Finally...Unequivocal Proof That the Apollo Moon Landings Were Staged on Earth

I didn't write "Comedy" after my rip on LQ as reference to the bad sentence that I was criticizing. I used it to throw his own silly vernacular back in his face. It was comedy that he was making fun of a poster's intellect while posting that trash. One of the sentences he wrote was wrong and it was clear to anyone with a brain (not moon-landing hoaxers) which sentence that was.

The ad hominems will keep coming if you keep acting like idiots. I'm not going to address the "major differences" because you all and your "points" have been getting destroyed by people who want to waste their time, and yet you blindly claim otherwise to try to rile up people to get them to answer your trolling further. Hard pass, tool.

I've now read a considerable chunk of the article you linked to and must say that I will not be critiqueing all of it; because virtually every single sentence is problematic in that it does NOT PROVE that NASA put men on the MOON. (Sure independent observers witnessed NASA take-offs and landings - but that tells us ZERO about what happened in between - and a LOT of these references are to the witnessing of Low-Earth Orbit stuff!)

I will comment on one additional thing though:

"During the Apollo 10 mission The Corralitos Observatory was linked with the CBS news network. Images of the spacecraft going to the Moon were broadcast live.[14] :p. 17"

This is NOT TRUE. There were NO LIVE FEEDS of the Apollo Missions (beyond Low Earth Orbit). ALL of what we were shown were "re-broadcasts" of earlier NASA tapes. THEIR stuff was supposedly not PHYSICALLY suited for broadcast, so it had to be displayed on a black-and white TV monitor and then RE-filmed. No one (outside of NASA) has any proof of how much "processing" was done BEFORE the networks were allowed to RE-FILM it. Thus there is no "chain of evidence" that what we were shown proves NASA sent men to the Moon.

We should also note that even back then, COLOR FILM existed. Why the BLEEP did NASA force the public to watch the lowest-possible, grainy, BLACK-AND-WHITE footage? Couldn't it be because the better the quality and the more the color, the easier it would have been to spot the forgeries???

ABOUT THE ILLUMINATION OF IMPORTANT PARTS OF THE LUNAR LANDER WHILE IN THE SHADE:

My apologies to the poster who earlier in this thread challenged me on this point. He/she claimed that that stuff was visible due to back-scattering off the surface of the Moon. My apology is that I can't find the original post; but here's my answer.

In the VERY PICTURES that show the in-the-shadows: USA sign, Lunar Lander components, and the 2nd astronaut exiting from the Lunar Lander - we can see LARGE AREAS IN THE SHADOWS - in which no details at all can be seen - as is to be expected in conditions of shade without an atmosphere. YET ONLY (parts of) the Lunar Lander and the American flag & sign, AND the astronaut (!) can be seen - and can be seen SUPER-CLEARLY. This is impossible under any such circumstances (unless NASA brought along lighting equipment which they claim they did not do).

Additionally, rocks on the very surrface of the "Moon", objects which should get the most illumination dye to "back scattering"; are completely in the dark with no details visible. So much for "back scattering" being the source of the illumination in the shadow areas on the Moon..

You can CLAIM anything you want to. In any event, I am not, in the least, "try[ing] to rile up people". Any independent observer could easily see that I am being as careful as can be in both content and style to avoid any hint of subjectivity and/or of trying to provoke subjectivity. Even in the face of my/our opponents resorting to all kinds of unprincipled attacks.

You say, "The ad hominems will keep coming if you keep acting like idiots. I'm not going to address the "major differences" because you all and your "points" have been getting destroyed ..."

Pablo: Clearly, resorting to UNPRINCIPLED behavior is self-admittedly part of your SOP. You can neither point to either: me acting like an idiot; NOR have my major points been destroyed.

btw, I don't know what this means, "Hard pass ..."

LQ your not alone. i doubted the moon landings since i was in 7th grade, before i ever saw any proof.

but you must realize here on LR there are so many sheep, and if you could take them to the moon and stay a full year looking around to prove it to them they still would claim the nasa studio was real.

these are the same people who are now on the Renato/rekrunner bandwagon that PEDs and EPO dont work. you could inject them with massive dosages have them run a WR and they would still claim it was just a change in their training that was the ticket.

i dont doubt we have sent things to the moon and mars etc...but no i dont think MAN has gone past our upper atmosphere. i think the highest MAN has gone is to the space station, because the passing the van allen belt is deadly to all life forms. the space shuttle is way more advanced than anything they had in the 60-70s apollo missions and has it ever gone past the van allen belt? no, nothing goes past that but machines, and even then when they go past things go wrong.

Thanks for the kind words.

The shuttle was also called the "orbiter" because that is what is was design to do, orbit the Earth.

Van Allen himself said it is possible to go thru the belts if time of exposure is limited. Apollo avoided most of the inner belt and passed thru the outer belt in a short time. This has been addressed already here in this thread.

LQ - the transmissions were not instantaneous. There is about a 2 second delay between mission control and the Astronauts. In some clips you can even hear MC then the echo of their transmission prior to the Astronauts voices. They delay is often not noticed. In some clips from documentaries it's been cleaned up to sound better.

As it turns out the radiation exposure was no worse than that of a typical nuclear plant worker per year. Read and learn.

https://www.popsci.com/blog-network/vintage-space/apollo-rocketed-through-van-allen-belts#page-4

PLEASE scroll down this page about 1/3rd of the way, to the last photograph before the cut-away diagrams of how the Lunar Lander was filled with stuff. In that photo, we supposedly see the Lunar Lander (upper and lower parts).

PLEASE take a CLOSE LOOK at it.

The lower section looks like something constructed by grammar school kids (with the help of their parents, perhaps). The outside looks like it is made of gray-colored construction paper, cut UNEVENLY !, held together by "scotch tape".

The upper section looks not much better quality. We see what clearly look like white-colored construction paper-panels, that are clearly bent and warped and don't seem close to making a proper seal any panel with the surrounding panels.

At the right side of these white panels is a zipper-looking thingy - what the bleep is THAT doing there?

Imagine you are going to be one of three passengers on this thing, while traveling at 10s of thousands of miles per hour, up thru Earth's dense atmosphere, then thru the Van Allen Radiation Belts, then into outer space (filled with unshielded-by-Earth's magnetosphere Solar radiation0, then to Lunar orbit and landing (with a massive rocket blowing out extremely hot gases right below your a**es; Then spending a few days on the Lunar surface (when not out on the surface itself). All while being constantly bombarded with micro-meteorites AND during the SOLAR FLARE MAXIMUM (1969-1970).

I defy ANY OF YOU to swear that you'd risk your life for a half-million-mile trip in this CONTRAPTION!

PLEASE, look at it closely!!!

-----

Btw, to help locate this particular picture, it is preceded by the following paragraphs:

"While what is depicted in the images may initially appear, to the untrained eye, to be some kind of mock-up that someone cobbled together in their backyard to make fun of NASA, I can assure you that it is actually an extremely high-tech manned spacecraft capable of landing on the surface of the Moon. And incredibly enough, it was also capable of blasting off from the Moon and flying 69 miles back up into lunar orbit! Though not immediately apparent, it is actually a two-stage craft, the lower half (the part that looks like a tubular aluminum framework covered with Mylar and old Christmas wrapping paper) being the descent stage, and the upper half (the part that looks as though it was cobbled together from old air conditioning ductwork and is primarily held together, as can be seen in the close-up, with zippers and gold tape) being the ascent stage."

"The upper half, of course, is the more sophisticated portion, being capable of lifting off and flying with enough power to break free of the Moon’s gravity and reach lunar orbit. It also, of course, possessed sophisticated enough navigational capabilities for it to locate, literally out in the middle of fucking nowhere, the command module that it had to dock with in order to get the astronauts safely back to Earth. It also had to catch that command module, which was orbiting the Moon at a leisurely 4,000 miles per hour."

and followed by the following lines:

"But we’ll get to all that a little later. I think we can all agree for now that such a sleek, stylish, well-designed craft would have no problem flying with that kind of power, precision and stability."

----

IF you care to, you might also inspect the cut-away diagrams of the (two-part) Lunar Lander Module. Not counting its 4 landling legs/pods, it is 8 feet across. In the upper part, IF YOU LOOK REALLY CLOSELY, you can find the "crew compartment". Three fully grown men had to spend days together in that tiny space (on both legs of the journey to/from the Moon. (They supposedly ate there, slept there, worked there and peed, farted and defecated there (right in front of each other seemingly).

mods can we finally kill this thread off already? just feeding the trolls and retards

Yes, NASA went back and edited the original audio tapes to "insert" the delay. I posted this fact a couple pages ago. Please listen to the first YouTube clip I posted when Houston spoke to the actorNOTS. There was NO delay. A conversation with somebody located 240,000 miles away would be ponderous- 2.6 sec pause for a round-trip transmission.

Plus, I posted another video where an actorNOT was hammering a metal post on the Moon. You can clearly hear "clanking" sounds. According to physics, sound does not travel in a vacuum- just another example of fakery from NASA. Please explain how sound can be heard in a vacuum.

Thanx for bringing this up.

Interesting isn't it that the clean-up workers at the Fukuoka Nuclear Power Plant were not outfitted with NASA space suits to protect them from that radiation! (It was acknowledged that they wouldn't work under those conditions).

Also quite interesting that the US Gov detonated a massive nuke up in the Van Allen Radiation Belts in hopes that it would blow a hole thru them, a hole thru which men could get to the Moon with less risk of radiation. Yet, the (n)ever successful US Military, instead of blowing a hole, added a whole new layer of radioactivity - one that was still active during the Apollo Missions.

Also, it was during 1969-1970 that the SOLAR MAXIMUM (of flare activity), a once every 11 years phenomenon, was at its height. The amount of radioactivity goes way up; and is more unpredictable than ever. NO PROBLEMA (astronaut guinea pigs!)

So we are supposed to believe that DESPITE ENDLESS and monumental failures of NASA and its US military overlord, PRIOR to Apollo; AND during the early Apollo testing and flights; on SIX of the missions, they had a PERFECT PERFORMANCE RECORD.

ugh why wrote:

mods can we finally kill this thread off already? just feeding the trolls and retards

This is a perfect example of a delusional person too lazy to do any research and brings nothing to the table.

ugh why wrote:

mods can we finally kill this thread off already? just feeding the trolls and retards

+1

It's getting really old. How many conspiracy topics are we going to recycle? These guys are trolling idiots, and the people engaging in the argument (getting trolled) are indeed retards for not realizing they're being trolled.

Legit question wrote:

This is a perfect example of a delusional person too lazy to do any research and brings nothing to the table.

... and there it is. The legit retard troll realizing someone isn't playing into the game. Anyone who won't play along is "too lazy to do any research and brings nothing to the table."

No, they are not feeding the troll. :)

You are the other two idiots are trolls. Plain and simple. Anyone who engages in your troll are retards and slow.

If people say that it's so easy to put a man on the Moon today, then why are Elon Musk's SpaceX rockets failing so badly?

.... and there it is wrote:

Legit question wrote:

This is a perfect example of a delusional person too lazy to do any research and brings nothing to the table.

... and there it is. The legit retard troll realizing someone isn't playing into the game. Anyone who won't play along is "too lazy to do any research and brings nothing to the table."

No, they are not feeding the troll. :)

You are the other two idiots are trolls. Plain and simple. Anyone who engages in your troll are retards and slow.

No, you demonstrate a lack of critical thinking and cannot present a case to support a pro NASA argument.

Newz wrote:

This is incredible -- Newsweek still exists.

I also thought that was the most shocking in this.

Go Pablo! You are slaying these NASA true believers with facts and diagrams and they still won't bother to look. "You can lead a horse to water...."

I wonder if they set up an outhouse on the Moon, LMAO!!!