Stucky Intervention #1: HF

@mike, lots of those pictures are suspicious.

@Stucky:

1) Have you researched Stanley Kubrick’s involvement with the studio setup of the Apollo simulations that NASA contracted him to do?

2) What about the Van Allen radiation belts that NASA now says are a problem (but weren’t back then?)

https://ronabbass.wordpress.com/2012/08/30/moon-landing-hoax-nasa-unwittingly-reveals-van-allen-radiation-belts-prohibit-human-spaceflight-2min-vid-incl/

I’m not saying we did or did not land on the moon, but there are some strong arguments either way.

I enjoy reading the writing and comments from you, HF, and lots of other regulars and big dogs on this site. I forwarded your photo essay on European cathedrals to my one of my brilliant sisters-in-law whose MFA thesis was on the stained glass windows in some of those and other cathedrals. She told me about Chartres bleu, a shade of blue glass which no one has figured out how to make. She gave you a big thumbs up.
There is a site which purports to show a famous director making fake moon videos. Other sites claim to see flaws in the official reports.
If you go to the Smithsonian Air & Space Museum you can look at replicas of the various capsules and landers.
I would be curious to read what some former soviet experts think. You know, getting a second opinion. As Yogi said, “It ain’t over til it’s over.”

Just because HSF thinks it was weird that there were 750 Disney employees working on the launch site for the first moon mission does not prove we did not land on the moon. They just wanted it to look dramatic and worth all those tax dollars.

it appears to be a matter of trust. just finished reading toyko, doolittles raid, many americans were pissed that they found out details of raid from the japanese. what few realize 250,000 chinese may have died as a consequence. revisiting history is not my aim, yet our government often finds the truth not to be in our interests. what is interesting is why the soviets gave up the quest. once confidence is lost can it ever be regained? we question everything, all thanks to warren commission.

NASA admitted some photos were faked. It’s like all government reports going back to JFK: either you believe the official lies or you don’t.

1) It would require moisture in the soil to support such a pristine footprint
2) No dust cloud during lunar lander takeoff or landing
3) 100% perfect photos taken by astronauts with cameras mounted to chest
4) No stars in pictures but earth is crystal clear

The astronauts are not lying, they were fed screen memories

Jeff Rense & Jose Escamilla – Amazing Moon Anomolies

I always thought that we landed on the moon, but recently I heard that moon rocks have exactly the same chemical composition as earth rocks. This leaves two possibilities that I can see 1) the moon used to be part of earth 2) They didn’t go to the moon so the rocks they “brought back” really are earth rocks, not moon rocks. The problem with the moon having been part of earth is how did they split from each other? If it was another large body hitting the earth (just about the only thing that could cause that big of a split) why is the surface of the earth homogenous and the same as the moon instead of one or both showing evidence of areas having the chemical composition from the other body?

Then there’s the whole issue of why the moon and the sun have the same apparent diameter when viewed from earth. It is very unusual for a planet the size of earth to have a moon as large as our moon. The chances that we would not only end up with that large of a moon but that it would settle naturally into an orbit that not only gave it the same apparent diameter as the sun but that crossed the sun’s orbit causing those neat eclipses are astronomically small. So it looks like somebody placed the moon in its current orbit for some reason. If someone placed the moon there it would make sense that they might not want us going to the moon and figuring out exactly what it is and why it is there.

Why are the moon and the sun the same size in the sky?

Didn’t the government free cheese handouts start about this same time?? No moon landing equals no cheese.

If no cheese what were these poor folk really fed?

Back in PA Mike, Have you considered that NASA may have had someone like Stanley Kubrick take staged moon pictures on some movie set so that NASA would have much better “Moon landing” pictures for the public than photos the astronauts took on the moon? Sharp, well-composed, and dramatic moon pictures would help NASA sell their program to the public. No photos or poor ones that might have been taken under adverse conditions wouldn’t be very appealing.

apparently we only went to the moon (if you believe it ) to say we were first, that makes little sense in the big picture. other than tang and some other dry foods what really was gained? recently heard many moon rocks have been lost, how can that happen. normally empires would stake a claim with a fort and a settlement and exploit every resource possible.

Stucky, now you’ve offended me! Just because I’m no where near the shed doesn’t mean I’m not sharp!

Odds are astronomically high that Stuckys got this one. Thousands were involved in the lunar landings and not one of those has come forth calling it all a scam? Not going to happen. Not to mention the lunar ranging program, ie. bouncing lazers off of planted lunar reflectors measuring distance, these being recorded by various countries.

So how did the burden of proof fall on the deniers?
By that logic then just because I can’t explain exactly what caused WTC7 to implode means it must have been a perfectly normal event.

As far as how many people were in on it? My guess is 5 to 10 but it wouldn’t matter if it was 100. Wherner knew who he could trust.

Stucky,
I know you did the cathedrals essay and my comment was directed to you and not HF. Interesting how a mere comma can alter the interpretation of a sentence. And we speak the same language.
Back to the question, I really would like to see a few interviews with Russian scientists on whether the radiation belt was a problem and
why Russia did not compete and set a Soviet flag on their own lunar base.
They still build some humungous rockets, keeping the international space station supplied and crews rotated. We buy rocket engines from them to power our US satellite launches. I think they had the technology and equipment to match us. One thing I observed attending a tech college in the ’60s was Russian scientists on the campus, doing graduate work and freely exchanging ideas about everything from our political systems to their particular field of study.

Lots of people work for NASA , each one working on their particular segment of launching rockets into space. Each worker is aware of their task and outcome, not every facet of each mission. Therefore since the government had huge plans to complete launches of low-orbit satellites and space stations (all of us agree they have tons of spy/communication/weather satellites ) they very well could have not known that leaving Earth’s orbit was faked. In other words there were very legit projects in motion which needed the ability to launch rockest with payloads and they took the opportunity to slip in the lunar landings (24 Billion worth) and that would be like 150 Billion in today’s money. Would people have cheered for NASA to get 24 Billion of their hard earned tax dollars for SATELLITES and SPACE STATIONS, not in 1969. That number was bigger than anyone could imagine. They needed a story big enough to make spending 24 Billion dollars seem legit to the sheep as the sheep had no concept of cellphones or internet etc.

Nkit- My 8:47 post was an attempt at your question, maybe the stage crew and others who worked on the moon landing were far less than you would expect. How is it that CNN continues to fake news events and news stories using crews and they never spill the beans? Not that other news channels don’t, but CNN is the worst. Last time I looked people still believe cable news is legit.

Apollo 11 landing site as imaged by Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter:
http://www.space.com/14874-apollo-11-landing-site-moon-photo.html

You can see the footprint trails in the image

Apollo 12 landing site also imaged by the LRO spacecraft. Retrieved parts from the unmanned Surveyor 3 which touched down in 1967. You can see both the Lunar Module and the Surveyor lander:

There are similar images of all six Apollo landing sites:
http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/LRO/news/apollo-sites.html

I guess the deniers will say these pictures are faked too.