First of all, NASA claimed to put mirrors on the moon with their missions. So why try to fake it, when anyone who has a powerful enough laser can merely point it at the mirror and see a reflection? I knew something was off when none of the moon conspiricy theorists pointed out these mirrors.
Second, many of the observed video flaws were replicated when Mythbusters tried to replicate the artificial conditions on the moon. http://mythbustersresults.com/nasa-moon-landing. This shows that either a lot of effort went into artificially simulating conditions on the moon, or its real.
I guess the lesson here is reader beware the conspiricy theorists, they might be onto something or rehashing the disproven myths.
The mirrors were put there by aliens, and/or the people who live on the moon called the Lunarians. The aliens use them like we do; because of their vanity and while brushing their teeth and getting haircuts. But NASA sometimes shines lasers at them, which makes them mad.
Stanley Kubrick created the artificial moon, which is why he used the same video equipment in 2001: Space Oddysey and leaves clues about it in the Shining.
As for mythbusters:
Photo is still fake (if we think it is the moon), it was just created without editing on a set.
Same for this one.
It can flap in a vacuum, but there was no vacuum on that picture.
@Aristophanes: It is not true - as you stated in another thread - that amateur telescopy can resolve Apollo objects on the Moon. In any case, I await independent confirmation of Apollo sites from a non-governmental organization.
@eliotn: The “Moon landing” specifically means landing and returning human beings from the surface of the Moon. There is no in-principle reason why we could not have landed abiotic objects on the Moon either at the times the Apollo missions were supposedly landing men on the Moon or at some later date.
Mythbusters - as most “conspiracy debunkers” are wont to do - addressed only a few of the most absurd “conspiracy” theories, most of which are probably disinfo originating with the government itself.
Take a careful look at this and this. I would ask you to view the first footage several times over and really absorb what is depicted there and try as hard as you can to imagine the depictions arising merely as a result of low gravity. That footage is so visually baffling that I think it creates a prima facie presumption that Apollo 16 lunar footage was entirely faked. The next question is whether all the Apollo Moon footage was faked or not. As I asked in another thread: why fake just one video?
They had means, motive and opportunity to do it. The “lie” is an easy sell: national security, baby. We did it it to take the wind out of the Soviets and bankrupt them (success 1989!) as they fell for our world-class fakery and exhausted themselves trying to do IRL what we were merely faking. And we were only faking just a small part of the space program, 99% of it was genuine. Take this to your grave, boys, for God and country. And you’ll be wealthy and successful as long as you play along… and we don’t need to mention that bad things could happen to you - or your family - should you begin to make waves and cause problems… remember what happened to Grissom?
The purpose of going to the Moon: So we could tell the Soviets, “We have bigger, brassier balls than you have.” That and to invoke religious awe in the public at the awesome capability of the government: “When we put our minds to it, we can accomplish annnnnnnnnnnything!”
If you tell the man on the street that government is inefficient, what is one of the most common objections you will hear? “Well, yes, there is some waste but they did put a man on the Moon and you know that private industry could never make investments at that scale. We have microwaves, styrofoam and velcro thanks to NASA and the Space Program.”
So, in essence Clayton, the moon landing becomes a propaganda victory for the intellectuals, the opinion-shapers, creating a powerful argument for government action generally.
Ok, Clayton, I have a lot of questions and comments about this moon conspiracy theory. But this isn’t all of them.
First of all, if the goal was to get a man on the moon to “beat” the russians and invoke awe in the american public, then why not simply do it if possible? Especially when people are going to be investigating this awe-inspiring event?
Second, mirrors were placed on the moon. However, to make them useful for distance measurements, they need to be placed with precision. Simply dropping them from a great height can damage them or cause them to move (remember no air resistance to cushion the fall. How do you do that without people physically coming on the moon?
And all of the governments and private organizations that monitor NEO (organic satellites) keep this secret on behalf of the Western power elite?
The USSR gets amde a fool of (they killed their first astronaut bringing him back form orbit- he burned to death screaming blaming his government, I think the recordings are online) and they don’t simply … tell the other nations that will believe them. Castro and Chavez get on TV and denounce US weather weapons. Why would Khrushchev not?
And, yes we do take credit for bankrupting the USSR even though that is not what happened.
So genuine that they kept the actual US government space programsecret until 1992. The NRO just builds spy satellites. Why would the US government have policies to go to the moon way back then? People in the US were more frugal than they are now (I think we know why). There is no economic benefit to it. Satellites, for spying, on the other hand…
If we are conspiricizing about the moon landing it makes more sense to me that the Nazis and the CIA (the banks and scientific minds with power) had a joint operation under the guise of a US space program. They did go to the moon and the Soviets, as well as the US, know that the Nazis (today it would be their money and who controls it) are a more powerful underground force than people realize. They did send theorist to Barcelona to hypothesize as if they lost the war; how they could escape, keep their money, etc. Then, we have US intelligence pardons, Vatican ratlines; Israel had to hunt down some of the Nazis they wanted dead as far as the 1980’s…and no one in the after war cleanup ended up with the bell.
If Wernher von Braun was right when he wrote in Conquest of the Moon that the radiation in space was many times too great for unshielded travel, then it is likely that the test animals that were sent up into space retrurned dead and this was covered up.
I can’t find the cite right now, but I recall reading that James Van Allen (after whom the radiation belts are named) actually worked with a Congressman for a period in the late 60’s or early 70’s to either halt or reorganize the NASA space program. I’ll keep digging.
Not sure. Radio telemetry maybe? I think that’s an ancillary issue. Note that you can bounce and detect light pulses off the Moon with sensitive equipment even without a reflector. I’m only pointing this out to say that the mirror doesn’t - in and of itself - prove that men were on the Moon.
And please, please, I want to head off any accusations of Ludditism. The reason we didn’t put men on the Moon is not technological - with enough resources, I have no doubt that all the technological problems are solvable. The issue is purely economic. I think it is simply far more costly to send men out into space than people have been led to believe.
the chinese spacewalk seems faked, alright, but the moonwalks still seem real. The fact that the astronauts never jumped heights that one would expect is likely a result of caution and the stiffness of the suits restricting their movement. The image artifacts are interesting but not conclusive proof of anythng at this point.
I disagree with your interpretation of the footage but I will watch some more. My question is why would it be necessary to fake 6 separate landings? You fake one video to accomplish the mission (pretend to land on the moon in such a way that people believe you) and you dont fake 5 more to limit the evidence.
they had means, motive, and opportunity to land on the moon 6 times (plus a dry-run flyover). The motive was to find out what was up there, because generations of observations suggested that there was at least some sort of weather/seismic phenomena, and who knows what else? The apollo program was the greatest reconnaisance campaign in recorded human history, of course they wont tell us what they found.
one of the things that I find interesting about the moon is how many facts are secret or covered up. Like, the moon has an atmosphere. And, the moon has water. And, transient lunar phenomena are largely unexplained, having been observed for hundreds of years. But youre loony if you question the official story. In my opinion thats why smart people do question the factual basis of human exploration of luna. There are so many lies and pieces of false evidence that its an initially plausible hypothesis. I simply dont think the case has been made, I lean more towards the opinion that the photographs were doctored to remove archaelogical evidence of settlement or non-terran technology.
@Malachi: So you have no issues whatsoever with the dangling feet and the “hoisting” of the “downed astronaut”?? I can’t get myself to see how those effects are physically possible, regardless of the lower gravity. Can you speak on how you’re seeing those play out in a low gravity environment?
The landing footage is a joke. Have you watched it recently? you can view it on youtube. If you think that footage is real, I have a bridge I would like to sell you.
So you are more likely to believe in a NASA coverup of alien technology on the moon than you are that NASA fooled the world in to believing they landed on the moon? Some logic.
The biggest problem I face when dealing with trying to convince people that NASA is a fraud is their inability to conceive of it, the unwillingness to consider it and their general childish emotional attachment to the idea of space travel in all its glory.
When man finally does leave the atmosphere and go to the moon it will be on a ship the size of a skyscraper and the footage will be amazing. The technology will be able withstand extreme radiation, extreme climate conditions, have extreme propulsion technologies and super advanced camera technologies. Not some pathetic aluminium-cheap-1969 not even as advanced-as-my-android-phone non sense.
The footage of the stars a lone would be so mind blowing that it would be worth the hassle. Imagine the possibilities.
I just watched the “dangling feet” section of the video repeatedly. I’m not seeing it. It looks like all the other footage, which all looks plausible to me. I’ve never been in an environment that was dominated by lunar gravity so I have no basis for comparison to “the real thing” but it doesnt seem to resemble the footage immediately after that in the test rig. As the the astronaut “being pulled to his feet” he braces himself against the ground and pushes off of the other astronaut with his left arm. His arm is mostly obscured by the other astronaut but you can see him put his arm there before he gets up and you can see part of it as he finishes standing. Of course the lifting appears to be done mostly with his pectoralis which would be a minor feat of strength unaided in earth gravity. I admit the sequence looks suspicious at first but it doesnt after you see the arm.
