View New Content

Javascript Disabled Detected

You currently have javascript disabled. Several functions may not work. Please re-enable javascript to access full functionality.

Moon Landing

Started by Pavin, Dec 26 2005 08:39 AM

Next

Please log in to reply

33 replies to this topic

#1 Pavin

96 posts

Posted 26 December 2005 - 08:39 AM

The moon landing was totally fake. They just wanted to beat the Russians probably.
If you've seen it; have you ever asked yourself "How's that guy who's recording going to get back to Earth if he's recording the rocket leave?"

Also; Neil wasn't the first guy on the mood even if it's not fake. The guy recording it is :shifty:

lmao; sorry about the title :oops:

Edited by Chocolate Vans, 26 December 2005 - 08:53 AM.

Back to top

#2 Dan

Resident Know-It-All

6382 posts

Users Awards

Posted 26 December 2005 - 08:41 AM

What if Neil set up the camera equipment on a tripod? What if they left the camera equipment there, transferring signals to Earth?

Back to top

#3 Pavin

96 posts

Posted 26 December 2005 - 08:49 AM

It seems like a human is recording when they show the part where Neil is leaving.

Back to top

#4 Zero DeLocke

2087 posts

Posted 26 December 2005 - 08:51 AM

I like conspiracy theories as much as the next, but this is stupid.

They just wanted to beat the Russians probably.

Uh, yeah. That was the goal of the space race.

"How's that guy who's recording going to get back to Earth if he's recording the rocket leave?"

What if Neil set up the camera equipment on a tripod?

Did you honestly think that they would leave behind someone for that? Come on now. Someone probably did set up some camera equipment to take videos and pictures of Earth and such for future use. If it was Neil, all the more power to him, but it could have been anybody who was on the ship.

Also; Neil wasn't the first guy on the mood even if it's not fake. The guy recording it is

For something as important as this, they probably set everything up to make sure that the world knew who was boss. For all we know, they probably even rehearsed thier lines. This was a powerful moment for America. A big slap in the face to the Russians. They had to play it up.

So, no. I do agree with your theory.

Back to top

#5 XenoCyde

4223 posts

Posted 26 December 2005 - 08:51 AM

mood?

Back to top

#6 Zero DeLocke

2087 posts

Posted 26 December 2005 - 08:52 AM

I'm sure he meant, "moon."

Back to top

#7 redlion

I don't exist!

12072 posts

Users Awards

Posted 26 December 2005 - 09:01 AM

I like conspiracy theories as much as the next, but this is stupid.
Uh, yeah. That was the goal of the space race.
Did you honestly think that they would leave behind someone for that? Come on now. Someone probably did set up some camera equipment to take videos and pictures of Earth and such for future use. If it was Neil, all the more power to him, but it could have been anybody who was on the ship.
For something as important as this, they probably set everything up to make sure that the world knew who was boss. For all we know, they probably even rehearsed thier lines. This was a powerful moment for America. A big slap in the face to the Russians. They had to play it up.

So, no. I do agree with your theory.

In addition, the recorder (that would be Buzz Aldrin) was recording over Armstrong's shoulder, so Armstrong really was the first on the moon.

Back to top

#8 Pavin

96 posts

Posted 26 December 2005 - 09:15 AM

In addition, the recorder (that would be Buzz Aldrin) was recording over Armstrong's shoulder, so Armstrong really was the first on the moon.

But who was recording him taking the first step? Wouldn;t that person be the first man on the moon?

Back to top

#9 redlion

I don't exist!

12072 posts

Users Awards

Posted 26 December 2005 - 09:18 AM

The cameras mounted on the exterior of the space ship?

Back to top

#10 Sakura

2180 posts

Posted 26 December 2005 - 09:24 AM

The American Moon Landing was in 1969. We were sophisticated enough to have multiple cameras that could be directed. And even IF Neil Armstrong wasn't the first off of the ship, all of the crew members were still American's on an American shuttle, rendering this argument pointless.
And uh...yeah, it was called the "Space Race" for a reason. =/

Back to top

#11 |nfinite

181 posts

Users Awards

Posted 26 December 2005 - 01:32 PM

Hm...

Well, I haven't seen the moon landing, so I don't really have an opinion about it. As far as the landing - Perhaps they just happened to land on the dark side of the moon?

Ah, Wtf, I don't know.

Anybody heard of the conspiracy of "The Spear of Destiny"? That's another good one.

How about the Conspiracy Set against Dave Chapelle?

Back to top

#12 Zero DeLocke

2087 posts

Posted 26 December 2005 - 01:38 PM

Anybody heard of the conspiracy of "The Spear of Destiny"? That's another good one.

How about the Conspiracy Set against Dave Chapelle?

How about you make a new thread about those?

Back to top

#13 Tim

2795 posts

Posted 26 December 2005 - 01:42 PM

Hm...

Well, I haven't seen the moon landing, so I don't really have an opinion about it. As far as the landing - Perhaps they just happened to land on the dark side of the moon?

Ah, Wtf, I don't know.

Anybody heard of the conspiracy of "The Spear of Destiny"? That's another good one.

How about the Conspiracy Set against Dave Chapelle?

Ooh, post the Chappelle one ^_^

Back to top

#14 Zero DeLocke

2087 posts

Posted 26 December 2005 - 01:43 PM

Yes, I am curious as to what happen to that fellow. I've been confused.

Back to top

#15 Tim

2795 posts

Posted 26 December 2005 - 01:45 PM

Yes, I am curious as to what happen to that fellow. I've been confused.

The story that's going around is he moved to Kenya or something, I don't know the rest.

Back to top

#16 Zero DeLocke

2087 posts

Posted 26 December 2005 - 01:48 PM

Lets keep this about moon landings.

Dave Chapelle thread

Back to top

#17 Frizzle

M'lord

16889 posts

Users Awards

Posted 26 December 2005 - 01:51 PM

Corey, I know why the flag was waving, it's because the Americans moved it on purpose to be patriotic. I can't remember how though.

Back to top

#18 Alex

6640 posts

Users Awards

Posted 26 December 2005 - 01:59 PM

I watched a documentary on the possibility of the moon landing being fake, long time ago.
There was also some doubt about the crater that the landing shuttle left(or did not leave, I dont remmeber).
I also saw the camera crosshairs overlapping or underlapping things.
It can be fake, and I think there's a high probability it was fake.

Infinite, the spear of destiny is interesting, its that whole Nazi obcession with it right?

Back to top

#19 Frizzle

M'lord

16889 posts

Users Awards

Posted 26 December 2005 - 03:09 PM

1) It's Cody... lay off the pot.
2) It still shows obvious tampering with...

1) Sorry, I keep doing that.

2) The American Government admitted to doing it though..

3) You almost made a post with no grammical errors.

1) It's Cody... lay off the pot.
2) It still shows obvious tampering with...

Back to top

#20 pyke

13686 posts

Users Awards

Posted 26 December 2005 - 08:01 PM

Jeeze people, a probae launched onto the moon could have had the camera, I am pretty sure they didn't ship out camera men if they landed on the moon

Back to top

#21 Pavin

96 posts

Posted 27 December 2005 - 09:09 AM

I've seen it on the computer...
Anyone know if it's possible to get one at a Video Rental store?
haha

Back to top

#22 Guest_Casilla_*

Posted 27 December 2005 - 11:31 AM

I love threads like these, because then I get to explain laws of physics to people! <squeal!>

Now, the SHADOWS.

This is where conspiracy theorists get themselves confused with other theories.

The conspiracy is NOT that there were multiple shadows. There are no moon pictures with multiple shadows (being cast from the same object). I dare you to find me one.

Rather, the problem is with the length and the darkness of the shadows themselves. Some do not think the shadows are long enough, some do not think the shadows are dark enough, etc etc. The problem with this, of course, is that they forget that the moon is not a flat surface, and also, that the sun is reflecting off all parts of the moon - the lunar surface and the astronaunt's suits.

Crazy people!

Stars - why can't you see stars in the sky? Because it's, well, daylight. The camera simply is flooded out by the light of the sun and so therefore, cannot see stars. You can actually try this with a simple camera (not autoexposure, though, I think), where if you set up a really bright light and take a picture at night, you won't see any stars because there is just too much light.

The C rock - there is a picture of a rock with a C in it - thus, it looks like it's a fake. However, in the original image, this C does not appear. Rather, the C was latter added by some hoaxists or perhaps by NASA's team for clarification. I am not sure WHY the C was added later on, but it does not exists in the original images.

The crosshairs - This is perhaps the only true oddity in any of the moon landing photos, I admit. However, with the right conditions, you can recreate it. Basically, the photography - as pointed out in the stars section - was not that great back then. When you have an object that is reflecting a great deal of light, it will bleed over onto other objects. Thus that "glow" effect. Concerning the crosshairs, the reflected light of the antenna bled over - "glowed" over the crosshair, thus that effect that the crosshair is behind the antenna.

You'd also have to realize that IF this were a fake, they'd still have the crosshairs in the camera and not behind the set. And especially if they manipulated the photo afterwords, why would the hand suddenly slip like that? It makes no sense for that to be fake, at all.

The flag - My favourite part! The flag was not "flapping" in the wind. It was...shaking. You do realise that, even if they hadn't admitted to getting it to shake, it could still be shaking from the moment they put it in, right? Hell, the thing could still be shaking right now, thirty-seven years later. It's physics! What's in motion STAYS in motions! There is NOTHING up there to stop that flag from shaking - no resistance at all. It will keep on moving, until it loses some energy in some fashion (contrary to popular belief, the moon DOES have an atmosphere, but a very very thin one, barely there at all - so the thing will stop shaking eventually).

----

And of course, you have to ask, WHY would they fake a moon landing?

To win the Space Race? The Soviets weren't idiots. They would know immediately if the landing was faked - hell, if forty year-olds sitting in their basements can figure out a supposed hoax, don't you think the top scientists of the times could have known it when they saw it? That's leaving alone satellite survalience that I'm sure they had on us all the time, including close watch on our incomings and outgoings.

The Soviets would know if it was a fake at the time that it happened, and they would have called NASA out on it - IF IT WERE TRUE.

Why else? To distract us from the Vietnam War? The Apollo program was started four years before Vietnam, and was planned completely out at that time, even though they did end up cancelling the last three. So unless NASA has some clairvoyents, once again, a silly thing.

Why else? To make MONEY? Ahahahhaa, there's a laugh. NASA got a lot of money, be sure, but they spent all of it funding the missions - plenty of businesses can assure you of that. Why spend all that money to make all those parts, and then SCOUR those parts so that you can put them in museums later? That's a lot of time, money and effort for relatively no motive. They SPENT that money, that is for sure, and they developed a lot of technologies with it. Nobody made any money off of the Apollo missions. They lost out, a lot.

Back to top

#23 Alex

6640 posts

Users Awards

Posted 29 December 2005 - 07:53 PM

The flag - My favourite part! The flag was not "flapping" in the wind. It was...shaking. You do realise that, even if they hadn't admitted to getting it to shake, it could still be shaking from the moment they put it in, right? Hell, the thing could still be shaking right now, thirty-seven years later. It's physics! What's in motion STAYS in motions! There is NOTHING up there to stop that flag from shaking - no resistance at all. It will keep on moving, until it loses some energy in some fashion (contrary to popular belief, the moon DOES have an atmosphere, but a very very thin one, barely there at all - so the thing will stop shaking eventually).

Moon has gravity I believe. Wouldn't it stop it?