I believe NASA DID go to the moon!

[apollo_gnomon]

Originally Posted by stelios

I havent seen you writing anything that proves that NASA was not run by a bunch of Nazis and Shysters.

Wait, what? Which is it? Nazis? Or Jews?

OH!!! I get it now!!

Nazi
And
Semites
Against Stuff!!

[moving finger]

Damn! All this time I was assuming that video and photographic evidence, telemetry evidence, scientific evidence, witness testimony,all presenting a coherent and consistent body of material that proves beyond any doubt that there was a series of manned moon landings was enough, but now it turns out that having either a Jewish name or a German accent means it was impossible.

It's true ladies and gentlemen: THERE ARE NO GERMAN SCIENCE BOOKS!! NO SCIENCE WAS EVER WRITTEN IN HEBREW - it just can't be done. Your pen will melt if it even tries to write a hypothesis with an umlaut in it.

Show's over, we can all go home - man I'm surprised gravity holds those pesky Germans to the ground, the laws of physics just stop right there at the border.

[truegroup]

My original quote: "The German rocket scientists helped with the rockets they didn't run run the program."

Originally Posted by mandelbrot

And yet, more semantics from you.

Originally Posted by mandelbrot

Dr. Wernher von Braun was the director charged with developing the Saturn V.

You mean he was in charge of the rocket? He was German. He was a rocket scientist. The others helped yes? Sounds like a fairly accurate summary to me, as opposed to the original clusterfuck spam by stelios where he original says the NAZI's ran things, then says da NAZI's were in cohorts with the ebil Jews. Epic facepalm.

You HBs are seriously pathetic. YOU'VE GOT NOTHING.

[truegroup]

Originally Posted by apollo_gnomon

Wait, what? Which is it? Nazis? Or Jews?

OH!!! I get it now!!

Nazi
And
Semites
Against Stuff!!

Did you notice that he didn't back up his original off topic bullshit statement when you challenged it? The one about Spacex being owned 60% by Jews. Instead he spams the board with anti-semite crap.

[thirdwave]

Originally Posted by moving finger

Damn! All this time I was assuming that video and photographic evidence, telemetry evidence, scientific evidence, witness testimony,all presenting a coherent and consistent body of material that proves beyond any doubt that there was a series of manned moon landings was enough

Lol, well thats because NASA who provided all of the abovd for you, are being viewed as dishonest.

Video and photographic evidence could have been done in a studio, so we need evidence that proves it could not have been.

telemetry evidence? From who? Also Lets not forget probes had already been sent to the moon ..

Scientific evidence?

Whitness testimony? Who from? NASA worksmen?

Feel fred to post all this undinable evidence, but so far it does not seem to
Prove anything other than what NASA claims..

[truegroup]

Originally Posted by thirdwave

Feel fred to post all this undinable evidence, but so far it does not seem to Prove anything other than what NASA claims..

Feel free to post something that shows "anything other that what NASA claims", and maybe in your own words describe why

I shall be very disappointed in you as a "troofer" if you post something I have already addressed, but you have just ignored.

Reminder:

Originally Posted by thirdwave

You do not find evidence for something by ignoring its existence do you mr brain box? what would constitute as evidence for you?

Originally Posted by thirdwave

Cant be arsed to read all your links.. They will not convince me they went to the moon.

Facepalm.

[ranb]

So does anyone here have any direct evidence that the Apollo moon landings were faked? I mean something other than jews or nazi's were involved so it must be fake.

On a related note, how is it that the jews are so powerful as to be controling nearly everything but they let people say bad things about them on this website? How can the jews fake the moon landings, 9/11 and nuclear power but be so feeble that they can not stop people here from "exposing" them?

Ranb

[apollo_gnomon]

http://www.randompics.net/?p=31390

[night_gaunt]

that's hilarious.
90% of what david icke said has been proven?!
'if not gravity on the moon wudda floated out into space..'
Not sure whether to laugh or cry. I guess i'll compensate with both.

[stelios]

Originally Posted by ranb

So does anyone here have any direct evidence that the Apollo moon landings were faked? I mean something other than jews or nazi's were involved so it must be fake.

On a related note, how is it that the jews are so powerful as to be controling nearly everything but they let people say bad things about them on this website? How can the jews fake the moon landings, 9/11 and nuclear power but be so feeble that they can not stop people here from "exposing" them?

Ranb

Mate, i kind of see the angle you are coming from.
Firstly, nobody suggested that Jews faked the Apollo Moon Landings.
Clearly the issue of 9/11 has been proven beyond reasonable doubt to have been committed by Jews.
So i dont get why you bring that up.
Nuclear power? Nobody has once mentioned nuclear power on this thread to my knowledge.
So you are clearly mixing things up.

The points you may have missed.
NASA tells lies.
There are criminal elements within NASA such as the Israeli spy who was caught and the many others who remain.
O'Bummer has rewarded some of his campaign donors with massive contracts such as SpaceX and Tesla Motors and SolarCity which are all owned by Elon Musk.

As far as the "exposing them" point you make i assume you have not heard about all the work that Cass Sunstein and his army of keyboard warriors do.

[moving finger]

Originally Posted by thirdwave

Lol, well thats because NASA who provided all of the abovd for you, are being viewed as dishonest.

Not by me, or by any of the scientists you routinely use their data.

Video and photographic evidence could have been done in a studio, so we need evidence that proves it could not have been.

Low gravity? Vacuum? Can you demonstrate how these could have been faked in a studio, and then demonstrate that it was actually done?

The video and photographic evidence I have looked at (and I think by now I have pretty much looked at all of it) demonstrate that they were on the moon.

Having plotted the location of all of the lunar orbital photographs on the lunar surface, many of which show the lunar module or the command & service module, and many of which show a level of detail in the lunar surface that would not be matched for another 40 years, and having compared the satellite photos taken from above the Earth with every sequence of pictures of Earth taken on the Apollo missions (including video screenshots), I can tell you that we went. I've done my own research, not just relied on other people's.

telemetry evidence? From who? Also Lets not forget probes had already been sent to the moon ..

From people all over the world who tracked it, from the Spanish & Australian observatories that were used to co-ordinate communications, from the amateur radio hams that followed the craft there and back, from Jodrell Bank who tracked and recorded the missions. Probes did go to the moon. Did they take photographs of themselves while they were there? Did they bring back samples of any significant size? Did they take high resolution photographs? Did they install scientific experiments?

Scientific evidence?

Tons of it. Equipment was set up that broadcast data from the moon for many years after the missions stopped - equipment that could not have been installed automatically. Lunar material . Go to the NASA technical reports server and look for the scientific papers on the Apollo data.

Whitness testimony? Who from? NASA worksmen?

Who else would provide direct testimony of their involvement? Most trials involve evidence from people who were involved in events. You could also go to places like Jodrell Bank or Honeysuckle Creek and read their recollections, as they are neither American or NASA owned. You could listen to some of the oral histories at places like this http://apollotalks.com/, you could go to one of the many conventions like this http://www.spacefest.info/ where Apollo veterans are often involved in Q&A sessions, or attend a presentation by one of the Astronauts themselves, or read the autobiographies of them. You could watch the launches and make a mental note of the hundreds of thousands of people who watched the most expensive and difficult part of the Apollo mission happen. You could read the words of the many broadcasting and science professionals who are not employed by NASA but were nonetheless involved - people like Patrick Moore and Walter Cronkite or the many scientists who have worked on NASA data and have no problem with its authenticity.

Or you could listen to the uninformed and scientifically illiterate ramblings of people who weren't even born when Apollo happened, had no involvement in it and have no understanding of any single aspect of it, and yet who somehow manage to dominate the debate just by shouting into a video camera and posting garbage on the internet. People who allegedly "know people who know people" but never know names, people who have secret and important information that proves things but never actually provide it, people who heard about someone who heard about something but can never provide details or events or locations, or people making money from their badly written books and badly researched DVDs.

Your choice.

Feel fred to post all this undinable evidence,

No evidence is undeniable. That doesn't make it untrue. Fred can see to himself.

It's all out there. Go for it. Most of it has been posted on this website at one time or another. Why are you asking me for it when you have a google toolbar sitting right there?

but so far it does not seem to Prove anything other than what NASA claims..

That's right, the claim that we landed on the moon.

[apollo_gnomon]

Originally Posted by stelios

The points you may have missed.
NASA tells lies.

Please list them. Provide citations.

There are criminal elements within NASA such as the Israeli spy who was caught and the many others who remain.

The "Israeli spy" was neither. He was a dumb dickweed who managed to get caught at some kind of fraud, then decided to make it worse by falling for an FBI entrapment sting because he was desperate for cash.

O'Bummer has rewarded some of his campaign donors with massive contracts such as SpaceX and Tesla Motors and SolarCity which are all owned by Elon Musk.

http://fundrace.huffingtonpost.com/n...usk&fname=Elon
Yeah? And? Welcome to Earth. That's how politics works. Always has.

As far as the "exposing them" point you make i assume you have not heard about all the work that Cass Sunstein and his army of keyboard warriors do.

Sunstein shot his mouth off at some point, but you can't prove there has been any follow-through on his modest proposal. I find it amazing how much you guys believe in this "paid shill" thing, but not one of you has ever tried to infiltrate them.

[stelios]

Originally Posted by apollo_gnomon

Sunstein shot his mouth off at some point, but you can't prove there has been any follow-through on his modest proposal. I find it amazing how much you guys believe in this "paid shill" thing, but not one of you has ever tried to infiltrate them.

Cass Sunstein does more than just run his mouth.



Cass Sunstein has long been one of Barack Obama's closest confidants. Often mentioned as a likely Obama nominee to the Supreme Court
Sunstein is currently Obama's head of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs
His portfolio, among other things, includes responsibility for "overseeing policies relating to privacy, information quality, and statistical programs." In 2008, while at Harvard Law School, Sunstein co-wrote a truly pernicious paper proposing that the U.S. Government employ teams of covert agents and pseudo-"independent" advocates to "cognitively infiltrate" online groups and websites -- as well as other activist groups -- which advocate views that Sunstein deems "false conspiracy theories" about the Government. This would be designed to increase citizens' faith in government officials and undermine the credibility of conspiracists.

Sunstein advocates that the Government's stealth infiltration should be accomplished by sending covert agents into "chat rooms, online social networks, or even real-space groups." He also proposes that the Government make secret payments to so-called "independent" credible voices to bolster the Government's messaging (on the ground that those who don't believe government sources will be more inclined to listen to those who appear independent while secretly acting on behalf of the Government). This program would target those advocating false "conspiracy theories."

http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/gl...01/15/sunstein

Obama Information Czar Cass Sunstein Confronted on Cognitive Infiltration of Conspiracy Groups - YouTube

Obama Information Czar Cass Sunstein Confronted on Cognitive Infiltration of Conspiracy Groups - YouTube

www.youtube.com/watch?v=4OIiOztc52g

Glenn Beck on Cass Sunstein - YouTube

Glenn Beck on Cass Sunstein - YouTube

www.youtube.com/watch?v=z-SKCXcEZvI

ps:
Tell us how you infiltrate Cass Sunstein's keyboard army.

[apollo_gnomon]

ps:
Tell us how you infiltrate Cass Sunstein's keyboard army.

Oh, that's right. I forget you consider yourself disempowered and regard all authority as the Other.

I've actually emailed a couple places in the US Gvt trying to apply for a position. Haven't heard back from them. As far as you know.

[thirdwave]

Originally Posted by truegroup

Feel free to post something that shows "anything other that what NASA claims", and maybe in your own words describe why

You seem to lack the understanding of people having another opinion to you.

Lets brake it down.. NASA have claimed to send people to the moon and have presented their "evidence" and info of such...

Many do not believe them and think they have staged the "evidence" and have lied.

Many like you think they are telling the truth.

My self or others are not claiming to have done something and there for we do not know what really happened, however, we still have the right to be skeptical of info given to us.. I have raised my points as to why I do not believe their story was true.

I have brought up many points on the thread which raise suspicion..
I have told you what I believe regarding their "evidence"... I'm not asking you to believe what I believe, NASA have asked us to believe them.

So I ask again, feel free to show me something which proves that faking it was not possible back then...

I shall be very disappointed in you as a "troofer" if you post something I have already addressed, but you have just ignored.

I have admitted when points have been addressed and answered as the thread shows.. so not sure what you are on about.

However it seems because you can eliminate some questions that the rest can be brushed away... and also I have not been content with all answers, also this is a debate not a link contest, because because you post 5 pages of someone else's text it does not mean you are addressing the question. Most wont read all of them as its too time consuming and its also away to pretend all answers have been addressed.

Another point is if you are so set on ignore other mass data regarding hidden space craft technology then its clear that your prespective is very limited and there for not an easy person to debate with. Ignorance is not a good ingredient for truth...

This is why I like to focus on the real evidence, where you can show me something that proves with out a doubt that the footage is real and could not be faked.

The footage where they are clearly trying to deceive the camera while in space, making out the cam was pressed to the window when infact it was far away from the window with the lights off, making it look like they were out of earths orbit... for me that says it all.

[thirdwave]

Originally Posted by moving finger

Not by me, or by any of the scientists you routinely use their data.

not all Scientist work for NASA mate!... Try Tesla.... am I routinely using his Data?.. are you? ..

You are implying because im not scientist that i should just submit to any info given to me by a well funded group of them who work for NASA..

Low gravity? Vacuum? Can you demonstrate how these could have been faked in a studio, and then demonstrate that it was actually done?

firstly nice try, no I can not demonstration how they were done as I am not a Hollywood movie maker, how ever I can assure you that there where people who could have known how to do it back then.

Here is Aldrin and Arm strong having a little play around lol



for me looking at the "moon landing" footage you can clearly see a "set" has been "staged"... you do not see the guys spin around and walk around each other through the cams view.. its all set from one still position pretty much...

So regarding how they faked, clearly the whole thing could have been done on a stage set, with a load of cement and sand used for the mane stage and then a screen placed up in the back ground, if you look you would see a possible back drop line that can be drawn in all the footage, where the floor would stop and the rest of the image would just be the back drop..

Stan Kubrick used this to great effect in space Odyssey... go to 2:30 for some footage..

2001: A Monkey Rukus - YouTube

2001: A Monkey Rukus - YouTube

As for the low gravity and vacuum effect, Kubrick also accomplished this in the movie.. using wires that were obviously hidden.. as seen here as 1:30

Stop Dave, I'm Afraid - YouTube

Stop Dave, I'm Afraid - YouTube

also the part where Hal kills Frank in space and Dave goes to help him (cant find it on youtube watch the film), you see the effect while they are suspended by wires... along with some slow motion effects placed in when needed... Why are you saying this was not possible on the moon landings set?

The video and photographic evidence I have looked at (and I think by now I have pretty much looked at all of it) demonstrate that they were on the moon.

you have a right to your opinion... but unless you can prove it as a fact then you are more than likely to get challenged when stating so.

Having plotted the location of all of the lunar orbital photographs on the lunar surface, many of which show the lunar module or the command & service module, and many of which show a level of detail in the lunar surface that would not be matched for another 40 years, and having compared the satellite photos taken from above the Earth with every sequence of pictures of Earth taken on the Apollo missions (including video screenshots), I can tell you that we went. I've done my own research, not just relied on other people's.

lol, you mean this?


Do you think this could have been easily faked? or do you think its conclusive?... also you are using the word of the people being accused of lying as evidence of their innocence..

example..

"Hey, you guys did not go to the moon, the moon landings vids are from a film set and staged"...

"Yes we did and here are some images we have taken from the moons orbit"...

do you see how that kind of does not work?

From people all over the world who tracked it, from the Spanish & Australian observatories that were used to co-ordinate communications, from the amateur radio hams that followed the craft there and back, from Jodrell Bank who tracked and recorded the missions. Probes did go to the moon. Did they take photographs of themselves while they were there? Did they bring back samples of any significant size? Did they take high resolution photographs? Did they install scientific experiments?

More ignorance, people may well of tracked them when they were in space, talking to each other.. does not mean they went to the moon though...

As for Spanish and Australian observations, to regard that as evidence one would need to automatically eliminate the possibility that other countries space programs were not in support of the hoax and would not share the same benefit... Have you still not woke up to the fact that there is less divison among the powers in various countries? Who do you see fighting against the NWO?

There is also very little info on what you say.. Did they track them in space or the moon?... because objects had already been tracked to the moon anyway so thats not really evidence that people were... all very vague that.

you make it sound like the whole world could see this event unfold which is bollocks... so someone apparently heard radio signals.. and Spain and Australia back them... Spain and Australia also back the "fact" that Muslims brought down the twin towers.

Tons of it. Equipment was set up that broadcast data from the moon for many years after the missions stopped - equipment that could not have been installed automatically. Lunar material . Go to the NASA technical reports server and look for the scientific papers on the Apollo data.

This is not relevant to me as I believe they had already been to the moon.

You must note, its not just a case of "have we been to the moon", its an argument about if the "Apollo Mission" had been to the moon.


To much to read in your post and don't have time to answer everyone ... but will address more points as and when..

Feel free to tell me why Kubrics film making talents could not be applied to the Hoaxed moon footage?

[thirdwave]

for the record while Im not so sure disclosure will come out on this issue. I am pretty sure that in the future as events unfold it will become more and more blatant that the landings were faked.

But I think as is with the case of UFO disclosure and maybe even ET disclosure, it will all happen at a time where our mind sets and reactions to such info will not be able to burden there world plan.... in other words it will be to late to do anything about it anyway.

by then I'm sure there will be the same brainwashed people trying to educate everyone on the new truth they are clinging too for dear life... that's if they have any control of their thoughts by that point.

I also have no interest in the race and religion issue, which creates the most ignorant conspiracies of all and only seeks to benefit a creed and not the truth, period.

[ranb]

Originally Posted by thirdwave

As for the low gravity and vacuum effect, Kubrick also accomplished this in the movie.. using wires that were obviously hidden.. as seen here as 1:30

Stop Dave, I'm Afraid - YouTube

also the part where Hal kills Frank in space and Dave goes to help him (cant find it on youtube watch the film), you see the effect while they are suspended by wires... along with some slow motion effects placed in when needed... Why are you saying this was not possible on the moon landings set?

Your knowledge of Apollo is just as sloppy as your knowledge of film making. Did you notice that the scene of Bowman shutting down Hal consisted of many cuts to differing camera angles? This does not happen on the Apollo films/video. The difference is night and day. No one was capable of making a convincing 1/6th gravity film back in the 60's just as they are not able to do so today. Take a look at the film Apollo 13 and HBO's From the Earth to the Moon to see what I am talking about.

As far as 2001 is concerned, if I was looking for someone to make faked Apollo footage, Kubrick's lunar scenes would convince me that he was obviously not up to the task. In the Lunar conference room the people are obviously near 1 g, not 1/6th. The lander kicks up lots of billowing dust, something that only happens in an atmosphere as dense as Earth's. The 2001 scene of the astronauts walking on the moon was unconvincing as well.

People who say that Kubrick was capable of making faked Apollo footage based upon his work on 2001 are just fooling themselves.

Ranb

[thirdwave]

Originally Posted by ranb

Your knowledge of Apollo is just as sloppy as your knowledge of film making.

Stupid comment seeing as I am here asking questions... just because Im not happy with most of the answers my knowledge on Appllo and film making is sloppy?

Did you notice that the scene of Bowman shutting down Hal consisted of many cuts to differing camera angles? This does not happen on the Apollo films/video.

thats another silly irelivant point.. as the point is he was suspended using wires, and you could not see the wires... your point about having lots of camera angles is silly and irrelevant and if anything promotes the effectiveness of wires being used and not seen.

Go and check out the film and the part where Dave goes to help Frank while he was trying to fix the space ship in his space suit, clearly you can see a slow floating effect and see no wires, so go ahead and tell me why that could not be used on the faked moon landing vids?

The difference is night and day. No one was capable of making a convincing 1/6th gravity film back in the 60's just as they are not able to do so today. Take a look at the film Apollo 13 and HBO's From the Earth to the Moon to see what I am talking about.

I have just posted you and directed you some footage where convincing gravity was used in the 60s... you just came out with some bollocks about camera angels and did not comment on my other example.

As far as 2001 is concerned, if I was looking for someone to make faked Apollo footage, Kubrick's lunar scenes would convince me that he was obviously not up to the task.

Well for me common sense would tell me that his Lunar sceans would not really impress NASA if they were done exactly the same as the Faked moon landing ones ... if anything I would say the fact that the rest of the film goes to so much effort to express gravity and vacume, to the slow walking on the space shuttle ... to Dave moving in his suit.... and then the Lunar effects where the actors do not even walk slowly... for me this makes sense as why would you want his Lunar footage to be the same as the Appollo one.

To be honest the Lunar sceane kicking up dust only needed to be slowed down with slow mo... are you saying that was not possible in that scene?

That being said, within the movie you can clearly see effects being implemented that could have easily been used on the fake landings footage. if you are not deliberately being ignorant like you.

In the Lunar conference room the people are obviously near 1 g, not 1/6th. The lander kicks up lots of billowing dust, something that only happens in an atmosphere as dense as Earth's. The 2001 scene of the astronauts walking on the moon was unconvincing as well.

Yes true, but I am not asking you if in the Space Oddysey movie he created the same scenes I am asking if there are scenes in the Apollo fakes landings that could not have been possible for a film maker to create.

Its common sense that around the same time of the moon landings that the Creator would create the same kind of scenes in a movie.. ask your self this?... why not?, when you look at the effects successfully used in other parts of the movie...

Go ahead and pick me out a scene of the Appolo faked landings and tell me why Kubrick could not have created it.

People who say that Kubrick was capable of making faked Apollo footage based upon his work on 2001 are just fooling themselves.

People who say that are just ignorant and easily fooled..

[truegroup]

Originally Posted by thirdwave

I have just posted you and directed you some footage where convincing gravity was used in the 60s... you just came out with some bollocks about camera angels and did not comment on my other example.

Bullshit. Convincing gravity of what? Floaty weightlessness? Yeah right. If that convinces you, you're lost in a world of wooo. Notice no inanimate objects are "floating around" like on Apollo cabin footage, or being thrown in perfect lunar gravity on the Moon.

Go ahead and pick me out a scene of the Appolo faked landings and tell me why Kubrick could not have created it.

You have been given dozens of examples, you ignored them by putting on your tin foil hat and saying lalalala I can't hear you. Sad really.