Stanley Kubrick's Confession: The Moon Landings Were Faked.
- Thread starter GoldenEye
- Start date
I'm kind of 50/50 on this topic. Meaning I don't really care if they did put a man on the moon or not.
I will say there's a lot of oddities surrounding it. The lost technology. The grainy footage (even for the period). The fact no other country ever put a man on the moon. The fact that a movie director was involved.
But given all the above, if someone is convinced that we went to the moon, I won't argue the point. Mostly because there is no point.
I will say there's a lot of oddities surrounding it. The lost technology. The grainy footage (even for the period). The fact no other country ever put a man on the moon. The fact that a movie director was involved.
But given all the above, if someone is convinced that we went to the moon, I won't argue the point. Mostly because there is no point.
If the moon landing was fake how much space stuff is fake?
There are videos from space stations and space walks that are obviously fake, are the rest just faked better?
Is space a psyop to make humanity appear insignificant?
Are some of my questions.
There are videos from space stations and space walks that are obviously fake, are the rest just faked better?
Is space a psyop to make humanity appear insignificant?
Are some of my questions.
You just need to watch the Crown on netflix. One of the episode is about the moon landing as young Phillip was into stuff like that.He was very disappointed with the outcome of the meeting with the astronauts.I will try to find which season/episode was it.
shinymetal said:
I dont know what to believe on this subject of fake moon landing, personally i dont fucken care, Im on the same page as Administrator,
But I Used to build Observatories, Ive seen the International space station, from one of them with my own eyes and it was really clear, so that thing is real, a couple of the domes Ive built got sent to Nasa and USA universities, they were huge fucken things with massive telescopes that would blow your mind what they can see. One of the uni's we built an observatory for, the professor said he has seen a capsule dock with the space station using the telescope looking from the ground, lots of these can be easily proven, sadly the moon is a bit far away to get that close of a shot. so we cant just look at foot prints or any of that.
There are however instances where astronauts have been Phtographed from the ground while in space, working on the ISS
But many of those uni's or observatory clubs can allow you to see many of these things for your self with your own eyes in the right conditions and with the right timing.
there are even hobbyists who have telescopes powerful enough to take High def photos and zoom in on the ISS, its crazy the tech has got smaller as its got better and telescopes being able to auto track these things, there is luck involved as well as they move really fast so you often get a blur but can get good photos with luck.
So again As for the moon landing, No fucken idea if that happened or not, wouldn't surprise me either way. I think its possible that people went to the moon on at least one of those 6 different occasions that are supposed to have had people land on the moon, but I think it would have been easier to fake it, so yer, dont really care.
brilliant post thanks jason1; it is great to hear people's first hand experiences.
I have read elsewhere many times that the moon is too far away for us to be able to observe the landing sites. i find that hard to believe given technological advancement, but could be wrong.
I have read elsewhere many times that the moon is too far away for us to be able to observe the landing sites. i find that hard to believe given technological advancement, but could be wrong.
It only took 250 years to have space stations.. so for previous occupants beforeus for the past 5-8k years there must have been many attempts be it probes or landings. It was all possible in the past for some non humans. so it will be again for humans to be doing just our turn. so this was written on stones for us to see but not understand...
belever said:
So Ill start by Im not saying it did or didnt happen, I hate having to put disclaimers when Im being objective, but Often people who havent read previous posts, tend to read me as being for or against when im being neutral. so this is for those who arent reading back.
with that over and done with
and to give some Comparison the ISS is only like 420 km above Earth..
Now Compared to
the Moon which is 384,400 km away from Earth. massive Telescopes can see further than that, But zooming in on a small area with any sort of detail 384,000 km away is not within our ability, Yet. Seeing big objects from extremely long distances is easy enough, zooming in on small targets with detail from long distances away is not easy. millions of reasons as to why that is the case.
It would be nice tobe able to look at a telescope and see it, which would be great to prove or disprove its landing, But at this point its not possible. from What I remember they were supposed to have landed all six moon landings on the earth side of the moon, with their reasoning they needed tobe there so they could communicate with earth. So if that happened as they say and the 6 separate moon landings were real and there was a telescope that existed that meant you could zoom in good enough to see the ground of the moon up close with detail, then technically you should be able to see the landing areas of those 6 landings from earth. Only if there was a telescope that could do that, we would be able to see where the landing happened, and they couldnt use an excuse like oh, its on the other side of the moon , so thats why you wont be able to see it, we Know its supposed tobe on the earth side of the moon. lol the only thing stopping us from seeing it from the ground is there is no such telescope with that ability,and it maybe many decades before such tech would be made with that sort of power, we would need togo really far in advancements before we got to that stage in telescope tech sadly.
So if all US moon landings are fake and never happened, the government doesnt have to worry about people using telescopes to disprove it right now, because simply put we dont have telescopes able to see it, Bugger.
VLT (Very Large Telescope) Is 4 massive telescopes combined to make one telescope, they were testing the optics of the telescope too see how close of a resolution they can get to the moons surface, but was no where near able to see such a small area on such a large rock so far away.
Now
there are 7 countries that claim to have had manned space missions that have orbited the moon, so there is a good chance at least humans have traveled that distance to the moons orbit. . So if we believe all reports Its only the US has Landed on it on six occasions. vs 7 countries that have orbited it with manned crews
Like I said Im not in side any government body who would know the truth behind the moon landing,
If you can trust the following third party supposed evidence,
there are photos of the moon landing lander debris from the moons orbiters, because they were close enough to the moons surface, apparently japans Selene Orbits captured the sites,and Chinese Chang'e 2 orbits captured lander parts, and you can see the vehicle tracks. India tried to capture images of the landing zone but their equipment wasn't suitable todo that on their first orbit mission but apparently captured it If i remember correctly on their second attempt with Chandrayaan-2. These pictures can be seen online, if you arent skeptical about them.
Now again please keep in mind my post is about being Unbiased and Im not saying it did or didnt happen. so im not arguing that it did or didnt happen.
On the question of the moon landing being fake, Is it the first Neil Armstrong landing people believe didnt happen or is it all 6 moon landings people dont believe happened?
Allot of talk is about the first landing but I dont hear much in regards to claims for the landings after Apollo 11, so im not sure if the concerns go beyond Appollo 11 to the rest of the moon landings after it, what are peoples thoughts on those?
belever said:
If we assume the landings did happen, and going by the USA Governments reasoning, by the end of the 6th there was a huge lack of interest and so the budget for NASA was being talked about. no longer did any one give shit and it cost a tonne is why they say moon landings were stopped.
The 5th and 6th landings received very little public interest,In fact by the 6th it wasnt even really televised as TV channels found no rating value in it, Apparently the 6th apparent landing received more tv views in Australia than it did in the USA, as The ABC broadcasted it in full.
But really The decline of interest started after Apollo 13's failed attempt which would have been the 3rd, People started not caring much and started questioning the money being spent on these landings. NASA started getting budget cuts as a result.
as for batteries,I've just asked an Astronomer friend over messenger, who is Space geek. he said the following "The Apollo Missions used Eagle Picher silver-zinc batteries, For around 50 years these Batteries were the most common Batteries used in space and In USA weapon systems"
I asked about How they could stay warm, cool and not use up batteries, reply "Not to sound Nerdy I will put it like this- Essentially it has to do with their Suits, the insulation and the vacuum of space."
"There was allot of planning on when to land the craft in relation to when the radiation was more favorable to astronauts"
"The Astronauts suits blocked most of the radiation and because their boots were insulated they did not lose or gain any heat via contact with the Moons surface. What most People don't Know is in the vacuum of space there is only two ways heat can transfer naturally and that is gained via radiation or lost by contact with a surface, Eg feet or hands touching the moons surface. With good insulation and good light deflection, Keeping a Livable temp is easy without using powered heating or cooling sources. Essentially they were never exposed to the Moons wild temperature variations Simply because of their suits which they wore the entire time they were on the moon"
"The LEM was simply wrapped in a very thin foil which protected the equipment, the LEM did not have an airlock and the astronauts lived in their suits, so foil aka thermal control blanket was all that was needed protect the LEM"
So going by that and if correct to me it sounds like there was no drain of battery power for heating or cooling due to there actually being no heating or cooling being done at all with the space lander.
EDIT: from what Ive read also there was some water being pumped around the suit when needed for cooling of the bodies natural heat thats generated by the body it self not from the outside, and some body heat and humidity vented from the suit along with co2, so there likely wasnt a great deal of energy being used todo that. the life support system is fairly basic in those back packs yet did such a complex thing. So in-regards to the questions raised on the meme on the previous page, which poses interesting questions. It however seems the Lander was not providing life support, other than carrying things for the suits, like air tanks the suits had their own life support back packs, with own battery packs. they wore suits the entire time and changed out life support components when they needed. So if we say this is all real then, the Landers batteries would have only been doing the basics and the coms from the moon, would have been sent to the command Module that was floating around the moons orbit, then from the Command module the transmissions would have been relayed to earth. from memory radio- tv signal doesn't need a great deal of power to transmit. its mostly about the receiver side, but Im trying to remember year 8 stuff here lol so dont quote me completely on the radio tv signal, power requirement stuff
"What they did have problems with was Dust Filtration, it was not a problem when they were on the moon as they were living in their suits, But when they returned to the command module, they brought back with them all the dust they had on their space suits"
Moon Dust is Extremely fine, and is positively charged so it stuck to space suits like a magnet"
"During All 6 moon landings a number of Astronauts got sick from the Moon dust and it made return flights to earth extremely uncomfortable. The Moon dust contamination is actually one of the main reasons many say moon stations would fail"
NOW Again Im not advocating a for or against here, im just giving some explanations Ive been given. we will likely never know for sure if the moon landings were real or not sadly
Edit again: he sent me the specs of the life support system for the suits back packs, they had rechargeable batteries. they only required 33watts to power the life support, so if thats the case, damn thats efficient, looks like it needed its oxygen charged by tanks on the lander every 4 hours. it doesnt seem to say however how much battery capacity is in the suits Life support, which is unfortunate, because we cant see if they needed to charge the battery while they were on the moon or not. I dont know if its a 12v-24v-48v system. THIS IS A BIG GUESS, but Lets say for arguments sake, it was a 50AH battery which is roughly 600wh @12v, that would mean 600watt hours, meaning the suit using 33watts would mean the battery would last 18hours roughly before needing a charge. obviously thats a big guess on what battery it ran. 50ah seems like a size that would fit in a backpack fairly easily though.
This is at least an interesting convo, like i said im on the fence about this moon landing stuff so its great looking at both arguments.
Attachments
belever said:
your phone is likely many times more powerful than what was used by NASA back then.
as for the lander it self, that computer would not been very big or powerful at all, according to the history books, they left one computer (PSEP) behind that contained the antenna, a battery, 2 solar panels, which was data collection of Moonquakes to send back to earth, that lived for just over 20 days, that computer was likely even more powerful than what was on the lander, and Likely thousands of times less powerful than your phone.
We sort of forget we managed todo things before having Powerful computers, places Like these space agencies around the world used to have rooms full of smart people making calculations in those days, now we essentially have a lap top doing that job hundreds of the worlds smartest people used todo.
People used to fly around the world with out the use of Computers, that got easier when we got basic computers, now planes can fly them selves without man.
NASA ADMITS : WE NEVER WENT TO THE MOON.
[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SGU1BkUzut8[/youtube]
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SGU1BkUzut8
[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SGU1BkUzut8[/youtube]
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SGU1BkUzut8