When will the Lunar landings be accepted?

King Mob

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Cartoon_Head wrote: »

It would be intended.

Nice.:D:rolleyes:

Overheal

Knock it off.

pueblo

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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'.

euroboom13

1,000,000 miles round trip in a tin can with the accuracy of Eric Bristow, at a time when we were all broke down at the side of the road, and to bring your own car,whoozers....NASA like all Americans ,you rock!

Dohnjoe

Not keen on posting videos but this is just 13 minutes and quite entertaining. Anyone on the fence about this should have a look

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sGXTF6bs1IU

BBDBB

Brilliant video DohnJoe

namloc1980

U5ername wrote: »

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

All this stuff has been debunked so many times yet the hoax believers are so close minded and entrenched that they refuse to accept it.

Tell me how many light sources are in this picture? I mean the shadows aren't parallel - it must be a hoax I suppose?

Overheal

The Earth also acts as a light source on the moon, in addition to the Sun.

namloc1980

Overheal wrote: »

The Earth also acts as a light source on the moon, in addition to the Sun.

Indeed but with both in the sky Earthshine would be completely overwhelmed by the Sun.

Overheal

You can't really say it completely overwhelms it really, there would still be light traveling from earth that would have some effect especially in spots where direct sunlight doesn't reach.

namloc1980

Overheal wrote: »

You can't really say it completely overwhelms it really, there would still be light traveling from earth that would have some effect especially in spots where direct sunlight doesn't reach.

Not sure what relevance this has but on the night side of the moon of course a full earth would be quite bright but you'll never have a full earth and sun in the same sky if you were standing on the moon.

Reg'stoy

namloc1980 wrote: »

Not sure what relevance this has but on the night side of the moon of course a full earth would be quite bright but you'll never have a full earth and sun in the same sky if you were standing on the moon.

The moon is less than 5% of the earths mass, yet shadows will be cast by reflected moon light. The earth will be about 10 times the size of the moon in our sky when viewed from the surface of the moon.

Sun rises and sunsets are not the same time wise on the moon as on the earth. See this article

Dannyboy83

Titanucd wrote: »

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:

Yep.

York, Maine is on the Eastern Seaboard.
https://www.google.ie/maps/place/York,+ME,+USA/@42.4734647,-102.8666277,4.75z/data=!4m2!3m1!1s0x89e2bad76d499fcd:0x38483922a6dad659

The students were calling from : Riverside Preparatory Academy in Oro Grande, Calif., at 10:40 a.m. PDT (1:40 p.m. EDT) Thursday, Aug 15

Here is the location of Oro Grande, "all the way across the United States", on the Western seaboard, from where the questioner was talking to them right then: https://www.google.ie/maps/place/Oro+Grande,+CA+92368,+USA/@34.6501322,-116.4144023,8.25z/data=!4m2!3m1!1s0x80c37aeaeca33d35:0xc1dd7d943a4c35f1