Were the moon landings fake?

[melthebell 862]

15 hours ago, ez8004 said:

Wow.  The level of uneducated drivel is strong.

 

NASA's Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter in 2009 clearly displayed pictures of the past landing sites which still show the presence of equipment left behind by the Apollo missions.  This is just one example that proves that the moon landings are real.

Yeah but that one was faked too

Edited May 11, 2019 by melthebell

[Robin-H 11]

15 hours ago, MAC33 said:

The word astronaut should clearly be changed to reveal its true meaning. 

 

Astro not.

Oh my god I think you've solved it. Those sneaky sneaky people at NASA thought no one would crack that ingenious code! 

[Crosser 10]

I think I'll point Dave Gorman at this topic.

 

I'm sure he'd have great fun making a "found poem" from this lot LOL

[Waldo 96]

On 10/05/2019 at 18:45, swarfendor437 said:

https://www.wakingtimes.com/2015/03/20/if-the-moon-landings-were-real-then-why-is-nasa-stumped-by-this/

 

Perhaps the thread should have been cited as "Is the moon fake?*

 

 

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCW4k9vXjgOSDcYq6Ge9hWWg

I wonder what actually causes the artefact though?

[MAC33 10]

59 million a day from the taxpayer and in return they give us various CGI and underwater videos faking 'space'.

 

 

 

Edited May 19, 2019 by MAC33

[ez8004 10]

25 minutes ago, MAC33 said:

59 million a day from the taxpayer and in return they give us various CGI and underwater videos faking 'space'.

 

 

 

If you think NASA is just about space then you are pretty deluded. 

 

As as an example, NASA came up with computational topography that is used in MRI. How many lives has MRI saved in modern medicine?

 

Who am I trying to kid? You don’t believe in vaccines either. So why did you turn to modern medicine when you got hit by a speed boat?

[MAC33 10]

Modern mediSIN is great if you need patched up after suffering a serious trauma.

 

To take their Big Pharma pills without question is stupid.

 

On topic - do you believe NASA has ever gave us fake images instead of real unaltered photos?

 

All their pics of the earth from the ISS are clearly fake.

[Mikes10 10]

Well Mac33 are the following fake:

1957, USSR, first dog in space: Laika
1957, USSR launched Sputnik-1
1961, USSR, Yuri Gagarin became the first man in space

 

[Longcol 597]

3 hours ago, MAC33 said:

On topic - do you believe NASA has ever gave us fake images instead of real unaltered photos?

 

All their pics of the earth from the ISS are clearly fake.

How can you tell they're fake - or did you learn it from the University of Youtube?

 

What would you expect a picture of Earth to look like from the ISS?

[melthebell 862]

The fake almost never happened

https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p07804tz

[bendix 10]

The worst and scariest thing about these conspiracy theory nuts is not that they all believe such nonsense and when they believe one thing - landings are a fake - they tend to also be anti-vaccers, flat-earthers, Trump voting idiots also.  No I can live with that.

 

The worst thing is how proudly they proclaim their stupidity, wearing it like a badge of honour.

 

 

[Robin-H 11]

11 minutes ago, bendix said:

The worst and scariest thing about these conspiracy theory nuts is not that they all believe such nonsense and when they believe one thing - landings are a fake - they tend to also be anti-vaccers, flat-earthers, Trump voting idiots also.  No I can live with that.

 

The worst thing is how proudly they proclaim their stupidity, wearing it like a badge of honour.

 

 

Did you catch that documentary on Netflix about Flat Earth believers?

 

It's quite hilarious and worth a watch. I was dubious at first as I think giving any oxygen to this sort of thing can be problematic, but the documentary included people demonstrating the very basic science as a rebuttal to their very silly claims, so nobody watching it would be under any illusion as to the absolute absurdity of their position. 

 

The funniest bit was the flat earthers trying to do their own experiments to prove their point. Don't get me wrong, I think doing experiments to gain a greater understanding of something is brilliant. The trouble was when the experiments came back and disproved their theories, they didn't change their theories, they just invented reasons as to why they didn't show what they wanted (such as 'heaven rays' disrupting the equipment, etc).