Customer Discussions > Science forum

was the moon landing real or fake, and why?


Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 2701-2725 of 1000 posts in this discussion
In reply to an earlier post on May 16, 2012 9:57:09 PM PDT
Yeah. You have to be very driven to make it to space. Such people aren't very good at taking no for an answer.

In reply to an earlier post on May 16, 2012 10:54:38 PM PDT
On may 16,2012 @6:16;25 PM PDT iruri wrote:
roundaboutte says:
Intersecting shadows? AS17-147-22568
Good work. roundaboutte, clearly a fake picture. More proof of Apollo Hoax missions

iruri then edited his post to read:
On second look, it does look like a wire.

Now the question is, after all the evidence denouncing every piece of so called iron clad proof that iruri has presented and blown us off with our responses, how is it that this one particular piece of nonesense has seemingly turned our OP into someone who can intelligently look at a suspect image, and for the first time actually look outside the LHA box and recognise this a no shadow illusion hoax, but simply a black cable from an apollo surface experiment? Why iruri? Why has this sudden burst of neurons caused you to think sensibly for the first time? Now if only you could look at your blast crater and your stars in photographs dilema with a similarly clear mind and logical thought process, then who knows what amzing things you may be able to present. A self analysis of the whole LHA brainwashing phenomena would be a worthy start.

In reply to an earlier post on May 17, 2012 5:38:58 AM PDT
Lj3d says:
iruri says: Some of the Astronauts don't have the right stuff?

Lj3d: Its called the real world Iruri. As I have said several times here, astronauts are people like you and me who happen to decide sometime in life to do something extraordinary. NASAs screening process weeds out as many people as it can who are not qualified to be astronauts. But no screening process is perfect.

In reply to an earlier post on May 17, 2012 5:49:55 AM PDT
Lj3d says:
Christopher Girvan says: Lj I find it so disturbing that iruri (for all his Orwellian references) still looks at 'evidence' like this and still computes that 1+1=3.

Lj3d: One of the biggest LHA claims is shadows from two light sources being cast by two of the astronauts being imaged from the LM cabin camera as they walked near the flag. One cast a short shadow...the other a long shadow. If they had two light sources illuminating them, each would cast a short and long shadow. The video producers knew this, especially if they had so called photo experts looking at the vid in question. The shadow lengths were the result of uneven terrain. But Sibrel and company sell it as evidence of two light sources anyway hoping people who are not technically qualified to analyze what they see and they are right. Just as the commentary on the cable image posted just after your post shows.

What ends up happening is that the Kaysings and Sibrels of the world capitalize on the market of people who are so eager to show they think out of the box, and those people become their dupes. LHAs are two types. People who produce and sell the conspiracy, and gullible believers who believe what they are told because they want to.

In reply to an earlier post on May 17, 2012 5:52:08 AM PDT
Lj3d says:
Christopher Girvan says: Now the question is, after all the evidence denouncing every piece of so called iron clad proof that iruri has presented and blown us off with our responses, how is it that this one particular piece of nonesense has seemingly turned our OP into someone who can intelligently look at a suspect image, and for the first time actually look outside the LHA box and recognise this a no shadow illusion hoax, but simply a black cable from an apollo surface experiment? Why iruri?

Lj3d: Maybe Iruri does not like competition, and has to appear to be the credible LHA here by disagreeing with the competition.

In reply to an earlier post on May 17, 2012 5:59:16 AM PDT
Last edited by the author on May 17, 2012 6:06:00 AM PDT
Lj3d says:
Daryl Carpenter says:
The shadow on the left is of one of the Lunar Surface Profiling Experiments, and it's "intersecting" the cable leading to the Lunar Surface Gravimeter in the middle of the picture.

Of course, I actually had to find a high-resolution version of that picture and do about 10 minutes research into the Apollo 17 ALSEP to figure that out. If I were to go by "gut feelings" and "truthiness", it would have taken me 10 seconds to call the picture a fake.

Lj3d: DC, good call on the pic. Your right, anyone can find a picture (In this case, roundaboutte) that shows something that is not what it seems or should be and call it a fake or at least question it. It takes someone with good analytical skills to look at a suspect image and figure out why it appears as it does. This is why I mention techical qualifications or skills to LHAs who demonstrate they are woefully short of these skills.

LHAs should take note here. The shadow pic example is one that clearly shows someone has not used critical analysis skills in interpreting the photo. Otherwise, there would have been no need to post it.

In reply to an earlier post on May 17, 2012 6:01:43 AM PDT
Last edited by the author on May 17, 2012 6:02:07 AM PDT
Lj3d says:
roundaboutte says: Intersecting Shadows? AS17-147-22568

Lj3d: As DC already pointed out, its a black cable harness. If they were shadows, what and where are the source of the shadow?

In reply to an earlier post on May 17, 2012 2:04:33 PM PDT
Last edited by the author on May 17, 2012 2:06:39 PM PDT
iruri says:
Yes, I'm sure there are people that just believe what they are told, aka, "Go Along to Get Along".
Circa, LBJ. Gulf of Tonkin.
The shadows you mention aren't needed because there are so many other discrepancies.
The one I like the most is the Astronut coming down the Ladder, all Lit up like a Light Bulb.
In this same Picture the back of the LM, which is in Shadow, Lit up also and shows the "Flag" and words, "United States" and the Gold Mylar Plastic lit up.
Folks, this thing is getting too stupid to be believed. Anyone with 1/2 their brain tied behind their back can see this whole thing was Faked. The Moon Landings did not happen, no one walked on the Moon.

Posted on May 17, 2012 2:25:03 PM PDT
Anyone with half a brain? That would be you iruri! 2708 posts explaining, amongst other things, reflected light on the moons surface, and you still cannot comprehend a simple analysis of a photographic image. You are beyond being beligerantly pathetic.

In reply to an earlier post on May 17, 2012 2:28:33 PM PDT
Christopher, I think you need a better yardstick. "Half" is being way too generous!

Posted on May 17, 2012 3:03:40 PM PDT
Thankfully, I have an entire brain encased in my skull, not a half a brain that would be squished every time I sat down.

Posted on May 17, 2012 3:33:16 PM PDT
iruri says:
Daryl Carpenter says:

Thankfully, I have an entire brain encased in my skull, not a half a brain that would be squished every time I sat down.

Squished or not, It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out the moon landings were Hoaxed.

In reply to an earlier post on May 17, 2012 4:00:46 PM PDT
Lj3d says:
iruri says: Yes, I'm sure there are people that just believe what they are told, aka, "Go Along to Get Along".
Circa, LBJ. Gulf of Tonkin. The shadows you mention aren't needed because there are so many other discrepancies. The one I like the most is the Astronut coming down the Ladder, all Lit up like a Light Bulb.
In this same Picture the back of the LM, which is in Shadow, Lit up also and shows the "Flag" and words, "United States" and the Gold Mylar Plastic lit up. Folks, this thing is getting too stupid to be believed. Anyone with 1/2 their brain tied behind their back can see this whole thing was Faked. The Moon Landings did not happen, no one walked on the Moon.

Lj3d: I'd explain the Aldrin pic, but it would be a waste of time. I'd sure like to see you use just a tenth of your brain to answer my questions on why there are no stars in the ISS, Soyuz etc. pics. But I know your just here because you like to be idiotic...in fact, I believe you believe the moon landings really happened!

In reply to an earlier post on May 17, 2012 4:14:28 PM PDT
iruri says:
Yes, I have heard the explanatin for Buzz being lit up, and it wasn't from Jack Daniel's.
It's because of the reflection of the sun off the surface of the moon. , I can't buy that one.

Posted on May 17, 2012 4:30:19 PM PDT
iruri says:"I can't buy that one"

Well then perhaps it WOULD take a rocket scientist to explain it to you that the landing really happened.

Loren: Statements like 'half a brain....tied behind their back???" proves to be the best yardstick I believe.

In reply to an earlier post on May 17, 2012 4:43:22 PM PDT
iruri ignores my posts but i will persist anyway.

Ask him how does he think the moon is such a bright object in the night sky when viewed from here on earth. Would it be the reflective qualities of the lunar surface? Ask him how on a full moon details can be seen standing in your own backyard under moonlight without the assistance of any other lighting? Would that be the intensity of the reflective qualities of sunlight reflecting of the lunar surface?

I think bringing Jack Daniels into the equation pretty well says alot. He even states that he knows the answer but can't buy it? What is so difficult for him to understand, or is that half a brain he has completely damaged?

Posted on May 17, 2012 4:51:16 PM PDT
This thread on the Clavius forum provides a perfect insight into the mind of a typical LHA:

http://www.apollohoax.net/forum/index.php?PHPSESSID=4fc3204c07a0f9fc74eeb1c751704431&topic=77.0

Posted on May 17, 2012 5:23:33 PM PDT
Daryl; Can you imagine trying to get iruri to acknowledge the information presented at Clavius? Perhaps that is what we should do in response to his cut & pastes, simply post the link to clavius!

Just noted a response to iruri's 'reveiw' on Eugene Cernans Last Man on the Moon book where the poster writes a quote' The claim that radiation exposure during the apollo missions would have been fatal to the astronauts is only one example of such nonesence' by Dr james Van Allen. Strangely there is no smart comeback or response from iruri yet?
Your reply to Christopher Girvan's post:
To insert a product link use the format: [[ASIN:ASIN product-title]] (What's this?)
 

In reply to an earlier post on May 17, 2012 5:27:21 PM PDT
Lj3d says:
I think its time Iruri came clean and just admit he thinks we really did land on the moon. Nobody with half a brain would persist in presenting poorly researched cut and pastes for this amount of time...would they?

Posted on May 17, 2012 5:33:34 PM PDT
Well he is an aging Swiss ex-pat living in a country he doesn't like, so what else can he do with his time?

Let start a new thread- "What have the Swiss ever done to support the development of mankind, and should all beligerant delusional LHA ex-pats be removed and sent back to the old country"

In reply to an earlier post on May 17, 2012 6:42:42 PM PDT
Lj3d says:
Are you sure hes not Russian?

In reply to an earlier post on May 17, 2012 7:25:43 PM PDT
Last edited by the author on May 17, 2012 7:26:13 PM PDT
No, Swiss. And this is why he has me on ignore, because I pay attention to these things. Evidence? See page 4 of this discussion dated nov 28 2010 and read his brief exchange with a contributor called Maurer Roland who posts from Switzerland and iruri calls him from the old country. They go on to exchange notes on his micrometers, which also would indicate that iruri is not as dense as he makes out to be with technology and sciences.

You can see now why he has me on ignore, yes?

Posted on May 17, 2012 8:56:27 PM PDT
Lj3d says:
That clears it up to say the least and I agree. I suspect he tries to act dense about technology. Thats why I have a tough time believing hes really an LHA.

Posted on May 18, 2012 12:32:26 AM PDT
And it is also why he is a troll of the most devious kind. Manipulates on a certain point, frustrates all who contribute, then drops that 'toy' like a beligerant child, only to start all over again with another game of cut & paste. A debater with an emphesis on the 'bait.'

In reply to an earlier post on May 18, 2012 2:47:08 PM PDT
Lj3d says:
He's way past the point of being able to frustrate me. I learned long ago that some people simply do not even consider an opposing view, much less look at what supports that view and weigh it against their view and change their view if the evidence warrants. I usually like to know which people will not even consider an opposing view so I don't spend a lot of time on them. I have probably spent more time on responding to Iruri than I should but, what the hey.
[Add comment]
Add your own message to the discussion
To insert a product link use the format: [[ASIN:ASIN product-title]] (What's this?)
Prompts for sign-in
 


Recent discussions in the Science forum

Discussion Replies Latest Post
Global warming is the most serious problem of our generation part 2 9395 9 minutes ago
Us Creationists....We call your bluff 44 14 minutes ago
The war to save our society 22 1 hour ago
Russian scientist spies mountain-sized asteroid heading our way 30 2 hours ago
The Gelles Curve II 5 2 hours ago
The Origins Of Life 6489 2 hours ago
Australian scientists announce solar energy breakthrough 67 2 hours ago
The Tale of Two Brains (the source of morality and why we think we have a "conscience") 29 2 hours ago
Why can't the Science Forum receive effective moderation? 47 3 hours ago
A Planned Global Economy to meet Growth Objectives --versus-- A Global Market Economy without Plan or Known Purpose 7 3 hours ago
Creationists ask.......Are there ANY honest Geo-Physicists? 314 3 hours ago
Did the Dinosaurs Become Extinct Because They Were Good Eating? 18 4 hours ago
 

This discussion

Discussion in:  Science forum
Participants:  219
Total posts:  5480
Initial post:  Nov 23, 2010
Latest post:  Sep 5, 2014

New! Receive e-mail when new posts are made.
Tracked by 9 customers

Search Customer Discussions