I came across this "gem" on the IMDB tonight. The reviewer is from China, whose government is notorious for manipulating and suppressing facts. Maybe that's why I found it so funny. Also, it's been way too long I debunked an HB.
One important thing that has always been puzzling to me is that how come NASA hasn't done it again?
Last time I checked, NASA wasn't a rogue agency, spending money against the taxpayer's will.
After all, technology has advanced so much. We have never heard any big plans from the US government, or NASA about sending people to the moon ever again.
I'm guessing this guy never heard of Project Constellation or any of the plans to send Americans back to the Moon by 2018.
Why is that? Can they really say that all the information they have collected from the moon is already plenty and enough?
North pole is so close, and so easy to get to, yet People are still there doing research.
It's doesn't cost $2 billion to send four scientists to the North Pole.
This film is good, because it didn't just give out random facts.
No, it's good because it doesn't give out any facts!
It actually showed the actual footage and evidence to support why the moon landing was faked.
As opposed to recreating the original footage using pantomime actors?
I was surprised to know that at that time, people already have colored camcorders, etc.
Actually, the first professional camcorder didn't come out until 1982, but whatever.
Before I watched this video, I thought that they only had black and white camcorders, and since the telecommunication technology was really bad, that is why the moon landing video clips all looked so blurry.
Here we see the convenient HB tactic of pretending that Apollo 11 was the only landing mission, and completely ignoring the fact that the video quality was bad because the images were sent through the LM's antenna. But I actually had to do research to realize that.
So if they had camcorders that can record things in color, why didn't they record them?
Did Bart Sibrel really say that none of the Apollo films are in color?
And if they can not transmit them right away, they should at least broadcast them later when they "returned" from the moon.
I'm getting increasingly confused by the reviewer's logic, but weren't they perfectly capable of sending back video real-time, but they didn't bother because the TV networks didn't care anymore?
And how about those colored pictures? According to this video, NASA only released about 20 or so pictures, that is it? come on, the government spent billions of dollars on the project, all they took back was 20 or so pictures?
At the Apollo Lunar Surface Journal, there's literally thousands of high-resolution pictures taken during the Apollo missions. Amusingly, this is the complete opposite of the argument that the astronauts took too many photographs in the alloted time!
At that time, the US government felt the urgency and necessity to reach the moon first during the cold war time. It could boost national pride, and make the soviets fearful.
This is actually true.
So the government will try anything to land on moon whether it is real or fake.
You can't land on the Moon if it's fake.
And for those firm believers with their national pride,
Which doesn't explain why people from all over the world who use this forum and believe the Apollo missions were real.
just like those people who believe in their own religious god, telling them that landing on the moon was entirely faked, it would be as if part of their believe system was destroyed.
Years of laughing at hoax theories has actually strengthened my faith in Apollo, not destroyed it.
Therefore, there is no way that they will believe that it was staged.
Because most of the people who think it was staged seem to be off their rockers.
And soviets and the US were both competing against each other, how come the soviets never ever sent their people to the moon?
Because their rockets kept exploding.
Both governments were able to build many nuclear weapons, warships, etc.
Well, for one thing, most warships don't have to survive spaceflight and re-entering the Earth's atmosphere...
Why did the soviet just sit there and watch the people from the US landed on the moon without doing anything?
Were the supposed to try to shoot them down or something?
And ever since then, why didn't any other countries around the world ever try to send their people to the moon?
Lack of money, resources, political will, public interest, scientific know-how...
Only now, in the 21st century, China is the only country that is planning to send Chinese to the moon.
Well, at least the Americans won't have to send the Chinese to the Moon.
At that time, how many people had TVs in their private homes worldwide? And how many people even had their own home phones? So it should be easy to fool people at that time.
So color camcorders were common in the late 60s, but TVs weren't? What about the 600 million people who watched the Apollo 11 landing on their TV? And how would the lack of home phones fool people into believe the landings were real? Did the lack of home phones stop people from calling up others to tell them the landings were fake?.
One thing this video did not mention is whether they brought any rocks from the moon? I think that they did, this video did not spend any time discussing whether those moon rocks were real or fake.
So the reviewer is convinced the landings were faked, but isn't quite sure if the rocks themselves are real or faked. So it's entirely possible the moon landings are real but they forgot to bring back any rocks and had to fake them later.
No other countries has ever collected any moon rocks.
Except the Russians.
Each year, there are plenty of meteoroids hitting earth. So how can we be sure that those "moon rocks" are really from the moon, but not some meteoroid rocks?
You know, I'm pretty sure that 10-foot long core samples with no evidence of atmospheric heating don't just fall on Earth at random.
Another thing is the radiation belt. It was shown as two big circles surrounding the earth which can't possibly be true.
Yeah, but it must be true, because Sibrel said so!
Because the north and south pole areas seem to be free of radiation. So it was a technical error of its own.
So if the area above the poles really were free of radiation, this reviewer wouldn't buy into it because he's convinced otherwise.
Or it should at least explain to the viewers why the north and south poles were free of radiation, and why the spaceship can not go through those two ares without the radiation damage? This video is like one of the religious books, if you believe that religion, no matter how bad that book is, you still believe in the religion. Any small evidence will only make you believe it even more.
So if 99.9% of something is pure rubbish, the 0.1% that's actually true validates the remainder that isn't?
And for those who don't believe that it was a hoax, no matter what you tell them, they will still believe that it really happened.
Being in a position to easily refute any theory that's thrown at us puts us in an easier position.
For me, I am still open minded. Until that day when NASA sends another spaceship to land on the moon, I have some serious doubts that it really happened.
My head hurts.