Poll: Was the Moon Landing a Hoax?

[Moretorque]

Just watch the Apollo 11 press conference, it says it all. They never went!

It would be easy for them to send Droid however, you don't have to worry about shit, shave or shower and that's just the short list.

[Ghost]

.

[Ghost]

.

[fschmidt]

So maybe you and Franklin and the other two can go form a commune of people who want a Patriarchal society BUT still believe the stuff the MSM feeds you. "True Believers". Outcasts who still wanna belong.

You really think that Ghost and I have a great desire to belong to modern culture? Seriously?

Just because mainstream media says that grass is green doesn't mean that it is really red but was painted green in some vast conspiracy. But then I wouldn't really know what the mainstream media says because I don't even watch it.

A Patriarchal society based on common sense is what I want. See my signature.

[Moretorque]

Just watch the Apollo 11 press conference, it says it all. They never went!

It would be easy for them to send Droid however, you don't have to worry about shit, shave or shower and that's just the short list.

I'm watching it now. I only just started watching it, so maybe there's an admission in there where they state they never went...but so far all I'm seeing is people in the comments saying, "look at their faces and listen to their voices! They are obviously lying!"

That's the evidence that Apollo 11 was a hoax?! That's laughable...at best.

Edit: Now I'm about 25 minutes into it. Overall, it just sounds like a normal, boring press conference. The astronauts look bored, but there is also plenty of joking and laughter during the conference. So far, no admission that it was a hoax...

Droid might need company on the trip, a ghost doesn't even require electricity and if something goes wrong you can just zip out of there and Droid can take the brunt of it.

I looked the whole thing over and the press conference was the last straw.

[Ghost]

.

[Moretorque]

It's hard to argue with a super natural being such as yourself and also I am scared of Ghost but here we go, drum role please. Here are just a few and I mean a few where there are many many reasons not to believe the moon landings.


# 1 I realize the US went bankrupt in 1933.

# 2 The lunar lander real life simulation was abandoned after the first try when Neil Armstrong nearly lost his life in the real time piloting of the simulation lander here on earth and no such other attempt was ever made to perfect the real life system test. They ran out of time, even Obama admitted they could not get back in the time frame established in the first endeavor.

# 3 There are all kinds of photographic errors as well as video errors in the broadcast for the publics spoon fed supposedly live viewings as well as obvious technical errors.

#4 The Apollo 11 press conference. This backs up the rest just by the way they acted, not even close to how humans would act who took the most courageous adventure in human history besides the blackman packing his bags and leaving Africa to populate the earth.

#5 This is what I always go by ultimately, talking to real people who have experienced the problem of it first hand , on Neil's 80 TH birthday my aunts company threw a huge party for it and guess what ? Neil did not say a word about going to the moon and this came directly from my cousin who talked to him personally. You can research this, Lou Hammond and Associates is the name of the company that threw the gig.

#6 Mr. Wu say's so and that settles it.

[Winston]

The most obvious reason the moon landing is obviously a hoax is because if it was real, then we would have moon bases and hotels and daily flights to there by now. Technology ALWAYS moves forward, it NEVER moves backward, at least in recorded history. There's no way in hell it could move backward that much especially. This is common sense.

Technology can regress and can be lost. Civilizations do collapse and knowledge can be lost.

In some cases yeah, like when a civilization is destroyed and overrun by barbarians. For instance when the Roman Empire collapsed, a lot of its technology in building irrigation canals, sewer systems, architecture, and arches were lost during the Middle Ages for hundreds of years. Whatever technology was used to build the Egyptian Pyramids or move the huge blocks of rock at Stonehenge, has also been lost too. But those are extreme cases with extraordinary explanations.

But when was NASA destroyed or overrun by barbarians? NASA has no excuse for losing technology or information. All its stuff is held in top security vaults and computers with the highest technology far beyond anything the public has. So are you shitting us? That's a totally INVALID comparison. Come on. I thought you were bright? Where is your common sense? I thought you were a freethinker?

Btw, NASA also claims to have all the telemetry tapes of the Apollo missions. The tapes were in many boxes that could fill the size of several rooms! Yet they claim they are all missing? You buy that? LOLOLOLOLOLOLOL

Today NASA admits that it does not know how to safely get back to the moon. And President Obama has publicly said that "We don't need to go to the moon because we've already been there". WTF? What an insult to our intelligence! That's the dumbest statement any president can make. Did Europe say after Columbus, "We don't need to sail to the New World again, because we've already been there"? Obama is the stupidest liar ever.

1. They don't exactly produce Saturn V rockets anymore, and they scrapped the Orion program. The U.S. clearly has declined sharply and does not care about exploring space anymore, with some exceptions. Which ties into losing technology over time.

2. Obama is an idiot.

They can tell you anything and make any excuse they want. But we all know they lie most of the time. So why you buying it? If they really went to the moon, there would be daily flights and moon bases now. Technology always moves forward, never backward. All of this has been mentioned in this thread and other moon hoax threads. Haven't you learned anything from the past posts on this subject?

It seems that you are reluctant to accept that the moon landings were a hoax, so you have cognitive dissonance in filtering out all the evidence that it was. Why is that? Why do you have a psychological need to believe in the moon landings? High school physics can prove that it was a hoax. Otherwise, if you have valid arguments as to why it was real, please present them rather than trying to poke holes in other people's arguments.

Momopi believes in the Apollo moon landing. He keeps saying it will happen again, yet it never does. There's always some excuse. When will people like him realize that we've been hoaxed?

He is probably wrong about that...the U.S. has declined severely and clearly cannot do what it used to be capable of.

Another thing is that the Apollo astronauts were never able to jump more than a foot high on the moon, which is not more than they could have on Earth. Yet the moon is 1/6 earth gravity, so they should have been able to jump much higher, even if their space suits were heavy. Instead, they could not jump any higher on the moon than on the earth! That's another obvious giveaway of fraud. NASA cannot explain this, so it doesn't even try. It just runs away or ignores such questions.

Because jumping high on the moon might not be the best of ideas? I don't know, wearing sensitive equipment and being there for science instead of fun (although they had a little fun too) might preclude trying out high jumps and whatnot.

Come on. Haven't you seen the Apollo moon footage? They jumped many times. But they never reached up more than one foot off the ground, which is no higher than in Earth gravity. Where do you get the idea that they purposely didn't want to jump high? That is a bizarre argument that no one else has made, cause it's nonsensical. Why are you trying to grasp at straws? Just admit the obvious.

Also, NASA can't explain how the space suits and the camera offered any protection against the radiation and extreme heat on the daylight side of the moon. It can't, because the suits and camera didn't. So again, it ignores the question, because it cannot admit that it was a hoax or else all public trust in the US government and NASA would come tumbling down.

I don't know much about this. I know gold was used in certain items like the visors to shield from radiation. They did take precautions against radiation, but remember that these missions were short. Longer term missions probably would've encountered problems with radiation poisoning. That is a concern for extended missions and settlements in the future. There was definitely some luck involved in this too. I don't see how NASA has ignored it. Radiation shielding is an essential. Even if you don't believe the moon landings happened, NASA has certainly explained it.

You are purely speculating and trying to make excuses for them. Why? Yes NASA ignored it because if you ask them critical questions like that, they run away. A lot of researchers have. NASA refuses to debate this or answer such hard questions. They refuse to let anyone examine the space suits and equipment too.

How come they can't protect from radiation today but they could in 1969? Gotcha.

Luck? They must be extremely lucky alright. A real trip to the moon would have involved many casualties. Even the Space Shuttle has blown up twice and killed 14 people. Yet it was only 200 miles above the Earth. The moon missions went 240,000 miles to the moon, and yet all 6 missions resulted in ZERO casualties. You buy that? If so I have water under the bridge to sell you.

Please present some logical arguments why the moon missions were real. I presented 30 proofs that they were not in my conspiracy report. Yet your mind and cognitive dissonance refused to look at them. Why?

http://www.debunkingskeptics.com/Conspiracies.htm

All this has been addressed many times here. Why does your mind filter them out?

[Winston]

Also, NASA can't explain how the space suits and the camera offered any protection against the radiation and extreme heat on the daylight side of the moon. It can't, because the suits and camera didn't. So again, it ignores the question, because it cannot admit that it was a hoax or else all public trust in the US government and NASA would come tumbling down.

There is no "extreme heat" on the moon during the day, as we know it in the earth. There is a vacuum, so it's not like you can measure a weather.
Things just get hit by sunlight and if they can't reflect enough or they can't give thermal radiation (infrared) back fast enough, the object gains temperature.

The theory is that to expel heat gained from the white suit's light absorption and the astronaut's body, the suits had an ice-based heat exchanger (sublimator).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liquid_Coo ... on_Garment

One concern would be regarding how much the ice would last, but the oxygen/air supply is limited as well. So the astronaut has to come back to the vehicle eventually anyway.

My main point here though is all this is not the same as saying it's 250F* out there!
Same thing for the "cold" during the night.

As far as the radiation protection goes, it's funny, i didn't know it is accepted that this protection is "limited', and that the cooling water tubes are doing most of the protection, aside from the aluminum-mylar. Some designs are exploring using a full water envelope
http://www.researchgate.net/profile/Joh ... 4917b6.pdf

You got things backward. Yes the moon has no atmosphere and space there is a vacuum. That's why the temperature is extreme. There's no convection air to cool the moon. How does that make the temperature any less real? I don't get you. Look here:

http://www.space.com/18175-moon-temperature.html

Temperatures on the moon are extreme, ranging from boiling hot to freezing cold depending on where the sun is shining. There is no significant atmosphere on the moon, so it cannot trap heat or insulate the surface.

The moon rotates on its axis in about 27 days. Daytime on one side of the moon lasts about 13 and a half days, followed by 13 and a half nights of darkness. When sunlight hits the moon's surface, the temperature can reach 253 degrees F (123 C). The "dark side of the moon" can have temperatures dipping to minus 243 F (minus 153 C).

I'm sorry but 250 degrees F is exactly that, and very hot. How is 250 F not 250 F? WTF? It seems like your mind is desperately trying to deny the facts here. Weird.

The point is, that's an extremely high temperature. Not only did the suits not have any protection from that, but the Kodak film in the Hasselbad camera could not have survived it either. Kodak even admitted so, that their film cannot withstand such temperatures.

Any cooling system in the space suit would require lots of battery power, more than they had. Remember that the astronauts would stay on the moon surface for several days at a time. If you think that ice and cool liquid can last very long in 250 F, you are absolutely insane and crazy. Turn up your oven to 250 F and put some ice in it and see how long that ice lasts. Probably 2 o 3 seconds.

And besides how do you explain the extreme cold of minus 250 F in the shadows or at night on the moon? A heating system requires a lot of power, more than the power they had in their batteries.

The radiation issue is complicated. I provided links to it in my Conspiracy report above.

[Winston]

Just watch the Apollo 11 press conference, it says it all. They never went!

It would be easy for them to send Droid however, you don't have to worry about shit, shave or shower and that's just the short list.

I'm watching it now. I only just started watching it, so maybe there's an admission in there where they state they never went...but so far all I'm seeing is people in the comments saying, "look at their faces and listen to their voices! They are obviously lying!"

That's the evidence that Apollo 11 was a hoax?! That's laughable...at best.

Edit: Now I'm about 25 minutes into it. Overall, it just sounds like a normal, boring press conference. The astronauts look bored, but there is also plenty of joking and laughter during the conference. So far, no admission that it was a hoax...

You're shitting us right? Are you on crack or weed? You mean you can't tell the difference between a bored face and a guilty/reluctant/sad one? Even dogs and children can see the difference. Why can't you?! WTF?!

They do not look bored. They look disturbed and bothered by guilt, because they were forced into going along with the moon hoax. If you really went to the moon and were the first one to do so, and you made it back and survived, would you look sad and guilty? No of course not. You'd look ecstatic and relieved, and be thanking the heavens that you made it back alive. Also, if you were in front of a news media and audience, you would try to look pleasant and friendly, not bored. Even if you were truly bored, you'd hide it in front of a press conference wouldn't you? Duh! This has been explained many times before.

Watch the press conference again. They do not look bored at all. They look guilty and reluctant that they are being forced to lie to the world that they went to the moon. That's not what a bored face looks like. Everyone knows this. Come on.

Here are images of their sad, guilty, reluctant faces below:





Now do those look like bored faces to you? These are mature adults, why would they look bored in an important press conference? Think about it! Think Think Think! Did you also know that 2+2=4? Or does that have to be pointed out too?

Here it is on video. Watch the faces closely. Quit your denial of the obvious. Notice how when Armstrong talks, he looks like he wants to cry. It's as if he's at a funeral or something.



Furthermore, did you know that after this press conference, Neil Armstrong went to his home in Ohio and rarely ever gave any interviews about it again for many years? He didn't want to talk about the moon missions for some reason. Why is that? Obviously because he doesn't like to lie.

In fact, one of his last interviews, Armstrong said that after the moon mission in 1969, he never thought about it again. Isn't that the oddest statement or what? He is cryptically telling you that it was a hoax. If you went to the moon and came back, would you never give it a second thought ever again?

Also, did you see that during the press conference, they were asked if they saw stars on the moon, and Michael Collins and Neil Armstrong looked at each other as if they didn't know what to say? That's highly suspicious.

Then when Armstrong says that, "We could not see any stars with the naked eye", Michael Collins turned to him and said, "I don't remember seeing any either." Yet Collins was in space inside the command module orbiting the moon at 4000 mph when Armstrong and Aldrin were on the moon's surface, allegedly. So why could he not see any stars out in space? Furthermore, in his autobiography called "Carrying the Fire", Michael Collins wrote that he could see lots of stars:

"My God, the stars are everywhere: above me on all sides, even below me somewhat, down there next to that obscure horizon. The stars are bright and they are steady. Of course I know that a star's twinkle is created by the atmosphere, and I have seen twinkle-less stars before in a planetarium, but this is different, this is no simulation, this is the best view of the universe that a human ever had." - Michael Collins, Carrying the Fire, pg. 221

So why did he contradict himself? How do you explain that?

Furthermore, any astronomer can tell you that on the moon's surface, you can see many stars vividly. So why did Armstrong say he couldn't? Did he f**k up the script?

Seriously Ghost, I like your posts, but you would make the absolute WORST DETECTIVE. You couldn't even solve the simplest case. And you'd make a horrible psychologist as well since you can't even read basic body language, which dogs and children can. LOL

[Winston]

Conspiracies are replete throughout history, but not everything is a conspiracy. Conspiracies far smaller have not been able to be contained, but somehow several moon landings have? There are astronauts who have blatantly stated they have seen UFOs or believe in aliens. No conspiracy this big could possibly stay safe from an astronaut coming out and saying, "it was a hoax."

Allegedly, James Irwin, the Apollo 15 astronaut, was going to confess to Bill Kaysing, author of "We Never Went to the Moon", that the moon landings were faked. According to Kaysing, Irwin called him out of the blue and said that he had just become a born again Christian and wanted to talk to him in person about his moon hoax book. But unfortunately, Irwin suddenly died of a heart attack before he could meet with Kaysing.

The lesson here is that if Irwin was somehow silenced before he could confess, then whistleblowers need to know that before they blow the whistle on a government conspiracy or hoax, they should not use the phone to tip off their intentions, in case their phones are tapped or they are being watched and monitored.

[Moretorque]

Mr. Wu has spoken, case closed!

[Moretorque]

Mr. Wu's comments about Ghost may very well come back to haunt him.

[starchild5]

Conspiracies are replete throughout history, but not everything is a conspiracy. Conspiracies far smaller have not been able to be contained, but somehow several moon landings have? There are astronauts who have blatantly stated they have seen UFOs or believe in aliens. No conspiracy this big could possibly stay safe from an astronaut coming out and saying, "it was a hoax."

Allegedly, James Irwin, the Apollo 15 astronaut, was going to confess to Bill Kaysing, author of "We Never Went to the Moon", that the moon landings were faked. According to Kaysing, Irwin called him out of the blue and said that he had just become a born again Christian and wanted to talk to him in person about his moon hoax book. But unfortunately, Irwin suddenly died of a heart attack before he could meet with Kaysing.

The lesson here is that if Irwin was somehow silenced before he could confess, then whistleblowers need to know that before they blow the whistle on a government conspiracy or hoax, they should not use the phone to tip off their intentions, in case their phones are tapped or they are being watched and monitored.

Common Winston...They not only went to the moon but to Mars and to Mercury and even inside the Sun...and further away from milky way galaxy....

They are b**ls**ting us with Moon Landing Hoax...Its a PSY-OP withIn a PSY-OP....Of-course It was a HOAX and they left clues to divide the people like they did for 911...Nobody went to the Moon as they said they did...

The ENTIRE NASA is NOT WHERE THE REAL ACTION IS....

NASA is just DRAMA for the Gullible Public...The Lame Stream Sheeps...Who are still debating whether we went to the moon or not....The joke is on us really,...Ofcourse they didn't go to the moon...They went beyond but not the way they are telling us...

No real scientist work in NASA....All Real Scientist work under the ground or off planet or in other dimension...

-----------------------------------

Its now a fact they have 100s of Portal and Jump room directly to Mars....It takes less than 5 seconds now to go to Mars....

----------------------------------

Can't believe people are still falling for the Psy-op done some 50 years back...The whole point of Moon fakeness was to not tell-know what they are doing under the ground

I hope you close the thread and NOT FEED the Psy-Op any more....

-------------------------------------

They have technology even for TIME TRAVEL..Not only time travel....They can even SHRINK TIME....Let me say that again...They can SHRINK TIME>>>AKA SLOW DOWN TIME ITSELF

[droid]

You got things backward. Yes the moon has no atmosphere and space there is a vacuum. That's why the temperature is extreme. There's no convection air to cool the moon. How does that make the temperature any less real? I don't get you. Look here:
http://www.space.com/18175-moon-temperature.html

I'm sorry but 250 degrees F is exactly that, and very hot. How is 250 F not 250 F? WTF? It seems like your mind is desperately trying to deny the facts here. Weird.

The point is, that's an extremely high temperature. Not only did the suits not have any protection from that, but the Kodak film in the Hasselbad camera could not have survived it either. Kodak even admitted so, that their film cannot withstand such temperatures.

Any cooling system in the space suit would require lots of battery power, more than they had. Remember that the astronauts would stay on the moon surface for several days at a time. If you think that ice and cool liquid can last very long in 250 F, you are absolutely insane and crazy. Turn up your oven to 250 F and put some ice in it and see how long that ice lasts. Probably 2 o 3 seconds.

And besides how do you explain the extreme cold of minus 250 F in the shadows or at night on the moon? A heating system requires a lot of power, more than the power they had in their batteries.

The radiation issue is complicated. I provided links to it in my Conspiracy report above.

God you're very enlightened in some things but very ignorant in others man. It seems you're too invested in all this already (true believer) and need to lash out at those presenting opposing views.

It is precisely the lack of air convection that makes the moon's surface temperature not heat you up nearly as much. You can only get that heat transferred to you via infrared radiation, or through your tootsies. I already addressed that.
Also the spacesuits, being white, reflected 90% of incoming light/infrared.

On top of this, fine grained compounds have low heat conductivity, especially in a vacuum
http://www.lpi.usra.edu/meetings/lpsc2013/pdf/2864.pdf
So the sand might be very hot but only thinly at the surface. You have to understand that something might be very hot, but the total energy stored may not be massive.

Turn up your oven to 250 F

^^
That's your problem right there.

Same thing for the "cold" that you mention. There's no cold air trying to freeze you, get that around your head. If anything, the vacuum acts as a perfect insulating blanket so to speak. You only lose heat through thermal radiation.

Any cooling system in the space suit would require lots of battery power, more than they had. Remember that the astronauts would stay on the moon surface for several days at a time. If you think that ice and cool liquid can last very long in 250 F, you are absolutely insane and crazy.

No, the energy was spent by the module when making the ice, not the suit itself.
The sublimator would dissipate heat at a rate of 500w, according to my previous post link.But that doesn't mean it was the suit's battery energy being used.
Did they really spend "days at a time" on the surface without coming in back to the module??? Com'on.

One more thing is that the landings took place (if they did) during the lunar dawn. See the long shadows in the photographs (fake or not). So the temperature of the surface was most probably not even close to 250.
Do I have to explain i'ts not binary as in -250 OR +250?