Did Man Set Foot On The Moon In The 60s, 70,s Or Ever?

@OCCOM BILL,

Hjolstrums Law says otherwise Billy. (youre Billy,orOB, the other guy is BillR). The smaller the particle , the greater the energy to get it moving .(Its more a thing of particle cohesion at small diametrs. And the enrgy of thrust wasnt that great to dsilodge larger stones. Yet the pix DO show that there is a radial dust ring that emanated from the location of the nozzle in the landing LM.

Can I understand why we would even fake something like this? especially in the height of Vietnam? What if it were really found out to have been faked? DO you think Nixon would have even finished his first Term? He was just in his first year and he hated the Kennedy/Johnson Legacy. He wanted his own and he was so damn paranoid that, qwere this found out to be a fake effort, I dont think he would have continued in the filming.

Waay too much to chance. Imagine all the people that would have to be bought off or killed to keep the secret.

Hundreds of thousands of people were either directly or indirectly involved.

1 Reply

@farmerman,

Quote:

Theyre just having fun with you Bill. Jezuz, lighten up! Its too fuckin hot to squabble.

I do not think so famerrman.

Mark might had but not the others here.

As hard as it is to understand that anyone sane or not could give credit to this kind on nonsense however there are people who do and we are bless with some of them on this website.

1 Reply

@OCCOM BILL,

OCCOM BILL wrote:

Vacuum Magical place where actions can't have reactions that include upward movement.

But I haven't claimed such a thing. Since you discuss "reactions", perhaps you are familiar with Newton's Third Law?

Please, please, please go to your kitchen, get some baking soda, and put it on a plate. Now blow down directly at the center of the plate.

Or look at this picture of a microburst:

http://www.kywgcap.org/Portals/26/Microburst.jpg

1 Reply

@OCCOM BILL,

OCCOM BILL wrote:

but it would also cause a multitude of collisions, whose reactions in turn would send it in virtually every direction. How can this not be obvious to everyone?

Because it's wrong. Watch the video of when the dust is actually blown away. It doesn't go "every direction". It goes one direction: away from the rocket exhaust.

0 Replies

@BillRM,

O Bill has been one of the most vocal criticas of all the "911 truth" guys. Im not willing to believe that he has totally abandoned all logic in this "Moon SHot hox" cause.

All the moon shot hoax folks have claimed that Werner Von Braun was responsible for the killing of people who didnt serve his purpose of staging the moon landing on a sound stage.

Wehave therefore , according to OB, indicted every legislator and president (and Nasa worker) since the moon launch program began. That would include several people on A2K, no doubt.
JEezus, nobody is that clueless.

I have read several of the "Moon ;anding hoax" qwebsites and find them, like the 911 ****, full of errors, manufactured filmcl;ips, lies, and just plain cries for attention.

1 Reply

@farmerman,

Quote:

Can I understand why we would even fake something like this? especially in the height of Vietnam? What if it were really found out to have been faked? DO you think Nixon would have even finished his first Term? He was just in his first year and he hated the Kennedy/Johnson Legacy. He wanted his own and he was so damn paranoid that, qwere this found out to be a fake effort, I dont think he would have continued in the filming.

Waay too much to chance. Imagine all the people that would have to be bought off or killed to keep the secret.

Hundreds of thousands of people were either directly or indirectly involved.

The above is some of the reasons why any sane or near sane mind would reject the moon hoax theory out of hand.

Now we got people who are supporting this nonsense so by simple logic they are not sane or near sane at least on this subject.

0 Replies

@DrewDad,

You and Parados really need to concede this point. Your contention is ridiculous. The moon's surface is not smooth like a plate; it has peaks and valleys and a multitude of obstacles and deviations that can and would redirect lateral movement upward. Denying the obvious is a sorry substitute for reasoned argument. Relax. You are not under any obligation to explain this anomaly. A simple "I don’t know why there’s no debris noticeable the Lander's foot in the picture" would suffice… especially since it happens to be the truth.

1 Reply

@OCCOM BILL,

<shrug>

You do realize that the landing sites were specifically chosen to avoid "peaks and valleys and a multitude of obstacles," right?

1 Reply

@farmerman,

farmerman wrote:

O Bill has been one of the most vocal criticas of all the "911 truth" guys. Im not willing to believe that he has totally abandoned all logic in this "Moon SHot hox" cause.

Thanks for your generosity. Laughing

RM's conflation of one conspiracy theory to another struck me as too idiotic to respond to.

farmerman wrote:

All the moon shot hoax folks have claimed that Werner Von Braun was responsible for the killing of people who didnt serve his purpose of staging the moon landing on a sound stage.

Wehave therefore , according to OB, indicted every legislator and president (and Nasa worker) since the moon launch program began. That would include several people on A2K, no doubt.
JEezus, nobody is that clueless.

What? According to OB my ass. Disagree till your heart's content, but stop short of attributing idiotic accusations I've never made to me, thank you. The tripe above is akin to saying every legislator and president (and soldier) since Vietnam is indictable for My Lai. Knock it off. I've not made not one single suggestion as to how such a trick might have been pulled off, and neither does my doubt about those pictures provide me any responsibility to do so. Got that? Neither do I need to explain how the Pyramids were assembled to doubt anyone's particular explanation for same. Neither do I have to explain where the magician gets his rabbit to doubt he produced it out of a hanky. I don't have issues with saying "I don't know."

2 Replies

@OCCOM BILL,

Maybe they used vacuum cleaners on the lunar module landing pads to make them more photogenic.

0 Replies

@DrewDad,

DrewDad wrote:

<shrug>

You do realize that the landing sites were specifically chosen to avoid "peaks and valleys and a multitude of obstacles," right?

Take another look at the picture, and see if the moon's surface in it ever remotely resembles a dinner plate. Laughing

Then try being intellectually honest for a change and see if you can spot some obstacles and irregularities for yourself. Wink

2 Replies

@OCCOM BILL,

See farmer the man is not all there for some reason or other he is not just playing games.

I did some fast google internet research to see if there had been studies done on the personality types of the far out conspiracy believers sadly so far without a great deal of luck.

In the next few weeks I will try to get to the resources of the university of Miami library system to try to find such studies.

0 Replies

@OCCOM BILL,

Tell me this, Bill: If dust were to be ejected upward, how long would it remain suspended?

1 Reply

@OCCOM BILL,

I encourage you to state loudly and often that you believe that the Apollo 11 moon landing was faked.

Bring it up at the office. Bring it up at happy hour. Make sure that you bring it up on first dates.

2 Replies

@DrewDad,

Quote:

I encourage you to state loudly and often that you believe that the Apollo 11 moon landing was faked.

You are bad and you are funny but I would suggest he is very careful not to get into Buzz face with those claims unless he would like to get hurt.

0 Replies

@DrewDad,

DrewDad wrote:

Tell me this, Bill: If dust were to be ejected upward, how long would it remain suspended?

Till gravity took it's toll, why do you ask?

1 Reply

@OCCOM BILL,

And how long will that take?

Let's assume a very fine particle of dust is ejected to a height of 2 meters.

1 Reply

@OCCOM BILL,

Quote:

Blowing down on it will make it scatter laterally in all directions, yes... but it would also cause a multitude of collisions, whose reactions in turn would send it in virtually every direction. How can this not be obvious to everyone?

Having dealt with fine dust, what you think is obvious isn't what actually happens even in an atmosphere. You only have one source blowing the particles. They will not collide and go all over the place. They will collide as they move in the same direction but it won't violate the laws of physics and send them in opposite directions.

2 Replies

@DrewDad,

DrewDad wrote:

OCCOM BILL wrote:

DrewDad wrote:

<shrug>

You do realize that the landing sites were specifically chosen to avoid "peaks and valleys and a multitude of obstacles," right?

Take another look at the picture, and see if the moon's surface in it ever remotely resembles a dinner plate. Then try being intellectually honest for a change and see if you can spot some obstacles and irregularities for yourself.

I encourage you to state loudly and often that you believe that the Apollo 11 moon landing was faked.

Bring it up at the office. Bring it up at happy hour. Make sure that you bring it up on first dates.

Here we see DrewDad's intellectual dishonesty on display. Distraction denied. Look at the picture again.

0 Replies

@parados,

Yeah, I don't think that he understands that the whole thing acts like a fluid.

0 Replies

Did Man Set Foot On The Moon In The 60s, 70,s Or Ever?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know