Holy piss, the Apollo moon missions were fake?!

[candrew]

Apollo Astronaut Michael Collins dead at 90.

Clearly killed as part of the deep state cover up...

https://www.npr.org/2021/04/28/509599284/forgotten-astronaut-michael-collins-dies

 

[Cosmored]

More on the lighting issue...

Apollo Moon Hoax? Dr. David Groves Analysis​

 

[babe]

I agree it could be done today. As for "then", I'm game. Show me a faked photograph from the early 1970s where the shadows were converted from radiant to parallel, that does not involve the lunar landing. If we could do it, surely someone did it.


So, you think with 1960s technology, it would have been easier to create a robot to set up reflectors and retrieve lunar rocks?

I remember the 1960s. A Univac computer filling a pretty big room. I used to do cards, data entry. It took hours to run the program with my data, calculating molecular orbitals for a rotating molecule around a sugar bonded to a planar nucleoside.

I don't think we shipped a computer like that. Radio controls, however, were available, as well as simple analog devices energized by springs.

I'd have designed a box on a chain with a lid that opens to the side, with a spring-driven scooper to draw stuff in and close the lid. Also the chain would be on a ratchet that woujld retract the box into the hold.

 

[One Brow]

I'm not an expert on lighting. I just posted that info for the viewers to check out.

Right. You're a non-expert, the guy making the videos is clearly not an expert, no one involved is an expert.

You're all just a bunch of non-experts asking questions, while ignoring answers that experts have een giving for decades, and thinking you are smart for not believing people who really understand the subject. Disbelieving the experts is like thinking you know chess better than Carlsen or Caruana, except you don't realize how badly you are losing the game.

I've seen other photos in which non-parallel shadows are alleged.

In you picture, the every object has a parallel shadow to the near objects, including those further away than the LEM(?) and the LEM(?). The LEM(?) also has a second shadow, which no other object has, at a right angle to the first shadow. Do you propose a magic light source that only affects one item in the picture? Did a djinn from a magic lamp conjure it? Or, are you misinterpreting a some anomaly with the film?

I'm done clicking your links. It's obvious that you don't care about the evidence.

 

[One Brow]

I remember the 1960s. A Univac computer filling a pretty big room. I used to do cards, data entry. It took hours to run the program with my data, calculating molecular orbitals for a rotating molecule around a sugar bonded to a planar nucleoside.

I don't think we shipped a computer like that. Radio controls, however, were available, as well as simple analog devices energized by springs.

I'd have designed a box on a chain with a lid that opens to the side, with a spring-driven scooper to draw stuff in and close the lid. Also the chain would be on a ratchet that woujld retract the box into the hold.

How does the box get lowered to the ground and raised again? What guarantees the vehicle will land properly? This is much more complicated than you are making it.

 

[Gameface]

How does the box get lowered to the ground and raised again? What guarantees the vehicle will land properly? This is much more complicated than you are making it.

If NASA was able to send robots to the moon in the late 60's early 70's they would have been crowing about that at least as much as they did about sending men to the moon. Russia would have been double outdone. The U.S. would be able to send autonomous space vehicles to the moon and deployed advanced (completely non-existent at the time) robots to intelligently collect lunar samples and place reflective devices before safely returning to earth.

In so many ways that would be more impressive then sending people.

 

[Red]

Argumentum hominem paleae.

We can make pictures like that today, and could make them then, with common techniques generally employed to create cartoons and such. We then and now could use the same techniques to alter real pictures from any kind of 'set".

You should know that.

First clue to realizing when you're being duped is when a dweeb like Adam comes into the picture, or that skeptical assistant.

You should know that.

a rock that descends from space through our atmosphere has characteristics of that event.

Any lunar rock will have similar circumstantial characteristics. The rock, however, may have been retrieved and brought here by a machine that was deployed and retrieved and brought home.

You should know this.

Six times they pulled this off, if you really believe what you are saying about unmanned missions returning the rocks. Six times they pulled it off, with who knows how many in on it.

Sorry, but from my own perspective, you can’t be taken all that seriously. Conspiracism is your default thinking mode. And, as a result, after awhile, even if you’re right at times, it just like the boy who cried wolf. Simply because conspiracies are your thing. Your credibility is fairly well shot from where I stand. And who’s fault is that? You present no actual evidence whatsoever for your alternative mode of lunar sample delivery. Just plug in a conspiracy theory and presto!

“Six Apollo missions collected 2,200 samples of material weighing 381 kilograms (840 lb), processed into more than 110,000 individually cataloged samples”. Six times they did this, and, according to you, six times they faked including human beings on the missions. That’s one hell of a feat, to pull that off that many times. Yeah, babe, like you say, I outta know that, lol.

 

[Red]

Argumentum hominem paleae.

We can make pictures like that today, and could make them then, with common techniques generally employed to create cartoons and such. We then and now could use the same techniques to alter real pictures from any kind of 'set".

You should know that.

First clue to realizing when you're being duped is when a dweeb like Adam comes into the picture, or that skeptical assistant.

You should know that.

a rock that descends from space through our atmosphere has characteristics of that event.

Any lunar rock will have similar circumstantial characteristics. The rock, however, may have been retrieved and brought here by a machine that was deployed and retrieved and brought home.

You should know this.

I found one more thing you’ll have to incorporate into your conspiracy theory. I don’t think this has been mentioned as yet. The photos of Apollo mission human footprints taken from orbit. I imagine the mission leaders could have sent a machine along to impress footprints into the lunar regolith.....

Here's Your Proof That We Landed On The Moon, Steph Curry

It's okay to be skeptical. That's why we have evidence.

www.forbes.com

 

[Cosmored]

Have you people looked at the anomaly I pointed out in this video?

Holy piss, the Apollo moon missions were fake?!

I wonder what would be behind a name tag like "Cosmo Red". I used to know a woman with bright red hair. Her email address was cosmored...something. I stole the name from her.

jazzfanz.com

Tell us what makes the dust blow when the lid falls. Start watching at the 2:07:26 time mark.

 

[Gameface]

Have you people looked at the anomaly I pointed out in this video?

Holy piss, the Apollo moon missions were fake?!

I wonder what would be behind a name tag like "Cosmo Red". I used to know a woman with bright red hair. Her email address was cosmored...something. I stole the name from her.

jazzfanz.com

Tell us what makes the dust blow when the lid falls. Start watching at the 2:07:26 time mark.

I started a little before the 2:07:26 mark and saw the narrator claim that dust that was being thrown by the tires should never do that... Uh, color me not impressed. Then I watched the infamous flap you've gone on about repeatedly and part of it is off screen and the astronaut is like sweeping or whatever and very likely is bumping the part of it that is off screen. I also didn't think the motion looked at all like a thing being acted upon by air. So again, big yawn from me on that. Then I watched a lid drop, some dust from that lid got propelled downwards by momentum.

Is that **** really supposed to prove something? 100% not convincing at all. Please try harder while NOT ignoring all the very significant evidence that the moon landings were real.

Thanks in advance.

 

[Gameface]

And I'll just say this again.

Let's pretend you convinced me that the moon landings were fake. What do I do next?

Then answer: Not a ****ing thing. It will change 0% of my life one way or the other.

So why do you come here and promote this stuff? Same reason conspiracy theorists always go on and on about stupid BS that ultimately doesn't matter. Because they want to feel special and these somewhat average intelligence people want to feel smart and clever and impress themselves with their logical abilities (and think they they are impressing others, when they most definitely are not).

 

[Archie Moses]

And I'll just say this again.

Let's pretend you convinced me that the moon landings were fake. What do I do next?

Then answer: Not a ****ing thing. It will change 0% of my life one way or the other.

So why do you come here and promote this stuff? Same reason conspiracy theorists always go on and on about stupid BS that ultimately doesn't matter. Because they want to feel special and these somewhat average intelligence people want to feel smart and clever and impress themselves with their logical abilities (and think they they are impressing others, when they most definitely are not).

I don't understand why someone cares to argue for or against this. Who cares. At least argue for something impactful like aliens.