When will the Lunar landings be accepted?

Reg'stoy · 21-07-2015 3:38pm #1

Was following the annual twitter lunar landings are fake tweets to Prof Brian Cox and Al Murray the comedian, such is the eclectic nature of my twitter account.

To be honest I had thought that this CT had been firmly debunked, but no; some people for (to me) unbelievable reasons still claim that the landings never happened. From the radiation would have killed them once they ventured beyond a certain point, to incorrect shadows been cast, to no stars in the pictures and my favorite how Stanley Kubrick's widow admitted that he had confessed on his death bed to been involved in the filming of the fake landing TV feed.

Brian Cox and Buzz Aldrin sum it up nicely in this tweet

screen-shot-2015-07-21-at-1-27-51-am.png?w=650

screen-shot-2015-07-21-at-1-27-51-am.png?w=650

So considering it's been over two years since it was discussed here, do any CT regulars think they all were faked, some were faked or they didn't happen as we are been led to believe.

The same feeds claiming they are fake seem to be young earth creationists because to accept that we can travel to other worlds might involve us finding non terrestrial life particularly on Mars which would mean no more earth created in six days. Hence the Mars landings are also faked.

Overheal · 21-07-2015 4:07pm

Edward Snowden left the NSA having had priviledged/administrative access to everything on the NSA's servers - regardless of position or rank, he could see everything because his job required him to. This went on for several years actually. In the 2 years he's been on the run, he hasn't revealed anything about such CTs. If such a conspiracy existed then either it still represents a risk to national security (snowden has mentioned he knows a lot more than he is revealing, names of operatives, operations, etc because of risk to the life of others and national security) or, the NSA has no knowledge of it - which given their data acquisition capabilities, seems unlikely.

ancapailldorcha · 21-07-2015 4:15pm

I'm quite happy to accept the landings as fact. It's a fairly odd thing for the US government to spend resources faking and then cleaning up.

ScumLord · 21-07-2015 4:23pm

Plus they brought back moon rock which they handed out as gifts to other nations, we even got a bit. It would probably be pretty straightforward for any nation that got a bit of moon rock to show that the rock definitely wasn't from the moon. Plenty moon rocks got stolen and put into private collectors hands. It wouldn't surprise me if the deniers had gotten a bit and proved themselves wrong by now. Of course there are plenty of these people making good money off the ejits that buy into their stories. It really wouldn't surprise me to find out most the people pushing these theories now full well they're bunkum and keep the thing going for profit.

Reg'stoy · 21-07-2015 5:28pm

Yeah totally agree with you ScumLord; profit.

The same reason according to the latest infinite monkey cage podcast that young Earth creationist totally ignore the overwhelming evidence that the planet is older than 6000 thousand years. They also mentioned that there is a creation museum in the States and they have a model of a dinosaur with a saddle beside models of humans

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AoDkVYgs0h0

Seeing as it is the Conspiracy Theory forum and considering there would be a time delay from say a manned Mars mission; with today's technology, how easy would it be to fake the actual landing seeing as it would be one way with no one to parade in front of the press on their return.

degrassinoel · 21-07-2015 6:26pm

Capricorn 1 was a great film, and this theory is older than the film - i believe NASA landed men on the moon.

Have to say though, some of the theories do have some valid points, specifically on lighting and reflections on some of the stills taken from the moon's surface. Plus NASA don't always give the whole truth and nothing but the truth, which is understandable also.

It's a shame the way this theory has to show up on the anniversary of what should be celebrated as a fete of massive human endeavor.

Consider that foundation technology behind the Saturn 5 rocket was effectively formed throughout world war 2 by nazi Germany in Peenemunde - the spoils of war (operation paperclip and it's Soviet counterpart) afforded two great nations the ability to leave our planet albeit with a small crew, both space agencies have had massive failures and spectacular losses in both assets and lives - to dismiss the moon landings as fake, flies in the face of all of those people since the time the first V1 rocket flew against a target to the space shuttle Challenger in 2003 who've lost and given their lives knowingly or not to the exploration of space.

ScumLord · 21-07-2015 8:45pm

That family guy video leads to some hebe jebe crazy. It's funny how often god comes up in these videos. They're attempts at using science to disprove science is downright laughable.

Bigus · 21-07-2015 8:59pm

It was said quieter wisely on boards before , " if a U.S. president can't even cover up a BJ from an intern in a blue dress( involving only 2 parties) how the hell could any conspiracy work" ?

As a general observation CT s seem to be overwhelmingly to do with USA and its government.

Myth busters did a good job on proving it very hard to re create the moon footage with gravity.

ScumLord · 21-07-2015 10:12pm

Bigus wrote: »

As a general observation CT s seem to be overwhelmingly to do with USA and its government.

All these conspiracy theories are basically coming out of westboro baptist church type loonies. Just about every conspiracy theory video either ends up descending into a Christian rapture fantasy where the devil is coming to take over the world or is so loaded with Christian viewpoints and wording that it's very clear what the message is.

The point of all these conspiracy theories is to discredit scientific progress. They want to to get people with a belief in god to turn away from what scientists are saying and promote their own minority Christian viewpoint and it's alarming how successful they are with such barmey theories. They've seen how scientific progress in things like medicine is basically taking away peoples dependence on god.

There's a picture on facebook at the moment of a car crash scene with paramedics on the scene with the tag "look closely" and someones photoshopped angels into it standing over the paramedics. As if the angels are the real heroes, not the paramedics that showed up in a helicopter. It's not like if the angels were there and the paramedics weren't that the people in the crash would survive.

weisses · 21-07-2015 10:21pm

Could it be they actually went to the Moon but to make it look better they shot some footage on earth ? ... Just thinking out loud

pueblo · 21-07-2015 11:29pm

Overheal wrote: »

Edward Snowden left the NSA having had priviledged/administrative access to everything on the NSA's servers - regardless of position or rank, he could see everything because his job required him to. This went on for several years actually. In the 2 years he's been on the run, he hasn't revealed anything about such CTs. If such a conspiracy existed then either it still represents a risk to national security (snowden has mentioned he knows a lot more than he is revealing, names of operatives, operations, etc because of risk to the life of others and national security) or, the NSA has no knowledge of it - which given their data acquisition capabilities, seems unlikely.

Ah yes...ex CIA officer Ed Snowden....I know I would certainly trust whatever he told me without question...:rolleyes:

pueblo · 21-07-2015 11:36pm

ScumLord wrote: »

All these conspiracy theories are basically coming out of westboro baptist church type loonies. Just about every conspiracy theory video either ends up descending into a Christian rapture fantasy where the devil is coming to take over the world or is so loaded with Christian viewpoints and wording that it's very clear what the message is.

The point of all these conspiracy theories is to discredit scientific progress. They want to to get people with a belief in god to turn away from what scientists are saying and promote their own minority Christian viewpoint and it's alarming how successful they are with such barmey theories. They've seen how scientific progress in things like medicine is basically taking away peoples dependence on god.

There's a picture on facebook at the moment of a car crash scene with paramedics on the scene with the tag "look closely" and someones photoshopped angels into it standing over the paramedics. As if the angels are the real heroes, not the paramedics that showed up in a helicopter. It's not like if the angels were there and the paramedics weren't that the people in the crash would survive.

Ironic you see it like that when in fact the 'new religion', infallible and full of dogma, is Science..

Science: the religion that must not be questioned

"The problem is that we (not the royal we, but the great unwashed lay public who won't know the difference between an eppendorf tube and an entrenching tool) are told, very often, and by people who ought to know better, that science is a one-way street of ever-advancing progress, a zero-sum game in which facts are accumulated and ignorance dispelled. In reality, the more we discover, the more we realise we don't know. Science is not so much about knowledge as doubt."

http://www.theguardian.com/science/occams-corner/2013/sep/19/science-religion-not-be-questioned

SpaceTime · 21-07-2015 11:40pm

I'm pretty sure the lunar landings were observable by telescope by amateur astronomers.

It's not that hard to prove they happened.

Also the soviets were highly motivated and equipped to show up any scams !! You can be damn sure they were watching very closely with telescopes and other instruments.

NomadicGray · 21-07-2015 11:49pm

SpaceTime wrote: »

I'm pretty sure the lunar landings were observable by telescope by amateur astronomers.

No, not true.

Landings still happened though, but you'd need one hell of a telescope to see it from here. I think they left behind a mirror for nasa to bounce a laser off though

SpaceTime · 21-07-2015 11:50pm

NomadicGray wrote: »

No, not true.

Landings still happened though, but you'd need one hell of a telescope to see it from here. I think they left behind a mirror for nasa to bounce a laser off though

There were plenty of big telescopes around in that era!

SpaceTime · 21-07-2015 11:54pm

Seems they were absolutely observed by radio telescope with more than a few nations picking up the signals from the crew.

pueblo · 21-07-2015 11:57pm

SpaceTime wrote: »

Seems they were absolutely observed by radio telescope with more than a few nations picking up the signals from the crew.

Link?

Guy:Incognito · 22-07-2015 12:01am

NomadicGray wrote: »

I think they left behind a mirror for nasa to bounce a laser off though

CCTV footage from NASA

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-e5CtbbZL-k

BBDBB · 22-07-2015 12:04am

I tend to agree with the prevailing view that they weren't faked. However to answer the original question there are a few factors that will mean that there will always be some who will insist it was faked
1) as time passes events become blurred as the facts get short cutted
2) CTs are self perpetuating as those motivated to disprove something present the evidence in a manner that supports their theory
3) if social media & message boards has taught me anything it's that you could swear on a stack of bibles, take lie detector tests and hand someone a bit of moon rock and there are folk who would still say it was faked. It's just the way people are

degrassinoel · 22-07-2015 12:05am

ScumLord wrote: »

All these conspiracy theories are basically coming out of westboro baptist church type loonies.

That's not fair really, granted there are some headers that dream up these theories, but ye cant make a sweeping statement like that about every Ctheorist.

Just about every conspiracy theory video either ends up descending into a Christian rapture fantasy where the devil is coming to take over the world or is so loaded with Christian viewpoints and wording that it's very clear what the message is.

The point of all these conspiracy theories is to discredit scientific progress. They want to to get people with a belief in god to turn away from what scientists are saying and promote their own minority Christian viewpoint and it's alarming how successful they are with such barmey theories. They've seen how scientific progress in things like medicine is basically taking away peoples dependence on god.

Yeah i've noticed those ones too, they're generally rubbish and at best clutching at straws or riding on the backs of other theories that have more weight. Aliens are demons is a common one.. very meh, fairies are elves..

There's a picture on facebook at the moment of a car crash scene with paramedics on the scene with the tag "look closely" and someones photoshopped angels into it standing over the paramedics. As if the angels are the real heroes, not the paramedics that showed up in a helicopter. It's not like if the angels were there and the paramedics weren't that the people in the crash would survive.

clickbait - cant stand ****e like that and FB is rife with it

Dohnjoe · 22-07-2015 3:46am

pueblo wrote: »

Ironic you see it like that when in fact the 'new religion', infallible and full of dogma, is Science..

Science: the religion that must not be questioned

I would have thought scientific methods and theories have always been questioned - that's pretty much the point of it. No one stood up one day and said "plate tectonics!" and it was somehow infallible from that point on. It was just another theory, among many, and in fact was largely ignored and dismissed early on. It's only when a lot of measurement, tests, experimentation, consensus, peer review and so on eliminated the other theories, did it rise to become the strongest theory.

Most popular conspiracy theories are the complete opposite of this, starting with the belief in the conspiracy and working backwards from there. Questioning to suit an agenda, rather than seek the truth.

pueblo · 22-07-2015 9:09am

Dohnjoe wrote: »

No one stood up one day and said "plate tectonics!" and it was somehow infallible from that point on. It was just another theory, among many, and in fact was largely ignored and dismissed early on.

And so many conspiracy theories are just that, 'theories among many (others)'until proven or disproven.

Most popular conspiracy theories are the complete opposite of this, starting with the belief in the conspiracy and working backwards from there. Questioning to suit an agenda, rather than seek the truth.

Most conspiracy theories are not the opposite of this as you state, they start with something that does not fit, something that does not add up in the official narrative and work forwards from there.

In this regard conspiracy theorists are more scientific than the general population as they question what they are told as opposed to just blindly accepting the official line verbatim.

SpaceTime · 22-07-2015 10:12am

When you throw hundreds of billions of R&D and the entire U.S. Military-industrial complex, top scientists and also get serious public support you can achieve almost anything.

What's happened since then is space tech has stagnated. Commercial companies are really only interested in satellites and without the space race prerogative, there's no motivation to fund it like that.

NASA isn't very well funded anymore and ESA in Europe really scrapes around for crumbs while the USSR no longer exists and you're really only looking at the legacy of a huge space programme.

So we're stuck to the odd probe mission and a far more academically driven agenda for space exploration.

Manned missions are also incredibly risky. There was every possibility they could have been totally disastrous.

That's why we're very much less likely to see anything like the lunar landings for a long time.

We have the technology and far better materials and vastly better communications, computers and electronics - we don't have the motivation to get the finances & resources together to do it though.

Dohnjoe · 22-07-2015 12:52pm

pueblo wrote: »

And so many conspiracy theories are just that, 'theories among many (others)'until proven or disproven.

Well in name only. I wouldn't say the theory of plate tectonics is on the same level as the theory of Bigfoot, although I am sure some would

Most conspiracy theories are not the opposite of this as you state, they start with something that does not fit, something that does not add up in the official narrative and work forwards from there.

There are always discrepancies that don't "add up" in any large event (e.g a terrorist attack), conflicting early news reports, witnesses giving differing accounts, grieving relatives acting "strange", coincidences, gaps in information, etc.

Someone who has, let's say, conspiratorial beliefs will naturally gravitate towards these to discredit the accepted version of events and coincidentally replace with their own vague personal conspiracy narrative

It's a pretty simple technique, personally I could highlight dozens of holes and discrepancies regarding the Boston Bombing. However I, nor it seems any of the thousands of conspiracy theorists have yet to put forward a single solid alternative theory with suspects/dates/times that stands up to even the most basic scrutiny

Within science it's the equivalent of those who attack the theory of evolution only to promote their theory that the world is 6,000 years old and created by a supernatural being

ScumLord · 22-07-2015 1:16pm

degrassinoel wrote: »

That's not fair really, granted there are some headers that dream up these theories, but ye cant make a sweeping statement like that about every Ctheorist.

Probably, but there seems to be a growing list of "conspiracies" that focus on attacking science and even law and order. There's certainly an active Christian movement that's attempting to discredit science and government by attacking some of our greatest achievements like vaccines and space travel. Americans are experts at exporting their culture so this has spread, but I find it bizarre when people from around the world just buy into this propaganda even though from outside the US it is even more obvious that the theories are mostly nonsense.

The Christians have to be stopped, or they'll have us banging rocks together to light a fire within the decade!! :pac:

degrassinoel · 22-07-2015 1:33pm

I dunno now, ye probably wont be the last person in the world to say that

If there's a religious agenda to a theory i tend to become disinterested as it's almost guaranteed to be dull read, unless it's about the vatican's statement on alien life, which was very interesting reading

Just as there is a multiplicity of creatures on earth, there can be other beings, even intelligent, created by God. This is not in contrast with our faith because we can’t put limits on God’s creative freedom… “Why can’t we speak of a ‘brother extraterrestrial’? It would still be part of creation…

source

Reasonably sure that science has religion on the ropes these days, and that statement is an embrace of both science and religion which isnt a bad thing imo.

pueblo · 22-07-2015 4:48pm

ScumLord wrote: »

The Christians have to be stopped, or they'll have us banging rocks together to light a fire within the decade!! :pac:

Em let's see....so you are saying 'the Christians' will be the cause of some apocalyptic disaster that will destroy the world? :rolleyes:

Please do explain how that would play out?

If we ever get to a serious SHTF scenario is it not much more likely to be from the use of nuclear weapons (thanks science)? or perhaps from some screwed up accident with the Large Hadron Collider (thanks science)?? or from extreme climate change as a result of pollutants in the atmosphere (thanks science)?

It seems you have your own personal axe to grind with 'the Christians', which is fine except you sound just as deluded (if not more so) as the very conspiracy theorists you deride when you claim that 'the Christians' will somehow cause the downfall of humanity!

ScumLord · 22-07-2015 5:32pm

pueblo wrote: »

Em let's see....so you are saying 'the Christians' will be the cause of some apocalyptic disaster that will destroy the world? :rolleyes:

That's not what I'm saying at all. I phrased it badly too, I should have said "if the Christians get their way".. This little guy :pac: at the end was to highlight I was joking.

The fundamentalist Christians in the US, the likes of the WBC would have us abandon scientific and political progress to implement something along the lines of a Christian version of sharia law. I don't think they'll ever achieve this but I think there are many people around the world that don't realise that these anti science theories are coming out of religious fear mongering.

pueblo · 24-07-2015 12:20am

This seems a little strange...

NASA hoax ISS Actornaut Chris Cassidy accidentally admits they are filming in the USA

King Mob · 24-07-2015 1:06am

pueblo wrote: »

This seems a little strange...

NASA hoax ISS Actornaut Chris Cassidy accidentally admits they are filming in the USA

What's strange about it? An astronaut having a brain fart during an interview?

Is the more reasonable and likely explanation that NASA is faking all space exploration (and covering up any major evidence for this) and then going to the effort of setting up a fake interview (which the editor of the video claims no one will watch) complete with special effects to fake the astronauts hair in zero g, but then let such a major screw up still go out?

pueblo · 24-07-2015 1:17am

King Mob wrote: »

What's strange about it? An astronaut having a brain fart during an interview?

Is the more reasonable and likely explanation that NASA is faking all space exploration (and covering up any major evidence for this) and then going to the effort of setting up a fake interview (which the editor of the video claims no one will watch) complete with special effects to fake the astronauts hair in zero g, but then let such a major screw up still go out?

I don't know this, but I am presuming this was a live 'satellite' link up interview and as such they didn't have the chance to edit out his blunder.

King Mob · 24-07-2015 1:25am

pueblo wrote: »

I don't know this, but I am presuming this was a live 'satellite' link up interview and as such they didn't have the chance to edit out his blunder.

Most live boardcasts are actually on a delay to edit out swear words and other things. There's no reason why NASA wouldn't do this.
They didn't even have to do it live. There's no reason they couldn't have just prerecorded it with fake questioners.

But if it is live then that means they are faking those zero g effects in real time. Which is impressive, if not impossible.

So are you seriously suggesting that this is a more reasonable explanation than an astronaut having a brain fart?

pueblo · 24-07-2015 4:29pm

King Mob wrote: »

So are you seriously suggesting that this is a more reasonable explanation than an astronaut having a brain fart?

All I am suggesting is that people should not automatically accept what they are told verbatim (either by the MSM or any CT source) and perhaps do a little research with an open mind, always taking into consideration what Mark Twain said..

"It is easier to fool the people, than to convince them they have been fooled" ~ Mark Twain

Overheal · 24-07-2015 11:56pm

King Mob wrote: »

What's strange about it? An astronaut having a brain fart during an interview?

I frankly feel like an astronaut does more public interviews on the ground just like for a while after quitting a job you might still answer the phone in your "how may we help you" mode.

King Mob · 25-07-2015 12:23am

pueblo wrote: »

All I am suggesting is that people should not automatically accept what they are told verbatim (either by the MSM or any CT source) and perhaps do a little research with an open mind, always taking into consideration what Mark Twain said..

"It is easier to fool the people, than to convince them they have been fooled" ~ Mark Twain

No. What you are suggesting is that its equally likely that an astronaut mispoke as it is there's a massive decades long conspiracy to fake space missions for some reason.

These things are clearly not equally likely.
And one sentence is incredibly flimsy evidence for a conspiracy.

I dont see what this has to do with accepting things unquestioningly.
What research should people do into the idea of a hoax space program?
Do you think this conspiracy is or could be true even though it's so patently silly?

pueblo · 25-07-2015 9:17am

King Mob wrote: »

No. What you are suggesting is that its equally likely that an astronaut mispoke as it is there's a massive decades long conspiracy to fake space missions for some reason.

These things are clearly not equally likely.
And one sentence is incredibly flimsy evidence for a conspiracy.

I dont see what this has to do with accepting things unquestioningly.
What research should people do into the idea of a hoax space program?
Do you think this conspiracy is or could be true even though it's so patently silly?

The idea that there was a VIP paedophile sex ring involving high ranking politicians, entertainers and police officers was also labelled 'patently silly' until not too long ago, no doubt by people just like you (if not you?)

Today's 'patently silly' is tomorrow's fact.

SpaceTime · 25-07-2015 11:08am

Consider: you can see the International Space Station every once in a while passing by and you watch TV on satellite television, a space technology that has become so common place that you don't even think about it.

You take GPS & GLONASS for granted, which relies on satellites and a time adjustment for the theory of relativity!

So, I think you can safely assume that human space technology is most definitely there. There's no grand conspiracy!

It would be one hell of a task to keep covered up too! There were tens, if not hundreds of thousands of people involved in NASA and other space agencies like ESA over the years and in all the companies that provide services to them, that build space craft and components!

If there was a conspiracy controlling a leak in what are basically civilian organisations would be next to impossible!

Firewalkwithme · 25-07-2015 11:42am

Some people are just born to disbelieve.

I honestly believe that if you could put one of these people on a rocket, launch it and land them on the moon before safely returning it home they would still be trying to come up with all kinds of ways to explain how it was "faked".

You can't reason with minds that work like that. They are too entrenched in their positions exposing the reality that they are anything but open minded since they only want to disbelieve the official line and the commonly accepted view of reality in order to boost their own self esteem by believing that they are all clued in to what is "really" going on while the rest of the human race are clearly less intelligent than themselves.

There is a lot more I could say but I don't really want to offend anyone badly.

pueblo · 25-07-2015 3:52pm

Cartoon_Head wrote: »

Some people are just born to disbelieve

There is a lot more I could say but I don't really want to offend anyone badly[/B].

Go on, don't hold back. No offence will be taken if none is intended.

Firewalkwithme · 25-07-2015 4:02pm

pueblo wrote: »

Thank you for proving my point.

Go on, don't hold back. No offence will be taken if none is intended.

It would be intended.

weisses · 25-07-2015 5:59pm

Cartoon_Head wrote: »

Some people are just born to disbelieve.

I honestly believe that if you could put one of these people on a rocket, launch it and land them on the moon before safely returning it home they would still be trying to come up with all kinds of ways to explain how it was "faked".

That sounds more ridiculous then many CT

pueblo · 25-07-2015 6:36pm

Cartoon_Head wrote: »

It would be intended.

Nice.:D:rolleyes:

AdHominemAttackChristianLutheranLCMSDebateDoctrineCreedFalseTeachingConfessionsBible_zps125c74fb.jpg

Overheal · 27-07-2015 7:30pm

Knock it off.

pueblo · 27-07-2015 9:06pm

Because important issues are lost in the detritus that is the nonsense of the majority of CT's

I agree with you reg'stoy...Compared to the satanic sex abuse crap that the elite VIPs are up to with little children, the lunar landings, faked or not pale into insignificance.

I bow out of this particular debate.

Dohnjoe · 30-07-2015 10:02am

pueblo wrote: »

The idea that there was a VIP paedophile sex ring involving high ranking politicians, entertainers and police officers was also labelled 'patently silly' until not too long ago, no doubt by people just like you (if not you?)

Today's 'patently silly' is tomorrow's fact.

News stations have been pressuring and harassing the government for a long time to get information, and the success of police investigations like operation Yewtree have encouraged more to come forward to shed light on a ****load of abuse that went down in 60's/70's/80's

I don't know what the conspiracy community has had to do with this? apart from constantly suspecting authority figures of practically everything possible, seems more a case of "even a stopped clock is right twice a day"

pueblo · 30-07-2015 1:17pm

Dohnjoe wrote: »

News stations have been pressuring and harassing the government for a long time to get information, and the success of police investigations like operation Yewtree have encouraged more to come forward to shed light on a ****load of abuse that went down in 60's/70's/80's

I don't know what the conspiracy community has had to do with this? apart from constantly suspecting authority figures of practically everything possible, seems more a case of "even a stopped clock is right twice a day"

You see the difference between you and me is that you are infinitely more concerned with winning petty debates with the 'conspiracy community' (whoever the hell they are) then you are with the actual facts of the outrageous abuse and subsequent cover ups.

I couldn't care less about winning some shi**y internet debate with you or anyone else....I am concerned with the reality of these events and the impact they have on real people in the real world, not the inconsequential, score keeping trip that you seem to be on.

So unless you are interested in the issues at hand then I have no interest in engaging with you.

Mod note: user is barred from thread; do not reply.

U5ername · 31-07-2015 3:08am

I don't care who calls me crazy, here's what I believe.

Firstly I'' say that I used to believe it was all fake & that man never went to the moon.
Now however I believe that man did indeed go to the moon and only the landing footage was faked.

Come on - it was faked. The same rocks in the same places yet supposedly filmed elsewhere? The lighting, the shadows...

Why? I believe, but of course it's only my belief, not something there's any proof on, that it was faked because of what was there. A BBC documentary back in the 70's, Panorama (a highly respected journalism program) investigated and put out on the show that we were not alone on the moon, that there were craft, observing the landings from across the ridge. There were huge buildings & structures on the 'dark side'. They had audio of one of the astronauts stating so. Panorama was not the type of program to do April fool type pranks.

Like I said, call it crazy, look it up yourselves if you like ( I can't find anything on the Panorama episode). But it would be a damn good reason to fake it all, wouldn't it?

Overheal · 31-07-2015 4:34am

pueblo wrote: »

I agree with you reg'stoy...Compared to the satanic sex abuse crap that the elite VIPs are up to with little children, the lunar landings, faked or not pale into insignificance.

I bow out of this particular debate.

pueblo wrote: »

You see the difference between you and me is that you are infinitely more concerned with winning petty debates with the 'conspiracy community' (whoever the hell they are) then you are with the actual facts of the outrageous abuse and subsequent cover ups.

I couldn't care less about winning some shi**y internet debate with you or anyone else....I am concerned with the reality of these events and the impact they have on real people in the real world, not the inconsequential, score keeping trip that you seem to be on.

So unless you are interested in the issues at hand then I have no interest in engaging with you.

Pueblo, do not post in this thread again.

Titanucd · 31-07-2015 10:22am

It is possible that the astronaut got his wording mixed up. 'Right across from where we are speaking to you from today' could just as easily be 'Right across from where you are speaking to us from today' It would be interesting to know the geography of where he went to school compared to where the school the questions were coming from

If its North or South as opposed to East or West then I'm probably wrong and they're in a studio somewhere!:eek:

Firewalkwithme · 31-07-2015 5:17pm

U5ername wrote: »

A BBC documentary back in the 70's, Panorama (a highly respected journalism program) investigated and put out on the show that we were not alone on the moon.....

Yes but we can't trust anything the "mainstream" media day can we? Funny how it's ok to refer to it when it suits your theory but otherwise it would just be rubbish when it doesn't isn't it?

Panorama was not the type of program to do April fool type pranks

Really? I guess you never heard of the spaghetti harvest:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spaghetti-tree_hoax

m.youtube.com/watch?v=tVo_wkxH9dU

U5ername · 31-07-2015 8:44pm

I never realised Panorama did the Spaghetti tree thing.
Okay, but they'd not do a full program as a hoax.

As for what suits me - It would suit to fall in with the mainstream and not risk ridicule, but sometimes the alternative argument is more convincing to me than the mainstream version.

"When it suits my theory" - It's not my theory. It is nice though when a reputable source is there claiming the same, so yes, I will use it to suit.

I've had many other ideas & theories in the past that I've changed / binned given reasonable evidence against it.
Please don't tar me with the same brush as those that won't listen to reason. There are too many of them on BOTH sides of the conspiracy fence.

I've seen 'proof' that the landings were faked and 'proof' that they were real.
By my own personal reasoning and therefore my opinion & belief (not an absolute statement), I see more 'proof' in the 'faked' side of the argument than the 'real' side.

Both sides of the argument of course let themselves down with poor 'evidence'.

When will the Lunar landings be accepted?

Comments