The latest moon hoax documentary

Anyone who reads the thread will see that they had the attitude that they'd refuted it but they hadn't actually refuted it.
https://forum.cosmoquest.org/showth...pollo-footage-was-filmed-in-air-here-on-earth

You're trying to mislead those viewers who don't take the time to look at things in detail.

This video debunks your MythBusters video.

windyz.wmv



Apollo 15 flag, facing air resistance; proving the fraud of alleged manned moon landings.


The flag is seen facing air resistance, as it bend backward between 8.7 and 9.1 seconds, then later is moved due to displaced air, as the astroclown is passing close by at 2:37.


I'm still waiting for you people to address this post.
http://www.sciforums.com/threads/the-latest-moon-hoax-documentary.163196/page-4#post-3645211

I'm not going to forget about this.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

They did refute it. You just don't understand what the video portrayed.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Of course they refuted it! You are just too gullible and ignorant to understand why. Or perhaps just trolling? Which is it?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Not going to forget about what? Your gullibility? your ignorance? Your trolling? The fact that you have absolutely no evidence at all showing the fact that we obviously did go to the Moon?

 

That's funny? I still don't see anyone even vaguely supporting your nonsensical claim/s, and I have no one on ignore.

 

Well Freddy that video was very compelling and I would be surprised if anyone could get thru it without conceeding that the presentation raises various points that as you say could not make one suspicious.

If the video has no edited material relating to communication there certainly is prima facie evidence to support a claim that the conversations in question could not be between two people one on the Earth and one one the Moon. If those who say we went to the Moon can not see the implications of this aspect I would be surprised however I do think that there is the possibility that we went to the Moon however the "movie" could have been produced in a studio. I think there is a great deal in the video that strongly suggests that "the movie" could be made on a Set.

Certainly the radiation exposure during the trip makes one wonder but the fact is, in my case, I have no way of quantifying the radiation or it's effect on a human. I understand the suits have deteriorated so may not be around for their ability to protect to be looked at...anyways I can not comment as I dont know any numbers or if I had them what they mean...This is the way anyone who is not an expert must approach that aspect.

What does concern me in general is how the radiation during the entire course of the mission appears not appear to have had any effect whatsoever on the photographic film..one must expect there would be a huge effect on film and it will be interesting to find out how NASA via their camera and film experts produced such great photos showing no signs of being degraded by radiation....and whilst on the photography aspect, and only a couple of days ago discussing frozen film with a astrophotographer, one wonders how any camera could work or how the film could be moved in the camera..in the days of astrophotograghy with film they would freeze the film and this chap said they had to make plates with a single frame of film because it was so brittle it could not be used in a camera....no doubt NASA would have addressed these matters.

The lighting is entirely suggestive of a studio and I doubt that can be dismissed easily if at all...and here there is plenty of commentary by experts stating on many occassions that the lighting could not come from the Sun.

What I found interesting was the general construction of the craft...it really did surprise me and I think it is inconsistent with my expectations and for this reason the video I found an eye openner...

Anyways all I saw I find consistent with the Moon landing having been filmed on a Set and expect there will be those who can argue the opposite...
However that leaves use with a movie made on a Set, which may have been the only way to give the public what they wanted to see...what is covered in the video does not establish that the actual trip did or did not take place.

The loss of the plans and data is simply unbelievable but why need not be answered...

Now for all of you who think I have gone crazy do not dare to comment unless you watch the video as if you think you want to argue about this you must watch the video as my comments are on the video...and to dismiss what you imagine is in it without seeing it would be silly.

I usually just don't watch these things thinking they are nonsense but the fact is you end up not seeing what folk are so concerned about...

So Freddy you must be happy but note my comment that there is no proof we did not go but I do think it could be done on set, that seems a reasonable conclusion in my view, but I don't have a problem with that...in fact it makes more sense to me to do it that way leaving the guys who went there doing more than taking movies to making taxpayers happy.


Alex

 

Well you by now will have seen my post and all I can say is what I have said...but in my view I think there is plenty of evidence to support a case that the movie was made in a studio which is no comment about not going but on meeting the real need to justify the missions to the public.. if there is a hoax it may well be simply on how the news was delivered to the public...in any event I don't care at all...water under the bridge and if I am not there I am unconvinced..of anything...even if I see something with my own eyes I still allow for the possibility that I am being conned ..otherwise I am not a sceptic at all.
Alex

 

You didn't address the issue I raised in this post.
http://www.sciforums.com/threads/the-latest-moon-hoax-documentary.163196/page-4#post-3645211

I beg to differ. There is a ton of proof that they did not go* and there is zero proof that they went. Post something you consider to be proof that they went and we can talk about whether it's really proof.


*
https://www.giraffeboards.com/showthread.php?t=31034

 

I thought I had and although I don't have anything more to say I grant you one question but make it brief.

You don't have to beg so please differ away.

Then rather than me waste my time hunting for the proof could you please give me just one proof that they did not go..only need one so you pick out the proof you feel is the most convincing.

Well I won't be doing that as I have not made such a claim and as I have pointed out I don't really care ...you however seem to care so out of courtesy I will review the one proof you present and I will deal with it fairly. It will only take one item I expect unless you are approaching the matter on the basis of throwing lots of mud in the hope something sticks...if a proof works you only need one don't you?

Alex



Alex

 

I am sure I have not heard all probably only the top 20

So if there is a new one on the way waiting I am with breath baited it is

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Freddy....this proves nothing it is interesting but it proves nothing. I found the bit in the video showing one astronaut who was totally ignorant of the belts interesting but again it proves nothing..very interesting but proves nothing.

I have seen the incident and I think the violet response was most unwise for reasons I think anyone can work out so I won't list them and sidetrack Freddy from presenting his one proof..it only takes one...like the little bit pregnant thing or DrA saying they only needed on scientist to prove him wrong not hundreds..it takes only one proof.

If anyone can prove that we did not go to the Moon I would be interested but like most things it would not surprise me. If it was a lie it certainly won't be the biggest lie told and retold. Go after religion Freddy is all I can say.

From what I have seen I am rather convinced that the landing was a movie production but if it was that has little bearing on proving we did not go..and frankly if I was running the show I would not wish to be going up there tasked with putting on a show for the world in general and taxpayers in specific... making a movie would be the smart thing to do, produce your movie on a Set pre mission to have a news reel and allow the mission to do what it need do which is not taking pictures and holiday movies.

The lighting gives it away as being on a Set there is no way to get around that and all the other stuff, flag movement etc is just more mud and debatable but you can't get around the obvious lighting problems, even with Mythbusters, it is all through the movie and to me it is so obvious I feel no need to debate the matter..you either see it or you don't.. but if you want to go to the trouble you could sample different spots in the photos and scientifically prove that you are not dealing with Sunlight lighting in the scene.
Again I don't care if someone wishes to reject the lighting problem that is on them. Anyways the problem Freddy has is an inability to deal with proving his claim..there will be no way he says to me..well your take seems reasonable and indeed probable and explains the problems... I wait for the one piece of proof that we did not go rather than convincing me the movie was done on a set...I think there is a strong case that a set was used but why wouldnt you..many reasons to do it that way.
Anyways Freddy has a claim we did not go and I say he can not prove his claim.
Alex

 

I can not see a way to prove we did not go..unless we send a team up to look at the landing site...if there is nothing up there well we did not go..all the stuff people raise may prove what the public saw was a movie but proving what we saw was done on Earth on a Set only proves what we saw was done on Earth on a Set...and to make the news reel makes sense so the real objectives of the missions were not cluttered with holiday snaps and movies.
Alex

 

I said it was mere circumstantial evidence.
http://www.sciforums.com/threads/the-latest-moon-hoax-documentary.163196/page-4#post-3645211

Doesn't it make you a little suspicious? You don't sound like an objective person.

 

I am already a full on totally suspicious of each and every claim made by every human both in these times but from the start of recorded history...I am suspicious of you and note I asked you questions which you did not answer wherein I sought to determine your motivation...not giving me any answer makes me suspicious but it does not entitle me to make up my own story and fit you in it..it just means I dont know what your motivation is a d that you have not addressed my enquires in thst regard.
Now you called upon me to provide proof to support a claim that I did not make and I had the impression that your claim was that we never went to the Moon so you now saying that it was mere circumstantial evidence has me confused as to what you are actually claiming...I thought you had proof...lots of proof in fact I think you mentioned truck loads..all I ask for is one proof that shows we never went to the Moon..are you now saying you don't have such?
Is all your activity only to make us suspicious?

Objective for some stuff subjective for other stuff..that's the only way it can work.

Anyways please state what it is that you claim and provide one proof in support.

Alex

 

Probably to late to find the movie stage or bribe a staff member to take you there

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

I claim that the Apollo footage was faked in a studio.

Here is some evidence of atmosphere in the footage.

Apollo 15 Rover Traverse Issue

(Be sure to watch at the 3:13 time mark)

Apollo 15 flag, facing air resistance; proving the fraud of alleged manned moon landings.

(2:35 time mark)

Initial Apollo 15 Flag Movement


The flag that moved


windyz.wmv

(00:50 and 1:50 time marks)

Moonfaker: LRO, Flag or no Flag?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nRXretl0amQ

https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=MoonFaker: The Flags Are Alive
https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=MoonFaker: Flagging The Dead Horses

Start watching this at the 2:06:30 time mark.
American Moon (English Version)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KpuKu3F0BvY

 

Yes so what?

I think it probably was and if you took the time to read what I say you would know that. Read my earlier posts and tell me my opinion. Heck I am giving you a go and you miss it ... has a gone here watched any of your videos or given you the time at all..I have and you missed it...read my posts.

I asked for one piece of proof how could you miss that..one piece of proof..one means ...just one..and certainly not a list of videos that I will not be watching.

If you can in your words present your proof,do so, but really there is no point in me talking to you if you don't bother to read anything I say...how could you miss my expressed belief that a movie set was involved.

I specifically asked you not to throw mud hoping that something will stick.

What is your game? Your list of videos proves one thing but that can be my secret ...but also understood by other members.

Clearly you do not want any discussion and so I will bow out and let you rant and spin your wheels.

So we at least agree there is a high probability that they made a news reel movie.

Did you miss me saying that at all?

The thing is news reel movie or not has no bearing on going or not..you do realise that don't you?

Alex

 

If they really went, why would they show us faked footage. The footage was obviously faked in a studio. I think it's pretty silly to entertain the notion that they went and then showed us footage faked in a studio.

 

You only think it is silly because you have never given any thought to the difficulties in ruling millions of people.

Now put yourself in the place of the king of a mythical place where they are going to send a mission to the Moon...now first question you ask is "what's in it for me" even though you are king you always need more money to wage war to make more money..that's the way of it..well your advisor is no fool, after all you picked him as advisor because he is clever right? So being clever the advisor tells you,the king, that a mission to the Moon is a good thing cause there must be lots of gold and rare Earths and that such a mission will get you votes which you dont need being king but you certainly pick up on the "lots of gold"... So now you have a problem..getting there is only part of it hiding the fact you are interested only in the gold is the main issue...at that point you realise that the people will want pictures and news headlines..and heck that is a big part of what you do...so you set up a committee to produce a news reel..which you can run no matter what..the mission can never fail as you have your movie..and of course there is the science..we do need to know about the geology etc ( the gold but you dont ever mention that when putting the committee together)...so the fake movie is so obvious..any failure..run the movie...and if the scientists find the gold you are not looking for you certainly don't want that shown on tv.
So you make the movie in-house know what you have and don't waste time on the Moon taking movies etc just doing geology.
The situation is for the US a movie was needed for the taxpayers and propaganda so the real mission did not have to do it...at least if I were king not looking for gold that's the way I would do it...and you keep feeding the public these movies until they go back to watching football and forget all about "the geology".

It is not silly in the least if you think it through.
Alex

 

cosmored/fatfreddy/rocky/drifty

I await this unbelievable person to answer where he is cornered.

We know three things for a fact:

1. Dry sand takes no prints whatsoever.
2. Wet sand does, fine detail or otherwise.
3. When you kick wet sand it clumps.

From that we can deduce that the Apollo footage is not dry sand because we see prints being made all the time, it cannot be wet sand because we see fine dust being kicked all the time. Your crap theory is busted.

1. EXPLAIN this in your own words. I'll just keep posting it until you answer it properly.

2. Itemise in your own words the top 10 undebunkable "hoax anomalies". You keep making your moronic claim that it is proven when any true thinking person laughs at idiots who can't see how it has been debunked. You cowardly dismiss presented debunks to you by claiming opposing views represent no credibility.


I find it interesting that you have another person who thinks the footage was faked but seems to lack the scientific rigour to understand how that it is actually provably impossible.

@xelasnave,1947 You asked for proof, just one item - try this one video I found. If you don't understand the implication I can explain. This is IMPOSSIBLE to fake, physics cannot be rigged like this:



Edit: another video to show what that video is explaining - it deals with the gravity and fall times: