[Closed] Trying to settle an argument

I can't believe that some people still believe the 'moon landing' took place.

Next you'll be saying that Diana died in an 'accident' ..... ffs

If he's not convinced already I doubt anything else will help.

I'm not sure you can get a photo of the lander or rover. It's 250,000 miles away and they are only a few metres across.

But if he gets a laser he can bounce it off the mirror they left up there.

I know, I know but his theory is that no pic has ever been taken because there's nothing there...and it did get me thinking why this might be!

Just for a moment, let's assume it was actually possible to photograph something so small, so far away. wouldn't he just counter that whatever photo you showed him was "photo-shopped"?

Best let him be an idiot and have other folk make fun of him.

Mmmm you're probably right but just thinking about it wouldn't a telescope or the Hubble telescope be able to do it?

It would be fairly easy to fake a picture - why is your mate so trusting of pictures?

There was a picture of a double decker bus on the moon once, followed up in the same paper the next week by an undoctored pic and the headline "Double decker bus disappears from the moon".

I suggest he asks [url=

no

no - to hubble question

...also, if they parked the lunar rover behind the bus it wouldn't show up. It wouldn't mean it wasn't there though...

wouldn't a telescope or the Hubble telescope be able to do it?

I don't think Hubble can focus on something that close! Only 1/4 million miles.

It would be fairly easy to fake a picture

Absolutely.

As is wonderfully illustrated here :

[img] [/img]

[url= ]Here's a recent piccy of a lunar rover taken from earth for you.[/url]

What about a terrestrial telescope then?

There's a mirror or some such reflector that was left by one of the mission so that NASA could take accurate distance measurements.

[url= http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/SEhelp/ApolloLaser.html ]Left by one of the missons [/url]

er...aracer it would really need to be the one left on the moon...oh, I see, you're joking, I get it 🙂

Of course, there is the possibility that NASA failed to get any real footage off the Moon, and had a 'contingency plan'.

I'm not going to deny categorically, that Mankind has ever stepped on the Moon or not, as I was not there myself to witness it, but that flag, fluttering in the 'breeze'? Come on...

Anyone who unquestionably believes everything the Americans claim, is a bigger fool than anyone who has a penchant for metal foil headgear. The Yanks had too much at stake, for the Moon missions to fail. And for a country who's government has lied on numerous occasions, I woon't put it past them at all.

nickc - I thought that lasers became unreliable when fired through the Earth's atmosphere?

RudeBoy - I know where you're coming from.

So Tyger is your "mate" still not convinced?

* s****s *

On balance I believe NASA's evidence more than I believe anything you've asserted Rudeboy, boils down to that essentially

I'm convinced but his argument is appearing annoyingly still valid.

Thread no good without pictures.

Nico - LOL!

There's not really an argument, it's just a bunch of random "stuff" and noise that makes it seem like there's a coherent conspiracy. It's all pretty low level bits and pieces that can be easily shown to be, not to put to finer a point on it, crap.

They went to the Moon, they came back, that's pretty much the start, middle and finish of it really. People are free to believe what they want, don't change it though.

I'm not saying it's all lies, get a grip. I'm merely hypothesising that considering the globally significance and importance of the Moon landings, I doubt the Yanks wooduv relied entirely on the possibility that footage from the Moon would in fact be viewable. Do you really think, during that Cold War period, the Yanks wooduv risked losing face, and being the object of ridicule for the World's press? Would they bollocks. That fluttering flag is proof of such 'contingency plans'.

Oh, and the film in the cameras, used to take such wonderful images, would not have been sufficient temperature for the chemical reaction to take place, in order to have silver halide crystals react to light. The surface of the moon, being devoid of an atmosphere, would be proper bastard cold, well below the effective range in which film can work. The material itself wooduv been extremely brittle, and prone to cracking. Those cameras had no heating systems. They conveniently left the cameras on the Moon, and only brought back the film...

Nice studio shots, though! 😀

but that flag, fluttering in the 'breeze'? Come on

Rudy - the flag didn't 'flutter in the breeze'. Check it out here :

However, that clip is definitely a hoax. Because everyone knows that there's no gravity on the moon, so that herbert jumping about all over the place would just have taken off into outer space.

[u]Plus[/u] he's not even doing the proper 'moon walk' ffs

.....they must think we're all stupid or something.

Oh, and when James May was driving the Lunar Rover thing, it had a petrol engine, rather than the leccy one the 'real' ones wooduv had to use. 'Cos of course, a petrol engine woodun't work on't Moon...

Nickc; you sound like you're trying to convince yourself, tbh... 😉

Without using the internet for reference and being that it's late, i've got issues un be known to anyone and am tired yet can't sleep therefore anything i write maybe taken down and use against me to put me in a home may i say this.

30 years or so ago man supposedly landed on the moon, since then what has been learnt and to what benefit, how much has the space programme progressed why isn't the moon subjected to further landing for testing and an understanding of it's make up and to test for it's stability as a mass....is it assumed it's stable and safe from sudden deterioration, for without we'd certainly be unable to survive here.

So why do they explore the further expanses of the universe, to the outer reaches searching for the unknown, i appreciate it's importance and the intrigue but have they tested the moons structure?

recently they have taken pics of the lack of solar flares coming from the suns surface and with concern they explore something they'll never be able to explore...

It all seems pointless and of little direct significance to the now.

What i'm saying is it's likely they have landed there, but not when they said they did, just some big willy waving mission and then off they go to find a bigger willy to wave.

[img] [/img]

proof that it happened

his argument is appearing annoyingly still valid.

It's probably on the T'net somewhere, must be true, eh?

Shit video, ernie. [url=

e's a better one.[/url]

Gotta LOL at the pathetic attempts to defend it, mind.

People are free to believe what they want, don't change it though.

Indeed. And I will chose to believe , based on the actual incontrovertible proof that the American Regime has repeatedly lied about all manner of things, that not [i]everything[/i] that comes out of America is in fact the Truth. WMDs, anyone?

Anyway, can somebody provide me with definitive proof that STW is real?

Next you're be telling me that Evolution is true 🙂

Shit video, ernie. Here's a better one.

You're having a laugh aincha ?

The flag in your video isn't 'fluttering in the breeze'.

It's moving cause the **** won't stop moving the ****ing flagpole.

What do you expect it to do ? Remain stiff like a piece of cardboard ? You daft div.

.... however, that alleged 'moon walk' 😕

The Moon's gravity is 1/6th of Earth's, allegedly.

So why does not in any way the flag gradually flop down? Eh? Eh?

Plus, the astronauts are only jumping a foot or two off the ground. In 1/6th gravity, they'd be able to jump a lot higher, and further, surely? Even with those heavy suits on.

Nah, sorry, FAKE.

does not in any way necessarily mean they jolly well have not been to the Moon, just that that footage ain't shot on the Moon...

Had millions fooled, though.

Anyway, my work here is done. Good Night all! XXX

So why does not in any way the flag gradually flop down? Eh? Eh?

Obviously because there's a ****ing rod in it.

If it had been allowed to 'flop down' it would have been pointless.

Flag "flutters" because it was being moved about by hand and as there is no air to resist it it flutters more than it would here on earth.
I know because I was there. 🙂

I don't care if it flutters all I want is a pic 🙂

RudeBoy: that video pretty much proves the opposite of what you believe. The flags is moved and the lower half shows a nice smooth pendulum-like motion while the rest of it stays pretty still, in other words, entirely consistent with there being no air resistance.

If you care to watch more a bit more of that footage you will later see the flag perfectly still. Are you suggesting that the troublesome "wind" that was ruining their fakery suddenly died down to a complete dead calm? That was lucky eh? 🙄

Also don't you think that the Russians (or some other American foe) might maybe have mentioned it if they had the enormously damaging evidence that the landing was fake?

Also don't you think that the Russians (or some other American foe) might maybe have mentioned it if they had the enormously damaging evidence that the landing was fake?

You're not paying attention GrahamS.

Everyone knows that the Yanks paid the Russians millions to keep their mouths shut.

Anyway, my work here is done. Good Night all! XXX

Of course. And the Chinese as well presumably.

Like all the best conspiracy theories it requires literally thousands of people to be in on it and remain entirely silent.