Jump to content

Were the moon landings fake?

Recommended Posts

We need vResistance and truthlogic back:)

 

Please, noooooooooooooooooooooooooooo :help:

 

Anyhow - the moon landings were far too tame for that pair pair - even they'd be pushed to claim it was a plot by the illuminati to kill off half the population of the world.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's a bit like the conspiracy theories around the deaths of Presley, Marilyn Monroe etc. I have doubts that the technology to fire a manned space ship was available in the sixties. There are also suggestions that the human body could not have withstood the gforces at the speeds necessary to get there!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
NASA are currently building a rocket to "return" to the moon. After the test flight I believe their statement was the next stage was t work out how to get through the radiation belts safely.

 

Can anyone explain why this needs to be worked out, surely they have previous technology...

 

Working out the radiation level has nothing much to do with people and all to do with modern miniaturised electronics. The smaller the dies used to create the transistors, cpu's and circuitry the easier it is for them to be knocked out by radiation. They need to balance protection, shielding and weight.

 

The reflective mirror argument is false. They could have been placed by remote control. No one doubts we cant get stuff to the moon, just not humans.

 

Trouble is that the retro-reflectors have to be accurately manually aligned to Earth to be any good, they cant just be dropped anywhere.

 

 

Russia may have been eavesdropping on transmissions sent from the moon, however who's to say these didn't originate from earth and just relayed back?

 

The Russians, as they were monitoring broadcasts from the Moons surface and not a relayed transmission.

 

As you can see I'm very sceptical about the moon landings !

 

But like most other sceptics you are wrong.:)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The photo thing has always been something the conspiracy theorists pick up on. Who knows... maybe they were faked - didn't turn out well, solar radiation exposed the film? I dunno. My favourite doubts are -

 

How the hell did they do it with less computer power than a modern calculator?

 

Did they fake it just to win one element of the Space Race?

 

How come, in 40 years we haven't been back?

 

and... the fact that Moon rock is, amazingly, the same composition as Earth rock, thereby adjusting our entire theory of how the moon came into being.

 

But I'm sure we'll find out soon enough - when the Japs turn the moon into a solar power plant.

 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/japan/10480950/Japanese-firm-plans-250-mile-wide-solar-panel-belt-around-Moon.html

 

They will have to shuffle the old Lunar Buggies and Lander platforms out of the way first... Messy Americans.

 

There is only one thing to guarantee that an event is real and that is when the conspiracy theorists pick up on it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
But like most other sceptics you are wrong.:)

 

Indeed, to suggest the Russians didn't dispute it because they weren't capable is ridiculous.

 

Neil Armstrong visited Moscow in May 1970, 10 months after the moon landings, where he was given a tumultuous welcome & wild applause!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Nope.

 

But I'm looking forward to this one:D

 

I'll bring the wine and cider you want to organise the popcorn? We've not had this debate for a while....

 

It'll be chemtrails season again soon as well...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The shadows make no sense. Kodak confirmed they had no film that would be able to be captured then processed at the time of the moon landing. They did not land when they said they did. Absolutely no proof. We have more proof to dispute the landing than there are that they did.

 

I passed the ball over the net… Your go!

 

---------- Post added 09-07-2015 at 23:33 ----------

 

Anyone remember how important you had to be with a roll of film before digital? Anyone remember the leaders in 1969.? Kodak.. Anyone remember as the world leader in photo processing saying…. You could NOT take an image on the moon to then be processed on earth? If Kodak say it is a no go. I believe it.

 

---------- Post added 09-07-2015 at 23:46 ----------

 

This forum has many graphic designers, illustrators, professional and amature photographers. Web designers, Cartoonists etc, etc . And the first thing you need to understand is lighting. And the moon landing images make no sense.

Edited by code word

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
OK... I'll bite. But just on the grounds that the probability of most things is unlikely to be 'zero'. The same scientists that claim the moon landings are real are also in the process of conducting an experiment to find out if our entire existence is, in fact, real...

 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/science/science-news/10451983/Do-we-live-in-the-Matrix-Scientists-believe-they-may-have-answered-the-question.html

 

What does real mean?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The shadows make no sense. Kodak confirmed they had no film that would be able to be captured then processed at the time of the moon landing. They did not land when they said they did. Absolutely no proof. We have more proof to dispute the landing than there are that they did.

 

I passed the ball over the net… Your go!

 

---------- Post added 09-07-2015 at 23:33 ----------

 

Anyone remember how important you had to be with a roll of film before digital? Anyone remember the leaders in 1969.? Kodak.. Anyone remember as the world leader in photo processing saying…. You could NOT take an image on the moon to then be processed on earth? If Kodak say it is a no go. I believe it.

 

---------- Post added 09-07-2015 at 23:46 ----------

 

This forum has many graphic designers, illustrators, professional and amature photographers. Web designers, Cartoonists etc, etc . And the first thing you need to understand is lighting. And the moon landing images make no sense.

 

Kodak never said such a thing

 

Film is actually more forgiving of exposure errors than a CCD

 

You have to understand that the lander was wrapped in reflective tinfoil. Much like your head it seems.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What does real mean?

 

Ooh. Deep :c)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
We need vResistance and truthlogic back:)

 

The shadows make no sense. Kodak confirmed they had no film that would be able to be captured then processed at the time of the moon landing. They did not land when they said they did. Absolutely no proof. We have more proof to dispute the landing than there are that they did.

 

I passed the ball over the net… Your go!

 

---------- Post added 09-07-2015 at 23:33 ----------

 

Anyone remember how important you had to be with a roll of film before digital? Anyone remember the leaders in 1969.? Kodak.. Anyone remember as the world leader in photo processing saying…. You could NOT take an image on the moon to then be processed on earth? If Kodak say it is a no go. I believe it.

 

---------- Post added 09-07-2015 at 23:46 ----------

 

This forum has many graphic designers, illustrators, professional and amature photographers. Web designers, Cartoonists etc, etc . And the first thing you need to understand is lighting. And the moon landing images make no sense.

 

As if by magic... :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now you are not saying that theres a conspiracy for vResistance to appear as if by magic are you? :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.