It's actually easy to scientifically demonstrate that Apollo 11 went to the moon without astronauts inside!
The reasoning is as follows. The astronauts could not be inside Apollo 11 simply because there wasn't enough room! We all know Apollo 11 only had 3 seats, and they were already taken by a professional filmmaker, a special effects specialist, and the carpenter responsible for building the fake scenario on the moon!
Faking the moon landings requires a massive conspiracy which hasn't been broken in decades. That is not probable. :p
Not massive at all, read the thread...only a handful of people would need to know the dudes were not in the capsule...mission control, listening stations would all believe they were talking to the guys in the capsule..when they were on their hotel balcony's.
The JFK thing has been kept quiet has it not...it's not probable there was only one shooter... ;)
Not massive at all, read the thread...only a handful of people would need to know the dudes were not in the capsule...mission control, listening stations would all believe they were talking to the guys in the capsule..when they were on their hotel balcony's.
The JFK thing has been kept quiet has it not...it's not probable there was only one shooter... ;)
If all these things are brilliant conspiracies they've not done a very good job of keeping them secret have they :)
Everyone knows about the ufo that crashed in new mexico so why do they bother pretending it didn't happen?
If all these things are brilliant conspiracies they've not done a very good job of keeping them secret have they :)
Everyone knows about the ufo that crashed in new mexico so why do they bother pretending it didn't happen?
They've done a great job of covering them up. Conspiracy nuts are going to talk either way..(9/11 as an example). The official word on it remains the same.
Of course the REALLY great ones you've never heard of ;)
Yes Mexico crash is another great example of a cover up...The gov with their disinformation people has the world believing a UFO crashed there, when really it was just a few crash test dummies.
If all these things are brilliant conspiracies they've not done a very good job of keeping them secret have they :)
Everyone knows about the ufo that crashed in new mexico so why do they bother pretending it didn't happen?
To be fair, Area 51's rumours could have been started and/or kept going by the American government for reasons of their own, such as to divert attention to that location rather than a secret area somewhere else. It's not likely, but it is possible. Certainly far more possible than supposing that aliens managed to cover many light-years of space to visit us and then despite choosing not to reveal themselves to us, their flying saucers get seen by lots of (mostly drunk) people, and the aliens actually take people up in the ships to examine them or show them around the ship, and then drop them back off* having erased the memories of half of the humans.
Me, I do think that there is alien life out there. If it evolved on Earth, then it's possible elsewhere. Even if the chances of life evolving is zillions to one against, then given the millions of galaxies, each containing millions of stars, there must be other inhabited planets. I just think that (a) it's probable (but not certain) that life is so unlikely that we're probably very far from other life bearing planets (especially ones whose life-forms have developed space travel), (b) if faster than light travel or wormholes or hyperspace etc are all impossible (as most physicists seem to agree) then the chances of them travelling all this way, and in the right direction to stumble upon us (or the signals that we've been broadcasting for such a short period of time, universally speaking) is extremely small (like winning the lottery eighteen weeks running, or meeting someone who likes Sabre Wulf and can read without moving their lips), and (c) if they do want to remain unnoticed by most or all of Earth's population (as they seem to want to do, if they are here, otherwise they'd make a big announcement surely), then they are doing a pretty bad job of staying out of site.
* But not Glenn Miller. For some reason they kept him. They must like Band music, or he turned out to be a really good flying saucer driver, or someting.
The cost of the Apollo project in today's money was over 100 billion dollars. Hardly what I would call doing something on the cheap.
Perspective.
If the unmanned faked version cost $100 billion in todays money, and a actual crewed mission would have been $200 billion and a delay in the project....then the former would be doing it on the cheap.
Nah just for giggles, I know they went. Just pointing out that it WAS possible to fake it (the first landing at least) and there was a big motive(s)...a cold war first, take attention from the Vietnam war, fulfill the promise of being on the moon within the decade etc etc.
in effect they were right, the photographs are not fakes.
The content is.
...which would equally apply to the moon landing movies/photos...that was the point of that.
But rather than a couple of schoolgirls, a pair of scissors and some cardboard...the US gov/Nasa had far greater resources to make them look 'good'.
EDIT: But on the bigfoot one, anthropologists said it was not a human walk....that was the content, and they were wrong...it was a dude in a Halloween costume.
They even talked about the 'pendulous' breasts moving in a real way etc... :lol:
so, if it was possible to fake it, what makes you sure that it wasn't?
just asking.
Good question.
I suppose you (I) can rarely be sure of anything 100%. As guesser said earlier in the thread though, there is a point where you have to accept certain things to make a decision...boils down to faith in what you are told, what your common sense tells you and what you rationalize as being realistic.
Comments
Yes we are, and you are locked in with us - you can't escape!
What about the Key Grip?
http://youtu.be/Obd_jTO66-0
Not to mention the poor bloke that had to stay behind after panning the camera! (Alright, I know, they controlled the camera from earth)
Yep, in the next room to where the 'astronauts' were broadcasting. :lol:
Which one?
Ok ... sure ... I believe ya.
(read: has no clue)
It was a Very Large Cord indeed.
I don't know. That girl looks real enough to me.
No no. 1960s inter-planetary telemetry was easily up to the job. Why would anyone doubt that?
And likewise just because it was possible they were real doesn't mean it's probable they were real ;)
That works both ways! :lol:
Only if you don't have any understanding of what the word probable means :p
I do, google it if you are not sure...still works both ways ;)
It's probable that the US gov would go the cheaper safer route if they could get away with it...
You can base that on nigh on every gov contract going to the lowest bidder....'it's probably ok to do so..'
Not massive at all, read the thread...only a handful of people would need to know the dudes were not in the capsule...mission control, listening stations would all believe they were talking to the guys in the capsule..when they were on their hotel balcony's.
The JFK thing has been kept quiet has it not...it's not probable there was only one shooter... ;)
If all these things are brilliant conspiracies they've not done a very good job of keeping them secret have they :)
Everyone knows about the ufo that crashed in new mexico so why do they bother pretending it didn't happen?
They've done a great job of covering them up. Conspiracy nuts are going to talk either way..(9/11 as an example). The official word on it remains the same.
Of course the REALLY great ones you've never heard of ;)
Yes Mexico crash is another great example of a cover up...The gov with their disinformation people has the world believing a UFO crashed there, when really it was just a few crash test dummies.
Great job!
it was broken in 1978, when the motion picture "capricorn one" was released.
To be fair, Area 51's rumours could have been started and/or kept going by the American government for reasons of their own, such as to divert attention to that location rather than a secret area somewhere else. It's not likely, but it is possible. Certainly far more possible than supposing that aliens managed to cover many light-years of space to visit us and then despite choosing not to reveal themselves to us, their flying saucers get seen by lots of (mostly drunk) people, and the aliens actually take people up in the ships to examine them or show them around the ship, and then drop them back off* having erased the memories of half of the humans.
Me, I do think that there is alien life out there. If it evolved on Earth, then it's possible elsewhere. Even if the chances of life evolving is zillions to one against, then given the millions of galaxies, each containing millions of stars, there must be other inhabited planets. I just think that (a) it's probable (but not certain) that life is so unlikely that we're probably very far from other life bearing planets (especially ones whose life-forms have developed space travel), (b) if faster than light travel or wormholes or hyperspace etc are all impossible (as most physicists seem to agree) then the chances of them travelling all this way, and in the right direction to stumble upon us (or the signals that we've been broadcasting for such a short period of time, universally speaking) is extremely small (like winning the lottery eighteen weeks running, or meeting someone who likes Sabre Wulf and can read without moving their lips), and (c) if they do want to remain unnoticed by most or all of Earth's population (as they seem to want to do, if they are here, otherwise they'd make a big announcement surely), then they are doing a pretty bad job of staying out of site.
* But not Glenn Miller. For some reason they kept him. They must like Band music, or he turned out to be a really good flying saucer driver, or someting.
Which is more probable...
The US gov lying to save money and get a project completed cheaper and quicker than the cold war enemy.
Or a gov being honest and doing the right thing...(try not to laugh at that one).
The cost of the Apollo project in today's money was over 100 billion dollars. Hardly what I would call doing something on the cheap.
Perspective.
If the unmanned faked version cost $100 billion in todays money, and a actual crewed mission would have been $200 billion and a delay in the project....then the former would be doing it on the cheap.
so, if it was possible to fake it, what makes you sure that it wasn't?
just asking.
in effect they were right, the photographs are not fakes.
The content is.
...which would equally apply to the moon landing movies/photos...that was the point of that.
But rather than a couple of schoolgirls, a pair of scissors and some cardboard...the US gov/Nasa had far greater resources to make them look 'good'.
EDIT: But on the bigfoot one, anthropologists said it was not a human walk....that was the content, and they were wrong...it was a dude in a Halloween costume.
They even talked about the 'pendulous' breasts moving in a real way etc... :lol:
Good question.
I suppose you (I) can rarely be sure of anything 100%. As guesser said earlier in the thread though, there is a point where you have to accept certain things to make a decision...boils down to faith in what you are told, what your common sense tells you and what you rationalize as being realistic.