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

Moon Landing: Hoaxed?

segovius said:
rynner2 said:
The Templar Treasure is on the Moon! :shock:

Of course! Why didn't I see that before? ;)
Click to expand...
You KNOW it's out there somewhere!!!!!
Click to expand...
I expect there'll be a website about it within 24 hours, complete with multi-coloured fonts, exclamation marks, bad spelling, and background music you can't turn off... :roll:
 
rynner2 said:
segovius said:
rynner2 said:
The Templar Treasure is on the Moon! :shock:

Of course! Why didn't I see that before? ;)
Click to expand...
You KNOW it's out there somewhere!!!!!
Click to expand...
I expect there'll be a website about it within 24 hours, complete with multi-coloured fonts, exclamation marks, bad spelling, and background music you can't turn off... :roll:
Click to expand...

yeah...we should write the book and make a million before some other loser does.

1) Christ was an alien
2) Templars discovered it and got paid off by the Church with a sackload of booty
3) They hid the treasure which contained the payoff and some extraterrestrial power from Moses that Christ had custody of.
4) The Nazis rediscovered it in the 30s - at Rennes le Chateau
5) Werner Braun was the only surviving Nazi who retained the awesome knowledge it conferred and he took it to the US to work on the Apollo program.
6) Real purpose was to move the treasure to the moon as it was no longer safe on earth...
7) After they had done this they set up an elaborate rumour system of hoaxes designed to implant the belief that no-one had ever been to the moon and thus deter others such as the Russians etc from going there and getting their hands on the booty.

Which is why no-one has ever been back. to preserve the hiding-place and perpetuate the myth it is impossible to achieve..

All dodgy shadows and lost tapes serve same purpose..

Right; where's my $1, 000, 000 advance???
 
You're really Dan Brown aren't you?
 
Yeah, it proves that Apollo 11 landed on the moon. I still think that the first landing was staged [for necessary political reasons] and that the extra time gained led to the real moon landings. I think I stick to that belief because:
a) I'm stubborn [even if I know I have no chance of winning, I stick with my decisions] and b) it feels right somehow and makes it all so much more interesting.
 
Hardly spectacular uair01, rather underwhelming in my opinion. Apollo 14 was the one with the astronaughts bouncing around with their gold visors up wasn't it? I also believe there was a photo taken of someone jumping in the air failing to show the flap adrift clearly seen in the video of said jump. :?
 
Fake Dutch 'moon rock' revealed

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/8226075.stm

A treasured piece at the Dutch national museum - a supposed moon rock from the first manned lunar landing - is nothing more than petrified wood, curators say.
It was given to former Prime Minister Willem Drees during a goodwill tour by the three Apollo-11 astronauts shortly after their moon mission in 1969.
When Mr Drees died, the rock went on display at the Amsterdam museum.
At one point it was insured for around $500,000 (£308,000), but tests have proved it was not the genuine article.
Click to expand...
 
That revelation is odd. If you wanted to fake moon rock, there seems to be a lot better materials than petrified wood. A simple piece of basalt would probably work better.
 
KarlD said:
uair01 said:
Now absolutely spectacular proof that they've been there ... and that they did go:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/patlejch/3738835271/

:D
Click to expand...

Erm sorry latrine, anyone else find that a little surprising, I thought that their suits recycled their urine and they had special sucky toilets on the lander for number twos.
Click to expand...

Someone doctored that piccy for comedy effect, yes.
 
segovius said:
Fake Dutch 'moon rock' revealed

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/8226075.stm

A treasured piece at the Dutch national museum - a supposed moon rock from the first manned lunar landing - is nothing more than petrified wood, curators say.
It was given to former Prime Minister Willem Drees during a goodwill tour by the three Apollo-11 astronauts shortly after their moon mission in 1969.
When Mr Drees died, the rock went on display at the Amsterdam museum.
At one point it was insured for around $500,000 (£308,000), but tests have proved it was not the genuine article.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

I was amazed when I read that article. It rather suggests that NASA knowingly gave the Dutch a fake moon rock... which leaves lots of questions just hanging there. :shock:
 
Moon rocks were a rarity, and destined for research labs. I don't believe they were ever given away as 'souvenirs'. Is there any original documentation to back up the Dutch story?

Another alternative is that former Prime Minister Willem Drees was given a moon rock, but some felon stole it at some time, replacing it with a piece of fossilised wood to conceal his crime.
 
Or perhaps he had several pieces of rock and forgot which was which...

If someone did find petrified wood on the Moon that would really be a story...
 
Scientist Rubbishes Apollo 15 Conspiracy Theory
www.moondaily.com/reports/Scientist_Rub ... y_999.html

File image.
by Staff Writers
Delhi, India (PTI) Sep 04, 2009
A Camera on board India's maiden unmanned lunar mission Chandrayaan-1 has recorded images of the landing site of US spacecraft Apollo 15, a scientist said today, rubbishing conspiracy theories that the fourth US mission to land on the moon four decades back was a hoax.
The Terrain mapper camera (TMC) on board Chandrayaan-1, which had an abrupt end a few days back, has sent the prints of landing site of Apollo 15 and tracks of the lunar rovers used by astronauts to travel on lunar surface, a senior scientist associated with India's lunar mission said during a presentation here.

"The images captured by hyper spectral camera fitted as a part of Chandrayaan-1 image payload has reconfirmed the veracity of Apollo 15 mission," said Dr. Prakash Chauhan, who is a senior scientist with Indian Space Research Organisation's (ISRO) Hyderabad-based space application centre.

Chauhan was presenting the findings of Chandrayaan-1 mission in his paper 'Chandrayaan-1: TMC and HYSI data analysis for Apollo landing sites and 'Mare Orientale', which would be unveiled in public domain two months later, after further analysis.

The Chandrayaan-1 images have disproved the theory of conspiracy which had claimed that the Apollo 15 was a hoax, he said.

"Chandrayaan-1 has managed to identify the landing site used by the Apollo 15 shuttle on the basis of the disturbances on the moon's surface," Chauhan said.


Source: Press Trust of India
Click to expand...
 
One giant slip in Bangladesh news

Two Bangladeshi newspapers have apologised after publishing an article taken from a satirical US website which claimed the Moon landings were faked.

The Daily Manab Zamin said US astronaut Neil Armstrong had shocked a news conference by saying he now knew it had been an "elaborate hoax".

Neither they nor the New Nation, which later picked up the story, realised the Onion was not a genuine news site. :D

Both have now apologised to their readers for not checking the story.

"We thought it was true so we printed it without checking," associate editor Hasanuzzuman Khan told the AFP news agency.

"We didn't know the Onion was not a real news site." :roll:

The article said Mr Armstrong had told a news conference he had been "forced to reconsider every single detail of the monumental journey after watching a few persuasive YouTube videos and reading several blog posts" by a conspiracy theorist.

"It took only a few hastily written paragraphs published by this passionate denier of mankind's so-called 'greatest technological achievement' for me to realise I had been living a lie," the fake article "quoted" Mr Armstrong as saying.

The made-up quote went on to say that although the journey had felt real, in fact "the entire thing was filmed on a sound stage, most likely in New Mexico".

"I suppose it really was one small step for man, one giant lie for mankind."

The story was published on the Onion's website on Monday and on Wednesday, the Daily Manab Zamin translated it into Bengali, attributing it to the Onion News Network in Lebanon, Ohio. It then ran in New Nation on Thursday.

Daily Manab Zamin, the only tabloid newspaper in Bangladesh, published an apology to its readers on Thursday, saying the report had "drawn a lot of attention".

"We've since learned that the fun site runs false and juicy reports based on a historic incident," it said.

"The Moon landing one was such a story, which received numerous hits on the internet.

"The truth is that Neil Armstrong never gave such an interview. It was made up. We are sorry for publishing the report without checking the information."

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/8237558.stm
 
I don't know what's more worrying, the fact that they printed it without checking or that they thought it was completely serious.
 
Formerly these videos were on YouTube.

They are not to be found there anymore.

We did land on the moon.

Link
 
I've only recently come to this particular 'conspiracy', and I'm just enjoying being curious about it in a non-partisan way.

Has anyone seen THIS series of articles? Incredibly detailed and very elegantly written. A fun read if nothing else.

I read them from the POV of almost total disbelief, but I have to admit by the end I was at least prepared to allow there seem to be a lot more holes in the Moon-landing story than I'd ever been aware.

Just a couple of the major points he raises that I'd like to see properly rebutted before I'm totally happy.

1. NASA has 'lost' all the original moon-walking footage, and all the telemetry data, and all the original voice-data from all the manned moon-missions. The blueprints for the SaturnV rockets, the Moon Buggy and the LEM have also vanished. Just a weird way to handle such historic data. Is this true? If so, why did they do this?

2. These guys in the 1960s traveled 250,000 miles away from the surface of the earth, a feat that has not only gone unmatched by anyone since, but hasn't even come close to being attempted. Ther furthest the shuttle travels from earth is 400miles. Why have we never repeated the landings, and why in 2005 did NASA say it would take at least 20 years, with modern technology, to replicate what they did back then in just 8 years, with 1960s technology? It should be easier, not harder. Why isn't it?


The guy raises a lot of other points that I haven't yet found a refutation for. I'm expecting to get answers in the end, because I do have a tough time believing it was all a scam, but I'm intrigued.


Anyone else read this stuff? Thoughts?
 
AngelAlice said:
I've only recently come to this particular 'conspiracy', and I'm just enjoying being curious about it in a non-partisan way.

Has anyone seen THIS series of articles? Incredibly detailed and very elegantly written. A fun read if nothing else.

I read them from the POV of almost total disbelief, but I have to admit by the end I was at least prepared to allow there seem to be a lot more holes in the Moon-landing story than I'd ever been aware.

Just a couple of the major points he raises that I'd like to see properly rebutted before I'm totally happy.

1. NASA has 'lost' all the original moon-walking footage, and all the telemetry data, and all the original voice-data from all the manned moon-missions. The blueprints for the SaturnV rockets, the Moon Buggy and the LEM have also vanished. Just a weird way to handle such historic data. Is this true? If so, why did they do this?

2. These guys in the 1960s traveled 250,000 miles away from the surface of the earth, a feat that has not only gone unmatched by anyone since, but hasn't even come close to being attempted. Ther furthest the shuttle travels from earth is 400miles. Why have we never repeated the landings, and why in 2005 did NASA say it would take at least 20 years, with modern technology, to replicate what they did back then in just 8 years, with 1960s technology? It should be easier, not harder. Why isn't it?


The guy raises a lot of other points that I haven't yet found a refutation for. I'm expecting to get answers in the end, because I do have a tough time believing it was all a scam, but I'm intrigued.


Anyone else read this stuff? Thoughts?
Click to expand...

Just to answer a your points

1) Total cobblers. Original recordings in what way? I can see transferring the recordings onto more durable and multiple media then the originals decaying after 69'. Also in 'Carrying the Fire' (Micheal Collins 1974) Micheal clearly has access to telemetry records during his writing.
I would be amazed if no blueprints still existed for all that equipment. There would be huge amounts of drawings for each component. There is without doubt some somewhere - even if for security reasons they should have been destroyed (see the tsr2 and avro arrow for erasure of data to 'secure' something from copying by an enemy state).

2) The manned moon landings were an extravegant gesture. Unmanned missions have gone much further for far less cost. Why will it take 20 years to go back? R&D and testing of all new designs. The original program became somewhat reckless (IMO) with Apollo in the race to put an American boot on lunar soil. Given that it isn't a race now, and much much more will be expected from it, that isn't too bad, especially as there are no longer existing plants to build such monsters.

I mentioned Carrying the Fire, that would be a good read if you want a first hand account of the whole moon program from the sharp end. I can't see anyone absorbing it and believing the hoax stories.
 
AMPHIARAUS said:
Just to answer a your points

1) Total cobblers. Original recordings in what way? I can see transferring the recordings onto more durable and multiple media then the originals decaying after 69'. Also in 'Carrying the Fire' (Micheal Collins 1974) Micheal clearly has access to telemetry records during his writing.
I would be amazed if no blueprints still existed for all that equipment. There would be huge amounts of drawings for each component. There is without doubt some somewhere - even if for security reasons they should have been destroyed (see the tsr2 and avro arrow for erasure of data to 'secure' something from copying by an enemy state).
Click to expand...

Well, according to the site (I really urge you to visit it - http://www.davesweb.cnchost.com/Apollo1.html - as he probably explains it much better than I do), the original footage was never broadcast, for technical reasons. What happened was the raw footage was transferred onto video and then displayed on a monitor which had a TV camera trained on it, and it was this copied, footage we have all seen. According to news reports, which the site quotes, that raw footage, together with the telemetry data and all the blueprints have indeed vanished.

Seems like madness doesn't it. I do think it's worth trying to find a secondary source for this as, more than all the stuff about wobbly flags etc this seems quite weird.


2) The manned moon landings were an extravegant gesture. Unmanned missions have gone much further for far less cost. Why will it take 20 years to go back? R&D and testing of all new designs. The original program became somewhat reckless (IMO) with Apollo in the race to put an American boot on lunar soil. Given that it isn't a race now, and much much more will be expected from it, that isn't too bad, especially as there are no longer existing plants to build such monsters.
Click to expand...

Yes, I always understood this to be the case, and I'm sure it probably is, but does it explain why in 2005 NASA was predicting it would take 20+ years to achieve another moon-landing? I mean it does seem a bit odd doesn't it.

I mentioned Carrying the Fire, that would be a good read if you want a first hand account of the whole moon program from the sharp end. I can't see anyone absorbing it and believing the hoax stories.
Click to expand...

The thing is though, if (and it's a massive 'if' obviously) it was a hoax, then it'd be as much a psy-op as anythong else, and we'd all by now be so conditioned to believe, and had such a massive mind-f*ck done on us that we'd probably find it almost impossible to see the issue clearly. I agree it seems almost impossible to believe. But I'm also aware I'd think just the same if we'd all been tricked foir this long. Which is why i'm sort of entertaining the unthinkable, just to try and make sure our current reality-paradigm in this area is as secure as we all assume, you know?
 
TANGRAM said:
Formerly these videos were on YouTube.

They are not to be found there anymore.

We did land on the moon.

Link
Click to expand...

I'd like people to read the link that was given before answering from mere memory. Just to stir it up a bit [and I am always direct]: No man ever landed on the Moon!
There. Cheers :_pished:
 
IMO they did land, and they faked some footage.
This was to ensure they had enough to show for the effort to guarantee further funding and score propaganda points against the Soviets.
If they didn't land, they must have faked everything, and that would have to include all the stills in the Apollo Image Libraries, of which there are thousands. Quite a few of these images contain anomalies, and if they were faking them why would they include evidence of alien activity?
 
Ok, I should really give reasons as to why I still believe we didn't put any living being on the moon but as was said before, the guy in the article does an extremely good job. His opinions are also from a different angle, which is refreshing.
There are points as well, that I noticed but weren't discussed [maybe somewhere else]. For starters as a photographer I loved the part about the cameras. In the 'famous' full length photo, you can see the photographer reflected in the helmet. Is it me or can anyone else see a distinct ellbow at face hight [something you would obviously see if someone held a camera to the eyes but which wasn't necessary with a chest mounted camera]?

I have always had my doubt about moon landings. Mostly I went with that the first manned landing was a hoax in order to win the space race but that with more time we eventually managed. However I was missing a few facts.
I am now more inclined to say that we never send a human [or any other living being] to the moon.

I really urge anyone who wants to give the 'usual' explanations to first read through the whole thing and then give their opinions as it would help no end to bring this whole Moon-Hoax discussion a step further.
 
I tried the link above but the videos won't play without stopping every two seconds.
It's possible that they faked stuff from the later missions, maybe for reasons other than political expediency.But I just can't believe that if they were faking it they would have done Apollo 17 at all, rather than go to all the trouble of pretending to have humans there on top of obfuscating the fact that they were examining a humungous artificial structure.
Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter has sent back hi-res photos of the footprints.
If there weren't humans up there, surely they would have had even greater problems obfuscating that than everything else. Sending real people would have been much easier.
 
Bigfoot73 said:
I tried the link above but the videos won't play without stopping every two seconds.
It's possible that they faked stuff from the later missions, maybe for reasons other than political expediency.But I just can't believe that if they were faking it they would have done Apollo 17 at all, rather than go to all the trouble of pretending to have humans there on top of obfuscating the fact that they were examining a humungous artificial structure.
Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter has sent back hi-res photos of the footprints.
If there weren't humans up there, surely they would have had even greater problems obfuscating that than everything else. Sending real people would have been much easier.
Click to expand...

Good point.
 
Dingo667 said:
In the 'famous' full length photo, you can see the photographer reflected in the helmet. Is it me or can anyone else see a distinct ellbow at face hight [something you would obviously see if someone held a camera to the eyes but which wasn't necessary with a chest mounted camera]?
Click to expand...

You're right. It is just you.

http://xxos.net/resources/images/armstrong_moon.jpg

Seriously though I think what you might be taking as a face height elbow is actually just the Backpack.

Gordon
 
I can't be bothered to rehash all the arguments against the conspiracy theory (especially as they've mostly been made already, on this very thread).

Just a couple of points, though: by the time of the landings, there was no Space Race. The Americans had already demonstrated their superiority in space technology, and the Russians then had no hope of a manned moon landing (and have not acheived one since).

And I reckon the Moon Landing doubters consist mostly of people who weren't born at the time, so never lived through the constant barrage of news, interviews and information that surrounded the event. Sadly, as those of us who did experience that media frenzy die off, I suppose the number of doubters might increase :( . But those who take the trouble to thoroughly research the subject will learn a) that there was no reason to hoax the landings, and b) such a hoax would have been so complex and wide-ranging, and involve so many thousands of people, as to be more difficult to carry out than simply making the landings!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top