My Husband Directed The Fake Moon Landing Says Stanley Kubrick's Widow.

easy hoodwink the commodities if they are continualy dumbstruck with the moon landing deal. a singular episode in explasmam. they'll fool you ervery day the week.

Another one suckered. Success!
[link to en.wikipedia.org]

your link doesnt work

here the working one

[link to mountzion144.ning.com]

mountzion144.ning.com/profiles/blog/show?id=2127676%3ABlogPos​t%3A700730

the evidence is compelling

Moonhoaxtards - dumb as a box of errr... moonhoaxtards

It is scam.

People who under stand facts and science understand that Americans landed on the moon.

In 1958 Skunk Works designed a plane that flew faster than a 30-06 bullet for extended periods. The engines were an odd hybrid of a turbo jet and pulse jet with a retracting nose cone to stifle the effects of shock-waves. A decade previous they were dropping nuclear weapons on cities. They had the technology and they went.

LOL

The funny thing is- and the most basic of all is that a spacesuit to withstand the heat, cold, and radiation has NOT even been developed yet... LOL

Never happened. At least not the way they are telling us with the equipment they are telling us about,.

That was a very weak response to facts. Fact, they flew on the edge of space spying on the world. Fact no one could shoot it down. Fact those men wore space suites in the SR 71 as they flew on the edge of space at over 3000 mph.

[link to science.nasa.gov]

what about the moon buggy that doesnt leave tracks?? ahahah

it doesnt take an astronaught visitng the mooon to bring back some rocks!

and the common sense part is just a ploy to make people think its obvious they did, when all the evidence points to that they didnt.

facts are subjective

so fubarman explain how this rover got where it is in the picture without leaving any tracks??

[link to bp0.blogger.com]

bp0.blogger.com/_7Bqr1I5gzyk/R519Frk7fOI/AAAAAAAAAPM/AcFZK9C3​iWc/s1600-h/moon%2520stuff001.jpg


can you??!

Myth busters, busting the delusion...


[link to www.youtube.com]

Watch this video.

[link to www.youtube.com]

You can see the lunar buggy motoring around on the moon. It hard leaves tracks because it is throwing the powdery mix right back in the groove causing it to fill it's tracks. When you watch the video you can barely see the previous tracks.

The foot print does not cover its on track with fine dust. You can see the buggy's tracks from the hubble telescope.

you can't see the footprints where they walked around disturbing the soil and erasing any tracks? Oh wait, you can, you even pointed out the footprints but you're too stupid to think about it.

what about this one then?

[link to bp3.blogger.com]

bp3.blogger.com/_7Bqr1I5gzyk/R52Qebk7fYI/AAAAAAAAAQc/LU3Zo1f4​DnU/s1600-h/moon%2520stuff003.jpg

you trying to tell me that even when it comes to a stop it perfectly covers up its own tracks??

are you a retard?

now double the speed of the video.. looks like its on earths gravity.. and yet moons is not half of earths!

this completely debunks your explanation as you can clearly see tracks that did not magically cover themselvs up

[link to bp3.blogger.com]

bp3.blogger.com/_7Bqr1I5gzyk/R583O7k7fgI/AAAAAAAAARc/kk7mh0f0​fpg/s1600-h/moonrover_packed_with_tracks.jpg


this leaves me with one conclusion of the following your either full of shit, brainwashed or retarded.

As we again study the surface on the moon we find our previous landing sites.

[link to www.youtube.com]

Ad hominem attacks are always great when you are proven wrong.
Of course you refuse to read or look at the videos with overwhelming evidence you are believing a lie.

go on continue to ignore common sense and logic , no one cares if you dont get it, its plain obvious with everyone who has a working brain..

yes its quite obviosu when its you that focus's on the attack and not the evidence... your not very good at this, expect to loose your job.

Holy shit it really was faked! The tracks/no tracks are the most compelling evidence to me.

exactly and coupled with the footprint being where the track should be, it proves the rover was stopped.

So let me get this straight.

You are using a photo from the moon to prove that we have never been there?

Priceless.

Epic fail.

LOL you cannot even comment on the blinding evidence in front of your eyes! LOL.

It is quite hilarious that the best argument NASA can make for the "moon landings" is their "moon rocks." Any discerning scientist or engineer who has read the scholarly papers on the "moon rocks" should notice one glaring problem:

All such papers assume the lunar provenance of the "moon rocks," and then work to explain away all the anomalies found in them. This is the exact opposite of genuine science, which is supposed to start with the evidence and come to a conclusion rather than starting with a conclusion and fudging the evidence.

Here is but one example of such backward thinking, now acknowledged as such by the mainstream media:

[link to www.newscientist.com]
---
The Apollo samples contained water, so why were the signs disregarded?
...
Indeed, early isotopic studies revealed suspicious similarities between the water in some lunar soils and on Earth.
...
And reports of what appeared to be a water-bearing mineral called amphibole in several lunar samples simply "never caught on", says Apollo scientist Larry Taylor of the University of Tennessee in Knoxville.

Despite the uncertainties, these hints may have been dismissed too quickly due to "group think", says Apollo veteran David McKay of NASA's Johnson Space Center in Houston, Texas. "These [reports] were discounted very early because most lunar rocks showed no sign of water," he says. "It was almost taboo," adds Roger Clark of the US Geological Survey. "It really showed a bias in the science community."
---

Chuckle. What do you mean "we"? You mean that the same bureaucracy that gave us the "moon landings" before is now giving us that same story again.

Let's review our Science 101, History 101, and Law 101:

Scientists require independent reproducibility.

Historians require independent corroboration.

Courts require sworn testimony under cross-examination.

NASA has provided us with none of these.

ralph cramnden sent alice to the moon years ago!
Bang ZooM