Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

How many of you actually believe the Moon Landing was fake?

Options
24567…29

Comments

  • Options
    #32
    gizmo
    Registered Users Posts: 8,405 ✭✭✭gizmo


    gbee wrote: »
    Not going OT, But I'd throw in Pearl Harbour and The Twin Tower here too. The US has a history of making grandiose fakery.
    You think Pearl Harbour was faked? :eek:


  • Options
    #33
    My name is URL
    Registered Users Posts: 25,068 ✭✭✭✭My name is URL


    gizmo wrote: »
    You think Pearl Harbour was faked? :eek:

    I think he's referring to the theory about the US having some prior knowledge of the planned attack


  • Options
    #34
    gizmo
    Registered Users Posts: 8,405 ✭✭✭gizmo


    My name is URL wrote: »
    I think he's referring to the theory about the US having some prior knowledge of the planned attack
    Oh, at least that's mildly plausible. To suspect that they did it themselves would be pure crazy talk. :(


  • Options
    #35
    uprising2
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,627 ✭✭✭uprising2


    gizmo wrote: »
    Oh, at least that's mildly plausible. To suspect that they did it themselves would be pure crazy talk. :(

    Yea and maybe a little background knowledge of CT's would help before jumping in head first to things you know nothing about.

    The US knew there was a attack planned and did nothing to stop or prevent it, actually they provoked it, google it and read something up on it then come back when you get the gist of it.

    EDIT:
    Back on topic!
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y1tqZyZVoDM


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


    The photo's were faked, video faked, a pre recorded message that the astronauts had died and yet nothing to hide some still believe........


  • Options
    #36
    gizmo
    Registered Users Posts: 8,405 ✭✭✭gizmo


    uprising2 wrote: »
    Yea and maybe a little background knowledge of CT's would help before jumping in head first to things you know nothing about.

    The US knew there was a attack planned and did nothing to stop or prevent it, actually they provoked it, google it and read something up on it then come back when you get the gist of it.
    I have looked into it and while the government may have known about an impending attack and even forced Japan into a position where first strike was the only response, it still doesn't mean that they perpetrated the attack themselves which is what I referred to as "crazy talk".

    Also, it would have been nice if the US didn't need to come up with a reason to enter the war but if they had done so otherwise there probably would have been mass protests against it. Without their aid, however, we'd be living in a very different world. :(

    As for the first Banned In American video, I was under the impression that had already been debunked even in CT circles after the footage of the Earth they claimed was generated by pointing the camera out of the window while in low orbit, actually does match up with what the Earth would look like at the distance they say it was shot.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #37
    uprising2
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,627 ✭✭✭uprising2


    gizmo wrote: »
    I have looked into it and while the government may have known about an impending attack and even forced Japan into a position where first strike was the only response, it still doesn't mean that they perpetrated the attack themselves which is what I referred to as "crazy talk".

    Also, it would have been nice if the US didn't need to come up with a reason to enter the war but if they had done so otherwise there probably would have been mass protests against it. Without their aid, however, we'd be living in a very different world. :(

    As for the first Banned In American video, I was under the impression that had already been debunked even in CT circles after the footage of the Earth they claimed was generated by pointing the camera out of the window while in low orbit, actually does match up with what the Earth would look like at the distance they say it was shot.


    Ok so you agree the US had foreknowledge of pearl harbour, pity the troops at the base didn't isn't it!, but hey!, he who sacrifices nothing gain's nothing.

    As for the video, I've never seen it debunked, and an oblong earth just doesn't seem right.

    But all in all I don't believe they went to the moon, I probably won't be getting involved in any discussion here as I've posted 1000's of post's on this subject over the years and in the end thought what a waste of time, so over and out, PROBABLY!


  • Options
    #38
    gbee
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,388 ✭✭✭gbee


    gizmo wrote: »
    it still doesn't mean that they perpetrated the attack themselves

    They sold the story of a sneak and unprovoked attack, make a new thread and I'll chat more on it. ')


  • Options
    #39
    gizmo
    Registered Users Posts: 8,405 ✭✭✭gizmo


    uprising2 wrote: »
    Ok so you agree the US had foreknowledge of pearl harbour, pity the troops at the base didn't isn't it!, but hey!, he who sacrifices nothing gain's nothing.
    I'll at least entertain the idea in the spirit of a CT forum. Suggesting they carried out the attack themselves, as I initially interpreted for the post above however, does not merit discussion.
    uprising2 wrote: »
    As for the video, I've never seen it debunked, and an oblong earth just doesn't seem right.
    I can't find the article which dealt with this video itself but even looking at it now, jump from 5:20 to 6:00 and back again. The "porthole image" at around the 5min mark looks remarkably like the Earths' terminator line except rotated so that it is horizontal instead of vertical. The cloud patterns also look wrong for the same reasons. If you flick to 6mins then you see the terminator line in the correct place and the cloud patterns look normal again.

    As for some of the other theories proposed, I found this NG video interesting at least.

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


  • Options
    #40
    El Guapo!
    Registered Users Posts: 12,431 ✭✭✭✭El Guapo!


    This is the original documentary that I watched which made me question the legitimacy of the moon landing. I know there's 5 parts but its well worth the watch if you have the time.



    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y5MVVtFYTSo


    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b309_YspwMk


    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CwELkMitta4


    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ei-0X9SYA6M



    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZiCKy41zZMU


  • Options
    #41
    meglome
    Registered Users Posts: 7,980 ✭✭✭meglome


    Dean09 wrote: »
    This is the original documentary that I watched which made me question the legitimacy of the moon landing. I know there's 5 parts but its well worth the watch if you have the time.

    I've read a lot about this topic and other than some photo anomalies (which I've since had explained in detail) I didn't see a problem. I also saw two good shows, Mythbusters and another documentary. Both used real experiments and both found the moon landings to be real. And there are reflectors up there to this day that anyone with the correct equipment can check.

    What are the main points against?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #42
    King Mob
    Registered Users Posts: 25,229 ✭✭✭✭King Mob


    Dean09 wrote: »
    This is the original documentary that I watched which made me question the legitimacy of the moon landing. I know there's 5 parts but its well worth the watch if you have the time.
    I've seen it before, it's not worth the watch.
    Same tried old crap thats been debunked for years regurgitated...

    Actually it was a debunking of the nonsense in this "documentary" that lead me to believe that the moon lands happened beyond a shadow of a doubt.

    http://www.badastronomy.com/bad/tv/foxapollo.html
    Each and every point in that show is easily torn apart by basic research into the topic.


  • Options
    #43
    El Guapo!
    Registered Users Posts: 12,431 ✭✭✭✭El Guapo!


    meglome wrote: »
    I've read a lot about this topic and other than some photo anomalies (which I've since had explained in detail) I didn't see a problem. I also saw two good shows, Mythbusters and another documentary. Both used real experiments and both found the moon landings to be real. And there are reflectors up there to this day that anyone with the correct equipment can check.

    What are the main points against?

    I prob should've said in my post that I also have seen the mythbusters moon landing episode and it explained some of the points but didn't fully convince me. At the moment I'm kind of on the fence.
    I'm not a conspiracy theorist at all by the way. The only ones that interest me are the moon landings and the 911 ones. TBH I think most of the others are pure shíte about lizards and all that stuff. :pac:


  • Options
    #44
    squod
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,704 ✭✭✭squod


    Off to watch Jas Whites new Vids. The debunking videos are as senseless as watching the original faked NASA stuff. Still a huge marked for crap like mythbusters.


  • Options
    #45
    namloc1980
    Registered Users Posts: 18,139 ✭✭✭✭namloc1980


    squod wrote: »
    Off to watch Jas Whites new Vids. The debunking videos are as senseless as watching the original faked NASA stuff. Still a huge marked for crap like mythbusters.

    Is that the guy with the INCREDIBLY annoying accent who makes stuff up, jumps to conclusions and generally has no clue about science or how things work (such as the Apollo spacecraft)? And you watch his stuff?? .....crikey looks like there is still a huge market for crap like that.


  • Options
    #46
    bytey
    Closed Accounts Posts: 266 ✭✭bytey


    namloc1980 wrote: »
    Is that the guy with the INCREDIBLY annoying accent who makes stuff up, jumps to conclusions and generally has no clue about science or how things work (such as the Apollo spacecraft)? And you watch his stuff?? .....crikey looks like there is still a huge market for crap like that.

    actually he presents very well researched and very comprehensive evidence
    he does a very good job, and does none of the above that you pointed out, and bringing his accent into it makes you look like an idiot.


  • Options
    #47
    meglome
    Registered Users Posts: 7,980 ✭✭✭meglome


    squod wrote: »
    Off to watch Jas Whites new Vids. The debunking videos are as senseless as watching the original faked NASA stuff. Still a huge marked for crap like mythbusters.

    Mythbusters is an entertainment show however they've shown a willingness to actually try out theory's with real experimentation. I see a lot of things on CT sites but usually no experiments whatsoever. Mythbusters were easily able to debunk the CT's on the moon landing. The simple thing would be for CT'ers to recreate the experiments and show them to be wrong but that won't happen.


  • Options
    #48
    squod
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,704 ✭✭✭squod


    meglome wrote: »
    I see a lot of things on CT sites but usually no experiments whatsoever.


    Obviously then you have no interest in the ''CTers'' that have.
    meglome wrote: »
    Mythbusters were easily able to debunk the CT's on the moon landing.

    That's hillarious.


  • Options
    #49
    meglome
    Registered Users Posts: 7,980 ✭✭✭meglome


    squod wrote: »
    Obviously then you have no interest in the ''CTers'' that have.

    That's hillarious.

    Just link me to the experiments they carried out and I'll read with interest.


  • Options
    #50
    namloc1980
    Registered Users Posts: 18,139 ✭✭✭✭namloc1980


    bytey wrote: »
    actually he presents very well researched and very comprehensive evidence
    he does a very good job, and does none of the above at you pointed out, and bringing his accent into it makes you look like an idiot.

    No he just makes stuff up and jumps to conclusions (conclusions that are in line with his own agenda). Watched his videos and he just rehashes the same old rubbish that has been debunked many many times over.


  • Options
    #51
    squod
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,704 ✭✭✭squod


    namloc1980 wrote: »
    No he just makes stuff up and jumps to conclusions (conclusions that are in line with his own agenda). Watched his videos and he just rehashes the same old rubbish that has been debunked many many times over.

    As a matter of interest what's your take on the alleged moon landings?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #52
    namloc1980
    Registered Users Posts: 18,139 ✭✭✭✭namloc1980


    squod wrote: »
    As a matter of interest what's your take on the alleged moon landings?

    Based on the massive body of evidence man did land on the moon. I look at the evidence and the so called 'evidence' that is was fake does not stand up to any reasonable unbiased assessment. The important word being unbiased


  • Options
    #53
    squod
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,704 ✭✭✭squod


    That's where we differ, that massive body of evidence simply doesn't exist.


  • Options
    #54
    namloc1980
    Registered Users Posts: 18,139 ✭✭✭✭namloc1980


    squod wrote: »
    That's where we differ, that massive body of evidence simply doesn't exist.

    If you can't be bothered to examine the evidence yourself but prefer to swallow everything that youtube warriors like Moonfaker makes up, then that's your perogative. But saying it doesn't exist is just laughable.


  • Options
    #55
    ferguson
    Closed Accounts Posts: 137 ✭✭ferguson


    namloc1980 wrote: »
    It's been proven that stars would not be visible in these photos over and over and over and over and over and over
    bit OT but you can see stars in outside shots in the film moon. Did they make a mistake?


  • Options
    #56
    gizmo
    Registered Users Posts: 8,405 ✭✭✭gizmo


    ferguson wrote: »
    bit OT but you can see stars in outside shots in the film moon. Did they make a mistake?
    Well, Moon wasn't shot on location as far as I'm aware...


  • Options
    #57
    King Mob
    Registered Users Posts: 25,229 ✭✭✭✭King Mob


    ferguson wrote: »
    bit OT but you can see stars in outside shots in the film moon. Did they make a mistake?

    Great film.
    But they also made the usual sci fi mistake of having sound in space....


  • Options
    #58
    ferguson
    Closed Accounts Posts: 137 ✭✭ferguson


    gizmo wrote: »
    Well, Moon wasn't shot on location as far as I'm aware...
    i know that!:D but would they not have tried to be 'right'


  • Options
    #59
    Sir Digby Chicken Caesar
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 23,556 ✭✭✭✭Sir Digby Chicken Caesar


    you can also see cars exploding into a ball of fire when they run into a bee in hollywood movies, they throw it in there because people think 'ooh, space.. there's lots of stars there isn't there'


  • Options
    #60
    uprising2
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,627 ✭✭✭uprising2


    meglome wrote: »
    Mythbusters is an entertainment show however they've shown a willingness to actually try out theory's with real experimentation. I see a lot of things on CT sites but usually no experiments whatsoever. Mythbusters were easily able to debunk the CT's on the moon landing. The simple thing would be for CT'ers to recreate the experiments and show them to be wrong but that won't happen.


    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=23BIb_PMJ4M


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #61
    gizmo
    Registered Users Posts: 8,405 ✭✭✭gizmo


    That's Mythbusters though, what about the NG documentary which set out to prove the same thing?


Advertisement