| Author |
Date Added (PST) |
Subject |
Strider_Hiryu 
|
2/15 11:12pm |
RE: OT: The moon landing probably
*was* fake... |
| There was no sound from the
rocket cause they turned off the rocket before that video
started. Did you notice that video only lasted about 10-15
seconds ending with them landing? They turned off the rocket
quite awhile before that. I mean the gravity of the moon isnt
that strong, they just need to have the rocket on until they
are within a certain distance to where they can simply fall
the rest of the way without causing damage. This is the same
reason there isnt a big mark under the craft, if they had the
rocket on the whole way they wouldn't have even landed cause
the pressure coming from that would have made them hover and
whatnot. So to save on fuel and everything they only had it on
as long as they needed to, and that means they turned it off
quite a ways up.
-----signature-----
My Stridey Sense is TINGLING!
|
| Gleeman
|
2/15 11:14pm |
RE: OT: The moon landing probably
*was* fake... |
Anyone ever consider that the
flag wasn't all cloth?
Kinda looks all crinkled like
it is on a foil of somekind so that it would be more resiliant
and stand up better...
Looks that way to me anyway ;)
And you mean to tell me that we have Satelites that
can read newspapers on the Earth, and telescopes that can see
details far out in space, but we can't take a peek at the moon
where the landing happened and see a flag? ;P
|
| ALIEN
|
2/15 11:18pm |
RE: OT: The moon landing probably
*was* fake... |
| last post. Satilites that take
the really impressive photographs of earth are only a few 100
miles above the earth (if that). The moon is 250,000 miles
away.
-----signature-----
E = ps2
Entertainment =
PlayStation Squared
|
| Marty_Chinn
|
2/15 11:51pm |
RE: OT: The moon landing probably
*was* fake... |
| Monsta beat me to it about the
picture issue. Of course you're seeing the best of the best.
It's not like every shot they took came out perfect. They just
released the good ones. You wouldn't show your relatives your
hand covering the lens from your vacation trip would you? Plus
I recommend that anyone who has doubts on some of the issues,
go watch From the Earth to the Moon. It's an excellent series
that explains a lot of this stuff.
|
| simplee
|
12:42am |
RE: OT: The moon landing probably
*was* fake... |
After reviewing this whole
thread (I'm on vacation or else I'd never be up all night like
this) I can still respond to some points (the great thing
about vacation is that no one can refute me for now haha).
Seems like the moon rock thing is the only evidence
that hasn't been combed over.
The one thing that
bothers a skeptical person like myself is that MonstaThrilla
easily accepts the findings of geologists who he doesn't know
and will never come in contact with but, discounts the retired
scientist who appeared on the show to say that there was no
way those astronauts could pass through the Van Allen belt.
First off, the Van Allen belt IS real, it's not a
theory (I don't want to go into Doppler shift and a bunch of
other junk that's been demonstrated to prove it - I'ts real
trust me).
Why would one believe that rocks from the
moon are billions of years old and show traces of radiation
purely on the word of "experts", but not believe that humans
couldn't penetrate the Van Allen belt with only tin foil
protecting them?
As if enough photographic stuff
hasn't been covered already, YES there WAS multiple shadows
cast on some of those pics. Shadows so stark that diffuse,
reflected light could NOT have created them; Only DIRECT
bright light could make such dark shadows.
Very
interesting night for me, thanks fellas
|
| Kaijima_A_Frostfang
|
1:00am |
RE: OT: The moon landing probably
*was* fake... |
I have to remark that after
watching the program, and a lot of the reactions here, I think
both the conspiracy theorists and the man on the street (or
forum) really isn't thinking about some very basic concepts.
One is that space - and the moon - is not Earth.
Repeat that.
For example, they focused on the "flimsy"
lander frame prototype that was shown spiraling out of control
on a test flight on Earth. Then they say, in effect: wow, if
it has trouble flying in the good old predictable Earth
environment, how will it fly in dangerous unknown outer space?
*sigh*
The environment the lander had to
manuver in FOR REAL was far more forgiving than Earth. 1/6 the
gravity. No atmosphere to cause drift. Far LESS powerful
thrusts (and thus more gentle and controlable) neccessary to
manuver the vehicle. Yet horrifyingly obvious items like this
don't seem to occur to people.
And like the Van Allen
belt. They show pictures of Hiroshima victims then switch to
diagrams of the belt. They're practically trying to MAKE
people jumpt to uninformed, emotional conclusions. The
spacecraft with it's "tin foil" shielding had to pass THROUGH
the belts very briefly. Not sit in them and BAKE. In addition,
the belts are magnetic phenomena... not frickin' nuclear death
rays like at ground zero of an atomic bomb.
There's
many other issues, like the WELL KNOWN fact that the flag (s)
planted on the moon where heavily starched to force them to
stay somewhat erect and not sag eventually under the weak
gravity. The "flapping" of the flag was the astronaut
struggling with the pole. Imagine struggling to hold a pole
upright that had a flag shaped flimsy plastic sheet attached
to it. The sheet is going to bend and sway like mad. In LATER
SHOTS, on the very SAME program, the astronauts are shown
moving around the flag once it is planted and expends its
inertia... the flag is bolt upright, perfectly still,
untouched.
I mean, come on. The show disproved it's
own accusations at some points with it's own footage!
There were NOT a lot of counterpoints to the claims.
This was a disappointment, but is totally expected from what
is basically a trash TV explotation special. I mean come on -
people are acting like this was some National Geographic
special that actually has something approaching ethics behind
it.
But if you not, the NASA representative did indeed
say something telling, and from what I saw of the _attitudes_
and evident perception levels of the "experts" seeking to
debunk the moon landings, I go with what the NASA rep said:
that it was all a bunch of really bad science and poorly
understood principals that people were twisting around to make
SOUND really good, really sweet, and try to push their
agendas.
End of line.
-- Kai
-----signature-----
------------------------------------------------
"Any man that has not yet found something he can die for
is not fit to live." - Martin Luther King Jr.
|
| Hitokage
|
1:13am |
RE: OT: The moon landing probably
*was* fake... |
| Kaijima gets my cookie.
-----signature-----
"If you can't tell reality from
imagination, you still have some way to go."
- Kagato,
Tenchi Muyou: RyouOuKi ep 6
GA since July 1999
|
| Strider_Hiryu
|
1:17am |
RE: OT: The moon landing probably
*was* fake... |
I agree about the lander thing,
my bro and I were talking about the difference in gravity and
actually presence of AIR in the tests for the lander thing. It
was hilarious when the guy was like "as soon as they move one
inch it would have thrown the weight off and sent the whole
thing spinning out of control" hahahha, I'm sorry but I know
thats false because I've seen many things on training in
dealing with zero-gravity situations of controlling just your
own body, and what that dude said was crazy. And then I love
how the footage of the flag waving was never shown with the
dudes hands off the pole.
As for the radiation I
already touched on that in one of the other moon landing
threads. Also I agree on some of these guys attitudes giving
them away, also they are on a freaking TV special and they are
retired. They've got nothing else to do, they've got no job to
be putting at risk, who's to say they didnt get paid off?
-----signature-----
My Stridey Sense is TINGLING!
|
| simplee
|
1:28am |
RE: OT: The moon landing probably
*was* fake... |
I'm risking alot by being so
anal and so confrontational here (for a newbie) but....
No matter what anyone says about that friggen flag, I
challenge you to review that footage and tell me that it isn't
flapping in the wind.
"It's got a rod along the top
edge", "It's kinda krinkly like foil", "It should be blurry
from the movement", "It's being pushed and manipulated by..A)
vibrations from the people walking near it, B) heat from the
cooling boosters, C) after afects from the astronauts holding
it up initially, D) Photon rays from the sun etc.."It's been
heavily starched (the new one on me)...
I try to be
the most level headed, reasonable, skeptical, doubtful person
I can be but, GEEZ LOUISE!!!!
Can't you look at that
footage of the flag and say "What the F*ck?"
That
rolling footage is SO convincing that I think people trying to
debunk it are sillier than the folks trying to prove that the
ovens at Auswich were just for cookin' killer meals for the
nice Jews living there.
|
| ninge
|
3:17am |
RE: OT: The moon landing probably
*was* fake... |
simplee - if you are so
convinced that the flag is blowing in the wind surely the
tinfoil on the ships and the dust on the groud should also be
effected in the same way?
im pretty sure its much
easier to blow dust about than a flag? didnt see any evidence
of that myself like..
-----signature-----
100% un-biased gamer :)
|
| Strider_Hiryu
|
3:22am |
RE: OT: The moon landing probably
*was* fake... |
| Well some of us (myself
included) have seen the FULL footage -including the part where
they let go of the flag- and it stays perfectly freaking
still.
-----signature-----
My Stridey Sense is TINGLING!
|
