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

m!ndweak wrote:

to pablo and LQ

i skimmed through page three on that link....and most of the claim that i read was we faked the moon to get the media attention off of the Vietnam war......but i dont buy that. i know there has to be a way bigger need for this lie than that.

so for you two, what is the theory you guys have on the reason we faked it? and if it was just for the war why have they continued to fund NASA to this day? if it had died out it would be forgotten except for the small black and white pic in a history book

I believe that Pablo mentioned earlier that the US was behind the Soviet Union in the so-called "space race." The Russians, put the first cosmonaut into low orbit and then we followed up with Alan Shephard. I will defer to Pablo, but I believe it was the whole red, white & blue vs the "evil empire" of the USSR. We just could not allow our enemy to beat us to the Moon. Plus, JFK threw down the gauntlet, when he declared that we would put a man on the moon before the end of the decade.

It was the "good guys" vs the "bad guys" scenario and the USA needed a big positive (to counter Viet Nam, JFK/MLK/RFK assassinations, unrest on college campuses, flower power, etc) and get all of America excited again. America bought into the NASA program, money poured into the NASA budget, and it became must see TV for the Apollo launches from Cape Canaveral. Putting a man on the Moon was the great achievement that would make America feel good about themselves despite all the crap going on domestically/civil unrest and with the war. Talk anyone who were young adults in the 60's, they will probably confirm what I said.

Pablo, you probably can explain this better....

Correction: America bought into the NASA propaganda...

As cited in:

L. D. Smullin and G. Fiocco, Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers Proceedings 50, 1703 (1962)

Researchers at MIT had already succeeded in observing laser light pulses reflected from the lunar surface using a laser with millisecond pulse length in 1962.

Locating tiny lunar reflectors would thence serve no scientific purpose, given that a collimated laser beam from Earth spreads over 6km in diameter (by the time it reaches the moon's surface).

Thanx for the clarification.

btw, I don't see a whole lot of use in calling someone such as myself a troll- I'm not pushing some position just to cause problems- I have had genuine doubts about the Apollo Program since during when it was going on. Are you saying that everybody who holds a position opposed to your own is a troll? Is there no room (in your way of thinking) for open, public debate of controversial issues? Is it, in other words, impossible that someone disagree with UNLESS they were a troll?

Would YOU stake your life on the Apollo Program having been real?

I have said,, and now repeat, I certainly would NOT stake MY life on the Apollo Program having been a hoax - I lean that way very strongly; but am completely open to being proven wrong - and do not, by any means, rule out that possibility.

Please permit me to ask you one question, ok? Have you actually looked over the picture (I linked to) of the Lunar Module (upper and lower stages)?

http://centerforaninformedamerica.com/moondoggie-2/

about a third of the page down, last photo of the Lunar Module before the two cut-away diagrams of it.

IF you have, do you REALLY believe that that thing was capable of all that was claimed about it? Truthfully, it looks like it was made out of light-weight construction paper PLUS scotch tape PLUS amateurish cutting PLUS a zipper or two. In my opinion, that one foto says more than all the other arguments I could muster - the thing just looks like a joke - I can not imagine PROFESSIONAL space-vehicle builders building such a weak-look piece of bleep; nor imagine any professional astronaut climbing into one for a real mission to the Moon.. Can you? Really?

Opticus Majoris,

This is no small point. It WAS the case that they were already bouncing (laser) signals off the Moon and back; so no special reflector was needed or would serve any purpose (especially since, contrary to the belief of many people, Lasers do spread out (not nearly as much as does "normal" light; but, given the distance to the Moon; we ARE talking about a huge area.

Further, the ACCURACY of their measurements was plenty good enough - there was and is no need (or ability) to get any more precise with any would-be "reflector". After all, the Moon is pretty good at reflecting (Sun) light quite well; a much more focused light, such as a laser, would be a "lead-pipe cinch" at a ridiculously low price.

Besides, even IF NASA put a reflector on the Moon, that would be no proof that it was put there by MEN during a MANNED Mission. It'd be millions of times cheaper and safer to do it without humans on board (just as it is to land robotic rovers, etc).

Pablo Novi wrote:

Would YOU stake your life on the Apollo Program having been real?

Yes.

Defense contractor wrote:

Pablo Novi wrote:

Would YOU stake your life on the Apollo Program having been real?

Yes.

+1

absolutely wrote:

Defense contractor wrote:

Yes.

+1

I think I would as well. Too many people had to be in on it. Also too much risk faking it more than once.

LQ,

I probably can NOT explain it much better than you did! (Stop stealing all my reasons to brag on my own sorry a**, bleep it! (lol).

Please permit me to give it another go - which might very well be no big improvement on either what I said earlier or what you've just said (imo, quite well!).

1) Just as the War OF Terror has been the US Gov's pretext for ENDLESS WARS and ENDLESS POLICE STATES; before 9/11, the PRETEXT was, "COMMUNISM". This previous boogey-man held sway over the great majority of the people of the world, INCLUDING Americans for about a CENTURY - that's one great boogey-man. During WWI, the US Gov labeled ALL opponents (pacifists and non-pacifists) of the World War as "commies". It labeled all labor-organizers as "commies". It labeled pretty muc EVERYBODY who opposed any injustice committed by the US Gov as "commies". During my childhood, the RED SCARE tactic was in full operation. I literally went to bed each night in deathly fear of "commie" woman-rapers and baby-eaters (or was it, baby-rapers and woman-eaters? lol). WE ALL DID. That psychological campaign was UNIVERSAL throughout the US and it was SUPER-EFFECTIVE.

2) WITHIN THAT CONTEXT, EVERYTHING was portrayed as a world-wide battle between two completely opposing systems: (US) Capitalism vs (USSR) Communism. The examples were everywhere and everywhen. For example, the US War vs Vietnam was presented as (US) capitalism's stand against the commie "domino effect". Supposedly if one country "fell" to the commies, the others would fall soon afterwards. (It should make one wonder what kind of a system could that effectively win the millions over in such `short periods of time - but that's neither "here nor there" in this discussion here and now).

3) THIS THEN HIGHLIGHTS THE "WHY" OF THE IMPORTANCE OF THE "SPACE RACE". IF "communism" was so evil, so corrupt, so anti-people, how in the world could they be ahead of us "good guys"; much less many years ahead? The whole began asking exactly this question. So it WAS an IDEOLOGICAL threat to the Red Scare PROPAGANDA an entire generation of Americans had been weened on (I can not possibly over-emphasize how fantastical and fanatical and widespread was this belief, this FEAR. (Somehow, they could just take over your mind and make you do exactly the opposite of what the real you wanted to do - pretty scare stuff!)

4) VIETNAM: This was another HUGE EXAMPLE of the world-wide supposed struggle between good (the US) and evil (the commies). And, the US Gov was getting it a** kicked all over South-East Asia. The ONLY thing it was winning at was in destroying property and killing millions of innocents. Within THAT context, the US super-rich, had themselves started the "Anti-War Movement" thru the "liberal wing of the Democratic Party". It was called the "Mobe" (for Mobilization); and it's aim was to hamstring the anticipated anti-war movement BEFORE it had really even risen.

I KNOW this all too well, because at every single step of the process of helping to end that war, our Anti-War Movement encountered the all-out resistance of the "MOBE" "wing" of our Movement. They never stopped demanding just the very things which would most hold back our effectiveness:

i) that THEY decide who could and could not be members of the Anti-War Movement (you HAD to profess complete non-violence no matter what, you couldn't even be open to working with any "commies", EVERYTHING had to ultimatly support Democratic Party candidates and campaigns, THEY insisted on THEIR VETO power over ALL our slogans and literature.

Their KEY TACTIC was exaggerating the danger of the more RADICAL elements within our Movement - and nobody was supposedly more radical than the "commies".

Still, more and more, we outmanuevered them and won the leadership of millions of Americans; in the process radicalizing ourselves and everybody influenced by us! (In San Diego, at the first demonstrations I personally attended, there were EIGHT PEOPLE there, count 'em, 8! - and it remained that way for the first 6 months. This was going on in San Diego while in L.A., the average demonstration had 100,000 people! (and in San Fran, up to 1,000,000 people - I KNOW this because I regularly attended such demonstrations in those (and many other cities across North America).

But it was definitely NOT just our efforts that contributed to the rapid growth of our Movement. It was the sheer, unadulterated VIOLENCE of the US war machine (splashed continuously on the nightly news). AND it was the ever-increasing victories of the Vietnamese - people started to ask, "How is this possible? How is it possible that such poorly fed and armed people, vastly outnumbered and out-ARMED by the US side; how could they hold on? How could they possibly be winning?

5) MASSIVE WAR-SPENDING = MASSIVE UNDER-FUNDING OF HELP-PEOPLE PROGRAMS: To finance that war (in which the US Gov dropped more bombs on that tiny country than all the bombs in all of human history dropped by all armies!) two main things had to be done: a) CUT ALL SOCIAL SERVICES TO THE BONE; b) put the next generations in debt thru gargantuun budget-deficits thru US bank loans to finance the war.

6) ALREADY PRE-EXISTING OTHER MASS MOVEMENTS IN THE US (and secondarily world-wide). Those were also the days of the: Black Liberation Movement, Chicano Liberation Movement, Women's Liberation Movement, Gay Liberation Movement, other-minority Liberation Movements, Labor/Union Organizing drives. In sum, the American people were getting increasingly hard for our rulers to control.

So, as Legit Question pointed out, the US Gov (of, by and FOR the AMERICAN super-rich) faced a convergence of "negative" factors - the general, world-wide lessening of US influence, combined with specific loss of face in the Space Race PLUS the specific massive defeat in 'Nam, plus the ever-spreading mass popular movements (in the US and world-wide). It was truly an ALL-SIDED crisis for the super-rich of America.

In fact, there was an article in Newsweek, THE #1 weekly news magazine at that time, which stated that "there are currently 2-3 MILLION (Pablo's emphasis) revolutionaries IN the US at the present time". SOMETHING, SOMETHING BIG, HAD TO BE DONE.

ENTER APOLLO!

Apollo, to a HUGE extent "solved" or at least pacified large segments of the US population for significant chunks of time. Can I/we pinpoint ONE KEY REASON FOR THE US multi-millionaires using Apollo for that? Not really. It worked against so many of THEIR problems - so, one is certainly tempted to think that THEY USED Apollo just so.

As I said earlier in this thread, this tactic was EXTREMELY EFFECTIVE. Even at our most militant, million-"man" marches in San Fran, the main thing we talked about was NOT the Vietnam War; it was about the glorious Apollo Program! The number of` anti-war protestors was greatly reduced due to the Apollo "successes" - how could one really oppose the US Gov when it was so gloriously advancing mankind's struggle forward???

And, certainly most people (including myself for some years) BELIEVED that "America had leap-frogged ahead of those damned 'commies'" - so all was right again in the world.

plusser of 2 wrote:

absolutely wrote:

+1

I think I would as well. Too many people had to be in on it. Also too much risk faking it more than once.

+3.

I've previously in this thread addressed your:

1) "Too many people had to be in on it" (see the Manhattan Project - which kept its secrecy FROM the American people for decades despite 10s of thousands of people working on it 40 hours a week!)

and

2) "Too much risk faking it more than once" (BUT, the very easy and all-encompassing success of the Apollo 11, gave the US super-rich every reason to expect that further "missions" would bring further success while limiting the whole cash-cow program to only one mission would tend to raise increasing doubts, "Why just once???" After all, the FIRST ONE was, by far, the hardest to pull off. After that, it was mostly just "rinse and repeat". But then, as soon as the 2nd one, Apollo 12, people were already getting bored with the unprecedented success rate of Apollo; and started mass complaining about NASA programming interrupting "I Love Lucy" (or whatever was THE TV "thing" of the day). So, along comes Apollo 13; a moment-to-moment "thriller" which re-captured American interest very deeply.

3) As to you "THINKING" you'd bet your actual LIFE on the Apollo Missions being true; I'd be a bit careful if I were you. The whole world once 100% believed that the Sun went around the Earth. Bascially everybody was 100% SURE. I bet if we had polled them back then; they too would have "bet their lives on that belief"; yet 100% of them were wrong.

btw, OUTSIDE OF THE US, the vast majority of the world's people believe that the Apollo Project was a HOAX. (Similarly, outside the US, the vast majority of the world (except Canada as the only exception) believes that USAma Bin Laden did not do 9/11; but that instead, it was an inside job by the US Gov (or elements within it). Proving that Americans are just as easily misled by our government and other peoples usually are by theirs; AND, the "closer to home" the issue, the more the brainwashing is pushed and the more effective it tends to be.

plusser of 2 wrote:

absolutely wrote:

+1

I think I would as well. Too many people had to be in on it. Also too much risk faking it more than once.

Exactly! And what would also be the purpose of faking 13 and putting the astronaut's spouses and family in a panic crisis? I can just imagine Lovell going over the dramatic Holloywood script written by NASA and saying "WTF!....I ain't doing this sh*t...go find some other sucker!" ?

The stupid idiotic conspiracy theorists fail miserably in explaining 13, which destroys their whole stupid logic on their goofy idea of faked lunar landings! ????

Reformed Faked Moon Landing Conspiracy Theorist wrote:

plusser of 2 wrote:

I think I would as well. Too many people had to be in on it. Also too much risk faking it more than once.

Exactly! And what would also be the purpose of faking 13 and putting the astronaut's spouses and family in a panic crisis? I can just imagine Lovell going over the dramatic Holloywood script written by NASA and saying "WTF!....I ain't doing this sh*t...go find some other sucker!" ?

The stupid idiotic conspiracy theorists fail miserably in explaining 13, which destroys their whole stupid logic on their goofy idea of faked lunar landings! ????

Please read "Wagging the Moondoggie Part 9", the author destroys the Apollo 13 story. Since you won't read the link, I will paste the explanation. Lovell is a liar.

"I wonder why it is, by the way, that the Apollo 13 astronauts were said to have been very cold throughout their return flight in their allegedly crippled spaceship? As recalled by Jim Lovell, “The trip was marked by discomfort beyond the lack of food and water. Sleep was almost impossible because of the cold. When we turned off the electrical systems, we lost our source of heat, and the sun streaming in the windows didn’t much help … It wasn’t simply that the temperature dropped to 38° F: the sight of perspiring walls and wet windows made it seem even colder. We considered putting on our spacesuits, but they would have been bulky and too sweaty … We found the CM a cold, clammy tin can when we started to power up. The walls, ceiling, floor, wire harnesses, and panels were all covered with droplets of water.”

"There is so much wrong with that brief description of the flight that it is difficult to know where to begin critiquing it, but let’s start by pondering why they would have been short on food and water. The mission ended up returning a few days early, so unless they overindulged the first few days, there should have been more than enough food and water for the trio in the conjoined command and lunar modules. And as for the cold, how could that 250° F “sun streaming in the windows” not help much What does Lovell use to warm himself at home – a blowtorch?

"As for the water droplets covering the interior of the command and lunar modules, wouldn’t many of those droplets have been airborne if they were in a zero-gravity environment? Wouldn’t the inside of the module have looked something like a snow-globe? And as for opting not to don the spacesuits, that is just laughably absurd.

"As already noted, without the suits the only thing that would have been protecting the astronauts from the hazards of space was a double layer of aluminum foil. For that reason alone it is inconceivable that they wouldn’t have been wearing them. And now we find that they were also facing near-freezing conditions and yet they still chose not to utilize the suits – because the suits were, you know, a little bulky, and it is much better to nearly freeze to death than it is to break a little sweat."

I'm not going to sling mud even though you resorted to making insults. An insult is not an argument. Your defense of Apollo 13 is rather weak. Try again.

Defense contractor wrote:

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.

How did Van Allen know this? Did he actually go into space and experiment or is it just theoretical?

Van Allen belts explained, or perhaps something like it (1,400 years ago):

"O Company of Jinn and Mankind! If you are able to pass beyond the regions of the heavens and the earth, then pass. You will not pass except by the authority (of God)"

Quran: Chapter (55) (The Most Gracious)

This is the Book, no doubts in it (for those who fear God)

Quran: Chapter (2) (The Cow)

A big part of why you are not taken seriously, are premature conclusions like this, only demonstrating your own lack of research and knowledge on the subject. In the real world, NASA thought a lot about this problem, they have explained it, because there is an explanation.https://www.space.com/22597-space-poop-astronaut-toilet-explained.html

Legit question wrote:

NASA, obviously never thought about the human waste problem when planning this hoax. No bathrooms, no storage for human waste in the capsule, did they use a pee & ass vacuum cleaner? It was never explained because there is no explanation.

When are these NASA believers going to wake up? Apollo is such a farce and full of holes.

You're obfuscating (what's new ?). The CM was covered in a mirrored insulation that was designed to reflect solar heat with layers of thermal insulation underneath that. The remaining CM heat sources simply did not produce sufficient heat to replace the heat lost to to space by radiance. So the capsule interior cooled. The explosion also destroyed the CM's main water coolant storage tanks where the crew had to conserve their drinking water supply for use of the CM's cooling system:

And you haven't explained where the A13 crew was at for several days. Here's the ABC footage of re-entry & splashdown. Hundreds of witnesses on the Iwa Jima. Surprise!...surprise!...it's Lovell, Haise & Swigert coming out of the capsule (@ 3:00 in):

Weren't they suppose to be in some secret NASA studio faking the mission? ??

Seriously, show some respect for these guys. If it wasn't for the fine efforts of NASA, they would have ended up like the crew of Apollo 1.

God Speed

Ground Control to Major Tom wrote:

A big part of why you are not taken seriously, are premature conclusions like this, only demonstrating your own lack of research and knowledge on the subject.

In the real world, NASA thought a lot about this problem, they have explained it, because there is an explanation.

That's got to be the best user name for this debate. ? So funny that I had to go watch the video: