The most compelling evidence that Apollo mission was faked

Thu Dec 17, 2009 12:01 am » by **jetxvii**

terrac1de512 wrote:OK, some good clementine mosaics of the moon available HERE
http://ser.sese.asu.edu/MOON/clem_color.html

and a lot more info on the Clementine mission HERE
http://filer.case.edu/~sjr16/advanced/2 ... ntine.html

Ohhh sorry man it was a different guy with alot of numbers as a name. my apologies

Thu Dec 17, 2009 1:18 am » by **Tinman4higher**

jetxvii wrote:
terrac1de512 wrote:OK, some good clementine mosaics of the moon available HERE
http://ser.sese.asu.edu/MOON/clem_color.html

and a lot more info on the Clementine mission HERE
http://filer.case.edu/~sjr16/advanced/2 ... ntine.html

Ohhh sorry man it was a different guy with alot of numbers as a name. my apologies

muah ha ha ha

Thu Dec 17, 2009 12:13 pm » by **Ufosearcher**

We live in a funny world indeed...

CRATERS...

Source image:
http://www.lpi.usra.edu/resources/lunar ... 46_med.jpg

______________________________________________________________

Thu Dec 17, 2009 2:20 pm » by **Electrobadgr**

Unfortunately i could only find part 2 of this insightful documentary about the moon landings, the full version seems to have been removed from google video as all links i have found were broken. Eventually found part 2 only, here it is:

[googlevideo]-3186616594425246748#[/googlevideo]

The full documentary can be downloaded here, it is 4 hours long but well worth a watch,
enjoy

http://www.megaupload.com/?d=659AJP54

Thu Dec 17, 2009 6:16 pm » by **Ogmios**

Once again this subject has produed a heated and well argued debate on both sides. I myself am firmly in the "this is pure bullshit" camp for a few reasons.

Firstly, have a look at the social, political and military atmosphere at the time. The USA was in the middle of an ideological struggle with the Soviet Union who were miles ahead in terms of space exploration. The American president who'd first stated the aim of reaching the moon was murdered and was still playing on the collective consciousness of the nation. Added to that, the civil rights movement and opposition to the vietnam war had created a counterculture which seriously threatened the establishment. Mainstream America was under attack and what better way to silence the dissenters than that elusive manned moon mission promised by the dead president?

The problem was that they couldn't physically do it. Before Apollo 11, there had never been a safely executed un-manned landing on the moon. Even the Russians crash-landed their probe. But Kennedy had promised this. What to do? There was only one option. Fake it. Since their is not a single piece if incontrovertible proof of the verity of the moon mission's success a rational mind has to err on the side of caution and, therefore, skepticism. When you consider the possibility of failure, live on TV of corporate America's greatest moment then ask yourself: "Was failure an option in front of the entire world?".

Let's look at the moon rock. It takes a leap of faith to accept that the rock presented came from the moon. Why? Well, because the only reason we know that it's definitely moon rock is because it is the same as rock found in Antactica in 1972 by....... guess who...... NASA. How can we be sure that the original moon rock was not the very same rock found in the ice? We can't. That's the answer. It would be twisted logic to deduce that we can verify the validity of the moon landings because of moon rock.

How do we know it's moon rock?
Because it's the same as the Antarctic stuff.

How do we know the Antarctic stuff is moon rock?
Because it's the same as the stuff we found on the moon.

Do you see my point? It is not rational or logical. Instead it asks of us a religious belief in the original story and the fake pictures. Add to that the fact that so many of the moon rock samples have been found to contain Earthly, organic materials and this particular piece of evidence, even under a lenient burden of proof, does not stand scrutiny. But this is only one area of evidence. I maintain that none of the evidence bears scrutiny.

And what of the supposed landing sites? Surely this new super telescope could end the argument once and for all. There can be only one reason for not taking pictures of the equipment left behind. There is no equipment there. Someone mentioned that the supposedly crash-landed Russian probe helped produce the data as to the moon's distance from Earth. This is patently untrue. They have now stopped firing lasers towards it and it never worked in the first place since by the time the laser came back to Earth it would have spread to cover such a large area as to have made it impossible to ascertain where the tiny photons were coming from. The Earth-Moon distance is determined by bouncing radio-waves off of the moon.

Someone else said they had seen the landing sites with a telescope. I hate to shout liar but......

@ Electrobadgr. I liked your theory on The Shining. I'll have to watch it again with that in mind.

Thu Dec 17, 2009 11:44 pm » by **Ufosearcher**

electrobadgr wrote:Unfortunately i could only find part 2 of this insightful documentary about the moon landings, the full version seems to have been removed from google video as all links i have found were broken. Eventually found part 2 only, here it is:

The full documentary can be downloaded here, it is 4 hours long but well worth a watch,
enjoy

THANKS Electrobadgr for the excellent video--though a part, it is very informative. And to ogimos.
____________________
CHANDRAYAAN STUNS...

I visited the Indian Space Research website, and saw the image gallery of CHANDRAYAAN. The first photo is a 3-in-one: A FT DE ROY crater. I did the same thing we do for Lunar Orbiter photos: turn upside down and turn horizontally, and selected one of the three craters to see. Here is the astounding result.
The difference between the last photo here and the last-but-one is, the same part, but appears to show different 'faces' as it were.

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6,

7.

WHAT IS THERE ON THE MOON, REALLY? WHO PAINTS SO MANY FACES, IF AT ALL THEY ARE THERE?CAN'T BE COINCIDENCE

Source of the image: http://www.isro.org/Chandrayaan/htmls/ImageMoon_tmc.htm

Wed Dec 23, 2009 5:54 pm » by **Electrobadgr**

I've literally just stumbled across this documentary and downloaded it, can only seem to find this three part cut-down version but you can download the whole thing at http://www.checktheevidence.com. It's about Stanley Kubricks involvement in the apollo project!!Am watching it now, so far so good :flop:

Hope you enjoy

Wed Dec 23, 2009 6:46 pm » by **Electrobadgr**

erm, ok...just watched it all....think it was a joke :headscratch:

It was really strange......donald rumsfeld, henry kissenger, kubricks wife were all it in but towards the end it starts to get silly......you just have to watch it all and see for yourself :headscratch:

Bizarre

Fri Jan 15, 2010 5:33 pm » by **Electrobadgr**

Forgive me for keeping this thread alive, i admit this is one of my favourite subjects but i've just watched the post Apollo 11 press conference and have never seen 3 more miserable, awkward looking men in my life. These guys we're supposed to be pioneers who had sucessfully returned from another world, this is certainly not reflected in their tone of voice, body language or facial features. I need to watch it all again to fully analyse what was said etc but maybe some of you guys have a head start on me and would want to present your analysis here with reference to the time code on the video. If you haven't seen this press conference (as i hadn't) have a look, i find it fitting that we look at this so late in the thread as after viewing the whole content then watching this, their demeanour should come with very little surprise.

[googlevideo]1535324572487804641&e[/googlevideo]

I feel SO sorry for these guys, especially Armstrong. He always looks so beat down when he makes his rare appearances. If i was to ever meet the guy i would give him the biggest hug i could, the guy may not have went to the moon but he is still a hero in my eyes. If only for staying alive...