I were a conspiracy theorist, is why did they make so many "mistakes" on the Moon landing that were later proved not to be. Such as the lack of stars that were on the photos and flags waving in the "wind". Every conspiracy loon banged on about this as 'proof' and yet it was just something nobody had considered until it actually happened. Later on the science behind the 'why' made sense, but only after someone 'noticed' it. A bit like the Moonwalk - nobody ever 'guessed' that was the way you'd walk on the moon, every Sci-Fi effort always showed people just walking slowly, so if they were faking it in some Holywood studio, why didn't they fake it better (more as expected) so people wouldn't ask questions?

[Lawrie]

Another anomaly to ponder, the photos from the moon were taken on a Hasselblad camera strapped to the astronauts chest, the camera is basically a metal box. The temperature on the moon is just over 250 degF or about 125 degC so the temperature inside the camera could have been 150-180 degC. The camera wasn't digital in 1969 so it had the same type of film stock as an old 35mm camera but in a larger format. If you have any old rolls stick one in the oven the next time you're cooking your tea and see how long it lasts.

Also, NASA shot hundreds of frames which each needed its own film back, the astronauts would have to return to the lander to change rolls. The temperature in the lander would also be over 150 degC, the astronauts would presumably have to enter the capsule, turn on the aircon, replace the oxygen, take off their gloves change the film and go out again releasing all the air or pumping it into storage. Just how much air, water and power did they have for 3 days on the moon considering every ounce of weight means more fuel?

Spooky

 

They were not standard Hasselblads, and were specially built for the moon, so I assume were insulated, radiation proof, and ridiculously expensive.  The film was specially made by Kodak, with a very wide latitude to allow for the bright and dark.  Instead of 12 shots to the roll, there were 150. 

 

The photos do show a little "photoshopping" (as we now call it) but given the extremes of bright and dark this has to be expected, but given the reflections from the ground, wasn't as bad as expected. 

 

Much of this was covered in an episode of Mythbusters, and whilst they aren't the most accurate and reliable laboratory in the world, on about 6 tests, they proved genuine, and replications on the movie lot didn't work.  Myth Confirmed I'm afraid, and let's face it, the Russians would have told us if it was fake

[Blatman]

There was a Mythbusters dedicated to proving the moon landing conspiracies. It was interesting. But I guess as it's in "the media" they were being controlled to produce results that fit in with the views of the believers. Oh well...

[B.RAD]

I LOVE conspiracy theories. I love the creativity and the ingenuity that people put in, both to the original 'event' and the theories to dispel it. However, the one thing I find a little frustrating about the typical proposers, on either side, is that they NEVER put forward a balanced argument. It's either 100% real, or 100% fake, with no ground given. Why can't someone just say, "actually, it's entirely possible that NASA could have gone to the moon - x Y and z evidence suggests it was possible, however there is a b and C that suggests it didn't happen." Conspiracy Theorists always blame the layman (ie. Me) for being ignorant for believing what were told, then demanding we believe what they're telling us, which makes me doubt the statement presented. Put forward a balanced, factual debate, wrought with actual information, and I will listen and absorb with interest!

The video of the NASA astronaut saying 'across from where we are now' - is that really empirical evidence of a hoax, or just a normal human, on camera, under a pressured environment (ever tried presenting on camera? I have, it's daunting) saying something he didn't mean? What if he'd been trained to give that response in their training centre, and when he learned to say it, it was true? Not questioning the truth, just putting an opposing and equally as valid explanation IMHO forward.

[Captain Colonial]

I need to talk to this man!!

Appreciate your predicament Scott, you believe in him as family, others believe in the media because we're conditioned too, in the end there's only one truth, we either went or we didn't. The body of evidence suggests we didn't, maybe we will find out but I'm not holding my breath for an answer.

Spooky

Not a predicament for me at all - he and his giant brass balls went to the Moon. He is not a liar, he's the bravest, smartest, most honest man I've ever met.

There is a body of suspicions, not a body of evidence. As Blatman says, if it was faked, why did the Russans not expose it? And how did they get the 500,000 people who worked on it to keep it secret as well? To what end?

Finally, please explain how several reflectors are on the surface of the Moon that anyone with a sufficiently powered laser can fire at them and get a return signal, thereby proving Man placed them there.

It's good to question that which we do not understand. But in science, it is up to the scientist to not only develop a theory and provide the evidence but the undeniable proof of its accuracy as well - they do not think of a theory and tell others to prove it isn't true.

If you're happy in your beliefs, good for you. I'm very content in mine.

[Kingster]

I'd be really interested to know exactly HOW they faked the moon landing footage. I mean the technology to record that amount of video simply didn't exist - and they'd have to record it in order to slow it down to give the Moonwalk effect.

For the OP - you like your videos - you seen this one

[dombanks]

There was a Mythbusters dedicated to proving the moon landing conspiracies. It was interesting. But I guess as it's in "the nedia" they were being controlled to produce results that fit in with the views of the believers. Oh well...

Blatters you are obviously in pay of "the man" .... those videos are absolutely proof that it's all bunkem. Or is it just a case of poorly chosen words and comments that prove little more than people when on the spot/have limited time say daft things?

.... any hoo... its time for dinner. I can hear my brother talking... "Let's eat dad"

[Kingster]

Oh - by the way - welcome to the club Mulder - you should really introduce yourself and tell us about your car  - and I'm being serious