THE MOON LANDING HOAX (FULL DOCUMENTARY)


denniskee

Senior Member
Oct 26, 2003
5,468
2
0
bukit batok
Visit site
#1
[video=youtube;VW4_5kAPzb0]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VW4_5kAPzb0[/video]

Like this last comment "the truth will always set us free"
 

Last edited:

kei1309

Senior Member
Apr 12, 2010
7,314
23
38
Earth
www.facebook.com
#4
Didn't we have this discussion a little while back :bsmilie:

Anyway this argument has been around for decades
 

justme77

New Member
Dec 17, 2008
284
0
0
#7
It was probably cloudy or foggy at the time they landed. :bsmilie:
You might as well says it is raining there at that time :) (since if you have clouds you can have rain). Or better still, its day time there when they landed, so its kind hard to see the stars with the sun shining in your eyes..
 

quadpod70

New Member
Aug 19, 2012
80
0
0
Singapore
#8
they couldn't have went to the moon. its impossible to pass thru the van allen radiation belt in the first place.
 

denniskee

Senior Member
Oct 26, 2003
5,468
2
0
bukit batok
Visit site
#9
Also, iirc, they calculated the size n fuel of those rockets not able to cover the distant. Also about the LM have to be in region of Mark6 to dock with the Return Module.
But what interest me most is the photography part. I wanted to laugh.
 

Last edited:

Edwin Francis

Senior Member
Mar 24, 2006
883
3
18
www.sgwriter.com
#10
Oh good grief!! Not this nonsense again. Would you like a dead horse too?

What is amusing is the apparent lack of basic knowledge of those propagating the nonsense. What, pray tell, is Mark 6.
Return Module? I've heard of Lunar Module, Service Module, Command Module... did you send a new one up with that cloud of smoke you're generating?
 

ArchRival

New Member
Sep 17, 2006
559
4
0
#11
No stars because the cameras were set to daylight exposure.
Everyone knows daylight exposure can't get you stars, especially with crummy cameras back then.
You need at least 10-20s exposure before constellations can be made out, even with a fast lens.
 

donut88

Senior Member
Nov 14, 2008
2,182
5
0
#12
No stars because the cameras were set to daylight exposure.
Everyone knows daylight exposure can't get you stars, especially with crummy cameras back then.
You need at least 10-20s exposure before constellations can be made out, even with a fast lens.
One question. Who was holding the camera on the moon filming the whole landing?
 

sjackal

Senior Member
Jul 9, 2008
4,490
10
38
#15
Director of Hoax Photography must be rather inexperienced.

Anyway, old topic and being a space topic enthu, I believe they never landed on the moon. Sorry. The Russians don't believe, as does many from the rest of the world.
 

ArchRival

New Member
Sep 17, 2006
559
4
0
#17
The Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter took high resolution shots of the landing sites, showing objects left behind by the Apollo missions. And also the tracks of the rovers.

Plus there are retro-reflectors left on the moon that anyone can use for their own laser ranging experiments.
 

Bukitimah

Senior Member
Nov 28, 2010
1,268
6
38
Singapore
#18
When you cried wolf too often, that is the result. It is good to always question and not just listen and believe in everything. (unfortunately we still have many such people in Singapore) We are brought up in different culture and if you have experienced with American, you know that they are the greatest sale man around. With the Japanese, Indian and Chinese, yes and no are never that clear. That is how we Asian are brought up.

If going to the moon took place that long ago, surely we should see more but whatever that you fake, there will be loopholes. Anyway, the world did enjoy this friction didn't we? haha
 

Top Bottom