Proof of a faked Apollo landing???

Discussion in 'Moon Landing' started by Bob0627, Nov 20, 2017.

  1. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    6,858
    Likes Received:
    1,392
    Trophy Points:
    113
    For those who don't believe the US sent humans to the Moon.

    Moon landing truthers swear this photo is the ultimate proof of a faked Apollo landing

    By now you’ve no doubt seen and heard the case that conspiracy theorists have put forth regarding their belief that NASA never actually landed on the moon. They believe that, for a number of different possible reasons, the original moon landing and all subsequent visits to the lunar surface were nothing more than a big Hollywood-level production. Evidence, of course, is harder to come by, but by scouring some vintage photos of the Apollo 17 landing that were only just released in recent years, they think they’ve finally nailed NASA in a history-shattering lie.

    The photo in question is pretty innocent at first glance, showing one of the Apollo 17 astronauts standing next to a large rock outcropping, with a small instrument sitting on the dusty lunar surface in front of him. However, the person taking the snapshot is visible in the astronaut’s reflective visor, and if you’re buying what the moon landing truthers are selling, he doesn’t have a space suit on.

    Read the rest ...

    https://www.yahoo.com/news/moon-landing-truthers-swear-photo-ultimate-proof-faked-171844599.html

    For me all this shows is that the MSM, as usual, is trying real hard to discredit those who don't believe the US government made a successful Moon landing. Rather than hold the government's feet to the fire and make them prove it, they do the opposite, try to shift the burden of proof and liberally use the "truther" label as a form of insult. I don't really know if the Moon landings were real or fake but I have no faith in the US government to ever tell the truth about anything significant and I question many things about the official Moon landing narratives. IMO, it's far from conclusive.
     
  2. Scott

    Scott Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2008
    Messages:
    2,863
    Likes Received:
    171
    Trophy Points:
    63
  3. Betamax101

    Betamax101 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2011
    Messages:
    1,368
    Likes Received:
    42
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Whoever wrote that article is either badly mistaken or lying. The entire photographic catalog was released after each mission. None of the Apollo 17 pictures have "just been released", particularly this one.

    He is however perpendicular to the visor, so therefore MUST be taking the picture. His shadow also has a PLSS. This claim is not even close to being a new one, it came up nearly 10 years ago! This is a fairly concise video explaining it perfectly:-

     
  4. cerberus

    cerberus Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2015
    Messages:
    25,552
    Likes Received:
    5,363
    Trophy Points:
    113
    OP

    Well excuse us for being sceptical of any government announcement. Governments tell lies, and like any liar - if they lie once they'll lie again, therefore are not deserving of public trust. I have my own doubts about it, as a matter of fact.
     
    Bob0627 likes this.
  5. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    6,858
    Likes Received:
    1,392
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Exactly, fools and shills defend every single detail of every government narrative (some 24/7) and never question any of it. Intelligent/enlightened people always question every single government narrative because they are fully aware all governments are self serving pathological liars.

    "The two enemies of the people are criminals and government, so let us tie the second down with the chains of the Constitution so the second will not become the legalized version of the first." - Thomas Jefferson
     
  6. Hoosier8

    Hoosier8 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2012
    Messages:
    95,466
    Likes Received:
    26,065
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Meh, those that set foot on the moon would not agree with the crazies.
     
  7. cerberus

    cerberus Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2015
    Messages:
    25,552
    Likes Received:
    5,363
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Excellent post, Bob. Your summing up kind of exemplifies the message in my sig. 'Make the lie big, make it simple, keep saying it, and eventually the gullible will believe it.'
     
    Bob0627 likes this.
  8. Scott

    Scott Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2008
    Messages:
    2,863
    Likes Received:
    171
    Trophy Points:
    63
    The hoax-believers have made a few mistakes but correcting one of those mistakes doesn't make the other crushing proof go away.

    http://northerntruthseeker.blogspot.com.es/2008/11/project-apollo-what-were-they-thinking.html
    (exerpt)
    -----------------------------------------------
    There are a few inaccuracies that don't change the conclusion but could be used as debunker food.
    -----------------------------------------------

    The guy in the picture probably had a backpack on but that doesn't prove the picture wasn't taken in a studio.
     
    Last edited: Nov 28, 2017
  9. Betamax101

    Betamax101 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2011
    Messages:
    1,368
    Likes Received:
    42
    Trophy Points:
    48
    The evidence for the Apollo landings is so concise, so thorough and completely consistent, every single bit of this wall of spam has been debunked. The whole "crushing proof" has been answered here:-

    http://debunking-a-moron.blogspot.co.uk/?m=1

    The hoax believers have made hundreds of daft mistakes. They also lie, misrepresent and deceive.

    Nothing supplied by you or anyone else proves it wasn't taken on the Moon. Of course he had a backpack, there's no "probably" about it!
     
  10. Scott

    Scott Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2008
    Messages:
    2,863
    Likes Received:
    171
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Anyone who looks at your info and looks at the hoax proof presented by the hoax-believers can see that your info is just sophistry.
    http://www.politicalforum.com/index...andings-ever-happened.512081/#post-1067871432


    You've said some pretty lame things that destroyed your credibility.
    http://www.politicalforum.com/index...-ever-happened.512081/page-33#post-1068295062


    Nobody who takes the time to look at all of this is going to take you seriously. You might sway a few people who don't look at it with your rhetoric though.
     
  11. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    6,858
    Likes Received:
    1,392
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I have several questions about the Moon landings. They haven't been answered to my satisfaction. Furthermore, the US government has a long illustrious history of lying about everything, especially about highly significant issues. Only a fool would accept US government narratives without question and believe all questions have been answered and there are no further questions. IMO it's quite possible humans have set foot on the Moon but that doesn't mean it's a slam dunk case. The obstacles that existed decades ago (and some of those still exist) are quite enormous. At the same time, I'm not satisfied that there is "crushing proof" that it didn't happen either.
     
    Last edited: Nov 28, 2017
  12. Betamax101

    Betamax101 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2011
    Messages:
    1,368
    Likes Received:
    42
    Trophy Points:
    48
    One at a time, I'll see if I can give you more detailed answers?

    Without doubt. But even more so, only a fool would label everything as a lie/fake without seeing all evidence and explanations.
     
    Last edited: Nov 28, 2017
  13. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    6,858
    Likes Received:
    1,392
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Unfortunately, I don't look for answers from anonymous posters whose qualifications are unverifiable. Thanks anyway.

    I can't disagree with that but unfortunately, the source of the narrative is a pathological liar and therefore, everything is questionable and there are way too many problems with the narrative. My position with every single government narrative is the same as this guy:

     
  14. Betamax101

    Betamax101 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2011
    Messages:
    1,368
    Likes Received:
    42
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Whatever. What the heck did you start this thread for if you seek only responses with fully qualified and known people? Especially when you appear to routinely call such people liars. Your approach makes no sense at any level.
     
  15. Betamax101

    Betamax101 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2011
    Messages:
    1,368
    Likes Received:
    42
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Incorrect. You are as ignorant on this subject as you are persistent at spamming the same replies.

    When someone dishonest like you is the judge of what is lame or credible, it can be dismissed quite easily.

    I don't need to "sway" anyone. There are those who believe this hoax crap and nothing will change their view. The vast majority know the landings were not hoaxed. You are a serial forum spammer, you don't get to voice the claim of what conclusion people will come to.
     
  16. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    6,858
    Likes Received:
    1,392
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Where did I say that? Please show me where I said that. Is it time to invent crap because I disagree with you?

    I call "fully qualified and known people" liars? Show me where I said that?

    Ask me if I care what you think about my approach. Coming from someone who questions NOTHING about any official narrative, I'll take that as a compliment. Thanks anyway, I'll stick to my approach.

    In any case, for those who are more interested in honesty, this thread was started:

    For those who don't believe the US sent humans to the Moon

    (see very first sentence in first thread)

    It certainly is however, open to anyone, including you, as long as you keep it civil. And so far that's questionable.
     
    Last edited: Nov 28, 2017
  17. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    6,858
    Likes Received:
    1,392
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Very true, neither do you of course.
     
  18. Betamax101

    Betamax101 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2011
    Messages:
    1,368
    Likes Received:
    42
    Trophy Points:
    48
    You refused to entertain any response from me because I was anonymous and you had no way of verifying my qualifications. If you now wish to say
    that isn't what it implied, kindly fill in the blanks.

    NIST engineers and analysts.

    Who says I question nothing, You?! I question things, I just don't arrive at the same inept conclusions as conspiracy theorists.

    And that is civil how?

    Didn't you notice the other dozen threads on this? Did you not do any research on the article you automatically copied? I responded to it above but you seem unable to read and reply. The pictures were all out there 20 years ago. This claim is 10 years old and was debunked many times then. The video I supplied was 7 years old. You followed up my post by being most uncivil by labelling people as shills and fools.

    You start a thread then refuse to actually debate the subject? How very strange.
     
  19. Betamax101

    Betamax101 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2011
    Messages:
    1,368
    Likes Received:
    42
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Your point?
     
  20. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    6,858
    Likes Received:
    1,392
    Trophy Points:
    113
    That is of course yet another invention. I've already responded to your posts as evidenced by all the posts in this thread. Furthermore, there's nothing untrue about what I said about your "qualifications" but that does not mean I am not responding to your posts..

    NIST engineers and analysts are far from the only "fully qualified and known people", you generalized. Fully qualified and known people have proven beyond the shadow of any doubt (for me) that those responsible for the 9/11 NIST reports are liars and scam artists. But that was self evident well before their scientific proof. And I'm fully confident that the impending peer review (by fully qualified and known people) of Dr. Leroy Hulsey's study (a known and fully qualified person) will only confirm it in additional scientific detail.

    I never said you question nothing, I said specifically that you question nothing about any significant official government narrative that I'm aware of. And yes it was ME who posted that. Do you have any evidence that contradicts what I actually posted? If you do, then I will stand corrected.

    9/11 for example was a conspiracy and the official narrative was nothing more than a conspiracy theory based on lies. Anyone who can't see that despite the mountain of evidence is not only a conspiracy theorist but has arrived at an inept conclusion. But that's their problem, not mine.

    It is self explanatory, honesty is civility, dishonesty is not civil.

    Nope, I haven't read through all the threads in this section of the forum.

    Nope, the moon landings are not my primary concern. I merely posted the article I recently found, again for this reason:

    For those who don't believe the US sent humans to the Moon

    Thanks for responding. However, that's just your opinion, others differ. And you are apparently not one of those persons I intended this thread for.

    Generalizing once again by taking part of what I posted out of context, I did not label PEOPLE shills and fools. Go back and re-read what I posted. This is exactly what I mean about being civil, you are being dishonest.

    I don't debate, I discuss (like what I'm doing now), there is a huge difference. If it's "strange" to you, you are certainly free to leave the discussion.
     
    Last edited: Nov 29, 2017
  21. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    6,858
    Likes Received:
    1,392
    Trophy Points:
    113
    It's self explanatory.
     
  22. Betamax101

    Betamax101 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2011
    Messages:
    1,368
    Likes Received:
    42
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Wow. A blatant lie. My first post in this thread - indicate where you responded to it. You refused to "discuss" your non satisfaction to previous answers based on my anonymity and unverified qualifications. The only thing you are responding to is this ridiculous side issue.

    Irrelevant! I said you routinely call qualified people liars. You denied this. You were dishonest. They ARE qualified you call them liars.

    You seem to have real trouble reading your own posts! You said:-

    " Coming from someone who questions NOTHING about any official narrative."

    Not "significant", not "government" and how could you be aware of my questioning or my methods in doing so? You used it as a put down which is most uncivil.

    The mountain of debunks on the "mountain of evidence" is bigger. You don't get to speak for "anyone", you even agreed this.

    You were bring a hypocrite and quite clearly a member of the group who are unable to admit things.

    You read something from an official source. You didn't verify its accuracy on any level and ignored the only response highlighting such inaccuracies.

    A truly pathetic response. It is not just my opinion. It is fully verifiable.

    The claim goes back nearly 10 years. The debunk video is 7 years old. The camera is chest mounted. The subject is perpendicular to the closest point on the visor. He must be the source of the photograph. Ergo he must be facing. His shadow has a PLSS(backpack). Your article which you didn't bother to check is inaccurate. None of that is my opinion.

    I can see why you don't want to "discuss" this!

    You called PEOPLE:-

    "Exactly, fools and shills defend every single detail of every government narrative (some 24/7) and never question any of it."


    You followed this up by insisting that I was in that group. Your blatant hypocrisy and dishonesty are nothing new. It appears to be the norm with those who "question everything"!

    Then discuss the points I raised. Start by discussing why you think they are my opinion. Then discuss why they don't close the whole claim.
     
  23. Greataxe

    Greataxe Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2011
    Messages:
    9,402
    Likes Received:
    1,345
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    There is plenty of physical evidence of us being on the Moon, as several reflective arrays are right where our guys put them:
    The ongoing Lunar Laser Ranging Experiment measures the distance between Earth and the Moon using laser ranging. Lasers on Earth are aimed at retroreflectors planted on the Moon during the Apollo program (11, 14, and 15) and the two Lunokhod missions.[1] The time for the reflected light to return is measured.

    [​IMG]
    Apollo 15 LRRR
    [​IMG]
    Apollo 15 LRRR schematic
    The first successful tests were carried out in 1962 when a team from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology succeeded in observing laser pulses reflected from the Moon's surface using a laser with a millisecond pulse length.[2] Similar measurements were obtained later the same year by a Soviet team at the Crimean Astrophysical Observatory using a Q-switched ruby laser.[3] Greater accuracy was achieved following the installation of a retroreflector array on July 21, 1969, by the crew of Apollo 11, and two more retroreflector arrays left by the Apollo 14 and Apollo 15 missions have also contributed to the experiment. Successful lunar laser range measurements to the retroreflectors were first reported by the 3.1 m telescope at Lick Observatory, Air Force Cambridge Research Laboratories Lunar Ranging Observatory in Arizona, the Pic du Midi Observatory in France, the Tokyo Astronomical Observatory, and McDonald Observatory in Texas.

    The unmanned Soviet Lunokhod 1 and Lunokhod 2 rovers carried smaller arrays. Reflected signals were initially received from Lunokhod 1, but no return signals were detected after 1971 until a team from University of California rediscovered the array in April 2010 using images from NASA's Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter.[4] Lunokhod 2's array continues to return signals to Earth.[5] The Lunokhod arrays suffer from decreased performance in direct sunlight—a factor considered in reflector placement during the Apollo missions.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lunar_Laser_Ranging_experiment

    There are more thoughts on why the Moon Landings were real here;
    http://pirlwww.lpl.arizona.edu/~jscotti/NOT_faked/
     
  24. Betamax101

    Betamax101 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2011
    Messages:
    1,368
    Likes Received:
    42
    Trophy Points:
    48
    The counter claim is that our lasers were unmanned like the Soviet ones. A claim which not only has no evidence whatsoever to support it, but also has practical limitations on visible launches, launch windows let alone the thousands of necessary personnel who have never made any confessions.

    Other physical evidence includes the 842lbs of peer reviewed lunar samples. Physical attributes prove they are not from Earth and cannot be meteorites. Some of the samples are 3m long core extractions.
     
    Greataxe likes this.
  25. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    6,858
    Likes Received:
    1,392
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I'm hard pressed to continue this line of "discussion" as it is becoming boring and the Moon Landing topic is far down on my list of my priorities anyway. But ....

    No it's 100% fact as evidenced by this response as well as all the others. Since I'm being accused of not discussing and lying about it, it looks like the evidence speaks for itself that you're the one who's lying.

    And therefore, you're lying. Thanks.

    No it's right on. I don't routinely call qualified people liars as evidenced by nearly all my posts in this forum. I call liars liars to be accurate. It doesn't matter that you may believe qualified people don't lie, anyone with minimal intellect knows qualified people lie. But not all of them of course, so you lie again, you generalized ... as already well explained.

    Oh my sincere apologies, you have yet to prove me wrong though. I asked you to try to prove me wrong but so far a lot of hot air. And this is why I don't look for answers from anonymous posters whose qualifications are unverifiable. Which is exactly what I said in the first place, not the silly skewed words that you try to pass off as my words.

    You apparently have no understanding of the concept of evidence. It's not about quantity, it's about quality. It's also about trust. (see above bolded for reference).

    No son, I'm Bob and I don't belong to any group of any kind. Group thinkers are those who parrot every government narrative without question, some 24/7. You're inventing crap once again.

    However, my challenge stands, show me a post where you question anything (preferably significant) about any significant US government narrative. I have time.
     
    Last edited: Nov 29, 2017

Share This Page