First man on the moon - 45 years ago

[Paul Lake's Left Knee]

There is more than one moon, scientists estimate there could have been upto 18,000 in the earths history, some orbiting for a short space of time (a year or less) some for upto a decade, before they are fired back out of earth orbit by gravitational forces. That is of course if you believe the earth is more than 6,000 years old.

As for the landings, i believe they happened, i also believe that NASA came back with a load of shit photos so they touched them up, the cameras were chest mounted on the astronauts so they didnt know exactly what they were shooting at or if they were in focus, so NASA touched them up, these touched up photos give the head wobblers some ammunition when disputing the landings.

 

[RandomJ]

People who believe it's a hoax will always do so and will not have their mind changed despite the mountain of evidence that supports that man did land on the moon and every single conspiracy argument being easily explained. Just leave them to it if it makes them so happy.

 

[SWP's back]

That's a shit video. It's two men babbling. Then they start talking retroreflectors and lunar lasers. The Soviets also placed retroreflectors on the Moon. So they landed men on it did they?

Skashion, I've read your stuff on here before and I know that you know a lot about this subject.
In your opinion is there anything that could be taken as absolute proof that the moon landings happened?

Other than the films, pictures, tracking data and the fact that not one of the 8,000 odd involved in the conspiracy has come out and called it a fake?

 

[yeah whatever !!]

I'm well educated and I don't believe in the moon.

What's that big round thing in the sky that you can see at night when it's not cloudy then?

The ball from Phil jones last penalty.

 

[dazdon]

We live in a time of information and disinformation.

Johnny 5 has blown a gasket.

 

[TheMightyQuinn]

I'm well educated and I don't believe in the moon.

What's that big round thing in the sky that you can see at night when it's not cloudy then?

Heavens

 

[Ancient Citizen]

Using reason and evidence to believe the moon landings does not equate to gullibility.

Brian Cox has a very good two minute YouTube on this:

<a class="postlink" href="http://youtu.be/1aXuQ9Dg2gE" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://youtu.be/1aXuQ9Dg2gE</a>

That clip is like a bad D:Ream.

Why the fuck has he got that irritating smirk on his face whatever he is saying?
He could be talking about the Holocaust and still be grinning like a simpleton staring up a skirt.
Other than this he's quite informative.

 

[Skashion]

That's a shit video. It's two men babbling. Then they start talking retroreflectors and lunar lasers. The Soviets also placed retroreflectors on the Moon. So they landed men on it did they?

Skashion, I've read your stuff on here before and I know that you know a lot about this subject.
In your opinion is there anything that could be taken as absolute proof that the moon landings happened?

Absolute proof, no. I'd say there's plenty of evidence that is makes it very very likely. The amount of Moon rocks brought back would be proof number #1. Way more than we've found on Earth, and undamaged by passing through Earth's atmosphere at high temperatures. I think they brought back about 700 kg all told, whereas the Soviets managed less than 1 kg in the same condition as the Americans did. Highly suggestive of man, not robotics. There's also the issue that the American space program was way way behind the Soviets in robotics so some of what they did would be highly unlikely if man hadn't gone.

There's the pendulum experiment on one of the later Apollo missions. Low gravity is hard to simulate and that, in particular, would have been very difficult to simulate.

Then there's the LRO images, the LRO images confirmed a lot of it including decent rover-sized tracks, which, as I said earlier not likely to have been driven around by robotics. The LRO images also found Lunokhod 2, so we know those images are real. There has also been independent 3D terrain imaging based on those photos which come up with excellent matches of the photos taken by the Apollo 11 astronauts.

Then there's the technologically feasibility. The biggest problem was getting that amount of equipment into space. To this day we still cannot lift 100,000 kg into space but the Saturn V could. The Saturn V had enough thrust to get men to the Moon so I don't see why they wouldn't have gone. The Americans clearly and undeniably overcame the biggest hurdle.

Stack it all up, yeah, man has landed on the Moon, most likely on July 20th 1969 in my opinion.

 

[bakerdave76]

Some good stuff here
<a class="postlink" href="http://www.moonlandinghoax.org/index.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.moonlandinghoax.org/index.html</a>

 

[Wilf Wild 1937]

That's a shit video. It's two men babbling. Then they start talking retroreflectors and lunar lasers. The Soviets also placed retroreflectors on the Moon. So they landed men on it did they?

Skashion, I've read your stuff on here before and I know that you know a lot about this subject.
In your opinion is there anything that could be taken as absolute proof that the moon landings happened?

Other than the films, pictures, tracking data and the fact that not one of the 8,000 odd involved in the conspiracy has come out and called it a fake?

Ha,ha when did you change your name?