|
Thread Rating:
- 29 Votes - 2.24 Average
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
MarzipanMan Registered User User ID: 83218 03-12-2012 05:33 PM
Posts: 472
|
RE: Moon Hoax Proven
[Insert troll Face here.]
|
|
|
|
LoP Guest lop guest User ID: 37643 03-12-2012 05:39 PM
|
RE: Moon Hoax Proven
Old Whatshisname Wrote:BloodRed Wrote:Old Whatshisname Wrote:... and people wonder why I'm so disgusted with the public school system.
WHAT?? Wait... aren't you -more- disgusted, though, that our 'golden dawn' of space-agery didn't give us all the rocket-pack commuting fathers and jet-cars for happy nuclear families as seen on the covers of 'Popular Mechanics', or the Syd Mead-esque cars and buildings as promoted in the old 'U.S. Steel' brochures?? 
Heck, I'm still waiting for the diesel-powered wristwatches they were talking about in the 1930's. Whatever happened to them?
Diesel powered wrist watches?
|
|
|
|
Dire_effects lop guest User ID: 83116 03-12-2012 05:47 PM
|
RE: Moon Hoax Proven
I think the video of the astronauts from like 30ft away while the 1st man is coming out of the lander is suspect.
I think the astronuts falling at 1/4 speed MOST of the time and tools falling at 100% speed is also suspect.
I think that their space suits and continued technological development not expanding from that area are suspect. For example.
The moon has supposedly 0 or close to 0 atmosphere and/or earth like sustainable protective shrouds created from rotation. Therefor, a spacesuit can shield direct assaults from extreme cold and heat. Nothing that impressive there. A space suit can also block solar storms in their own admissions. Solar storms are radiation and solar winds.
most main stream news sites covered this is you want to look in their archives. Missions to mars. 3 months of travel would make traveling back to earth impossible as radiation build up would become lethal.
So what does this mean?
Missions to the moon in space suits several times leads to x amounts of radiation.
Now lets look at the international space station.
Wearing relatively old space suits for space walks.
So the best shield for radiation WE 'civilians" know of is lead. I dare say that the pics of the international space station do not support radiation shielding. Even with the close earth orbit and some protection from the upper magnetosphere still expose them to small but steady amounts of radiation.
So several return trips to the moon which after thousands of years of heavy radiation saturation would poison them much quicker. The early days protected them? No.
They didn't go.
|
|
|
|
Wretch Fossil Registered User User ID: 83893 03-15-2012 08:14 AM
Posts: 201
|
RE: Moon Hoax Proven
Further evidence NASA faked moon rocks:
Scientists know for a long time that our moon has no magnetism. So, rocks collected on the moon should not be magnetic. But many moon rocks are magnetic. This further proves that NASA FAKED MOON ROCKS.
|
|
|
|
Wretch Fossil Registered User User ID: 83954 03-15-2012 05:15 PM
Posts: 201
|
RE: Moon Hoax Proven
Wretch Fossil Wrote:Further evidence NASA faked moon rocks:
Scientists know for a long time that our moon has no magnetism. So, rocks collected on the moon should not be magnetic. But many moon rocks are magnetic. This further proves that NASA FAKED MOON ROCKS.
Added on March 16: Reasons for Above Claim
"Until the Apollo missions, many prominent scientists were convinced that the moon was born cold and stayed cold, never melting enough to form a liquid core." (Ref. A) Such a liquid core is essential for a long-lasting magnetic dynamo, which in turn is essential for the magnetism found in the "moon rocks". No one ever proved the Moon had a liquid core. (Ref. A)
The Moon has "pockets" or "areas" of "local" magnetism based on the distributed material in the crust, and on the small magnetic fields present in the alloys of ferromagnetic material there (that is, meteorites found ON the Moon) (Ref. B). Such local magnetism could not produce many magnetic "moon rocks" brought back by Apollo astronauts (Ref. A).
Ref. A: http://www.space.com/6321-source-moon-magnetism.html
Ref. B: http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Does_the_moon_...etic_field
Added on March 16: Moon never had an atmosphere, as it had little gravity/magnetic field.
The Moon has no strong gravity or magnetic field, so there's
virtually no reason to expect it to maintain an atmosphere for any appreciable length of time (Ref. C). Anyway, the Moon was far more likely lifeless than otherwise. Or do you think the neuron fossils originated on the Moon?
Ref. C: http://in.answers.yahoo.com/question/ind...222AAydm5l
|
|
|
(This post was last modified: 03-16-2012 03:45 AM by Wretch Fossil.)
|
|
AC488 I got no balls User ID: 488 03-15-2012 05:56 PM
|
RE: Moon Hoax Proven
Pi Wrote:The moon mission was a huge propaganda tool for the US to claim technological superiority over other countries.
If the missions were faked, why didn't the Russian, who had the equipment to track and either confirm or debunk the moon mission, poke a massive hole in the US propaganda attempt? Especially since most of these missions happened during the peak of the cold war.
And if it's so easy to fake these trips, why hasn't every country on the planet engaged in these hoaxes?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third-party...nt_parties
Quote:Apollo missions tracked by independent parties
Aside from NASA, a number of entities and individuals observed, through various means, the Apollo missions as they took place. On later missions, NASA released information to the public explaining where third party observers could expect to see the various craft at specific times according to scheduled launch times and planned trajectories.
Observers of all missions
The Soviet Union monitored the missions at the Space Transmissions Corps, which was "fully equipped with the latest intelligence-gathering and surveillance equipment". Vasily Mishin ("The Moon Programme That Faltered."), in Spaceflight. 33 (March 1991), pages 2–3 describes how the Soviet Moon programme lost energy after the Apollo landing.
The missions were tracked by radar from several countries on the way to the Moon and back.
The NASA Manned Space Flight Network (MSFN) was a world-wide network of stations that tracked the Mercury, Gemini, Apollo and Skylab missions. Most MSFN stations were only needed during the launch, Earth orbit and landing phases of the lunar missions, but three "deep space" sites with larger antennas provided continuous coverage during the trans-lunar, trans-earth and lunar mission phases. Today, these three sites form the NASA Deep Space Network: the Goldstone Deep Space Communications Complex near Goldstone, California; the Madrid Deep Space Communication Complex near Madrid, Spain; and the Canberra Deep Space Communication Complex, in Tidbinbilla, near Canberra, Australia.
Although most MSFN stations were NASA-owned, they employed many local citizens. NASA also contracted the Parkes Observatory in New South Wales, Australia, to supplement the three deep space sites, most famously during the Apollo 11 EVA as documented in Publications of the Astronomical Society of Australia and portrayed (humorously and not quite accurately) in the movie The Dish. The Parkes Observatory is not NASA-owned; it is, and always has been, owned and operated by the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organization (CSIRO), a research agency of the Australian government.
Several other Australian sites which are no longer part of the Deep Space Network were also involved in relaying Apollo lunar transmissions. The deep space (lunar) tracking station was originally Honeysuckle Creek Tracking Station. Carnarvon Tracking Station was one of the smaller and more numerous MSFN sites used primarily to support the near-earth segments of Apollo missions, though it also relayed data from the ALSEP lunar surface experiments. Due to its location on Australia's west coast, Carnarvon played a special role in the Apollo trans lunar injection and atmospheric reentry phases. Deakin Switching Centre routed the Apollo television broadcasts.
It would have been relatively easy for NASA to avoid using the Parkes Observatory to receive the Apollo 11 EVA television signals by scheduling the EVA at an earlier time when the Goldstone station could provide complete coverage.
You people are complete and utter idiots.
And don't even bother making bigger fools of yourselves by claiming that the former Soviet Union is in on the claimed hoax too.

Because the Russian missions were fake too.
|
|
|
|
Old Whatshisname Registered User User ID: 8317 03-15-2012 06:18 PM
Posts: 6,904
|
RE: Moon Hoax Proven
Wretch Fossil Wrote:Wretch Fossil Wrote:Further evidence NASA faked moon rocks:
Scientists know for a long time that our moon has no magnetism. So, rocks collected on the moon should not be magnetic. But many moon rocks are magnetic. This further proves that NASA FAKED MOON ROCKS.
Added on March 15: Reasons for Above Claim
The Moon has "pockets" or "areas" of "local" magnetism based on the distributed material in the crust, and on the small magnetic fields present in the alloys of ferromagnetic material there (that is, meteorites found ON the Moon).
Such local magnetism could not result in many magnetic "moon rocks" brought back by Apollo astronauts. Until the Apollo missions, many prominent scientists were convinced that the moon was born cold and stayed cold, never melting enough to form a liquid core. Such a molten core is essential for a long-lasting magnetic dynamo, which in turn is essential for the magnetism found in the (faked) "moon rocks"
Ref: http://www.space.com/6321-source-moon-magnetism.html
One problem with your assertion is that most researchers believe now that the Moon was formed as a result of a collision between the Earth and a Mars-sized plenetismal shortly after the formation of the planet (~4 Gyears ago). The resulting debris field accreted while in orbit and, because of the accretion, melted. So although the moon may be cold , that does not mean it couldn't've had a magnetic field at one time, nor does it mean that there are not magnetic rocks on either the surface or the interior.
If you're serious about research, you might want to check this out:
http://burro.astr.cwru.edu/stu/earth_moon.html
If, on the other hand, you're emotionally involved with the "moon hoax", then you probably wouldn't want to read anything which might contradict your pre-conceived notions.
Fighting ignorance -- one ignoramus at a time.
|
|
|
|
Wretch Fossil Registered User User ID: 83893 03-16-2012 03:50 AM
Posts: 201
|
RE: Moon Hoax Proven
Wretch Fossil Wrote:Further evidence NASA faked moon rocks:
Scientists know for a long time that our moon has no magnetism. So, rocks collected on the moon should not be magnetic. But many moon rocks are magnetic. This further proves that NASA FAKED MOON ROCKS.
Added on March 16: Reasons for Above Claim
"Until the Apollo missions, many prominent scientists were convinced that the moon was born cold and stayed cold, never melting enough to form a liquid core." (Ref. A) Such a liquid core is essential for a long-lasting magnetic dynamo, which in turn is essential for the magnetism found in the "moon rocks". No one ever proved the Moon had a liquid core. (Ref. A)
The Moon has "pockets" or "areas" of "local" magnetism based on the distributed material in the crust, and on the small magnetic fields present in the alloys of ferromagnetic material there (that is, meteorites found ON the Moon) (Ref. B). Such local magnetism could not produce many magnetic "moon rocks" brought back by Apollo astronauts (Ref. A).
Ref. A: http://www.space.com/6321-source-moon-magnetism.html
Ref. B: http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Does_the_moon_...etic_field
Added on March 16: Moon never had an atmosphere, as it had little gravity/magnetic field.
The Moon has no strong gravity or magnetic field, so there's
virtually no reason to expect it to maintain an atmosphere for any appreciable length of time (Ref. C). Anyway, the Moon was far more likely lifeless than otherwise. Or do you think the neuron fossils originated on the Moon?
Ref. C: http://in.answers.yahoo.com/question/ind...222AAydm5l
|
|
|
(This post was last modified: 03-16-2012 03:55 AM by Wretch Fossil.)
|
|
Old Whatshisname Registered User User ID: 52919 03-16-2012 05:14 AM
Posts: 6,904
|
RE: Moon Hoax Proven
Wretch Fossil Wrote:The Moon has no strong gravity or magnetic field, so there's
virtually no reason to expect it to maintain an atmosphere for any appreciable length of time (Ref. C). Anyway, the Moon was far more likely lifeless than otherwise. Or do you think the neuron fossils originated on the Moon?
Ref. C: http://in.answers.yahoo.com/question/ind...222AAydm5l
And where did you get the idea that there are "neuron fossils" in the rocks? I'd never heard of that! Did you just make it up?
Fighting ignorance -- one ignoramus at a time.
|
|
|
|
sign7 Registered User User ID: 82006 03-16-2012 05:25 AM
Posts: 951
|
|
|
|
Wretch Fossil Registered User User ID: 84445 03-18-2012 02:20 AM
Posts: 201
|
RE: Moon Hoax Proven
Damp Moon Falsifies Bone Dry Moon Rocks, Period.
The "Apollo moon rocks" are at least 3 billion years old. Every day for 3 billion years water molecules were made all over the Moon and deposited in the lunar soil (Ref. 1, 2) and rocks. But Moon Hoax Producers collected 2,415 pieces of "moon rock" samples, almost all of which are bone dry (Ref. 3, 4). God cannot accept that.
Ref. 1: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lunar_water
Quote from Ref. 1: "Water may have been delivered to the Moon over geological timescales by the regular bombardment of water-bearing comets, asteroids and meteoroids [9] or continuously produced in situ by the hydrogen ions (protons) of the solar wind impacting oxygen-bearing minerals.[10]"
Ref.2: http://www.csmonitor.com/Innovation/Tech...-the-water
Quote from Ref. 2: “… solar protons (the nuclei of hydrogen atoms) allow our own supposedly arid moon to make enough water every day to offset evaporation and maintain trace amounts of moisture all over its surface. Forget those bone dry textbook images. In September, several research teams made the case for a damp moon in Science online. A decade of data from several spacecraft showed water concentrations up to a liter per ton of lunar "soil". The European Space Agency (ESA) confirmed that finding with a study of its own announced last month…The water trick works like this. Lunar "soil" is a loose mix of dust grains that soaks up protons in the so-called solar wind. Trapped between the dust grains and absorbed, the solar protons react with the oxygen there to make water. They continuously make enough to offset the water that evaporates back into space. A European-supplied instrument on board India's Chendrayaan-I craft now orbiting the Moon found the data to back up this scenario.” Unquote
Ref.3: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moon_rock
Quote from Ref. 3: “Almost all lunar rocks are depleted in volatiles and are completely lacking in hydrated minerals common in Earth rocks.” Unquote
Ref. 4: http://planetary.org/blog/article/00002117/
Quote from Ref. 4: "Some Apollo and Luna samples contain very tiny amounts of water (~50 parts per million) but it is virtually impossible to tell whether this water originated on the Moon or arose from Earth contamination."
Read more at http://wretchfossil.blogspot.com/
|
|
|
(This post was last modified: 03-18-2012 10:44 AM by Wretch Fossil.)
|
|
Kill the Matrix Misanthrope User ID: 38238 03-18-2012 02:28 AM
Posts: 2,800
|
RE: Moon Hoax Proven
There is a plausible explanation that makes sense.
Perhaps the Moon landings were "faked" which would account for all the apparent discrepancies in the photos and films, but this doesn't answer how we can detect man made artifacts on the Moon now.
What if we had already been to the Moon long before then, and the information disseminated for public consumption was faked?
In other words, perhaps we really did go to the Moon, but what was released as the actual event was faked.
“Doubt not that there is a judgment day where every foul deed and deal of death will be brought to light, and justice will be meted out to the perpetrators in a most satisfying, and eternal fashion.”
|
|
|
|
|