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

Ridicule or sarcasm of this type ... contributes NOTHING to the thread or the discussion.

Whichever side your putting down, could just as easily as you'e done, put down the other side. Yippie, "WE WON!" (NOT)

But even more to the point, your SINGLE SENTENCE tells us TONS about YOU!

1) You put down LR MB - as if the average poster/reader/participant is a dumb-bleep (supposedly, according to YOU,, "proven" by the length of this thread). {What length of this thread would have been "OK" in your almighty judgement?)

Personally, I DISOWN any association with such an ARROGANT PUT DOWN OF A SIGNIFICANT NUMBER OF PEOPLE. (Shame on you).

2)There is nothing INHERENTLY "ludicrous" about the title of this thread - this is just more ridicule, sarcasm & ARROGANCE on YOUR part. Who are you to "decide" what's a worthy title (or subject matter); REALLY, who the BLEEP are YOU to say such?? And when, and by who, are you "anointed" as arbiter of right and wrong, in style and content, here on LR? You some kind of a mod here?

3) "I haven't read the thread,..." WOW. The ULTIMATE ADMISSION of arrogance and COMPLETE LACK OF RESPECT (for ALL those who have posted in this thread, and for ALL those who have been reading along!)

Personally, I DISOWN any association with such an ARROGANT PUT DOWN OF A SIGNIFICANT NUMBER OF PEOPLE. (Shame on you).

Yes, that Fukuoka Atomic Plant workers didn't use NASA spacesuits from the 1960s proves that the Apollo Moon landings couldn't have taken place. Okay, I'm done here.

I've NEVER seen a chat room where there is ZERO REPETITION OF THREADS. In other words, it's SOP for the same topic to come up again, later - and I see exceedingly little harm in that. (If it was as ridiculous as you make it out to be, either those chat rooms would lose membership, even shutting down ... OR ... YOU'RE the PROBLEM; not the discussion.

Where and when in human discourse are discussions, even ones in which it APPEARS that one side has smashed the other; under what (never-before-occuring) circumstances might we see, for the FIRST TIME EVER, no repetition whatsoever of such topics?

Is it not the case, that new, originally-minority, views almost always get "stomped on" early on. Yet, SOME of them get re-discussed (some multiple-times) and SOME of them actually win over the majority later on. Where would we be if everytime one side "stomped" on the arguments of the other side - no further discussion was repeated?

I'll tell you where - centuries less developed, centuries more in the dark, than we are now.

THE "DARK AGES" LASTED ONE THOUSAND YEARS!

This is EXACTLY what defines the "Dark Ages" - ALL intellectual doubt (and minority opinions) were squelched; and, as a result, humanity as a whole, lost ONE THOUSAND YEARS - during which ALL science, ALL medicine, ALL KNOWLEDGE was stifled.

"try honesty" - YOU PROUD OF THAT?

-----

Besides, IF the deniers of the Moon Landings are wrong - the only harm would be some wasted time on the internet. But, IF the Apollo Moon Landings were HOAXED - unveiling one of the GREATEST BIG LIES in all of history - that would be worth almost any price. PLUS, it would TEND to focus MUCH MORE attention on US Gov public agencies - and hold their hands "closer to the fire" - to finally do what OUR tax dollars are paying them to do.

MAKE AMERICA GREAT, AGAIN! By NOT Sending AMERICANS "Back" To The Moon "AGAIN"????

Kudos to you: "Let's Get To The Bottom Of This"

It is NO SMALL POINT, especially for a country, such as the US itself, which just elected an AMERICAN PRESIDENT, elected on the basis of his PROMISE TO: MAKE AMERICA GREAT, AGAIN! ...

What could possibly even compete with an "AMERICAN FINALLY RETURNS TO THE MOON - AN EVEN GREATER STEP FOR MANKIND." ???

Remember, the billionaires spend multi-millions EVERY YEAR on advertising - if there is ONE THING THEY KNOW; it is HOW TO ADVERTISE / PROMOTE whatever it is that makes THEM the most PROFIT; AND that makes them look the best. So it is NOT even theoretically possible that none of the 545 American billionaires, including The Dumpster, and the ones that the Killary's (& Heart-Bern & Jill-Born & the Liberatardian) work for - it's not even theoretically possible that none of them remembered Apollo and all that AMERICAN GREATNESS - therefore, ALL of them CONSCIOUSLY DECIDED to NOT Send Men "BACK" To The Moon.

But, that's a bit hard to believe, isn't it??? They conned us this latest time with , "Make America Great, Again!" yet don't set us up for the BIGGEST BONANZA POSSIBLE - an AMERICAN "RETURN" TO THE MOON?

NOTHING ls could DISTRACT most AMERICANS (from all the hell going on IN OUR NAME, within the US and around the world)!

NOTHING else would make AMERICANS feel as proud of the US Gov as would an AMERICAN "Return" To The Moon!

No Way, Jose! No Way In Hell - would the SUPER-RICH pass up THIS opportunity ...

IF THEY H-A-D DONE IT BEFORE ....

FIFTY - BLEEPING - YEARS BEFORE!

For people who THINK / SUSPECT that the US Gov has lied to us about something important, the ONUS is not on us to PROVE it was a HOAX. Our ONLY ONUS is, IF there is reasonable doubt (and in this case there certainly is) ... our ONLY ONUS is to TRY to force an INDEPENDENT INVESTIGATION into the allegations. If not guilty, the US Gov (and its owners-and-operators, the 545 American billionaires) would have NOTHING TO FEAR from such an investigation; and lots to gain - re-confirming that American WAS Great back during Apollo; and absolutely CRUSHING the doubters and "conspiracy theorists".

-----

WHAT DID THE HEAD OF THE CIA, HIMSELF, SAY ABOUT US GOVERNMENT PROPAGANDA?

N.B. Back a half-century or so ago, the very head of the CIA, William Casey, said this,

“We’ll Know Our Disinformation Program Is Complete When Everything the American Public Believes Is False.”

WHAT DID THE CIA ACTUALLY D-O TO ACCOMPLISH THIS MASS-BRAIN-WASHING?

Around the same time, the CIA was infiltrating ALL the major American media (placing their own men in key positions of power throughout the US media) - the sole source of the "news" for 95++% of the American people (and now owned by ONLY 6 media-conglomerates - ALL bllionaire-owned!

HOW DID THE CIA DEAL WITH THOSE OPPOSED TO T-H-E-I-R MASS-BRAIN-WASHING?

Also, around the same time, the CIA, faced with wide-spread opposition to the JFK "Lone Gun Man Theory"; decided to organize an all-sided campaign to paint the JFK-hit exposers and ALL those concerned about the endless string of US Gov. conspiracies - to paint all of them with the brush of "conspiracy theorists" - who, thru the CIA's mass brain-washing program would be seen as either pathetically dumb, or hopelessly mislead, or driven by evil ("un-patriotic") agendas.

-----

PERHAPS, it's finally time to start "connecting the dots". The CIA did do ALL of the above. Then along comes Apollo; quite soon after they FIRST decided to mass-brain-wash the American people.

I REPEAT: I am NOT SURE that Apollo was HOAXED. But I AM SURE, that IF it was HOAXED, the CIA did an excellent job of brain-washing the American people into believing it actually happened.

Should we really be afraid of the Real Possibility that almost 50 years ago, the US Gov told us (just another of its endless string of) BIG LIES?

WHY WASN'T NASA-TYPE SPACESUIT TECHNOLOGY USED TO HELP PROTECT THE FUKUOKA NUCLEAR DISASTER CLEAN-UP WORKERS? (Though it is not, in itself ABSOLUTE PROOF that NASA FAKED APOLLO; it certainly is an interesting question!)

Some may try to use the existence of NASA spacesuit technology capable of resisting "highly dangerous radiation levels" (according to NASA itself) that was supposedly neither improved upon for DECADES nor used AS-IS to protect the Fukuoka Nuclear Power Plant clean-up workers - to use that FACT to claim that this is PROOF.

Others of us make NO SUCH C-L-A-I-M. In particular, I, Pablo Novi, do NOT claim it as proof.

OTOH, it sure is ONE HELL OF A CONUNDRUM; one hell of a CONTRADICTION -

"enough to make you go, HMMMMMM????"

P.S. Those "dumb-bleeps" at NASA. Once again they had a PERFECT OPPORTUNITY to "PROVE" they did go to the Moon; through showing that their Apollo technology WAS capable of protecting humans from "highly dangerous radiation levels".

With this endless string of lost great opportunities - they sure seem to be THEIR OWN WORST ENEMIES!

Hey Pablo, don't forget that NASA "lost" that amazing 1960's technology. Haha! That's the line they are feeding the public today and the vast majority accept that with no questions asked.

That was the perfect reply. You nailed it, Pablo!

Look Pablo T. Novi, not only do you not understand much about America or Americans, you wouldn't be here trolling today if it wasn't for America and Americans such as my father, and many, many others, who fought for your dumb ass to be free.

Legit question wrote:

That was the perfect reply. You nailed it, Pablo!

Why don't you two get a nice single-bed room, somewhere. :)

what a joke wrote:

Legit question wrote:

That was the perfect reply. You nailed it, Pablo!

Why don't you two get a nice single-bed room, somewhere. :)

+1

Legit seems to have quite the hard-on for Pablo. He gets pretty excited with his adoring praise.

agreed... wrote:

what a joke wrote:

Why don't you two get a nice single-bed room, somewhere. :)

+1

Legit seems to have quite the hard-on for Pablo. He gets pretty excited with his adoring praise.

???

Can't Believe What I'm Hearing wrote:

agreed... wrote:

+1

Legit seems to have quite the hard-on for Pablo. He gets pretty excited with his adoring praise.

???

I think Legit wants to see the dark side of Pablo's moon.

Oh I missed this -- I respected you taking it on your own initiative to do more research and correct your critique of SELENE and what it actually shows, and doesn't, giving you a second chance to correct your errors for yourself, and in fact, you were talking about hours spent writing a lengthy Van Allen belt response. How disappointing. One problem with "the other side" stepping up and "debating" you, is the false implication and tacit admission that your lengthy posts with STYLE have yet presented any points worthy of debate. Simply getting a response that takes you seriously, is a victory. This was my reluctance from the start to even engage. You said that "reasonable doubt" clearly exists -- there is no agreement that any of the doubts raised to date are "reasonable". For someone who values STYLE, and says he doesn't use RIDICULE, you show no such restraint, e.g. against Popular Science and NASA, -- RIDICULE is one of your main tools. The main problem with your response regarding SELENE, is that you clearly didn't understand what SELENE corroborates. For example, you expect to see real photographs of the surface, with human artifacts, like the Rover. We can see it in your words, for example, when you admit you don't understand what reconstruction of a 3D landscape image could even mean. When you know the basics of the subject, there really can be no confusion, and yet you expressed complete confusion. SELENE was a third party (Japan) satellite sent to map the surface of the moon (among other things). The Terrain Camera was not a traditional camera taking photographic images in the visible spectrum, but used larger wavelengths (0.43-0.85 micrometer), from an orbit of hundreds to thousands of km, above the moon. The resolution was comparatively low, about 10m per pixel, too low to capture a lunar rover in any detail, but suitable for mountains. The topographical image data was used to corroborate that the landscape in astronaut photos was amazingly accurate, strongly arguing against a staged lunar landscape in a studio. Getting that landscape right in "fake" astronaut photos, without landscape data would essentially be impossible, and much harder than taking real pictures. Reconstruction of the landscape from SELENE imaging data would be a simple mathematical transformation of the topographical image data, from the approximate perspective of the astronaut's camera. This is the kind of homework you should do, BEFORE pasting a lengthy rebuttal, to avoid making the kinds of fundamental errors that litter your lengthy expressions of doubt. This is something I would expect from someone who has harbored doubts for nearly 50 years, and someone who claims they have done EXTENSIVE RESEARCH on the topic before posting. What utterly failed is your lengthy "disproof", which has a STYLE, but is also liberally filled with WRONG CONTENT, and only really demonstrates that you didn't understand what SELENE was, or what it showed, when you attempted to disprove it. You built a SELENE straw man, which indeed did utterly fail. What about your lengthy 4 part rebuttal of Van Allen radiation? It seems that most of your arguments boil down to "You expect us to believe that?" The short answer is "Yes, why not?" Despite your lengthy rebuttals, that's still where we are. You've only managed to express doubt, without expressing any reasons that such doubts are valid. NASA thought radiation would be a problem, but once they gained more knowledge (i.e. from the failed tests) they found a workable solution, by selecting a trajectory that avoids the worst part (clearly visible in the diagram), and accepting the risk of radiation for the short durations of exposure involved. The one key comment that should disqualify all four parts of the lengthy post, is your demonstration of misunderstanding that 3 sheets of aluminum foil would be insufficient to protect them from radiation. By now, you should know the difference between the COMMAND module and the LUNAR module (I gave you two pictures), and that the astronauts had much greater protection than the LUNAR module offers, because they were not in the Lunar Module when going through the Van Allen belts. You expect Popular Science to show data? It's correct to ask for DATA, but not from Popular Science. I noticed you took the words of Popular Science (and NASA) that radiation was a risk, WITHOUT DATA. But you don't take their words when they say, once they gathered more information, the danger was not a show-stopper for the mission. The data we need, to assess the DANGER, is INTENSITY of exposure, and DURATION of exposure, and what levels of INTENSITY and DURATION is damaging to humans. Comparing them to Nuclear Plant employees requires more data: FREQUENCY of EXPOSURES. For example, think of getting X-rays from a hospital -- the short number of exposures to X-rays may be negligible for patients, but not for hospital staff and doctors. What about "we need decades" to see long term damage? We have had decades. What about re-entry? Coming back down is much faster, and exposure to radiation is even shorter. The list is as long as your lengthy posts, but the main issue is you repeatedly demonstrate a clear lack of understanding about the things you doubt, or try to debunk, coupled with a clear demonstration that you didn't even conduct a few minutes of research on the topic, that would debunk many of your points before you wrote them. I often say YOU, but others, like Dave McGowen commit many of the same errors. In fact, reading through the first five or so parts of his "Wagging the Moondoggie", I wonder if your ideas are yours, or his. In any case, he writes with a great STYLE, and often employing RIDICULE, but also clearly and repeatedly doesn't understand what he is purporting to debunk. The fact that the ideas and research are his, and not yours, likely explains why your lengthy rebuttals are so feeble, generally lacking in substance. You promised us you would be the first to execute some kind of self-introspection as to why you were wrong. The starting point is that you don't understand the arguments "from the other side", and we've seen repeatedly that you haven't even conducted a few minutes of investigation to form a minimum understanding, before attempting to refute, debunk, or disprove them.

Pablo Novi wrote:

CORRECTION:

Someone earlier in this thread insisted I respond to a link where supposedly it was proved by independent (non-US Gov) scources that man went to the Moon. Part of that linked article was about the Japanese SELENE stuff. I DID respond in detail to the first several would-be proofs. I stated then, and repeat now, that those "proofs" utterly failed. No one has responded to that post of mine.

Otoh, my would-be post that I just referred to is Not re: SELENE; but about the Popular Sci article about the Van Allen Belts. I still can't YET get that by the LR filters - despite it NOT having any "inappropriate language" in it.

So easy to fake, they even missed this one

https://c1.staticflickr.com/6/5226/5683785190_45962b83f9_b.jpg

I think there's an alien outpost on the moon. ? Once we Humans developed nuclear weapons we became a concern with some of the type 1 alien civilazations in this part of the galaxy. A base on the moon would seem likely to be a strategic location to monitor us from. They probably didn't like us traveling to the moon and blowing their cover. We may have been warned after Apollo 17 not to come back or else. Imagine all the classified documents that NASA has in it's files...I think the world would be shocked at what they know and won't tell us.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-4308270/UFO-hunters-claim-footage-aliens-moon.html

https://www.gaia.com/lp/content/what-did-nasa-really-discover-on-the-moon/

The shallow depth of journalistic critical power applied to evaluating Apollo "Tech", is represented in this bubble-gum 2009 Computer Weekly article:

http://www.computerweekly.com/feature/Apollo-11-The-computers-that-put-man-on-the-moon

Caveat emptor.

The late Dr. Edgar Mitchell believed that UFOs are real and we've been visited by aliens:

https://www.thoughtco.com/astronaut-edgar-mitchell-ufos-are-real-3293680

More astronauts that believe we've been visited:

https://nypost.com/2017/04/06/these-nasa-astronauts-believe-aliens-have-already-contacted-us/

Why we have never gone back may have something to do with the alien connection. ?

"Edgar Dean Mitchell was an American pilot and astronaut who spoke openly about his belief that UFOs are visits by space aliens."

Would that be making the distinction between undocumented aliens visiting by UFO from Mexico?