Recommended Posts

Exerpt from AboveTopSecret:

Here are some smoking gun photos I found that will make you slap your forehead in embarrassment. You will probably be too embarrassed to speak after this. Take a good hard look at these photos. This will be the clincher that will change your mind if you are on the fence or an Apollo believer.

http://www.debunking...onspiracies.htm

5. Distinct line separating foreground from artificial backdrop

In many moon photos, you can see a distinct line between the foreground and backdrop, which consists of different textures, and indicates that the background is ARTIFICIAL, as in a movie set. Here is a clear example:

http://www.spacewall...5FlagSalute.jpg

IMPORTANT! Here is a much larger version that I want you to open in a new window and look at closely, because it contains a BIG NEW SMOKING GUN! View this image at its original size, and notice that behind the astronaut the edge of a WHITE CLOTH SHEET can be seen placed over the dirt! This is a MUST SEE smoking gun that I discovered but don't see mentioned on any other sites yet!

http://upload.wikime...2000-001114.jpg

4. Buzz Aldrin spotlight photo a smoking gun blunder

The famous photo of Buzz Aldrin standing in the spotlight is a giveaway in that he is being lit up in a spotlight from alleged sunlight while the ground around him is in darkness! How can the sun put a spotlight around a particular person like a stagehand pointing a spotlight on an actor or singer on stage?! This was obviously a major screw up, and NASA was reckless for thinking that no one would notice or that they could get away with it. In fact, it was such a blunder that NASA even tried to cover it up by brightening the rest of the surface in subsequent versions of it. Why would they do that if they had nothing to hide?

Here is the original version of it by NASA, which was released to newspapers in 1969:

http://grin.hq.nasa....2001-000013.jpg

Here is the edited version with the surface brightened up for the Lunar Surface Journal:

http://history.nasa....1-40-5903HR.jpg

8. Sun image on moon turns out to be light bulb in enhanced image

Here is another smoking gun that will make Apollo believers feel foolish and embarrassed. An Apollo image of the alleged sun from the moon?s surface turned out to be a big light bulb upon image enhancement! See images and enhancement below:

http://www.aulis.com/jackimages/as12sunbulbrevise.jpg

http://www.aulis.com/jackimages/11_14sunsetonmoon.jpg

more

Erm ... stop it. None of these photo's show anything they're being described to show. Also ... has anyone thought that when you see a photo that 'proves' something ... that perhaps the 'proof' photo was the hoax one? I just don't see the point in this.

The USA went to the moon. I'm not even American and I 100% believe they went and the photos are real.

I would like to call BS, but that's because I have faith that in this day and age, we have telescopes that can see the moon in very high detail, I'm sure someone could spend the time scanning the lunar surface and find the Flag, abandoned Rover, old Modules etc...

Edit

Lol the sun was a giant light bulb,

it technically still is a giant lightbulb :p

  • Like 8

For every nutter that believes it was a hoax there are millions of documents, pictures, resources, first hand accounts, telescopic photographs from earth, and satellite images that proves that they were there.

all this hoax stuff needs to stop, common if we were not there, don't you think Russia at the time would of tried to disprove it or China now with their mapping of the moon, or heck all the satellites we have looking at it... or even better the laser retro reflector we can PROVE is on the moon wouldn't be there right?

all this hoax stuff needs to stop, common if we were not there, don't you think Russia at the time would of tried to disprove it or China now with their mapping of the moon, or heck all the satellites we have looking at it... or even better the laser retro reflector we can PROVE is on the moon wouldn't be there right?

Get out of here with your sound logic and facts. CAN'T YOU SEE THE WHITE SHEET IN THE PICTURE???

/s

  • Like 2

Come on. I have family that worked on the lunar landers./ I also during tax time an aarp person who works here was a project lead at Grumman for the lunar lander and was at mission control when the landing happened. Also they have the lunar lander that was supposed to go on the next mission before it was cancelled here on long island.

It is not fake.

Besides the satellite pictures of the moon with our flag still there.

PS there would be multiple light sources on the moon, the sun. and the light being reflected off the earth.

  • Like 2

We went to the moon. There are satellite pictures that show the American flag still standing up along with the what's left of the lunar orbiters.

http://www.abc.net.a...tanding/4166604

Those photos/images are as bad as fake UFO pics, you can see bugger all except pixels!

We went to the moon. There are satellite pictures that show the American flag still standing up along with the what's left of the lunar orbiters.

http://www.abc.net.a...tanding/4166604

You seriously take those **** poor fuzzy blurry images as proof of anything ??? LOL :rofl:

post-37120-0-05819300-1354123881.jpg

  • Like 3

* Shows picture of astronauts on Moon*

"easily faked, backdrop, filmed in desert, etc."

*shows picture of Earth from the Moon*

"YOU DON'T KNOW WHAT THE EARTH LOOKS LIKE."

*shows pictures of rover on Mars*

"AIN'T NO PROOF MARS EVEN IS."

:rofl:

I'm not sure if these guys just don't believe we landed on the moon, or if the disavow the entirety of space travel. I mean Google maps must blow their tiny little minds.

  • Like 4

You all do realise that Hum is just the messenger and posts (usually weird) news stories he finds, right?

I posted this to see what people thought -- unfortunately there aren't many intelligent replies.

I too, do not see the white sheet allegedly laying on the ground, and do not understand why there would be one, even on a movie set.

They may have sent men to the moon, however, it's pretty clear that none of the video or photographs were taken there.

Any photo expert who is bold enough to tell you the truth will tell you this too. Even the Hassalblad camera engineer, Jan Lundgren, who developed the camera that the Apollo astronauts used, said that he could not explain the discrepancies and anomalies in the Apollo photos.

Is Mars a hoax too? I mean surely Curiosity can't be real, right?

I do believe in the Mars rovers -- I see no reason to fake those.

They can easily edit out any Life signs found there. ;)

  • Like 2

Is Mars a hoax too? I mean surely Curiosity can't be real, right?

I dunno, I get the feeling a human is behind it's twitter account. SOUNDS FAKE TO ME. :rofl:

They may have sent men to the moon, however, it's pretty clear that none of the video or photographs were taken there.

We can add this to the list of unintelligent replies, I guess.

  • Like 4

You seriously take those **** poor fuzzy blurry images as proof of anything ??? LOL :rofl:

Those photos/images are as bad as fake UFO pics, you can see bugger all except pixels!

If better pictures could be taken at this time, don't you think they would have done it? There's always one snitch--If it were truly fake, a high up NASA personnel would have leaked it by now. Scientist all over the world have examined moon rocks--they would have been proven as fake. In 1969, we didn't have robots to just go fetch some rocks so that rules out that possibility. I'm not trying to start a flame war, rather bring up arguments.

  • Like 1

I dunno, I get the feeling a human is behind it's twitter account. SOUNDS FAKE TO ME. :rofl:

We can add this to the list of unintelligent replies, I guess.

If you were intelligent, you would have READ the reasons why they are very unlikely to be genuine, before posting. :laugh:

You added no reasoning why you think the Moon images are real.

Why do some people spend so much time trying to discredit something, someone would have already confirmed it was faked if it was fake, its very hard to keep a secret for 40 years. And, at the time the USSR would have jumped at any opportunity to discredit the US. Unless of course it is a global conspiracy. Maybe the moon isn't real?

  • Like 2
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Posts

    • You've tried DuckDuckGo and Brave Search, now get serious with SearXNG by Paul Hill Over the last decade, it has become quite trendy to dump Google Search in favor of privacy-preserving alternatives such as DuckDuckGo, Startpage, and Brave Search. These search engines have done a very good job at highlighting dodgy practices by Google, such as adjusting search results based on what it thinks you’ll like (filter bubble) and stalking you around the web to advertise to you. While these search engines are good starting points when compared to non-private services like Google, there are still quite a few issues with them. For example, both DuckDuckGo and Brave Search require running non-free JavaScript in your web browser, which is comparable to running proprietary software on your computer, meaning you can be sure about what it’s actually doing in the background. Another issue is that these search engines are hosted on the respective companies’ servers, and you are using a service that you don’t control. Finally, DuckDuckGo, while offering privacy features, relies heavily on Microsoft’s infrastructure for its results and, in the past, has permitted Microsoft tracking scripts. If you are looking for a more private search solution than DuckDuckGo, Brave Search, and Startpage, then I recommend taking a look at SearXNG. It is a privacy-respecting metasearch engine that can be used via different public instances, which is useful for mobile users, or you can install it on your computer or server and run it locally with maximum control. Unlike Google, Bing, or Brave Search, which crawl the web and have their own search indexes, SearXNG is a metasearch engine, meaning it taps other search engines, stripping your identifying data, such as IP address, user agent, and cookies, in the process. Your search query is sent to the other search engines you enable before aggregating the results. SearXNG has deployment flexibility. If you are a casual user or a mobile user and don’t want to run SearXNG locally, you can use a public instance that is hosted by someone else. The main problem with this is that you are putting trust in the maintainer of the instance regarding stuff like logs that they may keep; good hosts should have a privacy policy explaining their policies. If you are trying to use SearXNG, you can also install the software on your device and then head to 127.0.0.1:8080 in your browser and search from there. While you don’t have to worry about a third-party admin like the public instances, search engines could ultimately block your IP address if they frown on you pulling in their search results locally. If you want to run it locally, it’s a good idea to use proxies or VPNs to hide your actual IP. You don’t have to worry about this with a public instance, as search engines never see your IP address. The main privacy benefit of using SearXNG is that it isolates your identity from the underlying engines that it’s capable of searching, such as Google and Bing. These search engines will only see requests coming from a generic server, so they can’t profile you and create a bubble filter that influences what results you see. This also ensures that your search engine doesn’t turn into an echo chamber that prevents you from reading alternative points of view. As a free software project, you are allowed to inspect SearXNG to make sure there are no negative features bundled inside. This sets it apart from the privacy search engines mentioned earlier because you can’t check their source code. As a meta search engine, you are not restricted to getting results from one source. Due to the fact that it scrapes content from other websites, your SearXNG instance will periodically get blocked from different providers, so it’s good to select a range of sources as a backup. While enabling all of the services will give you great results, this can make searching slower. I am personally happy with slower searches for the best results, but you can always check which providers are slowing down your search from the search results page and disable them to speed things up. If you want decent results quickly, enable the main search providers such as Google, Brave, DuckDuckGo, Qwant, Bing, and Yahoo. This way, you get wide coverage without the latency. On the Engines tab in Preferences, do note that there are different tabs, such as General, Images, and Videos, with their own providers that can be toggled and are not covered by "Enable all" while on the General tab, so be sure to dig into each. Just a note, if you want to enable everything, press "Enable all" in one tab, then hit save at the bottom of the page, then do the next tab, and so on. If you press "Enable all", then do that in each tab, and then save, nothing will stick. When I had just some of the search engines enabled, I searched “define nefarious” and results came back with the definition of “define” - obviously that was a sucky result. However, when I had everything enabled, it found dictionary pages for the word “nefarious” and even had an inline definition on the sidebar, which is quite nice too - that was delivered by WolframAlpha for anyone wondering! Probably the worst thing about this meta search engine is that the engines you select are saved with a cookie, so you must enable them on every new device you use SearXNG on, including if you decide to go into incognito mode with your web browser. Honestly, I would say this is the most annoying aspect, and perhaps if your browser lets you choose a separate private browsing search engine, then it would be best to use DuckDuckGo for this portion of your browsing. Another weakness of SearXNG is the random blocking of it by search providers. When you are on the results page, expand the “Response time” box, and it will show things like “Suspended: too many requests” or “access denied”. This is why it is good to enable several providers so that there is always a fallback to get results from. I won’t pretend SearXNG will be for everyone, however, if you enable all of the providers and put up with the slower response time, the results can be really amazing. Even if you don’t want to use it as your daily driver, keeping a bookmark handy that links to it is a good idea if you ever feel like doing a deep dive into a niche topic where other search engines are just failing to bring up any good result, due to the amount of sources it looks on. If you’re interested in radical user control over the software you use, installing SearXNG locally can also be a good idea, but be prepared to be temporarily blocked from sites if you trigger bot sensors without a VPN. Personally, I’ve opted to use a public instance, rather than install it myself. If you want to use it via a public instance, head over to searx.space to find a provider. Let us know in the comments if you have used SearXNG or its predecessor, Searx. What do you think about the quality of the results?
    • Dear Neowin, If it is not too much trouble, can you start using the new-ish designations for Insider Preview? "Experimental" is different than "former Dev" as it can apply to different models, eg 26H1 or 26H2 etc, right? No need to seed confusion IMHO. And, please "finally" update your graphics. OK?
    • Did you see their FAQ, its quite good. Have a look in the Advanced section. https://delta.chat/en/help
    • Just install Linux Mint that is a real blessing and many times cheaper because you can continue using your old Windows computer/laptop with the latest Linux updates.
    • Interesting share -- however it does not make sense: Email messages get stored somewhere, so how is Delta Chat "based on email" and decentralized without actually storing anything? By Web3 standard practices, the various Relays would require dedicated storage to make messages available to the recipients (like a large series of message queue channels, akin to racks of traditional post office boxes)... and Contacts must be two-way confirmed in order for encryption keys to be exchanged (ostensibly every key-pair is uniquely bound between sender and recipient) and the Relays would preserve the public keys in order to facilitate message carriage... or every device stores all sorts of keys and contact info. All of this to say, decentralized messaging is like running Bluesky nodes except instead of discovering/browsing public feeds by various posters (at the given node) these Delta Chats would be relaying encrypted messages (via Relays) that only trusted recipients would have the appropriate decryption key (their own private key) to read it. But this doesn't solve the "it's like email" sales pitch. The only way it's like email is that there's encrypted binary stuff being transported from your app into the federated ether of Delta Chat Relays for others to decrypt (hopefully only the intended recipient)... but outside of this federated relays framework, it is absolutely nothing like email.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Week One Done
      Woland13 earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Month Later
      Woland13 earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • One Year In
      bernmeister earned a badge
      One Year In
    • Week One Done
      Scoobystu earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Week One Done
      tuben earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      503
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      226
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      158
    4. 4
      Steven P.
      75
    5. 5
      FloatingFatMan
      71
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!