Climategate!

[sgreger1]

Ironic

So you trust NASA's evidence as long as it doesn't have anything to do with AGW :?:

NASA = Moon landing = Real
NASA = AGW = Fake :?: :roll: :roll:

http://climate.nasa.gov/

How does NASA fit into your carbon credit conspiracy?

Lol, how did I know that was coming. I generally think NASA covers things up, doctors photos etc, but this photo seems to me to be a pretty clear cut example of proof we went. As for their temperature monitoring sattelites, I havn't looked much into NASA's angle on this to be completely honest.

[tom502]

It's still not convincing to me, because how many times are we alledged to have gone to the moon? 6 times(manned trips)? And since the 50's or so, unmanned flights have been made, that landed testing rovers on the surface. So, yes, there would be "stuff" on the moon, and marks on the surface could exist, and it could be from a radio controlled unmanned rover.

It's still too far away to be definitive "proof" for me.

[sgreger1]

Well to me I don't see why we wouldn't have gone. Myths about the radiation belt etc might paint the picture that it was impossible, but the reality was all the technology required was there, the manpower was there, the money was there, and the will was there. Plus with defeating the russians as our primary goal of the day, it seems that this could be possible.

Take that and the >800lbs of rocks they harvested from the moon and i'd have to say I don't see any credible evidence as to why we wouldn't have gone. Plus our enemies would not have missed an oppertunity to point out our fakery. The russians had moles everywhere, including probably nasa. They would have blown the whistle.

[tom502]

I am mostly convinced we did not go.
All your questions are answered on www.moonmovie.com in their FAQ section. A great site. I could cut and paste, but I just offer this site.

[sgreger1]

Yah i'm familiar with the site. But an outrageous claim demands outrageousely good evidence, and they just cite things like reflections on the helmet, stuff about the radiation belt that isn't true, talk about how there are no stars in the background and how one of the reticles looks like it's behind the astronaut.

The problem with all of this "evidence" is that it can be explained away so easly. To prove we faked walking a man on the moon, you would need some serious evidence, not just analysis of photos by people who are not familiar with lunar photography. Too many people with websites want to act like they know about radiation belts and the limits of x,y,z, when really they don't know what they are talking about. Pick any 3 of your favorite pieces of evidence and I bet I could offer a completely reasonable explanation for it. I promise I won't blame it on swap gas or weather baloons lol.

[tom502]

I think that site produces very intelligent evidence, along with actual Nasa film, photos, and speakings by former astronauts, and scientists. It's not just a bunch of hillbillys spouting stuff. Look at the various videos on there when you get a chance, if anything, it is interesting. And I've always heard you can't prove a negative. Well, I don't know, but Nasa has not proven to me we did go, 6 times, in the 60's and 70's. I'm just not convinced. I could be wrong, and maybe partially wrong, but something is not 100% true about what we have been shown and told to accept.

[sgreger1]

I think that site produces very intelligent evidence, along with actual Nasa film, photos, and speakings by former astronauts, and scientists. It's not just a bunch of hillbillys spouting stuff. Look at the various videos on there when you get a chance, if anything, it is interesting. And I've always heard you can't prove a negative. Well, I don't know, but Nasa has not proven to me we did go, 6 times, in the 60's and 70's. I'm just not convinced. I could be wrong, and maybe partially wrong, but something is not 100% true about what we have been shown and told to accept.

I'll have to see the videos, though as I recall they were charging for them last time I visited the site. But no astronauts are saying we didn't go, every discrepency I have seen in the photos can be explained, etc.

We even have a mirror on the moon we placed there that you can bounce laser rangefinders off of. Robots cannot assemble things in their current technology, it couldn't have installed it there.

I mean we have artifacts there, astronauts who claim to have gone, we had the capability, the will and the money to do it, and we brought stuff back as well.

Like I said, it would take a LOT of evidence to debunk NASA's claims.

I'll tell you what though, I know we went, but they may have re-created some of it ona soundstage for some reason. There is some evidence and videos that I couldn't see how to explain away that would point to some of it being done on a soundstage. Yet we have overwhelming evidence of us going to the moon.

Could be one of those things where they are lying about something, but not what you thought they were.

[tom502]

All those points you bring up, are handled directly on the FAQ section:

http://www.moonmovie.com/faq.htm

The moon rocks, the mirrors(lazer reflectors)....

[sgreger1]

Lets start with the rocks.

Their points are that a fake moonrock was given to a dutch museum. this is true. They claimed that buzz and his astonaut buddies gave this fake rock to them. That is false

The museum acquired the rock after the death of former prime minister Willem Drees in 1988. Drees received it as a private gift on Oct. 9, 1969 from then-U.S. ambassador J. William Middendorf" (Forbes News)

October 1969: NASA had not yet given ANY piece of rock to anyone. The pieces of rock that were given away (there are hundreds) came from later missions.


That one rock had passed through several hands before it got to the museum years later, and was probably sold on the black market by some janitor or something. Similar rocks were distributed by NASA to over 100 places, and all of them were real.


The websites 2nd claim: they try to say moon rocks are exactly the same as earth rocks. There is countless peer-reviewed papers regarding the minerology of moon rocks, detailing their differences and similarities. A moon rock is different from an earth rock and simple tests can conclude whether a rock is of terrestrial origin or not.



Then when asked about "well can't you see the lander" it says that telescopes have been commisioned to do so but the results remain secret. Yet I JUST posted a picture on this forum with the results.


Sites that get 9 out of 10 things wrong and fail to do even minimal investigation into their claims really debunk themselves. Ihn their entire FAQ section, the only thing noteworthy is that the russians had left similar mirrors by dropping them from unmanned probes, therefore not requiring the human component for getting it on the moon.


So far there is nothing there that hasn't been explained, and most of the FAQ answers claim things that anyone with google can prove are not true.


I think there is something odd about the space program but I think as far as us goign to the moon, we went. Whether they re-enacted it ona soundstage is still up for debate.

[tom502]

If we did go, then something was there, or something, that they did not want us to know, and then faked a load of photos and film shots. I don't know, I wasn't there, but the whole thing does not seem 100% open and legit to me.

[wa3zrm]

<embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/7H0aLSQ_VK4&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="640" height="385"></embed>