Godlike Productions - Conspiracy Forum
Users Online Now: 3,142 (Who's On?)Visitors Today: 1,150,966
Pageviews Today: 1,764,089Threads Today: 598Posts Today: 10,392
01:40 PM


Rate this Thread

Absolute BS Crap Reasonable Nice Amazing
 

Finally after many years I now believe the Apollo Moon Landings were a hoax.

 
MrHennity
User ID: 29729347
United Kingdom
12/12/2012 04:08 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Finally after many years I now believe the Apollo Moon Landings were a hoax.
The one thing that has convinced me after many years is watching an old programme of UK TV..."The Sky at Night" has been presented by a real eccentric named Patrick Moore (Sir)and was a real likeable guy seemingly....his progs of the sky and stars were fabulous.

One of the progs was shown recently and who should be on the programme but Neil Armstrong...he was obviously asked by Patrick Moore about the moon and its characteristics and the manner of Neil Armstrongs answers left me feeling he didn`t know...he was very uncomfortable and hesitant and set me off on a look at all the other stuff again...and there`s a lot of it !

Shame !
WeAreOne

User ID: 24503624
United Kingdom
12/12/2012 04:11 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Finally after many years I now believe the Apollo Moon Landings were a hoax.
I've seen the interview of them all after they came back. Neil Armstrong was most definitely troubled by something. It looked more fear and worry than elation at their achievement.

I'm the other way around to you. I thought it was a hoax but now I'm not so sure. I think we were told the moon is off limits.
Be the change you want the World to be. Be someone that makes you happy.
Alex
User ID: 27504920
United Kingdom
12/12/2012 05:17 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Finally after many years I now believe the Apollo Moon Landings were a hoax.
Best argument for:

If it was a hoax Russia wold have shown u.s up due to Cold War/space race indications
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 29728529
Germany
12/12/2012 05:32 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Finally after many years I now believe the Apollo Moon Landings were a hoax.
Best argument for:

If it was a hoax Russia wold have shown u.s up due to Cold War/space race indications
 Quoting: Alex 27504920


Oh, for fucks sake..

The same pricks controlled/control the USSR as have controlled the USA.

Wake up already.
Quagmire

User ID: 17929804
United States
12/12/2012 05:42 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Finally after many years I now believe the Apollo Moon Landings were a hoax.
We went to the moon. Experiments were left there that are still being interfaced with today.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 29731015
Australia
12/12/2012 05:45 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Finally after many years I now believe the Apollo Moon Landings were a hoax.
We went to the moon. Experiments were left there that are still being interfaced with today.
 Quoting: Quagmire


no man has eve set foot on the moon.
Oldcrow64
My cars shift themselves.

User ID: 26562299
United States
12/12/2012 05:56 PM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Finally after many years I now believe the Apollo Moon Landings were a hoax.
We would have been called out by the Soviets, Chinese, N. Vietnamese, N. Koreans, Cubans, Hussein Iragis, Iranians, and other not so friendly govs. They all have astronomers and physicist.
It started in the 80s by some crack pot in a trailer in the mid-west.
Bowyn Aerrow

User ID: 28433574
United States
12/12/2012 07:11 PM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Finally after many years I now believe the Apollo Moon Landings were a hoax.
Neil Armstrong was the very worst person to pick to be the first to do anything. He was shy to the point of nearly being a full time recluse.

The poor guy hated all the attention he got, hated to be interviewed he only wanted to be left alone.

So yes, anything he said, any interviews he took would be 'painful' at best.

Lost of sites are out there about his 'shyness': [link to www.google.com]
"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
-
User ID: 29692837
United States
12/12/2012 07:40 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Finally after many years I now believe the Apollo Moon Landings were a hoax.
We would have been called out by the Soviets, Chinese, N. Vietnamese, N. Koreans, Cubans, Hussein Iragis, Iranians, and other not so friendly govs. They all have astronomers and physicist.
It started in the 80s by some crack pot in a trailer in the mid-west.
 Quoting: Oldcrow64



BUZZZ - wrong answer.

There is a NWO. They founded Russia since 1917 at least, then went into China.

The reason for the HOAX was not to beat the Russians or any space race. the REAL reason was big bangism theories that say life is possible in space. It is not. There is no life in space. It is too harsh. Before the 1960s most believed life in space was impossible. NASA claims they can easily go to the moon rofl next mars and life on other planets and UFO ET psyop HOAX.

It is all mind control.
Thor's Hamster

User ID: 29656734
United States
12/12/2012 07:49 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Finally after many years I now believe the Apollo Moon Landings were a hoax.
Neil Armstrong was the very worst person to pick to be the first to do anything. He was shy to the point of nearly being a full time recluse.

The poor guy hated all the attention he got, hated to be interviewed he only wanted to be left alone.

So yes, anything he said, any interviews he took would be 'painful' at best.

Lost of sites are out there about his 'shyness': [link to www.google.com]
 Quoting: Bowyn Aerrow


Armstrong was more easily controllable than the astronaut who was originally slated to command the first manned mission to the moon -- Virgil "Gus" Grissom, a highly charismatic, exuberant, extrovert who said what was on his mind. Grissom died in 1967 in the Apollo 1 command module when it burned up on the tarmac in a launch pad test at Cape Canaveral. Some members of his family still harbor suspicions about the cause of his death.
Apollo astronauts couldn't have passed through Van Allen's Belt. Van Allen wore suspenders.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 14093935
United States
12/12/2012 07:51 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Finally after many years I now believe the Apollo Moon Landings were a hoax.
If we didn't go to the moon, then explain this:

Thor's Hamster

User ID: 29656734
United States
12/12/2012 07:56 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Finally after many years I now believe the Apollo Moon Landings were a hoax.
Neil Armstrong was the very worst person to pick to be the first to do anything. He was shy to the point of nearly being a full time recluse.

The poor guy hated all the attention he got, hated to be interviewed he only wanted to be left alone.

So yes, anything he said, any interviews he took would be 'painful' at best.

Lost of sites are out there about his 'shyness': [link to www.google.com]
 Quoting: Bowyn Aerrow


Armstrong was more easily controllable than the astronaut who was originally slated to command the first manned mission to the moon -- Virgil "Gus" Grissom, a highly charismatic, exuberant, extrovert who said what was on his mind. Grissom died in 1967 in the Apollo 1 command module when it burned up on the tarmac in a launch pad test at Cape Canaveral. Some members of his family still harbor suspicions about the cause of his death.
 Quoting: Thor's Hamster



Apollo astronauts couldn't have passed through Van Allen's Belt. Van Allen wore suspenders.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 14443159
United States
12/12/2012 07:57 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Finally after many years I now believe the Apollo Moon Landings were a hoax.
The one thing that has convinced me after many years is watching an old programme of UK TV..."The Sky at Night" has been presented by a real eccentric named Patrick Moore (Sir)and was a real likeable guy seemingly....his progs of the sky and stars were fabulous.

One of the progs was shown recently and who should be on the programme but Neil Armstrong...he was obviously asked by Patrick Moore about the moon and its characteristics and the manner of Neil Armstrongs answers left me feeling he didn`t know...he was very uncomfortable and hesitant and set me off on a look at all the other stuff again...and there`s a lot of it !

Shame !
 Quoting: MrHennity 29729347


www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y5MVVtFYTSo
Thor's Hamster

User ID: 29656734
United States
12/12/2012 07:58 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Finally after many years I now believe the Apollo Moon Landings were a hoax.
Was Gus Grissom "Adjustment Bureau'd"?
Apollo astronauts couldn't have passed through Van Allen's Belt. Van Allen wore suspenders.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 26125917
United States
12/18/2012 09:50 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Finally after many years I now believe the Apollo Moon Landings were a hoax.
We went to the moon. Experiments were left there that are still being interfaced with today.
 Quoting: Quagmire


+1
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 40514665
United States
05/26/2013 01:25 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Finally after many years I now believe the Apollo Moon Landings were a hoax.
We went to the moon. Experiments were left there that are still being interfaced with today.
 Quoting: Quagmire


Proof? If the experiments are all controlled by NASA, then why are we to believe they are telling the truth?
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 18902721
United States
05/26/2013 02:05 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Finally after many years I now believe the Apollo Moon Landings were a hoax.
No, we went to the moon. Very little was gained, besides bragging rights over the Russians*. A lot of military R&D money was hidden in PR-savvy NASA projects.

See, there's not one thing in space humans can do better than unmanned probes, besides give interviews to the gullible public who watched too much Buck Rogers. The most important thing we gained from manned space flight is the knowledge of just hoe inhospitable and vast space is, and how precious the Earth looks in comparison.

The public was told things like the Russians were going to put a missile base on the moon if they got there first. Crude "high ground" metaphors were used effectively against a gullible public who never asked whether or not it would be smart or possible to put missiles on the moon when you could just put them a few thousand miles away on Earth, and shoot them on a ballistic trajectory into New York.

But the ruse took, and the whole charade, albeit based on brilliant engineering and science, is still drilled into the heads of dumb consumers everywhere, saying, "we're America, we can do anything because we Went To The Moon."

*The whole space race was bullshit. We always held (because of the brilliance of Nazi German engineers we retained after WW2) the lead in the race in all meaningful catagories. We knew the Russians were only capable of firing beeping spheres into unstable orbit, or performing dumb stunts that were successful only in making headlines they used to scare the American people into forking over billions to hit golf balls in 1/6 G.
Rogue Lemming

User ID: 39337837
United States
05/26/2013 02:37 AM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Finally after many years I now believe the Apollo Moon Landings were a hoax.
No, we went to the moon. Very little was gained, besides bragging rights over the Russians*. A lot of military R&D money was hidden in PR-savvy NASA projects.

See, there's not one thing in space humans can do better than unmanned probes, besides give interviews to the gullible public who watched too much Buck Rogers. The most important thing we gained from manned space flight is the knowledge of just hoe inhospitable and vast space is, and how precious the Earth looks in comparison.

The public was told things like the Russians were going to put a missile base on the moon if they got there first. Crude "high ground" metaphors were used effectively against a gullible public who never asked whether or not it would be smart or possible to put missiles on the moon when you could just put them a few thousand miles away on Earth, and shoot them on a ballistic trajectory into New York.

But the ruse took, and the whole charade, albeit based on brilliant engineering and science, is still drilled into the heads of dumb consumers everywhere, saying, "we're America, we can do anything because we Went To The Moon."

*The whole space race was bullshit. We always held (because of the brilliance of Nazi German engineers we retained after WW2) the lead in the race in all meaningful catagories. We knew the Russians were only capable of firing beeping spheres into unstable orbit, or performing dumb stunts that were successful only in making headlines they used to scare the American people into forking over billions to hit golf balls in 1/6 G.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 18902721


That's great.

1.There is less gravity on the moon so a probe (satellite) would actually have to orbit slower and closer to the moon than a comparable one orbiting earth to maintain moon orbit.

2. There is virtually no atmosphere on the moon in comparison to earth which would give less distortion having to look through atmosphere here at home and would be much clearer pic than our earth orbiting ones.

3. They have had satellites that could read the large print on newspapers since the 80's. I can make out what kind of fucking car I have on the damn google earth so I should be able to see the GOODYEAR letters on the moon buggies tires by now (I know they were some mesh type shit, it's for dramatic effect) with our current technology.

4. We have like 455 satellites orbiting earth and all it takes is a bit more speed and a couple mathematical equations and we could have an HD satellite going around the moon in days people.

The older I grow, the more obvious it is by the lack of data we are given exposes NASA and frankly the rest of our governments lies. Technology nearly double every 18 months and if anyone expects me to believe NASA's telling us the truth must be retarded.

Don't link me those crude unrecognizable photos they put out a while ago either cuz they're bullshit too!!

ufo56
conspiracy:

The act of two or more persons, called conspirators, working secretly to obtain some goal, usually understood with negative connotations.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 589518
Australia
05/26/2013 02:40 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Finally after many years I now believe the Apollo Moon Landings were a hoax.
No, we went to the moon. Very little was gained, besides bragging rights over the Russians*. A lot of military R&D money was hidden in PR-savvy NASA projects.

See, there's not one thing in space humans can do better than unmanned probes, besides give interviews to the gullible public who watched too much Buck Rogers. The most important thing we gained from manned space flight is the knowledge of just hoe inhospitable and vast space is, and how precious the Earth looks in comparison.

The public was told things like the Russians were going to put a missile base on the moon if they got there first. Crude "high ground" metaphors were used effectively against a gullible public who never asked whether or not it would be smart or possible to put missiles on the moon when you could just put them a few thousand miles away on Earth, and shoot them on a ballistic trajectory into New York.

But the ruse took, and the whole charade, albeit based on brilliant engineering and science, is still drilled into the heads of dumb consumers everywhere, saying, "we're America, we can do anything because we Went To The Moon."

*The whole space race was bullshit. We always held (because of the brilliance of Nazi German engineers we retained after WW2) the lead in the race in all meaningful catagories. We knew the Russians were only capable of firing beeping spheres into unstable orbit, or performing dumb stunts that were successful only in making headlines they used to scare the American people into forking over billions to hit golf balls in 1/6 G.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 18902721


That's great.

1.There is less gravity on the moon so a probe (satellite) would actually have to orbit slower and closer to the moon than a comparable one orbiting earth to maintain moon orbit.

2. There is virtually no atmosphere on the moon in comparison to earth which would give less distortion having to look through atmosphere here at home and would be much clearer pic than our earth orbiting ones.

3. They have had satellites that could read the large print on newspapers since the 80's. I can make out what kind of fucking car I have on the damn google earth so I should be able to see the GOODYEAR letters on the moon buggies tires by now (I know they were some mesh type shit, it's for dramatic effect) with our current technology.

4. We have like 455 satellites orbiting earth and all it takes is a bit more speed and a couple mathematical equations and we could have an HD satellite going around the moon in days people.

The older I grow, the more obvious it is by the lack of data we are given exposes NASA and frankly the rest of our governments lies. Technology nearly double every 18 months and if anyone expects me to believe NASA's telling us the truth must be retarded.

Don't link me those crude unrecognizable photos they put out a while ago either cuz they're bullshit too!!

ufo56
 Quoting: Rogue Lemming


The ignorance in your post is astounding.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 23382441
United States
05/26/2013 02:40 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Finally after many years I now believe the Apollo Moon Landings were a hoax.
The one thing that has convinced me after many years is watching an old programme of UK TV..."The Sky at Night" has been presented by a real eccentric named Patrick Moore (Sir)and was a real likeable guy seemingly....his progs of the sky and stars were fabulous.

One of the progs was shown recently and who should be on the programme but Neil Armstrong...he was obviously asked by Patrick Moore about the moon and its characteristics and the manner of Neil Armstrongs answers left me feeling he didn`t know...he was very uncomfortable and hesitant and set me off on a look at all the other stuff again...and there`s a lot of it !

Shame !
 Quoting: MrHennity 29729347


It took you that long to figure it out? WTF are you stupid? bwahahahahahaha!!
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 40514366
United States
05/26/2013 02:44 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Finally after many years I now believe the Apollo Moon Landings were a hoax.
I think you are a idiot Stanley Kubrick filmed that shit. Check yourself before you wreck yourself OK?
jackety sux
User ID: 40518555
United States
05/26/2013 02:46 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Finally after many years I now believe the Apollo Moon Landings were a hoax.
Rogue Lemming

User ID: 39337837
United States
05/26/2013 02:47 AM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Finally after many years I now believe the Apollo Moon Landings were a hoax.
No, we went to the moon. Very little was gained, besides bragging rights over the Russians*. A lot of military R&D money was hidden in PR-savvy NASA projects.

See, there's not one thing in space humans can do better than unmanned probes, besides give interviews to the gullible public who watched too much Buck Rogers. The most important thing we gained from manned space flight is the knowledge of just hoe inhospitable and vast space is, and how precious the Earth looks in comparison.

The public was told things like the Russians were going to put a missile base on the moon if they got there first. Crude "high ground" metaphors were used effectively against a gullible public who never asked whether or not it would be smart or possible to put missiles on the moon when you could just put them a few thousand miles away on Earth, and shoot them on a ballistic trajectory into New York.

But the ruse took, and the whole charade, albeit based on brilliant engineering and science, is still drilled into the heads of dumb consumers everywhere, saying, "we're America, we can do anything because we Went To The Moon."

*The whole space race was bullshit. We always held (because of the brilliance of Nazi German engineers we retained after WW2) the lead in the race in all meaningful catagories. We knew the Russians were only capable of firing beeping spheres into unstable orbit, or performing dumb stunts that were successful only in making headlines they used to scare the American people into forking over billions to hit golf balls in 1/6 G.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 18902721


That's great.

1.There is less gravity on the moon so a probe (satellite) would actually have to orbit slower and closer to the moon than a comparable one orbiting earth to maintain moon orbit.

2. There is virtually no atmosphere on the moon in comparison to earth which would give less distortion having to look through atmosphere here at home and would be much clearer pic than our earth orbiting ones.

3. They have had satellites that could read the large print on newspapers since the 80's. I can make out what kind of fucking car I have on the damn google earth so I should be able to see the GOODYEAR letters on the moon buggies tires by now (I know they were some mesh type shit, it's for dramatic effect) with our current technology.

4. We have like 455 satellites orbiting earth and all it takes is a bit more speed and a couple mathematical equations and we could have an HD satellite going around the moon in days people.

The older I grow, the more obvious it is by the lack of data we are given exposes NASA and frankly the rest of our governments lies. Technology nearly double every 18 months and if anyone expects me to believe NASA's telling us the truth must be retarded.

Don't link me those crude unrecognizable photos they put out a while ago either cuz they're bullshit too!!

ufo56
 Quoting: Rogue Lemming


The ignorance in your post is astounding.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 589518


Elaborate please?
conspiracy:

The act of two or more persons, called conspirators, working secretly to obtain some goal, usually understood with negative connotations.
Rogue Lemming

User ID: 39337837
United States
05/26/2013 02:52 AM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Finally after many years I now believe the Apollo Moon Landings were a hoax.
No, we went to the moon. Very little was gained, besides bragging rights over the Russians*. A lot of military R&D money was hidden in PR-savvy NASA projects.

See, there's not one thing in space humans can do better than unmanned probes, besides give interviews to the gullible public who watched too much Buck Rogers. The most important thing we gained from manned space flight is the knowledge of just hoe inhospitable and vast space is, and how precious the Earth looks in comparison.

The public was told things like the Russians were going to put a missile base on the moon if they got there first. Crude "high ground" metaphors were used effectively against a gullible public who never asked whether or not it would be smart or possible to put missiles on the moon when you could just put them a few thousand miles away on Earth, and shoot them on a ballistic trajectory into New York.

But the ruse took, and the whole charade, albeit based on brilliant engineering and science, is still drilled into the heads of dumb consumers everywhere, saying, "we're America, we can do anything because we Went To The Moon."

*The whole space race was bullshit. We always held (because of the brilliance of Nazi German engineers we retained after WW2) the lead in the race in all meaningful catagories. We knew the Russians were only capable of firing beeping spheres into unstable orbit, or performing dumb stunts that were successful only in making headlines they used to scare the American people into forking over billions to hit golf balls in 1/6 G.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 18902721


That's great.

1.There is less gravity on the moon so a probe (satellite) would actually have to orbit slower and closer to the moon than a comparable one orbiting earth to maintain moon orbit.

2. There is virtually no atmosphere on the moon in comparison to earth which would give less distortion having to look through atmosphere here at home and would be much clearer pic than our earth orbiting ones.

3. They have had satellites that could read the large print on newspapers since the 80's. I can make out what kind of fucking car I have on the damn google earth so I should be able to see the GOODYEAR letters on the moon buggies tires by now (I know they were some mesh type shit, it's for dramatic effect) with our current technology.

4. We have like 455 satellites orbiting earth and all it takes is a bit more speed and a couple mathematical equations and we could have an HD satellite going around the moon in days people.

The older I grow, the more obvious it is by the lack of data we are given exposes NASA and frankly the rest of our governments lies. Technology nearly double every 18 months and if anyone expects me to believe NASA's telling us the truth must be retarded.

Don't link me those crude unrecognizable photos they put out a while ago either cuz they're bullshit too!!

ufo56
 Quoting: Rogue Lemming


The ignorance in your post is astounding.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 589518


Elaborate please?
 Quoting: Rogue Lemming


And before you reply Australia, remember my government supposedly sent men to the moon with near perfect success several times with a computer no more powerful than scientific calculator. I hope your explanation is not going to tell me how much fucking harder it is today to put a satellite around the moon to take high res. pics, is it?
conspiracy:

The act of two or more persons, called conspirators, working secretly to obtain some goal, usually understood with negative connotations.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 40519616
United States
05/26/2013 03:00 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Finally after many years I now believe the Apollo Moon Landings were a hoax.
The ignorance in your post is astounding.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 589518


Elaborate please?
 Quoting: Rogue Lemming


And before you reply Australia, remember my government supposedly sent men to the moon with near perfect success several times with a computer no more powerful than scientific calculator. I hope your explanation is not going to tell me how much fucking harder it is today to put a satellite around the moon to take high res. pics, is it?
 Quoting: Rogue Lemming


Please, don't stop - this is making my night. You are hilarious! iamwith
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 40519616
United States
05/26/2013 03:09 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Finally after many years I now believe the Apollo Moon Landings were a hoax.
That's great.

1.There is less gravity on the moon so a probe (satellite) would actually have to orbit slower and closer to the moon than a comparable one orbiting earth to maintain moon orbit.
What? This makes no sense. Do you even understand physics? A satellite is not forced to orbit at a certain distance or speed from any celestial body. In fact, the distance from said body determines the speed at which it orbits


2. There is virtually no atmosphere on the moon in comparison to earth which would give less distortion having to look through atmosphere here at home and would be much clearer pic than our earth orbiting ones.
What? I'm not sure I understand your point here...pictures taken from satellites orbiting the Earth should be of lower quality than those taken from the moon, because the moon has no true atmosphere? Think about that for a second. No matter where you are taking the picture from, the light bouncing off the Earth is still passing through Earth's atmosphere. Although I'm still not sure what point you are trying to convey here.

3. They have had satellites that could read the large print on newspapers since the 80's. I can make out what kind of fucking car I have on the damn google earth so I should be able to see the GOODYEAR letters on the moon buggies tires by now (I know they were some mesh type shit, it's for dramatic effect) with our current technology.
Satellites that can read large print on newspapers since the 1980's? Yeah...no. I'm going to need to see a source on that rather than conjecture. Not saying it's impossible, but what's the point of putting a multi-million dollar satellite with such capabilities in orbit of the moon? The pictures aren't going to be that exciting.

4. We have like 455 satellites orbiting earth and all it takes is a bit more speed and a couple mathematical equations and we could have an HD satellite going around the moon in days people.
It's been done: [link to www.google.com] . But what's the profit involved in sending a satellite capable of taking very high quality pictures? Ohhh, to silence the handful of moon landing conspiratards on the internet. Yeah, that's definitely worth hundreds of millions of dollars.

The older I grow, the more obvious it is by the lack of data we are given exposes NASA and frankly the rest of our governments lies. Technology nearly double every 18 months and if anyone expects me to believe NASA's telling us the truth must be retarded.
What does NASA gain by spending hundreds of millions of dollars just to prove a point to a handful of skeptical idiots?

 Quoting: Rogue Lemming
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 40519616
United States
05/26/2013 03:18 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Finally after many years I now believe the Apollo Moon Landings were a hoax.
Elaborate please?
 Quoting: Rogue Lemming


I did.
Rogue Lemming

User ID: 39337837
United States
05/26/2013 03:26 AM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Finally after many years I now believe the Apollo Moon Landings were a hoax.
That's great.

1.There is less gravity on the moon so a probe (satellite) would actually have to orbit slower and closer to the moon than a comparable one orbiting earth to maintain moon orbit.
What? This makes no sense. Do you even understand physics? A satellite is not forced to orbit at a certain distance or speed from any celestial body. In fact, the distance from said body determines the speed at which it orbits The reason I said that is to debunk anyone that says we can't orbit close enough to get good pics, I understand the mass,speed,gravitational pull factors dumbass and there is a minimum speed/distance for all objects orbiting any celestial body to maintain orbit. I was merely pointing it out in relation to earth since we have satellites that can see small objects from further out than a satellite would need to be orbiting the moon


2. There is virtually no atmosphere on the moon in comparison to earth which would give less distortion having to look through atmosphere here at home and would be much clearer pic than our earth orbiting ones.
What? I'm not sure I understand your point here...pictures taken from satellites orbiting the Earth should be of lower quality than those taken from the moon, because the moon has no true atmosphere? Think about that for a second. No matter where you are taking the picture from, the light bouncing off the Earth is still passing through Earth's atmosphere. Although I'm still not sure what point you are trying to convey here. Why is hubble in space dumbass? It is because of the distortion of ground based telescopes doesn't allow you to see space as clearly as one outside of the atmosphere so it would be logical that looking through the earths atmosphere would not be as clear of pictures as looking at the moon while orbiting since it has no gases or atmosphere per say to distort the views. Therefore picture of the moons surface would be clearer with no distortion although I think we are saying the same thing, your mother ever tell you that you just like to argue for arguments sake?

3. They have had satellites that could read the large print on newspapers since the 80's. I can make out what kind of fucking car I have on the damn google earth so I should be able to see the GOODYEAR letters on the moon buggies tires by now (I know they were some mesh type shit, it's for dramatic effect) with our current technology.
Satellites that can read large print on newspapers since the 1980's? Yeah...no. I'm going to need to see a source on that rather than conjecture. Not saying it's impossible, but what's the point of putting a multi-million dollar satellite with such capabilities in orbit of the moon? The pictures aren't going to be that exciting. Put one up there that can clearly see the stuff we supposedly left up there, come on dude. I would gladly pay a service fee to scan the moon, anyone else? Its all about money bro and the moon would sell so I'm not buying that BS either. And I didn't say they should have put one in the eighties, which would have been great. It should be relatively simple to put one in the moons orbit today and would be VERY profitable

4. We have like 455 satellites orbiting earth and all it takes is a bit more speed and a couple mathematical equations and we could have an HD satellite going around the moon in days people.
It's been done: [link to www.google.com] . But what's the profit involved in sending a satellite capable of taking very high quality pictures? Ohhh, to silence the handful of moon landing conspiratards on the internet. Yeah, that's definitely worth hundreds of millions of dollars.I'll just give you a LMFAO on this one "NASA Maps the Moon With Google ... Satellite imagery of Earth was developed in partnership with the Earth Observatory team at NASA's Goddard Space Flight …

Yes it says in partnership with NASA

The older I grow, the more obvious it is by the lack of data we are given exposes NASA and frankly the rest of our governments lies. Technology nearly double every 18 months and if anyone expects me to believe NASA's telling us the truth must be retarded.
What does NASA gain by spending hundreds of millions of dollars just to prove a point to a handful of skeptical idiots?Umm, we paid for it fuckface!!

 Quoting: Rogue Lemming

 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 40519616


Last Edited by Rogue Lemming on 05/26/2013 03:36 AM
conspiracy:

The act of two or more persons, called conspirators, working secretly to obtain some goal, usually understood with negative connotations.
Rogue Lemming

User ID: 39337837
United States
05/26/2013 03:30 AM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Finally after many years I now believe the Apollo Moon Landings were a hoax.
Elaborate please?
 Quoting: Rogue Lemming


I did.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 40519616



Now that everyone can see your attempt at distraction, answer me this?


Why do we not have any high resolution photos of the stuff we left up there?

I have asked that question and have gotten a myriad of ridiculous answers and I am really looking forward to yours
conspiracy:

The act of two or more persons, called conspirators, working secretly to obtain some goal, usually understood with negative connotations.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 40519616
United States
05/26/2013 03:34 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Finally after many years I now believe the Apollo Moon Landings were a hoax.
That's great.

1.There is less gravity on the moon so a probe (satellite) would actually have to orbit slower and closer to the moon than a comparable one orbiting earth to maintain moon orbit.
What? This makes no sense. Do you even understand physics? A satellite is not forced to orbit at a certain distance or speed from any celestial body. In fact, the distance from said body determines the speed at which it orbits The reason I said that is to debunk anyone that says we can't orbit close enough to get good pics, I understand the mass,speed,gravitational pull factors dumbass and there is a minimum speed/distance for all objects orbiting any celestial body to maintain orbit. I was merely pointing it out in relation to earth since we have satellites that can see small objects from further out than a satellite would need to be orbiting the moon


2. There is virtually no atmosphere on the moon in comparison to earth which would give less distortion having to look through atmosphere here at home and would be much clearer pic than our earth orbiting ones.
What? I'm not sure I understand your point here...pictures taken from satellites orbiting the Earth should be of lower quality than those taken from the moon, because the moon has no true atmosphere? Think about that for a second. No matter where you are taking the picture from, the light bouncing off the Earth is still passing through Earth's atmosphere. Although I'm still not sure what point you are trying to convey here. Why is hubble in space dumbass? It is because of the distortion of ground based telescopes doesn't allow you to see space as clearly as one outside of the atmosphere so it would be logical that looking through the earths atmosphere would not be as clear of pictures as looking at the moon while orbiting since it has no gases or atmosphere per say to distort the views. Therefore picture of the moons surface would be clearer with no distortion

3. They have had satellites that could read the large print on newspapers since the 80's. I can make out what kind of fucking car I have on the damn google earth so I should be able to see the GOODYEAR letters on the moon buggies tires by now (I know they were some mesh type shit, it's for dramatic effect) with our current technology.
Satellites that can read large print on newspapers since the 1980's? Yeah...no. I'm going to need to see a source on that rather than conjecture. Not saying it's impossible, but what's the point of putting a multi-million dollar satellite with such capabilities in orbit of the moon? The pictures aren't going to be that exciting. Put one up there that can clearly see the stuff we supposedly left up there, come on dude. I would gladly pay a service fee to scan the moon, anyone else? Its all about money bro and the moon would sell so I'm not buying that BS either

4. We have like 455 satellites orbiting earth and all it takes is a bit more speed and a couple mathematical equations and we could have an HD satellite going around the moon in days people.
It's been done: [link to www.google.com] . But what's the profit involved in sending a satellite capable of taking very high quality pictures? Ohhh, to silence the handful of moon landing conspiratards on the internet. Yeah, that's definitely worth hundreds of millions of dollars.I'll just give you a LMFAO on this one "NASA Maps the Moon With Google ... Satellite imagery of Earth was developed in partnership with the Earth Observatory team at NASA's Goddard Space Flight …

Yes it says in partnership with NASA

The older I grow, the more obvious it is by the lack of data we are given exposes NASA and frankly the rest of our governments lies. Technology nearly double every 18 months and if anyone expects me to believe NASA's telling us the truth must be retarded.
What does NASA gain by spending hundreds of millions of dollars just to prove a point to a handful of skeptical idiots?Umm, we paid for it fuckface!!

 Quoting: Rogue Lemming



Anyone who says we can't orbit close enough to get high definition images of the moon's surface is an idiot. Putting expensive satellites in orbit of the moon is only going to give us higher resolution images of craters and rocks...and yes, the rovers and landing modules. This get's back to my original point - these images exist. But guess what? These images already exist. And guess what? The conspiratards complain that they are low resolution and likely photoshopped. And guess what? If NASA supplied higher resolution images, they would still say the same thing. "Photoshopped!". "Well yeah, the images came from NASA - of course we can't trust them!". Bottom line - it's just not worth the money to put an expensive satellite in orbit of the moon to take pictures of the rovers and landing modules, when these same idiots are going to say they are fake and doctored. Please, tell me exactly what it would take to convince you that the USA put men on the moon? What incontrovertible evidence would you need to change your mind.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 40519616
United States
05/26/2013 03:36 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Finally after many years I now believe the Apollo Moon Landings were a hoax.
Elaborate please?
 Quoting: Rogue Lemming


I did.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 40519616



Now that everyone can see your attempt at distraction, answer me this?


Why do we not have any high resolution photos of the stuff we left up there?

I have asked that question and have gotten a myriad of ridiculous answers and I am really looking forward to yours
 Quoting: Rogue Lemming


To re-iterate my last point - what would high-resolution pictures accomplish, when the same people would just complain that since they are provided by NASA they must be photoshopped? Why drop hundreds of millions of dollars on a satellite that will provide high-resolution images of craters, rocks, and a couple landing modules when the images won't change the minds of people who are already set in their beliefs?