Moon Landing hoax? Debunking the Debunkers?

You should watch too halcyon.



Idiot

I still actually know a guy who believes we landed on the moon.

Some folks like to still believe in fairy tales.

Some folks don’t want to let go of their childhood.

I feel bad for him.

That Halcyon is a full on shill.

He’s assigned to try to keep the hoax going.

This too is sad.

Notice he only shows up for moon hoax threads.

I believe the moon landing is real ....


but some of the video we see of the process was filmed in a secret film studio... for a better reenactment of the process to the masses...


and possible to hide any unknown objects that may expose life unknown ...


which we all know nasa does... constantly ..

Is he any crazier than Buzz... haha...

Im sorry but no matter what you think of the man , what he captured on film are facts, and no amount of character assassination of the fella can change whats is on film.

What he captured was such evidence of bizarre human behavior from men that should be ROCK solid sources for information regarding this epic journey they allegedly took... you cant refute it , no matter how many people you call out as sub intelligent... your entertaining in your approach tho I will give ya that.

I believe the truth is much simpler than this.

I will say that whatever actually did take place has been mis_described... and well leave it at that.

"The question should of course be: could the audiovisual record AS IT EXISTS be faked?
Experts say no."

Ahahahahhaha!

OMG. All that typing just to finish with this gem. Goddamn.

He just commented on this "Anne Frank" thread:
[link to godlike.com (secure)]

He said "Neo-nazi scum still lying scum."

Start at about 50 seconds. And then 1:19 seconds.

If you cannot tell that the "lunar background" (NOT what the rover is traveling on) is nothing backdrop wall for a set, you are blind as a bat.

Go to this site and learn or stop running your cunt mouth?!

Lazy fuk


A u l I s . Com

Yes, that's exactly what courts do. The purpose of a court trial is to confirm or refute a historical allegation--e.g., whether person A murdered person B, or whether person C defrauded person D.

So for example, a jury in 1999 unanimously determined that Martin Luther King was assassinated by a government conspiracy.
[link to www.latimes.com (secure)]
---
Last year Jowers was declared liable in King’s death for having allegedly hired a Memphis police officer as part of a vast conspiracy to assassinate King. In finding that government agencies and unnamed others also were involved, the jury in the wrongful death case essentially accepted the plaintiffs’ argument that James Earl Ray was innocent.
---

Chuckle. The last refuge of a government liar is, "You have no standing." The politician or bureaucrat is essentially telling the taxpayer, "It's none of your business how we spent your $billions." "It's none of your business whether we are lying to the public, falsifying the historical record, and subverting science."

Last Edited by BeSkeptical on 11/29/2019 11:13 PM

Dance monkey dance !!!

i always like moon hoax threads so i check them onhere and in everyone of them this halcyon dayz guy just comes in calling eveyone liers its really suspicious to me.

why do u waste ur time talking to moon hoax believers does it make u feel smart?it does right?u feel so good laughing at the screen,pathetic if u ask me.

either that or u get paid,to debunk.both make u an uber turd.
zielig mannetje...

[youtube] [link to www.youtube.com (secure)]

why so few pics of astronuts on the moon with earth in the background?

Haha , I been looking at this shit for years and you betcha im lazy... I still enjoy the discussion, I like to check back and see how far one way or the other the opinions have gone. I for the most part have resigned myself to having to live with inconsistencies and the mysteries behind some of them until the day I am not above ground. There is nothing new with respect

none of that matters if they faked the footage--everything can be faked. The real question is why did they tape over the original footage AND lose the technology to go to the moon?

sounds like there is something rotten going on... the reality is, if the moon landings were fake, the truth would be put out and has been out since its inception, in different forms, because those are the spiritual rules: the truth is always put out and tptb always need our agreement, on some level...

If the moon landings were not fake, why has it been implied that they were for so long and why so much implicating it was fake?

And as always, ask: who benefits by the moon landing hoax? Watch Kubrick's "2001, Space Odyssey": clearly the idea that there is no God and that "aliens" evolved us, is the purpose of a fake moon landing...

now we have increased knowledge of DNA complexity and can surmise that evolution is another hoax, statistically-speaking...there has not been enough time for our genome to evolve and furthermore, it is in a constant state of decay, not improvement.

You sir, have no idea of the effects of radiation, nor the material science of mitigating it.

You just proved how stupid you really are.

Saturday Afternoon Drive-by.


You think that's new?
Percy and Bennett have been peddling that crap for decades.


kOOk.




For once in your life try to a make an argument that isn't fallacious.
The only thing hoaxies need to do is provide evidence for their accusations.
But all they ever do is whine about the mean old PANs.
It's very telling...


And another liar.
(Or an idiot who doesn't know how to use the search function.)




Prove by "because I say so."

Not how it works among adults.




If everything captured on film was fact we wouldn't be having this discussion.

Not all is as it seems. Don't they teach media studies where you're from.


LOL.
Psychologist's Fallacy.

You are giving all the weight to your personal interpretation of behaviour of people you don't even know.
As if you are qualified to actual make such an assessment.
And no, watching 13,000 hours of TV drama does not give you a realistic perception of human behaviour.
While giving no weight at all to the physical evidence that proves beyond any reasonable doubt that Men landed on the Moon.

It doesn't matter that you think your neighbour is acting shifty.
You still need to prove that your claim that he murdered is wife is true.
Heck, you need to prove first that his wife is actually dead.

You can't.
You know you can't.
That's why you keep bringing up this nonsensical pseudo-evidence.
So you can pretend you are being rational about this.




You can't win with kOOks.
If you say nothing they must be right.
If you say they are wrong they must be right.

Just fucking prove you are right already.
Oh, wait... You can't.


You have know idea how entertaining kOOks are.


Aaaand another loser who just could not resist resorting to the Shill Gambit.
Really clever, how you expose yourself as yet another empty-headed loser.


Because Earth is high up in the sky and they are imaging the Moon?

So, in your professional opinion as a photo-documentalist, HOW MANY images of Earth from the surface of the Moon should there be?




They do.

Or can you prove otherwise.

Doesn't the quote function work for you, or is using it beyond your intellectual capacity?

Notice he only shows up for moon hoax threads.
—Halcyon Dayz

And another liar.
(Or an idiot who doesn't know how to use the search function.)
—Shillmeister Halcyon Dayz


“Just look at the threads I made!! I just created one 5 YEARS AGO!!!”
— Shillmeister Halcyon Dayz


You’re too damn lazy to even create a thread in 5 YEARS to at least make it SEEM like you’re not a low paid shill!!

God you suck at this!!!

Last Edited by Beast love should be legal on 11/30/2019 08:36 AM

Always the bit about how much one doesnt know and then the insult trigger attempt, followed by the ad homz (sic) ...the stale tactic of the shilly... You really need some new material...

Other things things to look for are old image manipulation technics... in other words methods used to alter an image before the Photoshop days. Same methods used to insert special effects in the 70s as well... anyone remember the little squares around the ships etc in Star Wars before all the remasters?

As seen in the images here (in link) ...which can be found all over the internet...this site came up higher in the search for them, but show the same thing.

These are the common sense problems people have with images from.. Nasa has since fixed this in re_issues of the the said same images.

[link to www.express.co.uk (secure)]

Why don't you change your name since it sounds so much like the other guy's?

They say that picture was not made by NASA.

Congratulations. You've found jpeg compression. Nothing has been "fixed". You just have to look at the non compressed images to start with.
And of course, that is NOT a NASA image. That one on your link is a composite made by somebody on the internet later.

a u l I s. Com


Hahahahaha aha

Learn something today.

Your WELCOME!

Whenever anyone draws to the flaws , someone comes out of the woodwork saying it was them who had done the hoax of the hoax... everything is layers of double doubles. Its always an uphill battle.

Not to get off topic... but

Its like the Patterson Bigfoot from 1967 and all the people who came out later to say they were the person in the suit... and yet no one could reproduce it, even hollywood effects specialists.. Im not afraid to post the bunkers or debunked, In many cases thats just noise, hearsay and/or nonsense... I look at the media and the facts.

And yet another low-effort "I'm a loser" post by the fake.

The Shill Gambit bites losers in the ass for two reasons:
- First, it is just another claim you cannot prove. Like all your idiot claims.
- Second it DEMONSTRATES to the peanut gallery that once again you made a claim you know you cannot prove. Like all your claims.

Way to go, loser.




Your own link debunks this nonsense.
Didn't you even read the article?

Hoaxies are the funny.
Do you really think that becoming a forensic photo-analist requiring training and certification is just a lark?

And then they wonder why people point and laugh at them.


But you don't know any facts.




Spam-tard.

Do you at least get a commission, or are you promoting those frauds for free?

Do they still feature Jack White, the most inept photo-analist in human history?
Only educational in the comedic edutainment sense.

you missed the point completely...

Photos and videos. That is all anyone needs to look at, to decide for themselves.

People like Halcyon DO NOT want you to look at the photos and videos. And I am not talking about flags waving or 'incorrect' shadows. With uneven terrain, shadows can do all kinds of thing. It isn't the right argument (because there is no way to prove the exact contours of the terrain).

But look at the 'Sun' in the Apollo footage. Look at the (lack of) lunar gravity. As soon as you look for those things, you CANNOT un-see the fakeness of the footage.

Then you start to see the backdrops.

Allegedly they used a remote control car to film the rover footage (I think the rover POV footage, not necessarily all the rover footage)!

Metal halide floodlights, remote control cars, all developed... What do you know. Right around the time of the Apollo Program!

The 'Sun' should appear as a 'Sunstar' in absolutely every picture taken, once outside the Earth's atmosphere. You can verify this by looking at photos of the Sun taken from low Earth orbit spacewalks. Apollo footage? Nope.

"While giving no weight at all to the physical evidence that proves beyond any reasonable doubt that Men landed on the Moon."

What physical evidence is this? Why does a MAN have to land on the Moon, in order for there to be physical evidence? The Soviets returned lunar soil (and rocks) to Earth, and they never claimed to have landed a cosmonaut on the Moon!

Haha you walked right into it...I was chumming you Obviously. They are what is known as “rag mags”. They publish anything they want to publish without any concern about whether or not the things they publish are factual, gossip or completely untrue.

You spend pages saying this or that is bunk or hoaxies as if its gospel (if it) goes against your position signaling.

but if it supports your position your OK with a known Faux reporting mechanism... confirmation bias 101.

Keep the hits coming