NASA publishes new fake moon landing photos

[DiveCon]

SPACE.com -- New Photos Reveal Apollo 11 at First Moon Landing Site






let the tin foilers begin

 

[JBeukema]

Stop encouraging them...

 

[Oddball]

Obviously photoshopped!!

 

[Modbert]

What actually will give them ammo is that NASA erased the video of the original moon landing back in the 70/80's.

 

[Big Black Dog]

My dear old Grandmother always said it was all filmed in Hollywood and not real at all. I guess she was right... Now, seriously, do you really in your heart of hearts think this is anything more than high-grade bullshit?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

NASA: We accidentially deleted the Apollo landing video to tape a Jenna Jameson in Rio special.

NASA continues to deceive the public on what it knows about the Moon.

 

[DavidS]

What I don't get is how they managed to land the spacecraft on that big hunk of swiss cheese!

 

[Luissa]

I told my Grandmother once that they say the moon landing never happened, if she was eighty I think she would have kicked my ass. I only said it to get her going and it worked. lol

 

[Terral]

Hi Dive:

SPACE.com -- New Photos Reveal Apollo 11 at First Moon Landing Site

let the tin foilers begin

The fact that the Apollo 11 moon landing was faked is easy to determine from the 'film' evidence. Anyone who has sent film through the airport scanners knows that spots appear from the x-ray machine that represents a very small percentage of what happens when 1960's film is taken into space (orwelltoday.com evidence). However, the film that supposedly was erased (link = yeah right) shows no signs whatsoever of any x-ray radiation damage (story); which means that film never left the protective atmosphere of the earth. Period.

The faked images show a flag waving in the wind (story), but the moon has no atmosphere. The Hasselblad 500 camera does not even work beyond the temperature ranges commonly experienced on the moon. The moon landing is a staged HOAX (primeline link) like the 9/11 Inside-Job Attacks and the current U.S. Economic Implosion taking place right before your very eyes.

GL,

Terral

 

[KittenKoder]

Okay ... ... Terral ... um ... only going to address one point because it's just too funny to point out to you ... but um ... you do know that space craft have to be shielded from x-rays ... right? Especially manned craft ... x-rays are deadly to living beings if exposed too much of it ... so um ... yeah ... the tape wouldn't have been effected by more than normally encountered in the Earth's atmosphere anyway.

Just to let you know a bit about science there.

 

[JBeukema]

Now that's some funny shit

 

[KittenKoder]

Now that's some funny shit

Conspiracy nut posts hurt my eyes to read them ... I only do it because I have to now.

 

[Terral]

Hi Kitten:

Okay ... ... Terral ... um ... only going to address one point because it's just too funny to point out to you ... but um ... you do know that space craft have to be shielded from x-rays ... right?

Ms. Kitty may as well ask questions, because you have no evidence to support a case for ANYTHING. Click on this picture and tell us what you see. The moon has no atmosphere, so where are the stars? The surface of the moon should be pitted by the impact of a myriad of flying objects that are destroyed by the earth atmosphere, but all you see is flat sand like we would see in the Nevada desert where these photos were taken. The horizon is almost flat (like on earth), but the moon is a small fraction of the earth size and would show us a more curved horizon. And lastly, your film must be in the camera held by the other astro-not . . . and the moon has no protect barrier to stop the radiation from destroying the film.

Click on this picture and tell us what you see. I see the picture of an astro-not with light coming from his left (our right), which is supposed to be from the sun. Now look closely (click + for zoom) into the astro-not's viser to see his partner 'and' that he is fully lit up across his entire body while facing this astro-not. The light is obviously NOT coming from his right side. Then note the shadow from the third image standing between them. The evidence from this photo says that we are looking at multiple light sources and the presence of 'too many shadows' from two astro-nots, because all of this moon landing HOAX was staged . . .

GL,

Terral

 

[KittenKoder]

Hi Kitten:

Okay ... ... Terral ... um ... only going to address one point because it's just too funny to point out to you ... but um ... you do know that space craft have to be shielded from x-rays ... right?

Ms. Kitty may as well ask questions, because you have no evidence to support a case for ANYTHING. Click on this picture and tell us what you see. The moon has no atmosphere, so where are the stars? The surface of the moon should be pitted by the impact of a myriad of flying objects that are destroyed by the earth atmosphere, but all you see is flat sand like we would see in the Nevada desert where these photos were taken. The horizon is almost flat (like on earth), but the moon is a small fraction of the earth size and would show us a more curved horizon. And lastly, your film must be in the camera held by the other astro-not . . . and the moon has no protect barrier to stop the radiation from destroying the film.

Click on this picture and tell us what you see. I see the picture of an astro-not with light coming from his left (our right), which is supposed to be from the sun. Now look closely (click + for zoom) into the astro-not's viser to see his partner 'and' that he is fully lit up across his entire body while facing this astro-not. The light is obviously NOT coming from his right side. Then note the shadow from the third image standing between them. The evidence from this photo says that we are looking at multiple light sources and the presence of 'too many shadows' from two astro-nots, because all of this moon landing HOAX was staged . . .

GL,

Terral

Well .. I'm bored enough to blow away one more of your faux issues ...

Actually, even without an atmosphere the area effected by sunlight would not show stars on old film, and that's where they landed because they wouldn't have seen anything but stars on the dark side. Photosensitive paper does not pick up light that is behind light, and that's all they had for pictures back then. Also the resolution of the film they used was low quality, so they could get the most pictures without wasting too much space. Launching a pebble into space even now would require a lot of fuel, much less massive photographic equipment, and they already had to launch a few tons of gear with them. So um ... yeah ....

 

[strollingbones]

okay *putting on tin foil hat* my husband just made fun of me..when i ask him....why is the flag waving?

 

[strollingbones]

 

[Midnight Marauder]

The Mythbusters bust every myth about the moon landing being fake, including the flag waving. This video is the first of 6, watch them all at the guy's page, YouTube - donnei1992's Channel

Here's part one:

[ame=http://youtube.com/watch?v=mefEKqzq8cg]YouTube - Mythbusters Moon Landing Hoax 1 HQ[/ame]

 

[Terral]

Hi Strolling:

okay *putting on tin foil hat* my husband just made fun of me..when i ask him....why is the flag waving?

The flag is waving because there 'is' an atmosphere in the Nevada desert.

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tTmInbo6rtA&feature=related"]Apollo 11 - 20th Century's Greatest Hoax Part 1/5[/ame]

GL,

Terral

 

[KittenKoder]

Hi Strolling:

okay *putting on tin foil hat* my husband just made fun of me..when i ask him....why is the flag waving?

The flag is waving because there 'is' an atmosphere in the Nevada desert.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tTmInbo6rtA&feature=related]Apollow 11 - 20th Century's Greatest Hoax Part 1/5[/ame]

GL,

Terral

That's gotta be the worst of the conspiracy theories about the moon landing ...

 

[Zoom-boing]

SPACE.com -- New Photos Reveal Apollo 11 at First Moon Landing Site

You're such a party pooper, Dive!