First satellite images of the Apollo landing sites released - Polidicks

[QUOTE=Gmod_Fan77;16140650]1. The Van Alen radiation belts stop all but the most shielded spacecraft from exiting the atmosphere. The combined weight of the Apollo ship and the shielding needed would render it flightless. 2. The shadows in the pictures of them on the moon show obvious signs of artificial light. 3. No dust clouds, no dust on the lander, nothing. It's like they never even landed. 4. The lander looks like it's made of tin foil and plastic. 5. If you speed up the "moon walking" clips in the videos taken, you'll notice they're jumping at a normal speed and height, barely going off the ground. 6. The rock seems to be made of paper machete. 7. There is a recorded conversation of the crew talking to Houston about how they're faking the landing.[/QUOTE] Mythbusters S06E11. Ok?

[QUOTE=Madman_Andre;16141302]If the goddamn Hubble Telescope can read a newspaper from orbit, it better sure as hell see the fine print on the side of the goddamn lunar lander. Goddamn, I say goddamn too much. Still, glad they do have pictures of this.[/QUOTE] The difference is, the Earth's surface is 350 miles away from Hubble. The moon's a good quarter of a million miles from Hubble :P

What actually happened is that they never got to the moon, and now they saw some aliens land on it and took the chance to "prove" themselves right. And in 2 weeks we are all gonna be dead. :D

Woops I missed these ones. [QUOTE=Gmod_Fan77;16140709]Further evidence: 8. At a typical speed, it would take around 3 days to reach the moon. The Apollo crew acts as if they reached it in a matter of hours. [B]What do you mean they 'acted' as if it took a matter of hours. They took 3 days, and for all 3 days, astronomers were tracking them.[/B] 9. The "picture of Earth" they took is off in terms of the shadows on it. [B]There's multiple pictures of the Earth so I'd like to see which one, but keeping in mind the other argument you brought up about shadows it's probably not off, just different to what people expect, and when thing's are different there are some people who just can't accept it. [/B] 10. There isn't a single star in any of the pictures, [B]I love this one! If you've ever used a camera for more than 10 minutes, you'll know a little bit about exposure. Take a picture of something bright with automatic settings on. The camera stops the subject from appearing too bright by lowering the exposure. This means anything that was 'normal brightness' will seem very dark in the picture. On the moon, they are in broad daylight with no atmosphere or clouds to stop the light. In other words, on the moon the sun is really bright and anything that's reflective will also seem really bright, such as the spacesuits and the moons surface. To stop these being over exposed, the camera lowers the exposure. This means the stars, which are incredibly faint compared to the sun and the objects it's lighting, they just dissapear completely. This is partly the reason you don't see any stars in the day time on Earth. Just because the sky is black on the moon, doesn't mean it isn't daylight. This is another case of things looking different to what we're used to, making some people believe it must be faked.[/B] [/QUOTE]

[QUOTE]bullshit my gmod_fan77.[/QUOTE] Hey idiot, they left equipments on the moon that can be checked on earth, such as a laser reflector. If you have wouldn't be so ignorant I would explain what it does. But since you are either trolling or just dropped out of kindergarten I won't bother explaining. [editline]08:21PM[/editline] Just fuck off fucking idiot.

[QUOTE=Swebonny;16141846]Hey idiot, they left equipments on the moon that can be checked on earth, such as a laser reflector. If you have wouldn't be so ignorant I would explain what it does. But since you are either trolling or just dropped out of kindergarten I won't bother explaining. [editline]08:21PM[/editline] Just fuck off fucking idiot.[/QUOTE] Wrong quote, bro. You should direct your fire at Gmod_Fan77

Lets look for the bags of poop they left behind.

[QUOTE=Swebonny;16141846]Hey idiot, they left equipments on the moon that can be checked on earth, such as a laser reflector. If you have wouldn't be so ignorant I would explain what it does. But since you are either trolling or just dropped out of kindergarten I won't bother explaining. [editline]08:21PM[/editline] Just fuck off fucking idiot.[/QUOTE] Wait, are you supposed to be arguing with the guy who thinks it never happened?

Yea he mis-quoted

[QUOTE=Gmod_Fan77;16140817]What about the force of the engines? [B]Since there's no gravity[/B], the force of the engines kicking up dust would cause a massive dust cloud to form, as it would all immediately float up. Also, my other 7 points remain un-debunked. Saying "The video is probably a hoax" doesn't disprove that the Apollo crew talked to Houston about faking the landing.[/QUOTE] [B]WRONG[/B] if you paid attention in school you'd know that the moon is still under the effect of earth gravitational pull. So, the moon till has gravity, but 1/6 of it. Meaning that you still get pulled down. If there was NO gravity on the moon, you would float off, there is still a pull holding the astronauts down on the surface, when they jump, they are 1/6 there weight and with low gravity, they float up a bit and float down.

[QUOTE=OvB;16141938]Wrong quote, bro. You should direct your fire at Gmod_Fan77[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=carcarcargo;16142000]Wait, are you supposed to be arguing with the guy who thinks it never happened?[/QUOTE] Fuuuuck friendly fire!

you can totally see the landing site.. not why the fuck can't nasa get some good fucking pictures for once?

[QUOTE=mysteryman;16142131][B]WRONG[/B] if you paid attention in school you'd know that the moon is still under the effect of earth gravitational pull. So, the moon till has gravity, but 1/6 of it. Meaning that you still get pulled down. If there was NO gravity on the moon, you would float off, there is still a pull holding the astronauts down on the surface, when they jump, they are 1/6 there weight and with low gravity, they float up a bit and float down.[/QUOTE] If [i]you[/i] payed attention in school, you would know that gravity is caused by mass. Not by Earth. The reason that gravity has less of a pull on the moon is because the moon's mass is less than that of Earth's. Meaning that if the Moon was off in space somewhere completely independent of any other body's gravity, there would still be gravity on the moon. It's frustrating when someone corrects someone else using fallacious logic. If the Moon's gravity was caused by Earth, then the astronauts would have been pulled right off the surface of the Moon!

[QUOTE=Hamburglar18;16147159]If [i]you[/i] payed attention in school, you would know that gravity is caused by mass. Not by Earth. The reason that gravity has less of a pull on the moon is because the moon's mass is less than that of Earth's. Meaning that if the Moon was off in space somewhere completely independent of any other body's gravity, there would still be gravity on the moon. It's frustrating when someone corrects someone else using fallacious logic. If the Moon's gravity was caused by Earth, then the astronauts would have been pulled right off the surface of the Moon![/QUOTE] He said the moon was under the effect of the earths gravity, which it is... He also said the moon still has it's own gravity, but only about 1/6th of what the earth has. He never said the moons gravitational pull was caused by the Earth. Hell, the moons pull effects the tides of beaches here on Earth.

[QUOTE=Gmod_Fan77;16140650]1. The Van Alen radiation belts stop all but the most shielded spacecraft from exiting the atmosphere. The combined weight of the Apollo ship and the shielding needed would render it flightless. 2. The shadows in the pictures of them on the moon show obvious signs of artificial light. 3. No dust clouds, no dust on the lander, nothing. It's like they never even landed. 4. The lander looks like it's made of tin foil and plastic. 5. If you speed up the "moon walking" clips in the videos taken, you'll notice they're jumping at a normal speed and height, barely going off the ground. 6. The rock seems to be made of paper machete. [b]Edit:[/b] Oops I forgot 7 due to its hilarious absurdity. Please give us a link. 7. There is a recorded conversation of the crew talking to Houston about how they're faking the landing.[/QUOTE] 1. Space shuttle missions launch many times a year. 2. I'm fairly certain the astronauts brought some form of artificial light with them. Also, there is [b]NO[/b] way you can possibly definitively distinguish between artificial light and light from the sun. 3. Dirt sticks to thing because of moisture. Not alot of moisture on the moon, now is there? Dirt powders out through the air because its movement is resisted by the air. Not alot of air on the moon, now is there? 4. If they spent so much time faking it, you really think they couldn't flatten out a few buckles in their aluminum foil? My understanding is that the foily stuff was not actually necessary, except to prevent unwanted things from entering the important parts of the lander. 5. NASA is funded billions of dollars by the government. You think they couldn't have afforded a few bungee cables? 6. I don't even know what to say to that. I'm sure a with the billions they saved [i]not[/i] going to the moon they could afford a few rocks?

[QUOTE=Gmod_Fan77;16140650]1. The Van Alen radiation belts stop all but the most shielded spacecraft from exiting the atmosphere. The combined weight of the Apollo ship and the shielding needed would render it flightless. 2. The shadows in the pictures of them on the moon show obvious signs of artificial light. 3. No dust clouds, no dust on the lander, nothing. It's like they never even landed. 4. The lander [B]looks[/B] like it's made of tin foil and plastic. [B]That's no fact... You may 'look' smart but that doesn't mean anything...[/B] 5. If you speed up the "moon walking" clips in the videos taken, you'll notice they're jumping at a normal speed and height, barely going off the ground. 6. The rock [B]seems[/B] to be made of paper machete. [B]Idem... [/B] 7. There is a recorded conversation of the crew talking to Houston about how they're faking the landing.[/QUOTE] There aren't any dust clouds because there is no atmosphere, therefore a feather and a lead ball would fall evenly fast, because there is no air resistance... The same happens with dust. Argument #1 is something that can't be proven unless you and me are both scientists and we know about what we are talking. This isn't the case. "1. The Van Alen radiation belts doesn't stop all but the most shielded spacecraft from exiting the atmosphere. The combined weight of the Apollo ship and the shielding needed wouldn't render it flightless." See? This is perfetly valid... all I did was add a negation...

[QUOTE=Gmod_Fan77;16140650]1. The Van Alen radiation belts stop all but the most shielded spacecraft from exiting the atmosphere. The combined weight of the Apollo ship and the shielding needed would render it flightless. 2. The shadows in the pictures of them on the moon show obvious signs of artificial light. 3. No dust clouds, no dust on the lander, nothing. It's like they never even landed. 4. The lander looks like it's made of tin foil and plastic. 5. If you speed up the "moon walking" clips in the videos taken, you'll notice they're jumping at a normal speed and height, barely going off the ground. 6. The rock seems to be made of paper machete. 7. There is a recorded conversation of the crew talking to Houston about how they're faking the landing.[/QUOTE] You are a complete moron, please kill yourself to prevent your genes from spreading to another generation.

Personally I think the first landing was fake. The others are real though in my opinion.

[QUOTE=ViralHatred;16158118]Personally I think the first landing was fake. The others are real though in my opinion.[/QUOTE] That's what my opinion was. I believe that the 1969 "landings" were faked, but I never said the more recent landings are. Really, you never know if something like a space landing is real or not. Just because NASA or another presitgious group says it did, or just because there are photographs of it, doesn't mean it's true. Hell, there was a report of these two people faking a supposed "picture of real-life fairies" back in the early 1900s. If two kids can fake a photograph in 1920, then what makes you think NASA can't fake photographs in 1969?

[QUOTE=Gmod_Fan77;16160865]That's what my opinion was. I believe that the 1969 "landings" were faked, but I never said the more recent landings are. Really, you never know if something like a space landing is real or not. Just because NASA or another presitgious group says it did, or just because there are photographs of it, doesn't mean it's true. Hell, there was a report of these two people faking a supposed "picture of real-life fairies" back in the early 1900s. If two kids can fake a photograph in 1920, then what makes you think NASA can't fake photographs in 1969?[/QUOTE] But why would the Russians [I]confirm[/I] we landed on the moon? If you're not aware, we were in a race to get there, plus the cold war. There is no way in HELL the Russians would allow us to get away with a fake, AND confirm that we did go. If we really did fake it, the Russians would be all over us, and they would still try to get to the moon.

[QUOTE=Gmod_Fan77;16160865] Really, you never know if something like a space landing is real or not. Just because NASA or another presitgious group says it did, or just because there are photographs of it, doesn't mean it's true.[/QUOTE] Just because you're an ignorant brick wall doesn't mean anyone should have to be subjected to your bullshit.

I think Gmod_Fan77 is a troll, because no one could humanly be as retarded as he is. [quote](look at the Daily News section) [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_Page[/url] They applied to join the EU today. More like the E.U.S.S.R. [/quote] About Iceland joining the EU. He trolled the [B]SHIT[/B] out of this thread: [url]http://www.facepunch.com/showthread.php?t=774061[/url] [quote]1. Because homosexuality is an immoral and degrading practice. 2. He made nature not for man alone, but for the beings on Earth. 3. Humanism is believing one's self to be a god, to shun any belief and public teaching of a religious diety of any type, and to not use the moral values of any religion in political, etc. decisions.[/quote] what

[QUOTE=Prismatex;16163178] He trolled the [B]SHIT[/B] out of this thread:[/QUOTE] Everyone trolled the shit out of that thread.

This thread trolled the shit out of itself. :c00l:

[QUOTE=Gmod_Fan77;16140650]1. The Van Alen radiation belts stop all but the most shielded spacecraft from exiting the atmosphere. The combined weight of the Apollo ship and the shielding needed would render it flightless. 2. The shadows in the pictures of them on the moon show obvious signs of artificial light. 3. No dust clouds, no dust on the lander, nothing. It's like they never even landed. 4. The lander looks like it's made of tin foil and plastic. 5. If you speed up the "moon walking" clips in the videos taken, you'll notice they're jumping at a normal speed and height, barely going off the ground. 6. The rock seems to be made of paper machete. 7. There is a recorded conversation of the crew talking to Houston about how they're faking the landing.[/QUOTE] 1) The amount of time sent in the radiation belt isn't enough to harm astronauts, how would it render a spacecraft flightless, anyway, all you need is 25,000 miles an hour in velocity to escape earth's gravitational pull 2)The shadows are modified slightly for two reasons, Wide angle lenses and the shape of the terrain, it's proven you can modify the angle of an objects shadow by modifying the plane it's sitting on 3) The only dust that's going to be moved is the dust that's actually touched by the Flame/exhaust of the lander, there's no air being blown around, no matter how intense the Thrust 4) It is made of Tin Foil and plastic... well almost, there are parts of the floor that if you were to step on you would fall through 5) Yes, if you speed up the moon walking clips, it almost does look like it's on earth, except for the fact the gear isn't Bouncing around and jarring like it would if it WAS on earth, instead of the 1/6 Gravity they are in in the footage 6) What Rock? 7) You're talking about some communication of an astronaut that sounds like he says Now, giving a cue to talk, other than that, no such conversation exists... your 'facts' are all twisted and using bad science (Or no science at all to be more accurate) You think No Stars in the background is proof that it's a soundstage, instead of Day Time Exposure setting on the camera, Extremely well lit and bright Foreground just making the stars not show up in the photos, Hey I can fetch a recent photo from space that shows this same thing [media]http://wanderingspace.net/wp-content/uploads/2007/08/earth-shuttle-horizon.jpg[/media] No stars! MUST BE FAKE Our Government couldn't cover up a break-in in someone's hotel room, and you think tens of thousands of people can fake the moon landings for 40 years?

[QUOTE=TheTalon;16164153]1) The amount of time sent in the radiation belt isn't enough to harm astronauts, how would it render a spacecraft flightless, anyway, all you need is 25,000 miles an hour in velocity to escape earth's gravitational pull 2)The shadows are modified slightly for two reasons, Wide angle lenses and the shape of the terrain, it's proven you can modify the angle of an objects shadow by modifying the plane it's sitting on 3) The only dust that's going to be moved is the dust that's actually touched by the Flame/exhaust of the lander, there's no air being blown around, no matter how intense the Thrust 4) It is made of Tin Foil and plastic... well almost, there are parts of the floor that if you were to step on you would fall through 5) Yes, if you speed up the moon walking clips, it almost does look like it's on earth, except for the fact the gear isn't Bouncing around and jarring like it would if it WAS on earth, instead of the 1/6 Gravity they are in in the footage 6) What Rock? 7) You're talking about some communication of an astronaut that sounds like he says Now, giving a cue to talk, other than that, no such conversation exists... your 'facts' are all twisted and using bad science (Or no science at all to be more accurate) You think No Stars in the background is proof that it's a soundstage, instead of Day Time Exposure setting on the camera, Extremely well lit and bright Foreground just making the stars not show up in the photos, Hey I can fetch a recent photo from space that shows this same thing [media]http://wanderingspace.net/wp-content/uploads/2007/08/earth-shuttle-horizon.jpg[/media] No stars! MUST BE FAKE Our Government couldn't cover up a break-in in someone's hotel room, and you think tens of thousands of people can fake the moon landings for 40 years?[/QUOTE] I like how beautiful all of the space pictures look. Anyone that says the moon landing is a hoax is a dumbass.

[QUOTE=Gmod_Fan77;16140344]Doesn't matter if the satellite pictures look good, the moon landing never happened, bottom line. There's a shitload of evidence against them landing on the moon, but really, the best proof of all is THAT THERE IS A VIDEO RECORDING OF THEM TALKING ABOUT HOW THEY FAKED THE LANDING. What other proof do you need?[/QUOTE] You realize if there was even a hint of proof we didn't go to the moon, Russia would have been all over it and blown the whistle on us big time. We were in the middle of a heated space race with them at the time.

Well, explain this. If I remember, light isn't visible in the vacuum of space, so explain how they "lit up" the ground of the moon if the area around the moon is a vacuum.

[QUOTE=Gmod_Fan77;16165212]Well, explain this. [B]If I remember, light isn't visible in the vacuum of space, so explain how they "lit up" the ground of the moon if the area around the moon is a vacuum.[/B][/QUOTE] Holy fuck, where did you get that from? That is the stupidest thing i've ever heard. [B]EDIT:[/B] Ohh, i see what you're thinking. You cannot hear anything in space, since there are no air particles to vibrate. The spacemen talk to eachother via microphone in their suits. Which their suits are filled with air. Sound cannot travel through space. Light definately can.

If light couldn't travel through space, how the fuck do you think we can see the sun?