MOON LANDINGS 'FAKE': Shock video shows 'Stanley Kubrick' admit historic event was 'H

You people who maintain that the landings were real are ignoring the clearest hoax proof.

The flag moving without having been touched is one of the clearest pieces of proof.
http://www.politicalforum.com/moon-landing/362999-air-caused-flag-move-so-obviously-studio.html

Initial Apollo 15 Flag Movement
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dW9qcL4LiUg


This is such clear proof that Jay Windley* refused to even debate the issue with me.
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=216531&page=204


This is pretty clear proof too.
http://www.politicalforum.com/moon-landing/403884-proof-moon-mountains-were-backdrops-movie-set.html


There's more. Check it out.
http://www.politicalforum.com/moon-landing/347662-apollo-moon-missions-were-faked-studio.html


*
http://www.clavius.org/about.html

 

http://www.snopes.com/false-stanley-kubrick-faked-moon-landings/

 

Oh god

 

Sorry but I need more evidence than that - and I'd already taken it into consideration. As there's so much footage of the event why is there none showing take-off? I don't think there's any showing touchdown either.

Incidentally, snakestretcher, do you have any observations to make on my 'probe bouncing off fast-moving asteroid' theory? And I don't mean what you've read in Science magazine.

 

Why would you be sorry "to" Americans? That statement made no sense at all. Are you trying to say that to us Americans (meaning, from our viewpoint), you are somehow sorry? That would not make much sense at all. Could it be that you meant that you are sorry FOR Americans?

Either way, the actual topic of the thread is about whether moon-landing conspiracy theorists get another breath of fresh air or not and I don't believe it's about any one person''s 'sorry-meter'.

Of course, imo, the biggest piece of evidence that the moon landing and the entire Apollo mission was quite real can be found by the Russians themselves, namely, through their silence. Their surveillance technology has pretty much always be on par with ours. Had the moon landing been faked, then the Russians would have screamed bloody murder about it, but they didn't, so....

 

I am not too sure how much he had to do with this....

 

You're assuming what we were being told reflected what was really happening. What was happening behind the scenes might have been very different. There's some info on that issue in post #1 of this thread.
http://www.politicalforum.com/moon-landing/347662-apollo-moon-missions-were-faked-studio.html

Also, the fact that the Soviets didn't snitich doesn't make the crushing proof of fakery disappear. The anomalies prove the footage was all taken in a studio (see above thread).

 

This is the Apollo 15 lander taking off. Touchdown might be tricky if there's nobody on the Moon to film it. As for the asteroid probe thing, if both the asteroid and the spacecraft are moving at the same speed through a vacuum any 'bouncing' would be fairly gentle given an identical trajectory in both objects.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BMBcLg0DkLA

 

Thanks, I'm convinced. I thought there might have been some planned means of filming the landing. As to the probe/asteroid - not at all convinced. What was the guidance method for the former to track the latter; what was the means of equalising the speeds of both, for example the probe would need to have gone faster than the asteroid in order to catch up? And I'm not convinced (notwithstanding the 'vacuum') that when the probe was in the upper limit of 'the bounce' why the asteroid wouldn't have left it behind.

 

No it isn't. It's a model. It's a video of the take-off being faked.

 

And you know this because...?

 

Because of the mountain of crushing proof of fakery which you're ignoring.
http://www.politicalforum.com/moon-landing/347662-apollo-moon-missions-were-faked-studio.html

 

The bounce wasn't high and the probe merely bounced onto another part of the asteroid when the screws which were supposed to deploy to anchor it down, failed. Remember that at this point (after the initial landing), both the asteroid and the probe are moving at the same speed through space, therefore the probe would not be left behind. Ever tried jumping while on a moving bus or train? The principle is the same and you don't find yourself smacking into the rear of the coach as it passes beneath you.

http://www.esa.int/Our_Activities/S...chdown!_Rosetta_s_Philae_probe_lands_on_comet

 

Ah yes. There is a conspiracy theory section for those who question everything. But, let me ask you this first; what on Earth would have been gained from faking the Moon landings, and how would one ensure that everyone involved kept quiet?
Furthermore there is no "crushing proof" merely something called 'confirmation bias' which you can read all about here:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confirmation_bias

Perhaps you could tell us about the statues and roads on Mars?

 

I dealt with those issue in post #1 of this thread.
http://www.politicalforum.com/moon-landing/347662-apollo-moon-missions-were-faked-studio.html

I don't think you're going to have much success in convincing the viewers that there's no crushing proof after they've taken the time to look at it.
http://www.politicalforum.com/showthread.php?t=436449&page=6&p=1065646461#post1065646461

Your authoritative patronizing attitude and rhetoric will only sway a few viewers who don't take the time to look at the proof.

 

You have never dealt with any of the issues which ruin your claim.

No one viewing these videos believes the bs.

 

Thanks for that, but you still don't address the 'pursuit' issue, specifically how the probe tracked (ie how was it being 'steered', and who was doing the steering?); and the corollary of the actual convergence, viz. at what speed must it have reached prior to catching up with something hurtling through space at 300K mph, and having caught up, to then slow down in order to equalise the speed essential for touch-down? I also 'get' the 'jumping on a moving conveyance' theory, but that seems to cancel out the 'walking/running along the aisle of an aeroplane in flight' theorem, viz. are you travelling faster than the plane is, or at the same speed? My 'conspiracy suspicion' (there's always one, isn't there : but then somebody once had the temerity to posit the suggestion into the pubic arena that 'the world isn't flat'? It would have been me! ) is predicated on the fact that this 'space thing' has become an industry, and too many otherwise intelligent people unquestioningly believe what those who belong to it choose to say in order to secure their lucrative-jobs-for-life? And you know what? I don't blame them - I would!!

 

Maybe because we tracked it on radar?

 

They used the lunar lander module which had propulsion jets attacked to it with sufficient fuel to thrust it upwards, in the low 1/6th gravity of the moon, vs that of earth's, it was sufficient to carry them back into lunar orbit and dock with the command module orbiting the moon. If I remember correctly, and there is tape of it taking off from the moon's surface, it was the only thing about the Apollo 11 mission that didn't have a backup system. It was just simple gas propulsion, probably CO2. The jets were also used to set the lunar lander on the moon, when you hear the Houston mission controller announce .60 seconds Eagle,he isn't referring to the time to reach the surface, it refers to the amount of time Armstrong has to use the jets before cutting into the reserve which will lift them off of the moon when their work is done.

The NASA astronauts took about 600,000 photographs from the moon, which are on display all over the world, and probably many more that were not considered satisfactory enough to release. The Apollo mission which orbited the moon on Christmas Eve had exactly the same capability to land as Apollo 11 did, NASA didn't give the go ahead, because they already had picked the astronauts for the moon landing. The very first thing Armstrong did, after setting foot on the moon, was quickly use the snag pole, similar to a selfie stick of today for camera's, and scoop up dust, rocks and anything it would hold, and put them in a pouch in case anything went wrong, and they had to leave immediately. That would have been proof of their making the surface.

Further proof that America went to the moon is in the fact that from the late 1950's onward, everything pertaining to the Space Race regarding America, was on live television, covered by all three networks, ABC, CBS and NBC, and worldwide. We saw our rockets explode on takeoff, we saw Glenn and Shepard strapped into the capsules atop the rockets, we saw our fighter jets at full speed trying to record the rocket's as they raced out of the atmosphere. As America was willing to risk showing the public our space exploits live on television, like we usually do in airing our dirty linen to the world, there is no doubt the space race was conducted, and our astronauts went to the moon numerous times.

In fact after Apollo 11, American's became so used to the idea, it became boring. That is how successful NASA accomplished their mission. We even witnessed the Challenger explosion on live television, and another exploding on reentry to earth, those people died, the Challenger ones when they hit the water, the pilot actually attempted to fly the capsule down. If you watch the explosion, you will observe it breaking off on the right side of the solid fuel rockets, and tumbling down that way. Those bodies are gone, we didn't attempt to recover them, but they were not killed in the explosion, and the one that blew up over Texas on reentry, those people never returned to earth. I suppose conspiracy theory would demand some deaths to lend credence to the "alleged" moon landings, after all, it was dangerous work, and nobody, not even NASA could do it without tragedy (sic). Money and bureaucracy ended the Shuttle missions, a mistake IMO, two should have been kept flying just to scare the Russians. The Shuttle's were how we got our techno-spy satallites into orbit.

I have heared all the moon landing hoax years ago. The idea that it is based on a movie produced in the Nevada desert at Area 51, where there are buildings that resemble movie sets in Hollywood and Burbank. The movie was Capricorn One, and they produced it in 1978, while we went to the moon in 1969. Doesn't stop conspiracy experts from citing it as proof we didn't go to the moon.

If we didn't, the entire space race conducted by America, from 1947 when Yeager broke the sound barrier, to when the scientists discovered that discarding unneeded pieces of equipment while the flight to the moon took place, and coming home with just the capsule and the astronauts, would allow us to go into outer space, would have had to be a hoax. That many years, that much technological expertise isn't available to Hollywood movie makers, even if the U.S. government underwrote it. Would you really believe that the Atlas rocket that took Allen Shepard into space actually was a duplicate of one that exploded months before on the launch pad on live television? We even had Jose Emanez, the comedian, appearing regularly on the Ed Sullivan show, joking about being blown up on his space flight. I suppose he was a CIA plant and spy.

Military test pilots are brave, and that is where the astronauts ranks came from, but even they are not stupid enough or full of enough daredevil bravado, as to step into a death trap. It was a risk, and one they considered acceptable, and one which succeeded. Astronauts like race car drivers and pilots are people that trust in science and machinery. We went to the moon, numerous times, and returned...........

 

I have said this several times....it would be over 1000 times easier and cheaper to land on the Moon than to FAKE landing on the Moon.

AboveAlpha

 

That's impressive stuff. Where did you get all that information from?

 

Oh 'radar'? Right. Why didn't I think of that!

 

You might have a point there. Scott - it did sort of 'ping' off of the 'undercarriage'; It reminded me of those kids' toys that have a suction cup on the underneath, and when the suction is eventually compromised they suddenly 'ping' up into the air.

 

Question, snakestretcher - if you worked for a so-called 'space agency' on a good salary, a big mortgage to service, a family to feed, and the purchase of the car of your dreams in mind, would you break ranks and become a whistleblower? No porkies, now!!