NASA, Sick of all that Conspiracy Thing and Released over 10,000 Photos From Apollo

[Powerogue]

Yea, same here. All we have to go on, is what they say or show us. I mean, maybe we actually have landed on the moon. But to say, we never have, isn't that far fetched.

That's the least crazy thing he's said (but still on the list, given the photos). I'm more concerned with him thinking the earth is flat. (And possibly the moon as well? He wasn't terribly clear on that but he implied it with that "the moon isn't an object that can be landed on". Does he think the moon is painted on the firmament? I legitimately wouldn't be surprised. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firmament

[Hooked]

I agree with Eric Dubay's take on "gravity."



- - - Updated - - -



I know, which is why I don't believe in the moon landing. There is no "scientific evidence" that supports it.

I agree with the video.

[Tackhisis]

If you get an expensive enough telescope you can probably see the flag.

The problem is that no one can see it, or any remains of a manned flight. They even cannot get a Google-quality satellite maps of it now, in 2016.

[Tackhisis]

This argument presupposes that he accepts that the ISS is actually in space.

Well, as primitive as the low-orbit ISS is, it is the pinnacle of a human space program, which is trivial to be inspected today. Yet they tell us that 40 years ago, when no one could prove that independently, USA pulled ELEVEN SUCCESSFUL MANNED missions on the MOON and we are asked to believe in it.

[May90]

The problem is that no one can see it, or any remains of a manned flight. They even cannot get a Google-quality satellite maps of it now, in 2016.

Hmm? They do see it, dude.

http://www.space.com/16798-american-...lo-photos.html

[Garnier Fructis]

Well, as primitive as the low-orbit ISS is, it is the pinnacle of a human space program, which is trivial to be inspected today. Yet they tell us that 40 years ago, when no one could prove that independently, USA pulled ELEVEN SUCCESSFUL MANNED missions on the MOON and we are asked to believe in it.

I'm not going to take you seriously until you pony up a reason why it's impossible.

[Tackhisis]

Hmm? They do see it, dude.

And what is that supposed to be?

[Tackhisis]

The weird part is that it's likely more difficult for the Moon landing to be a government conspiracy at this point

What is difficult about that? You just show some patriotic pavilion and training shots, launch some automatic stations, some staged landings, with no casualties and no chance for failure. It is easier than actually risking lives and disgrace.

[Pantelija]

NASA Got Sick of all that Conspiracy Thing and Released over 10,000 Photos from the Apollo Moon Mission

More in link

I heard photos are really hard to manipulate in 2016

As always Genn Greymane continues spam for post count.

[Garnier Fructis]

The most distressing thing about this whole topic is that I can't tell who's saying 'doctored photos' as a joke, and who's saying it seriously.

[Tackhisis]

keeping thousands of people silent for decades

There was no "thousands of people" involved. In such projects teams do not know what others are doing.

[May90]

And what is that supposed to be?

What's what supposed to be? Read the article, mate.

What is difficult about that? You just show some patriotic pavilion and training shots, launch some automatic stations, some staged landings, with no casualties and no chance for failure. It is easier than actually risking lives and disgrace.

What are you talking about? There were casualties; real people died or were injured in space programs throughout the years. Many missions failed, and the public knew of it - there was no disgrace, every sane individual understands how complicated space missions are and how many things can go wrong.

Unlike some other conspiracy theorists, you do not even seem to get basic facts right. Your skepticism is based exclusively on your ignorance and unwillingness to educate yourself.

There was no "thousands of people" involved. In such projects teams do not know what others are doing.

You do not seem to know much about how NASA operates either... *sigh*

[Tackhisis]

real people died or were injured in space programs throughout the years.

There need to be "casualties" or "malfunctions" from time to time, but again, it is nowhere close to what we would have get if they had actually attempted manned Moon missions with the 70s technology.

[May90]

There need to be "casualties" or "malfunctions" from time to time, but again, it is nowhere close to what we would have get if they had actually attempted manned Moon missions with the 70s technology.

And what makes you think that? By the time the first landing mission started, the space tech was already refined enough to (mostly) avoid casualties due to factual mistakes.

Garnier Fructis asked you this a few times, but you never responded. So I will ask too: which part of the missions was impossible? You say it was impossible with the 70-s tech - what was exactly? The moon landing missions aren't nearly as complicated as some other missions successfully executed throughout the years.

---

It is the same damn thing with all these conspiracy theories. People never get into the details, because they lack the knowledge on the subject. They just say, "It is all a conspiracy, because [insert a vague reason]".

[Stonecloak]

It doesn't matter. The people that don't believe it happened will just find whatever reason they can to not believe. If they were brought to the moon to the exact site they'd say "This was just staged just before we got here". There's no limit to how far people take denial. Overall there's no good enough argument convincing anyone to think it didn't happen.

[madworldzzz]

No, I am sorry, believing in conspiracy's IS stupid and ignorant.

conspiracy definition: "goes against the official narrative"

what you are implying: whatever any official media outlet tells me is 100% true and they are telling me purely for my own benefit, anyone that stops and thinks for even one second IS stupid and ignorant.

- - - Updated - - -

It doesn't matter. The people that don't believe it happened will just find whatever reason they can to not believe. If they were brought to the moon to the exact site they'd say "This was just staged just before we got here". There's no limit to how far people take denial. Overall there's no good enough argument convincing anyone to think it didn't happen.

just trying to be subjective, being that you personally were not on the moon, are you not in an equal and opposite level of denial?

[May90]

conspiracy definition: "goes against the official narrative"

No, conspiracy theory is when there is no evidence supporting it and you choose to believe it because it goes against the official narrative.

[Stonecloak]

conspiracy definition: "goes against the official narrative"

what you are implying: whatever any official media outlet tells me is 100% true and they are telling me purely for my own benefit, anyone that stops and thinks for even one second IS stupid and ignorant.

- - - Updated - - -



just trying to be subjective, being that you personally were not on the moon, are you not in an equal and opposite level of denial?

No, because as I said, the evidence presented to me proving we did land on the moon very much outweights evidence which suggests it did not. That is the only way anyone who didn't land on the moon, or wasn't working for NASA can formulate a conclusion. Not to mention common knowledge on our presence in space can help as well. What you're saying is we can't have reason or logic. There's two sides, so they must both inherently be suspicious. Which is wrong. How do you think we prove anything to ourselves. Is the gov. shady AF? Yea, but that doesn't mean everything all of a sudden is a false flag. You have to have some balance to thinking. If you accept the fact that it may be false you also have to be willing to accept it can be real, then just let the evidence support the logic.

[Tackhisis]

If they were brought to the moon to the exact site they'd say "This was just staged just before we got here".

We ask for independent confirmation, not some blurry photos where pieces of rubble are decorated with arrows and labeled as 'landing modules', 'rovers', 'left equipment' etc.

[May90]

We ask for independent confirmation, not some blurry photos where pieces of rubble are decorated with arrows and labeled as 'landing modules', 'rovers', 'left equipment' etc.

Dude...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G6A72ufn3l4

This was shot almost 50 years ago. This is as good as you are gonna get, until the next expedition lands on the moon and takes new photos with modern cameras (which, again, you will probably say they have photoshopped in Hollywood). If you want "independent confirmation" of the kind you are asking for, then build your own spaceship and fly over there on your own.

Your arguments do not even make sense any more. You do not know anything about the optics and technological requirements to get a clear shot from the orbit of a tiny flag with visible colors on it?