1969 Man on the moon

Jake just called everyone a communist and I doubt he'll return to this thread so...


Did you watch the video? That's how I convinced Den.

No. I'm too lazy lol.

Watch it. Or I become hacker and force you to watch.

If you become hacker you first need learn you're grammars.

The more I read about these so called lunar landings the more ridiculous the whole thing is, in 1969 the technology just wasn't advanced enough to put man on the moon, even today NASA have admitted it would be very difficult if not impossible to put man on the moon and they don't know how they managed it in 1969 because a mysterious fire burned down the place the records were kept. A bit convenient that wouldn't you say? And we're led to believe that those astronauts spent eight weeks in space getting there and when they landed they felt like playing golf and jumping around. The whole thing was filmed at night in the New Mexico desert that's why the CIA refuse to let anyone analyse the so called moon rocks that were brought back. There's even photos of the New Mexico desert with the exact same landscape as the moon landing footage, another coincidence? And why we're there no stars? Being in space you would think there would at least be a couple.

« Last edited by Sanzano on Oct 17th 2016 »

If you have ever been up to Teide in Tenerife (where they have filmed a number of films) there are parts we call lunar landscape for that reason.
They could have easily done it here too and had no problems.

Matt77 said:

If you become hacker you first need learn you're grammars.

*a [hacker]
* to [learn]
* your
* grammar


Hehe batch

Dan - You know I was taking the **** out of you don't you? Oh wait, you're a Kiwi that's right.

Warrior13 -

Sanzano said:

The more I read about these so called lunar landings the more ridiculous the whole thing is, in 1969 the technology just wasn't advanced enough to put man on the moon, even today NASA have admitted it would be very difficult if not impossible to put man on the moon and they don't know how they managed it in 1969 because a mysterious fire burned down the place the records were kept. A bit convenient that wouldn't you say? And we're led to believe that those astronauts spent eight weeks in space getting there and when they landed they felt like playing golf and jumping around. The whole thing was filmed at night in the New Mexico desert that's why the CIA refuse to let anyone analyse the so called moon rocks that were brought back. There's even photos of the New Mexico desert with the exact same landscape as the moon landing footage, another coincidence? And why we're there no stars? Being in space you would think there would at least be a couple.

Can you please investigate for us??? Perhaps also take images of the Breaking Bad set while you're there?

« Last edited by Matt77 on Oct 17th 2016 »

Matt77 - IK, I was playing along. You wouldn't know because you're an Aussie =).

Maybe you should drink some water with ice because the heat seems to be getting to your head.

If it was faked, which I don't think it was, it definitely didn't happen here (New Mexico). We had Trinity and Aliens. That's it.

Are those stage cameras's I see on the top left hand side of the picture? No way that flimsy spacecraft covered in tin foil landed on the moon. Where are the stars? The photo looks too staged for my liking.



« Last edited by Sanzano on Oct 18th 2016 »

Have you noticed that its day in the photo. The sun is up. How many stars do you see during the day on earth?

« Last edited by testuser on Oct 18th 2016 »

I don't know, it all looks very suspect to me, regardless if it is night or day they still look like stage light cameras on the top left of the picture and how do you explain getting past the Van Allen Belts with only tin foil as protection.

IF they were going to fake a photo, they would make sure there weren't any 'stage lights' in it.

The Van allen belts are potentially dangerous yes. Certainly you wouldnt want to hang around in them. But they aren't everywhere and they aren't instantly deadly. Same as the radiation that it present all over the earth in places.

This is from wikipedia, so is not necessarily totally trustworthy. But it might help.
"The Apollo missions marked the first event where humans traveled through the Van Allen belts, which was one of several radiation hazards known by mission planners.[30] The astronauts had low exposure in the Van Allen belts due to the short period of time spent flying through them. Apollo flight trajectories bypassed the inner belts completely to send spacecraft through only the thinner areas of the outer belts.[24][31]"

"Astronauts' overall exposure was actually dominated by solar particles once outside Earth's magnetic field. The total radiation received by the astronauts varied from mission to mission but was measured to be between 0.16 and 1.14 rads (1.6 and 11.4 mGy), much less than the standard of 5 rem (50 mSv) per year set by the United States Atomic Energy Commission for people who work with radioactivity.[30]"

The 'tin foil' that you see in the photos is a thermal blanket surrounding the craft made up of 25 layers of materials to protect it.
"The various layers were composed of material such as kapton, mylar, aluminum, nickel foil, glass wool, titanium, and gold."

Still not convinced about the tin foil...

John Mauldin, a physicist who works for NASA, once said shielding at least
two meters thick would be needed. Yet the walls of the Lunar Landers,
which took astronauts from the spaceship to the moons surface were, said
NASA, 'about the thickness of heavy duty aluminum foil'.

This one made me laugh, if you look closely in the astronauts visor you can see Stanley Kubrick filming.



What about all these discrepancies Lol...

* They managed to adjust their cameras, change film and swap filters in
pressurized clubs. It should have been almost impossible without the use
of their fingers.

Award winning British photographer David Persey is convinced the pictures
are fake. His astonishing findings are explained alongside the pictures on
these pages, but the basic points are as follows:

* The shadows could only have been created with multiple light sources
and, in particular, powerful spotlights. But the only light source on the
Moon was the sun.

* The American flag and the words 'United States' are always brightly lit,
even when everything around is in shadow.

* Not one still picture matches the film footage, yet NASA claims both
were shot at the same time.

* The pictures are so perfect each one would have taken a slick
advertising agency hours to put them together. But the astronauts managed
it repeatedly.

* Apollo 14 astronaut Allen Shepard played golf on the Moon. In front of
a worldwide TV audience, Mission Control teased him about slicing the ball
to the right. Yet a slice is caused by uneven air flow over the ball. The
Moon has no atmosphere and no air.

* A camera panned upwards to catch Apollo 16's Lunar Lander lifting off
the Moon. Who did the filming?

* One NASA picture from Apollo 11 is looking up at Neil Armstrong about to
take his giant step for mankind. The photographer must have been lying on
the planet surface. If Armstrong was the first man on the Moon, then who
took the shot?

* The pressure inside a space suit was greater than inside a football. The
astronauts should have been puffed out like the Michelin Man, but were seen
freely bending their joints.

* The Moon landings took place during the Cold War. Why didn't America
make a signal on the moon that could be seen from earth? The PR would have
been phenomenal and it could have been easily done with magnesium flares.

* Text from pictures in the article. Only two men walked on the Moon
during the Apollo 12 mission. Yet the astronaut reflected in the visor has
no camera. Who took the shot?

* The flags shadow goes behind the rock but doesn't match the dark line in
the foreground, which looks like a line cord. So the shadow to the lower
right of the spaceman must be the flag. Where is his shadow?

* And why is the flag fluttering?

lol I read out all of your points to my friend and he tried so hard to make points against it.

That evidence looks pretty solid but surely if it was faked they would've found out in the 47 years since it happened.

If America admitted that they never went to the moon and the whole thing was staged they will be the laughing stock of the world. It will come out eventually...

I never said America would admit it. I'm saying if America faked it, surely in the 47 years since, someone somewhere in the world would've been able to find out.

Personal friends of both Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin have stated both men recieved death threats to keep their moon landing secrets.