Godlike Productions - Conspiracy Forum
Users Online Now: 1,857 (Who's On?)Visitors Today: 245,629
Pageviews Today: 338,815Threads Today: 92Posts Today: 1,521
02:18 AM


Rate this Thread

Absolute BS Crap Reasonable Nice Amazing
 

Mythbusters VS Fake Moon landing...

 
Ghenghy

User ID: 1348975
United States
12/09/2011 06:06 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Mythbusters VS Fake Moon landing...
We have Landed on the Moon

BUT

The footage shown was faked (Training video shown instead)

What was seen was too sensitive to be screened
 Quoting: strange fellow


Bwaahhahahaahaha SUCH AS???
consciousness shift

User ID: 3529367
United States
12/09/2011 06:20 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Mythbusters VS Fake Moon landing...
i was pissed off at their attitude towards it. tory said "take that conspiracy theorists!" like they were proving something to us.

the fact is there is no proof man has been up there. they could send unmanned rockets and the laser reflector without humans.

i'm not saying 100% that man wasn't on the moon, but its very unlikely that man could survive in those capsules exposed to all that radiation with paper thin walls and the technology was so un-sophisticated. but there is no explination to how the van allen belt is survivable by humans passing through it.
consciousness shift
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 6845711
United States
12/09/2011 06:24 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Mythbusters VS Fake Moon landing...
They may not need any reflector for the laser. The entire moon is a reflector.
consciousness shift

User ID: 3529367
United States
12/09/2011 06:28 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Mythbusters VS Fake Moon landing...
They may not need any reflector for the laser. The entire moon is a reflector.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 6845711


very true
consciousness shift
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 6850983
United Kingdom
12/09/2011 06:28 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Mythbusters VS Fake Moon landing...
alright so has anyone seen that episode of mythbusters that does all the tests on the conspiracy theorys?

what was your take on it and what do you think after watching that?
this is what i think..
in a way i think that its good because they watched the videos, found out the dimensions of everything and made it too scale....doesnt that just prove in itself that it can be faked using studio sets? (WHICH i now dont believe was used, i think they used something else)

what that actually tells me is that insted of a studio, nasa used a space vaccum room? oh and they proved that using a small table that is scaled to size with the real nasa dimensions they can use the topography to make the multiple shadows.....soo nasa just used fake topography in there video to make it seem more real?


oh and as for foot prints they reckon that in a space vaccum using *replicated moon dust* they can actually make foot prints in a 0 moisture enviroment because the "sand" particles are sharp and not rounded and compact....so im guessing the replicated moon dust you fukers used on mythbusters you used in the video too??

last one....they proved that we went to the moon because we can bounce a fukin laser off the moon...yea if we have rovers running around mars ripping shit up im sure that we can drop a metal fukin plate off whilst were flying past too

[link to mythbustersresults.com]


 Quoting: Razon 6491324


Those who don't believe in the Moon landings are deluded idiots.

That's reality.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 6824778
Portugal
12/09/2011 06:29 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Mythbusters VS Fake Moon landing...
They may not need any reflector for the laser. The entire moon is a reflector.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 6845711


very true
 Quoting: consciousness shift

clappa
Halcyon Dayz, FCD
Contrarian's Contrarian

User ID: 1222987
Netherlands
12/09/2011 09:43 PM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Mythbusters VS Fake Moon landing...
Just trying to insult people isn't going to get you anywhere. For example, you refer to "evidence". I would then ask....WHAT evidence? What "evidence" do you have that we have actually put men on the moon?
 Quoting: mehitable

The presence of LRRRs on the landing sites.
We know the hardware, how and where, and by whom it was designed and build.
Certified as the real deal by any aerospace engineer who looked at them.
We know when it was launched, in front of literally millions of witnesses.
We tracked it to the Moon.
We know the men who placed them.
There is photographic documentation of the whole process.
Video, DAC, telemetry, dosimeters, voice recordings, live broadcasts, independent observations, including by the Soviets.
Thousands of autobiographical books, articles, and interviews, by some of the 400,000 people involved in the process.
None of whom EVER voiced ANY doubt that what they did was not for real.

Years of telemetry from the science stations.
Tens of thousands of scientific publications and engineering reports based on the results from Apollo.

The science itself.

Much of it a complete surprise, and COMPLETELY CONSISTENT with anything that has been learnt about the Moon since.

We have (or rather the Japanese do) conformation that the topological layout of the landing site documented by Apollo 15 DOES EXIST on the Moon.

This is information nobody could possibly have had at the time.

And there are the rocks.

Moon rocks. Hundreds of kilos.
Documented to been retrieved in-situ.
Often on live television with the geologists who got first dibs watching.
These geologist sometimes saying: No, that one, bring us that one!

Rocks verified by thousands of geologists the world over.
Matching the few ounces of Soviet samples.

And core samples. Which possibly couldn't even be roboticly retrieved with today's technology.

And that's just an overview.
Yes, there is evidence. A mountain of evidence.

Your sorry excuse for an "opinion" is ill-informed, to put it mildly.
Getting all your "info" from conspiracy peddlers tends to do that.

Certainly doesn't make you any better or smarter (or more correct) than the rest of us.
 Quoting: mehitable

All opinions are not equal. Some are a very great more robust, sophisticated and well supported in logic and argument than others. — Douglas Adams


They may not need any reflector for the laser. The entire moon is a reflector.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 6845711


very true
 Quoting: consciousness shift

Did you two miss the part about the reflection from the LRRRs being billions of times stronger then the reflection from any other spot on the Moon?
book

LROC_A17
Hatred is a cancer upon the world.
It rots the mind and blackens the heart.


Hi! My name is Halcyon Dayz and I'm addicted to morans.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 1580353
United States
12/09/2011 10:50 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Mythbusters VS Fake Moon landing...
Guys, I read the first thread of posts on this, so don't know if anyone has posted this or not... But if you want to know the real story about what goes on behind these TV programs (as if you didn't know already), watch this video clip of Adam talking about all of the behind the scenes shit they had to deal with when investigating the RFID chip show:

[link to www.youtube.com]

After listening to this clip, it will be obvious that they will report (or not report at all, whichever the case may be) whatever it is they're told to report, be it true or not.

I can guarantee you, that all of TV is like this, and we know this to be true just from watching MSM news. Correct?.. yes.

Peace.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 2142428
Australia
12/09/2011 10:54 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Mythbusters VS Fake Moon landing...
The thing is....

Governments lie about so much...

They twist and control our reality without shame.

Why the fuck should we believe men went to the Moon?
nomuse (not logged in)
User ID: 2380183
United States
12/10/2011 01:27 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Mythbusters VS Fake Moon landing...
i was pissed off at their attitude towards it. tory said "take that conspiracy theorists!" like they were proving something to us.

the fact is there is no proof man has been up there. they could send unmanned rockets and the laser reflector without humans.

i'm not saying 100% that man wasn't on the moon, but its very unlikely that man could survive in those capsules exposed to all that radiation with paper thin walls and the technology was so un-sophisticated. but there is no explination to how the van allen belt is survivable by humans passing through it.
 Quoting: consciousness shift


There is a DETAILED explanation.

Unfortunately for you, it is couched in the language of science; in precise terminology, in mathematical descriptions. The understanding is found in university-level physics, and in publicly-accessible models used by industry, and in published papers in the peer-reviewed literature and, yes, in the detailed technical pamphlets generated by NASA (not the simpler, pre-digested material meant for a general audience.)
DAV
User ID: 6868358
Australia
12/10/2011 02:04 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Mythbusters VS Fake Moon landing...
Look at the Yanks on damage control because someone disrespected their NASA, my god you guys are soooo predictable, too proud to open your eyes, but thats ok, its been their general populaces problem for generations

Keep it up, because everyone else knows you will anyways.
By the way, not ALL yanks are eyes wide shut, but if you read the first page here, it will be blatantly obvious.
Halcyon Dayz, FCD
Contrarian's Contrarian

User ID: 1222987
Netherlands
12/10/2011 01:35 PM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Mythbusters VS Fake Moon landing...
Look at the Yanks on damage control because someone disrespected their NASA, my god you guys are soooo predictable, too proud to open your eyes, but thats ok, its been their general populaces problem for generations

Keep it up, because everyone else knows you will anyways.
By the way, not ALL yanks are eyes wide shut, but if you read the first page here, it will be blatantly obvious.
 Quoting: DAV 6868358

Ahum...

And that's why nobody takes hoaxies serious.
Shitloads of empty rhetoric, but no evidence whatsoever.
book
Hatred is a cancer upon the world.
It rots the mind and blackens the heart.


Hi! My name is Halcyon Dayz and I'm addicted to morans.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 6902437
United States
12/10/2011 05:15 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Mythbusters VS Fake Moon landing...
there was the idea or 'myth' that;

the proof that the moon landing was shot on;

a MOVIE SET, WITH ARTIFICIAL LIGHTING,
was that there were SHADOWS THAT WERE NOT PARALLEL.

the shadows should ALL be parallel, NEITHER DIVERGING NOR INTERSECTING, unless it is on a MOVIE SET, WITH ARTIFICIAL LIGHTING.

(this happens on a MOVIE SET, WITH ARTIFICIAL LIGHTING, due to the CLOSE PROXIMITY of the light source, or use of multiple light sources.)

so what did the "Mythbusters" do ??
first they change the 'myth' from; 'NATURAL LIGHTING from the SUN, v/s ARTIFICIAL LIGHTING', to; 'can you get non-parallel shadows with a single light source'.
(since it is obvious that you can get these results with multiple light sources)

then they built a model,
and produced SHADOWS THAT WERE NOT PARALLEL,
(guess where !)

on a MOVIE SET, WITH ARTIFICIAL LIGHTING !!

EXACTLY WHERE WE SAID THEY COULD BE PRODUCED !!

this supposedly proved us wrong !!

ha ha ha ha ha !!

at no point during the show, do they use the sun as the light source, to produce their results.
Ghenghy

User ID: 1348975
United States
12/10/2011 07:32 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Mythbusters VS Fake Moon landing...
there was the idea or 'myth' that;

the proof that the moon landing was shot on;

a MOVIE SET, WITH ARTIFICIAL LIGHTING,
was that there were SHADOWS THAT WERE NOT PARALLEL.

the shadows should ALL be parallel, NEITHER DIVERGING NOR INTERSECTING, unless it is on a MOVIE SET, WITH ARTIFICIAL LIGHTING.

(this happens on a MOVIE SET, WITH ARTIFICIAL LIGHTING, due to the CLOSE PROXIMITY of the light source, or use of multiple light sources.)

so what did the "Mythbusters" do ??
first they change the 'myth' from; 'NATURAL LIGHTING from the SUN, v/s ARTIFICIAL LIGHTING', to; 'can you get non-parallel shadows with a single light source'.
(since it is obvious that you can get these results with multiple light sources)

then they built a model,
and produced SHADOWS THAT WERE NOT PARALLEL,
(guess where !)

on a MOVIE SET, WITH ARTIFICIAL LIGHTING !!

EXACTLY WHERE WE SAID THEY COULD BE PRODUCED !!

this supposedly proved us wrong !!

ha ha ha ha ha !!

at no point during the show, do they use the sun as the light source, to produce their results.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 6902437


There is no "proof" that will satisfy these idiots. All anybody has to do is watch one, just one, interview with Neil Armstrong. He's been shouldering this lie for a long time, and it shows.
nomuse (not logged in)
User ID: 2380183
United States
12/10/2011 08:42 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Mythbusters VS Fake Moon landing...
there was the idea or 'myth' that;

the proof that the moon landing was shot on;

a MOVIE SET, WITH ARTIFICIAL LIGHTING,
was that there were SHADOWS THAT WERE NOT PARALLEL.

the shadows should ALL be parallel, NEITHER DIVERGING NOR INTERSECTING, unless it is on a MOVIE SET, WITH ARTIFICIAL LIGHTING.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 6902437


The SHADOWS are. Their projection onto the film plane is not.

Do you understand this image?

[link to farm4.static.flickr.com]

Or either of these?

[link to img.photobucket.com]

[link to 3.bp.blogspot.com]

Or what about this one?

[link to www.successandfailure.net]



(this happens on a MOVIE SET, WITH ARTIFICIAL LIGHTING, due to the CLOSE PROXIMITY of the light source, or use of multiple light sources.)
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 6902437


No; this is what multiple light sources look like.

[link to www.flickr.com]

Don't believe me; ask any photographer or stage or film lighting designer. Or just open your eyes next time you are indoors.


so what did the "Mythbusters" do ??
first they change the 'myth' from; 'NATURAL LIGHTING from the SUN, v/s ARTIFICIAL LIGHTING', to; 'can you get non-parallel shadows with a single light source'.
(since it is obvious that you can get these results with multiple light sources)
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 6902437


No. It is not possible to get multiple discrete shadows from multiple light sources without visible blend zones. If you can manage that trick, there are a lot of lighting designers who would like to hear from you.

A SINGLE distant light source is a good approximation for sunlight, and the geometry is almost the same.

Again, don't believe me. Get a straight edge and a piece of paper and work it out for yourself.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 6379409
United States
01/10/2012 12:00 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Mythbusters VS Fake Moon landing...
Look at the Yanks on damage control because someone disrespected their NASA, my god you guys are soooo predictable, too proud to open your eyes, but thats ok, its been their general populaces problem for generations

Keep it up, because everyone else knows you will anyways.
By the way, not ALL yanks are eyes wide shut, but if you read the first page here, it will be blatantly obvious.
 Quoting: DAV 6868358

Ahum...

And that's why nobody takes hoaxies serious.
Shitloads of empty rhetoric, but no evidence whatsoever.
book
 Quoting: Halcyon Dayz, FCD


Hey smart guy. Nobody needs evidence for something that never happened. You claim we went to the moon, prove it. Show undeniable evidence, not some b.s. that NASA claims or some shoddy photos and video accompanied with newspaper articles. Please.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 1348975
United States
01/10/2012 12:12 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Mythbusters VS Fake Moon landing...
it was a terrible waste of money. We have too many problems on earth to bother about space.
 Quoting: mehitable

Most of those problems can't be solved by throwing money at them.

Some of those problems can be solved with space assets.

They don't believe in the moon landing for a very simple and obvious reason: the government lies constantly about virtually everything, and officials have been caught repeatedly - and still are - in lies.
 Quoting: mehitable

Meanwhile in Grown-up Land what people believe is immaterial.
The only thing that matters is what the evidence shows.
In THIS case it shows clearly and unambiguously the "government" isn't lying.

there is a complete lack of trust here.
 Quoting: mehitable

That should be your cue to change your government!

Being a deluded whiny Conspiracy Theorist on teh intertubes is NOT going to achieve that.
People have no time to be bothered with dimwits who can easily be shown to be wrong about even the most basic things.

When you combine that with the knowledge that a skilled filmmaker, ala Stanley Kubrick, could create film that would appear indistinguishable from a "real" event....
 Quoting: mehitable

That is not knowledge, that is fantasy.

See what I mean?
You people have no clue about how the real world works, which makes you incapable of telling the facts from the lies.
book
 Quoting: Halcyon Dayz, FCD


You're a fucking idiot. Why dont you kill yourself and save us all the trouble?
Virtue
User ID: 13435235
United States
03/29/2012 01:24 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Mythbusters VS Fake Moon landing...
All of you who think the moon landing is fake are the most Stubern people in the world. It's like religious fanatics saying the universe Is only 4000 years old they won't agree even though it's proven fact. I have a masters degree in astrophysics I'm not going to explain to all of you the math and facts about how that couldn't have been fake becouse you wouldn't understand and would just get all mad and spit out some dumb comment. When you can get a REAL scientist who isn't crazy, to say the moon landing was fake I will believe you. I give you my word
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 12283705
United States
03/29/2012 02:14 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Mythbusters VS Fake Moon landing...
alright so has anyone seen that episode of mythbusters that does all the tests on the conspiracy theorys?

what was your take on it and what do you think after watching that?
this is what i think..
in a way i think that its good because they watched the videos, found out the dimensions of everything and made it too scale....doesnt that just prove in itself that it can be faked using studio sets? (WHICH i now dont believe was used, i think they used something else)

what that actually tells me is that insted of a studio, nasa used a space vaccum room? oh and they proved that using a small table that is scaled to size with the real nasa dimensions they can use the topography to make the multiple shadows.....soo nasa just used fake topography in there video to make it seem more real?


oh and as for foot prints they reckon that in a space vaccum using *replicated moon dust* they can actually make foot prints in a 0 moisture enviroment because the "sand" particles are sharp and not rounded and compact....so im guessing the replicated moon dust you fukers used on mythbusters you used in the video too??

last one....they proved that we went to the moon because we can bounce a fukin laser off the moon...yea if we have rovers running around mars ripping shit up im sure that we can drop a metal fukin plate off whilst were flying past too

[link to mythbustersresults.com]


 Quoting: Razon 6491324

You're even more retarded than most of your fellow Australians.
Bowyn Aerrow

User ID: 12560157
United States
03/29/2012 03:49 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Mythbusters VS Fake Moon landing...
We have Landed on the Moon

BUT

The footage shown was faked (Training video shown instead)

What was seen was too sensitive to be screened
 Quoting: strange fellow




that could also be true but howd they get past that radiation belt?
 Quoting: Razon 6491324


The answer is in the name - Van Allen Belt. Its a belt, not a sphere, not a barrier a belt.
"My Dog, its full of fleas!"
-David Bowwow


“A paranoid is someone who knows a little of what's going on. A psychotic is a guy who's just found out what's going on.”
- William S. Burroughs
No Poser

User ID: 3973942
New Zealand
03/29/2012 03:57 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Mythbusters VS Fake Moon landing...
Mythbusters on the Discovery channel is owned by Disney, Disney are the ones that faked the Moon landings.
I Hide In The Dark To Do My Dirty Doo Doo's
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 13412080
Australia
03/29/2012 04:34 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Mythbusters VS Fake Moon landing...
The secretly funded war in Laos and the Moon program happened at the same time. Did they just redirect "Public Monies" to black ops??????????

[link to rt.com] 1968 – 1975

[link to en.wikipedia.org] 1961 - 1972
Really???
User ID: 15098001
United States
05/20/2012 10:23 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Mythbusters VS Fake Moon landing...
I guess I am glad I live in a country where idiots that claim the moon landing "never happened" are allowed to speak...even thought they are stupid, paranoid nut-bags are allowed to speak. The rest of us with a brain will be allowed to rebuff these morons...
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 2514922
United States
09/19/2012 11:53 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Mythbusters VS Fake Moon landing...
I guess I am glad I live in a country where idiots that claim the moon landing "never happened" are allowed to speak...even thought they are stupid, paranoid nut-bags are allowed to speak. The rest of us with a brain will be allowed to rebuff these morons...
 Quoting: Really??? 15098001


iamwith

You accidentally the whole grammar while trying to insult people's intelligence.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 17940605
United States
09/20/2012 02:09 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Mythbusters VS Fake Moon landing...
all you need to do is watch Kubrick's Odyssey. I downloaded it online. It explains how they were faked. it's great
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 11330901
United States
09/20/2012 02:58 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Mythbusters VS Fake Moon landing...
All of you who think the moon landing is fake are the most Stubern people in the world. It's like religious fanatics saying the universe Is only 4000 years old they won't agree even though it's proven fact. I have a masters degree in astrophysics I'm not going to explain to all of you the math and facts about how that couldn't have been fake becouse you wouldn't understand and would just get all mad and spit out some dumb comment. When you can get a REAL scientist who isn't crazy, to say the moon landing was fake I will believe you. I give you my word
 Quoting: Virtue 13435235


You know, the scientific community laughed at Chladni in the late 1700s when he said meteorites came from outer space, as main stream science didn't acknowledge this fact at the time.

In the past, people believed the world was flat, and today we laugh at them.

One day, people may laugh at us for believing we landed men on the moon in 1969.
nomuse (not logged in)
User ID: 2380183
United States
09/21/2012 05:21 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Mythbusters VS Fake Moon landing...
i was pissed off at their attitude towards it. tory said "take that conspiracy theorists!" like they were proving something to us.
 Quoting: consciousness shift


Well, they were. They were showing that a lot of Apollo Deniers are idiots.


the fact is there is no proof man has been up there. they could send unmanned rockets and the laser reflector without humans.
 Quoting: consciousness shift


There's no "proof" anything exists, including yourself (Descartes notwithstanding). It is impossible to have absolute proof of anything; there is always one more untested option.

What it is possible to have is a preponderance of evidence.



i'm not saying 100% that man wasn't on the moon, but its very unlikely that man could survive in those capsules exposed to all that radiation with paper thin walls and the technology was so un-sophisticated. but there is no explination to how the van allen belt is survivable by humans passing through it.
 Quoting: consciousness shift


Typical taking points.

"All that radiation" What radiation? Do you know how much it actually is? Do you know who measured it? What did they say? Are you, then, taking NASA's word for the very EXISTENCE of the Van Allen Radiation Belts (as a for-instance) -- something you have no ability to discover with your unaided naked eye -- but you have then decided that every single thing NASA says about those belts is false?

"Paper thin walls?" Do you know anything about the construction or materials of the spacecraft? Have you determined the properties of those structures -- as in, can they withstand the designed strain?

"Unsophisticated?" Compared to what? The 747, Concorde, color TV, the computer, fusion bombs, genetic sequencing, the electron microscope, CERN...all of these were already around in that time. How does the cell phone, or the human genome project, make a better rocket? Is the 747 completely incapable compared to a 767? Or is the later bird merely an incremental improvement?

Yes, there are explanation. There is extremely detailed technical information on every aspect of the Apollo Program. But no-one will force-feed it to you. It is all archived in ways convenient to those who are willing to do the work to go learn.
nomuse (not logged in)
User ID: 2380183
United States
09/21/2012 05:24 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Mythbusters VS Fake Moon landing...
They may not need any reflector for the laser. The entire moon is a reflector.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 6845711


very true
 Quoting: consciousness shift


EVERY VISIBLE OBJECT IS A REFLECTOR.

Otherwise you wouldn't see it.

And yet, Scotchlite stripes, crossing marker paint, bicycle reflectors are all still with us.

Perhaps the issue is more than binary. Perhaps it makes a difference HOW reflective, when you are actually trying to bounce a precision laser off the Moon in order to measure millimeter changes in distance!
nomuse (not logged in)
User ID: 2380183
United States
09/21/2012 05:28 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Mythbusters VS Fake Moon landing...
Guys, I read the first thread of posts on this, so don't know if anyone has posted this or not... But if you want to know the real story about what goes on behind these TV programs (as if you didn't know already), watch this video clip of Adam talking about all of the behind the scenes shit they had to deal with when investigating the RFID chip show:

[link to www.youtube.com]

After listening to this clip, it will be obvious that they will report (or not report at all, whichever the case may be) whatever it is they're told to report, be it true or not.

I can guarantee you, that all of TV is like this, and we know this to be true just from watching MSM news. Correct?.. yes.

Peace.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 1580353


Who the frack cares?

This is Mythbusters we're talking about. Which is to say...they do the experiment and tell you how they did it.

Which means it is reproducible.

Now, you might not have their budget. Or their access. Or as many lives as Buster.

But this basic nature of what they do means you never have to take their word on it. You can try it yourself.



So...perhaps there was one of their Apollo Hoax related demonstrations you think should have happened a different way? Perhaps you'd care to argue, specifically, some place in which you think they cheated or used special effects or otherwise covered up how the experiment would actually have come out?
nomuse (not logged in)
User ID: 2380183
United States
09/21/2012 05:29 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Mythbusters VS Fake Moon landing...
All of you who think the moon landing is fake are the most Stubern people in the world. It's like religious fanatics saying the universe Is only 4000 years old they won't agree even though it's proven fact. I have a masters degree in astrophysics I'm not going to explain to all of you the math and facts about how that couldn't have been fake becouse you wouldn't understand and would just get all mad and spit out some dumb comment. When you can get a REAL scientist who isn't crazy, to say the moon landing was fake I will believe you. I give you my word
 Quoting: Virtue 13435235


You know, the scientific community laughed at Chladni in the late 1700s when he said meteorites came from outer space, as main stream science didn't acknowledge this fact at the time.

In the past, people believed the world was flat, and today we laugh at them.

One day, people may laugh at us for believing we landed men on the moon in 1969.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 11330901



Read Isaac Asimov's essay, "The Relativity of Wrong."

News