Was the landing of the Apollo 11 false?

[mike2810]

Scott:
You have posted vids and made statements. I look at it this way. You are the prosecution. It is up to you to prove beyond a shadow of doubt that the moon landing was faked. It is not up to us to prove NASA was right. You have failed to do that.

 

[Goshin]

The capacity of conspiracy theorists to continue arguing long after their position has been proven untenable never fails to amaze me.

 

[Scott]

I missed post #148.

Once again....old data being corroborated by new independent data.

Landscapes match perfectly.

Unless of course the Japanese manipulated their data to help NASA in their lies.

There are plausible scenarios that would explain this. NASA had the technology to map the moon's surface back in the sixties so they could easily have made the studio consistent with what they saw with their probes. Then they could have easily shared this info with the Japanese. Those pictures are far from proof and they don't make the anomalies go away.

There's some stuff about those Japanese pictures here.
YouTube - moonfaker

I posted a partial summary of hoax evidence in post #73 and #74. If the videos in those posts don't work, they can be found here.
Did we land on the moon? - Naked Scientists Discussion Forum

I have to keep posting this summary of evidence to keep you pro-Apollo people from burying it; you people seem to know that, once thinking people have seen the evidence, you've lost because the evidence is so clear that the only thing you can do to actually sway people is to keep them from seeing it.

 

[mike2810]

Every notice that Scott posts Youtube and other blogs as evidence. Scott, come up with some creditable source. Open your mind, it won't hurt.

 

[Black Dog]

I missed post #148.

There are plausible scenarios that would explain this. NASA had the technology to map the moon's surface back in the sixties so they could easily have made the studio consistent with what they saw with their probes. Then they could have easily shared this info with the Japanese. Those pictures are far from proof and they don't make the anomalies go away.

There's some stuff about those Japanese pictures here.
YouTube - moonfaker

I posted a partial summary of hoax evidence in post #73 and #74. If the videos in those posts don't work, they can be found here.
Did we land on the moon? - Naked Scientists Discussion Forum

I have to keep posting this summary of evidence to keep you pro-Apollo people from burying it; you people seem to know that, once thinking people have seen the evidence, you've lost because the evidence is so clear that the only thing you can do to actually sway people is to keep them from seeing it.

So forum links to YouTube video's by some unknown guy is powerful evidence vs scientists and well documented tangible proof. :lol:

What a maroon!

 

[Scott]

Every notice that Scott posts Youtube and other blogs as evidence. Scott, come up with some creditable source. Open your mind, it won't hurt.

So forum links to YouTube video's by some unknown guy is powerful evidence vs scientists and well documented tangible proof.

What a maroon!

This tactic is called tap-dancing around the rebuttal instead of giving a counter-rebuttal. You people are about as impressive as the Black Knight in this clip from a Monty Python movie.
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9RZ-hYPAMFQ"]YouTube- Black Knight Holy Grail[/ame]

This is what happens on moon-hoax threads when a persistent truther keeps asking real questions. The evidence has been posted and people have seen it. The only thing you can do now is to try to bury it to keep more people from seeing it. I'll be here to post it from time to time in order to thwart you though.

I guess I'll have to keep posting the info about how the mainstream media and science journals are under control so that any scientists who doubt the moon missions will not have a voice. You people keep ignoring it. I foresee a lot of repitition in this thread just to keep you people from burying the evidence.

In this video a scientist talks about how information in scientific journals is controlled.
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7bAE7FGdNmA"]YouTube- Origins of Man Bonus Evidence II Part 2[/ame]
(00:16 time mark)

At around the 30 minute mark of this video a scientist alleges that science fraud is rampant in the US.
GLOBAL NUCLEAR COVER UP part 1


Some scientists at the Rand corporation say that depleted uranium is safe.
DefenseLINK News: RAND REVIEW INDICATES NO EVIDENCE OF HARMFUL HEALTH EFFECTS

There are other experts in these videos who have the opposite view.
depleted uranium: Google Videos


The experts at the Rand corporation also say that GM foods are not dangerous.
RAND | Newsroom | Commentary | Perceptions of Food That Are an Ocean Apart

There seem to be other experts who hold the opposite view.
11. Dangers of Genetically Modified Food Confirmed | Project Censored


We are lied to about history. This stuff below is pretty different from what we learn in school isn't it?
MAKING THE WORLD SAFE FOR HYPOCRISY: The American History You're Not Supposed To Know
economic hitman: Google Videos


Of course I don't know anybody who thinks we can trust the American media.
YouTube - William Schaap - Part 1/8 - The Media, CIA, FBI & Disinfo.
YouTube - chomsky media
Media Watch

Americans are bombarded by lies about science, news, and history. In an environment like this, simply believing what some expert says because he's an expert would be very naive.

Let's hear someone address the evidence in post #150-especially the part about the swinging jacket corner.

Also, someone post something he or she considers to be proof that they went to the moon and we can discuss whether it's really proof. Those pictures taken by the Japanese aren't proof by a long shot. I know there are other pictures but they are all fakable and they don't make the hard hoax evidence go away.

 

[Black Dog]

This tactic is called tap-dancing around the rebuttal instead of giving a counter-rebuttal. You people are about as impressive as the Black Knight in this clip from a Monty Python movie.
YouTube- Black Knight Holy Grail

This is what happens on moon-hoax threads when a persistent truther keeps asking real questions. The evidence has been posted and people have seen it. The only thing you can do now is to try to bury it to keep more people from seeing it. I'll be here to post it from time to time in order to thwart you though.

I guess I'll have to keep posting the info about how the mainstream media and science journals are under control so that any scientists who doubt the moon missions will not have a voice. You people keep ignoring it. I foresee a lot of repitition in this thread just to keep you people from burying the evidence.

In this video a scientist talks about how information in scientific journals is controlled.
YouTube- Origins of Man Bonus Evidence II Part 2
(00:16 time mark)

At around the 30 minute mark of this video a scientist alleges that science fraud is rampant in the US.
GLOBAL NUCLEAR COVER UP part 1


Some scientists at the Rand corporation say that depleted uranium is safe.
DefenseLINK News: RAND REVIEW INDICATES NO EVIDENCE OF HARMFUL HEALTH EFFECTS

There are other experts in these videos who have the opposite view.
depleted uranium: Google Videos


The experts at the Rand corporation also say that GM foods are not dangerous.
RAND | Newsroom | Commentary | Perceptions of Food That Are an Ocean Apart

There seem to be other experts who hold the opposite view.
11. Dangers of Genetically Modified Food Confirmed | Project Censored


We are lied to about history. This stuff below is pretty different from what we learn in school isn't it?
MAKING THE WORLD SAFE FOR HYPOCRISY: The American History You're Not Supposed To Know
economic hitman: Google Videos


Of course I don't know anybody who thinks we can trust the American media.
YouTube - William Schaap - Part 1/8 - The Media, CIA, FBI & Disinfo.
YouTube - chomsky media
Media Watch

Americans are bombarded by lies about science, news, and history. In an environment like this, simply believing what some expert says because he's an expert would be very naive.

Let's hear someone address the evidence in post #150-especially the part about the swinging jacket corner.

Also, someone post something he or she considers to be proof that they went to the moon and we can discuss whether it's really proof. Those pictures taken by the Japanese aren't proof by a long shot. I know there are other pictures but they are all fakable and they don't make the hard hoax evidence go away.

What you don't seem to understand is all this tired garbage (and that is what most of it is) has been debunked so many times it is no longer worth the effort.

The search function is your friend.

So now we just laugh at the "truthers" like everyone else. :2wave:

 

[mike2810]

Scott:
we have countered your stuff. OK, I'll use your tactic. Your evidence is bogus. The sources you have used lied on what they posted. Now prove they did not lie. You won't accept scientifc papers, source from NASA and Universities as fact. So guess this wraps it up. We can't debate if you won't accept sources. I am not accepting yours.

 

[Black Dog]

Scott:
we have countered your stuff.

This is a lie. Use the search function.

OK, I'll use your tactic. Your evidence is bogus. The sources you have used lied on what they posted. Now prove they did not lie. You won't accept scientifc papers, source from NASA and Universities as fact. So guess this wraps it up. We can't debate if you won't accept sources. I am not accepting yours.

You don't have to. We will just continue to laugh. :lol:

 

[mike2810]

This is a lie. Use the search function.



You don't have to. We will just continue to laugh. :lol:

Hey blackdog. See post 31 or 44 for links.

If you want to live in the dream world that the moon landing never took place, that NASA lied, and the US has conspired with multiple nations be my guess.

It is laughable the intelligence of some of the anti moon landing people or what the heck you call yourselves.

 

[Black Dog]

Hey blackdog. See post 31 or 44 for links.

If you want to live in the dream world that the moon landing never took place, that NASA lied, and the US has conspired with multiple nations be my guess.

It is laughable the intelligence of some of the anti moon landing people or what the heck you call yourselves.

Ummm Mike? I am on your side. I thought you were responding to me as one of the resident nut bags because of no quotes and it being below mine.

My bad. :2wave:

 

[Scott]

I asked you to analyze the evidence presented in post #150 and, instead of analyzing it, you seem to be trying to bury it. I guess I'll have to ask you about one specific issue at a time.

Look at the way Collins' jacket corner bounces up and down in this clip.
Apollo XI: The Little Gem. Part 4 - LiveVideo.com
(4:20 time mark)

Look at the way the jacket corners move in this clip.
YouTube - Discovery Crew Enters International Space Station

Look at the way the dogtags move in this clip 1:49 time mark and compare it with the way Collins' dogtags move in the first clip at the 4:05 time mark. [ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S3dGBSggYq8"]YouTube- NASA - Space Shuttle Atlantis STS-117 Crew Has Fun in Space[/ame]

Look at the astronaut's sleeves in the above video too. Then compare it with Armstrong and Collins' sleeves.

I know the difference between micro-gravity and zero-gravity but Collins' jacket corners are moving the way they would in strong gravity. Let's hear your analyses of the movement of Collins' jacket corner and dogtags and the way Collins and Armstrong's sleeves rest on their wrists (4:22 and 4:05 time marks).

 

[mike2810]

Ummm Mike? I am on your side. I thought you were responding to me as one of the resident nut bags because of no quotes and it being below mine.

My bad. :2wave:

All is good.

I'm still looking for the "others" to prove where NASA and other scientist lied to us about the landing. What we keep getting is more vids with "take a look and explain why this is not fake." Seems they need to explain why things are fake with creditable linked sources supporting their stance. Don't think we will see it.

 

[mike2810]

Comment.
Scott:
the one common thing in the vids you posted was it took place in space.
Different jump suites, different body movement, different space craft make it apple / orange comparison. Basically, your conclusions don't stand up to scientific method review.

Take a look at the scientific method. In a nutshell
Ask a Question
Do Background Research
Construct a Hypothesis
Test Your Hypothesis by Doing an Experiment
Analyze Your Data and Draw a Conclusion
Communicate Your Results
It is important for your experiment to be a fair test. A "fair test" occurs when you change only one factor (variable) and keep all other conditions the same.

You concentrated on the flap. So you need to take the same jumpsuit, worn by a same person, and have the same body movement done in different environments to gather data on how it reacts. That data can be compared to the vid in question. You might be able to draw some valid conclusions then.

 

[danarhea]

Every notice that Scott posts Youtube and other blogs as evidence. Scott, come up with some creditable source. Open your mind, it won't hurt.

Absolutely none of what Scott is posting has been peer reviewed and published in a reputable journal. I am not talking about you tube, but The Proceedings of The Royal Society, Scientific American, Science, or any other peer reviewed publication. And you know what he will tell us? That the editors of every peer reviewed publication in the world is in on it. I have no time for you tube nonsense. People who have an open mind enough to believe you tube have that open mind because they have a hole in the head. LOL.

Right now, I'll just wait and see what Elvis says about this. I may be waiting an awfully long time. :mrgreen:

 

[Scott]

Click on the X to increase the screen size of this video.
Apollo XI: The Little Gem. Part 4 - LiveVideo.com

The corner of Collins' jacket goes up, stops and goes back down (4:25 time mark). The only identifiable force making it go back down is gravity. I put a loose jacket on a coat hanger and bounced it up and down and I was able to exactly duplicate the movement of Collins' jacket here on earth.

Look at the way Collins' dogtags bounce up and down (4:05 time mark). They go up, stop and come back down just the way they would in normal earth gravity. I put some keys on a string around my neck and jogged in place and I was able to exactly duplicate the movement of Collins' dogtags just by imparting a little extra forward motion to my upper body. Collins' feet can't be seen. He may be on some kind of excercise device that would explain the extra horizontal motion.

I want to hear your explanations for the force that makes the jacket corner and dogtags stop, and come back down. I can't identify any force but gravity. Do you people think it's micro-gravity? It looks pretty strong to me. Do you think it would be possible to duplicate movements made in micro-gravity here on earth the way I did?

I await your explanations.

 

[Scott]

Absolutely none of what Scott is posting has been peer reviewed and published in a reputable journal. I am not talking about you tube, but The Proceedings of The Royal Society, Scientific American, Science, or any other peer reviewed publication. And you know what he will tell us? That the editors of every peer reviewed publication in the world is in on it. I have no time for you tube nonsense. People who have an open mind enough to believe you tube have that open mind because they have a hole in the head. LOL.

I guess I'll have to keep posting this to thwart your efforts to bury it.
http://www.debatepolitics.com/consp...anding-apollo-11-false-16.html#post1058646568

Government disinfo agents can never admit defeat and moon hoax threads finally turn into a war in which the truthers post evidence and the disinfo agents try to bury it to reduce the number of people who see it and the truthers have to keep reposting the same thing to thwart them and the thread fills up with repitition
Rules of Disinformation
(excerpt)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
4) They tend to operate in self-congratulatory and complementary packs or teams. Of course, this can happen naturally in any public forum, but there will likely be an ongoing pattern of frequent exchanges of this sort where professionals are involved. Sometimes one of the players will infiltrate the opponent camp to become a source for straw man or other tactics designed to dilute opponent presentation strength.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I posted a partial summary of hoax evidence in posts #73 and #74 on page 8 of this thread. Sometimes the videos work and sometimes they don't. If they don't work, they can be found here.
Did we land on the moon? - Naked Scientists Discussion Forum

 

[Scott]

(from post #163 )

I'm still looking for the "others" to prove where NASA and other scientist lied to us about the landing.

The Clavius site is a governemt damage-control site and all it's regular pro-Apollo posters know that Apollo was a hoax.
Clavius Moon Base - debunking the moon hoax

Jay Windley got caught telling a big lie on the Clavius forum which is explained here.
ApolloHoax.net - The Dust-Free Sand Issue

Look at reply #386 here.
ApolloHoax.net - Rover Footage Filmed on Earth

Now look at the 3rd and 6th posts on this thread.
A strange scenario re sifted sand | GeologyRocks

Look at the way Jay Windley ducked this question asked of him.
ApolloHoax.net - A question for Jay Windley

This is who Jay Windley is.
Clavius: Conspiracy - about the author


I got banned for thirty days at Clavius for using non-Apollo info to further my argument that the government is capable of telling gigantic lies.
ApolloHoax.net - All of the Apollo data are bogus
(see reply #33)

They talked about it in reply #138 here.
ApolloHoax.net - Banned users

I continued the topic in the "Conspiracy theory" section instead of the "Hoax theory" section in the hope that they would let me speak freely.
ApolloHoax.net - All the Apollo Data are Bogus

As you can see by reading the thread, the moderator closed it because his people couldn't discredit the topic without looking silly.

Just the fact that the Clavius site is there is circumstantial evidence that Apollo was a hoax.

 

[mike2810]

Scott:
Care to address post 164?

 

[mike2810]

(from post #163 )

The Clavius site is a governemt damage-control site and all it's regular pro-Apollo posters know that Apollo was a hoax.
Clavius Moon Base - debunking the moon hoax

Jay Windley got caught telling a big lie on the Clavius forum which is explained here.
ApolloHoax.net - The Dust-Free Sand Issue

Look at reply #386 here.
ApolloHoax.net - Rover Footage Filmed on Earth

Now look at the 3rd and 6th posts on this thread.
A strange scenario re sifted sand | GeologyRocks

Look at the way Jay Windley ducked this question asked of him.
ApolloHoax.net - A question for Jay Windley

This is who Jay Windley is.
Clavius: Conspiracy - about the author


I got banned for thirty days at Clavius for using non-Apollo info to further my argument that the government is capable of telling gigantic lies.
ApolloHoax.net - All of the Apollo data are bogus
(see reply #33)

They talked about it in reply #138 here.
ApolloHoax.net - Banned users

I continued the topic in the "Conspiracy theory" section instead of the "Hoax theory" section in the hope that they would let me speak freely.
ApolloHoax.net - All the Apollo Data are Bogus

As you can see by reading the thread, the moderator closed it because his people couldn't discredit the topic without looking silly.

Just the fact that the Clavius site is there is circumstantial evidence that Apollo was a hoax.

Clavius site exists because there is evidence Apollo was a hoax. Guess all of the other sites supporting Apollo are in the same category?

Maybe the its a hoax site exist because someone wants to feed disinformation and discredit the govt. Makes sense doesn't it.

 

[Commoncents]

I missed post #148.

There are plausible scenarios that would explain this. NASA had the technology to map the moon's surface back in the sixties so they could easily have made the studio consistent with what they saw with their probes. Then they could have easily shared this info with the Japanese. Those pictures are far from proof and they don't make the anomalies go away.

There's some stuff about those Japanese pictures here.
YouTube - moonfaker

I posted a partial summary of hoax evidence in post #73 and #74. If the videos in those posts don't work, they can be found here.
Did we land on the moon? - Naked Scientists Discussion Forum

I have to keep posting this summary of evidence to keep you pro-Apollo people from burying it; you people seem to know that, once thinking people have seen the evidence, you've lost because the evidence is so clear that the only thing you can do to actually sway people is to keep them from seeing it.

They had no such technology. Let is go,youve lost. Given your scenarios every other country on earth with a space program is now part of the conspiracy.Can you see how ridiculous it sounds.,in light of the fact the entire 'conspiracies' you cite were intended to one up them? Now they are our partners in upholding their secrecy. Logic is where most conspiracies fail and youve failed badly.

 

[Scott]

Scott:
Care to address post 164?

In post #166 I made a pretty good case for fakery. I'm still waiting for you people to prove it wrong. You people are famous for having the attitude that you're winning the whole time you're losing. Please address the evidence I posted.

Guess all of the other sites supporting Apollo are in the same category?

They're all part of the government damage-control program. Most of them were probably started by public-relations agencies. The people who write stuff for those sites are professional sophists who know Apollo was a hoax.

They had no such technology.

Surveyor to the Moon (1966 - 1968)
Google

They were taking pictures of the earth with satellites back then. If the Surveyor program was real, they had the technology.

Now will somebody please say why the evidence of fakery halfway to the moon that I presented in post #166 is wrong instead of just tap-dancing around it?

 

[mike2810]

Scott: Think you have it backwards. You need to prove that the event was faked. I can't duplicate what NASA shows in the vid. I don't have the money to go into space and travel to the moon.

Why not vid your experiment and post it. It would be interesting to compare to the NASA footage you claim is faked. Heck, why not ask some of the others that maintain misinformation sites to produce the vid. All I see is opinions of what NASA footage is showing. As I stated, more credibility would be given if the scientific method was followed. Something yours sites you quote do not follow.

 

[danarhea]

I guess I'll have to keep posting this to thwart your efforts to bury it.
http://www.debatepolitics.com/consp...anding-apollo-11-false-16.html#post1058646568

Government disinfo agents can never admit defeat and moon hoax threads finally turn into a war in which the truthers post evidence and the disinfo agents try to bury it to reduce the number of people who see it and the truthers have to keep reposting the same thing to thwart them and the thread fills up with repitition
Rules of Disinformation
(excerpt)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
4) They tend to operate in self-congratulatory and complementary packs or teams. Of course, this can happen naturally in any public forum, but there will likely be an ongoing pattern of frequent exchanges of this sort where professionals are involved. Sometimes one of the players will infiltrate the opponent camp to become a source for straw man or other tactics designed to dilute opponent presentation strength.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I posted a partial summary of hoax evidence in posts #73 and #74 on page 8 of this thread. Sometimes the videos work and sometimes they don't. If they don't work, they can be found here.
Did we land on the moon? - Naked Scientists Discussion Forum

Who is trying to bury it? Not me. In fact, I hope I am fanning the flames a little so you post more. The only reason I am in this thread is so I can have a good laugh at your expense. In the Conspiracy Theory Forum, it's all about the LULZ. :mrgreen:

However, you could be right. At least, that's what Elvis told me. I couldn't get an answer, one way or the other, from Bigfoot though. He doesn't speak English. Maybe I can take some illegal alien language lessons from the Illuminati. On second thought, I had better not. I hear that they are from an advanced culture on another world, in a galaxy far, far away, and not only look down on us, but like to do things to humans with anal probes. LOL.

 

[Scott]

Click on the X to make this video bigger.

Apollo XI: The Little Gem. Part 4 - LiveVideo.com

Start watching the corner of Collins's jacket at the 4:10 time mark.
Look at the way the dogtags bounce up and down at the 4:04 time mark.
Look at the way Armstrong's left cuff sits on his wrist a the 4:22 time mark.
Look at the way Collins' left cuff sits on his wrist at the 4:04 time mark.

Look at the way the jacket corners move in this clip.
YouTube - Discovery Crew Enters International Space Station

It's quite different from the way Collins' jacket corner behaves.

Look at the way the dogtags move in this clip and compare it with the way Collins' dogtags move in the first clip at the 1:49 time mark.
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S3dGBSggYq8"]YouTube- NASA - Space Shuttle Atlantis STS-117 Crew Has Fun in Space[/ame]

The movement is quite different from Collins' dogtags.

For starters please identify the force that makes Collins jacket corner stop and go back down after it's pulled up by his movement. I say it's fairly strong gravity-much stronger than micro-gravity, therefore, they are not halfway to the moon but somewhere on earth faking this footage.

Come on. If you're sincere truth-seekers, you'll address the issue. So far you've been behaving like typical shills who don't believe their own arguments whose jobs are to obfuscate the evidence.