Another problem with the moon landing photos can be seen in the next two Apollo images below. Several astronauts seem to be lit up, as […]
Continue Reading Apollo Moon Landing Hoax – More Photographic Proof
Another problem with the moon landing photos can be seen in the next two Apollo images below. Several astronauts seem to be lit up, as […]
Continue Reading Apollo Moon Landing Hoax – More Photographic Proof
I would love to think we landed on the moon, and feel it’s my patriotic duty, but…..there are some questionable anomolies.. the crater my biggest problem from an engineering point of view, 1/6 the gravity of the earth footprint impression but no crater impression whats the force from a man in a spacesuit?? 150-200Lbs/6 25-33Lbs of force
Even if the dust settled strait back down there still would be a sign of disturbance of some kind due to compressive forces but due to dynamics the likelyhood that the dust would fall exactly from whence it were disturbed is highly unlikely, like it or not thats a tough one to explain away…
Actually, if there HAD been a crater, that would have proven something was indeed wrong with the moon landing. Just use a search engine for “moon hoax debunked” (or something along those lines) and you will find many good sites that can explain ALL the hoaxers’ anomalies. Just remember, in over forty years, NO accredited scientist has EVER rejected the scientific explainations of ANY of these anomalies. If the conspiracy’s that big…it’s too late. We’re already all slaves to the illuminati. And if so, I’ll just drink another beer, surf the net, go where ever I want to go (well mostly), when I want to go, just like any other day of my life and think, “these illuminati guys…they’re allright”.
View Comment
Guys, my question is very simple and I hope it will help us understand the truth or the flaw in the facts…….
How do you direct your rocket to another rotating sub-planet, which rotates around your planet so fast that you can see it move around with your own eyes through the sky within one single night. Its like you are riding a unicorn on a marry-go-round and you plan to jump to another unicorn on another marry-go-round. You can visualize the fact by keeping the fact of the size of someone riding on a planet, instead of the unicorn. To which direction did the fly and how they calculated that they would land precisely on the moon?
It’s called math and science. I highly recommend it.
Oh then I hope YOUR “highly recommended” math and science can truly explain those Multi-oriented shadows too…………
Of course it can and has. It’s called “perspective”. Actually one of the easiest things to show. Here’s one example from a totally un-moon hoax (pro or con) related site. “http://www.pasty.com/discuss/messages/1779/1872.html#PN” Its just the top picture that is relevent.
You just take those recommendations for granted for the next 5-6 years and after that see of you still want to ask retard questions like the shadows in different directions. It is inevitable. The shadows will not be in parallel unless the surface is even. Go outside and observe this incredible phenomena your self. You don’t need to go to the Moon to see it. And if there were multiple light sources there would be objects with more that one shadows. If you think this is not the case if those sources are apart enough then how the surface is evenly illuminated? Again – science is strongly recommended. And science starts with observation. So start observing and thinking.
(…) Oh, yes, the flag moving in the (solar ?) wind …
Come on ! There was a horizontal rod, clearly visible in every picture !
Personally, I think that President Obama does not exist. The evidence ? I never met him in person !
Please, get rid of this stupid Moon Hoax “bad science” and face real science, history and greatness.
Is it related with “dubious U.S. political ambitions” ? I do not think so : the Apollo programme is related with human evolution !!
“How do you direct your rocket to another rotating sub-planet, which rotates around your planet so fast that you can see it move around with your own eyes through the sky within one single night.”
You surely don’t think the Moon completes an orbit around the Earth *every single day*? Don’t confuse the Moon’s *apparent* motion due to the Earth rotating under it with it’s actual orbit.
As for the rest, start with the page on Hohmann transfer orbits at Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hohman_transfer_orbit) and go from there.
Expanding on my earlier comment. Check out the following pages at Wikipedia; they give a rough idea of what’s involved in getting from the Earth to the Moon:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moon
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orbit_of_the_moon
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rocket
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trans_lunar_injection
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astrodynamics
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hohmann_transfer_orbit
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delta-v
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rocket_equation
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Specific_impulse
Following the various links on those will give you more detailed information, including how to calculate speeds, propellant mass, etc.
Dude – it’s called science. Engineers. Computers. How does the space shuttle dock with the space station? The space station is orbiting the earth at an insanely fast speed. There’s no way some redneck astronaut could drive that white school bus well enough to dock with that thing. Oh – that’s right. We’ve never been to space. It’s all Hollywood magic.
The Moon revolves around the Earth once every 28 days. It’s very predictable.
The Earth revolves on it’s axis once every 24 hours. Also very predictable.
Throw in a little math and presto, you’re on the Moon.
Stick to janitorial work and you’ll do fine.
I’m a pro photographer. I’ve met several astronauts including Neil Armstrong. You have to remember that the surface of the moon is very bright creating a fill light source. In face light is being bounced all around from several sources. I understand and respect your opinions about man going to the moon however we did go to the moon and I’m extremely proud of the men and woman that man this dream real.
my lord are people still debating this? seems you can debunk even the silliest of conspiracy theories and people will believe as they wish despite the evidence. too bad people who deny the moon landing discredit real conspiracy theories in their silliness. if there were more people that considered the weight of evidence in discussion perhaps we’d be on the moon building bases to go on to mars now.
Some people still think the earth is flat. Someone has to fill the first part of the bell curve.
+1.
Yeah but still it’s amazing how those in the first part of the bell curve are able to use a computer :) It’s amazing how easy Microsoft Google and Apple made it for those poor people :)
I think that everyone who believes the move landings were true and believe that those who think it was a hoax are not looking at evidence are rediculous. Try talking to experts in astronomy and space from independent non-partial institutions. I have spoken to many professors and academics at my university (ranked 17th in the world and not from an america) and they all suggest the moon landing was faked. 20 per cent of americans believe the moon landing was faked, I wonder how many of those are experts, academics, or students in contact with experts/academics. I also wonder how many of the 80 per cent are people who also believed that the American war on Iraq was because of weapons of mass destruction.
View Comment
I weep for your educational system.
Your educational system is sad. They could have at least taught you how to use spell check. The majority of foreign academics are so jealous of America’s scientific advancements of course they would claim the landing to be faked. I suppose these are the same people who believe we went to war with Iraq for oil. Now that American troops are being removed from Iraq allowing Iraq to fight their own wars, I have yet to see or hear of any oil being shipped to America and our prices keep going up.
100 percent of Americans are dead from the neck up. So what’s your point?
You people who believe it was fake are MORONS. There was half a million people involved in this, you think all of them could keep quiet? Like c’mon you imbeciles, its most definatly real and it is a great part of history. You welfare losers just come up with this stuff to try and make yourself smart. just like those religiois freaks with 2012.
Millions go to church and believe in god, but only an inbecile actually thinks he exists.
Plenty of people who worked at nasa say its faked, those that dont are the ones still getting paid by nasa.
Its a bit embarrassing to admit to friends and family that you have been employed to con the public, its better to say that you worked on the moon landing projects.
Most people believe we landed on the moon, but believing in something dosent make it true.
We get half evidence from both sides, they debunked one bit and not mention another.
or they prove one thing and assume everything else is proved
@Expert
“Plenty of people who worked at nasa say its faked”
Name one.
No one with any real knowledge of Apollo believes it was faked. Even the Russians, who would have had a lot to gain from exposing a hoax, believe that NASA faked it all.
“No one with any real knowledge of Apollo believes it was faked. Even the Russians, who would have had a lot to gain from exposing a hoax, believe that NASA faked it all.”
Oops… small typo there. Obviously I meant “Even the Russians DON’T believe that NASA faked it all.”
Ha ha ha ha ha etc etc…
I have just retired from city fire service.
The communications in our service via handheld radios as of today still don’t have the capabilities that they used back then.(A firehouse full of problems with this technology)
A lot of our technology comes from the battle field and in science research.
If an event didn’t happen, how do you prove that the communication of this quality did exist
If you don’t have o2 you don’t have fire.
“The communications in our service via handheld radios as of today still don’t have the capabilities that they used back then.(A firehouse full of problems with this technology)”
Does your firehouse use a 26 meter diameter dish to receive your radio transmissions? That might have something to do with the difference in quality.
The thing with the radio transmissions from Apollo is that they were not hidden. Anyone, including the Russians, could listen in on them and even track the location of the source of the broadcasts (in other words… the moon).
It is impossible to fake the source of radio transmission. If it was a satellite orbiting Earth it would be easily detected.
Does anyone else have a clue what this joker is trying to say?
All of you are beating around the bush and no one’s seeing in the “bush”, where the Snake lies actually hahahah. You make me scream and vibrate like the orgasmic recoils when you say foreign academics are jealous and all other funny stuff. Its better to sleep in the dark because it is always dark below the candle although its not all around it….
cheerios
In addition I’ll like you guys reviewing the following;
How do you direct your rocket to another rotating sub-planet, which rotates around your planet so fast that you can see it move around with your own eyes through the sky within one single night. Its like you are riding a unicorn on a marry-go-round and you plan to jump to another unicorn on another marry-go-round. You can visualize the fact by keeping the fact of the size of someone riding on a planet, instead of the unicorn. To which direction did the fly and how they calculated that they would land precisely on the moon? In the space, propelling is not an option, so the velocity shall remain constant. So you are never able to land your spaceship right on its bottom S.A.F.E.L.Y.
In addition to that, when you pay billions of dollars to reach moon, its ridiculous if you use a low def cam. Those are not your vacations videos and images that you can take with anything like stone carving or something. You can expand your thoughts furthermore while concentrating on WHY DID WE DO THIS WHEN WE PAID BILLIONS?
View Comment
People!
You don’t see the moon moving through the night sky because of its speed of revolution. You see it moving because of the rotation of the earth. Just like you see the sun move through the sky….and you all know the sun doesn’t revolve around the earth…At least I hope you do
+1.
Yeah but don’t hope too much. Recently I saw perfectly normally looking guy to use it’s smart phone to solve this super complex equation y=6×20 and I’m not kidding. Other experience – I was in a company of engineers with a 20+ experience in wireless technology and they didn’t know about the existence of FTA satellite television and told me I’m crazy if I think I can watch any satellite TV without baying monthly bills. So what to tell you my friend? My hope is dying a little with every argument like that :( The people’s ignorance is incredible.
More babbling nonsense from the peanut gallery…
Amazing, all these comments and no logic or rather stupid logic from so-called experts. How many moon landings have there been since the original one? Where is the footage for the entire trip? We have all the right to deny that the moon landing ever took place, it is up to NASA and the authorities to prove their case which if it did happen shouldn’t be very hard. To the atheist(s) in this comment section, you can neither dis-prove God’s existence so you are taking a very big chance with your life and I am sorry to inform you that you are currently living your heaven, in other words, this life as you are living it is as good as it gets for you so enjoy the few decades left of your life because that will be the last enjoyment you will have, you IDIOT(S)!
View Comment
“How many moon landings have there been since the original one?”
There were six moon landings (Apollo 11, 12, 14, 15, 16, and 17) and two lunar orbiting or flyby missions (Apollo 10 and 13). So there wasn’t just one landing. The fact that you don’t know that and yet claim to know more about the subject than the experts is laughable.
“Where is the footage for the entire trip?”
The footage of all of the Apollo spaceflights can be obtained through various means. Not all of it is online, but you can find it on DVD. Try a library.
“We have all the right to deny that the moon landing ever took place”
Yes, you do. You also have the right to say 2+2=5 if you want, but that doesn’t make it true.
“it is up to NASA and the authorities to prove their case”
The burden of proof falls on the person making the claim. NASA has provided proof that they went to the moon. If you claim their proof is fake then the burden is on you to prove it.
NASA has done everything possible to prove their case, and most reasonable people accept it. However, conspiracy theorists are not reasonable people.
NASA has provided thousands of photographs, hours of film and video, over 800lbs of lunar soil and rock samples. The rocket launches were witnessed by millions of people. Amateur astronomers saw the spacecraft en route to the Moon. HAM radio operators tracked the Apollo radio transmissions.
What MORE do they need to do to convince you? Some people can not be convinced, unfortunately.
View Comment
“There were six moon landings (Apollo 11, 12, 14, 15, 16, and 17) and two lunar orbiting or flyby missions (Apollo 10 and 13).”
Doh… another mistake. There were 3 lunar orbiting or flyby missions, not 2. Apollo 8 and 10 orbited the Moon but did not land on it. Apollo 13 followed a free-return trajectory that brought it around the Moon and straight back to Earth.
There is no hoax involved that much is sure. Too many ppl too much money too big a risk but please explain the van Allen belts to me how does any one survive that. Anna
The Apollo spacecraft avoided most of the Van Allen Belt (VAB). The VAB does not fully encompass the Earth… it’s more like a donut or a thick ring. NASA planned the trajectory of the spacecraft so that it would travel through the openings in the donut.
Conspiracy theorists believe the VAB poses an impossible obstacle to going to the Moon because they don’t think three dimensionally. Think of it this way. Imagine you want to throw a ball to a friend who is standing on the other side of a fence. You wouldn’t throw the ball through the fence, you would throw it over the fence. Does that make sense?
The spacecraft did pass through some weaker areas of the radiation, but the duration and amount of exposure was limited. The skin of the spacecraft was enough to protect the astronauts, and because they were travelling so fast they were only exposed to it for a very brief time.
View Comment
http://science.nasa.gov/science-news/science-at-nasa/2001/ast23feb_2/
It would be a good thing to look at the actual proof we landed on the moon instead of a bunch of armature researchers making youtube claims with their edited footage and falsified research. go to the source
You believe that they went to the moon but are unsure if they could survive the Van Allan belts?
Answer. They went there, they came back, they survived. Next.
Van Allen card is one of the most stupid I’ve ever heard. For those of you who missed your entire education is that the ionizing radiation has three components:
Alpha – stream of Helium ions actually two protons and two neutrons.
Beta – high energy, high speed stream of electrons (or positrons).
Gamma – electromagnetic waves with > 10 exahertz frequency.
So the first two are redirected by the Earth’s magnetic fields and are responsible for the forming the Van Allen’s belts and the auroras. The gamma rays are not affected by the magnetic field and the only thing protecting us from the Gamma rays is our atmosphere – they get absorbed as passing through the layers. Once you go out in the Earth’s orbit you are exposed and the our magnetic field doesn’t protect you from the Gamma rays. With that respect it’s the same if if you’re on the Moon or you’re out of the Earth’s atmosphere or you’re passing through the Van Allen’s belts. The Gamma rays pass through the space suit and space crafts. The Alpha and Beta which represent the Van Allen’s belts are stopped by the Apollo’s modules shell in high level. The effect passing through this belts though are communication disturbance which is a documented fact.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Van_Allen_radiation_belt
Read about, educate yourself, stop using the Van Allen’s belts as a scarecrow. The scarecrows work only against not so intelligent creatures anyway so don’t rely on this as a last resort of your desperation to prove that Moon landing was faked.
View Comment
There is no hoax involved that much is sure. Too many ppl too much money too big a risk but please explain the van Allen belts to me how does any one survive that. And how did they return without being fried,
Here’s a good page that discusses particle radiation and steps to mitigate exposure to it:
http://www.clavius.org/envradintro.html
WRT the Apollo missions, the short answers are as follows:
Orbital inclination was such that the spacecraft passed through the thinnest sections of the belts on its way to the moon;
Total exposure was limited to a few hours, after which the astronauts had several days to recover (as described in the page above, it’s easier to recover from an acute exposure to high levels of radiation than from a chronic exposure to low levels);
The spacecraft were shielded to a degree to absorb some of the radiation
Van Allen card is one of the most stupid I’ve ever heard. For those of you who missed your entire education is that the ionizing radiation has three components:
Alpha — stream of Helium ions actually two protons and two neutrons.
Beta — high energy, high speed stream of electrons (or positrons).
Gamma — electromagnetic waves with > 10 exahertz frequency.
So the first two are redirected by the Earth’s magnetic fields and are responsible for the forming the Van Allen’s belts and the auroras. The gamma rays are not affected by the magnetic field and the only thing protecting us from the Gamma rays is our atmosphere — they get absorbed as passing through the layers. Once you go out in the Earth’s orbit you are exposed and the our magnetic field doesn’t protect you from the Gamma rays. With that respect it’s the same if if you’re on the Moon or you’re out of the Earth’s atmosphere or you’re passing through the Van Allen’s belts. The Gamma rays pass through the space suit and space crafts. The Alpha and Beta which represent the Van Allen’s belts are stopped by the Apollo’s modules shell in high level. The effect passing through this belts though are communication disturbance which is a documented fact.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Van_Allen_radiation_belt
Read about, educate yourself, stop using the Van Allen’s belts as a scarecrow. The scarecrows work only against not so intelligent creatures anyway so don’t rely on this as a last resort of your desperation to prove that Moon landing was faked.
View Comment
If you can prove the exitense of god then all good for you. As in a court of law, it is not up to to you to disprove anything but to prove it
Warning: I’m trying some HTML in my response below, but without a preview feature or a list of what tags are supported, I’m not sure it will all work, so this will either look great or be an unintelligable mess.
Which explanations do you specifically have issues with?
After 11, we had 12, 14, 15, 16, and 17. So 5 successful landings after the first one. Nobody’s gone back since 17 for a number of reasons, the main one being that it’s bloody damned expensive to go. The entire Apollo program cost well over US $170 bn in 2005 dollars; any new manned lunar program would cost at least US $200 bn today.
You’re not going to find uninterrupted film footage from launch to landing. However, there’s a lot of material (stills, video, transcripts, reports, etc.) at The Apollo Lunar Surface Journal http://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/frame.html including plenty of fuzzy, badly-exposed photos that some hoaxers claim don’t exist.
I have the right to deny that the sky is blue; that has no bearing on the actual color of the sky.
They’ve done that. They’ve provided physical evidence (in the form of samples and scientific results), documentary evidence (film, video, telemetry) and eyewitness evidence (reports from the astronauts themselves as well as engineers on the ground) to support the case that we landed men on the moon and brought them home.
The burden is now on the deniers to provide proof for their case.
If you think the lunar surface footage was shot on a sound stage somewhere, the burden is on you to provide the evidence that the sound stage existed and that the footage NASA presented as authentic was actually shot on that stage. It’s not enough to say “it must have been that way, prove me wrong.”
If you think the lunar samples were returned by unmanned systems, the burden is on you to show that those unmanned systems existed. Where were they launched from? When where they launched? Who built them? How were the samples recovered?
If you think the lunar samples are fake, the burden is on you to demonstrate how they were faked, and why they couldn’t have originated from the Moon.
If you think the images are doctored, it’s up to you to find and show the undoctored originals.
Feel that Christian love.
At least I don’t live in never-ending fear.
View Comment
i am not a believer or non-believer in this theory or that theory or this conspiracy or that conspiracy, but i deem a lot of you somewhat foolish to latch on to these conspiracy theories so eagerly, i think a physcologist would diagnose paranoia bordering on delusion, probably both.
Myself i take things as i see them, for instance there is a small conservatory in some obscure american state ,ohio, maybe, i cant recall, where a couple of dedicated scientists track and measure the orbit and distance of the moon relative to our earth, this is done by a laser trajectory from earth beamed onto the surface of the moon, now the laser once in orbit and hitting the moons surface needs to bounce back to earth for our dedicated scientists to record the moons distance. How is this done? With MIRRORS on the MOONS surface, placed there by ASTRONAUTS(or maybe it was aliens), its been calculated that the moon is in fact moving away from us at a rate of 3.6cm a year, now how could this calculation be made without that sort of equipment being present on the moon? MAYBE ITS LIES A GOVERNMENT CONSPIRACY TO CONCEAL THE TRUTH ! THAT THE MOON IS IN FACT HURTLING TOWARDS US! AAARGH! AND THE ALIENS WHO ARE LIVING AMONGST US HAVE DONE IT. Come on! The other thing that generally condemns the hoax theory is the origins of the moon, thought to be a collision by another small planet with the earth. How was this theory evolved? By comparing samples from the moon rock collected with samples from our planet, they found oxide levels in both samples to be similar and various other similarities in mineral composition, also fragmants of rock usually associated with big impacts, like the moon hitting this planet?
View Comment