Forums

 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages 
Moon Landing - Hoaxed?
Goto page 1, 2, 3 ... 44, 45, 46  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Fortean Times Message Board Forum Index -> Conspiracy - general
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Anonymous
PostPosted: 16-08-2001 23:56    Post subject: moon landing Reply with quote

I have a question about the theory that the moon landing was a hoax. As I wasn't yet even the proverbial twinkle in my parents' eyes, I don't have any personal memories of the events. But, based on what a big deal the Space Shuttle was when I was little (watched every launch and landing in school for the first few years), I can't help but wonder: didn't just about everyone on the planet with a decent home telescope watch the lander go to the moon and come back? Surely the universities had good enough telescopes in their astronomy departments to watch a good bit of the progress to and from the moon. Or am I missing some major part of the theory?
Back to top
JamesWhiteheadOffline
Piffle Prospector
Joined: 02 Aug 2001
Total posts: 6220
Location: Manchester, UK
Gender: Male
PostPosted: 17-08-2001 01:18    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quite an interesting case has been made for the notion that
the moon landing was really done in a Hollywood studio - or
at least a studio on Area 51.

It has been questioned whether the thin materials of the space-suits
were sufficient protection against the radioactivity that would have
been encountered.

Chiefly, however, sceptics have concentrated on the photographs
published by NASA. The arguments centre around the lack of any
crater beneath the landing craft, the flags that wave in a non-existant
lunar atmosphere and the way that features are visible in what should
be deep shadow.

Even more extraordinary is the match which has been made between two
shots, supposedly shot on different days, where the terrain is clearly
identical.

There is plenty of this material on the web. There has never been any
satisfactory explanation of these anomalies.

Cor! Cool
Back to top
View user's profile Visit poster's website 
DerekH16Offline
Puzzled by life
Joined: 02 Aug 2001
Total posts: 1035
Location: Edinburgh
Gender: Male
PostPosted: 17-08-2001 01:19    Post subject: Reply with quote

Try

http://www.redzero.demon.co.uk/moonhoax/

or

http://www.badastronomy.com/bad/tv/foxapollo.html

(Neither of which was the site I was looking for!)

or just type 'apollo hoax' or 'moon hoax' into a search engine - there's plenty sites to choose from!
Back to top
View user's profile 
Anonymous
PostPosted: 17-08-2001 07:15    Post subject: Capricorn One Reply with quote

Movie reference, although I believe ideas about a fake moon landing were circulating before it was made.
Are there any telescopes that are powerful enough to see equipment left behind by the missions? confused

It might clear things up for the hoax proponents.


Last edited by Guest on 17-08-2001 07:23; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
lucydruOffline
Been, left, might be back again.
Joined: 03 Aug 2001
Total posts: 494
Age: 33
Gender: Female
PostPosted: 17-08-2001 09:22    Post subject: Apollo photo's Reply with quote

I have seen some of the photo's that have been deemed "faked". There was an artical on it in the first edition of X-Factor.

Two of the photo's do indeed have exactly the same background. Some rocks have letters on them, some of the grid reference markings (crosses) on the pictures go BEHIND things. And the inventor of the camera doesn't know how they could withstand the radiation they would of come into contact with, and still produce photo's. And why was Neil Armestongs first steps broadcast from pictures on a tv at mission control?!

Personally I believe what we have had people on the moon. Top astronaughts have said they have seen strange things up there (which nasa never told us about). If the guy who made the camera is right then hey would of had to fake it or be looked at like they were fools. But there is too much evidence (by my standards) to believe that we didn't go to the moon.

It sound possible that some people have got something to hide from us.

lucydru
Back to top
View user's profile 
Anonymous
PostPosted: 17-08-2001 13:24    Post subject: moon Reply with quote

The issue of the flags which appear to be moving has always intrigued me, because is there actually any live footage of a flag blowing in the breeze?

The reason I ask this is that from examining still photos of the flags (being realistic) it mearly looks like the flags have been unwrapped ( as they would have been folded during transport )
because there is no wind/air etc they appear to be blowing in the wind, but the same effect/or similar would occur if you unfolded a flag ( or any material for that matter ) under water and took a photo of it.
So unless there is any live footage then there isn't anything weird about this at all.

By the way with the ammount of dust on the moons surface it is highly likely that a "crater/burn marks" would have been formed on tuch down but once the dust had settled it would have covered it up again.
Back to top
Anonymous
PostPosted: 17-08-2001 13:40    Post subject: Reply with quote

The badastromomy link pretty much demolishes all the points put forward by the "whistleblowers" to my personal satisfaction, and the points are all argued from a sound scientific base.
I think we went to the moon. I don't know why we have not built a base there yet as it would make more sense for further missions.
Launching probes from a base on the moon would be so much easier than earth based launches, and the logistics of building a base on the moon do not appear to be that difficult.

Unless someone else is already there of course... confused
Back to top
DerekH16Offline
Puzzled by life
Joined: 02 Aug 2001
Total posts: 1035
Location: Edinburgh
Gender: Male
PostPosted: 17-08-2001 18:32    Post subject: Reply with quote

The site I was actually looking for (and will try again when I have time) was put together by folk who think NASA are hiding lots of stuff re UFOs, etc., but who are finding the waters being muddied by 'moon hoaxers', so they put together absolutely masses of evidence and explanation as to why these folk are wrong (poacher turned gamekeeper?).
Back to top
View user's profile 
Anonymous
PostPosted: 17-08-2001 19:07    Post subject: Reply with quote

DerekH wrote:

The site I was actually looking for (and will try again when I have time) was put together by folk who think NASA are hiding lots of stuff re UFOs, etc., but who are finding the waters being muddied by 'moon hoaxers', so they put together absolutely masses of evidence and explanation as to why these folk are wrong (poacher turned gamekeeper?).



Interesting, but haven't NASA publicly stated an interest in the Bonsall UFO footage?
The USAF have also released contradictory info regarding their position on UFOs. I think really they are as confused as the rest of us, over the UFO thing, and it would show them to be inadequate if they admitted this.
Back to top
Anonymous
PostPosted: 17-08-2001 19:44    Post subject: Reply with quote

Probably a hellishly innaccurate statement, but I imagine that there is no crater below the lander as it didn't really use the jet that much on the way in. Vertical landing spacecraft are only just now being developed.

Personally, I reckon we got there. If anything, the photos were retouched to make 'em more dramatic. Who knows? Maybe there is the odd 'set up' one in there. Actually, it would have been terribly embarrassing if they got all that way and the camera had bust.

A big point that everyone forgets; the moon does have an atmosphere. Neglible, but there. Which is often ignored in 'whistle blower' tracts.
Back to top
DerekH16Offline
Puzzled by life
Joined: 02 Aug 2001
Total posts: 1035
Location: Edinburgh
Gender: Male
PostPosted: 17-08-2001 20:36    Post subject: Reply with quote

DanHigginbottom wrote:

....Actually, it would have been terribly embarrassing if they got all that way and the camera had bust.



One of the video cameras did.....forget which mission, but the only movie type camera (i.e. not stills, wouldn't have been video tape, not then) got accidentaly pointed at the sun for just a little too long. By the time the astronauts noticed, it was goosed, so the mission continued in sound only! Smile
Back to top
View user's profile 
simonsmith
PostPosted: 17-08-2001 21:10    Post subject: Reply with quote

Wired magazine covered this story several years ago. Here is a copy of the article.

http://www.geocities.com/Pentagon/2666/MoonLandHoax.html
Back to top
DerekH16Offline
Puzzled by life
Joined: 02 Aug 2001
Total posts: 1035
Location: Edinburgh
Gender: Male
PostPosted: 19-08-2001 08:37    Post subject: Reply with quote

Finally found the site I was looking for!

http://www.lunaranomalies.com/
Back to top
View user's profile 
Anonymous
PostPosted: 19-08-2001 12:05    Post subject: Re: moon Reply with quote

[QUOTE]Originally posted by DONKAMELEON
[B]The issue of the flags which appear to be moving has always intrigued me, because is there actually any live footage of a flag blowing in the breeze?


Yes, there is! I've seen it on a documentary quite recently - on Ch4 or Ch5, I can't remember which... confused
Back to top
Anonymous
PostPosted: 20-08-2001 00:36    Post subject: Reply with quote

The moon landing were genuine.
The photos are "reconstructions" in a studio.
No way could anyone in a space suit get piccies that good using a fully-manual HASSLEBLAD.
Back to top
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Fortean Times Message Board Forum Index -> Conspiracy - general All times are GMT
Goto page 1, 2, 3 ... 44, 45, 46  Next
Page 1 of 46

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group