Or did we? Okay. Below is a video clip of what is said to be an outtake of the fabricated moon landing. Under that is a link to the explanation. I personally believe we did go to the moon but there are some strong believers of conspiracy that say we didn't. I have carefully chosen the other links below from a link page as the best of. These demonstrate the best evidence and arguments for both sides and aren't long and drawn out. They include pictures with unexplained lighting with cross shadows and bounced light considering the sun was the only source, absence of stars, scale issues, a rock with a clearly visible apparent prop I.D., images that cover lens reference crossmarks (suggesting superimposing). It was said that the film in the cameras would have been destroyed by the cosmic rays, there was no apparent communication delay between ground control and the lander as there should be with that kind of distance and there was not a direct feed to the networks for broadcast. A camera shot a monitor at ground control and then that image was sent to the viewers, suggesting that NASA carefully controlled what the public saw and heard to maintain the illusion. These links are very interesting and to the point. So, do you think we really made it to the moon or have we all been punk'd?

The Video - may take 5-10 seconds to load & play

www.moontruth.com/clips/moontruth.mpg


The Explanation

www.moontruth.com
__________________________________

The Making Of - quite comical - click on images for playback

www.moontruth.com/makingOf.htm
__________________________________

The "Prop" Rock

www.lunaranomalies.com/c-rock.htm
__________________________________

The Answers

www.apollo-hoax.me.uk/homepage.html

www.apollo-hoax.me.uk/index.html
___________________________________


The Images' Reference Marks & Lighting Issues

www.batesmotel.8m.com
___________________________________


www.apfn.org/apfn/moon.htm

http://pirlwww.lpl.arizona.edu/%7Ejscotti/NOT_faked/moon.htm

www.wired.com/wired/archive/2.09/moon.land_pr.html

www.science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2001/ast23feb_2.htm

www.lunaranomalies.com

Very cute. I'm positive we did BTW.

Very creative folks. I like watching these guys go at it back and forth. The lighting issue ought to give the lighting guys on the DVinfo site a field day.

The needless camera shake instantly gives away moontruth.mpg as faked. How could the first steps on the moon be photographed by an operator, handheld?

(In actuality, the camera hinged out of a compartment on the LEM in order to record those historic first steps. The camera was locked down. There would not have been--indeed, there was not--any camera shake.)

Robert. Did you not see the explanation?

www.moontruth.com

Oh boy, a web site run by 12 year olds. I'm sure they'll release unbefore seen footage of a second gunman soon.

Speaking of which. It's not a video but is ironic. Once there, scroll down to see the casing.

www.coasttocoastam.com/gen/page305.html

I over estimated their age, obviously their 9 years olds.

When I was 9, I was snapping pictures, Kodak style, and making little movies with my cheap little movie cam, besides hitting the pools, fishing holes and riding my bike along "the monkey trails." What happened? :-)

James--

The point to my last post being, if they wanted to shoot a plausibly convincing fake, they wouldn't have used shaky-cam.

"How could the first steps on the moon be photographed by an operator, handheld?

(In actuality, the camera hinged out of a compartment on the LEM in order to record those historic first steps. The camera was locked down. There would not have been--indeed, there was not--any camera shake.)"

Robert, you got me. I wasn't paying attention to what you said. You are correct. I believe there is an argument about this very thing in one of those links. One of those yahoos says, "well who took his picture if he was supposed to be the first one out?"

Well anything that was run on FOX loses credibility with me right off the bat.

And if you put man or dude at the end of a sentence, you lose credibility with me also. But that's just me.

Appreciated the moontruth.com link, James... for those of you who might not have read closely enough to get their point, the site and video is a "spoof based on the idea that the Apollo 11 moonlanding was faked," that is, they're making fun of those who actually believe that sort of nonsense. Very creative!

What does FOX or Mr. O'Reilly have to do with this? Have they been talking about this lately?

Finally. Thanks for that post Chris. I've been waiting for someone to actually read that far and talk about it. It seems to draw you in and then.....

I agree...this is a pretty good poke at conspiracy theorists. Nice to see it done in a good-humored fashion.

I don't get the last line "Sorry, Mr. Gorsky"...what conspiracy theory are they poking fun of in that respect? I see there's a link to something along the lines of "armstrong-gorsky.html" but the link is a dead end.

Update: Who thinks up this stuff? This one is kind of funny, though. Read about the Armstrong/Gorsky reference here. (http://www.truthorfiction.com/rumors/a/armstrong-gorsky.htm)

This is a timely post. TechTV did a show all about this, on a show called "Conspiracy." For the hundreds of men and women who worked on the moon launch it would be impossible for them to keep their secret.

Conspiracy theories always make me laugh. Now if we can just figure out where Elvis is...

Some fascinating stuff...especially after a few adult libations!

Don't these people have jobs?

Did laugh my ass off at the lighting grid taking a dump in mid-shot, really well done and acted.

NANU NANU!

People who think we didn't go to the moon should take a fair and balanced look at all the facts. Consider the math. By current standards it costs $10,000 per pound to get one pound of payload into orbit. So why is it so hard to believe that you could pop a 500lbs dune buggy all the way to the moon (1000x farther)? The other cool thing is that dune buggy could carry an extra 1000lbs utilizing only two 36v batteries. Also I don't know about you. But at the doctor they put a lead apron on me and leave the room as a CAMERA takes a 1/250 of a SECOND exposure of my teeth, but I'm sure a sheet of mylar could protect me just as well under 10,000 times that radiation at a constant 4 HOURS (Van Allen Belt)... and I wouldn't lose a hair or even get sick. Yeah, anyone who questions that is a total conspiracy theory dope. I say, "quit being a moron and turn off the questions you morons!" Did you know that Nasa openly says that the lunar lander had the same computing power as a calculator watch of today? Next time you hate your computer for some stupid glitch you should think to yourself, "It's not like I'm asking this thing to calculate a one in 10,000 chance of safely landing on the moon."

What motivation would there be to fake the impossible? I mean it's not like the entire world had it's eyes on the showdown between the USA and the USSR? It's not like the Soviets had the first rocket in space, the first satellite in space, the first monkey/dog in space, the first man in space... and the clear image of being the leader in space and space exploration... i.e. nuclear dominance. Did you know that the USSR actually DECIDED that it wasn't possible to get a man safely through the Van Allen Belt? And THAT is one of the primary reasons that they actually GAVE UP THE RACE they were clearly winning? All their scientists discovered was a great recipe for fried monkey.

Yeah, it's not like it's a political world where we had everything to gain and everything to lose based on winning the space race? It's not like there is EVER any exaggeration taking place for political motives? Damn conspiracy theorists.

Have we been there? I don't know... I'm about 50/50 on it. Do I think anybody that questions it is a moron? No.

I grew up in the Cocoa Beach area during the late 60's, and have several family members and friends who were both contractors and NASA employees during the time of the Apollo program, as well as the Apollo/Soyuz mission. As a result, my view is slightly skewed towards "we did it". To that end, I'll stay on the sidelines of this discussion--for now... <grin>

As a point of interest and slight tangent for the conversation, another poster mentioned the LEM's computer having the processing power of a desktop calculator... If any hard-core tech-head is interested in playing with a simulator of the LEM's on-board computer, go to this link:

http://apollo.spaceborn.dk/dsky-sim.html

Gee, makes you kind of appreciate the good old ASCII PC keyboard and Windows after seeing what they had to do for data entry.

I wonder if the Shuttle is still using the old OS9 operating system in their General-Purpose Computers like they used to... Ah, the days of the Tandy Color Computer II...

(Yes, I grew up drinking Tang!)

-Phil

Phil, I had to laugh when I saw the very last thing on your post. My first system used Pinnacle Studio and I want to join your club.

Hey I don't mean any disrespect to the believers in my "disbeliever" points. It's just that I read through the whole post and everybody made it "socially improbable" for somebody to make a compelling argument in opposition of the landing.

When I say I'm 50/50, I mean it. I'm a really patriotic guy. I WANT to think we did it. As a dreamer I need to feel those things are possible. I just happen to think that SOME of the conspiracy theorists raise some pretty good questions.

I've been to Cape twice and the Smithsonian three times. I have books about the space program that never mention any conspiracy. In fact my cousin designed the heat tiles for the shuttle. Believe me? First initial "B".

Anyway the one fair statement about the program is that I think it would only take a hundred (or fewer) people to pull it off. If I were one of the original "crew" I would understand the importance of keeping it real, so to speak.

How much have you heard about Area 51 outside of conspiracy theorists? There's a hundred times as many people involved with that location and there is no problem keeping that quiet... even if it's only a base you hear nothing about it... It would NOT be as difficult to do the same regarding a staged landing. Did you know that there are Gypsum dunes in Area 51? Personally I don't think there are UFO's there... but it wouldn't surprise me to find the surface of the moon there, and that would explain BOTH conspiracy ideas. BTW Gypsum is a super fine light gray powder.

People will die over spiritual beliefs with NO verification. If you show people a glimpse of something they'll buy it forever. I don't think even 90% of the original Nasa employees would have been in on it.

I hate to give away a little short I want to do, but here it is. I want to do a film I wrote about a Grip who volunteers for a science fiction movie that's going to be shot in the desert. As a short the story doesn't go through much development, it's a lot of dialog on a bus in the night, driving to an undisclosed location. Basically it's a comedy about a "Grip" that finds himself on the shoot of the moon landing... and the comedic motive is the implication that every "hollywood guy" is going to be killed at the end of the shoot. I'm sorry if you don't see the humor, but it's there. I will use variations of the conspiracy pictures as things that the incompetant Grip did because he was so worried about his safety. Imagine government suits with the personality of a gay director... really flamy, but when they're alone (and sometimes not realizing the Grip can hear them) they talk about wanting to kill the grip. The humor is in their "matter of fact" way of talking about it. As a variation the short could end with it being a cheezy Ed Wood type movie after all, with the Grip's imagination driving the whole moon landing thing. What do ya' think?

Sounds like it could be funny.

How do they get rid of all the plants and make all the craters without leaving footprints?

One hundred years ago people never believed that the Wright Brothers flew. The Flat Earth Society is still around. The Flat Earther's believe man never went to the moon or that we even went into space (you can't orbit a flat earth). The space shuttle is a hoax etc. etc.

There ist no moon. This is just some pancake somebody threw up on the ceiling that got stuck there.

Cheers, Peter