conspiracy the moon

[wetdog]

oh they have done that mate
and have you seen em

New Photos Reveal Apollo 11 at First Moon Landing Site | Space.com


here you go enjoy

funny how nasa got these pics yet the Japanese selene probe didn't find anything more yet got closer ?

thats pathetic, my digital camera can do that.

mick.

[Shady]

if that photos proof of apollo 11, then this

is proof of aliens

[TheJackel]

oh they have done that mate
and have you seen em

New Photos Reveal Apollo 11 at First Moon Landing Site | Space.com


here you go enjoy

funny how nasa got these pics yet the Japanese selene probe didn't find anything more yet got closer ?

Well thats me converted that evidence is so conclusive pmsl.

next.

[racin-snake]

yep the nasa pictures are a ~~~~in joke eh !

[D21198071]

if the base of aliens in moons....why not from a long time ago we attack them.... it's very nice joke

[dieselenginecat]

if the base of aliens in moons....why not from a long time ago we attack them.... it's very nice joke

because people in this world afraid of them....based on many movies...their technology 300 times than we know right now...

[Grizz]

Nasa pic doesnt look shooped which doesnt really prove anything either way.

Forensic Error Level Analysis Results for http://i.space.com/i...


However, Shady, i have some bad news for you

Forensic Error Level Analysis Results for http://1.bp.blogspot...

[RedSpider]

I don't believe in the moon and nothing any of you can say will convince me otherwise

[TheCoder]

oh dear, are people really still debating this stuff ?

First rule of a good conspiracy theory - at least make it believable !

Rather than enthuse about piddling little inconsistancies (which can usually be explained anyway if you try) why not try looking at the whole package.

If it were a hoax, then the most important question is why NASA would attempt to perpertrate that same hoax 7 different times ?

Remember, there was more than one moon landing, there were 6 of them (plus Apollo 13, the one failure).

One hoax, maybe marginally believable, Six of them, not a chance !

[nara]

Remember, there was more than one moon landing, there were 6 of them (plus Apollo 13, the one failure).

Strangely enough, a lot of the doubters seem to be unaware of this.

[racin-snake]

Strangely enough, a lot of the doubters seem to be unaware of this.

strangely enough i am extremely concious of these other packages as they are described all of the appollo missions . fully aware to be frank !

and yet am still not firmly convinced

so coder :

"yes" to the first question "this stuff" is still being discussed

i wonder if you could clear up contentions on these piddling little inconsistencies for us please
then we will all be on a level playing field knowing you are in fact right ?

or in fact wrong ?

so please feel welcome to go right on ....i look forward to your thesis

[TheCoder]

strangely enough i am extremely concious of these other packages as they are described all of the appollo missions . fully aware to be frank !

and yet am still not firmly convinced

so coder :

"yes" to the first question "this stuff" is still being discussed

i wonder if you could clear up contentions on these piddling little inconsistencies for us please
then we will all be on a level playing field knowing you are in fact right ?

or in fact wrong ?

so please feel welcome to go right on ....i look forward to your thesis

Tell me which particular ones your hung up on and I'll have a go.

In the mean time, perhaps you have a theory to answer my question as to why they would attempt to pull off the same hoax seven times ?

If the first one was a hoax and, as far as the rest of the world was concerned they got away with it, then why on earth would they choose to potentially expose the hoax by repeating it over and over ?

[racin-snake]

if you read the full thread you will see some conventional points to start with

any other questions i can feel are of interest i will ask as you go if you don't mind ..thanks

as for the other supposed landings
same applies for that
as you explain i will ask the points im "hung up on " if that's ok

so off you go mate the shows yours to show us all why were wrong

many thanks for this monumental undertaking

regards Racin-Snake

In the mean time, perhaps you have a theory to answer my question as to why they would attempt to pull off the same hoax seven times ?

If the first one was a hoax and, as far as the rest of the world was concerned they got away with it, then why on earth would they choose to potentially expose the hoax by repeating it over and over ?

maybe this explanation might help ?

"The size of the lie is a definite factor in causing it to be believed, for the vast masses of a nation are in the depths of their hearts more easily deceived than they are consciously and intentionally bad. The primitive simplicity of their minds renders them a more easy prey to a big lie than a small one, for they themselves often tell little lies, but would be ashamed to tell big lies." Adolf Hitler's quote for reference ..

[TheCoder]

maybe this explanation might help ?

"The size of the lie is a definite factor in causing it to be believed, for the vast masses of a nation are in the depths of their hearts more easily deceived than they are consciously and intentionally bad. The primitive simplicity of their minds renders them a more easy prey to a big lie than a small one, for they themselves often tell little lies, but would be ashamed to tell big lies." Adolf Hitler's quote for reference ..

An interesting quote with much truth in it but it still doesn't really provide any reason as to why such a large 'lie' would be repeated many times. Each repeat just multiplies the chances of being caught out so why do it ?

Ok, firstly a little explanation of my personal knowledge of the event.

At the time of Apollo 11 my father was a radio technician seconded to Jodrell bank and tasked with maintaining a communications link between various worldwide telemetery stations, including Jodrell bank, NASA and three stations in Australia. Although these stations were part of the larger NASA tracking network (I cant remember the exact number but think there were around 15 worldwide, each with there own sub-networks) they were also independant in the way they operated. Each 'dish' in the network tracked the spacecraft and relayed telemetery information when 'in view'.

Now, as part of the tracking network all the stations in the network had full access to the exact location of the spacecraft and, when 'in view' their own independant positional data. This 'local' data would of been impossible to fake, especially bearing in mind that the 'key' people at most of the sites were the same people that had been in the job for many years and the instrumentation itself was pretty damn simple to operate (my dad could, and did, do it on several occasions). Remember that the 'local' positional data is derived from the local dish, not from the extra NASA installed 'S' band gear used for the reception of spacecraft telemetary

To me, this proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that there was a spacecraft and that it did indeed journey to the moon and back. It doesn't, of course prove that the craft was manned but at least we can start with a sure knowledge that a craft at least made the journey.

Note that many completely independant networks also tracked the craft. This included both Russian and Chinese systems which most certainly would have no reason to participate in a hoax !

Ok, thats what I know so, are you willing to accept that a craft did indeed make the journey or do we need to examine that as well ?

[racin-snake]

read the full post apart from your fathers alleged involvement with jodrell bank you have only repeated nothing more than already stated in previous threads (#136 for example )

but glad you stated the unmanned part ....as its established the moon has had robotic landings which in fact throw positive and refuting proof that the reflectors folk so fervently cling to that were left there by the Apollo missions could have just as easily been put there by unmanned robotic craft ?
could it not also be the case


also if you could do it ..............without the family history it clouds the issue making it a tad too personal
your fathers alleged involvements add no credence and are not facts but conjecture no bearing on the facts whatsoever for me

just the facts please ...thanks

jodrell bank also tracked the Russian space craft too ...no big facts to glean here as its already been covered previously

so please feel free to go on ....thanks