Godlike Productions - Conspiracy Forum
Users Online Now: 2,809 (Who's On?)Visitors Today: 1,994,462
Pageviews Today: 2,765,289Threads Today: 654Posts Today: 11,937
06:20 PM


Rate this Thread

Absolute BS Crap Reasonable Nice Amazing
 

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

 
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 20363457
Canada
08/12/2012 06:26 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: My Husband Directed The Fake Moon Landing Says Stanley Kubrick's Widow.
Simple way to determine whether the moon landings were a hoax or not.

Was it possible to take the known number of photos (from NASA records) in the amount of time available (from NASA records?)

A time and motion study of the Apollo missions:
[link to web.archive.org]
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 16496460
Australia
08/12/2012 06:34 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: My Husband Directed The Fake Moon Landing Says Stanley Kubrick's Widow.
sure they went.
this looks so legit....lol.

[link to www.panoramas.dk]
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 13804718
United Kingdom
08/12/2012 06:35 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: My Husband Directed The Fake Moon Landing Says Stanley Kubrick's Widow.

 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 13804718


Wow, I just watched it so informative.
 Quoting: nzreva


Indeed, very interesting.
 Quoting: Goob


People need to watch this...
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 13804718
United Kingdom
08/12/2012 06:36 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: My Husband Directed The Fake Moon Landing Says Stanley Kubrick's Widow.
sure they went.
this looks so legit....lol.

[link to www.panoramas.dk]
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 16496460


Lol, that looks like somethin a kid would build
nzreva (OP)

User ID: 19624091
United States
08/12/2012 06:38 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: My Husband Directed The Fake Moon Landing Says Stanley Kubrick's Widow.
[link to web.archive.org]

Total minutes on the Moon amounted to 4834 minutes.
Total number of photographs taken was 5771 photos.

Hmmmmm. That amounts to 1.19 photos taken EVERY MINUTE of time on the Moon, REGARDLESS OF OTHER ACTIVITIES. (That requires the taking of ONE PHOTO EVERY 50 SECONDS!) Let's look at those other activities to see how much time should be deducted from available photo time:
t 5771 photographs were taken in 4834 minutes! IF NOTHING BUT PHOTOGRAPHY HAD BEEN DONE, such a feat is clearly impossible...made even more so by all the documented activities of the astronauts. Imagine...1.19 photos every minute that men were on the Moon –- that's one picture every 50 SECONDS!

The article says many examined photos were fake? Wow what a surprise for them.

Last Edited by nzreva on 08/13/2012 08:29 AM
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 21757275
Canada
08/12/2012 06:41 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: My Husband Directed The Fake Moon Landing Says Stanley Kubrick's Widow.
My Husband Directed The Fake Moon Landing Says Stanley Kubrick's Widow.

In the video 6min 20 secs interview
General Walters dies, at 85, in the night after a French interview that was going to expose details about the first moon walk, it was scheduled for the next day he did not survive the night.

6min 20 secs into video
[link to mountzion144.ning.com] share_post
Listen to what the New York Herald tribune says in the video. More
[link to thebodyofjesusthenazoraion.com]
 Quoting: nzreva


people that claim we landed on the moon are the same Christians that proclaim Jesus will return, its already been 2000 years for Jesus.


read, Conspirators and their main proposals one of their own freaking engineers came out and said it is a fake

[link to en.wikipedia.org]

the moon landings were faked
Goob

User ID: 13672072
United States
08/12/2012 06:45 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: My Husband Directed The Fake Moon Landing Says Stanley Kubrick's Widow.
On Dave's web he has written a very good and long article about the moon landings. In there is a description of the men who were in charge of the mission taking a trip to Alaska the year before where they found "moon rocks" which they used to give away after the missions. Moon rocks are from the moon, they landed here due to pieces of the moon being knocked off do to hits and entering our atmosphere.

[link to www.davesweb.cnchost.com]

And yet, despite the fact that it was a relatively benign lie, there is a tremendous reluctance among the American people to let go of the notion that we sent men to the Moon. There are a couple of reasons for that, one of them being that there is a romanticized notion that those were great years – years when one was proud to be an American. And in this day and age, people need that kind of romanticized nostalgia to cling to.

But that is not the main reason that people cling so tenaciously, often even angrily, to what is essentially the adult version of Santa Claus, the Easter Bunny and the Tooth Fairy. What primarily motivates them is fear. But it is not the lie itself that scares people; it is what that lie says about the world around us and how it really functions. For if NASA was able to pull off such an outrageous hoax before the entire world, and then keep that lie in place for four decades, what does that say about the control of the information we receive? What does that say about the media, and the scientific community, and the educational community, and all the other institutions we depend on to tell us the truth? What does that say about the very nature of the world we live in?

That is what scares the hell out of people and prevents them from even considering the possibility that they could have been so thoroughly duped. It’s not being lied to about the Moon landings that people have a problem with, it is the realization that comes with that revelation: if they could lie about that, they could lie about anything.

It has been my experience that the vast majority of the people who truly believe in the Moon landings know virtually nothing about the alleged missions. And when confronted with some of the more implausible aspects of those alleged missions, the most frequently offered argument is the one that every ‘conspiracy theorist’ has heard at least a thousand times: “That can’t possibly be true because there is no way that a lie that big could have been covered up all this time … too many people would have known about it … yadda, yadda, yadda.”

But what if your own eyes and your innate (though suppressed) ability to think critically and independently tell you that what all the institutions of the State insist is true is actually a lie? What do you do then? Do you trust in your own cognitive abilities, or do you blindly follow authority and pretend as though everything can be explained away? If your worldview will not allow you to believe what you can see with your own eyes, then the problem, it would appear, is with your worldview. So do you change that worldview, or do you live in denial?

The Moon landing lie is unique among the big lies in another way as well: it is a lie that seemingly cannot be maintained indefinitely. Washington need never come clean on, say, the Kennedy assassinations. After all, they’ve been lying about the Lincoln assassination for nearly a century-and-a-half now and getting away with it. But the Moon landing hoax, I would think, has to have some kind of expiration date.

How many decades can pass, after all, without anyone coming even close to a reenactment before people start to catch on? Four obviously haven’t been enough, but how about five, or six, or seven? How about when we hit the 100-year anniversary?
 Quoting: stillhere


On Dave's web he has written a very good and long article about the moon landings. In there is a description of the men who were in charge of the mission taking a trip to Alaska the year before where they found "moon rocks" which they used to give away after the missions. Moon rocks are from the moon, they landed here due to pieces of the moon being knocked off do to hits and entering our atmosphere.

[link to www.davesweb.cnchost.com]

And yet, despite the fact that it was a relatively benign lie, there is a tremendous reluctance among the American people to let go of the notion that we sent men to the Moon. There are a couple of reasons for that, one of them being that there is a romanticized notion that those were great years – years when one was proud to be an American. And in this day and age, people need that kind of romanticized nostalgia to cling to.

But that is not the main reason that people cling so tenaciously, often even angrily, to what is essentially the adult version of Santa Claus, the Easter Bunny and the Tooth Fairy. What primarily motivates them is fear. But it is not the lie itself that scares people; it is what that lie says about the world around us and how it really functions. For if NASA was able to pull off such an outrageous hoax before the entire world, and then keep that lie in place for four decades, what does that say about the control of the information we receive? What does that say about the media, and the scientific community, and the educational community, and all the other institutions we depend on to tell us the truth? What does that say about the very nature of the world we live in?

That is what scares the hell out of people and prevents them from even considering the possibility that they could have been so thoroughly duped. It’s not being lied to about the Moon landings that people have a problem with, it is the realization that comes with that revelation: if they could lie about that, they could lie about anything.

It has been my experience that the vast majority of the people who truly believe in the Moon landings know virtually nothing about the alleged missions. And when confronted with some of the more implausible aspects of those alleged missions, the most frequently offered argument is the one that every ‘conspiracy theorist’ has heard at least a thousand times: “That can’t possibly be true because there is no way that a lie that big could have been covered up all this time … too many people would have known about it … yadda, yadda, yadda.”

But what if your own eyes and your innate (though suppressed) ability to think critically and independently tell you that what all the institutions of the State insist is true is actually a lie? What do you do then? Do you trust in your own cognitive abilities, or do you blindly follow authority and pretend as though everything can be explained away? If your worldview will not allow you to believe what you can see with your own eyes, then the problem, it would appear, is with your worldview. So do you change that worldview, or do you live in denial?

The Moon landing lie is unique among the big lies in another way as well: it is a lie that seemingly cannot be maintained indefinitely. Washington need never come clean on, say, the Kennedy assassinations. After all, they’ve been lying about the Lincoln assassination for nearly a century-and-a-half now and getting away with it. But the Moon landing hoax, I would think, has to have some kind of expiration date.

How many decades can pass, after all, without anyone coming even close to a reenactment before people start to catch on? Four obviously haven’t been enough, but how about five, or six, or seven? How about when we hit the 100-year anniversary?
 Quoting: stillhere


I was with you until the whole santa thing, now he isn't real either....some people have some nerve. Santatard!!!
 Quoting: TOMMY B


Jesus is the adult Santa. Condition small children to believe is things that don't exist, as adults they grab at things like Jesus to make the let down of Santa bearable.
Halcyon Dayz, FCD
Contrarian's Contrarian

User ID: 19507663
Netherlands
08/12/2012 06:46 PM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: My Husband Directed The Fake Moon Landing Says Stanley Kubrick's Widow.
p1-5

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
 Quoting: US Coward 21681843

Where do you get this crap?
book
_____________________________________________________________​_______________

i keep hearing this one about the laser reflecting mirros... never have i seen a picture of one or ever seen someone outside of the industry use them...
 Quoting: UK Coward 21786571

You being ignorant of something is not evidence of anything other then you being ignorant of something.

besides they could have been placed there by machines not men.
 Quoting: UK Coward 21786571

"Could have" is not evidence, it is handwaving.

If you think there was a soopersekrit alternate space programme employing invisible spacecraft and super-advanced robotics you proof it.

where are the hires japanese sat images of the landing site??
well where are they?
 Quoting: UK Coward 21786571

Landing site?
Are you one of those tards who are only aware of ONE moonlanding?

Try JAXA. Try Google. Try a library.
You not being aware of the evidence is your problem, not anyone else's.
book
_____________________________________________________________​_______________

We have satellites capable of seeing scratches on a penny on earth from orbit.
 Quoting: Canadian Coward 11696035

Who is this 'we' you speak off?
And why do you use Hollywood flicks as your tech reference rather then, you know, actual tech references?

We spend billions in stupid shit every year.
 Quoting: Canadian Coward 11696035

More on cat food then space exploration.

We can't send one of those satellites to the moon.
 Quoting: Canadian Coward 11696035

Get out from under your rock.
LROC_A17

How are moon rocks different from earth rocks again?
 Quoting: Canadian Coward 11696035

Why don't you know?

just once.
 Quoting: Canadian Coward 11696035

And another only-one-moonlanding dolt.
book
_____________________________________________________________​_______________

Read the web site. No mirrors are needed.
 Quoting: USA Coward 21791002

Read the web site, they can tell the difference.
Hitting the spot increases the reflection many trillions of times.

Think about it like this. How could you possibly even hit a target so small 200,000 miles away? No way.
 Quoting: USA Coward 21791002

That is yet another they-didn't-have-the-technology claim not supported by any evidence.
Meanwhile no domain expert agrees with your 'expert' assessment.
book
_____________________________________________________________​_______________

I love the "X-RAY" Video effect!

you can see thru the astronaut but why can't you see his skeletal structure.

 Quoting: USA Coward 19858256

Because you not seeing through.
Video tubes have latency, i.e. bright spots take time to fade.
Look at any kinescope of old TV broadcasts and you will see the same thing.
book
_____________________________________________________________​_______________

'Moon rock' given to Holland by Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin is fake
A moon rock given to the Dutch prime minister by Apollo 11 astronauts in 1969 has turned out to be a fake.
[link to www.telegraph.co.uk]
 Quoting: UK Coward 5449673

Since not even Kosygin got a rocklet before 1971 why would any private citizen have gotten such a humongous one in 1969?
To piss of the Soviets? Then why wasn't it publicised?
Can you show that Middendorf (NOT the astronauts) actually met vadertje Drees?
Can you show any provenance of the rock in question prior to 1988?
Can you show that any one who should have had a clue ever claimed it was a Moon Rock?

The only thing you can show here is a comedy of errors and bad whorenalism.
book
_____________________________________________________________​_______________
I will have to go with Kubrick's Widow on this one
 Quoting: Bigboat

Are you slow?
That was NOT Kubrick's widow.
The whole point of the movie is to demonstrate how easy it is to twist the truth in a 'documentary'.
book
_____________________________________________________________​_______________

To which I reply, "Who was operating the camera?"
 Quoting: USA Coward 10868788

In your universe there is no such thing as remote control?
book
_____________________________________________________________​_______________
On Dave's web he has written a very good and long article about the moon landings.
 Quoting: stillhere

Long, yes.
Good, not so much.

McCowan's problem is his extreme ignorance of the project.
He has a standing invitation to discuss his accusations any time any place,
but all he does is hide in his little digital fortress.

He's a coward.
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: 13641821
United States
08/12/2012 06:49 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: My Husband Directed The Fake Moon Landing Says Stanley Kubrick's Widow.
My Husband Directed The Fake Moon Landing Says Stanley Kubrick's Widow.

In the video 6min 20 secs interview
General Walters dies, at 85, in the night after a French interview that was going to expose details about the first moon walk, it was scheduled for the next day he did not survive the night.

6min 20 secs into video
[link to mountzion144.ning.com] share_post
Listen to what the New York Herald tribune says in the video. More
[link to thebodyofjesusthenazoraion.com]
 Quoting: nzreva


SO
they are less sneaky than the Right-who BORROW billions from the Federal Reserve and then hand the taxpayer the bill later, claiming theyve not raised taxes! it s HUGE camouflaged tax swindleing scheme and YOU the taxpayers will be paying it off to the banks-for years to come. You Rightists are some pretty sneaky bastards, huh?
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 5562120
United Kingdom
08/12/2012 06:49 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: My Husband Directed The Fake Moon Landing Says Stanley Kubrick's Widow.
ok so you think you debunked it alll

what about the photographs on the lander leg?
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 21813756
United States
08/12/2012 06:54 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: My Husband Directed The Fake Moon Landing Says Stanley Kubrick's Widow.
Why isnt't Ed Sanders Beer Cans on the Moon on Youtube?burnit
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 19454051
United States
08/12/2012 06:55 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: My Husband Directed The Fake Moon Landing Says Stanley Kubrick's Widow.
THIS WHOLE VIDEO WAS A JOKE A SPOOF.IT IS FUNNY THOUGH..DON'T GET TRICKED INTO THINKING THAT THIS IS REAL..ITS JUST CAREFULLY EDITED AND ITS A JOKE..
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 1298661
United States
08/12/2012 06:56 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: My Husband Directed The Fake Moon Landing Says Stanley Kubrick's Widow.
People trying to control people. That's all anything is. All I need are some tasty waves, a cool beer buzz, and I'm fine.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 21817869
Canada
08/12/2012 06:58 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: My Husband Directed The Fake Moon Landing Says Stanley Kubrick's Widow.
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.
 Quoting: FubarMan


sure they went and killed their crew from the van allen radiation belt only to get atomised close to the moon because the beings living there are not very welcoming.

the nasa is a psyop program to distract the sheeps!

the real space program is the darpa military aeronautics division!
ehecatl

User ID: 21669867
Mexico
08/12/2012 07:04 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: My Husband Directed The Fake Moon Landing Says Stanley Kubrick's Widow.
sure they went.
this looks so legit....lol.

[link to www.panoramas.dk]
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 16496460


Lol, that looks like somethin a kid would build
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 13804718


That's so true. The aluminum panels up above, how they are poorly fit and buckled, and the other crappy construction which is so evident, not only would be substandard to any professionals in aerospace, but it was really substandard for a Kubrick production too. This must have really given him some grief.

And the metal foil... the explanation of its purpose is to reflect heat, right? Why did they cover the legs and other parts with foil. Have we ever heard, before or after Apollo, any spacecraft using materials like these, aluminum foil, and what looks like roughly placed tar paper squares? That black material would absorb heat rather than reflect it, right?

Who were the looser who designed and built this prop anyhow?

--------------
also, I know that the angle of the sun changes visibility of craters, but even taking that into account I just can't account for the craters shown and not shown in these various images presented so far on this thread. The landscape does not coincide in the surface details between these images -
[link to i50.tinypic.com]
[link to upload.wikimedia.org]
[link to 2.bp.blogspot.com]
[link to bp3.blogger.com]
[link to www.panoramas.dk]
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 20363457
Canada
08/12/2012 07:07 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: My Husband Directed The Fake Moon Landing Says Stanley Kubrick's Widow.
[link to web.archive.org]

Total minutes on the Moon amounted to 4834 minutes.
Total number of photographs taken was 5771 photos.

Hmmmmm. That amounts to 1.19 photos taken EVERY MINUTE of time on the Moon, REGARDLESS OF OTHER ACTIVITIES. (That requires the taking of ONE PHOTO EVERY 50 SECONDS!) Let's look at those other activities to see how much time should be deducted from available photo time:

The article says the examined photos were fake? Wow what a surprise for them.
 Quoting: nzreva


No you bonehead, it shows that it was impossible for them to have taken all the photos that we got in the time they were supposedly on the moon. EVEN if they were only taking photos the entire time it would have been impossible.

It's not about faked photos. It only addresses whether it was possible to take that number of photos in that time frame. If you read the link you'd understand that. Or, maybe you just needed someone with reading comprehension above a child's level to explain it for you.
Skeptic the First

User ID: 21309323
United States
08/12/2012 07:10 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: My Husband Directed The Fake Moon Landing Says Stanley Kubrick's Widow.
That was NOT Kubrick's widow.
 Quoting: Halcyon Dayz, FCD

The official story on Wikipedia is that Kubrick's widow did appear in the movie:

[link to en.wikipedia.org]
---
Karel had the co-operation of Kubrick's widow, Christiane Kubrick, and his surviving brother-in-law, Jan Harlan, in the making of the film, both of whom appear using scripted lines.
---
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 20363457
Canada
08/12/2012 07:11 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: My Husband Directed The Fake Moon Landing Says Stanley Kubrick's Widow.
Who were the looser who designed and built this prop anyhow?


 Quoting: ehecatl


Why don't you ask the shameless self-promoter and UFO-tard named Steven Greer? I believe it was his daddy who built that thing.
Kirk

User ID: 10818676
United States
08/12/2012 07:13 PM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: My Husband Directed The Fake Moon Landing Says Stanley Kubrick's Widow.
...


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??!
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 21786571


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.
 Quoting: FubarMan


The proof that the moon buggy is NOT on the moon can be seen by looking closely at the DUST ITSELF. Notice how the kicked up dust 'ribbons' as it hits atmosphere, before falling back to the ground?

If that was on the Moon, there is no atmosphere to stop the dust from flying in an arc for many feet before settling back to the moon's surface. Look closely at the dust being kicked up - it behaves that way because its hitting AIR. So wherever the buggy is, its NOT on the Moon.

Case closed. Thank you science.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 20832358

Interestingbump
 Quoting: nzreva

many people miss that
Worry is a misuse of the imagination.
Skeptic the First

User ID: 21309323
United States
08/12/2012 07:18 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: My Husband Directed The Fake Moon Landing Says Stanley Kubrick's Widow.
THIS WHOLE VIDEO WAS A JOKE A SPOOF.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 19454051

It is unlikely that Kubrick's actual widow and brother-in-law would risk smearing his name for a mere "joke" or "spoof."

It is much more likely that the movie is "fictionalized" in the Hollywood sense, in which a story that is true at its core is veiled in fiction in order to protect the writer from lawsuits.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 14143765
United States
08/12/2012 07:21 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: My Husband Directed The Fake Moon Landing Says Stanley Kubrick's Widow.
explain this, this and this.

with 100% closed logic, no room for error.

[link to bp3.blogger.com]

[link to bp0.blogger.com]

[link to i50.tinypic.com]

remember no room for error, why no tracks and why are the tracks bigger than the craters??
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 5562120


BINGO.

It's just impossible to have footprints BELLOW the machine - right where wheels have crossed over.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 21594154


Why? Why is it supposedly impossible when the picture was taken long after they walked around kicking around dust and stepping where the tracks were.
Skeptic the First

User ID: 21309323
United States
08/12/2012 07:23 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: My Husband Directed The Fake Moon Landing Says Stanley Kubrick's Widow.
Can you show any provenance of the rock in question prior to 1988?
 Quoting: Halcyon Dayz, FCD

This is an excellent question to ask about all of the "moon rocks." Do we have signed and notarized (i.e, sworn) statements of authenticity from the original astronauts and all personnel who later might have had access to the "moon rocks"? Without such evidence of provenance, the rocks could have come from anywhere.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 14143765
United States
08/12/2012 07:24 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: My Husband Directed The Fake Moon Landing Says Stanley Kubrick's Widow.
Still waiting for an answer for these images:

[link to bp3.blogger.com]

[link to bp0.blogger.com]

[link to i50.tinypic.com]

and the most intriguing one - clouds in top left... in the moon?

[link to 2.bp.blogspot.com]

C'mon people - explain away!
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 21594154


lmao, just wait until you turn the contrast up and see what its the background... haah

you will love that one.

best to get an original pic and do it.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 5562120


Nothing happens with the better scans, the hi res ones. You only see crap with the highly compressed low res jpegs. Compression artifacts.

Clouds? Really? No. First find the high res on the official NASA site. For all we know YOU altered that image.
ehecatl

User ID: 21669867
Mexico
08/12/2012 07:25 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: My Husband Directed The Fake Moon Landing Says Stanley Kubrick's Widow.
Who were the looser who designed and built this prop anyhow?


 Quoting: ehecatl


Why don't you ask the shameless self-promoter and UFO-tard named Steven Greer? I believe it was his daddy who built that thing.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 20363457

REAAALLLLLY??!!!!

Well now that really is quite an impressive thing for a tard to build and stage then.

There is both extreme undeniable professionalism,
...and obvious shoddy workmanship in this very same image.

[link to www.panoramas.dk]

Other question.
It has always seemed odd the shape they chose for the lunar module. For the strength, weight, volume issue, and considering that it was designed to go with in a cylindrical rocket body, it seems like the most unlikely shape possible.

I cannot believe that real NASA engineers designed this thing, because its materials, the foil being one of many things, just don't make sense in their use, and seem to have no parallel in older or modern spacecraft.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 14143765
United States
08/12/2012 07:31 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: My Husband Directed The Fake Moon Landing Says Stanley Kubrick's Widow.
Simple way to determine whether the moon landings were a hoax or not.

Was it possible to take the known number of photos (from NASA records) in the amount of time available (from NASA records?)

A time and motion study of the Apollo missions:
[link to web.archive.org]
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 20363457


How long does it really take to click a button? Jack White was an idiot. He subtracted time for various activities when taking pictures was PART of the activities. Also, on every mission after Apollo 11 they had TWO cameras. But what really sinks it is the FACT that every picture can be traced to a specific time in the transcript.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 14143765
United States
08/12/2012 07:32 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: My Husband Directed The Fake Moon Landing Says Stanley Kubrick's Widow.
sure they went.
this looks so legit....lol.

[link to www.panoramas.dk]
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 16496460


I see loose fitting insulation exactly as can be found on many satellites that also spend their entire useful life in the vacuum of space.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 4457590
United States
08/12/2012 07:33 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: My Husband Directed The Fake Moon Landing Says Stanley Kubrick's Widow.
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.
 Quoting: FubarMan


Can you 'splain the air conditioner in a vacuum space suit they were wearing to us dunderheads when one cubic foot of water weighs 62 pounds in 400 degree heat?

I can heat up 1 cubic foot of water on my stove and it will boil.

But our astronauts can take boiling water next to their skin because they are 'muricans!

And aren't they lucky they didn't get hit by any space debris traveling at 20,000 miles an hour?
ehecatl

User ID: 21669867
Mexico
08/12/2012 07:37 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: My Husband Directed The Fake Moon Landing Says Stanley Kubrick's Widow.
sure they went.
this looks so legit....lol.

[link to www.panoramas.dk]
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 16496460


I see loose fitting insulation exactly as can be found on many satellites that also spend their entire useful life in the vacuum of space.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 14143765


Zoom in and notice how badly the white sheet metal panels up above fit together.

Does something not make sense about this?
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 12705223
United States
08/12/2012 07:39 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: My Husband Directed The Fake Moon Landing Says Stanley Kubrick's Widow.

 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 13804718


Wow, I just watched it so informative.
 Quoting: nzreva


Indeed, very interesting.
 Quoting: Goob


People need to watch this...
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 13804718


they don't have the attention span to listen to 30 minutes of facts without being able to babble out some poorly thought out rebuttal.
Skeptic the First

User ID: 21309323
United States
08/12/2012 07:42 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: My Husband Directed The Fake Moon Landing Says Stanley Kubrick's Widow.
We did something extraordinary 40 years ago and we are still not capable of doing it again ? Did we somehow lost that "awesome" old technology ?
Humans make better and better things, we are not losing things and forgetting how to do/make something.

This must be the only example of technology going backwards in the whole existance of the human kind.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 1232278

43 years have passed since Apollo 11.

Here are examples of genuine technological breakthroughs:

Alexander Graham Bell invented the telephone in 1876. By 1919, the Bell System was completing transcontinental phone calls and had introduced rotary dialing.

Wright brothers first fly a plane in 1903. By 1946, we have jet planes and commercial intercontinental flights.

The University of Cambridge built the first stored-program computer (EDSAC) in 1949. By 1992, Apple was selling the Powerbook line of laptop computers.

News