Recommended Posts

Even if this happened, people could call BS on those photos too. Look save up some money and get up there yourself. Why not start a kickstarter fund to build a rocket to go to the moon and prove it yourself.

Pass, you can go right ahead, that way the glory will be yours

By the way, you've replied to a post I made Last November

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.

Every one of these nonsense conspiracy nut assertions was debunked by REAL scientists who REALLY know how the science of photography, space travel, engineering, physics, etc. works.  If anyone wants to know the TRUTH, they can just Google these images and be taken to the real debunking sites with real facts and real science.

 

Here's just one of them.  http://www.clavius.org/

 

Or you can just not feed the cynical/mentally ill who are doing this to sell e-books and drive ad hit revenue...and the nutters who ignorantly promulgate their idiocy.

  • Like 1

I don't see how anyone looking at the expert photographic evidence, the science of the moon 'landings', can seriously believe that Apollo astronauts went to the Moon.

 

Heat and radiation would have destroyed the film.

 

Heat and radiation would have cooked the astronauts.

 

They carried no significant water supply to run the suits 'air conditioning'.

 

The LEM dimensions would not allow astronauts to get in and out.

 

There was no way for the astronauts to 'eject' the leftover suits, equipment, and waste, that they claimed.

 

Micro particles bombarding the Moon would have killed astronauts and damaged the LEM.

 

The extreme brightness of reflected sunlight from the surface would have blinded them.

 

on and on ...

post-37120-0-27071800-1378224993.jpg

I don't see how anyone looking at the expert photographic evidence, the science of the moon 'landings', can seriously believe that Apollo astronauts went to the Moon.

 

Heat and radiation would have destroyed the film.

 

Heat and radiation would have cooked the astronauts.

 

They carried no significant water supply to run the suits 'air conditioning'.

 

The LEM dimensions would not allow astronauts to get in and out.

 

There was no way for the astronauts to 'eject' the leftover suits, equipment, and waste, that they claimed.

 

Micro particles bombarding the Moon would have killed astronauts and damaged the LEM.

 

The extreme brightness of reflected sunlight from the surface would have blinded them.

 

on and on ...

 

So a bunch of baseless made up assumptions with no actual evidence

  • Like 1

Heat and radiation would have destroyed the film. PPOR

 

Heat and radiation would have cooked the astronauts. PPOR

 

They carried no significant water supply to run the suits 'air conditioning'. PPOR

 

The LEM dimensions would not allow astronauts to get in and out. PPOR

 

There was no way for the astronauts to 'eject' the leftover suits, equipment, and waste, that they claimed. PPOR

 

Micro particles bombarding the Moon would have killed astronauts and damaged the LEM. PPOR

 

The extreme brightness of reflected sunlight from the surface would have blinded them. PPOR

 

on and on ...

 

If you don't know what PPOR stands for, its Post Proof or Retract. Basically, I'm saying prove your statements (by linking to an actual, credible source) or retract them. Don't bother making other statements unless you can do this.

The Earth reflects back light to the moon, just as similarly as the moon reflects back light to Earth. The sun isn't the only source of light in space.

I should add, the only difference with reflected light between the two bodies is that the moon has no atmosphere to scatter the reflected light from Earth.

 

 

I don't see how anyone looking at the expert photographic evidence, the science of the moon 'landings', can seriously believe that Apollo astronauts went to the Moon.

 

Heat and radiation would have destroyed the film.

 

Heat and radiation would have cooked the astronauts.

 

They carried no significant water supply to run the suits 'air conditioning'.

 

The LEM dimensions would not allow astronauts to get in and out.

 

There was no way for the astronauts to 'eject' the leftover suits, equipment, and waste, that they claimed.

 

Micro particles bombarding the Moon would have killed astronauts and damaged the LEM.

 

The extreme brightness of reflected sunlight from the surface would have blinded them.

 

on and on ...

Many, many fallacies here. First the spacecraft was shielded from heat and radiation (duh), otherwise, they would have been cooked going up, and coming back to Earth.

Second, space is big. VERY BIG. So big in fact, that any particles hitting the moon would be few and far between. Also, not all particles damage. Light particles for example, don't damage.

 

Until, you can post credible evidence to say otherwise, your claims are false.

The Apollo missions were relatively short, so any radiation they were exposed to while outside the capsules wasn't lethal. But many astronauts from those missions did get cancer, so there is probably something to be said about those risks they took.

 

If there were truths to any of those things, then the astronauts that do space-walks on the ISS would have basically those same problems, but they don't.

Here is hoping man lands on the moon in my life time.... I don't believe it has been done yet...

 

what exactly do you think the reflector dishes on the moon are from ? the remnants of the lander ? the footprints that are still there ? 

 

I guess the US has a secret teleporter in area 51 and we teleported them there to prove the hoax, that would be much easier than going there...

The Apollo missions were relatively short, so any radiation they were exposed to while outside the capsules wasn't lethal. But many astronauts from those missions did get cancer, so there is probably something to be said about those risks they took.

 

If there were truths to any of those things, then the astronauts that do space-walks on the ISS would have basically those same problems, but they don't.

 

pfft, the ISS which can be see with both your naked eye and in detail through a telescope is also a hoax. 

The Apollo missions were relatively short, so any radiation they were exposed to while outside the capsules wasn't lethal. But many astronauts from those missions did get cancer, so there is probably something to be said about those risks they took.

 

If there were truths to any of those things, then the astronauts that do space-walks on the ISS would have basically those same problems, but they don't.

 

Only 2 from the Apollo missions died of cancer/leukemia.

Given today's technology - I don't see this being a problem. Back in the 60s things were a lot more iffy.

 

Really? Why's that. In the 60s we were putting a lot more effort into it than we are now.

 

And regardless, if we did go today it would just be "Given today's technology it's a lot easier to fabricate a hoax."

Really? Why's that. In the 60s we were putting a lot more effort into it than we are now.

 

And regardless, if we did go today it would just be "Given today's technology it's a lot easier to fabricate a hoax."

Clearly these are 'Shopped. :P

 

http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/LRO/multimedia/lroimages/apollosites.html

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Posts

    • For a guy who claims to hate Farage and the ignorant, gullible, rightwing racist skinheads sponsored by Putin that his lies represent, you sure are quoting them time and time and time again, mate. I guess you're conveniently ignoring the fact that your country and commonwealth just happened to work much better when it was still part of the E.U.? Denial isn't just a river in Egypt.
    • Do you live in the U.K? Do any of the people here that are against the UK leaving the E.U, live in the U.K? If not then why are you bothered? If you do live here then it is a different thing . Brexit was a good idea, should have done it years before, it was done badly, but the idea was good. You are saying the same thing as remainers do, oh we did what Putin wanted, we listened to the lies and Farage. I hate Farage and never believed most of what he said, certainly did not believe the £350m a week for the NHS. But we did pay a lot of money to the E.U and yes some of it came back, but what is the point of paying it out for only some of it to come back? Get out of the E.U, no money to them and in theory we can use the money to do things in the country. I said in theory, but our governments are a total and complete waste of space. No matter what colour rosette they wear. You and others say it was a mistake and yet the two main parties in the U.K are not looking at rejoining the EU, I wonder why that is? I was not tricked by anyone. Makes no odds now, we are out and have been for 10 years, what we need is a decent government to run the country. All they do is shout at each other like a load of kids and seems to do nothing and make this country more into a police and nanny state. Getting more like China all the time.
    • 4TB TEAMGROUP MP44Q, 2TB T-Force G50, and 2TB WD My Passport SSDs drop to great prices by Fiza Ali Prime Day may be over, but there are still worthwhile storage deals available, including discounts on SSDs for shoppers who missed the event or are looking to upgrade their storage solution. Particularly, 2TB Western Digital My Passport, 2TB TEAMGROUP T-Force G50, and 4TB TEAMGROUP MP44Q SSD are selling at great prices with up to 23% off. The 2TB TEAMGROUP T-Force G50 is an M.2 2280 PCIe 4.0 x4 NVMe SSD with sequential read speeds of up to 5,000MB/s and sequential write speeds of up to 4,500MB/s. The drive has an endurance rating of 1,300 TBW (terabytes written) and features a DRAM-less design. The company specifies a mean time between failures (MTBF) of 3 million hours. The drive includes an "ultra-thin" graphene heat spreader that helps dissipate heat without significantly increasing the drive's thickness. It also supports S.M.A.R.T. monitoring, allowing compatible software to monitor drive health and operating status. The SSD is rated for operating temperatures from 0°C to 70°C, with a storage temperature range of -40°C to 85°C. The drive is backed by a five-year limited warranty as well. 2TB TEAMGROUP T-Force G50 SSD: $269.99 (Amazon US) The TEAMGROUP MP44Q is an M.2 2280 PCIe 4.0 x4 NVMe SSD that delivers sequential read speeds of up to 7,000MB/s and sequential write speeds of up to 5,900MB/s. It uses 3D QLC NAND flash memory to provide 4TB of storage capacity for games, applications, media files, and other data. The drive has an endurance rating of 2,000 TBW and an MTBF of 1.6 million hours. The SSD features a DRAM-less design and supports TEAMGROUP's S.M.A.R.T. monitoring software, allowing users to monitor drive health, temperature, and remaining lifespan. For thermal management, the MP44Q also includes an "ultra-thin" graphene heat spreader. It is designed to operate at temperatures between 0°C and 70°C and can be stored at temperatures ranging from -40°C to 85°C. The SSD is also backed by a five-year limited warranty. 4TB TEAMGROUP MP44Q SSD: $478.99 (Amazon US) The 2TB WD My Passport SSD connects via a USB-C port using the USB 3.2 Gen 2 interface. It delivers sequential read speeds of up to 1,050MB/s and sequential write speeds of up to 1,000MB/s through NVMe technology. In terms of security features, the drive includes password protection with 256-bit AES hardware encryption. The SSD is also designed to resist shock and vibration and is rated to withstand drops from heights of up to 6.5 feet. The recommended operating temperature range is 5°C to 35°C, while the non-operating temperature range is -20°C to 65°C. This drive is also backed by a five-year limited warranty. 2TB Western Digital My Passport SSD: $279.99 (Amazon US) Good to know This Amazon deal is U.S. specific, and not available in other regions unless specified. We only use first-party seller links (at the time of article publishing); ensure that you purchase from a first-party seller link only. Check out Today's Deals on Amazon | or our recent tech deals. Become a Prime member (for Students or SNAP) via Neowin Get Prime Access - Prime for half price (for qualifying Medicaid, EBT, SNAP) Subscribe to Prime Video, Audible Plus, Music Unlimited or Kindle Unlimited via Neowin As an Amazon Associate, we earn from qualifying purchases.
    • Yeah... The root of my comment, ostensibly, is how to spin the story via the actual technical merits of the solution! * Decentralized (aka federated) solution with built-in encrypted ephemeral message transport, * Transport via Relays (intermediary servers) with no message archival, * Second configurable pathway are actual email servers (if DNS records are programmed accordingly) via IMAP protocols carriage, * "Chat-over-Email" is the design pattern adopted; it can either leverage full-blown Email Server (must use the INBOX folder) to exchange all received messages/edits/reactions (so be weary of notifications overloads) [best practice is creating a separate email acct used explicitly for federated chat purposes!] or leverage its built-in Relay Server mechanism which actually resides on-device (by default but can be configured otherwise), * By virtue of be a decentralized/federated model, all other intermediary servers who may pass-along messages (while the recipient's final relay/device is inaccessible) cannot snoop on the messages due to the encrypted nature of contents. The intermediaries may, however, analyze the metadata due to the simple fact that routing mechanisms require hints for relay destinations. Unfortunately, whomever is posting about DeltaChat across socials are misleading with "zero metadata" claims -- especially when the Relays (according to their own technical documents) mandate the addition of chat-version metadata and other decorations in order to actually transport any message. -- Based on this summary, I'd prefer if they'd better dual-path message transport (email server add-in, federated relay engine) rather than patch-on email protocols to existing federated social media frameworks. They're frankensteining something rather than extending widely-deployed technology stacks.
    • Decentralized search result anonymization...
  • Recent Achievements

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

    1. 1
      +primortal
      493
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      225
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      148
    4. 4
      Steven P.
      75
    5. 5
      FloatingFatMan
      71
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!