I Will Prove The Moon Landings Were Hoaxed

[Swift]

<snip>
Realy all I want is independent varification from the moon probe . It will supposedly give a detailed topographic map and True Color photos. The Apollo Junk should be there pretty much how we left it. We will all see it , case dismissed.

I'll turn it around - why would you believe that? Let's say NASA or the Russians or China or the ESA sends a probe to the moon and they take pictures from orbit and they post on the Internet and put on TV pictures that clearly show the remains of the Apollo hardware. Why would you believe it then? If NASA can fake all of this stuff, with 1960s special effects technology, why would you believe anything they publish now, when the special effects technology is so much better. If China did it instead of the US, would you just say that China was paid off by the US to cover up the hoax?

What to you constitutes proof?

[Anla'Shok]

One better. What if China, upset with the US taking them to task over civil rights, gets to the moon and take photos of the Apollo "landing sites" that shows empty surface. The photos could be taken in the same area but from convenient angles so as to mask the presence of the real landings. This would cause severe embarrassment to the US causing us to have to prove we went, maybe having to send a mission before we are ready.

It would not be out of the realm of the Chinese long-range style planning to have launched this idea years ago with a few well placed comments to the right kind of susceptible person, someone who is already dissatisfied with the US Gov and just a little education. Then they use the internet to spread disinformation, Moon Man could be a poorly trained Chinese agent! After his poor showing here he was probably eliminated as an example to of agents.

It could take the US years to get the evidence it needs to clear their name, a lot of wasted resources. When the proof is given the Chinese could just say they were obviously in the wrong area.

[pghnative]

I don't find that scenario credible. The US space program is so open with its data and results, that no credible person thinks it could have been faked. Any attempt (by the Chinese or any other nation) to "prove" that the US hadn't gone to the moon would eventually be refuted and cause extreme embarrasment to those who tried.

Any pictures that were "photoshopped" would be eventually shown to have been manipulated. Any pictures from "convenient angles" or of "similar sites" could be compared with Apollo photos, and after matching craters/mountains, etc, shown to have been taken disengenuously.

[Anla'Shok]

I don't find that scenario credible.

Sorry, I had my HBer hat on, you know the tin-foil one. The idea of a foriegn source pushing the hoax is not totally out of the question.

[tbm]

Greetings. What a thread!

While there is a plethora of good reasons that have been posted here backing up the reality of the moon missions, there is one thing that the HB's have missed in their scattergun approach to things.

With the huge amount of people who were involved in the Apollo (and other) programs, what is holding back someone who is in the know of a "hoax"? After all the fame and fortune that would come from such a revelation would surely be out of this world (pun intended). If someone could truly reveal the ways and means of a true "Apollo Hoax", he could name his price for the information and proof. And the old "so-and-so was killed because he was going to spill the beans" is just self-serving garbage.

So until someone suddenly gets rich by revealing the "Hoax", I'll just stick with reality and believe the real facts.

Regards, tbm

[Extravoice]

So until someone suddenly gets rich by revealing the "Hoax", I'll just stick with reality and believe the real facts.

Based on the going price of this book, it would appear that there is money to be made in exposing conspiricies.

[Faultline]

Greetings. What a thread!

While there is a plethora of good reasons that have been posted here backing up the reality of the moon missions, there is one thing that the HB's have missed in their scattergun approach to things.

With the huge amount of people who were involved in the Apollo (and other) programs, what is holding back someone who is in the know of a "hoax"? After all the fame and fortune that would come from such a revelation would surely be out of this world (pun intended). If someone could truly reveal the ways and means of a true "Apollo Hoax", he could name his price for the information and proof. And the old "so-and-so was killed because he was going to spill the beans" is just self-serving garbage.

So until someone suddenly gets rich by revealing the "Hoax", I'll just stick with reality and believe the real facts.

Regards, tbm

Fooling the average layman with such a hoax would be easy, but the hoax wouldn't have been believable after the seventies were over with.

Fooling the average high school science teacher in the seventies would be tough.

Fooling the average university science professor circa 1970 would be next to impossible.

Fooling the actual techs and engineers that designed, built, and monitored the equipment... many of whom were professors... now that would be harder than landing on the moon.

If its a conspiracy, the HBer's need to decide exactly who was in on the joke. Was it mission control? The contractors and engineers that built the equipment? The scientists who calculated every turn of the mission? Or was it just the upper-level mission planners?

Keep in mind that the execs couldn't film the astronauts on a sound stage without a crew of technicians and artists who are all skilled in movie special effects. Take a look at the credits of any major motion picture. Even the mostly CGI movies have hundreds of names after you eliminate "executive producer, cast, and camera operators."

So that forms a lower limit of how many people could have been in on the conspiracy. I'd say it was no less than 2,000 on a guess. The bigger the conspiracy, the more cumbersome it is to keep it a secret. Eventually, the conspirators would have to expend enormous amounts of time, money, and effort just covering the conspiracy.

One leak with definite proof and it would be all over.

[novaderrik]

maybe they used one of the "flashy-thingies" from Men In Black to plant the memory or the lunar landings in the minds of the populace, and the people who claim it is a hoax never got flashed.
it's at least as possible as some of the claims i've read here as to why and how it was faked...

[ZaphodBeeblebrox]

Maybe, EVERYONE, was In, On It ...

$100,000 a Piece, For Everybody Alive, at The Time, Would Have Been, More than Enough!!!

Also, At a Price Tag, of Only $400 Trillion; It Would Have, Been Cheaper, than Actually, Doing It!

[Count Zero]

Maybe, EVERYONE, was In, On It ...

*Sigh*, If only I hadn't blown it all in Vegas... Hmm? OH! I mean, that's a ridiculous idea, Zaphod!

[Grey]

Also, At a Price Tag, of Only $400 Trillion; It Would Have, Been Cheaper, than Actually, Doing It!

The total Apollo budget was only about $20 billion, wasn't it? That would only have been enough for about 5 bucks apiece.

[montebianco]

Well, if everyone in the world is in on it, then you don't need to pay them anything. Whom will they tell?

[wayneee]

Here's another photo where you can see the astronauts face. It's Buzz Aldrin. The stuff is there if you look.

Thats a good photo, I am about 80 percent sure thats Buzz. It sure does look like him. That picture sure puts a crimp in my Astronauts remain circling earth secenario as Actors in space suits play out Moon Walk in studio on Earth.
Ok ,So That means Astronaughts that are recovered at sea are those who are being filmed on moon, and in capsule footage during trip, we see thier faces. Although, so far the pictures I have seen are by no means definative.
So to keep my Hoax alive I will give another possibility.
Astronaughts who are video taped on moon and in capsule and then later on recovery never leave Earth( more on this to come)

[AGN Fuel]

Just a comment: it might add a little more credence to your claims if you could possibly spell 'astronaut' correctly.

[Faultline]

Considering the paper-thin possibility that it could be hoaxed and everyone in on the scam stays quiet for three decades, its not enough to argue that a hoax was possible. You have to state how it is possible AND provide evidence that supports your version of how the hoax was accomplished.

Wayneee only wants to argue that a hoax is possible. Anyone can argue about what is possible. That's not what matters. Its harder to argue that something is IMpossible. Where is the evidence (not just questions, because we have lots of answers to HBer's questions that they choose not to mind) that supports that the lunar footage was filmed on a soundstage for all of the missions?

[Laguna]

So to keep my Hoax alive I will give another possibility.

Or in other words:
... to keep my Hoax alive I will grasp at another straw.

[Van Rijn]

Wayneee only wants to argue that a hoax is possible. Anyone can argue about what is possible. That's not what matters. Its harder to argue that something is IMpossible. Where is the evidence (not just questions, because we have lots of answers to HBer's questions that they choose not to mind) that supports that the lunar footage was filmed on a soundstage for all of the missions?

It is true that it is hard to argue about what is impossible, but the "filmed on a soundstage" idea comes pretty close. Nobody has presented an even vaguely credible method to duplicate everything we see in the videos in a way that would have fooled experts. It would be tricky enough to fool non-experts that were paying attention.

And there is just no getting around that something went and landed on the moon, that there are the moon rocks, and the transmissions and tracking somehow all fit.

[wayneee]

Greetings. What a thread!

While there is a plethora of good reasons that have been posted here backing up the reality of the moon missions, there is one thing that the HB's have missed in their scattergun approach to things.

With the huge amount of people who were involved in the Apollo (and other) programs, what is holding back someone who is in the know of a "hoax"? After all the fame and fortune that would come from such a revelation would surely be out of this world (pun intended). If someone could truly reveal the ways and means of a true "Apollo Hoax", he could name his price for the information and proof. And the old "so-and-so was killed because he was going to spill the beans" is just self-serving garbage.

So until someone suddenly gets rich by revealing the "Hoax", I'll just stick with reality and believe the real facts.

Regards, tbm

Well the threat of Death , and harm to your loved ones would be a good incentive of course. and being well off for your sevice would help as well , and there does not need to be thousands involved

[wayneee]

Not necessarily. If they sent the response to the astronauts when they were right here on Earth, or in Earth orbit, then the astronauts immediately sent the signal to the probe, which then immediately relayed it back to Earth, the delay would be about what you would expect. The astronauts' signal would arrive at the probe at about the same time as the original transmission (minus the time they needed to actually answer the question), then would take the same amount of time to get back. The only further delay would be from the relay system, which would have been extremely short. There are numerous problems with such a scenario, but the length of time before a response is recieved is not one of them.

Well thank you Black Cat for the back up ! I know, I wont get used to it.

[wayneee]

The idea of the moon rocks being lunites is as old as, well the hoax, but it shows a total ignorance of both Lunites and the Apollo samples. Firstly, the samples weren't just rocks, they included core samples up to 8' in length and dirt samples, something you CAN'T get from a lunite. Not only that, but lunites have numerous traits of their own that the Apollo samples don't have, most caused by their time in space and then the travel through the atmosphere, though they also often show signs of weathering. Add to that that many of the Apollo samples came from an area with high radioactive isotope concentration, smething that wasn't actually known about until the mid 1990's. Also add that the first lunite wasn't found until 1979 and wasn't identified until 1981, and that the entire amount of recovered lunite material is far less than that recovered by the Apollo missions. Further, that the Russians did robotic return samples and only gained a number of grams from the entire three returns. Robotics could not have gathered the rocks, which were selected for their usefulness in a geological study of the moon. Robots could not have taken the core samples. The soils and core samples could not have been from lunites, the rocks themselves cannot be lunites because their distinictive traits are entirely different. The Apollo rocks match with the elements that have since been found to be present at the landing sites while most known lunites don't match the region the landings were in (and are highly studied because of exactly this reason.) Lunites were determined to be from the moon because of their similarity to the Apollo samples.

Can you see why these samples are damning evidence against there being as hoax? There is only one way that these rocks could possibly have been gained. People who were geologically trained had to go there and pick them up, drill samples cores and take soil samples. There is just no other way to do it, no matter how much the HB's hate the idea and so glaze over it without anything other than "they were just lunar meteorites." (or even worse, they were manufactured.)

Core samples . never thought of that . Good Point. Are ther Photos of Astronauts taking core samples. What kind of tool was used to take the core sample. Was it a Soil core, did they use a Soil probe , or was it a Rock core Sample which would require a high energy drill. Something like that can not be done manualy, even on the moon.

[AGN Fuel]

Well the threat of Death , and harm to your loved ones would be a good incentive of course.

These guys were fighter pilots and test pilots who faced death daily. Many of them were also men of extraordinary personal integrity who had no compunction about calling a spade a spade. Who is going to tell the deeply religious Frank Borman, for example, that he has to lie to the entire world and have his reputation forever blackened when that deceit is exposed (as it invariably must)?

Why no deathbed confessions? Once out, any threats against other individuals become totally useless. Are you going to kill someone after a secret is exposed??

... and there does not need to be thousands involved

You keep saying this. You also keep not explaining how.

[wayneee]

The astronauts could not be in LEO to do this, or their transmissions to the probe would be blocked for 40 odd minutes out of every 90.

Well there is also another alternative. The moon landing is pretaped. The Ship indeed goes towards the moon just like the other Apollos. Sends Taped Moon Movie.(But I dont like that scenario)\

Better to have high orbit module mirroring unmanned capsule going towards moon transmitting data. Faces of astronauts on the moon seem to point to verification of Actual moon landing or Pretaped Moon movie.

[Van Rijn]

... and there does not need to be thousands involved

You keep saying this. You also keep not explaining how.

This reminds me of the Planet X argument: That a monster planet is going to come to finish us off soon, but They aren't telling us about it. They are a small group that know all about it, but are keeping it from us . . .

Which utterly misses just how many people actually look at the sky and would notice a monster planet coming our way. It is an argumet that only makes sense if astronomy is a foreign subject to you. This is the same: Assuming it was possible at all, a moon hoax would have been an absolutely mammoth project and would require a worldwide conspiracy.

[wayneee]

I'll turn it around - why would you believe that? Let's say NASA or the Russians or China or the ESA sends a probe to the moon and they take pictures from orbit and they post on the Internet and put on TV pictures that clearly show the remains of the Apollo hardware. Why would you believe it then? If NASA can fake all of this stuff, with 1960s special effects technology, why would you believe anything they publish now, when the special effects technology is so much better. If China did it instead of the US, would you just say that China was paid off by the US to cover up the hoax?

What to you constitutes proof?

Ok ,I have said this several times already. I have heard other Hoaxers claim the same thing. Independent verification by a photographic probe is what we want. Then we would know. Every time I tell you what I need, you skirt around and make excuses about how it too would be hoaxed or Hoaxers would be pig headed.
I have posted quite a few posts here , besides bad spelling I hope you all see that I am open minded.
As for other countries , who politicaly dislike us , any hoaxing on thier part should be easy to decipher, as added information to thier probes data stream would stand out like a sore thumb.

[wayneee]

Just a comment: it might add a little more credence to your claims if you could possibly spell 'astronaut' correctly.

yeah yeah you got me , Ive been reading some history about the Greman Pocket battleships , and the word Dreadnaught kept coming up , must have stuck to some sticky brain cell

[Hugh Jass]

any hoaxing on thier part should be easy to decipher, as added information to thier probes data stream would stand out like a sore thumb.

HUH?

So... no other country on earth, who was watching the Apollo missions could by this same argument easily decipher a hoax. But, if another country tried to re-hoax we'd know in an instant?

Am I not understanding what your saying?

[Hugh Jass]

You keep saying this. You also keep not explaining how.

Funny how this might be the single most repeated line in the conspiracy/ATM forums.

[wayneee]

These guys were fighter pilots and test pilots who faced death daily. Many of them were also men of extraordinary personal integrity who had no compunction about calling a spade a spade. Who is going to tell the deeply religious Frank Borman, for example, that he has to lie to the entire world and have his reputation forever blackened when that deceit is exposed (as it invariably must)?

Why no deathbed confessions? Once out, any threats against other individuals become totally useless. Are you going to kill someone after a secret is exposed??



You keep saying this. You also keep not explaining how.

Well Gus Grisom did die along with his crew. and your loved ones live on, Im sure you dont want your daughter threatened even after your death

As for the realitively low number of people in on the Hoax . I have explained this already. All contrators and the majority of Nasa personel think the mission is going on. They are being Hoaxed as well. Information which is being shown on screens and instrument panels are being duplicated as if a simulation was occuring. There is a ship in space for the world to see , sending telemetry and Voice. I only assert we did not step on the moon.

[wayneee]

Funny how this might be the single most repeated line in the conspiracy/ATM forums.

Well I have explained , unfortunately the board has become large , and many of my posts are lost in the back wash. There is a lot to read

[SolusLupus]

I have a question:

At what point did the scientists and the contractors and the engineers turn around and say, "Wait a minute. We don't have the technology to do this"?

The main point that Hoax Believers give are that NASA did not have the technology, and a trip to the moon would have been impossible. Yet, someone should've told that to the tens of thousands of engineers, astronomers, engineers (especially those specializing with space technology), etc.

Really, what is so hard to buy about the moon landings? We use submarines on a daily basis, and in the 1960's, we had them loaded with nuclear warheads capable of 5000 mile range. That's pretty impressive tech.