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

Why don’t they just make the outside of the ship a giant electric magnet that’s powered by cosmic radiation? You can generate the magnetic field that shields the ‘nauts from the radiation using the radiation as the fuel source like photovoltaic cells.

Disc, not sphere wrote:

Is the moon flat like the earth is?

The moon is actually a chunk of the earth knocked off by a giant asteroid, so duhhhhh,

of course the moon is flat, just like the earth.

give it up wrote:

Bad Wigins wrote:

^ and YOU should stop posting so many links, do you not realize how long that takes to load?

Legit Question and Rayo are complete retards. Don't even bother trying to reason with them.

No, they're not stupid, they're just bad trolls. Tone-deaf, one-dimensional, uncreative. LQ soapboxes endlessly with one or two people and fails to show any interest in finding a wider audience. That's spamming.

A good troll should make no more than 15% of the posts in any thread. A great troll can post once and have 20 other people arguing about it for the next 10 pages. On a non-inflammatory topic that nobody has ever trolled on before, not the standards that go 10 pages no matter what, such as "somebody cheated in a race."

Bad Wigins wrote:

Harambe wrote:

We have sent objects outside of orbit nearly every year -- probes, etc.

And how many of them landed on the moon to follow up on Apollo "science?" Much easier than their complicated Mars landings, but they're not interested.

The real world does not even care about moon landings. Y'all are arguing about nothing.

Why are you arguing with me?

There have been landers and impactors since Apollo. It's still rather straightforward to land on the moon, just not very cheap.

Bad Wigins wrote:

Why does anyone care if they were real or not?

Sending people to the moon was a meaningless stunt. If it was important, it would have happened again. Instead, as soon as the novelty wore off it was abandoned.

.

Dude, it was a test run for Mars. Just ask Elon Musk.

This series, "Wagging the Moondoggie", by Dave McGowan (RIP, website: Center for an Informed America) - imo, easily the internet's greatest investigative reporter. This series is WORTHY. It has now been made into an audio.

I highly recommend it

Legit question wrote:

Care to argue with a NASA scientist?

I wish you'd make up your mind whether NASA scientists are credible our not.

Legit question wrote:

Yes Barry, a blog that has been compiled by scientists & photographic experts. Photoshop exposed the fakery. Hello!

I laughed.

With material like this, you could be an A+ troll if you'd only learn to tone back the spamming.

Disc, not sphere wrote:

Is the moon flat like the earth is?

Of course.

Harambe wrote:

Bad Wigins wrote:

And how many of them landed on the moon to follow up on Apollo "science?" Much easier than their complicated Mars landings, but they're not interested.

The real world does not even care about moon landings. Y'all are arguing about nothing.

Why are you arguing with me?

There have been landers and impactors since Apollo. It's still rather straightforward to land on the moon, just not very cheap.

I wasn't arguing with you, only quoting you to argue with others, hence the use of "y'all."

But I will argue with you now if you like. Moon landers are very cheap compared to Mars landers, especially when you consider the failure rate. Where's all the moon missions? Yeah, I know, China, India. Beginners.

dwightarm wrote:

moon landing proof wrote:

The only proof/argument you need is this:

WE NEVER WENT BACK.

What are you talking about? There were six moon landings...

I thought there was a secret 7th mission were they retrieved some alien?technology that was left behind on the dark side of moon? ?

Bad Wigins wrote:

give it up wrote:

Legit Question and Rayo are complete retards. Don't even bother trying to reason with them.

No, they're not stupid, they're just bad trolls. Tone-deaf, one-dimensional, uncreative. LQ soapboxes endlessly with one or two people and fails to show any interest in finding a wider audience. That's spamming.

A good troll should make no more than 15% of the posts in any thread. A great troll can post once and have 20 other people arguing about it for the next 10 pages. On a non-inflammatory topic that nobody has ever trolled on before, not the standards that go 10 pages no matter what, such as "somebody cheated in a race."

Then why do you read the posts and chime in? So many people whine & cry about the "trolls" on these forums, but yet these same people love to participate in the debates. I've read where regular posters complained so much about the increased "trolling" on this forum where they've said they're done posting and are never coming back to this site. But yet a day or two later, these same complainers are back on the forum jumping in the middle of a thread arguing with other posters! Too funny! ?.

Legit question wrote:

"Ongoing study and analysis of the Apollo record strongly suggests that the lunar surface photographs were faked."

We never landed on the moon.

http://aulis.com/scientific_analysis.htm

I'd be more along the lines of the fact that we did land on the moon, but because of the highly sensitive "things" found or seen there, some of the landing had to be recreated in a studio. I'd say that disclosure is likely drawing nigh.

Legit question wrote:

Yet you believe that astronauts in the 1960's flew through all that radiation inside tin cans successfully.

I suspect the answer you're looking for is based upon the amount of time the astronauts spent outside the Earth's magnetic field. We are talking about almost a year to get to Mars, then a year back. So two years of radiation exposure. I believe the Apollo missions lasted about a week with some of that time inside the Earth's magnetic field. Do you see a difference here?

Harambe wrote:

I'm confused. That person in the reflection is so clearly in a space suit I don't understand the claim.

Can someone explain?

Yeah, has anyone else here looked at the image? It's not clear at all, but looks more like a astronaut in a space suit than anything else. Also, it's standing on the moon, and not "off stage".

I certainly don't see a seventies clothes, long haired dude. Nothing but stupid conspiracy troll BS.

Astro geologist wrote:

Disc, not sphere wrote:

Is the moon flat like the earth is?

The moon is actually a chunk of the earth knocked off by a giant asteroid, so duhhhhh,

of course the moon is flat, just like the earth.

This is close, but strictly speaking, not correct. The earth is in some respects 'flat', but including its atmosphere, is more "dome-shaped", and is mostly flat on the bottom. It is shaped kind of like a scone, or maybe a baked potato, if those approximate analogies help. The moon, on the other hand, is more like a wheel of cheddar. It has flat surfaces on each side, but is somewhat evenly thick all the way across. That makes it easier to slice, as we can see in the sky each month, as the gods or space aliens or whatever cheese-loving extra-terrestrials are up there seem to like to do. Likewise, the earth's shape makes it easier to sit on the back of the turtle that holds it up.

Glad I could help sort out some of the technical details in this fruitful discussion. I am especially glad to see the level of discourse here at LR be elevated a bit. It's good to get some science education while enjoying the great world of distance running! As always, expect great things!

The Chinese lunar rover article was a hoax. the Chinese know we went to the moon and if you look at their design for their lander it is a pretty good copy of our lunar Lander.

Complainers Love Misery wrote:

Then why do you read the posts and chime in? So many people whine & cry about the "trolls" on these forums, but yet these same people love to participate in the debates.

I have not been debating with the trolls, nor whining about trolling, only saying their trolling is low quality. And then, self-starter that I am, I set out to fix it. And now here YOU are whining about trolling. That is what's funny.

Notice how I have not posted even one embedded link. How I have deleted the previous nested quotes that would make this reply take up a whole page and ruin the whole thread. Posting on average only 1 or 2 times out of a page of 20 on this thread. I am demonstrating good manners to the bad trolls.