One thing both the flat earthers and the moon landing hoaxers have in common is that they can never actually explain WHY they believe these things. They can never explain who actually benefits from these theories
Lol. I didn't say that I couldn't explain how it's impossible. I can.
I didn't say that I couldn't produce any evidence that it's impossible. I can.
I don't need any qualifications to do so. It's a weird thing for you to demand.
You are now running away rather than just answer simple questions about your theory.
I have seen this on other threads from many other conspiracy theorists also.
Also, lol, I'm a shill again? Pray tell, who am I a shill for? Why would I be paid disagree with people who claim the moon landings were faked?
I don't have any qualifications to say that it's impossible. I don't require any to do so. Why would I need qualifications?It's not possible to use meteorites to fake moon rocks. You cannot explain how it is possible.
you cannot explain how it is impossible. you have no qualifications to be able to have an opinion and i w ill not be replying to you again. you seem to think you have some right to bullypeople to produce evidence while admitting you have no evidence and say questions dodged if someone doen't play. i have seen your use of this on other threads. you are either a troll or a shill,do your own research
Why wouldn't they have enough fuel?
People who believe the conspiracy theories generally do not know the extent of space missions and of NASA's research. They have not idea about how much footage and data and material is out there documenting the whole thing.
It's not all that rare for them to not even know there were multiple moon landings.
A lot of the people who claim there is a conspiracy do so because they believe that the world is indeed flat. Or they are getting their arguments from people who make those or similar claims.
Ok. Questions dodged. You cannot provide any explanations for these things.
You cannot show that the missions "went by the poles" because they didn't and the term makes no sense.
You aren't able to explain what you mean because it makes no sense.
I don't have any qualifications to say that it's impossible. I don't require any to do so. Why would I need qualifications?
It's not possible to use meteorites to fake moon rocks. You cannot explain how it is possible.
And It's always funny to see people demand that anyone who questions them to do their own research.
I have done my research. I know a lot about the moon landings and the conspiracy claims about them. That's why I know the conspiracy theories are all false and all a bit silly.
If the apollo programme was a hoax, why hoax apollo 13?
If it never happened why are there hours of audio tapes capturing the whole mission, why make these up? With such scientific and engineering detail.
The reason why we didnt go back is because of money, getting to the moon in the 60s had unlimited funding.
Are Katherine Johnson and Maragaret Hamilton just paid actors?
Why bother with all the Gemini missions?
Is the Earth flat?
Ughhhhhh
Okay and how does this internet video support this claim?
It's important to question everything, including the claims into the video.
Also there's a space forum on this site, posters there have good knowledge about this stuff if you want to know more
yes what the film says is they would n't have enough fuel. they claim it is NASA spiel to explain the belts and that the telemetry that could confirm it is issing.
who are you to demand all the explanations.? if you want it watch the film do your own research. i have seen you on many threads here. you seem to think you know everything and are some sort of authority over what people believe. you have a deep need for conspiracys not to be true
you show this when you jump in with
The flights did not "go by the poles" as this is also nonsense.What do you mean by this? How exactly did they go by the poles and what does this have to do with proving a hoax?
you don't know what it means but still say its nonsense?.
you didn't answer what are your qualifications to say "It's impossible to use meteorites to fake moon rocks."
science.thewire.in/the-sciences/apollo-11-van-allen-radiation-belts-translunar-injection/
It's impossible to use meteorites to fake moon rocks. If you believe otherwise, please point out some examples. Or please explain how you believe this was accomplished.
And ok. If you believe Nasa said this, point out where. Or please explain what you believe it means exactly.
It is not possible to use meteorites to fake moon rocks.
how do you know? what qualifications have you to say that?
if you don't know what it means how do you know its nonsense?.it's NASA that say they went by the poles
Hand waving "they used a laser" is nonsense.
The flights did not "go by the poles" as this is also nonsense.
What do you mean by this? How exactly did they go by the poles and what does this have to do with proving a hoax?
The claim that astronauts weren't on board is made up. Likewise the claim that Kubrick was involved.
The hoax is usually along the lines of: "it was shot in a studio", but no one has ever provided credible evidence of it. Most of these videos work by bamboozling viewers with disinfo and debunked claims and if someone doesn't know much about the landings they can fall for it
Can't remember. it said when the ice melts is the best time to find them. von Braun went with a team to collect some at one point.. the film claimed they are the moon rocks supposedly brought back from the the moon. it said the marks of burning as it came through the atmosphere are removed, can't recall how, then the a laser is used to make it look ike it was actually from the moon
I watched this film because i was looking at Nexus in a bookshop and it had an ad for his book.
I also heard Morocco is good for meteorites too and Libya, but not lunar rocks.
Antarctica is on the southern pole, I wonder why would they be more common there than anywhere else.
it does have attempts to make explanations of the hoax but i am not summarising 4 hours. i do not say i believe them anyway
. i was asking cos i had not heard before they went by the poles to avoid the van allen belts and the telemetry which would confirm or disprove this is lost
and i had not heard before the astroauts were not on board. they say the astronauts were flown to an island off hawaii and when it was time for splashdown they were taken on a plane and dropped from it into the ocean
They also say Kubrick may have been involved and refer to the Kubrick Horizontal in the photos
It's just a suggestion.
As for your points, the astronauts went through the thinnest part of the Van Allen belts to minimise radiation exposure. NASA lost some tapes. Nothing odd about the launch, and nothing to suggest the astronauts weren't on board that flight, nor the 5 subsequent flights that went to the moon.
Does the video explain what the hoax is, or does it just spend all its time trying to get it's audience to doubt the event?
you don't tell me what to watch. if you cannot answer my question stay out of it
This is a 12 year old thread.
I strongly suggest you watch a factual video on the launch not one riddled with all sorts of "claims" from a creator who does nothing but create "moon hoax" videos that never explain the hoax.
you can get some on earth, Antartica is a good place
I haven't read all of this and i don't know if it was faked or not. but i saw a video yesterday where it was said they now claim they went by the poles -north or south,i can't recall- to avoid the van allen belts.I had not heard this before . critics said they did not have time or fuel and that it cannot be verified because the telemetry is destroyed. it said loads of moon tapes are destroyed.They claimed nasa are destroying as much as possible because of new techniques of investigation may expose them
i must admit I wondered why they would destroy historical tapes. or maybe they are 'missing' but not lost i cannot remember
It also showed footage from someone who filmed lift off in one continouus shot and the spacecraft was not moving as fast as it should. i think they were able to know by how high it should be ? they claimed there were no astronauts on board and no equipment and they did this in order to use different engines, not the usual saturn 5 engines
this is the video in case anyone is interested.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s8XgEOtC7MQ there are 7 or 8 parts. i am not pushing it or saying it's true.
Little D wrote: » totally off subject but years back one particularly hard winter my cousins rabbit died and my uncle who was convinced the cold had caused its death so he got a hair dryer and began to blow it all over the lifeless body of the rabbit on the kitchen table, needless to say the rabbit did not come back to life, my uncle is now in the army, sleep easy we're in good hands he will keep the country safe
uprising2 wrote: » Same reason you don't put your cat in the microwave when its cold...:)
uprising2 wrote: » I'm not getting involved in this pissing competition again, I'm not getting bogged down in something that I don't believe happened 40 years ago, but nothing is proof, there is none, all the proof show's it to be a hoax as far as I'm concerned
Vomit wrote: » The question of the moving flag is surely one of great academic significance. Why have NASA never explained it? Where are the experts backed up back independent experts? There seems to be nothing but silence surrounding it. Either silence, or simple dismissal, i.e. "Well they DID go to the moon so there must be SOME good reason the flag moved". They only discussion about this I can find elsewhere is about the WRONG flag and the wrong video.
Torakx wrote: » There was a gift given to one of the european states of some moon rock after the americans mission.I read recently that it turned out after testing it was a piece of petrified wood but very old. So either there were trees on the moon or nasa gave somebody fake moonrock for an unkown reason.Or it was moonrock and the article i read was false.Only way to know is go to college steal a sample of this fabled monnrock and test it yourself.No evidence is ever enough either way if the will is there
Vomit wrote: » Can't they get moon rock without actually sending humans there?
noodler wrote: » Now I in no way shape or form believe it was faked but, as a physicist, would you have any theories on flag incident?
LIGHTNING wrote: » But the people who think its a hoax wouldnt be swayed even if they were given all the evidence in the world. That in itself says alot about people who belief it was faked.
humanji wrote: » If you can do that, why not just send a human.
LIGHTNING wrote: » Right! Its seems that ignoring scientific proof and embracing paranoia is a much better way of thinking. Well good luck with that! As a physicist I find some of the peoples thinking in here offensive/comical.
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://w8.vanillicon.com/v2/867a9f20e705add43a3ada2e4f4480cc.svg)
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://www.boards.ie/applications/dashboard/design/images/banned.png)
