Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 51

Thread: The Unmentionable Fakery of the Apollo Missions.

  1. #1
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Southside, Virginia, way out in the sticks.
    Posts
    104

    The Unmentionable Fakery of the Apollo Missions.

    OK, ok....I know we're not supposed to realize that the "moon missions" were very obviously bullshit. NASA is a sacred cow which should never be questioned or considered for defunding, because, dammit they put us on the MOON fer the luvva Pete. These trips to the moon were served up to us when we really needed to believe that "we", the (powerful federal government) people" could do anything better and faster than those communist Russians.

    About a year ago, on EPA, the discussion of something led to the mention of the Apollo moon missions. Remembering how absolutely phony the TV images seemed to me at the time, with the astronauts jumping around like crippled fleas in the low gravity of the moon, I joined in the discussion and was led by a posted link to a site, which linked to a series of articles titled "Wagging the Moondoggie". Here's a link to the opening article:

    http://www.whale.to/b/mcgowan3.html

    Here's a link to the series of articles and the other works by the same author.

    http://davesweb.cnchost.com/index.html

    And a Wayback Machine page of his older site:

    http://web.archive.org/web/200102030....com/index.htm

    Anyway, I was hooked. All the moonshot fakery sites I'd visisted were kind of boring and seemed devoted to arguing over minutae. Dave's writing and the way he pointed out obvious questions anyone might ask when confronted with the silliness of the official stories were mcuh more interesting.

    Check it out, and feel free to point out to me that I'm a delusional, tinfoil hat wearing idiot. When you do, maybe you can also show me where the author of the series is wrong. Hope somebody gets a kick out of all this.

  2. #2
    Wait, so you're saying the moon-landing didn't happen?

  3. #3
    Administrator Ken's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Lincolnshire, United Kingdom.
    Posts
    3,421
    Well, I for one have severe doubts, David. The majority of my misgivings relate to the extremely doubtful photographs and the apparent lack of any moon surface disturbances caused by the 'landing'. Looking at the footprints left by the astronauts, around the landing module, then at the complete absence of dust on the module surfaces it just does not compute. If the sub surface was rock, then the reverse thrust rockets would have blown away all traces of dust for about fifty yards or more around the touchdown area. Shadows going off in all directions don't help any either. I'm left with a mental image of a very large film set and some very early digital editing coupled with some poor efforts at continuity.


    I would, however love to believe it really did happen - it is just that nothing I have seen so far convinces me absolutely.

    Ken.
    Die dulci fruimini!
    Ken.
    Wolds Bikers, Lincolnshire, England.

  4. #4
    I honestly have no knowledge about this, but frankly, I fail to see what the liberty movement has to gain from even pursuing this line of thinking. Its kind of like the Holocaust Denial movement. Yes, I believe the holocaust actually did happen. No, I don't think everyone who denies it is necessarily an anti-semite. But since the Holocaust was never used to justify the war when it was actually going on, who cares? If you don't believe it happened, OK, whatever. But what does it have to do with anything? All it does is making you look like a whackjob with nothing to gain.

    Minus the racism, the same is true for the anti-moon landing view, IMO.

    Personally, I don't really care if you want to believe either of those things happened or not, but I don't see how it actually helps anything. The 9/11 truth movement I can at least understand because the 9/11 attacks actually were used to justify two wars. I'm not a truther (Yet another thing I'm not too informed on, but I mostly agree with Michael Scheuer, minus his assumption that action in Afghanistan was necessary, which I do not agree with) but I can at least understand the point in arguing for that conspiracy theory if you really do believe in it.

    Now, when it comes to foundational truths, being called a whackjob isn't necessarily a problem. Most people are naturally enemies of the anti-state, anti-war, pro-market (To borrow from LewRockwell.com) philosophy. No need to turn away some who might actually agree with us because of "conspiracy theories" or what have you.

    Any thoughts on this?

  5. #5
    Administrator Ken's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Lincolnshire, United Kingdom.
    Posts
    3,421
    I have absolutely no interest in the politics/conspiracy controversy. At the time the flights took place I was pleased to think that space was being opened up for exploration and amazed by the (apparent) technology. Then I saw the photographs and videos when they were published and thought 'Oh dear'.

    Ken.
    Die dulci fruimini!
    Ken.
    Wolds Bikers, Lincolnshire, England.

  6. #6
    Senior Member grouch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    2,140
    A really good telescope will pick out the landing sites. With no atmosphere to suspend dust, it doesn't act like it does here in air. It takes a super powerful telescope but when the sun is at the correct angle, you can see a glint of sunlight off the left behind equipment.
    Last edited by grouch; 11-28-2013 at 08:09 PM. Reason: I kant spel wurth a durn.
    Honk if you love Jesus.

    Text if you want to meet him.

  7. #7
    Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    Arizona, USA
    Posts
    89
    Excuse me Ed, are you really trying to tell me that "we" didn't fly 400,000 mile round trips to the moon and back, over 40 years ago? Pffft. (sarcasm)

    I remember those discussions, because I was a part of them, I believe they were from around last February (2013) if anyone wants to dig them up...

    Technology in every other field has advanced by over 10 fold in 40 years, space exploration is the only one that has seemed to have gone backwards...because it never happened. Nothing but bullshit propaganda to keep "us" thinking our wonderful government is out to use science to discover new things for "our" benefit.


    To David: This has to do with the liberty movement because if the government is willing to take miraculous steps to lie to everyone about its space exploration...what else do you think it's lying about?



    Our government does indeed go into outer space, but it is only so that it can set up spying satellites and weapons. Don't believe me? Go take a look at "Google Earth" and find your house, your neighborhood, and zoom in. Notice anything weird? "They" haven't updated it in over 3 years and "they" only allow us peasants to "zoom in" to a certain distance. If you don't think they are purposely not updating their shit, and not spying on us with further "zoom" capabilities then what "they" allow us to view, well then please pass your koolaid in my direction because I would love nothing more than to live in ignorant bliss once again. Also, take a look at North Korea on google maps....notice they have the whole fucking country censored? If the country is such a shit hole like our government says it is, why not allow us the "pleasure" of viewing the evidence for ourselves? (answer: because they're lying to us and don't want us to see the truth).


    Wake up!
    Last edited by Jacob; 11-28-2013 at 10:06 PM. Reason: typos, making myself sound smart, etc

  8. #8
    Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    Arizona, USA
    Posts
    89
    Quote Originally Posted by grouch View Post
    A really good telescope will pick out the landing sites. With no atmosphere to suspend dust, it doesn't act like it does here in air. It takes a super powerful telescope but when the sun is at the correct angle, you can see a glint of sunlight off the left behind equipment.

    Can you please show me a link to some pictures of these "super telescopes" that witness the landing sites? Thank you.

  9. #9
    Quote Originally Posted by Jacob View Post
    Excuse me Ed, are you really trying to tell me that "we" didn't fly 400,000 mile round trips to the moon and back, over 40 years ago? Pffft. (sarcasm)

    I remember those discussions, because I was a part of them, I believe they were from around last February (2013) if anyone wants to dig them up...

    Technology in every other field has advanced by over 10 fold in 40 years, space exploration is the only one that has seemed to have gone backwards...because it never happened. Nothing but bullshit propaganda to keep "us" thinking our wonderful government is out to use science to discover new things for "our" benefit.


    To David: This has to do with the liberty movement because if the government is willing to take miraculous steps to lie to everyone about its space exploration...what else do you think it's lying about?



    Our government does indeed go into outer space, but it is only so that it can set up spying satellites and weapons. Don't believe me? Go take a look at "Google Earth" and find your house, your neighborhood, and zoom in. Notice anything weird? "They" haven't updated it in over 3 years and "they" only allow us peasants to "zoom in" to a certain distance. If you don't think they are purposely not updating their shit, and not spying on us with further "zoom" capabilities then what "they" allow us to view, well then please pass your koolaid in my direction because I would love nothing more than to live in ignorant bliss once again. Also, take a look at North Korea on google maps....notice they have the whole fucking country censored? If the country is such a shit hole like our government says it is, why not allow us the "pleasure" of viewing the evidence for ourselves? (answer: because they're lying to us and don't want us to see the truth).


    Wake up!
    First off, I'm not going to claim to know all there is to know, but I am "awake" at least to the point where I don't believe that "government" is in any way necessary. If I'm still asleep, I guess my estimate of maybe 2% of people being awake is far, far too generous.

    Regarding North Korea, I suppose its possible that it is as you say but its also very possible that North Korea wouldn't allow anyone to see anything. Bad as the US government is, I don't see why it necessarily must be them here. And frankly, any system built around a worship of the government leaders themselves has to suck regardless of what else happens.

    Regarding the moon, even if the landing really did happen (I presume it did though I haven't looked into what you guys are saying) I have no doubt a purely free market economy could have done that more quickly, more efficiently, less waste, etc. And without the theft, at that.

    As for the spying, I don't doubt for a second the US government has been updating their spying capabilities. In fact, I'd go so far as to say... of course they have.

  10. #10
    Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    Arizona, USA
    Posts
    89
    Quote Originally Posted by David View Post
    Regarding North Korea, I suppose its possible that it is as you say but its also very possible that North Korea wouldn't allow anyone to see anything.
    I don't want to steer this thread too far off topic but do you honestly think that the reason google earth censors North Korea photos is because it fears retaliation from the North Koreans? North Korea has, according to the mainstream media, openly threatened to strike the United States, several times. And according to the mainstream media, North Korea has the missile capabilities of *insert witty sarcastic thing here* because the North Koreans cannot even get a single missle to launch correctly without it dunking straight into the ocean.

    I don't know what North Korea is hiding for our government to not allow us to see it, but I'd bet all my integrity that it has everything to do with a power grab for the government, not threats from an apparently 3rd world country. (I say "apparently" because I've never been to North Korea and have never spoken to anyone from there. I've only heard and read stories from the mainstream media about them. Given the mainstream media's track record, I think they're full of shit about North Korea and of course the moon landing).

  11. #11
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Southside, Virginia, way out in the sticks.
    Posts
    104
    "Any thoughts on this?"

    Yeah, here's a thought: not everything I do or say has to be done or said with en eye to how it "helps the liberty movement". If this doesn't interest you, go find a thread about abortion. That's obviously your main interest. Since I've been active in what you refer to as "the liberty movement" since before you were born, you may want to allow me a little leeway on what I choose to post. There are other threads if this one doesn't meet your standards.

    Another thought: if someone who may otherwise "actually agree with us" was inclined to turn away because I am interested in this topic, well...... fuck'em and feed 'em fish heads. How about a little of that?

  12. #12
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Southside, Virginia, way out in the sticks.
    Posts
    104
    Ken, I'm with you on that point and on many of the other questions brought up in the series. The utter absurdity that the technology to make spacesuits existed in 1969, but doesn't exist today is one point. The idea that somehow the etxreme distance involved in traveling there was easily surmountable in 1969, but is insurmountable today is also absurd. If you get around to reading some of the series you may be intrigued by the author's observations. I surely was.

  13. #13
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Southside, Virginia, way out in the sticks.
    Posts
    104
    For a few more of the absurdities mentioned in the artciles, here are a few snippets:

    "On July 16, 1969, Apollo 11, the flight that would allegedly land men on the Moon for the first time, took flight. Five days later, on July 21, Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin allegedly first set foot on lunar soil. Three days later, the trio of Apollo astronauts triumphantly returned home to a hero’s welcome."


    Hmmm....three days travel back to Earth from the moon....now, how far is it again? That was a quick return trip.

    "While lounging in the command module, unencumbered by spacesuits, gloves and helmets, and with the luxury of being able to hold their NASA-issue cameras in their hands, the crew (James McDivitt, David Scott, and Rusty Schweickart) took photos of each other that are unfocused, poorly composed, and not particularly well exposed – which is, of course, exactly the results that one would expect from amateur photographers using cameras that lacked viewfinders.

    However, after those very same astronauts donned their suits, gloves and helmets, and then ventured out for a spacewalk, making it rather difficult for them to stabilize themselves (and therefore their cameras), something truly wondrous and magical happened: the crew of Apollo 9 suddenly gained the ability to shoot absolutely stunning compositions that look like they were professionally produced in a studio. Though it’s hard to pick a favorite, the one featuring the Earth’s reflection perfectly framed in one of the actor’s helmet visors is pretty impressive.
    While lounging in the command module, unencumbered by spacesuits, gloves and helmets, and with the luxury of being able to hold their NASA-issue cameras in their hands, the crew (James McDivitt, David Scott, and Rusty Schweickart) took photos of each other that are unfocused, poorly composed, and not particularly well exposed – which is, of course, exactly the results that one would expect from amateur photographers using cameras that lacked viewfinders.

    However, after those very same astronauts donned their suits, gloves and helmets, and then ventured out for a spacewalk, making it rather difficult for them to stabilize themselves (and therefore their cameras), something truly wondrous and magical happened: the crew of Apollo 9 suddenly gained the ability to shoot absolutely stunning compositions that look like they were professionally produced in a studio. Though it’s hard to pick a favorite, the one featuring the Earth’s reflection perfectly framed in one of the actor’s helmet visors is pretty impressive..........All of the astronauts on future Apollo missions, of course, proved themselves to be exceptional photographers as well, but only when operating under the most difficult of conditions. Neil Armstrong, the very first photojournalist to allegedly work on the Moon, that most foreign of environments, set the bar exceedingly high for all who were to follow. HJP Arnold, considered to be one of the world’s foremost authorities on space photography before his death in June 2006, once said of the film magazine allegedly shot by Armstrong:

    “That sequence of images on the lunar surface, taken mainly by Armstrong of course with that one camera … That film probably I would say has never, ever been bettered, whether on the Moon or subsequently. Almost every one of those relatively small number of images taken by Armstrong appear to be splendidly composed. You remember the classic face-on picture of Aldrin with his visor reflecting the entire landing scene – the lunar module, the flag, the TV camera, and Armstrong taking the picture, uh, reflected in the visor? It’s a marvelous picture!”

    Despite all the acclaim he has received for his exploits as an astronaut, Neil Armstrong clearly has been unjustly denied recognition of his astounding abilities as a photographer. Some may argue that he clearly was not playing in the same league as, say, an Ansel Adams, but I beg to differ. Adams created some awe-inspiring work, to be sure, but could he have done so while wearing a spacesuit, gloves and helmet, and with his camera mounted to his chest, and while acclimating himself to an environment that featured no air, greatly reduced gravity, and extreme heat and cold?

    I think not."

    Good points. If you read the article and view the photos he mentions, you'll probably laugh out loud at the obvious accuracy of his observation.

  14. #14
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Southside, Virginia, way out in the sticks.
    Posts
    104
    A sample from the series:

    “Well,” you now say, “what about all those cool Moon rocks? How did they get those? The Moon is, you know, the only source of Moon rocks, so doesn’t that prove that we were there?”

    No, as a matter of fact, it does not prove that we were there, and as odd as it may sound, the Moon is not the only source of Moon rocks. As it turns out, authentic Moon rocks are available right here on Earth, in the form of lunar meteorites. Because the Moon lacks a protective atmosphere, you see, it gets smacked around quite a bit, which is why it is heavily cratered. And when things smash into it to form those craters, lots of bits and pieces of the Moon fly off into space. Some of them end up right here on Earth.

    By far the best place to find them is in Antarctica, where they are most plentiful and, due to the terrain, relatively easy to find and well preserved. And that is why it is curious that Antarctica just happens to be where a team of Apollo scientists led by Wernher von Braun ventured off to in the summer of 1967, two years before Apollo 11 blasted off. You would think that, what with the demanding task of perfecting the hugely complex Saturn V rockets, von Braun and his cronies at NASA would have had their hands full, but apparently there was something even more important for them to do down in Antarctica. NASA has never offered much of an explanation for the curiously timed expedition.

    Some skeptics have said that it is possible that Moon rocks could have been gathered from the Moon with robotic probes. But while it isn’t being argued here that unmanned craft haven’t reached the Moon, it seems virtually inconceivable that any unmanned spacecraft could have landed on and then been brought back from the surface of the Moon in the 1960s or 1970s. There is no indication that it can even be done today. It’s been more than three decades since anyone has claimed to do it, and that claim, by the Soviets, is highly suspect.

    What is known for sure is that even some of the ‘debunking’ websites have, albeit reluctantly, acknowledged that meteorite samples gathered from Antarctica are virtually indistinguishable from NASA’s collection of Moon rocks. Of course, as we very recently learned, that is not true of all of NASA’s Moon rocks. Some of them apparently bear no resemblance at all to lunar meteorites. Instead, they look an awful lot like petrified wood from the Arizona desert.

    Such was the case with a ‘Moon rock’ that the Dutch national museum has been carefully safeguarding for many years now, before discovering, in August of 2009, that they were in reality the proud owners of the most over-insured piece of petrified wood on the planet. The ‘Moon rock’ had been a gift to the Dutch from the U.S. State Department, and its authenticity had reportedly been verified through a phone call to NASA. I’m guessing that NASA was probably running low on meteorite fragments and figured the Dutch wouldn’t know the difference anyway. Or maybe Washington was a little peeved over the fact that Dutch newspapers reportedly called NASA’s bluff at the time of the first alleged Moon landing

  15. #15
    Ed - The Moondoggie articles are great, aren't they?
    They're what finally pushed the topic into my, "OK, settled for now," folder Thorough, concise, comprehensive, and just the right amount of sarcastic wit. I didn't start out looking for a conspiracy, but I do try to keep an open mind, and I like to read what "the other side(s)" are reading and saying as a matter of principle. If I'm going to take issue with an idea, I like to know what I'm talking about and have all of the information any opposition might have.

    You might like Jay Weider's take on aspects of the debate. He had a good series of articles on Stanley Kubrick's films that tie in, but he has since finished packaging them as a documentary sold as 2 dvd's, the articles just link to Amazon now. (I should have saved the pages, not just the links.) His hypothesis is that Kubrick was brought in to stage the landings - this was around the same time that he was making "2001".
    And, that Kubrick's version of "the Shining" symbolically encodes his experience of being involved in the Apollo project, which it turned out was not all that safe for him and his family.
    It makes sense of all the changes and additions Kubrick made to Stephen King's novel, as well as many of the set details. For myself, it was not immediately or obviously falsifiable, but it was well presented and verrrrrryyyy interesting. I bet the dvd's are worth the money, and it may be on youtube already, haven't checked. His take on "2001" is worth a view as well.

  16. #16
    Quote Originally Posted by Jacob View Post
    I don't want to steer this thread too far off topic but do you honestly think that the reason google earth censors North Korea photos is because it fears retaliation from the North Koreans? North Korea has, according to the mainstream media, openly threatened to strike the United States, several times. And according to the mainstream media, North Korea has the missile capabilities of *insert witty sarcastic thing here* because the North Koreans cannot even get a single missle to launch correctly without it dunking straight into the ocean.

    I don't know what North Korea is hiding for our government to not allow us to see it, but I'd bet all my integrity that it has everything to do with a power grab for the government, not threats from an apparently 3rd world country. (I say "apparently" because I've never been to North Korea and have never spoken to anyone from there. I've only heard and read stories from the mainstream media about them. Given the mainstream media's track record, I think they're full of shit about North Korea and of course the moon landing).
    I wasn't saying that North Korea was threatening anything so much as North Korea possibly managing to hide itself from Google Earth. That said, your theory is possible too. I don't know.

    That said, I've heard enough from people who have lived in NK that I seriously doubt its a wonderful place to live. That doesn't mean they're a threat to the US either.
    Quote Originally Posted by Ed View Post
    "Any thoughts on this?"

    Yeah, here's a thought: not everything I do or say has to be done or said with en eye to how it "helps the liberty movement". If this doesn't interest you, go find a thread about abortion. That's obviously your main interest. Since I've been active in what you refer to as "the liberty movement" since before you were born, you may want to allow me a little leeway on what I choose to post. There are other threads if this one doesn't meet your standards.

    Another thought: if someone who may otherwise "actually agree with us" was inclined to turn away because I am interested in this topic, well...... fuck'em and feed 'em fish heads. How about a little of that?
    Wow... that was a little harsh. Yeah, I get what you're saying. Of course you can talk about whatever you want. And of course I talk about things that have nothing to do with politics as well.

    But I believe this sort of thing is actually hurting the anarcho-capitalist cause, making it look like everyone who hates the State must be a "Conspiracy theorist." But hey, I'm young. Maybe I'm completely wrong

  17. #17
    Administrator Ken's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Lincolnshire, United Kingdom.
    Posts
    3,421
    Quote Originally Posted by grouch View Post
    A really good telescope will pick out the landing sites. With no atmosphere to suspend dust, it doesn't act like it does here in air. It takes a super powerful telescope but when the sun is at the correct angle, you can see a glint of sunlight off the left behind equipment.
    Or, maybe, it is the sunlight reflecting off the telescope of a moonman looking up at earth to try and pick up the equipment that they left behind. (Sorry, Grouch, couldn't resist.) Could it not just be reflecting off something dumped during a fly-by? The only real answer is going to be found by actually visiting the moon with a couple of independent witnesses - let's go.

    Ken.
    Last edited by Ken; 11-29-2013 at 06:39 AM.
    Die dulci fruimini!
    Ken.
    Wolds Bikers, Lincolnshire, England.

  18. #18
    Administrator Ken's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Lincolnshire, United Kingdom.
    Posts
    3,421
    Quote Originally Posted by Ed View Post
    Hmmm....three days travel back to Earth from the moon....now, how far is it again? That was a quick return trip.
    Three days, 72 hours, 232,000 miles (roughly) that works out, if my mental arithmetic is correct at an average speed of around 3250 mph. The maths seems OK to me, much more believable than the photographs. Earth's escape velocity is, I believe around 17500 mph, the moon's EV woould be considerably less.
    Die dulci fruimini!
    Ken.
    Wolds Bikers, Lincolnshire, England.

  19. #19
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Southside, Virginia, way out in the sticks.
    Posts
    104
    Horse, I remember reading Jay's articles (or someone's, it's been awhile) on the possible Kubrick role in the fakery. The dvds are going on my list if I find them. BTW, McGowan's Laurel Canyon series has been slated for a book, due to be released in a month or two.

  20. #20
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Southside, Virginia, way out in the sticks.
    Posts
    104
    ". Maybe I'm completely wrong"

    Yeah, I'd say that's a distinct possibility. Those who want to call anyone questioning the obvious absurdities in government fables "conspiracy theorists" are being roundly ignored these days, in case you haven't noticed. Government shills are shouted down on blogs everywhere and they only manage to keep their input going on mainstream media outlets online. Those outlets are ignored and reviled by increasingly large segments of online participants, as well.

    Who really cares what those assholes say? This is a thread about the series of articles. If you haven't read some of the articles, or even one of them, you have nothing to contribute to the discussion and are hijacking the thread. That's generally considered rude behavior in a forum setting. People who persist in that kind of "participation" get the reputation of being trolls.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •