Hard Light Productions Forums

Off-Topic Discussion => General Discussion => Topic started by: jdjtcagle on July 02, 2004, 05:07:04 pm

Title: Sad Day...
Post by: jdjtcagle on July 02, 2004, 05:07:04 pm
I always thought the moon landings were real, but after looking into it.  There not... :sigh:
Do you think it is or isn't? why?

try to keep flaming clean and act mature

EDIT:I have changed my opinion on this matter, and it's no longer a sad day :)

My spirit has been broken on believeing in the Moon landings...   :(
I feel like crying
(http://www.apfn.org/images/moonlanding.jpg)


Resource:
http://www.apfn.org/apfn/moon.htm
Title: Sad Day...
Post by: aldo_14 on July 02, 2004, 05:15:49 pm
Bollocks.  

The flag is fluttering because the pole was twisted when it was put up - there's no air resistance to stop it.

The pictures are probably clear because the poor ones were junked.

There are multiple light sources on the moon - reflection from lunar dust and the earth being examples.

Etc.

EDIT: FFS don't believe everything you read on the internet!!!
Title: Sad Day...
Post by: jdjtcagle on July 02, 2004, 05:18:14 pm
I undertood those...  

Ex.
Who was filming Neil Armstrong com down the latter?
Title: Sad Day...
Post by: aldo_14 on July 02, 2004, 05:23:37 pm
Quote
Originally posted by jdjtcagle
I undertood those...  

Ex.
Who was filming Neil Armstrong com down the latter?


Most likely he went outside, put the camera down, then went back in and made a grand entrance for the camera.  Y'know, showboating.

Or it's possible they could have deployed a remote camera when the lander arrived.

EDIT - on that website;


 3. "One NASA picture from Apollo 11 is looking up at Neil Armstrong
about to take his giant step for mankind. The photographer must have been lying on the planet surface. If Armstrong was the first man on the Moon, then who took the shot?"

You really ought to learn more about the missions before you start
attacking them like this.  There was an arm attached to the lander that was deployed just before Neil Armstrong opened the hatch.  This arm had a television and a still camera mounted to it.
Title: Sad Day...
Post by: jdjtcagle on July 02, 2004, 05:27:07 pm
:lol:
...could have a good point there :)
I still haven't voted, I want to believe they did... but I'm... skeptical.
Title: Sad Day...
Post by: aldo_14 on July 02, 2004, 05:27:20 pm
Oh yeah, and would you really trust a website with these 2 links at the bottom;

NASA Masonic Conpsiracy
http://www.biblebelievers.org.au/masonapo.htm#NASA%20Masonic%20Conpsiracy  

NASA and the Reptilian Overlords
http://www.apfn.org/apfn/nasa.htm
Title: Sad Day...
Post by: Tiara on July 02, 2004, 05:30:03 pm
Light up the moon landing site with magnesium flares? Is this guy kidding? He must be really stupid :p
Title: Sad Day...
Post by: jdjtcagle on July 02, 2004, 05:30:35 pm
:lol:  Well everyone vote and does anyone know where you can download that footage?
Title: Sad Day...
Post by: DragonClaw on July 02, 2004, 05:32:25 pm
We still have Flat-Earthers among us!
Title: Sad Day...
Post by: Killfrenzy on July 02, 2004, 05:32:30 pm
My argument:

If they were faked, then thousands upon thousands of people would have to be in on the 'joke.' From the astronauts themselves and their families, through mission control, right down to the engineers and technicians who built the vehicles. That's too many people involved for it to be a fake!

I seriously despair when people start belittling great achievements like this. :(
Title: Sad Day...
Post by: jdjtcagle on July 02, 2004, 05:36:44 pm
Quote
Originally posted by DragonClaw
We still have Flat-Earthers among us!


NO just young and ignorant :p

EDIT:  I voted yes, I think I've regained my respect for the matter
Title: Sad Day...
Post by: Killfrenzy on July 02, 2004, 05:50:11 pm
Hehe - good for you!

One last point, IIRC the flag was starched so it would look as if it was waving even though there was no wind. Basically, a photo as historic as that just couldn't have a droopy flag! :D
Title: Sad Day...
Post by: Mr. Vega on July 02, 2004, 05:54:04 pm
9 SPACE ODDITIES:

1.  Apollo 14 astronaut Allen Shepard played golf on the Moon. In front of a worldwide TV audience, Mission Control teased him about slicing the ball to the right. Yet a slice is caused by uneven air flow over the ball. The Moon has no atmosphere and no air.

:lol:Irrefutable proof!:lol:

2.  A camera panned upwards to catch Apollo 16's Lunar Landerlifting off the Moon.  Who did the filming?

The Lunar Rover's camera is movable and can be controled by remote from mission control.

3.  One NASA picture from Apollo 11 is looking up at Neil Armstrong about to take his giant step for mankind. The photographer must have been lying on the planet surface. If Armstrong was the first man on the Moon, then who took the shot?

Aldo is right there

4.  The pressure inside a space suit was greater than inside a football. The astronauts should have been puffed out like the Michelin Man, but were seen freely bending their joints.

I'm almost certain he's wrong about the internal pressure in a space suit. If I recall correctly it was lower than sea level. And air doesn't have much mass. So unlike the body's internal fluids, it can't really exert that much force(He/she must have been watching way too many scifi movies). Methinks the suit can take it.

5.  The Moon landings took place during the Cold War. Why didn't America make a signal on the moon that could be seen from earth? The PR would have been phenomenal and it could have been easily done with magnesium flares.

:lol::lol::lol::lol: Um, would a transmission from the moon to the earth count? There is no air on the Moon, so how can you burn magnesium?

6.  Text from pictures in the article said that only two men walked on the Moon during the Apollo 12 mission. Yet the astronaut reflected in the visor has no camera. Who took the shot?

It may have been the astronought was taking a picture of himself and the reflection of the camera was out of the view.

7.  The flags shadow goes behind the rock so doesn't match the dark line in the foreground, which looks like a line cord. So the shadow to the lower right of the spaceman must be the flag. Where is his shadow? And why is the flag fluttering if there is no air or wind on the moon?

:lol::lol: Did he ever bother to notice how stiff the flag looked and realized the flag had been fixed in position?

8.  How can the flag be brightly lit when its side is to the light? And where, in all of these shots, are the stars?

Q1. It looks to me like the flag has been rotated so the light is striking the flag.
Q2: Ether because the sun blotted it out, or the stars were removed.


9.  The Lander weighed 17 tons yet the astronauts feet seem to have made a bigger dent in the dust. The powerful booster rocket at the base of the Lunar Lander was fired to slow descent to the moons service. Yet it has left no traces of blasting on the dust underneath. It should have created a small crater, yet the booster looks like it's never been fired.

You can't see under neath the lander. Besides, the descent engine wasn't that powerful.

And if there was wind, why is there no dust moving in the videos?
Title: Sad Day...
Post by: Flipside on July 02, 2004, 05:57:26 pm
The only part of that which was never explained was the apparent crosshairs on film going behind object, but then, it could simply be a contrast of development thing, it usually happened on bright backgrounds, so the crosshairs most likely got saturated out.

Either way, it happened, it's not a fake, I've even seen pictures taken in death valley to disprove all the light source/direction crap as well :)
Title: Sad Day...
Post by: jdjtcagle on July 02, 2004, 06:10:31 pm
:lol: http://www.moontruth.com/clips/moontruth.mpg :lol:

http://www.moontruth.com

There claiming this is real... :lol:

But then again its not... http://www.moontruth.com/full.htm :p
Title: Sad Day...
Post by: Mr. Vega on July 02, 2004, 06:13:44 pm
No they're not. (http://www.moontruth.com/full.htm)

Edit-beat me by 2 seconds
Title: Sad Day...
Post by: Flipside on July 02, 2004, 06:18:53 pm
HAHAHAHAHAHA!!!! That is so obviously hookie it's unbelievable!

1 : He is moving really slooooowly when he is moving down the ladder, like he is in low gravity, then he jumps off the ladder and :thud: down he goes under gravity.

2 : Pressure made Neil Armstrongs suit 'billow', not droop.

3 : Check this out and show them this :-

http://www.revelate-rock.com/neilmoon.htm

Warning... swearing ;) This isn't any more real in my opinion, but it's funny ;)

Edit, Damn! 2 posts in the time it took to type this ;)
Title: Sad Day...
Post by: ShadowWolf_IH on July 02, 2004, 06:21:44 pm
all i have to say is that i was attacked by the BATBOY, i saw Satan's face in my captain crunch, and you can always tell an alien from a human being because thier shoes never match thier suits.    We should start a website of our own.  

The answer...yes i think we went to the moon.
Title: Sad Day...
Post by: karajorma on July 02, 2004, 06:58:43 pm
Phil Plait (http://www.badastronomy.com/bad/tv/foxapollo.html) sets it all straight.

As for those who don't believe man landed on the moon find a movie of the astronauts jumping around on the moon. Watch the dust carefully.

Dust does not move like that under atmospheric conditions. Every time the dust goes up it comes straight back down again or traces a perfect parabolic path.

To fake the moon landings the entire set would have had all the air removed.
Title: Sad Day...
Post by: aldo_14 on July 02, 2004, 07:13:53 pm
Quote
Originally posted by karajorma
Phil Plait (http://www.badastronomy.com/bad/tv/foxapollo.html) sets it all straight.  


That's the exactly the website I was thinking of :nod:

Quote
Originally posted by Flipside
The only part of that which was never explained was the apparent crosshairs on film going behind object, but then, it could simply be a contrast of development thing, it usually happened on bright backgrounds, so the crosshairs most likely got saturated out.
 


Which would raise the question as to why NASA would paint crosshairs on a sets' background.....
Title: Sad Day...
Post by: Flipside on July 02, 2004, 07:18:54 pm
I think the implication was that the images were 'touched up' and some of the crosshairs that are on the camera lens were covered over by the adjustment, personally, it sounds like a big pile of monkey poo, but hey :)
Title: Sad Day...
Post by: Mr. Vega on July 02, 2004, 07:25:22 pm
Who voted no?
Title: Sad Day...
Post by: jdjtcagle on July 02, 2004, 07:27:18 pm
WOW! that website 100% proves it's not a fake...

Here's something that shoes what I mean...

Bad: When the movies of the astronauts walking and driving the lunar rover are doubled in speed, they look just like they were filmed on Earth and slowed down. This is clearly how the movies were faked.

Good: This was the first new bit I have seen from the HBs, and it's funny. To me even when sped up, the images didn't look like they were filmed in Earth's gravity. The astronauts were sidling down a slope, and they looked weird to me, not at all like they would on Earth. I will admit that if wires were used, the astronauts' gait could be simulated.

However, not the rover! If you watch the clip, you will see dust thrown up by the wheels of the rover. The dust goes up in a perfect parabolic arc and falls back down to the surface. Again, the Moon isn't the Earth! If this were filmed on the Earth, which has air, the dust would have billowed up around the wheel and floated over the surface. This clearly does not happen in the video clips; the dust goes up and right back down. It's actually a beautiful demonstration of ballistic flight in a vacuum. Had NASA faked this shot, they would have had to have a whole set (which would have been very large) with all the air removed. We don't have this technology today!

This is another case of selective vision on the part of the HBs.
Title: Sad Day...
Post by: Flipside on July 02, 2004, 07:35:37 pm
Quote
Originally posted by Mr. Vega
Who voted no?


Theres always one ;) It wasn't me btw, I hadn't even seen the poll :D
Title: Sad Day...
Post by: jdjtcagle on July 02, 2004, 07:40:14 pm
My dad thinks it's a hoax :D  Oooo... wait till he comes home! ;)

Edit: WOOT! I'm a Sobek!!!
Title: Sad Day...
Post by: adwight on July 02, 2004, 10:32:44 pm
Quote
Originally posted by Mr. Vega
9 SPACE ODDITIES:

1.  Apollo 14 astronaut Allen Shepard played golf on the Moon. In front of a worldwide TV audience, Mission Control teased him about slicing the ball to the right. Yet a slice is caused by uneven air flow over the ball. The Moon has no atmosphere and no air.

:lol:Irrefutable proof!:lol:

2.  A camera panned upwards to catch Apollo 16's Lunar Landerlifting off the Moon.  Who did the filming?

The Lunar Rover's camera is movable and can be controled by remote from mission control.

3.  One NASA picture from Apollo 11 is looking up at Neil Armstrong about to take his giant step for mankind. The photographer must have been lying on the planet surface. If Armstrong was the first man on the Moon, then who took the shot?

Aldo is right there

4.  The pressure inside a space suit was greater than inside a football. The astronauts should have been puffed out like the Michelin Man, but were seen freely bending their joints.

I'm almost certain he's wrong about the internal pressure in a space suit. If I recall correctly it was lower than sea level. And air doesn't have much mass. So unlike the body's internal fluids, it can't really exert that much force(He/she must have been watching way too many scifi movies). Methinks the suit can take it.

5.  The Moon landings took place during the Cold War. Why didn't America make a signal on the moon that could be seen from earth? The PR would have been phenomenal and it could have been easily done with magnesium flares.

:lol::lol::lol::lol: Um, would a transmission from the moon to the earth count? There is no air on the Moon, so how can you burn magnesium?

6.  Text from pictures in the article said that only two men walked on the Moon during the Apollo 12 mission. Yet the astronaut reflected in the visor has no camera. Who took the shot?

It may have been the astronought was taking a picture of himself and the reflection of the camera was out of the view.

7.  The flags shadow goes behind the rock so doesn't match the dark line in the foreground, which looks like a line cord. So the shadow to the lower right of the spaceman must be the flag. Where is his shadow? And why is the flag fluttering if there is no air or wind on the moon?

:lol::lol: Did he ever bother to notice how stiff the flag looked and realized the flag had been fixed in position?

8.  How can the flag be brightly lit when its side is to the light? And where, in all of these shots, are the stars?

Q1. It looks to me like the flag has been rotated so the light is striking the flag.
Q2: Ether because the sun blotted it out, or the stars were removed.


9.  The Lander weighed 17 tons yet the astronauts feet seem to have made a bigger dent in the dust. The powerful booster rocket at the base of the Lunar Lander was fired to slow descent to the moons service. Yet it has left no traces of blasting on the dust underneath. It should have created a small crater, yet the booster looks like it's never been fired.

You can't see under neath the lander. Besides, the descent engine wasn't that powerful.

And if there was wind, why is there no dust moving in the videos?


Umm, a slice is cause by you hitting the ball with the right side of your club head instead of in the center, it has barely anything to do with the wind.
Title: Sad Day...
Post by: redsniper on July 02, 2004, 10:57:08 pm
Once in Popular Mechanics there was a letter to the editor saying that the moon landings were fake. The editor's response was "You're right. And did you also know that the Earth is flat and the center of the universe." :lol:
Title: Sad Day...
Post by: karajorma on July 03, 2004, 02:44:08 am
What always makes me laugh is why the Hoax Believers think the Russians kept quiet. Once you get to that you start hearing some really crazy stuff :D
Title: Sad Day...
Post by: Tiara on July 03, 2004, 05:02:36 am
Quote
1 : He is moving really slooooowly when he is moving down the ladder, like he is in low gravity, then he jumps off the ladder and :thud: down he goes under gravity.

:lol:

That's. So. Funny.

:lol:
Title: Sad Day...
Post by: Setekh on July 03, 2004, 08:48:39 am
Meh. Conspiracy theories, there's nothing to 'em. "Do not call conspiracy everything they call conspiracy..."
Title: Sad Day...
Post by: Tiara on July 03, 2004, 08:54:13 am
Quote
Originally posted by Setekh
Meh. Conspiracy theories, there's nothing to 'em. "Do not call conspiracy everything they call conspiracy..."

*remembers The Plan™*

:p
Title: Sad Day...
Post by: Gank on July 03, 2004, 09:06:56 am
Quote
Originally posted by aldo_14
Oh yeah, and would you really trust a website with these 2 links at the bottom;

NASA Masonic Conpsiracy
http://www.biblebelievers.org.au/masonapo.htm#NASA%20Masonic%20Conpsiracy  

NASA and the Reptilian Overlords
http://www.apfn.org/apfn/nasa.htm


Just so ya know theres nothing actually about reptilian overlords on the page as far as I can see, just bog standard conspiracy ****.
Title: Sad Day...
Post by: ARothers on July 03, 2004, 09:28:50 am
I believed the moon landing to be faked until I watched a TV program about the moon landings.  Apart from the photos the conspiracy people said that the astronauts wouldn't be able to survive the Van Allen belts.  But they only enjoyed a few hours in the belts and Van Allen who is still alive says that stories about killer radiation in the 'belts are entertaining but perposterius'.  And you would need to have stayed there for about a month before you get radiation sickness/
Title: Sad Day...
Post by: Flipside on July 03, 2004, 09:32:53 am
Well, the Van Allen belts are created by an enormous magnet, called Earth, which I'm sitting on right now ;) When dealing with Nuclear weapons etc, you are dealing with all kinds of radioactive isotopes, they are created more of less at random. That's why you need such thick protection. The Van Allen belts are a lot more predictable afaik, so you can be a lot more specific and efficient with your protection equipment :)
Title: Sad Day...
Post by: Carl on July 03, 2004, 09:45:45 am
*sigh* bad astronomer to the rescue!

http://www.badastronomy.com/bad/tv/foxapollo.html
Title: Sad Day...
Post by: jdjtcagle on July 03, 2004, 11:25:37 am
I'm now curious to know, why people are putting no...  
"lurkers" :shaking:
Title: Sad Day...
Post by: Knight Templar on July 03, 2004, 10:00:52 pm
You forgot the Beans option.
Title: Re: Sad Day...
Post by: castor on July 04, 2004, 03:29:33 am
Quote
Originally posted by jdjtcagle
I always thought the moon landings were real, but after looking into it.  There not... :sigh:
Do you think it is or isn't? why?
If it is, nice.
If it isn't, its just another chapter of normal political BS (TM).
I won't be sad.
Title: Sad Day...
Post by: Black Wolf on July 04, 2004, 11:00:27 am
Did anybody at all see the "Moon Landings Were Faked" April Fools documentary? They had Donald Rumsfeld and a few other white housers on there - it was serious for the first half, well put together/thought out then it started getting gradually crazier and crazier (and funnier and funnier). Twas awesome :)