Moon Landing= Big Hoax... Seriously
 

A few years ago I saw a show on television called conspiracy theory. The main subject of this particular episode was on the moon landing and how it could easily have been a well-constructed government hoax. I know some of you are thinking that it is a crazy idea and that I should shut up before I give my self a headache... maybe your right, but the evidence is right in front of us:

1. The American Flag was flapping in the wind (there is no wind on the moon).
2. We have never gone back to the moon since, why is that?
3. The spaceship never made a crater in the moon (it should have).
4. The crosshairs on the photos taken on the moon were under certain entities (not sure what it means exactly).
5. You could hear the astronaut’s voices over the very loud spaceship engine (apparently your not suppose to be able to).
6. Perfect motive: competing with the Russians which beat the Americans to space travel.
7. There’s a satellite photo of area 51 that shows off an area with many craters.

There are more things that just don’t make sense, but I can’t remember them right now. I guess we will all find out the truth the next time we go to the moon…

What are your thoughts on this controversial subject?

Oh, i heard about this. I came to the conclusion America was and still is run by a bunch of f*ckwits. What sort of country would fake a Moon landing just to be ahead in the 'space race' i mean, come on. Thats like little kids faking illness to be kept off school. Its pathetic.

Re: Moon Landing= Big Hoax... Seriously
 

I love doing this, there aren't enough stupid people on that rival board that I usually post.

I went to a good site about this after I watched that show. I'll see if I can find it.
http://www.badastronomy.com/bad/misc/apollohoax.html

2. Because it's boring.
4. This is completely irrelevant. They could have taken the pictures with a camera with crosshairs on earth.
5. There is no air on the moon as it is in space. This is pre-GCSE stuff. Learn some physics before you post in future.
7. Wow. That's amazing. Earth also has asteriod craters. Stop the press!

I love you, Tom.

Shhh! I told you I wanted to keep that a secret!

Saying this would be funnier:

'Shhh, this is not the time nor the place...'

I was suspicious of a hoax when the camera that was supposed to film the capsule shooting off he moon actually followed it as it went up. Coincidence?! I think not!! :O

There must be a 50 foot pole coming off the ship with a camera coming off it. It's called the '50 foot pole with a camersa on it'.

I've also heard that the Flag doesn't move, but they had a pole to hold it up to make it look better. I don't know how true this is though.

Ahem.

You people have way too much free time. And imagination.

!WARNING! UNECCESSARY MEANESS:

2. Maybe that's why people don't visit you...
4. The statement you made is even more irrelevant then mine.
5. Here's a physics lesson for you: My foot in your ass.
7. How 'bout I make a crater in your face!

**I’m just kidding buddy, but please stop proving me wrong… it makes me look bad. No hard feelings?

P.S. When I said ass I meant a donkey… that’ll keep the mods of my back, hehe.:D :D

He didn't prove you wrong...

I couldn't think of anything better to say; besides he knows what I meant.

What about the fact that there were no stars whatsoever in that entire moon landing documentary.

Because of the sun light. Thats why there was no stars. What ever you heard was a hoax. The moon landing happened. I saw the part they left behind through a telescope one time.

How can you be so sure? Do you work at NASA?? I didn't think so.

No my neighbor I know has a good telescope. It is one of those electric telescopes. One time we looked through it at the moon and we saw the capsol. Thats all.

We're not saying the Merkins didn't go on the moon. Just that they weren't on the moon first...

I watched Conspiracy Theory. Just a month or two ago, in fact, so the evidence it presented is still reasonably fresh in my mind.

Because there has been no need to. It's really out of character for me to defend the American Government, but they did have a very good reason for getting to moon before the Russians - or was that itself the reason...whatever, there has been no need since. Of course, the Russians realised that it was impossible to get to the moon with the technology of that time and ceased efforts.

Interestingly, NASA claims it wouldn't have - which just goes to show how desperate they are. Any person with even a rudimentary understanding of the way the world works knows full well there's going to be a crater. Even the scientific sketches of the landing show a crater.

I couldn't quite understand what Tom was getting at, so I'll wait for that to be clarified. The point is, the cameras that were being used had crosshairs on the lens that are shown on the developed pictures, sort of like guidelines. They are always on top of everything in the picture, yet these ones are covered by objects such as the astros and the buggy and whatnot. For any person who studies faked photos and films, this is a very obvious indication that these objects have been superimposed.

The point here is that these craters match exactly the crater formation of the area that the Eagle landed. True, they could have been used as test areas, but why all the trouble getting it so exact? And how come the hangers at Area 51 look like stage hangers, like the ones you get in Hollywood? Not a persuasive arguement by itself, I know.

That's true also. Sunlight would not block the light coming from other stars, because the Moon hasn't got the right atmosphere for that to happen. It's possible it hasn't got an atmosphere at all, but I can't remember.

Other points of interest:
1. Looking at the photos, the shadows of the rocks point in a variety of directions, but there is only one source of light on the moon - the Sun.
2. There is a famous photo of an astro with the sun behind him, and yet we can see the features of his suit. In the real world, he would be silhouetted.
3. More photo evidence, of an astro coming out of the Eagle and into its shadow. And yet we can see both him and the shadowed side of the Eagle in perfect detail. Where is this light coming from in each of these three cases? Studio lights are the only answer.

4. Many of the photos and films that were supposedly taken a way away from each other show exactly the same landscape. A mistake? Like the one with the Eagle in the background, and a later photo where it has disappeared? No.
5. If you double the speed of the films, you can see very clearly that the astros and the buggy are travelling as they would under a gravity of 1G.
6. All of the people involved in the mission who doubted it would succeed or who claimed it was a rouse dies under very shady circumstances.

A Japanese satellite is travelling towards the moon, and will take photos of the area the Eagle supposedly landed in two years time. If the Eagle is not there, we will know for certain. If it is, the man in Conspiracy Theory promises to say no more about it other than to accept that he was wrong.

And just for the record, I believe the whole thing to be faked.

When they took pictures in space sunlight is reflective off either the surface of earth or the moon. It bounces off the surface onto the lens of the camara. Therefor you get incredible light even more brighter than the sun light we get on earth because there is no atmosphere. That which causes us to see no stars. Like I said the moon landing happened! What ever you heard was a hoax.

Allow me to be the first to say 'Moron' the Merkins were not the first people on the Moon PA. Christ, the entire evidence points against that...i understand your a proud American, but Hell, thats whats wrong with the world...Americans being so damn proud. Grow up and face facts.

I for one believe it to be fake. Also even if this Satellite does say the Americans were on the moon, big deal. They could have put that there ages ago.

I saw a documentery or whatever on Fox, with everything said here. I believe it was a hoax, relaly I do. PA, try disproving every piece of eveidence here. *looks at distressed expression on PA's face* C'mon, I know you can do it...

conspiracy
 

I studied this as a project for my science class and my conclusion was that it was not a hoax. I've forgotten my arguments though so I won't try to burst the conspirators bubbles.

The thing that really makes people seem so ignorant is when they say that there was a moon landing after hearing the facts and don't support the moon landing with any facts of their own, except that the Gov't woudn't do something so stupid... but they would... they really would.

**Also I know that the spaceship took off and went into space, but I beleve it just circled around earth a few times and came down. While up there they just played the recently made fake moon landing tape to the public; I don't think it was live.

So who were the first ppl on the moon?

It's hard to make a crater on rock

Simple: the camera lense was adjusted to take in a lot of light (ie from the sun). It then could not pick up tiny points of light like the stars. It's all a matter of contrast.

DERRRR... There were microphones in their spacesuits.

Bcos the ground was irregular. the ground lies at different angles so the shadows do too.

there are so many stories about area 51 that you'll have to excuse me disbelieving this one


One part of the moon looks a lot like another. And this sums up my general thesis about the moon landings: If the US wanted to fake it, surely they would have done a better job. they certainly wouldn't have used the same background for different locations.

The videos of the moon landing came through the Parkes telescope in Australia. the people who worked there are still alive and they will guarantee that the videos came from the moon.

And how do you know the're tellin the truth. Also, shadows go in the general direction the lights heading. I've yet to see a shadow actualy facing toward a different direction, when the rest aren't.

Yet some guy hopping around in low gravity makes clear footprints. Wait a mintue, either that or its a bad example or something. It is lower gravity, isn't it? Ah, nevermind.

Ehehehe... If I remember, they overlapped. Perfectly. Also, do you know how much other stuff there is to fake? Rocks, lots of pictures and videos, passable stories, ensuring the trust of other astronauts. Anyways, think: Faking lots of training exercises, getting everything prepared, etc... is still alot easier than getting people on the moon for real.

You have no idea what your talking about. Where did you get that info, some kind of reliable source... I didn't think so. If you knew what Majic, Jacob, Max, myself, and many others know, you would probably think differently. We have facts, but what you wrote told me nothing but your opinion.

landing
 

i think they can't fake a moon landing it will be too hard.

Re: landing
 

So is building a dam, impossible, no, very hard, yes.

hope no ones already mentioned this...
 

Flag argument: no wind to blow it

Rebuttle: The "blowing" motion of the flag was caused by the low gravity. When the astronaught set it up he caused it to move. It was still moving during the footage.

You don't have facts. you have theories that were made up by people with a very anti US bias.

I read an article about a month ago rebutting all of your theories. That's where I got all that from. Unfortunately I don't remember it perfectly. I will try to find it.

Please do.

I didn't see him shaking it violently...

Yes, but actually landing on the Moon, piece of cake.

To the people who say the US could do a better job, you have to realise that it was quite a while ago. And thus, they didn't know what we know now.

Also, the Astronauts weren't fat. Whats all that about?

And the first people on the Moon were sposedly the 2nd people on the Moon. If thats America then so be it, but the time when they sposedly went into space, they never.

Ok why don't you guys who seem to think the moon landing was a hoax ask your parents or grandparents if it was true. I am sure they were around in 1969 and during the sixties. America landed on the moon first but we were lucky because we were in a race with the Russians in beating us to the moon. We made it there first. It doesn't mean we were better for those who are anti American so spare me with the arguement on that part. The moon landing is a representation of all mankind in our greatest achievements this world has ever known.

Yes. That, cloning sheep, and Rogaine...

What will our Grandparents and Parents know you fool. lol!! Many people saw it, many people believe it. It doesn't mean its true!! Gawwwwwd...!! America never went to the moon when they said they did, face facts. I aint too bothered about Americans, im related to Americans...but the fact of the matter is, they lied. The Moon landing wasn't a representation of mans greatest achievements. It was a petty lie, a massive cheat and a pathetic attempt to seem better than others...

Ok Jacob were you around in 1969? hmm probabaly not same with a lot of us. Now how can u explane to the people who sat in mission control back then that what they were doing is a fake? Face it your wrong I am right and you know it. How about we take a bet that there was an actual moon landing! What do you say Jacob? You up for coughing up some cash to a complete stranger online? Because I know I would win. (I am being sarcastic) Don't take it the wrong way!:fuzblink:

PA, what does it matter that i wasn't around in '69? It doesn't.

PA, either Mission Control were in on it or they didn't have a clue.

And no, i wouldn't have a bet with you. For one thing when i win i wouldn't get the money cos your in the US and im in the UK

I am an American, I am not anti American. Let's face it, there are more facts that the moon landings were phony then there are that it really did take place. I have not heard a single good argument convincing me that it did happen, except that the government wouldn't do something like that. It is like a magician doing a magic trick in front of a large audience. You may think that the woman was cut in half... but she wasn't.

OK Jacob, What the hell does that mean?

If Neil Armstrong wasn't the first man on the moon, who was?