There’s plenty of proof, you just choose to argue and not believe it…..

The latter part of your statement is true. The former part of your statement is incorrect. To correct, there is plenty of evidence, but there is also plenty of evidence to counter the evidence for a manned moon landing.

Now interestingly within this thread alone, I’m getting to the point where I might come to the relaisation that it can’t be proven, becuase unless one/me chooses to accept the avidence for a moon landing, other than actually going with them myself and having a walk on the moon how would you convince me? Therefore it all becomes a non argument, just a matter of opinion.

Another quick question – do conspiracy nutters theorists not believe in any of the moon landings, or just the first one?

This

I don’t wholeheartedly believe anything much, starting with material existence

and this

Many people like to say “Science” proves this, “Science” says that.
Well, lots of “scientists” are saying that the physical world doesn’t even exist in the way that humans believe/perceive it to.

are just postmodernist twaddle, that have nothing to do with wether the moon landings are real or hoaxed.

If you want to apply those arguments then there is no convincing evidence that Yunki or Aye-Aye even exist to have posted their musings.

Meanwhile back in the real world..

This has yet to be shown:

but there is also plenty of evidence to counter the evidence for a manned moon landing.

come on present your evidence that it was a hoax?

rogg, to paraphrase Yunki a bit, you place agressive/antagonistic content in your post, but wouldn’t you feel silly / would you apologise if you were proven wrong? Its not like the US has never been revealed to cover stuff up is it?

NASA reckoned that Concorde was technically more challenging than the moon landings.

But to be fair that was faked too, because if it wasn’t you’d be able to fly to New York on it today.

there is also plenty of evidence to counter the truth

There isn’t. If you have a mountain of evidence on one hand, and a tiny amount of easily answered questions (being asked by people with no qualifications) on the other, why would you go against the evidence?

Oh, and

the truth

Ha!

The latter part of your statement is true. The former part of your statement is incorrect. To correct, there is plenty of evidence, but there is also plenty of evidence to counter the evidence for a manned moon landing.

There you go, proving my point straight away. You WILL argue no matter what. Even if we sent
to you to the bloody Moon to see the footprints you’d STILL say it was a hoax! You MUST argue. You MUST be right. Whereas I don’t really give a shit! 🙂

toys19 is just frustrated because he doesn’t exist

Or there’s the Buzz Aldrin approach to moon-landing deniers
[video]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1wcrkxOgzhU[/video]
Love the comment “That punch is clearly? fake! Look at the shadows, people!” 🙂

ok – Rogg / woppit – answer this one.

The Astronaughts had chest strapped camara with reference markings etched into the glass, verified by the designer. How do those markings appear behind object being photographed?

Oh and Rogg, $40bn to use for a cover up would go a long way I suspect.

Posted 1 minute ago # Report-Post
aye-aye – Member

toys19 is just frustrated because he doesn’t exist

Ummm this statement refutes itself….

Whereas I don’t really give a shit!

Why are you posting then?

I think it reflects badly on all of us that this topic has reached 4 pages.

I refer people to Brian Cox’s tweet linked to on page 1.

If you want to apply those arguments then there is no convincing evidence that Yunki or Aye-Aye even exist to have posted their musings.

Meanwhile back in the real world..

maaaaaaate.. I clearly wasn’t presenting an argument, just stating my position to prevent accusations of tin hattism
Don’t try to set things off on a tangent just cos we is slightly more cleverer than you..!! 😆
I’m ‘agnostic’ so to speak.. sillybilly

So much vitriol..!

I asked my questions up there ^^^ somewhere

can you answer them..?

How do those markings appear behind object being photographed?

Because the light from the object being photographed bleaches out the crosshairs. There are about a billion examples of this on the internet.

if you took a photo and saw this phemonenon would you doubt that you had taken the photo?

Again, I haven’t done any research – I should stop now until I have as its a bit pointless otherwise.

agressive/antagonistic

I’m sorry. I just think the whole thing’s daft. Yes, there have been conspiracies and cover-ups, but in this case I find it impossible to understand why anyone thinks it was a hoax. Have you read either of the website I linked to earlier? A lot of the so-called ‘hoax evidence’ contradicts itself. It’s all very easily explained. The programme was hopelessly one sided.
What the US achieved was amazing. Almost incredible. But in the way that 9/11 theories do those that died a dis-service, so this does for the tens of thousands of people involved.

No vitriol, thats your perception yunki. Anyway which questions, I had a look back through the thread and can’t find any from you about the moon landings?

Why are you posting then?

Truthfully?
Because it’s fun baiting you and I’m bored at work. 🙂

So, go on then, you conspiracy theorists, present your evidence. I could do with a giggle.

This thread doesn’t exist

Isn’t that like trying to prove the non-existence of (a) god(s)?

How do those markings appear behind object being photographed?

What toys said. The cross hairs disappear where they lie over white objects. There are images of the cross hairs over the US flag which disappear over the white bars but are present over the red bars. If the image was a fake, the whole flag would have been laid over the cross hairs (or the cross hairs over the flag).

Anyway which questions, I had a look back through the thread and can’t find any from you about the moon landings?

no need to be obtuse, that just insulting both our intellects..

I’ll re-post for clarity

I don’t wholeheartedly believe anything much, starting with material existence, and ending in UFOs and Simon Cowell so I really haven’t got an opinion either way and couldn’t care less..

What DOES interest me though is other folks seemingly unshakable and often almost quite aggressive faith in stuff..
So you guys that are certain, have you ever doubted or questioned your belief..?
Some of you talk about research and evidence.. what ‘one thing’ erased all doubt.. was there a moment where you thought ‘yes well that’s settled it for me..’?

What the US achieved was amazing. Almost incredible. But in the way that 9/11 theories do those that died a dis-service, so this does for the tens of thousands of people involved.

Agreed. Well said actually.
Have we got any evidence of a hoax yet?
I’ve read some of the ‘evidence’ in the past, and the 9/11 stuff and its actually laughable in the main.

The cross hairs disappear where they lie over white objects. There are images of the cross hairs over the US flag which disappear over the white bars but are present over the red bars. If the image was a fake, the whole flag would have been laid over the cross hairs

If you were faking photos, why bother with cross hairs at all? And even more, why bother taking them without the crosshairs, and then suddenly go ‘oh crap we need crosshairs in this image’ then somehow project them onto the background of the image behind all the stuff? Or erect a giant backdrop with fine crosshairs on it?

Surely if you really needed crosshairs you’d put them on the camera in the exact same way as they ‘real’ astronaut camera did? It’s really simple, and far simpler than arranging it in the background.

Occam’s razor.

Just watched the Buzz Aldrin video. To be fair, if someone called me a coward and a liar, I’d be tempted to do the same as well. I’m imagining Mr Aldrin had been in the military before he was an astronaut, so I guess he could handle himself. 😆

Wow … just wow

ITT people who claim to be open minded about the evidence, but can’t tell the difference between evidence and what some bloke said on the internet.

There comes a point when it might be better to assume the deniers are trolling; because that is less depressing than the thought that they are real people using our precious precious oxygen.

I have decided to call this point the “trolling event horizon”.
Where trolling and stupidity meet and become so dense that they form a singularity and (hopefully) vanish up their own fundament.

1) So you guys that are certain, have you ever doubted or questioned your belief..?

Questioned yes, as a teenager, I think after seeing capricorn one.

2) Some of you talk about research and evidence.. what ‘one thing’ erased all doubt.. was there a moment where you thought ‘yes well that’s settled it for me..’?

When I learned about radio in a level phsics and how schoolkids could directionally track the signals coming from early sattelites through to the apollo missions.

I wasn’t being obtuse, I think you are by raising existential philisophical questions over what is considered to be the standard of proof for the scientific method. And trying to slide your personal digs in for no real reason. I have not insulted you, and others here are happy to discuss this without being belligernet.

PeterPoddy – Member

Why are you posting then?

Truthfully?
Because it’s fun baiting you and I’m bored at work

Except its not really working, is it. You are just being proven hypocritical at every turn, this excuse now being used instead of an educated response.

Just watched the Buzz Aldrin video. To be fair, if someone called me a coward and a liar, I’d be tempted to do the same as well

Is PeterPoddy John Prescotts singletrack user name?

hmm.. I’m not sure I understand your irritation toys.. particularly about the existential questions bit that you seem to be preoccupied with..

erm, as a result I’m not really comfortable continuing this

This chap is trying to demonstrate how the first moon landing was originally achieved. He is using a bicycle and a chubby mans belly to demonstrate the theory.

Except its not really working, is it. You are just being proven hypocritical at every turn, this excuse now being used instead of an educated response

I honesty, truthfully have not the foggiest idea of what you mean or intend from that.
I’m sitting here in the weighbridge office of a quarry near Reading. I have 5 days left to work due to being made redundant. The trade is non existent here, I cannot be arsed to do anything for obvious reasons so I’m whiling away my day on the Internet.
Or do you think I’m a hoax? 😕

I haven’t done any research

Then you’ve two options, really.

a) do some research, or

b) believe the people who have.

Five seconds’ googling will answer your photo question.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Examination_of_Apollo_Moon_photographs

In photography, the light white color (the object behind the crosshair) makes the black object (the crosshair) invisible due to saturation effects in the film emulsion. The film particles that ought to have been black were exposed by light from the adjacent brightly lit particles. Ironically, this saturation effect would not happen if the crosshairs were drawn on in post, and so is evidence of genuine photos. Attempting to alter photos that already have crosshairs would make the compositing process far more difficult.

The amount of evidence for a faked moon landing is “none at all,” I’m afraid. The “evidence” routinely trotted out by the swivel-eyed all falls down when examined by anyone with a clue.

Any truth in the rumour that the quarry is closing as it is going to be used as a backdrop for the next video from the “Mars Lander”??

Druid, it would be a fairly reasonable place to try it. The gravel round here passes a passing resemblance to Mars!

I’ve been watching the NASA podcast of the Mars lander actually. Some cracking quality shots being taken. 🙂

hmm.. I’m not sure I understand your irritation toys.. particularly about the existential questions bit that you seem to be preoccupied with..

erm, as a result I’m not really comfortable continuing this

Look I am happy to discuss this and present any arguments/refutation, I don’t see what your problem is. I thought you were asking questions about the moonlandings, but I was wrong, sorry. I genuninely think the existential questions do not ahve a place here as they could apply to the discussion of any truth, including the things you can love or drink.

Your questions I answered and I thought they were valid, so I don’t see why we cannot carry on in that vein?

Is that some kind of evidence for hoaxed moon landings then Aye-Aye?