Merged: Discussion of the moon landing "hoax"

[sts60]

Originally Posted by FatFreddy88

The moon landing didn't happen.

Hi. I have to say I disagree, based on what I've learned about Apollo, as well as relevant education and work experience.

Originally Posted by FatFreddy88

Do a YouTube search on "Apollo 15 flag waving".

Argumentum ad YouTubeum. I personally prefer people to actually write out what they are trying to say - I think it's much more useful - but I've seen this motion claim discussed before, e.g. here on the apollohoax forum, with inconclusive results. But I generally leave imagery-type arguments to others, and there are plenty of people willing to argue them.

I think claims based on some snippet of motion imagery need to be attended by an explanation of how the claim trumps the rest of the Apollo record. It's been my experience that most hoax believers (HBs) don't grasp the magnitude of said record, including the engineering, scientific, and managerial work that went into it. Heck, I've hardly scratched the surface myself.

[Jrrarglblarg]

Originally Posted by Erock

It's Cosmored/Rocky/Davidc. Hi there!

Not convinced he's Rocky yet. He hasn't linked to a thread at another forum showing Cosmored/Rocky/Davidc getting spanked as if it were evidence supporting his case.

But time will tell. Some of these guys have serious "tells."

[sts60]

Originally Posted by ApolloGnomon

...He hasn't linked to a thread at another forum showing Cosmored/Rocky/Davidc getting spanked as if it were evidence supporting his case...

Or said that the "lurkers and viewers" could see through the conspiracy. Nineteen lurkers de-lurked for that thread. Every one of them said rocky/davidc was wrong. One commented to the board regulars, "I think you spend too much time fighting with mental patients."

[Corsair 115]

Originally Posted by FatFreddy88

Please link to where it's been debunked and we can talk about whether it's really been debunked.

I'm going to repeat to you here what I just said in the other thread. There are these things called public libraries that are filled with these things called books. They'll even let you take these books home for awhile to read them. The books dealing with history are typically written by authors who have spent years, sometimes decades, researching the topic about which they are writing. They'll include numerous footnotes pointing to the sources used in writing the book, and you can then look up those sources for yourself if you are so inclined.

In the case of the Apollo program, there is an ENORMOUS amount of such evidence. It would seem you are clearly not even aware of one tiny bit of the vast amount of data readily available on Apollo. Get yourself to a library and start reading some books on the subject.

Lastly the faked landing conspiracy theory fails on logical grounds alone. Why on earth would anyone fake six lunar landings, with each landing longer and more complex than the one preceding it? No, any sensible fakery would involve simulating one landing and then quit.

[drewid]

Originally Posted by matt.tansy

The idiot speaking in the video is profoundly ignorant of physics. "Suddenly it hits a wall of atmosphere". WTF? "Suddenly"? Really? Streams of regolith shooting up from the tires following a parabolic arc is obviously confusing this man. If it was filmed in an atmosphere where are the floating clouds of dust?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OrOsEXMbM-M

Wait... what? That doesn't even happen on Earth. So there's a "wall of atmosphere" that suddenly starts having an effect after a few feet? How in the name of boneheaded basic physics is that supposed to work?

[dafydd]

Originally Posted by FatFreddy88

Do a YouTube search on "MoonFaker: Flagging The Dead Horses". There is a rebuttal to your video there.

Do a YouTube search on "Initial Apollo 15 Flag Movement". This video makes it pretty clear that the flag started to move before he got close enough to touch it.

There's another video called "The flag that moved". It makes it pretty clear that the movement is consistent with the atmosphere explanation. The flag first moves away from the astronaut because of the wall of air caused by his approach. It then moves back toward him to fill the void caused by his passing. Anyone can duplicate this at home with a light piece of cloth hanging from a ceiling light.

Wrong.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3S6bc-p8HWU

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Originally Posted by drewid

Wait... what? That doesn't even happen on Earth. So there's a "wall of atmosphere" that suddenly starts having an effect after a few feet? How in the name of boneheaded basic physics is that supposed to work?

(Non-specific "you" here, referring to CTers, not you, drewid.)

Simple, you look at the evidence through your filter glasses. They're really great, they keep you from seeing anything that doesn't agree with your theory. For example, in the video where the engineer vehicle hit the wall at the Davidian compound, you can freeze the action so that it appears there is a flare of flame at that exact instant. With your filter glasses you don't have to see the rest of the footage, where it's clear that "flare" was actually something flying by and nowhere near the wall. Thus you have "proof" that the FBI firebombed those whackos. This gives credence to the belief that you and your whacko friends will be next. And so it's okay to blow up Oklahoma City.

See? Simple.

[SpitfireIX]

Originally Posted by FatFreddy88

At the beginning of this video...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ymwE1sNm82Y

...the astronaut is very close to the flag and the flag isn't attracted to him at all. In all the flag footage I've ever seen, I've never seen the flag attracted to an astronaut. The only time I've ever seen a flag move like that is when the movement is precisely consistent with the atmospere explanation.

You're assuming that the astronauts always had the same static-electric charge relative to the flag. In fact their charges would have varied during each EVA, just as your static-electric charge varies as you walk across a carpet and periodically touch metal objects.

[Erock]

Originally Posted by ApolloGnomon

Not convinced he's Rocky yet. He hasn't linked to a thread at another forum showing Cosmored/Rocky/Davidc getting spanked as if it were evidence supporting his case.

But time will tell. Some of these guys have serious "tells."

It's him for sure. We have his three favourites: Jarrah White, Apollo 15 flag and slap my forehead with a wet fish, Collins' jacket.

His major tell is the big wall of videos and text (not allowed on here). He rocketed through the forum posting one liners here and there, just so he could enable posting links.

Fatfreddy88 is one of many aliases (on youtube).

Google search on "Do a Youtube search on" and "cosmored" Here.


The clincher he 'says' he lives in Madrid and doesn't have his own computer:
http://www.internationalskeptics.com...9&postcount=43

[Jrrarglblarg]

Originally Posted by Erock

It's him for sure. We have his three favourites: Jarrah White, Apollo 15 flag and slap my forehead with a wet fish, Collins' jacket.

His major tell is the big wall of videos and text (not allowed on here). He rocketed through the forum posting one liners here and there, just so he could enable posting links.

Fatfreddy88 is one of many aliases (on youtube).

Seriously, he linked to a jw video? I didn't even follow his utub link, waste of time and I microcast from th is computer so I HATE having to switch off the music to listen to idiocy.

I dealt with David/rocky at Apollohoax when he was there, but I stay away from youtube. He wandered into DIF while I was still reading there but didn't get any support from the Delusional Idiots and eventually got tired of the repeated spankings.

Quote:

Google search on "Do a Youtube search on" and "cosmored" Here.


The clincher he lives in Madrid and doesn't own his own computer:
http://www.internationalskeptics.com...9&postcount=43

Oh, yeah, I remember that now. I tried to trip him up on that at AH but he didn't take the bait. I actually suspected him of being another user, a total character actor who had been banned under several names, a guy I call "the angry English truck driver."

[FatFreddy88]

Quote:

If it was filmed in an atmosphere where are the floating clouds of dust?

It would be easy to sift and wash sand to make it dust-free.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9S30XLds5gc

I know there are prints that look like they're in fine sand but we don't see them when they're being made.

Quote:

You're assuming that the astronauts always had the same static-electric charge relative to the flag. In fact their charges would have varied during each EVA, just as your static-electric charge varies as you walk across a carpet and periodically touch metal objects.

This video shows that the movement is consistent with the atmosphere explanation.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oFMpmjEv9o0

If the initial away movement of the flag were caused by it's being repelled by static electricity, it wouldn't move back in the other direction even farther than it initially moved. It moves back toward the astronaut after it's moved away from him because of the air drawn toward him to fill the void caused by his passing.

[Jrrarglblarg]

Originally Posted by FatFreddy88

It would be easy to sift and wash sand to make it dust-free.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9S30XLds5gc

I know there are prints that look like they're in fine sand but we don't see them when they're being made.

Hi Rocky/David! Still trying to pound THAT bent nail? Why? Haven't you learned anything in the, what, 3 years since you first had your tush handed to you over the issue?

[Captain_Swoop]

Originally Posted by ApolloGnomon

Oh, yeah, I remember that now. I tried to trip him up on that at AH but he didn't take the bait. I actually suspected him of being another user, a total character actor who had been banned under several names, a guy I call "the angry English truck driver."

I thought of him as well reading his posts in some of the other threads he has started. Wonder if he will mention his diving exploits?

[R.A.F.]

Originally Posted by FatFreddy88

I know there are prints that look like they're in fine sand but we don't see them when they're being made.

If you didn't see those footprints being made on live TV, then I have to question your investigative abilities...or at least your eyesight.

Also, what you call "sand" does not at all compare to the regolith of the Moon. For one thing, Earthly sand has rounded edges from erosion, while the Moon's surface does not face that same kind of erosion, leaving the individual particles with sharp edges, thereby allowing the "stickiness" that actually does resemble wet Earth sand...but the "resemblence" ends there.

[matt.tansy]

Originally Posted by FatFreddy88

It would be easy to sift and wash sand to make it dust-free.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9S30XLds5gc

I know there are prints that look like they're in fine sand but we don't see them when they're being made.

Watch the sand being kicked on the beach. It does not follow a parabolic arc. It goes up, slowing down in the process, and descends at a sharper angle than it went up. That is caused by air drag. All the regolith kicked up on the Moon follows a parabolic arc.

[000063]

Originally Posted by FatFreddy88

Please link to where it's been debunked and we can talk about whether it's really been debunked.

http://abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread566601/pg1

There you go. About 450 pages worth. Good luck!

[sts60]

Originally Posted by FatFreddy88

It would be easy to sift and wash sand to make it dust-free...

Hi, davidc/rocky. You were wrong about that before over on apollohoax and you're still wrong here. I'm reminded of that every time I deal with kitty litter.

Oh, and yes, the South Atlantic Anomaly does exist, and all the astrophysicists and space engineers know it, including the ones in Spain (where, incidentally, Apollo ALSEP telemetry was received for years).

The final tally on that "lurkers and viewers" poll, by the way, was nineteen new posters - every one of which said you were wrong.

[Paulhoff]

Is it any wonder that we still have Flat-Earthers.


Paul

[Craig4]

Originally Posted by FatFreddy88

It would be easy to sift and wash sand to make it dust-free.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9S30XLds5gc

Prove that anyone did that.

[ryanebelhar]

Originally Posted by Craig4

Prove that anyone did that.

The best part of that video is the claim that there are no footprints visible in the videos, followed by a variety of video clips clearly showing foot prints.

[Corsair 115]

Originally Posted by FatFreddy88

It would be easy to sift and wash sand to make it dust-free.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9S30XLds5gc

I know there are prints that look like they're in fine sand but we don't see them when they're being made.



This video shows that the movement is consistent with the atmosphere explanation.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oFMpmjEv9o0

If the initial away movement of the flag were caused by it's being repelled by static electricity, it wouldn't move back in the other direction even farther than it initially moved. It moves back toward the astronaut after it's moved away from him because of the air drawn toward him to fill the void caused by his passing.

So, do tell me, how much was von Braun and the rest of the engineers down in Huntsville building the Saturn V rockets paid to keep quiet about the products of their efforts not actually going to where they were designed to go? How much were all the folks over at North American Aviation who built the CM and all the guys over at Grumman who built the lunar landers? All of those many, many people just kept quiet about all their efforts being for nothing? How about all the astronauts? (Not all of whom actually flew on Apollo missions.)

You are apparently devoted to an utterly stupid and idiotic conspiracy theory in the face of absolutely overwhelming evidence against it (evidence which you apparently can't be bothered to read for yourself at the local public library), not to mention the conspiracy being self-defeating on purely logical terms.

Public libraries. Books. Read. Start now.

[Captain_Swoop]

This thread is like a flashback.

[aggle-rithm]

Originally Posted by FatFreddy88

It would be easy to sift and wash sand to make it dust-free.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9S30XLds5gc

I know there are prints that look like they're in fine sand but we don't see them when they're being made.



This video shows that the movement is consistent with the atmosphere explanation.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oFMpmjEv9o0

If the initial away movement of the flag were caused by it's being repelled by static electricity, it wouldn't move back in the other direction even farther than it initially moved. It moves back toward the astronaut after it's moved away from him because of the air drawn toward him to fill the void caused by his passing.

Funny joke, and you tell it well.

[twinstead]

This just goes to show that some people are hard wired to believe just about any stupid conspiracy theory they come across.

[Craig4]

This is where most CT'ers fail utterly. They focus on could have. Sand could have be cleaned of dust, pictures could have been faked. Could have doesn't matter, prove what did happen.

[Paulhoff]

I wonder why they don't believe in Computers seeing that they don't know how they work too.

And radios, TV, Planes etc etc etc.

Paul

[FatFreddy88]

Quote:

If you didn't see those footprints being made on live TV

If all the footage is still available, link to some that clearly shows one of those footprints in fine dust while it's being made.

Quote:

Also, what you call "sand" does not at all compare to the regolith of the Moon.

I already know that. The issue is whether the stuff we see in the Apollo footage is large-grained sand. I don't see how it can't be.

Quote:

All the regolith kicked up on the Moon follows a parabolic arc.

It sounds like you're seeing what you want to see.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sRSpntQ-VtY

The way the flag moves in this clip closes the whole case anyway.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ymwE1sNm82Y

Quote:

There you go. About 450 pages worth. Good luck!

I'll start taking a look at this this weekend when I have some more time.
http://abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread566601/pg1

Couldn't you just find one specific thing that proves it so I won't have to spend two hours looking for something substantial?

Quote:

So, do tell me, how much was von Braun and the rest of the engineers down in Huntsville building the Saturn V rockets paid to keep quiet about the products of their efforts not actually going to where they were designed to go? How much were all the folks over at North American Aviation who built the CM and all the guys over at Grumman who built the lunar landers? All of those many, many people just kept quiet about all their efforts being for nothing? How about all the astronauts? (Not all of whom actually flew on Apollo missions.)

There are plausible scenarios that would explain this. Scientist can lie and if one wanted to come forward, the press wouldn't report what he said. It would even be downright dangerous for someone to try to spill the beans.
http://es.youtube.com/watch?v=ZfYBJFPuiwE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ipKyUVuQ2Uk
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bvay28lZiHU

Here's some info on why we can't take what scientists publish as fact.

At about the 30 minute mark of this video a scientist says that science fraud is common.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...8989248030643#

Scientists at the Rand Corporation say that depleted uranium is safe.
http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/l...9_bt170-99.htm

There are other scientists who say the opposite.
http://www.google.es/search?q=deplet...nium&tbs=vid:1

It's clear that the government can find scientists willing to sell out and lie.

Here's a scientists who say that it's impossible to get something published in a science journal if it goes against the official version.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7bAE7FGdNmA
(00:16 time mark)

If someone tried to blow the whistle, the press would ignore him or her.
http://www.thismodernworld.org/arc/1...ntion-span.gif
http://www.youtube.com/results?searc...sky+media&aq=f
http://www.youtube.com/watch?gl=ES&hl=es&v=Wi5h3vZl6uo
http://www.youtube.com/results?searc...Disinfo.+&aq=f
http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Me...l_Chomsky.html
http://www.chomsky.info/articles/199710--.htm
http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Me...dia_watch.html
http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Pr...anda_page.html
http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Me...a_Control.html
http://www.cassiopaea.org/cass/official_culture.htm
http://www.youtube.com/watch?gl=ES&hl=es&v=trWcqxrQgcc
http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/He...ystem_One.html

We are lied to about history.
http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=145531

http://theconspiracyzone.podcastpeople.com/posts/28159
(excerpts)
---------------------------------------------
Q: Why do prominent astronomers like Sir Bernard Lovell and Patrick Moore support the Moon landings if they were faked?

A: Scientists and astronomers around the globe know full well that the Moon missions were faked, but rely on NASA to gain access to the vital data beamed back to Earth from the Hubble space telescope. They cannot slag off NASA otherwise NASA would deprive them of this essential information, which they so much require.
---------------------------------------------
Q: What about the vast number of people involved in Apollo, wouldn’t someone have spoken out.

A: Pan’s claim there were half a million people involved in the Apollo program, but that includes all the humble engineers working on machine parts in many companies around the globe. So if someone is making a part in some engineering factory in Seattle, and his boss tells him it’s for the Apollo spacecraft, is that engineer proof the landings took place? No of course it is not proof, and even if that engineer knew they never made it to the Moon, he would still brag to his friends that he made a part that went to the Moon just to make him feel proud in some way or other. Parts for the Apollo program were made at many different factories around the globe. For example the laser reflector supposedly left on the Moon was manufactured in France. NASA collected the unit from the French company, and that was the last they saw of it. It’s probably stashed away in some archive at Langley, but one things for certain it’s not on the Moon. Are those French engineers proof they landed on the Moon? No of course not, as very few, (probably less than 200 people), were actually involved in bringing the whole lot together, so as to minimize what was actually taking place. No need for any of them to speak out because (A) They are 100% patriotic to the USA, and would say nothing that would go against America, even if it were true. (B) They do not need millions of dollars to safeguard their future, as they have already received substantial amounts from NASA just to “keep mum”. Read comments from people who worked on the Apollo program in the APOLLO FEEDBACK section.

Quote:

This is where most CT'ers fail utterly. They focus on could have. Sand could have be cleaned of dust, pictures could have been faked. Could have doesn't matter, prove what did happen.

If it's plausible that NASA sifted and washed sand to make it dust-free so that there wouldn't be any dust clouds, the fact that there were no dust clouds doesn't prove they were in a vacuum.

[Jrrarglblarg]

Have you heard the one about the young australian genius and the $300 bucket of dirt?

[FatFreddy88]

Take a look at this article about James Van Allen. I posted the whole thing in case it goes off-line.

http://www.buzzcreek.com/grade-a/MOON/articles1.htm
-------------------------------------------------
THE VAN ALLEN ENIGMA
By Phylis and James Collier

In the early 1950's, a 35-year-old State University of Iowa physics professor and some of his students were cruising the cold waters ofnorthern Canada and the Atlantic Ocean, sending a series ofrocket-carrying balloons- which they dubbed "rockoons" - 12 to 15 miles into space.

They were trying to measure the nature of low-energy cosmic raysswirling around the earth. The experiments continued for five more years. Then, in 1958,Professor James Van Allen discovered his monster. Suddenly, his instrumentation warned of a giant beast of a thing, spewing enough deadly radiation counts to kill any human who ventured into its domain unprotected.

Van Allen and his students weren't sure of the size, shape and texture of the monster, they just knew they had encountered an incredible phenomenon.
...


It looks like Van Allen changed his opinion when he started working for NASA.

Snipped for compliance with Rule 4. Do not copy and paste lengthy tracts of text from elsewhere. Instead, post a short quote and a link to the other source. I've also edited the Apollo moon landing "hoax" bits of this post because there's an existing active thread for that topic. Please read the Membership Agreement if you are not sure about the rules to which you agreed when you signed up. Thank you.

Posted By:LashL

ETA: Upon reading the rest of the thread, I'm merging this entire thread with the moon landing "hoax" thread.

Posted By:LashL

[I Am The Scum]

No. You can relax, now.

[FatFreddy88]

The proof that the moon missions were faked is crushing. Here's some of it in case there's anyone who hasn't seen it yet.
------------------------------

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ymwE1sNm82Y
At the 2 minute 35 second mark of the video the flag is still. When the astronaut goes past it, it starts to move.

There's an analysis of that here in this three part series.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zr76q...x=0&playnext=1

Snipped for compliance with Rule 4 as it turns out this lengthy post is a copy and paste from elsewhere. Again, do not copy and paste lengthy tracts of material from elsewhere. Instead, post a short quote and a link.

Posted By:LashL

[Alferd_Packer]

Tldr

[kookbreaker]

Reported for copyright violation and flooding.

[Jrrarglblarg]

A) you're not very imaginative if you have to keep wringing out the same old dirty dishrag.

B) You started this thread to spam post about radiation. Why are you going off-topic by your second post in it?

C) . . . and here we have the wall of links to threads where you get spanked, combing the worst features of self-obsession and low intellect.

Why do you feel the need to rehash teh EXACT SAME POINTS on every forum in the googleverse? Are you convinced that somehow, somewhere, your unsupported opinions won't be spanked with data?

D) You've been told repeatedly that the ApolloHoax.net forum != Clavius website -- why don't you get it yet?

E) In one of the threads you linked to I told you something interesting about jayutah. Please review the links you provide before posting them to make sure you don't embarrass yourself further.

[FatFreddy88]

Quote:

Reported for copyright violation and flooding.

This has never been a problem on any other forum I've posted on. If I don't put all of the info on the first page, it will get buried and fewer people will see it. I just want everybody to see all of the info. Why is this bad?

[Jrrarglblarg]

Quote:

The astronauts look pretty nervous at the press conference.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-RcKLAo62Ro

Here's a link to the entire conference.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...24572487804641

This keeps going on and offline so if this link is dead, try googling "Apollo 11 press conference".

Their behavior look pretty suspicious here too. It begins in the second half of the video.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...15730495966561

I've opined before and I'll do it again, to me they look hung over in that press conference. Prove me wrong.

[Disco]

Originally Posted by Alferd_Packer

Tldr

This.

[Jrrarglblarg]

Originally Posted by FatFreddy88

This has never been a problem on any other forum I've posted on. If I don't put all of the info on the first page, it will get buried and fewer people will see it. I just want everybody to see all of the info. Why is this bad?

Maybe the biggest problem is that nobody wants to wade through a hundred links they've seen before on every forum where you post.

[Disbelief]

Originally Posted by FatFreddy88

This has never been a problem on any other forum I've posted on. If I don't put all of the info on the first page, it will get buried and fewer people will see it. I just want everybody to see all of the info. Why is this bad?

Because, it is against the MA which you agreed to when you became a member of this site.

[kookbreaker]

Originally Posted by FatFreddy88

This has never been a problem on any other forum I've posted on. If I don't put all of the info on the first page, it will get buried and fewer people will see it. I just want everybody to see all of the info. Why is this bad?

We have rules here. Your unfamiliarity with them is not my problem. Try following them instead of complaining.