Merged Discussion of the moon landing "hoax"

Status
Not open for further replies.
FatFreddy88 said:
Please answer this question that you missed from my last post.

You maintain that the movement of the corner of Collins' jacket is consistent with zero-gravity.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6fqdB1b53jc
(00:50 time mark)

Tell us what it would look like if it were moving in gravity.
Click to expand...

I could only guess since it is a rather unique situation, raised arms jogging on the spot and wearing loose clothing. I would say not that much different, considering all the activity going on with the blue oxygen device colliding with him. If he did that on Earth, his cuffs and tags wouldn't float like they do. His jacket is puffed out, not just at the back, but also the sleeves. The ISS bit on that video shows the same floating sleeve effect.

Now, kindly fully answer my last post, plus these that you have either ignored or given very poor one liners to.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=7223237&postcount=2700
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=7223785&postcount=2711
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=7271589&postcount=3242
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=7274264&postcount=3284
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=7274300&postcount=3287

Also, people on here have continually asked you to put details in your own words, instead of repetitive spamming of your linkbarfTM. Your reply to the following polite request, was to post your linkbarfTM.

"Give us, in your own words, without spamming your link in every post, the top 10 best bits of hoax evidence."

How can anybody take you seriously, when your objective seems to be to post the same links in almost every post? If you, as you claim to be, are a truther, list your top 10 and we can discuss them.
 
Last edited:
I really wish Jay Windley posted here. He's super smart and competent.
 
Jay is taking a well-deserved break from dealing with HBs. I learned a ton of stuff about Apollo from his posts (and to a lesser degree from the Clavius site).

For those still not wearing a tinfoil beanie, here's a few books to get you further into the Dark Side:

* Michael Collins: Carrying the fire
* Andrew Chaikin: A man on the moon
* Gene Krantz: Failure is not an option
and of course
* Phil Plait: Bad Astronomy
 
I could only guess since it is a rather unique situation, raised arms jogging on the spot and wearing loose clothing. I would say not that much different, considering all the activity going on with the blue oxygen device colliding with him. If he did that on Earth, his cuffs and tags wouldn't float like they do. His jacket is puffed out, not just at the back, but also the sleeves. The ISS bit on that video shows the same floating sleeve effect.
Click to expand...

Look at the way these jacket corners bounce around.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DTNGNW5Evs4
(00:14 time mark)

Now compare it to the movement of Collins' jacket corner.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6fqdB1b53jc
(00:50 time mark)

Now watch these jacket corners in real zero-G.
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=TejsnPThmd4

When Collins and the guy on earth stop moving, the jacket corners immediately go to a hanging position. There is no hanging position in the Space Shuttle footage.

There's more here.
http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/showpost.php?p=5237480&postcount=2245

(edit)
---------------------
Here's something that makes it even clearer.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1ofwzby1c7o
(3:17 time mark)

The straps attached to her waist have no tendencey to go downward the way Collins' jacket corner does.
---------------------

Sorry, but this anomaly is too clear to obfuscate. Collins is in gravity. This debate is over and you people lost. Of course now you're going to tap dance around and bury this part of the debate deep in the thread to reduce the number of people who see it. If I stop posting then, you'll go on as if this had never happened.

"Give us, in your own words, without spamming your link in every post, the top 10 best bits of hoax evidence."
Click to expand...

Actually these are my own words because I'm the one who started this thread.
http://www.politicalforum.com/moon-...n-missions-were-faked-studio.html#post3989720

You can reply to the evidence post there if you want. I'm going to be busy for a while though; I'm going to start watching Jarrah Whites new series on the moon rocks.
http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=MoonFaker:+Moon+Rocks+Revisited.+&aq=f
 
Last edited:
FatFreddy88 said:
Look at the way these jacket corners bounce around.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DTNGNW5Evs4
(00:14 time mark)

Now compare it to the movement of Collins' jacket corner.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6fqdB1b53jc
(00:50 time mark)

Now watch these jacket corners in real zero-G.
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=TejsnPThmd4

When Collins and the guy on earth stop moving, the jacket corners immediately go to a hanging position. There is no hanging position in the Space Shuttle footage.

There's more here.
http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/showpost.php?p=5237480&postcount=2245

Sorry, but this anomaly is too clear to obfuscate. Collins is in gravity. This debate is over and you people lost. Of course now you're going to tap dance around and bury this part of the debate deep in the thread to reduce the number of people who see it. If I stop posting then, you'll go on as if this had never happened.



Actually these are my own words because I'm the one who started this thread.
http://www.politicalforum.com/moon-...n-missions-were-faked-studio.html#post3989720

You can reply to the evidence post there if you want. I'm going to be busy for a while though; I'm going to start watching Jarrah Whites new series on the moon rocks.
http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=MoonFaker:+Moon+Rocks+Revisited.+&aq=f
Click to expand...



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5hfYJsQAhl0
 
ArmillarySphere said:
I learned a ton of stuff about Apollo from his posts (and to a lesser degree from the Clavius site).
Click to expand...


Same here. I also credit Jay as one of the inspirations for my deciding to go back to school and become an engineer even though I was in my late 30s. (Now working as a mechanical designer with a 2-year degree and taking two classes a semester to finish my B.S.)
 
FatFreddy88 said:
An unmanned probe moving away from the earth could have taken the photos.


It may not have been a satellite. It may have been an unmanned probe taking the exact route Apollo 11 was supposed to take.


They had control over all the records so they could have made everything match, or the pictures could have been taken by an unmanned probe.


If you look through binoculars backwards, everything looks farther away. The stronger the binoculars, the farther away it looks.


As I said before, the governent had control over all the satellite images so they could easily have made everything match...
Click to expand...
You could have paid attention in school and learned things. As with the silly little assertion the Apollo program was faked, evidence suggests otherwise.
 
FatFreddy88 said:
Jay Windley and all the regular posters at the Clavius forum know the moon missions were faked.

Clavius is a government damage-control site. It was probably thought up by a public-relations agency. Here's some info on the Clavius forum.
Click to expand...

In other words, you can't show them wrong using facts, evidence and reason, so you call them liars and conspirators. (AKA the shill gambit.)

Because, by golly, you know you are right! Damn the facts, damn the evidence, and damn reason!
You are a TrueBeliever™ and everybody who disagrees with you must be either a sheep, or one of them.

Face it, no amount of evidence will ever change your mind, and you will go to your grave still not knowing what really happened.

:rolleyes:

You can show me wrong by unequivocally stating what evidence would convince you that Apollo happened.
 
In other words, you can't show them wrong using facts, evidence and reason, so you call them liars and conspirators. (AKA the shill gambit.)

Because, by golly, you know you are right! Damn the facts, damn the evidence, and damn reason!
Click to expand...

I posted some evidence that supported what I said.
http://forum.davidicke.com/showthread.php?t=125628

I started that thread. The reason I stopped posting on it was that the moderator started deleting my posts.

Why don't you address one of the actual points I made instead of talking in generalities?

You can show me wrong by unequivocally stating what evidence would convince you that Apollo happened.
Click to expand...
Footage without anomalies would help. The Apollo footage is full of anomalies.
http://www.politicalforum.com/moon-landing/190138-apollo-moon-missions-were-faked-studio.html

If something really happened, there will be no anomalies in the footage.
 
Last edited:
FatFreddy88 said:
If something really happened, there will be no anomalies in the footage.
Click to expand...

The problem is that many "anomalies" are simply not anomalies. Looking at pictures for "anomalies" and saying, "hmmmmm" is simply your way of rationalizing away the huge amount of other evidence that taken as a whole to a rational person is incontrovertible.
 
Last edited:
The problem is that many "anomalies" are simply not anomalies. Looking at pictures for "anomalies" and saying, "hmmmmm" is simply your way of rationalizing away the huge amount of other evidence that taken as a whole to a rational person is incontrovertible.
Click to expand...
This anomaly is so clear that anyone who tries to obfuscate it simply discredits himself.
http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/showpost.php?p=5237480&postcount=2245

It's easy to tell movement in zero-G from movement in gravity.
 
This is ridiculous, can you put in your own words...without linking to your posts on another forum what your argument is. Posting links to your posts on other forums linking to yet more posts on different forums ultimately writing that a YouTube video doesn't look right isn't the same as evidence.
 
FatFreddy88 said:
I posted some evidence that supported what I said.
http://forum.davidicke.com/showthread.php?t=125628

I started that thread. The reason I stopped posting on it was that the moderator started deleting my posts.
Click to expand...

Double take. Everywhere you go they either ban you or delete your posts, and everybody is out to silence you, including the madhouse of DIF??? :rolleyes:

Why don't you address one of the actual points I made instead of talking in generalities?
Click to expand...

Apollo 15 flag

Apollo 15 flag has already been covered. The astronaut brushed it with his arm. There are 2 analyses showing this on youtube, and I know you have seen them. Jarrah White himself has concluded that also, with an assessment that the astronaut could well have brushed it with his arm.

Here they are again....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lx5H7Rwfkjo
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GbJvgqoeFSU

JW analysis (for those who wish to cut to the chase instead of listening to his droning voice flick to 3 minutes 50 seconds - then add the astronauts arms, usually akimbo - he hits the flag).
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QI3fwzPGtUk

You have been presented with videos demonstrating the flag moved exactly as it would in a vacuum and far longer than it would in an atmosphere. Your reply to say you don't know what the flag is made of is nuts. The fabric is nylon and obviously see through as shown in the video and pictorial records.

Here is one at double speed and far too quick astronaut motion....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8XbaWGXV9P8

You were presented with a video that demonstrated that JWs flag video, where he runs past a heavier flag moves for only 5 seconds at most, shown several times. Never does it edlessly sway back and forth as the Apollo flag does. Your argument back was would have/ could have/ plausible nonsense, that a heavier fabric moves longer, and maybe shmaybe the Apollo flag was heavier. You cannot seriously make this point, when it is obviously untrue.

Here is that video....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-0RsDqmPa_s

You were presented with a video that shows him running past that same flag much faster than Scott, with no movement until he was level with it. Your argument back was some nonsense about it being at a 45 degree angle. That is completely irrelevant.

Here is the video demonstrating no advance movement in atmosphere.....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V2uhMQXRegc


You were presented with a simple video that demonstrated that a plastic bag having a wide book dropped on it, only began to move when the book came into shot, a few inches.

Here is that video....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V2uhMQXRegc

JW relies on the "initial movement" as his flag of triumph. That is your supposed trump card. Even though you never supplied a source for your "atmosphere explanation". So please do so.

Now, that supposed "initial movement" you keep banging on about has been addressed irrefutably.

Here is a video showing Scott at least 4 feet from the flag with clear "movement" of the whole flag and the flagpole itself.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E4gbMT-Zs2Y

Here is another video showing Scott at least 6 feet away, with "movement".
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GJ888vXaKNM


Now, perhaps you can explain how anybody in their right mind could possibly believe a man in a spacesuit moves a flag from 4 or 6 feet away when JW can't do it from 6 inches, why the flagpole shifts right, and what knowledge you have of the camera used on Apollo 15. As the video stated, and proved, it was a clear camera anomaly.

All you can do is accuse everybody of being a shill, on a damage control forum, obfuscating and sophistry. Meanwhile you make no attempt to address the numerous posts aimed at you, or the questions they pose.

The Apollo footage is full of anomalies. If something really happened, there will be no anomalies in the footage.
Click to expand...

Circular argument. The so called anomalies are easily explained to anyone who hasn't already decided on a hoax. Apollo happened.

You can claim your victory all you like, I don't think anything would change your limited perception, or encourage you to study Apollo in more depth.

Collins was in space, the flag was a camera effect. You lost again, as you do on every forum you debate on.

You ignored my last post detailing a number of other posts you ignored. Your methodology, if it can be called that, is to stick with a topic, repeat your opinion, then do your Gollum victory dance. EPIC FAIL.
 
Last edited:
FatFreddy88 said:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6fqdB1b53jc

I don't see anything near his knees that floats up. Please be more specific.


No it hasn't. It's such clear evidence of a hoax that it closes the whole case by itself.

Look at the videos in post #1 here.
http://www.politicalforum.com/moon-landing/190138-apollo-moon-missions-were-faked-studio.html

All the objects that are bouncing around in gravity go to a hanging position when the running stops. All the objects that are bouncing around in zero-G don't go to a hanging position when the running stops. Collins' jacket corner goes to a hanging postion whent the running stops.


It looks to me like you're seeing what you want to see. As soon as they stop moving their arms, there is nothing that can be called floating. The cuffs immediately rest on their upper wrists the way they would in gravity. Please post the exact time mark of the video. If it turns out that there really is some floating, it can be explained by their being in a diving plane faking zero-G. If that's the case, they got careless and did some filming when the plane wasn't diving because the movement of the jacket corner closes the whole case.


The dogtags can be seen at the 1:00 time mark of the above video if anyone wants to see for himself. They go up, stop, and go back down the way the do in gravity. They don't float. floating means staying in the same place. It doesn't mean an object's going back down as soon as it reaches a high point. Tell us what makes them stop going up.

I was able to exactly duplicate the movemet of the dogtags with some keys hanging around my neck. It would be impossible to exactly duplicate zero-G movement in gravity.



If there were empty space under the jacket, it would be bouncing onto and off of his back in zero-G. We don't know what's under his jacket.


The dogtags can be seen at the 1:00 time mark of this video.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6fqdB1b53jc

Anyone who looks at them will see that they're going up and down the way they would in gravity.

Tell us how the jacket corner would be moving in gravity if you think that isn't gravity.


I don't see why you call this summary of hopax evidence spam.
http://www.politicalforum.com/moon-landing/190138-apollo-moon-missions-were-faked-studio.html

I'm a bit busy now. For now people will have to by happy with just that info.

Here's the latest from Jarrah White. It's about the rocks.
http://www.youtube.com/results?sear...ted.+Episode+1,+Water+In+Apollo+Samples.&aq=f
Click to expand...

I see, the videos show they're shot in gravity but if they don't show that then they're faked.

Heads I win, tails you lose.
 
FatFreddy88 said:
Why don't you address one of the actual points I made instead of talking in generalities?
Click to expand...

Because your posts just refer to more of your posts on other sites.

Are you capable of posting here in this/ thread your 3 best bits of evidence and why you think it is evidence.?

If you want to make your assertions on the JREF Forum it's only polite to present everything in the Forum and not fob people off with one of your own previous posts elsewhere which in turn points to some other post as evidence.
 
Last edited:
Captain_Swoop said:
Because your posts just refer to more of your posts on other sites.

Are you capable of posting here in this/ thread your 3 best bits of evidence and why you think it is evidence.?

If you want to make your assertions on the JREF Forum it's only polite to present everything in the Forum and not fob people off with one of your own previous posts elsewhere which in turn points to some other post as evidence.
Click to expand...

[fatfreddy88]The evil mods keep deleting my posts[/fatfreddy88]

In short he relies on his wall of linkbarfTM to prop up his argument, itself relying on links to other people's opinions and misconceptions. Despite numerous request to summarise his best points in his own words, his copy and pasted link is all he can offer, since it is self supporting.

From that Icke thread he posted....
http://forum.davidicke.com/showpost.php?p=1059060846&postcount=4

We can gauge the measure of his argument when he claims there are no signs of weightlessness, then back peddles to say maybe there is, but...it was filmed on a plane.:rolleyes:

We can gauge the measure of his debating when he avoids dozens of posts and concentrates on pushing his own single minded devotion to the corner of a jacket, clearly filmed in zero-g.

Abandon all hope........:D
 
FatFreddy88 said:
Halcyon Dayz said:
You can show me wrong by unequivocally stating what evidence would convince you that Apollo happened.
Click to expand...

Footage without anomalies would help. The Apollo footage is full of anomalies.

If something really happened, there will be no anomalies in the footage.
Click to expand...


An anomaly is something one doesn't expect.
Expectations depend on one's knowledge of the circumstances.
Without knowledge there is no basis for expectations.

IOW, anomalies are in the eyes of the beholder.
 
Apollo 15 flag has already been covered. The astronaut brushed it with his arm.
Click to expand...

As the video stated, and proved, it was a clear camera anomaly.
Click to expand...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GJ888vXaKNM

I'm a bit confused as to what your position is. Do you maintain that the astronaut brushed it, or do you maintain that it was a camera anomaly?

Everywhere you go they either ban you or delete your posts, and everybody is out to silence you, including the madhouse of DIF???
Click to expand...
The David Icke forum is one of the forums that have pro-Apollo moderators who use their power to control the direction debates take. I talked about that here.
http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=144487&page=54

There's a lot of censorship on the internet. I've tried to start moon hoax threads on a lot of forums and the thread usually gets deleted as soon as the moderator sees my summary of evidence and I get banned. That happens about ninety five percent of the time.


Are you people really saying that the straps in this video are moving in the same environment as that of the corner of Collins' jacket?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1ofwzby1c7o
(3:17 time mark)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6fqdB1b53jc
(00:50 time mark)

The corner of Collins' jacket seems to me to be moving in an environment such as this one.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DTNGNW5Evs4
(00:14 time mark)

And the straps seem to me to be moving in an environment such as this one.
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=TejsnPThmd4

The straps only change direction when something pulls or pushes them. The corner of Collins' jacket changes direction when there's nothing visibly pushing or pulling on it. It changes direction exactly the way gravity would make it change direction.
 
FatFreddy88 said:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GJ888vXaKNM

I'm a bit confused as to what your position is. Do you maintain that the astronaut brushed it, or do you maintain that it was a camera anomaly?
Click to expand...

I'm more than a bit confused by your position since you never say. It is totally obvious what my position is.

When the astronaut entered the picture there was a blooming effect on the bright flag. It was ably demonstrated. As he continued to move across, his arm brushed the flag, that too demonstrated by even JW.

Did the astronaut hit the flag with his arm?

Please explain how the flag supposedly moved from 6 feet away.

Please explain how the flagpole shifted right.

Please provide references for your "atmosphere explanation".

The David Icke forum is one of the forums that have pro-Apollo moderators who use their power to control the direction debates take. I talked about that here.
http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=144487&page=54
Click to expand...

Seriously? Icke thinks there are flesh eating reptilians living on the Moon and that Apollo was faked to cover this up! And you think the moderators are all pro-Apollo and censoring you?:rolleyes:

There is practically a new thread every other day on that, full of nutjobs who think the missions were hoaxed.

Looks like they censored you for repetitive spamming, as written down in their "rules".

There's a lot of censorship on the internet. I've tried to start moon hoax threads on a lot of forums and the thread usually gets deleted as soon as the moderator sees my summary of evidence and I get banned. That happens about ninety five percent of the time.
Click to expand...

A "lot" being hundreds, with always the same duplicate linkbarfTM. As for getting banned, you equate that with your "stunning" never seen before evidence, when it is always down to spamming and rule breaking.

Are you people really saying that the straps in this video are moving in the same environment as that of the corner of Collins' jacket?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1ofwzby1c7o
(3:17 time mark)
Click to expand...

Argument from incredulity.

Absolutely. As is her hair. Perhaps you could explain why the straps are not floating statically, and in fact are changing direction, sometimes in a downward way.

The corner of Collins' jacket seems to me to be moving in an environment such as this one.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DTNGNW5Evs4
(00:14 time mark)
Click to expand...

Seems to be? The guy is actually running to all intents and purposes, with his backside pushing backwards and forwards, and his hips knocking against his jacket. All inertial forces.

The straps only change direction when something pulls or pushes them.
Click to expand...

Just like Michael Collins' jacket.

The corner of Collins' jacket changes direction when there's nothing visibly pushing or pulling on it.
Click to expand...

Yes, you said this before a hundred or so times. Repeating incorrect observations doesn't eventually make them correct.

There are numerous forces acting on the jacket, not least the swinging attachment in front of him.

It changes direction exactly the way gravity would make it change direction.
Click to expand...

No it doesn't. Gravity would not show sleeves floating around his wrist and arm, it would not show a jacket that has billowing due to trapped air and it certainly would not show him floating up a couple of times.

Answer the posts you keep avoiding, I wrote a very detailed debunk of your Apollo 15 flag, and you come back with a stupid one liner.
 
Last edited:
Answer the posts you keep avoiding, I wrote a very detailed debunk of your Apollo 15 flag, and you come back with a stupid one liner.
Click to expand...
I just wanted you to clarify your position so I could reply to it.

This video shows the camera anomaly explanation to be wrong.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oFMpmjEv9o0

This video shows that the flag started to move before he got close enough to touch it. It was much closer than six feet.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dW9qcL4LiUg

Anyone can hang a light piece of cloth from a ceiling light and trot by it at a forty degree angle and see that it moves exactly like the movement in this video.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ymwE1sNm82Y

It first moves slightly away because of the wall of air in front of the astronaut. It then moves back toward the astronaut as the air goes in that direction to fill the void caused by his passing. Light fabric will come to a stop almost immediately and heavier fabric will keep moving for a while.

I don't see any movement of the pole when I watch the above video.
 
FatFreddy88 said:
This video shows the camera anomaly explanation to be wrong.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oFMpmjEv9o0
Click to expand...

No, it shows the edge of the flag. Nobody has denied that there is "movement".

This video shows that the flag started to move before he got close enough to touch it. It was much closer than six feet.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dW9qcL4LiUg
Click to expand...

Well yes, that version shows the anomaly as well. But the video I presented showed the "movement" started from 6 feet away.

Anyone can hang a light piece of cloth from a ceiling light and trot by it at a forty degree angle and see that it moves exactly like the movement in this video.
Click to expand...

Well yes again. Air wakes are produced as you run past objects, they are not created to any degree in front of an object.

It first moves slightly away because of the wall of air in front of the astronaut.
Click to expand...

Cite your reference for this "wall of air". The video shows movement from 6ft and 4ft, does your "wall of air" travel 4 feet in advance!!

Light fabric will come to a stop almost immediately and heavier fabric will keep moving for a while.
Click to expand...

Like the Apollo flag, but unlike the Apollo 15 flag filmed in a vacuum.

I don't see any movement of the pole when I watch the above video.
Click to expand...
You are lying or are visually impaired.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E4gbMT-Zs2Y

1 minute 14 seconds, bottom left, and watched in full screen.


Once again you avoided answering direct questions, and ignored 90% of my last post. Everybody can see this.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=7288069&postcount=3321

Why do you think Jarra White has not attempted to duplicate this on Earth? An Apollo replica flag, and the same camera angle. There would be no air movement of any significance, certainly none from 2/4/6 feet away, that would move the flag.
 
Last edited:
FatFreddy88 said:
At the top of the page to which this link leads there's some stuff about the Russians.
http://www.politicalforum.com/moon-...n-missions-were-faked-studio.html#post3989724

The anomalies have already proven the hoax so the issue of the Russians isn't about whether they hoaxed it. It's about how they hoaxed it.
Click to expand...
None of that actively answers the question of why the Russians were unable to figure it out or didn't call the US out. And no, the US didn't bribe them with wheat. Russia wouldn't stop at wheat. It'd basically win them the Cold War. Just faking the landing in the first place would be the political equivalent of giving a lunatic a loaded gun to stop stabbing you.

I also note that when someone asks Scott what his falsifiability conditions are, he says "I'll know it when I see it.", then the usual CT waffling about "anomalies". Given that all the "anomalies" have at least plausible explanations, it's no evidence at all. Problem is, he can point at anything he doesn't understand and call it an "anomaly". It's easy to do when you refuse to actually try and figure it out explanations for the anomalies yourself.

drewid said:
I agreee with Captain Swoop. I think he's a shill paid to make the HB movement look dull-witted. There's lots of evidence for that:
http://forum.davidicke.com/showthread.php?t=125628
Click to expand...
Ever heard of Poe's Law?
 
Last edited:
FatFreddy88 said:
There's a lot of censorship on the internet. I've tried to start moon hoax threads on a lot of forums and the thread usually gets deleted as soon as the moderator sees my summary of evidence and I get banned. That happens about ninety five percent of the time.
Click to expand...


So I see at least two possibilities for this. Either you are one of a relatively small portion of the population who has seen the truth and you are being silenced by sheeple and/or the conspirators themselves...

...or you're just wrong. Laughingly, forehead-smackingly wrong. So wrong that even people who think the world is run by lizards think you're not worth listening to.

Now, I think we all know which of those two possibilities you believe, but have ever EVER had the courage and objectivity to consider the other possibility? I've long maintained that the only idea too outlandish for Conspiracy Theorists to consider is the idea that they might be wrong.


I beg the court's indulgence here with the following anecdote, I am going somewhere with this...

Several years ago I was following an online discussion about the changes that George Lucas made to the Star Wars special editions. One of the participants (can't remember his user name, let's call him "Jabba") was angry that Lucas had removed dialogue from the scene in The Empire Strikes Back where Luke is hanging upside down in an ice cave. Other members corrected Jabba and said that there was never any dialogue in that scene. Furthermore they told Jabba that he was misremembering/conflating the movie with the radio adaption of Empire*. Despite all the patient explanations, Jabba began to divide the other forum members into what he saw as two camps; those who had been duped by Lucas' change to the movie and actual Lucasfilm employees were were attempting to enact their own brand of Stalinist/Orwellian revisionism. Jabba had found what he thought was an anomaly, used that anomaly to form an erroneous belief and then held onto that belief like grim death. Sound like anyone you know?:rolleyes:

After a time Jabba simply stopped posting. Did he discover that he was wrong and was simply too embarrassed to admit it to the people he had branded as dupes and co-conspirators? Was he just tired of trying to engage people who disagreed with him and resigned himself to the unshakable certainty that he was one of the last few rational human beings left on the planet? Or was he silenced by one of Lucas' minions? We may never know...

My point is that a conspiracy theory can be invented about anything by a person or persons who reach an erroneous conclusion due a mistake in perception/judgement/memory and then, through a noxious combination of pride, stubbornness, immaturity and (in some cases) mental illness are so locked into their belief that they delude themselves into thinking that everyone who disagrees with them must be intellectually and/or morally inferior.




*This was an understandable mistake considering that Mark Hamill had played Luke in both versions. In the radio version, the writer had to contrive to have Luke talk to himself so that the audience understands what's going on in the scene. Such dialogue not only would have been unnecessary in the movie, it would have been laughable.
 
Craig4 said:
Well if there's one thing we can all agree on is that George Lucas can't write dialogue.
Click to expand...


True, but the Empire screenplay was written by two very talented screenwriters (Leigh Brackett and Lawrence Kasdan) and the director (Irvin Kershner) even allowed the actors to ad-lib if it worked for the story. Lucas hasn't been shy about standing by the special edition changes (e.g., his defending of the infamous "Greedo shot first" alteration), so why would he be all secretive and Orwellian in regards to removing dialogue from a scene? Ultimately though where "Jabba's" claim fell flat was that he couldn't produce any actual evidence that supported his claim. All he had was a false, or at least confused memory and his own stubbornly righteous indignation. The same goes for Conspiracy Theorists; it's not that their theories are necessarily impossible, it's just that their "evidence" is at best feeble and at worst nonexistent.
 
None of that actively answers the question of why the Russians were unable to figure it out or didn't call the US out. And no, the US didn't bribe them with wheat. Russia wouldn't stop at wheat. It'd basically win them the Cold War. Just faking the landing in the first place would be the political equivalent of giving a lunatic a loaded gun to stop stabbing you.
Click to expand...
You're basing you opinions on the official version of things. Behind the scenes things may be very different. You should read Noam Chomsky's analysis of the cold war.
http://www3.niu.edu/~td0raf1/history468/apr2304.htm
(excerpt)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On the domestic front, the Cold War helped the Soviet Union entrench its military-bureaucratic ruling class in power, and it gave the US a way to compel its population to subsidise high-tech industry. It isn't easy to sell all that to the domestic populations. The technique used was the old stand-by-fear of a great enemy.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

No, it shows the edge of the flag. Nobody has denied that there is "movement".
Click to expand...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oFMpmjEv9o0

The point is that you people maintain that the initial movement is a photo anomaly. This video shows that it's not a photo anomaly.

Well yes, that version shows the anomaly as well. But the video I presented showed the "movement" started from 6 feet away.
Click to expand...
That footage was probably doctored. The above video is consistent with this video.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dW9qcL4LiUg

When GreenMagoos found this anomaly and put it on YouTube a few years ago, the pro-Apollo people were all saying the movement was caused by static electricity or ground vibration. When those theories were all shown to be wrong, they had to think of something else.

As I said before, anyone can duplicate the movement of the flag at home by hanging a light piece of cloth from a ceiling light and trotting by it at about a forty degree angle. The flag moves at the precise moment when it would move and the exact manner in which it would move according to the atmophere explanation.

I don't see any movement of the pole when I watch the above video.
You are lying or are visually impaired.
Click to expand...
I should have been clearer. I was referring to this video.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ymwE1sNm82Y

When I watch the movement there full screen, I see no movement of the pole. I think Betamax doctored his video


The corner of Collins' jacket changes direction when there's nothing visibly pushing or pulling on it.
-----------------------------------------------------
Yes, you said this before a hundred or so times. Repeating incorrect observations doesn't eventually make them correct.

There are numerous forces acting on the jacket, not least the swinging attachment in front of him.
Click to expand...
None of those forces are directly affecting the corner of the jacket.

The corner of Collins' jacket seems to me to be moving in an environment such as this one.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DTNGNW5Evs4
(00:14 time mark)
---------------------------------------------
Seems to be? The guy is actually running to all intents and purposes, with his backside pushing backwards and forwards, and his hips knocking against his jacket. All inertial forces.
Click to expand...
The point is that the corners of his jacket hang the way Collins' does.

The straps only change direction when something pulls or pushes them.
---------------------------------------------
Just like Michael Collins' jacket.
Click to expand...
This is just tap dancing which is all you can do with an anomaly that's as clear as this one. Collins' jacket corner goes up, stops, and goes back down when there's no visible object pushing or pulling it. It does this precisely when gravity would make it do this.

This anomaly is too clear to obfuscate.
http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/showpost.php?p=5237480&postcount=2245

Of course you people have to try to obfuscate it anyway so you have to say some pretty lame things to maintain your positions. As long as viewers and lurkers see the hoax evidence and you people have to answer real questions, your success rate is going to be close to zero. I'm not going to stay here forever and this will eventually get buried and there will be people who never see it, but now you all look very silly. That's why it's good to put all the evidence on the first page of a moon hoax thread such as this one.
http://www.politicalforum.com/moon-landing/190138-apollo-moon-missions-were-faked-studio.html

The pro-Apollo people can never bury the evidence deep in the thread to prevent people from seeing it and their success rate will always be close to zero.

Here's Jarrah Whites new series about the moon rocks.
http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=MoonFaker:+Moon+Rocks+Revisited&aq=f
 
Last edited:
FatFreddy88 said:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oFMpmjEv9o0The point is that you people maintain that the initial movement is a photo anomaly. This video shows that it's not a photo anomaly.
Click to expand...

No it doesn't. Repetition of your opinion is not actually proof.

As for saying "you people". Inaccurate, since it appears to be just me, and I'm just one. Others may think it is ground vibration.

That footage was probably doctored.
Click to expand...

Ostrich, sticks his head in the sand and says proof he is wrong is doctored.

Prove it. You can see it move on the frame grabs in all instances.

When GreenMagoos found this anomaly and put it on YouTube a few years ago, the pro-Apollo people were all saying the movement was caused by static electricity or ground vibration.
Click to expand...

So?

When those theories were all shown to be wrong, they had to think of something else.
Click to expand...

Where was this proven wrong? Surely you don't mean Jarrah jumping up and down next to his bed, or rubbing a blue balloon against his head?:jaw-dropp

As I said before
Click to expand...

What you say and prove are light years apart.

anyone can duplicate the movement of the flag at home by hanging a light piece of cloth from a ceiling light and trotting by it at about a forty degree angle.
Click to expand...

Jarrah White couldn't. His flag didn't move until he was level with it and it stopped after 5 seconds. You can't either. Put it on youtube, along with your dogtags rubbish.

the flag moves at the precise moment when it would move and the exact manner in which it would move according to the atmophere explanation.
Click to expand...

Jarrah's didn't.

You keep tap dancing around my questions without attempting to answer them.



CLICK BELOW AND ANSWER:

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=7288069&postcount=3321




Show your reference for the "atmosphere explanation".

Why does an obvious light material flag move for 30 seconds?

I should have been clearer. I was referring to this video.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ymwE1sNm82Y

When I watch the movement there full screen, I see no movement of the pole. I think Betamax doctored his video
Click to expand...

How are you going to see such a small movement at 29 frames a second!!

The old denial because the evil pro-Apollo supporter doctored the video. Just more ostrich behaviour.

You are just ridiculous. Prove it was doctored.


I'm done with the jacket, you lost, now you are just trolling. It's littered with clear signs of weightlessness.

You were cornered on the jacket, and just keep denying it. When shown clear signs of zero-g, it is suddenly - they could have shmaybe filmed it on the vomit comet.

Your Apollo 15 "wall of air" hogwash, that you continually refuse to back up has also been shown to be nonsense.

You deny a flagpole movement by making allegations that are obviously BS.

You deny the 6 feet away movement also with the same BS allegations.

Troll.
 
Last edited:
FatFreddy88 said:
You're basing you opinions on the official version of things. Behind the scenes things may be very different. You should read Noam Chomsky's analysis of the cold war. Snip



That footage was probably doctored. The above video is consistent with this video.
Click to expand...

What may have happened doesn't matter. Tell us what did happen. Probably doesn't matter either. Tell how it was doctored.
 
FatFreddy88 said:
I wanted to make clear that this video proved that the flag didn't move when the astronaut was six feet away from it.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oFMpmjEv9o0

This is good evidence that Betamax doctored his video in which the flag moved when he was six feet away. Now please address this argument.
Click to expand...

The video by bertl shows the movement of the flag is consistent with betamax101. Provably.

Position the video at exactly 40 seconds. Place the cursor on the circle tracking the video and jiggle it carefully to 41 seconds, then back and forth. Keep doing this and watch the top left corner.

The flag moves as the astronaut first appears. Busted. And you owe him an apology.

Now go to the clue shop and buy one. Debunking yourself without understanding it:D

btw. If you come back and say you can't see any movement, or that bertl has doctored his video, we will confirm what everybody knows - that you are a fake, and just trolling.

The 6ft away video busts your argument.

Once again you avoid all the questions and previous posts I have made.


For all ostriches.....

bert1s.jpg


bert2k.jpg
 
Last edited:
FatFreddy88 said:
I posted some evidence that supported what I said.
http://forum.davidicke.com/showthread.php?t=125628

I started that thread. The reason I stopped posting on it was that the moderator started deleting my posts.

Why don't you address one of the actual points I made instead of talking in generalities?


Footage without anomalies would help. The Apollo footage is full of anomalies.
http://www.politicalforum.com/moon-landing/190138-apollo-moon-missions-were-faked-studio.html

If something really happened, there will be no anomalies in the footage.
Click to expand...

Does it not occur to you that if a mod deletes your posts on DIF, one of the wackiest outposts on the web, that you might consider that your posts are beyond reason?
 
If you watch this on full screen...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ymwE1sNm82Y

...and use your mouse to put the arrow on the corner of the flag, you'll see there is a slight continuous movement. The flag in never completely still. That probably due to slight drafts in the studio.

The forty second mark of this video is where the scene starts.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oFMpmjEv9o0

If we go back, we'll see that the flag is continuously moving in the same way long before the astronaut reaches the six foot away mark. His approach isn't what made it move at the forty second mark.
 
Does it not occur to you that if a mod deletes your posts on DIF, one of the wackiest outposts on the web, that you might consider that your posts are beyond reason?
Click to expand...
Have you seen this video of David Icke's?
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=1485155465058882626#

They argue the moon hoax in that video but they also argue some wacky theories about mile-long space creatures. The people who made that video were trying to discredit the hoax theory by associating it with wacky theories. David Icke seems to be part of the controlled opposition. The objective of the moderators on that forum is to make sure that the moon hoax threads show that the pro-Apollo people are winning the debates. I started a thread about the flag waving with a long analysis that dealt with all the theories such as static electricity and vibration and the moderator deleted it as soon as he saw it. If someone puts forth some good evidence that the pro-Apollo posters can't obfuscate on a thread, the pro-Apollo posters bury it with their BS the moderator helps them do it.

Here's some of the stuff that happened on the David Icke forum.
http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=144487&page=54

By the way, I said the same thing about the video "Secret Space" at the "Unexplained Mysteries" forum and they simply deleted my post.
 
FatFreddy88 said:
Have you seen this video of David Icke's?
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=1485155465058882626#

They argue the moon hoax in that video but they also argue some wacky theories about mile-long space creatures. The people who made that video were trying to discredit the hoax theory by associating it with wacky theories. David Icke seems to be part of the controlled opposition. The objective of the moderators on that forum is to make sure that the moon hoax threads show that the pro-Apollo people are winning the debates. I started a thread about the flag waving with a long analysis that dealt with all the theories such as static electricity and vibration and the moderator deleted it as soon as he saw it. If someone puts forth some good evidence that the pro-Apollo posters can't obfuscate on a thread, the pro-Apollo posters bury it with their BS the moderator helps them do it.

Here's some of the stuff that happened on the David Icke forum.
http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=144487&page=54

By the way, I said the same thing about the video "Secret Space" at the "Unexplained Mysteries" forum and they simply deleted my post.
Click to expand...

You may actually win something here. I just nominateed that post for a stundie. Big up.:D
 
FatFreddy88 said:
If you watch this on full screen...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ymwE1sNm82Y

...and use your mouse to put the arrow on the corner of the flag, you'll see there is a slight continuous movement. The flag in never completely still. That probably due to slight drafts in the studio.

The forty second mark of this video is where the scene starts.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oFMpmjEv9o0

If we go back, we'll see that the flag is continuously moving in the same way long before the astronaut reaches the six foot away mark. His approach isn't what made it move at the forty second mark.
Click to expand...

Tap dancing better than old Fred Astaire!

Did betamax101 doctor his video? Going to apologise? Doubt it.

So, using the same process:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oFMpmjEv9o0

Put the video at 1 minute 3 seconds, pause it. Put the cursor on the circle again, the black indicator shows 1 min 3 secs(carefully, it splits between a picture and narrative) , now jiggle to 1 min 5 secs and back again, watch the screen top left, no astronaut. No movement whatsoever.

New theory, pulled from your rectum..........busted.

Got any more?

This is getting tedious.

ETA: 1min 6secs Movement, and.................the astronaut appears.
 
Last edited:
FatFreddy88 said:
They argue the moon hoax in that video but they also argue some wacky theories about mile-long space creatures. The people who made that video were trying to discredit the hoax theory by associating it with wacky theories. David Icke seems to be part of the controlled opposition.
Click to expand...

The same David Icke who wore turquoise shellsuits for two years in the early 90's because he believed them to give him cosmic energetic powers?:)
 
FatFreddy88 said:
Have you seen this video of David Icke's?
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=1485155465058882626#

They argue the moon hoax in that video but they also argue some wacky theories about mile-long space creatures. The people who made that video were trying to discredit the hoax theory by associating it with wacky theories. David Icke seems to be part of the controlled opposition. The objective of the moderators on that forum is to make sure that the moon hoax threads show that the pro-Apollo people are winning the debates. I started a thread about the flag waving with a long analysis that dealt with all the theories such as static electricity and vibration and the moderator deleted it as soon as he saw it. If someone puts forth some good evidence that the pro-Apollo posters can't obfuscate on a thread, the pro-Apollo posters bury it with their BS the moderator helps them do it.

Here's some of the stuff that happened on the David Icke forum.
http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=144487&page=54

By the way, I said the same thing about the video "Secret Space" at the "Unexplained Mysteries" forum and they simply deleted my post.
Click to expand...


I suppose you haven't even briefly considered the possibility that Icke and his followers are completely sincere in their beliefs and that they think you are the disinfo agent attempting to discredit them by saying "wacky" things?

No, no of course you haven't. That's what makes it funnier...and sadder. By all means carry on. It's perversely entertaining for the rest of us to observe. Sort of like watching Aliens vs. Predator...though in this case Jawas vs. Ewoks might be more apt.
 
When it comes to the content of Freddy's "proof" the lunar landings were faked, I can't but help think of a line from the movie Animal House:

"Fat, drunk, and stupid is no way to go through life, son."
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom