mrstickball said:
highwaystar101 said:
peace_lover said:
No Offense.., but since what they have discovered are beyond the others technology to reach, or too hard to proof its falsity by others.., it seem they're aready spewing crap like no others..., No offence, but nowadays.., people seem to be "forced" to believe whatever they said, whatever they found, since most people are ignorant at its best.., yeah, i'm no scientist, but judging from their bad track record about fake moon landing..., i'm not buying it anymore..
|
Seriously, the moon landings were not faked. Here's a few reason why...
- You can bounce lasers off a mirror left there by the Apollo astronauts.
- When you analyse the videos of people walking on the moon their motions cannot be explained by anything other than a low level of gravity (no, the footage isn't slowed down, and no they are not on wires).
- Videos were made of a feather and a hammer falling at the same speed, which is only possible in a vacuum. No vacuum chambers existed in 1966 capable of holding a convincing looking film set. It could have only been on the moon.
- They've even taken photos of the landing sites of Apollo 11 and 14 where you can see evidence of the human activity.
- The Soviets had the means to track the Apollo missions, and yet they never claimed it was a hoax. Despite the fact that exposing it as a hoax would have been a huge hammer blow for the USA during the cold war. (Essentially the biggest sceptics of all are satisfied).
And to be quite frank, all the "evidence" you hear against people going to the moon is usually easily explainable.
And they haven't found alien life, NASA have just said that they are going to discuss a piece of evidence that will help in the search of life. Nothing has been found.
|
Moon hoaxers are the most aggrivating people on Earth. 10 years from now, SpaceX will be selling rides to the moon - when that is the case, shouldn't one think that just *maybe* we could of done it with 20x more funding a few decades ago?
All hoax evidence is based on very small, objectionable issues...They totally deny all the sound arguments. After all, we've been sending stuff in space for decades now - why is it so impossible to believe that once we've left Earth, we haven't gone the few extra days' journey to the closest object to us?
|
I know, it's not infeasible to accept that man landed on the moon. Especially when there has been many powerful motivations to do it and it is within the reaches of the existing technology.
I love the flag argument, where they claim the waving is proof that they existed in some kind of atmosphere. But when you watch the video the flag is actually knocked, and waves for a lot longer than it would if it was knocked on Earth, indicating that there is no friction from the air.
Therefore the flag had to of been in a vacuum. How's the only way it could have been in a vacuum? If it was on the moon.
The evidence they actually cite to try and disprove the moon landings actually contains conclusive evidence in itself that the event took place on the moon.
