Join John Adams, world renowned Intl Matchmaker, Thurs nights 8:30 EST for Live Webcasts with FREE Prizes!
And check out Five Reasons why you should attend a FREE Live AFA Seminar! See locations and details.


Scam free! Check out Christian Filipina - Meet Asian women with Christian values! Members screened.
Exclusive book offer! 75% off! How to Meet, Date and Marry Your Filipina Wife



View Active Topics       Latest 100 Topics       View Your Posts       FAQ Topics       Switch to Mobile


Poll: Was the Moon Landing a Hoax?

Discuss conspiracies, mysteries and paranormal phenomena.

Moderators: jamesbond, fschmidt

Were the Apollo Moon Landings a hoax?

Yes. It is obvious from all the evidence, smoking guns, and the fact that they haven't been back to the moon.
9
43%
No. That's a crazy conspiracy theory that is implausible. Too many people would have had to be in on it.
8
38%
Unsure or undecided. I'm on the fence on this one.
4
19%
 
Total votes : 21

Re: Poll: Was the Moon Landing a Hoax?

Postby droid » Mon Jun 08, 2015 7:04 pm

Winston wrote: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. It's not the same thing at all.

Likewise for the "cold night" 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. That's how a Thermos keeps a beverage hot or cold, it's got a vacuum around it.

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. It's not a compressor-based cooling system.

Edit: I further found the ice is not premade, but is rather formed when stored water is exposed to the outside vacuum, the drop in pressure cools it to ice, but then heat from the suit sublimates it to vapor.
I think it uses what's called the triple-point of water (i didn't know about this stuff)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Triple_point

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?
Last edited by droid on Thu Jun 11, 2015 5:20 am, edited 3 times in total.
1)Too much of one thing defeats the purpose.
2)Everybody is full of it. What's your hypocrisy?
User avatar
droid
Veteran Poster
 
Posts: 2439
Joined: Fri Sep 20, 2013 6:38 am







Re: Poll: Was the Moon Landing a Hoax?

Postby Moretorque » Mon Jun 08, 2015 8:02 pm

How could such a delightful sophisticated piece of equipment be programmed so far off base ?

From my understanding the heat and cold swings on the moons surface created some serious problems for humanoids which you would not understand Droid. They obviously could not overcome all the obstacles in 8 years to get them back alive. Engineers wanted to have a look at all these glorious technologies NASA developed for this endeavor but some how the plans got lost.

The moon landings are a very carefully crafted con done to make us feel better after JFK got whacked and especially because our troops were going to be half way around the world tearing places such as Vietnam up for no good apparent reason.
Time to Hide!
Moretorque
Elite Upper Class Poster
 
Posts: 4153
Joined: Sun Apr 28, 2013 2:00 pm
Location: USA,FL

Re: Poll: Was the Moon Landing a Hoax?

Postby droid » Tue Jun 09, 2015 6:43 am

Moretorque wrote:How could such a delightful sophisticated piece of equipment be programmed so far off base ?


Thank you :oops: haha

Moretorque wrote:From my understanding the heat and cold swings on the moons surface created some serious problems for humanoids which you would not understand Droid.


But...but I'm a humanoid too :cry:
1)Too much of one thing defeats the purpose.
2)Everybody is full of it. What's your hypocrisy?
User avatar
droid
Veteran Poster
 
Posts: 2439
Joined: Fri Sep 20, 2013 6:38 am

Re: Poll: Was the Moon Landing a Hoax?

Postby Moretorque » Tue Jun 09, 2015 4:25 pm

droid wrote:
Moretorque wrote:How could such a delightful sophisticated piece of equipment be programmed so far off base ?


Thank you :oops: haha

Moretorque wrote:From my understanding the heat and cold swings on the moons surface created some serious problems for humanoids which you would not understand Droid.


But...but I'm a humanoid too :cry:


Ok sorry, you have human flesh grown on the out skirts of your metal body. FEEL BETTER NOW! :P your only part human.
Time to Hide!
Moretorque
Elite Upper Class Poster
 
Posts: 4153
Joined: Sun Apr 28, 2013 2:00 pm
Location: USA,FL

Re: Poll: Was the Moon Landing a Hoax?

Postby Ghost » Wed Jun 10, 2015 5:35 am

Winston wrote: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?


I think your logic here doesn't support your assertion. You admit that immediately useful technologies, such as sewers, aqueducts, and irrigation systems have been lost before. This doesn't make sense because they are immediately useful to civilization. And yet they were lost anyway. But you think it doesn't make sense for space flight technology to be lost despite it not being immediately useful for everyday purposes.

They haven't been building Saturn V's and other rockets for 40 years and most scientists and engineers who worked on them are dead or don't have much time left. Plus there isn't a big reason to do it. The moon landings were done for science of course, but there was a political and national angle to it as well - it was about gaining the upper hand in the Cold War and cementing a huge victory for the U.S. When given big reasons to do something, civilizations can rise to the challenge and make it happen. American civilization now is weak, decadent, in severe decline. No will to make such things happen.

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?


I disagree. Technology can and does move backwards. Take consumer products. Everything from furniture to gadgets are mostly shit now, but used to be better.

And no, there would not necessarily be daily moon flights or moon hotels or whatever. A 9 day mission is a lot different than being in space or on the moon for months or longer. It would be much harder on the body, and riskier. Aside from the difficultly for having it widely available, there is the expense. It's not something like car travel where it can be useful on a daily basis for everyone. So I don't see how the price would ever become affordable to have it be a regular thing.

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.


I still think the best argument against it being a hoax is that the Russians, NASA scientists, or others involved haven't just come out and said that it was a hoax. For for all the thousands of people involved, and all the millions more who would've had knowledge of it, no one has just come forward and said it was a hoax? It doesn't make sense. Much smaller conspiracies often can't be kept hidden, but this huge one can for some reason? It's illogical. And with Russia and America at each other's throats again, wouldn't it be to Russia's favor to come out and provide evidence that the moon landings were faked?

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.


I was only speculating. I don't see why this matters. Even if they hoaxed it, they could easily make the actor-nauts jump higher than a foot. So this doesn't prove anything.

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


I think the issue now is radiation protection for extended missions as opposed to short ones.

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.


Challenger involved stupid decisions made due to media pressure. It was entirely preventable. Columbia was an accident. There have been many more STS missions than moon landings. So it makes sense for there to have been more accidents with the program that had more missions.
Ghost
Elite Upper Class Poster
 
Posts: 5749
Joined: Sun Apr 17, 2011 1:23 am

Re: Poll: Was the Moon Landing a Hoax?

Postby droid » Wed Jun 10, 2015 10:41 pm

Ghost wrote:
Winston wrote: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.

I was only speculating. I don't see why this matters. Even if they hoaxed it, they could easily make the actor-nauts jump higher than a foot. So this doesn't prove anything.


The space suit weighed 180 pounds here on earth, and thus 30 pounds equivalent on the moon.
http://www.hightechscience.org/apollo_spacesuit.htm
How much could you jump with 180 pounds on you here on earth, Winston? perhaps a couple inches?
It thus makes sense that they could only jump about a foot high on the moon.

Not only that, but even if you're on the moon the suit still has the same mass (180lbs); you still have to overcome it's inertia to give it vertical speed.

This is only accounting for the weight, now add the lack of mobility and the risk of falling and damaging/puncturing the suit. Attempting high jumps would be ridiculous.
Last edited by droid on Thu Jun 11, 2015 5:16 am, edited 1 time in total.
1)Too much of one thing defeats the purpose.
2)Everybody is full of it. What's your hypocrisy?
User avatar
droid
Veteran Poster
 
Posts: 2439
Joined: Fri Sep 20, 2013 6:38 am

Re: Poll: Was the Moon Landing a Hoax?

Postby Moretorque » Thu Jun 11, 2015 12:16 am

Can anybody explain Neil's behavior after being one of the most courageous men ever ?

Winston when you do these debates on fake history vs real history just try and stick with the facts, to much deviation from what is not point blank right and it opens the door for people to take shots.
Time to Hide!
Moretorque
Elite Upper Class Poster
 
Posts: 4153
Joined: Sun Apr 28, 2013 2:00 pm
Location: USA,FL

Re: Poll: Was the Moon Landing a Hoax?

Postby Ghost » Thu Jun 11, 2015 6:36 am

droid wrote:
Ghost wrote:
Winston wrote: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.

I was only speculating. I don't see why this matters. Even if they hoaxed it, they could easily make the actor-nauts jump higher than a foot. So this doesn't prove anything.


The space suit weighed 180 pounds here on earth, and thus 30 pounds equivalent on the moon.
http://www.hightechscience.org/apollo_spacesuit.htm
How much could you jump with 180 pounds on you here on earth, Winston? perhaps a couple inches?
It thus makes sense that they could only jump about a foot high on the moon.

Not only that, but even if you're on the moon the suit still has the same mass (180lbs); you still have to overcome it's inertia to give it vertical speed.

This is only accounting for the weight, now add the lack of mobility and the risk of falling and damaging/puncturing the suit. Attempting high jumps would be ridiculous.


Good point. That reminds me, there was an astronaut who fell during the lunar EVA and had a lot of trouble getting back up. I'm thinking it was Charlie Duke, but don't remember for sure. With all that equipment on, jumping and falling down could be very dangerous.
Ghost
Elite Upper Class Poster
 
Posts: 5749
Joined: Sun Apr 17, 2011 1:23 am

Re: Poll: Was the Moon Landing a Hoax?

Postby droid » Thu Jun 11, 2015 7:12 am

In Winston's own terms lol, I'm expecting either logical rebuttals to my last posts, or apologies.
But I'm not holding my breath lol
1)Too much of one thing defeats the purpose.
2)Everybody is full of it. What's your hypocrisy?
User avatar
droid
Veteran Poster
 
Posts: 2439
Joined: Fri Sep 20, 2013 6:38 am

Re: Poll: Was the Moon Landing a Hoax?

Postby Ghost » Thu Jun 11, 2015 2:13 pm

Moretorque wrote:Can anybody explain Neil's behavior after being one of the most courageous men ever ?

Winston when you do these debates on fake history vs real history just try and stick with the facts, to much deviation from what is not point blank right and it opens the door for people to take shots.


Behavior doesn't prove anything. For all you know, he was sick of hearing nothing but moon talk his whole life and wanted to talk about something else.

Like I said before, you see what you want to see. Like in the Apollo 11 press conference you saw men who were obviously lying, but to me it just looked like bored guys having to give a boring science lecture after having the adventure of a lifetime.

You're entitled to your opinion, but saying, "Look at them! They are obviously lying!" is not evidence that there was a hoax.

Just like looking into the clouds. Some see dragons, monsters, or faces. But they're just clouds.
Ghost
Elite Upper Class Poster
 
Posts: 5749
Joined: Sun Apr 17, 2011 1:23 am

Re: Poll: Was the Moon Landing a Hoax?

Postby Moretorque » Thu Jun 11, 2015 6:46 pm

I see basic stuff that does not add up at all, there is no proof outside of NASA they ever went and also if the credit monopoly is ever blown wide open and thrown off humanity you are going to realize everything they said and taught as truth was all pretty much lies over the last 100 years or more.

Everything from the way they filmed and shot the supposedly live event to the German Camera used on the moon does not add up at all and like I stated I talked to my cousin who met him in person and talked to Mr. Armstrong at length and he said he had nothing and I mean nothing to say about the glorious lunar event when confronted with the greatness of the journey on his birthday and at the time I did not realize what it meant but I do now, he never stepped foot on the moon!

There has never been truer words spoken than " allow me to issue the currency and I care who not makes the laws ".
Time to Hide!
Moretorque
Elite Upper Class Poster
 
Posts: 4153
Joined: Sun Apr 28, 2013 2:00 pm
Location: USA,FL

Re: Poll: Was the Moon Landing a Hoax?

Postby Ghost » Fri Jun 12, 2015 3:57 pm

Tell me more about the faces in the clouds.
Ghost
Elite Upper Class Poster
 
Posts: 5749
Joined: Sun Apr 17, 2011 1:23 am

Re: Poll: Was the Moon Landing a Hoax?

Postby Moretorque » Fri Jun 12, 2015 6:44 pm

Anybody ever study the story behind the Hasselblad camera ? That alone sends up more major red flags. Why did the company not advertise the fact their cameras were used on the moon to generate way and I mean way more revenues and prestige ? because the camera engineers new the NASA modded Hasselblad camera was a fraud and the company did not want to take a chance on the whole promotion to make millions backfiring and blowing up in their faces.
Time to Hide!
Moretorque
Elite Upper Class Poster
 
Posts: 4153
Joined: Sun Apr 28, 2013 2:00 pm
Location: USA,FL

Re: Poll: Was the Moon Landing a Hoax?

Postby droid » Fri Jun 12, 2015 7:50 pm

ImageImageImageImageImageImage
1)Too much of one thing defeats the purpose.
2)Everybody is full of it. What's your hypocrisy?
User avatar
droid
Veteran Poster
 
Posts: 2439
Joined: Fri Sep 20, 2013 6:38 am

Re: Poll: Was the Moon Landing a Hoax?

Postby Moretorque » Fri Jun 12, 2015 8:27 pm

Never mess with a Droid. I will research it further, thanks.

What was Winston saying about having the Hubble point at the moon to show the equipment left but for some reason they would not do it ? The Hubble never focused on the moon and if it would have it could easily show the equipment correct ?
Time to Hide!
Moretorque
Elite Upper Class Poster
 
Posts: 4153
Joined: Sun Apr 28, 2013 2:00 pm
Location: USA,FL

PreviousNext

Return to Conspiracies, Mysteries, Paranormal

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest