Anyone else think the moon landing was a fake?

Why? Because good ole uncle Joseph said so?

That's a rather weak argument.

 

if you impart an impulse to something in low gravity, with no atmosphere to restrict it, it will go on moving for a very long time.

why would they shoot the whole thing on a closed set and then use the take where the flag was fluttering? "oh yeah, that'll do, i'm sure no-one will pore over this footage of one of mankinds most memorable achievements, paying any attention to detail, they'll have all forgotten about it by monday". where would the wind even be coming from on a set? did someone leave a fan on? bleedin' cowboys. their cinematographer and lighting technician need sacking straight away.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aVq4_c4hrH8"]A list of the moon's best friends, in order of preference. - YouTube

 

In our 6 year long discussion on the Paranoid Thread (from 2005-2011) someone else brought up that point and there was a logical explanation



Hotwater

 

Having personally touched moon rocks..... and being familiar with the lazer ranging operations using our reflector blocks, I have no problem with the fact that we've been on the moon.

Without the space program and moon landings, it's unlikely we'd be talking on computers right now...... that's where pretty much all modern consumer electronic tech originated. I mean, we'd have computers, but they'd really suck still.

As for the flag, you saw it moving..... in a picture? You realize if you hold the flag out on the moon, it will flutter for quite a while, right?

Also, right now there's a lunar orbiter, called the LRO or something, that is mapping the moon from pretty close. I don't know about other ones, but you can see the apollo 17 landing site, including the flag, lander base, rover, and maybe a reflector block or something. I think you can also see the rover tracks, I think they drove it a few miles, although the only real point was to say that we drove a go-kart on the moon.

 

Why is there no video of this waving flag?

 

Anyone who thinks the moon landing was fake is a lunatic in my book.

 

LOL I wasn't even using that as an argument, I was just replying to someone's post.

So, you believe it because Uncle Sam said so? There's certainly plenty of proof against it being real.

Just goes to show how powerful the lies of those in power can be that something so illogical is regarded as fact, and something that is logical is regarded as conspiracy.

Absolutely possible that those could have been the results of unmanned moon missions.

You need to question things more. I'm not saying go off the deep end, but that doesn't mean completely dismiss another side without looking into it. Keep an open mind. Should be true for anything.

People get so fired up about it, too. Calm down guys. I see much larger flaws in the moon landing being real than it being fake, to be honest.

 

You need to answer more.

I question why, if the "waving flag" is part of the supposed evidence that the landings were fake, there is no evidence anywhere showing the flag waving. No one seems able to answer that.

 

the flag didnt move because it wasnt pulled out properly, it wasnt "waving" per se, it was more or less just bunched up. and no offense but who gives a fuck if we believe the moon landing or not? i dont see how making a forum for it will change anything or benefit anyone.

 

Who says I do? Truth be told: I don't give a fuck about this story.

But I can tell you this: in 1969 in that part of the world people knew exactly what the kremlin wanted them to know.

And since EVERYBODY in the USSR knew, how come they never called hoax on this thing? Man, Brezhnev would have had a field day with that stuff.

Oh yeah.

 

Because If they called it a fake and couldn’t prove it they would have looked weak in the eyes of the rest of the world

They were wise to keep their mouths shut :2thumbsup:


hotwater

 

If you know for sure you MAKE proof. That's how governments roll.

 

searching...

not found it yet but fascinating thread EllisDtripp REALLY knows his shit about spacecraft engineering.

he's very patient too, i'd have lost it when that bloke posted that the moon was a star....

EDIT:right, read through the thread (it was long, but informative) although i did skim posts which appeared to be repeating the same information verbatum, so maybe i missed something. the only post which seems related to what i said was someone saying "if they filmed it in a hangar then why was there wind at all?" to which someone replied "they could have used large fans or wind machines" which, while undeniably true, is completely illogical- why woud they set up fans to make their fake footage look MORE fake?

i often find with conspiracies that there's a peculiar mixture of optimism and pessimism with regards to the government etc. theorists believe that their government is competent enough to mastermind a huge conspiracy which involves swearing tens of thousands of professional technicians, scientists and engineers to perpetual silence (many of whom had no affiliation to the USA at all, so patriotism doesn't come into it) yet are so incompetent that they couldn't orchestrate a simple indoor shoot?

I think you give the US government way too much credit.
these are the same guys who couldn't manage to burgle a hotel without getting caught out, right?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P6MOnehCOUw"]That Mitchell and Webb Look - Moon Landing Sketch - YouTube

 

That's because there is nothing convincing to the contrary... only people saying how obvious a fake it is.

 

Nah! I was in Canada at the time of the moon landing!

 

your right, i should have been clearer.

i've never heard anything convincing to the contrary, which didn't turn out, on closer inspection to be based on idle speculation and easily refuted by a more reliable source or, in some cases, the application of logic.

 

There’s plenty of evidence including a topographical image of Area-51 which when aligned with the NASA images of the astronauts walking on the moon perfectly matches the photo right down to the last micron

Hotwater

 

seems strange that they'd bother to recreating the topography of the sea of tranquility in TWO places, you'da thought the one they had in Flagstaff AZ would have would have been quite sufficient.

but theres nothing inherently suspicious about their attempting to recreate the surface of the landing site on earth before firing three men at the moon in an expensive tin can, i'd be more surprised if they hadn't, and just let the astronauts go in completely cold.

do you mean that the whole thing was shot around area 51 OUTDOORS? then we would have seen REAL wind. i thought the general view was that it was shot in one of the hangars there, not in the actual landscape...