Moonlanding Conspiracy theories

[Maurepas]

The biggest way to kick a conspiracy theorist in the nuts over this is tell him to get ahold of a *good* quality telescope (One of the upper end Celestron series) or visit an observatory. You can actually see the descent stages of the LEM's if you know where to look.

No electronic shit, just good optics is all you need.

The world's manufacturers of telescopes are in on it too!

Conspiracy theories. Immune to reason, always have been, always will be.

True, you will always have some level of whackjob that would disbelieve it even if you took them there...

The Telescope idea though is a good way to shut up the, I guess intermediate level whackos.

Just because you can see it now doesnt mean they didnt fake it the first time,

[UNIverseVERSE]

True, you will always have some level of whackjob that would disbelieve it even if you took them there...

The Telescope idea though is a good way to shut up the, I guess intermediate level whackos.

Nah, it's easy. It was placed there on automated missions to throw people off the scent, just like the mirrors that are on the Moon, and the soil samples, which were fetched by robots. Just to complicate things, unfortunately, there are pieces of debris on the Moon from automated missions, and soil samples brought back by robots.

Never, ever, underestimate the lengths a conspiracy theorist can go to to justify their bullshit.

[The Naacal]

True, you will always have some level of whackjob that would disbelieve it even if you took them there...

The Telescope idea though is a good way to shut up the, I guess intermediate level whackos.

Nah, it's easy. It was placed there on automated missions to throw people off the scent, just like the mirrors that are on the Moon, and the soil samples, which were fetched by robots. Just to complicate things, unfortunately, there are pieces of debris on the Moon from automated missions, and soil samples brought back by robots.

Never, ever, underestimate the lengths a conspiracy theorist can go to to justify their bullshit.

There is that...bullshit is the only thing deeper then deep space it seems

[UNIverseVERSE]

There is that...bullshit is the only thing deeper then deep space it seems

Well, yes. Once one has successfully denied most of physics, logic, and common sense, it's not particularly tricky to attribute some alternate explanation to the evidence of one's own eyes.

*For example, and in order: the Van Allen belts would have been lethal, that at least 6 different techniques were inconsistently applied to create the pictures from the Moon, and that the USSR wouldn't have exposed the whole thing in 20 seconds.

[Blouman Empire]

1. Have you tried photographing stars at the middle of the night with such an old camera? It does not work that way, the stars light could not outshine the sun and earth on the picture, it is a foucus issue on the lens.


No stars here either, the earth landing is a fake!

2. The sun is also reflecting on the moons surface, without an atmosphere the shadows go haywire.

3. Video transmission and photography are different technologies, a direct taken photoshot will alwyas be better then a video even today.

1) Yes I have and you attempt to prove your statement to me with a photoshopped image of the moon is dishonest. Not to mention that in your photo the moon takes up a larger amount of the photo then the Earth in the other photo

2)Umm yeah I said that we have two sources Sunshine and Earthshine, now we take that into fact then the shadows from these two sources the lights are some of the shadows are heading in the wrong way. As for your haywire bit what a load of bull a shadow is just where the light hasn't reached because an object is deflecting the light around it and so the light doesnt reach there. Why would u have a shadow facing towards a source of light?.

3)Hmm maybe but the other 2 points still hold

[Blouman Empire]

Nope, totally genuine.

Using a fake photo as proof does not prove your statement.

Because the Earth was more 'astonishingly brilliant'. As any photographer knows, taking a well exposed picture of a very bright object means that less bright objects will seem dim or just disappear. In this case, those were the stars.

Except there are no stars.

Oh, where? A look at it from here doesn't seem to show any shadows going the wrong direction, although you may have forgotten that the lunar surface is quite reflective -- as a result, what appears to be shadows can actually simply be ground at a different angle.

Where? If you can't see it you either aren't looking hard enough or don't want to look because then it will prove you wrong. We take into effect the two sources of light and we have shadows going another way not just those from the Earth and the sun.

Yes, that's because they were taken with different cameras. Of course, this photograph wasn't even taken on the Apollo 11 mission, so I'm not sure what video footage you're referring to.

That's right it wasn't taken on the Apollo 11 mission because there was no Apollo 11 mission.

[Phenia]

That's right it wasn't taken on the Apollo 11 mission because there was no Apollo 11 mission.

Do tell me you're joking.

[Blouman Empire]

Do tell me you're joking.

The only thing I am joking about is the stupidity of the majority of people that believe that the US landed on the moon 40 years ago.

[Phenia]

Do tell me you're joking.

The only thing I am joking about is the stupidity of the majority of people that believe that the US landed on the moon 40 years ago.

Oh, right. Ha ha, we're all stupid. That's pretty funny alright!

[Blouman Empire]

Oh, right. Ha ha, we're all stupid. That's pretty funny alright!

So you have nothing to go against my claims apart from refusing to see the truth (geez you sound just like a creationist) and resort to sarcasm.

Yep that's real intelligent.

[Non Aligned States]

1) Why isn't there any stars around the Earth? Esepically when Yuri Gagarin, pronounced the stars to be "astonishingly brilliant".

Yuri Gagarin wasn't looking at them with the sun as his backdrop. By the light angle, the image was taken with the sun at the cameraman's back, washing out whatever light the stars could have given.

2)We can clearly see shadows from craters go in opposite directions. Why is this? Well one may say from the sun and from the Earth, but even taking that into consideration one shadow is still falling the wrong way.

Where?

3)The video footage is of poor quality yet amazingly the photos are perfect.

What a shocker. Still photo's of higher quality than videos. Next you'll tell me those photo's of mustard gas burn victims from WWI are fake because they're of higher quality than the video footage of them.

[Phenia]

Oh, right. Ha ha, we're all stupid. That's pretty funny alright!

So you have nothing to go against my claims apart from refusing to see the truth (geez you sound just like a creationist) and resort to sarcasm.

Yep that's real intelligent.

Excuse me? Your claim that everyone who disagrees with you is stupid? That's not a claim, that's just obnoxious bullshit unworthy of anything but scorn and derision.

[Non Aligned States]

So you have nothing to go against my claims apart from refusing to see the truth

We're funny people here on NSG. We don't take any claims of "Truth" seriously. Not without reliable sources and a whole lot of proof, much less an argument as to why the next biggest challenger in the race went along with the game rather than saying the American's were a bunch of fraudsters.

[Blouman Empire]

Yuri Gagarin wasn't looking at them with the sun as his backdrop. By the light angle, the image was taken with the sun at the cameraman's back, washing out whatever light the stars could have given.

So now we have shadows heading left and right when the sun is behind them and should be casting shadows toawrds the Earth

Where?

Are you blind? Look in the forground there are shadows heading left and right.

What a shocker. Still photo's of higher quality than videos. Next you'll tell me those photo's of mustard gas burn victims from WWI are fake because they're of higher quality than the video footage of them.

Already dealt with Dude.

[Blouman Empire]

Excuse me? Your claim that everyone who disagrees with you is stupid? That's not a claim, that's just obnoxious bullshit unworthy of anything but scorn and derision.

No I claim that people who believe the government and NASA that we landed on the moon 40 years ago are acting stupid. It doesn't mean they are stupid just they are showing stupidity in believing this bullshit.

[Non Aligned States]

So now we have shadows heading left and right when the sun is behind them and should be casting shadows toawrds the Earth

Are you blind? Look in the forground there are shadows heading left and right.

You're seeing things that aren't there.

[Blouman Empire]

We're funny people here on NSG. We don't take any claims of "Truth" seriously. Not without reliable sources and a whole lot of proof, much less an argument as to why the next biggest challenger in the race went along with the game rather than saying the American's were a bunch of fraudsters.

Just because dem heartless commies believed it too doesnt mean it isnt true. Oh and you are yet to bring any real truth to the table apart from some say so on people in on the conspiracy and some footage filmed in Houston.

[Blouman Empire]

You're seeing things that aren't there.

Sorry I made a mistake they are near the back of the moon.

[Non Aligned States]

Sorry I made a mistake they are near the back of the moon.

Why don't you try outlining them, because I still don't see what you're talking about.

Just because dem heartless commies believed it too doesnt mean it isnt true.

There's this funny thing called radar. And telescopes. It lets people observe far away objects they wouldn't see with the naked eye. The Soviets had plenty of both and reason to track any such missions to the moon. They didn't need to believe anything.

Oh and you are yet to bring any real truth to the table apart from some say so on people in on the conspiracy and some footage filmed in Houston.

The lunar laser ranging modules are quite easily used to prove things if you have the right equipment. And if you have a good enough telescope and know where to look, you can see the landing module. Here's some reference coordinates.

[Blouman Empire]

Why don't you try outlining them, because I still don't see what you're talking about.

Because I don't know how to add arrows to a picture then place it on the forum.


Doesn't make my statement not true.

There's this funny thing called radar. And telescopes. It lets people observe far away objects they wouldn't see with the naked eye. The Soviets had plenty of both and reason to track any such missions to the moon. They didn't need to believe anything.

The lunar laser ranging modules are quite easily used to prove things if you have the right equipment. And if you have a good enough telescope and know where to look, you can see the landing module. Here's some reference coordinates.

Oh cool so I'll just go to my Observatory I have out back oh wait...




Alright I've had my fun, just to let everyone know I do think that 40 years ago Neil Armstrong took his first steps on the moon.

In order to come up with some of these reasons I had to go looking for what the theorists where saying and try and repeat them see what people said while giving people someone to argue about.

However, I have a few questions

What's this thing about shadows going in all directions because there is no atmosphere?

IIRC Doesn't the footage show Neil Armstrong landing on the moon from outside the module? If so where is this camera?

Why has NASA destroyed the orginal footage? Sounds like a stupid thing to do

[Phenia]

Excuse me? Your claim that everyone who disagrees with you is stupid? That's not a claim, that's just obnoxious bullshit unworthy of anything but scorn and derision.

No I claim that people who believe the government and NASA that we landed on the moon 40 years ago are acting stupid. It doesn't mean they are stupid just they are showing stupidity in believing this bullshit.

What weaselly horseshit.

[The South Islands]

IIRC Doesn't the footage show Neil Armstrong landing on the moon from outside the module? If so where is this camera?

Mounted on the Lunar Module. Armstrong pulled a ring before crawling down the ladder to deploy it to capture the moment.

Why has NASA destroyed the orginal footage? Sounds like a stupid thing to do

NASA recorded the original slow scan broadcast on Telemetry tapes, as only a backup in case something went wrong with the live broadcast. Since the live broadcast was without problems, the original recording was deemed unnecessary, and recorded over like other telemetry tapes. Retrospectively, a mistake. However, copies of the telemetry tapes may still exist, but they have yet to be found.

[The Naacal]

There was a camera mounted on one of the other legs of the Descent Stage of the LEM. That's what got Armostrong's picture.

[Blouman Empire]

What weaselly horseshit.

This tends to be your posting style people disagree with you and the best you usually come up with is your arguments are shit without any refutation of their argument.

[Blouman Empire]

Mounted on the Lunar Module. Armstrong pulled a ring before crawling down the ladder to deploy it to capture the moment.

The module wasn't at big was it?

NASA recorded the original slow scan broadcast on Telemetry tapes, as only a backup in case something went wrong with the live broadcast. Since the live broadcast was without problems, the original recording was deemed unnecessary, and recorded over like other telemetry tapes. Retrospectively, a mistake. However, copies of the telemetry tapes may still exist, but they have yet to be found.

The biggest thing for NASA to accomplish and they treat it like some ordinary mission.