Author Topic: Did America Land On The Moon  (Read 30169 times)

OzmO

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 22735
  • Drink enough Kool-aid and you'll think its healthy
Re: Did America Land On The Moon
« Reply #75 on: April 17, 2009, 11:42:21 AM »
okay.  bottom line.  in the 40 years since the moon landing...

Is there a single photograph from Earth of ANY of the multiple landing wreckage?  We left moon rovers, flags, golf clubs, and launching pad.

Surely there has to be one.

I'm still questioning whether is a privately owned telescope that can see the buggy and flag. 

But what about this reflector?

OzmO

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 22735
  • Drink enough Kool-aid and you'll think its healthy
Re: Did America Land On The Moon
« Reply #76 on: April 17, 2009, 11:48:38 AM »
Also,

The argument here should be to "prove the moon landing was fake".

It's been established that it was real. 

Same as any other CT.

240 is Back

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 102387
  • Complete website for only $300- www.300website.com
Re: Did America Land On The Moon
« Reply #77 on: April 17, 2009, 11:54:13 AM »
It's been established that it was real. 

Just to be clear, by whom?

Our govt, right?  I'm assuming you're just giving them 100% credibility in the matter.  Cool.

OzmO

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 22735
  • Drink enough Kool-aid and you'll think its healthy
Re: Did America Land On The Moon
« Reply #78 on: April 17, 2009, 12:14:24 PM »
Just to be clear, by whom?

Our govt, right?  I'm assuming you're just giving them 100% credibility in the matter.  Cool.

The burden is on the accuser.   Not the one who landed on the moon.

Do you believe the moon landings were faked 240?

Just curious, what about the reflector?


Also,

Your jabbing about me believing the government 100% is pretty lame.   Can you for once try and stay with the FACTS with out trying to deflect or embelish?  I really hate having to point stuff out to you like i did with the JFK thing where you as usual don't get your facts right and make incorrect statements.

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 40060
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Did America Land On The Moon
« Reply #79 on: April 17, 2009, 12:17:30 PM »
The burden is on the accuser.   Not the one who landed on the moon.

Do you believe the moon landings were faked 240?

Just curious, what about the reflector?


Also,

Your jabbing about me believing the government 100% is pretty lame.   Can you for once try and stay with the FACTS with out trying to deflect or embelish?  I really hate having to point stuff out to you like i did with the JFK thing where you as usual don't get your facts right and make incorrect statements.

You are asking this question to someone who still thinks Palin did not really give birth to Trig. 

240 is Back

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 102387
  • Complete website for only $300- www.300website.com
Re: Did America Land On The Moon
« Reply #80 on: April 18, 2009, 12:10:43 AM »
You are asking this question to someone who still thinks Palin did not really give birth to Trig. 

You are responding as a man who voted to give Palin power to punt the nuclear football.

Glass houses

2ND COMING

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 6307
  • Might is right.
Re: Did America Land On The Moon
« Reply #81 on: April 18, 2009, 12:20:27 AM »
You are responding as a man who voted to give Palin power to punt the nuclear football.

Glass houses

burn!

stormshadow

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 1655
  • Getbig!
Re: Did America Land On The Moon
« Reply #82 on: April 18, 2009, 12:33:57 AM »
You are asking this question to someone who still thinks Palin did not really give birth to Trig. 

haha... thought I was the only one that remembered that.  Adonis was in on it too.

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 40060
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Did America Land On The Moon
« Reply #83 on: April 18, 2009, 04:37:09 AM »
You are responding as a man who voted to give Palin power to punt the nuclear football.

Glass houses

Ha ha,  always fun debating with you. :) :) :) :)

andreisdaman

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 16720
Re: Did America Land On The Moon
« Reply #84 on: April 18, 2009, 11:17:47 AM »
No.

For the simple fact that if it was possible in the 60's, why the fuck aren't we going there now?




for the same reason you aren't banging the same chick you were banging when you were 18..been there done that....time to move on

andreisdaman

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 16720
Re: Did America Land On The Moon
« Reply #85 on: April 18, 2009, 11:27:24 AM »
Oh and by the way...that documentary at the beginning of this thread is FAKE!!!..they obviously spliced together different conversations from other topics taken out of context and put it together...I have seen many of the interviews in this piece ON OTHER DOCUMENTARIES HAVING NOTHING TO DO WITH THE MISSION TO THE MOON!!!

don't let yourself be fooled by this.....it is made to fool those who are too young to have been around when they went to the moon....they make er of this film has an obvious agenda...

we did go to the moon...case closed.....

OzmO

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 22735
  • Drink enough Kool-aid and you'll think its healthy
Re: Did America Land On The Moon
« Reply #86 on: April 18, 2009, 11:37:09 AM »



for the same reason you aren't banging the same chick you were banging when you were 18..been there done that....time to move on

lolololo

Nordic Superman

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 6670
  • Hesitation doesn't come easily in this blood...
Re: Did America Land On The Moon
« Reply #87 on: April 19, 2009, 03:11:26 AM »
okay.  bottom line.  in the 40 years since the moon landing...

Is there a single photograph from Earth of ANY of the multiple landing wreckage?  We left moon rovers, flags, golf clubs, and launching pad.

Surely there has to be one.

Well, obviously you're ignorant in regards to the science in question. I find it silly you make these statements and you haven't used Google.

It would require a mega telescope to get the resolution required to see a flag or other man made objects on the Moon even then it would have to be outside out atmosphere.

What's ironic is you bang on about "science" when it "seems" to back you up on the CT regarding 911 yet it's the first thing you ignore when promoting a CT about the moon landings being fake.

See: http://www.geocities.com/humealumni/flag.htm

And for the retards asking for the "coordinates": http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2005/11jul_lroc.htm
الاسلام هو شيطانية

Hugo Chavez

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 31865
Re: Did America Land On The Moon
« Reply #88 on: April 19, 2009, 03:23:33 AM »
Well, obviously you're ignorant in regards to the science in question. I find it silly you make these statements and you haven't used Google.

It would require a mega telescope to get the resolution required to see a flag or other man made objects on the Moon even then it would have to be outside out atmosphere.


I've always kinda wondered about that a bit.  I have a telescope that was given to me when I was a kid.  On the highest lens setting I can see pretty clearly individual craters.  The hardest part about being zoomed up that close is that it moves so fast so it's hard to stay locked on to a given spot long enough to check it out.  If I can see that kind of detail with my old telescope, why can't they get really good images with the huge fuckers?

Nordic Superman

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 6670
  • Hesitation doesn't come easily in this blood...
Re: Did America Land On The Moon
« Reply #89 on: April 19, 2009, 04:35:57 AM »
I've always kinda wondered about that a bit.  I have a telescope that was given to me when I was a kid.  On the highest lens setting I can see pretty clearly individual craters.  The hardest part about being zoomed up that close is that it moves so fast so it's hard to stay locked on to a given spot long enough to check it out.  If I can see that kind of detail with my old telescope, why can't they get really good images with the huge fuckers?

The known laws of physics show that you can't possible see the detail required to see these man made objects on the moon due to the lack of ability to resolve at the required angles.

You might think you can see every rock and spec of dust and that you should be able to simple zoom in but I assure you that's not the case. If you can find evidence debunking that post about the required angles let me know - but I'm sure some Soviet scientist would have already let the world know.

That article shows that the telescope would need a mirror 360 feet across, plus it would have to be in outer space. Nobody has the resources to spend on constructing that simple to test some mundane and easily debunked CT.

It is a fact there are reflectors on the moon which I'm sure anybody you test given the right equipment.

But I guess the laws of physics could be conspiring with the government about the whole Moon landing issue? :P
الاسلام هو شيطانية

Hugo Chavez

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 31865
Re: Did America Land On The Moon
« Reply #90 on: April 19, 2009, 05:06:03 AM »
The known laws of physics show that you can't possible see the detail required to see these man made objects on the moon due to the lack of ability to resolve at the required angles.

You might think you can see every rock and spec of dust and that you should be able to simple zoom in but I assure you that's not the case. If you can find evidence debunking that post about the required angles let me know - but I'm sure some Soviet scientist would have already let the world know.

That article shows that the telescope would need a mirror 360 feet across, plus it would have to be in outer space. Nobody has the resources to spend on constructing that simple to test some mundane and easily debunked CT.

It is a fact there are reflectors on the moon which I'm sure anybody you test given the right equipment.

But I guess the laws of physics could be conspiring with the government about the whole Moon landing issue? :P
first, I believe we went to the moon so I'm not approaching it from an angle to prove we didn't.  I just don't get why telescopes can't see that kind of detail on the moon.  I mean we can get pretty good images light years away but we can't see where a moon rover went apeshit for 23 miles on the landscape?  In fact didn't they leave the moon rover there?  So you understand the laws of physics, I don't, please educated me.  Why can't we see this kind of detail?  Don't quote from an article, explain to me since you have a great understanding of physics.

Hugo Chavez

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 31865
Re: Did America Land On The Moon
« Reply #91 on: April 19, 2009, 05:10:42 AM »
I'm sorry, one more thing, did you actually say a mirror would have to be 360 feet across AND have to be in outer space to see that detail on the moon?

OzmO

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 22735
  • Drink enough Kool-aid and you'll think its healthy
Re: Did America Land On The Moon
« Reply #92 on: April 19, 2009, 09:46:11 AM »
Well, obviously you're ignorant in regards to the science in question. I find it silly you make these statements and you haven't used Google.

It would require a mega telescope to get the resolution required to see a flag or other man made objects on the Moon even then it would have to be outside out atmosphere.

What's ironic is you bang on about "science" when it "seems" to back you up on the CT regarding 911 yet it's the first thing you ignore when promoting a CT about the moon landings being fake.

See: http://www.geocities.com/humealumni/flag.htm

And for the retards asking for the "coordinates": http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2005/11jul_lroc.htm

Bump for Sampson123   
 :o


ToxicAvenger

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 26516
  • I thawt I taw a twat!
Re: Did America Land On The Moon
« Reply #93 on: April 19, 2009, 09:55:22 AM »
carpe` vaginum!

Bindare_Dundat

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 12227
  • KILL CENTRAL BANKS, BUY BITCOIN.
Re: Did America Land On The Moon
« Reply #94 on: April 19, 2009, 10:00:51 AM »
first, I believe we went to the moon so I'm not approaching it from an angle to prove we didn't.  I just don't get why telescopes can't see that kind of detail on the moon.  I mean we can get pretty good images light years away but we can't see where a moon rover went apeshit for 23 miles on the landscape?  In fact didn't they leave the moon rover there?  So you understand the laws of physics, I don't, please educated me.  Why can't we see this kind of detail?  Don't quote from an article, explain to me since you have a great understanding of physics.

me too, I remember seeing craters and shit through a Sears telescope pretty clearly. I would like a dumbed down version of why we can't see these things through the massive telescopes we have on earth.

ToxicAvenger

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 26516
  • I thawt I taw a twat!
Re: Did America Land On The Moon
« Reply #95 on: April 19, 2009, 10:11:49 AM »
me too, I remember seeing craters and shit through a Sears telescope pretty clearly. I would like a dumbed down version of why we can't see these things through the massive telescopes we have on earth.


i'd just like to know why there is NO blast crater under the LEM

and NO stars are visible on the moon...there should be thousands visible since there is no atmosphere

i challange someone to find me 1 pic that shows stars





carpe` vaginum!

The ChemistV2

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 2008
Re: Did America Land On The Moon
« Reply #96 on: April 19, 2009, 10:58:39 AM »

i'd just like to know why there is NO blast crater under the LEM

and NO stars are visible on the moon...there should be thousands visible since there is no atmosphere

i challange someone to find me 1 pic that shows stars







The black sky should be full of stars, yet none are visible in any of the Apollo photographs.

This claim is one I hear frequently, and is one of the easiest to refute. The answer is very simple: they are too faint. The Apollo photos are of brightly lit objects on the surface of the Moon, for which fast exposure settings were required. The fast exposures simply did not allow enough starlight into the camera to record an image on the film. For the same reason, images of the Earth taken from orbit also lack stars. The stars are there; they just don't appear in the pictures. The hoax advocates often argue that stars should be visible, and some of their claims are valid, however they fail to recognize the difference between "seeing" stars and "photographing" stars. The astronauts could have recorded star images in their photos by increasing exposures, but they were not there to take star pictures. The purpose of the photos was to record the astronauts' activities on the surface of the Moon.




ToxicAvenger

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 26516
  • I thawt I taw a twat!
Re: Did America Land On The Moon
« Reply #97 on: April 19, 2009, 11:04:25 AM »
The black sky should be full of stars, yet none are visible in any of the Apollo photographs.

This claim is one I hear frequently, and is one of the easiest to refute. The answer is very simple: they are too faint. The Apollo photos are of brightly lit objects on the surface of the Moon, for which fast exposure settings were required. The fast exposures simply did not allow enough starlight into the camera to record an image on the film. For the same reason, images of the Earth taken from orbit also lack stars. The stars are there; they just don't appear in the pictures. The hoax advocates often argue that stars should be visible, and some of their claims are valid, however they fail to recognize the difference between "seeing" stars and "photographing" stars. The astronauts could have recorded star images in their photos by increasing exposures, but they were not there to take star pictures. The purpose of the photos was to record the astronauts' activities on the surface of the Moon.





convenient!


ok how about NON-parallel shadows of rocks on the moon?
1 light source (ie sun) = parallel shadows
carpe` vaginum!

The ChemistV2

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 2008
Re: Did America Land On The Moon
« Reply #98 on: April 19, 2009, 11:23:27 AM »
convenient!


ok how about NON-parallel shadows of rocks on the moon?
1 light source (ie sun) = parallel shadows
In many photographs the shadow side of the astronauts appear illuminated, while the shadow side of rocks appear totally black.
This Apollo 17 photograph [see photo] is a good example of the above hoax claim. The explanation is apparent from the photo itself. Look at the astronaut's feet and you will see that the shadow in this area is just as dark as that of the foreground rocks. The lunar surface acts as a reflector to illuminate the shadow side of the astronaut. At the elevation of the astronaut's feet, and the foreground rocks, this reflector surface is mostly covered by the adjacent shadows. However, at the elevation of the astronaut's head and torso, the shadows cover a much smaller percentage of the surface. For example, on a flat surface the angular distance from horizon to horizon is 180 degrees. At an elevation of five feet, a one-foot wide shadow subtends an angle of 11.4 degrees, or only 6% of the distance from horizon to horizon. At two inches above the ground, this shadow subtends an angle of 143 degrees, or nearly 80% of the surface. Furthermore, the rocks are darker and less reflective than the astronaut's white space suit.

Shadows cast on the lunar surface should be parallel. Some shadows in the Apollo photos are not parallel indicating more than one light source, thus the photos are fakes. Again there is a sound explanation; it is a simple a matter of perspective. A photo is a two-dimensional representation of a three-dimensional world, hence parallel lines may not appear as such on film. We all know how lines on a highway appear to diverge as they approach the observer, yet we know they are parallel. Another important factor that comes into play here is the slope of the ground. Let's consider two shadows - one cast on an upward slope and the other on a downward slope. If viewed from the side, these shadows would appear to go off in different directions. However, if viewed from high above, they would be seen as parallel. In other words, looks can be deceiving. There is no evidence of NASA trickery here.

This photograph [see photo], taken on Earth, is an excellent example illustrating how perspective causes shadows to appear non-parallel when seen on film. In this example [see photo] the astronaut on the right is standing on a small rise. The sloping ground has caused his shadow to elongate and appear at a different angle than the shadow of the astronaut on the left. Also note, if two spotlights produced the shadows then each astronaut would have two shadows.


SAMSON123

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 8670
Re: Did America Land On The Moon
« Reply #99 on: April 19, 2009, 12:09:51 PM »
When all of the theories are finished being 'refuted' and all of the excuses given for discrepencies...the truth will finally come out that there NEVER WAS A MOON LANDING!!!!

No need arguing anymore about the matter...americans fall for every hoax, hoodwink, sham, fraud and trick. The sad part is they all defend the LIE to their deaths and when the TRUTH is spoken it is (despite all evidence and proof to back it up) DISMISSED...

Carry on with the arguing... it is interesting for argument sake if nothing else.

Now about those black skies and backgrounds....how come no astronaut took pictures of the stars on the way to the moon?

Why does the background landscape just suddenly ENDS as oppose to fading away as normal backgrounds do?

The light side of the moon is hundreds of degrees hot and the dark side hundreds of degrees cold...how did these astronauts manage to stay on the light side without problems?

How come when the video that was shot on the moon is played at 2x it appears like people walking around normally?

How come no one is allowed to examine the space suits (even today)?

How did the astronauts and camers/file survive the high radiation levels of space and the moon?

There is no atmosphere on the moon so the suits had to be pressurized in order for the men to survive...how could a plain cotton and plastic suit be pressurized? How come the suits show no sign of pressurization in the videos?

C