• We have updated the guidelines regarding posting political content: please see the stickied thread on Website Issues.

Moon Landing: Hoaxed?

Ermintrude said:
Umm, @Tribble
Apollo imagery makes very little sense.

Focus on that perspective, long and hard, and forget blind alleyways regarding moon hoax hoax-theories. They are just circular distractions, diversions. I offer no explanations, as yet, regarding the imagery but I am stubborn.

Analysis of the pictures constantly results in raising more questions than it does answers..
moonTape.jpg
Click to expand...
We've discussed this before. The outer skin of the Lunar Module was not load-bearing or pressurised; it was instead loosely attached material that acted as thermal shielding for the components inside, as well as acting as a Whipple shield to protect against meteorites. Whipple shields are thin, loosely attached sheets that work best when there are gaps between layers. Here the attitude control rocket at the top of the picture has blown the gold foil away.

None of this is secret; you can see the fragile nature of the outside sheets in dozens of photographs, including this one of Apollo 16 looking even worse than the one above. This had no effect on the internal pressurised cabin, of course.
7008828495_7b0507f25a.jpg



More images of the LM being assembled can be found below; you can see the pressurised cabin, and the various electronic components, slowly being covered up by a series of thin layers that paradoxically act very well as insulation and micrometeorite protection.
http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/Hi...LM-noID-16.jpg
http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/Hi...LM-noID-18.jpg
http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/Hi...LM-noID-11.jpg
http://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/fi...ar20module.jpg
If there was anything odd about these pictures, do you think they would be so freely available and proudly displayed?
 
Ermintrude said:
Umm, @Tribble . I offer no explanations, as yet, regarding the imagery but I am stubborn.
moonLamp.jpg
Click to expand...

This looks like an internal reflection in the helmet, due to sunlight squeezing in between the helmet sunshade and the glass. Another internal reflection can be seen directly below, as a long diagonal streak. In the inset image the flare has been subjected to a ridiculous amount of sharpening and contrast enhancement; these are the same processes that can make cities appear in photos of the Moon. It's not a Super Trouper.
 
^Er....the f bomb......didn't know we were allowed to use that kind of language here.
:evil:
 
Don't worry, a fuckwit is a type of bird. ;)
 
Theory here that The Shining is Kubrick's confession that he helped fake the moon landing, first up in the vid:

 
OneWingedBird said:
Theory here that The Shining is Kubrick's confession that he helped fake the moon landing, first up in the vid:
Click to expand...

Only the First Space Shuttle Launch was 1981, and the film was made before 1980, released in 1980. Would he have known about the shape of the Space Shuttle Launch pad? Which is really not the shape in the carpet anyway. Although the Apollo 1 Jumper is an interesting addition to the scene.
 
Waylander28 said:
Only the First Space Shuttle Launch was 1981, and the film was made before 1980, released in 1980. Would he have known about the shape of the Space Shuttle Launch pad? Which is really not the shape in the carpet anyway. Although the Apollo 1 Jumper is an interesting addition to the scene.
Click to expand...

The Space Shuttles were launched from the same Launch Complex 39 as the Saturn moon shots - primarily from Launch Pad 39A (same as Apollo 11). Although the gantry and other support equipment within the pad areas were modified during the 1970's (first for post-lunar missions, then for the Shuttle ... ), the overall complex layout remained pretty much the same from the 1960's through the 1980's.

As to the geometric pattern of the carpet ... That 'hexagon-on-a-stick' motif (which I always associated with common depictions of a virus during that period ... ) goes back at least as far as the early 1970's, and I'm willing to bet I'd seen it in the Sixties. It was already stylistically anachronistic by 1980.
 
Hmm.....never heard that idea that The Shining was about Kubrick and the 'moon hoax'...but I did hear some time back that Eyes Wide Shut by him was allegedly about The Illuminati ,their control of the world ,and their occult sex orgies.
:cooll:
 
I'm not all endorsing this video, but it has some interesting ideas that other moon hoax theorists haven't mentioned:
It's probably utter bollocks, but I present it here for your entertainment.
 
I find it curious that the moon and the sun are the same size when one is 93 million miles away. Now if the sun ☀️ is really 93 million miles away, and is the size that it is, if you were to put it say 186 million miles away, it would be half the size. Now keep doubting the distance until you reach 5 trillion miles away. Would the sun still be visible from earth ? 5 trillion miles is the distance to our nearest star. So all of the stars you see in the sky at night are further than 5 trillion miles away save one. The moon isn't even a planet. It's probably more like the lighted surface of a flashlight. In other words it's probably just a light. The sun is likely just a disc like the Pharaoh Aketnaton described it. So where does NASA go when they are stealing our money? I think that they are hanging from the dome.
 
Thanks @stuneville

@Elsupremo -
Although I puzzle over certain imagery that is produced by NASA in respect of the moon, I think it's difficult to claim that the moon is not a sphere.

The phases of the moon, in terms of illumination, have always shown this.

Have a look at the very well-written explanation at this link from the US Naval Observatory.

Note that although we can't see the Moon's teetering locked rotation with the unaided eye, it can be seen illustrated by this animation.

The point being (in the context of your understandable impression that the Moon looks like a disk) is that it behaves as an sun-illuminated sphere would do,

Moon_movie.gif


What I thought you were going to comment upon is the huge (astronomically-huge) coincidence that the Moon is exactly the right diameter, now, to eclipse the Sun. This has become interpreted as possessing a neofantastical significance by some theorists, including Icke and Hancock http://www.express.co.uk/news/weird/771246/Hollow-Moon-theory-aliens

I puzzle over something much-more Fortean regarding the Moon, which I may try to explain here (although we are not really in the right forum). It is probably a fundamental misunderstanding on my part, multiplied by a misrecollection.

We shall await upon any further intervention from the FTMB Modeities, to see if we've to be reorbited onto another more-appropriate thread.
 
No - go with it on here and see where it leads. I would add that the moon isn't always (optically) the same size as the sun (you sometimes get a corona or halo rather than black-out), in the same way that my upturned thumb isn't always the same size as the Eiffel Tower. It's all in the perspective and the context.

Play on.
 
stuneville said:
It's all in the perspective and the context.
Click to expand...
Not forgetting the interpretation (which is a metaquantitative aspect that bites us all on the ass, always).

Here's the angle (pun intended) that I wish to subtend.

The Sun comes up: the Moon goes down. And vice-versa. To a first approximation, I stress (but you take my point). To expand upon that proposition, they are predominantly in opposition to each-other. Almost like opposite ends of a see-saw. And when in perfect cyclic opposition, we experience high tides (others, please concur or correct). This far, no flaw....

So: why would it be, nowadays, that I can often see the Moon during the day? In the sunlit sky, even late in the morning (sometimes even after 1100), in various phase-states. Or, more rarely (but not never) mid to late afternoon?

Here's the very Fortean thing (for me). I have no recollection of having witnessed this as a 60s kid. Or 70s teen. Or 80s dude...etc. It didn't happen (for me) in my formative years.

I somehow feel this is a latter-day effect. I cannot say how recently I've started noticing this.

Conversely, as a kid, I can remember the 'being chased' effect of the Moon, optically pursuing me on a clear night, if running, or in a car. This no longer happens. Ever.

Yet, bizarrely, there are often warnings of 'Supermoons' by our astronomers. I am certain that this term (and this effect, as reported) was not evident say 20yrs ago.

These are possibly false memory effects. Like my observation about the big benificent yellow sun of our collective childhoods (casting a warmth that did not fry us on the beach) versus the small angry white ball of intense halogenoid nasty that I (perhaps?) just imagine is above us in the sky. Presumably It's always been like that.... And my recollection (and lack of childhood melanoma) is all just false memory syndrome. Damned convincing though....and therefore fundamentally-Fortean.
 
Ermintruder said:
Not forgetting the interpretation (which is a metaquantitative aspect that bites us all on the ass, always).
Click to expand...
Quite so.

Ermintruder said:
..So: why would it be, nowadays, that I can often see the Moon during the day? In the sunlit sky, even late in the morning (sometimes even after 1100), in various phase-states. Or, more rarely (but not never) mid to late afternoon?

Here's the very Fortean thing (for me). I have no recollection of having witnessed this as a 60s kid. Or 70s teen. Or 80s dude...etc. It didn't happen (for me) in my formative years.
Click to expand...
No, I remember seeing the moon on a bright sunny afternoon when I was at primary school (early 70s), and the subsequent chat with the teacher about how this could be. The Infinite Monkey Cage touched upon this as well a few series back, and the sainted Cox pointed out that the moon is usually visible during the day from somewhere on Earth. We in the UK only really notice it because we have cloud cover so much of the time, so are surprised when a blue sky reveals it.

Plus, of course, people don't generally look up all that much.
 
Ermintruder said:
The Sun comes up: the Moon goes down. And vice-versa. To a first approximation, I stress (but you take my point). To expand upon that proposition, they are predominantly in opposition to each-other. Almost like opposite ends of a see-saw. And when in perfect cyclic opposition, we experience high tides (others, please concur or correct). This far, no flaw....

So: why would it be, nowadays, that I can often see the Moon during the day? In the sunlit sky, even late in the morning (sometimes even after 1100), in various phase-states. Or, more rarely (but not never) mid to late afternoon?

Here's the very Fortean thing (for me). I have no recollection of having witnessed this as a 60s kid. Or 70s teen. Or 80s dude...etc. It didn't happen (for me) in my formative years.
...

These are possibly false memory effects.
Click to expand...
Yes, false memory, combined with inadequate astronomical knowledge.

The moon orbits the Earth quite quickly, being so near. So sometimes Moon and Sun are in the same part of the sky (around New Moon) and other times they are opposite each other (around Full Moon). People centuries ago, when there was little artificial lighting, understood this much better than modern laymen.

Your post is either being deliberately provocative, or you are just displaying your ignorance. :p
 
I certainly saw the Moon in the day sky in the 80s. Then again I am not a brit.
 
Ermintruder said:
So: why would it be, nowadays, that I can often see the Moon during the day? In the sunlit sky, even late in the morning (sometimes even after 1100), in various phase-states. Or, more rarely (but not never) mid to late afternoon?

Here's the very Fortean thing (for me). I have no recollection of having witnessed this as a 60s kid. Or 70s teen. Or 80s dude...etc. It didn't happen (for me) in my formative years.

I somehow feel this is a latter-day effect. I cannot say how recently I've started noticing this.
Click to expand...

I have very clear recollections of seeing this in my youth (70s and 80s), because I looked up into the sky rather a lot. Didn't notice it in the 60s because I was too busy being a kid.

Ermintruder said:
Yet, bizarrely, there are often warnings of 'Supermoons' by our astronomers. I am certain that this term (and this effect, as reported) was not evident say 20yrs ago.
Click to expand...

Again, I have a very clear recollection of seeing a really HUGE supermoon back in the 70s, when I was a teenager. We were camping in Fleet, Dorset - right next to the coast. The moon looked gigantic and red in the sky, probably as result of the crepuscular light and a lensing effect that happens when there's a lot of dust in the upper atmosphere (and a lensing effect caused by a heat haze over the sea). It was so big that I could see individual craters on the surface with the naked eye. I'll have to ask my Dad if he has any photos from that event.
 
Ermintruder said:
So: why would it be, nowadays, that I can often see the Moon during the day? In the sunlit sky, even late in the morning (sometimes even after 1100), in various phase-states. Or, more rarely (but not never) mid to late afternoon?

Here's the very Fortean thing (for me). I have no recollection of having witnessed this as a 60s kid. Or 70s teen. Or 80s dude...etc. It didn't happen (for me) in my formative years.

I somehow feel this is a latter-day effect. I cannot say how recently I've started noticing this.
Click to expand...

Another one here, saw this often 70s 80s etc.
 
I've frequently seen the moon during the hours of daylight (in sunny weather) and had no idea it was at all unusual, much less controversial. Moonrise tomorrow is about 10:01, but it looks like being overcast...
 
Last edited:
Andy_X said:
I've frequently seen the moon during the hours of daylight (in sunny weather) and had no idea it was at all unusual, much less controversial. Moonrise tomorrow is about 10:01, but it looks like being overcast...
Click to expand...
The moon can often be seen in the sky in the early light hours from North Norfolk, either that or it's Endor.
 
I don't know what Endor is, but I bet NASA haven't been there due to Ray Alan Vent, or something.
 
Andy_X said:
I don't know what Endor is, but I bet NASA haven't been there due to Ray Alan Vent, or something.
Click to expand...


Its the moon the second Death Star was being built in orbit of in Return of the Jedi. You need to brush up on the classics Andy.

As for seeing the moon during the day, I frequently see it. And not at any particular time of the day, either in the morning or afternoon.
 
Ah, right you are. I have no knowledge of Star Wars beyond the first one, which I saw three times.

You sure these aren't spare Death Stars you're seeing? ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top