Moon Landing hoax? Debunking the Debunkers?

[link to video.google.com]

What part of Sibrel's video did you find so persuasive? There is not one single claim of his that hasn't been shown to be total twaddle.

Badastronomy is a die hard right winger
fully supporting government inspired science
.

Hi there.
Perhapse i missed something, but i think the video of the apollo crew fudging a shot out the window was very telling.

Is there some other explanation for this?

Thanks
Paul.

Yes there is , the video is completely taken out of its context and used as propaganda in a 'made up' or invented context

There you go

Like 114992 said.

There is so much wrong with that piece of deliberate deception by Sibrel that it's hard to know where to start.

First, he claims that it is sooper sekrit footage that was not meant to be released to the public. This is incorrect. It was available on video many years before Sibrel ever 'found' it. Fully half of it was BROADCAST LIVE during the Apollo 11 flight! The Spacecraft Films DVD, for example, has the full length of footage, so you can see it whole, rather than the small amount Sibrel shows you complete with narration telling you what he wants you to see.

Second, he claims that they are putting a transparency over the window to make the Earth look smaller so it appears they are en route to the Moon instead of (Sibrel claims) low Earth orbit. Here's a clue: Atlantis will (hopefully) be launching to the ISS tomorrow. There are several lengthy spacewalks planned, which will be carried live on NASA TV. Watch it, and see how fast the Earth scrolls by underneath the astronauts, which is to be expected when you are going around the Earth every 90 minutes. Then watch the Apollo 11 footage again and notice the static Earth view, which is to be expected if you are moving away from the Earth on the way to the Moon. They are so obviously not in LEO that it is laughable.

For a comprehensive trashing of Sibrel's claims, check out: [link to www.clavius.org]

Italian Mazzimo released this earlier this year. Guess it has to be a bit lengthy to cover such a vast subject...
Whatever happened - something was surely faked.


youtube.com/watch?v=KpuKu3F0BvY


Excuse the noob unable to embed...
How does that [/youtube]button even work?

""

[ youtube]Link here[ /youtube]

LOL

Phil Plait endorses the Democratic Party.
That might be right wing for a Dutchie, but it isn't in the US political spectrum.


What's wrong with government inspired and/or funded science.
Not as if private enterprise is interested in doing fundamental research, the profits are to uncertain and to far off.






Last Edited by Halcyon Dayz, FCD on 11/28/2019 10:13 AM

When a question is asked for an obvious strange thing such as no dust on landing gear... or no blast evidence, or Van Allen belts penetration... or whatever the other thousands of questions are ... and the explanation is , "your a retard" then ya know there is a problem. By the same people who claim we cant use the word retard anymore... lol. Its wild.

NASA means 'to deceive' in hebrew.

They made it obvious in late 70's films. Both 'Diamonds Are Forever' and 'Being There' feature staged moon sets and props.





Then there's 'The Shining' with Apollo 11 symbology, " A11 work and no play makes Jack a dull boy ". And this.

The problem with that line of thinking is that there are very logical answers to those questions and most people don’t respond “you’re a retard”. ALL of those standard questions have been answered over and over, including in a couple of links shown on this thread.

People who believe the moon landing was a hoax, or in flat earth, or “9/11 was an inside job” or any of those clearly disproven conspiracies cling to them in the face of overwhelming evidence because they are bought in emotionally. It is like they would be admitting they were fooled if they accept reality, and they just don’t want to admit they were wrong. Those folks will never be convinced for that reason.

NASA means 'to deceive' in hebrew.

No, it doesn’t. 30 seconds of research will prove that.

There are lunar satellites from various nations orbiting the moon with high res photos of each landing area, footprints and left equipment easily found on the web.

Only a fucking fool believes the fake moon bullshit.

I grew up a space junkie, and am an engineer , I have created tooling used to and involved in many aerospace projects over the years. I love everything about the space program/s... it was not until later in life I began to see the problems while others asked the questions and I myself.

I am obviously using generalities in my overall assesment of the reasons why people question the thing, and as usual.. folks like yourself use false equivalency to describe your defence of them over years. The truth lies in the middle somewhere , as NO not all the questions have been answered in a way that explains them and you know it, and I know it, so enough intelligence insulting.

For myself I have come to a place where I just dont know exactly what is going on.. but many things are being misdescribed. I have decided to table the thing until such a time where it is fully vetted...perhaps after life above ground...we will see

Feeling the need to ask questions that have literally been answered tens of thousands of times is certainly indicative of a learning disability.




[citation needed]


With "arguments" and "evidence" like these it is no wonder that even other CTers point and laugh at hoaxies.






Than why are you this ignorant?


Fallacious.


Unadulterated BULLSHIT!

Also, questions aren't evidence.
If YOU accuse tens of thousands of people of having committed fraud than surely YOU carry the burden of proof?
Otherwise you are nothing but a slanderer.


Nope, we don't know that.
Your delusions and ignorance are not facts.

Disinfo peddling and "I don't understand it" well never prove anything.
Meanwhile the people who aren't ignorant consider the manned landing proven beyond any reasonable doubt.

Hoaxies are irrational and ignorant.
Prove me wrong.

How exactly was it taken out of context? What was the context from which it was taken out?

OMG, 9/11 is a clearly disproven conspiracy.....you just shot any credibility you had all to hell.

Next thing you’ll tell us that Lee Harvey Oswald assassinated President Kennedy.

HEY OP, HERE'S THE DEAL.

IF YOU CAUGHT YOUR SPOUSE FUCKING AROUND ON YOU REPEATEDLY OVER THE ENTIRE DURATION OF YOUR RELATIONSHIP, OVER AND OVER AND NEVER ONCE ACCEPTED RESPONSIBILITY FOR THOSE ACTS, WOULD YOU COME ON GLP AND POST A LINK TO ONE OF HER LOVERS EXPLAINING HOW IT WAS ALL JUST A BUNCH OF LIES BECAUSE YOUR WIFE/HUSBAND SAID IT WAS?

ARE YOU THAT STUPID?

BELIEVE IT IF YOU WANT, YOU'RE NOT ALONE. BUT DON"T PRETEND THAT THEY KEY EVIDENCE THAT IT DID OCCUR IS COMING FROM AN ORGANIZATION THAT LIES CONSTANTLY AND NEVER ACKNOWLEDGES NOR REPENTS WHEN CAUGHT.

Feeling the need to ask questions that have literally been answered tens of thousands of times is certainly indicative of a learning disability.




[citation needed]


With "arguments" and "evidence" like these it is no wonder that even other CTers point and laugh at hoaxies.






There ya go making my points so very well...

No dust on the landing gear and no blast evidence have most certainly NOT been answered by shills for the official story.

Sure they have... the retarded ignorant people swept them clean :)

No they have not... and a whole host of other questions.

Absolutely correct along with so many other issues with the moon landing.

Fact: rockets cannot propel in space

There's always a troll to kill a thread.

and Epstein didn't kill himself.

Pin The Beanie...

[link to www.mupload.nl (secure)]
.