Niel Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin are scams! Noone has ever set foot in outer space. Anyone who has a video of the moon landing will realise that it was fake after reading through this website. there was also a television show which showed it was fake early 2003 in Australia, my dad showed that to me. Read the reasons why the moon landing was fake and why the giant leap for mankind was untrue in this website and in many others.
Believe me. its all fake. They are scams. Noones ever set foot on the moon. one of the reasons is because:
The flag was fluttering on the moon, there is no wind on the moon because there is no atmosphere. The tv show said they sent a spaceship into outer space, but it didnt go to the moon, it orbitted the earth to convince people that they were in outter space. They did all the filming in studios.
yep well its certainly true. once again, how can the flag be blowing in the wind when there is no wind (the guy didn't fart either) if he did, he would float away in his suit that would then be a balloon!
Well, Michael believes in things. for example, he believes that Coca-Cola will kill you if you fall asleep after drinking it. No word yet on his stand on the hot topic of the Easter bunny.
The flag was not blowing in the wind, it had to do with how the flag was designed. Let me ask you something, and I want you to answer it: Do you think they went to ALL the trouble to fake the moon landing, ALL the trouble to hide it, and then they "accidently" made it so the flag blew in the wind? That makes no sense at all.
99 percent chance that the above post is 100 percent correct.
Pete Nattress Cheesy Bits img src/uploads/sccheesegif
Registered 23/09/2002
Points 4811
14th December, 2003 at 11:52:05 -
yeah, if they wanted to make a fake, they'd have at least made it half decent.
"Noone has ever set foot in outer space."
uh-huh. so what about all those space stations that keep flying over our heads?
i quite frankly don't CARE whether the moon landing was fake or not. it's not like the world would stop if it was. although i did hear that neil armstrong was told to say whatever he said about moon cheese. so much for improv!
You must have a lot of free time to find stuff like this, don't you?
If they did this in a studio, then how did they do the low gravity effect without showing the strings? There wasn't as much movie technology back then. We'd be able to see the strings supporting the astronauts if it was done in a studio in the 60s.
I wonder if Mike is serious or not. Maybe he's laughing his head off that we took so much time out of our day to flame him. Now for my two words on the topic.
Oh god not this again. I've heard all sorts of arguments in favour of the hoax theory and have come to the conclusion that it would've been easier for NASA to actually go to the moon than to fake it.
Anyone who understands basic physics can dispell most of the arguments. For example the "fluttering" flag: There's no wind, so the flag had to be stretched out accross a horizontal rod, hence it looks stretched. Notice that the flag is only waving about because someone is holding it. They are causing the flag to wave, not wind. The lack of resistance means it waves more freely than it would on earth.
still, you have no explanation to why all the excessive heat and radiation didn't fry them
and why we've never even tried to get back there later
"If Darl McBride was in charge, he'd probably make marriage unconstitutional too, since clearly it de-emphasizes the commercial nature of normal human interaction, and probably is a major impediment to the commercial growth of prostitution."
-- Linus Torvalds, December 5th 2003.
(Darl McBride is CEO of The SCO Group)
this place sucks but don't tell anyone, it's our little secret, ok?
I always questioned that footage of Neil baby taking his one small step being filmed from the outside of the thing-y ma bob! Wtf is that???
People say that they mounted a camera on the side but I thought the weight ratio thing was all important so why would they add more work by adding a camera??
Show me the power child,
I'd like to say,
That I'm down on my knees today,
Gives me the butterflies,
Gives me away,
'Til I'm up on my feet again,
I'm feeling outshined.
of course i have free time, im on school holidays. I have a belief that its a fake landing, i dont care what others post, i only post this because i try to show people. Not make them believe anything. So yes... as HOSJ said, I am laughing at everyone because they're flaming is just a waste of their own time. I don't care how many people hate me on TDC, im not doing anything wrong on the rules. And i'm not breaking the rule of "disturbing the peace" because it is your own fault for clicking on this topic! So once again. I laugh at all of you who have flamed me and failed (which is all of you). HaHAHAHAhA!
Michael R. How does "I have a belief that its a fake landing, i dont care what others post, i only post this because i try to show people. Not make them believe anything." fit with "Believe me. its all fake. They are scams." ?
First we have to believe you and then we dont?
Ive seen so called evidence that it is fake, also a tv program earlier this year. The trouble with that program was its clear goal. To prove its theory, that the moon landings are fake. The program totally lacked diversity. A change for the opponent to defend himself.
Ive also visited a website that proves how the scam theory is wrong. As for the "moving flag" the solution is obvious and allready posted. The flag only moves when the astronauts are touching it. Now if I wave a flag on earth with an atmosphere, I can make it move. Without an atmosphere (resistance) the flag still moves (more?) when I move it/touche it?
The single largest non scientifical reason why its not a scam is the fact that the theory makers on one hand believes NASA had all the money and abillities (they were oh so clever) to make it fake, on the other hand NASA was not clever enough to do it properly??? That makes no sense.
Don't you know reading conspiracy theories is bad for you Michael?
Why, if you read too many of them you stay up all night and can't get to sleep. And reading them over prolonged periods can cause irreversable damage to your liver and stomach. There are words used in conspiracy theories that are even consindered harmful chemicals and highly toxic on there own. Your just lucky those words are mixed up with normal less potent words that don't do your body harm.
According to scientists, if you read more than 5 conspiracy theories in an hour you can die. That's how dangerous they really are.
Beware everyone drinking caf... i mean reading conspiracy theories is harmful to your health and can KILL YUO.
MUGGUS
Come and annoy me more at
www.muggus69.tk STOUT ANGER!!!
Assault Andy Administrator
I make other people create vaporware
Registered 29/07/2002
Points 5686
15th December, 2003 at 04:07:12 -
What about all those people with Jobs at the spacestations and stuff? Do you think they get paid to sit at a building and do nothing all day?
The reason the flag is flapping (according to NASA and virtually every other expert who actually knows what they're talking about) is because the arm of the person holding the flag is moving, which creates the illusion of a flapping flag.
There's no wind in a studio either, and I doubt it's something that the creators of such a high profile 'fake' would not think of. Considering that they would have needed to take into account the time delays for radio transmissions, getting the wirework perfect to simulate low gravity (considering this is 1966, before wirework was quite at The Matrix standard).
It's easy to challenge things this way, the moon landing is just the one that got more publicity.
Eg:
.How do you know Saddam has been caught? Because America told you, and released footage of the most doubled man in all history. Very fakeable indeed.
.How do you know that half the theoretical scientific discoveries of the past age work? Because the scientists who earn money from those theories and supposedly understand them tell you that they do.
.How do you know that Al Qaida had anything to do with 9/11? Simply because the USA said so, and A/Q admitted to it (as did many other groups).
.How do you know that Elvis is dead? Because you've been told.
If people want to believe in a conspiracy story, they'll find some way to rationalise it. 'The brain is a marevelous invention, capable of letting us find reasons to believe whatsoever we want to believe'. I forget what famous person said that, heh
and why we've never even tried to get back there later
We have... about 8 times. There were about 20 Apollo's that were sent off, the only one I know that failed after 11 was 13.
The analyzed the video tapes at a university a few years back and concluded that it was real by calculating the force put into the jump and the gravity and everything. (forgot the url, search on google) They didn't have the technology back then to make such an accurate depiction of what a moon walk would actually be like.
This is a load of crap. Half of the 'key points' are bull.
"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."
Note the word 'teased'
"A camera panned upwards to catch Apollo 16's Lunar Landerlifting off the Moon. Who did the filming?"
How does the video stream get sent back? So therefore, you can send to the camera. EG, Remote control.
"Text from pictures in the article said that 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?"
How do hidden cameras work? Do you really think they'd be able to operate a camera with their hands in a space suit? It's attactched to the suit.
"How can the flag be brightly lit when its side is to the light?"
Look at the lighting, it comes from the left. Look at the angle of the flag. Left.
Why have you desended onto earth to deliver all this bullshit! Why don't you go drink some coke and die... oh wait that was bullshit aswell, deary me you suck!
I'm not surprised america lied again on that one, you know.. america is full of gays.. that's got to mean something.. .Once I was walking home on a sunny day.. I was happy when suddelny an american bombed me.. that was such a putdowner..
"still, you have no explanation to why all the excessive heat and radiation didn't fry them
and why we've never even tried to get back there later "
Well to protect from heat they had, surprisingly, heat shields.
As far as radiation and "frying" are concerned, many tests were carried out to prove that it was, in fact, perfectly safe. Again, most of it could be blocked by simple shielding, and the speed at which they flew through it reduced the time during which any radation could penetrate the hull. Some radiation did reach the astronauts, but the dose was not nearly enough to cause harm.
"We" did go back there several more times, and there's currently talk of further missions in the future by the ESA.
I'm not flaming, I'm just giving my opinion and backing it up. Given what you said 13 posts up, Michael R, why on earth did you start this topic?
after reading that last one i have to say that the chances of it all being a hoax are fairly small and i have an answer to a simple question:
"why dont we go back there" [may not be actual quote]
this is simple: What possible profit can there be gained from repeatedly makeing a rediculously expensive trip to somewhere where there is little more than dust and several american flags? NONE
if it were made of cheese (no its not you fool) then maybe you could mine it other than that all our clothes and skin generate more than enough dust to make a mess of every house that needs it.
consider it in fools terms, would you hire out an entire concorde (at its current prices = $$$$$$) take a trip to an uninhabited volcano in the pacific (or other sea if ur in america) and then go home again? no. you might do it once if no-one had ever done it before and a concorde was the only wa to get there, but otherwise no
conspiricy theories are indeed bad for you
Edited by the Author.
Twas brillig, and the slivey toves
Did gyre and gimble in the wabe,
All mimsy were the borogroves,
And the momewraths outgrabe.
Nah, it's easier to fake the thing rather than actually go to the moon. Given the technology back then.
Why?
1. This is the US government. They always love showing that they're the best and it's effect on American morale is rather disturbing.
2. They were competing with 'evil' Russia. How would you feel if your biggest competitor defeated you in a race in front of everyone who gives you taxes for your multi-billion dollar space program?
"...believes NASA had all the money and abillities (they were oh so clever) to make it fake, on the other hand NASA was not clever enough to do it properly???"
> Dude, a studio is CHEAP. Just a few million dollars at best. A space program costs billions, especially back then when simple calculators were huge and liquid hydrogen was expensive. Orbiting the Earth is easy, but actually landing somewhere (besides on water) is a challenge. And then there's solar radiation, getting back to Earth, and surviving the whole trip.
I'm not saying that it's fake. I'm just saying that it would be easier to fake it.
Disclaimer: Any sarcasm in my posts will not be mentioned as that would ruin the purpose. It is assumed that the reader is intelligent enough to tell the difference between what is sarcasm and what is not.
Advertisement
Edited by the Author.
