You are viewing our Forum Archives. To view or take place in current topics click here.
Do you believe we landed on the moon after reading this topic?
Yes, We did, and I am 100% sure.
62.50% (25 votes)
62.50% (25 votes)
I'm not sure, because some of this evidence seems correct. 50%
20.00% (8 votes)
20.00% (8 votes)
No we did not land on the moon and this evidence proves why. 0%
17.50% (7 votes)
17.50% (7 votes)
Total Votes: 40
Did we really land on the Moon? Proof we didn't!!
Posted:
Did we really land on the Moon? Proof we didn't!!Posted:
Status: Offline
Joined: Dec 02, 201112Year Member
Posts: 136
Reputation Power: 6
Do you believe we 'landed' on the moon?
I don't. And I am going to prove to you, that we haven't.
After watching numerous conspiracy videos, I started to ask myself. 'Why would the government lie about landing on the moon?'
And I answered my own question...
Back when America were fighting Russia in the Cold War, America believed that, if they could beat Russia to the moon, Russia would back down and surrender their 150 Nuclear Warheads.
And every other country would see America as the most 'Dominant Country' on the Earth. This would give them power beyond belief.
After I had finished watching countless videos and documentary's on the web, certain things just didn't make sense. Here are a few that convinced me we never landed on the moon.
On all of the released footage released by the government. Many people realised the stars are not visible.
On the moon there is zero gravity, which means, there's no wind. But the American flag is still waving.
When the 'Lunar Lander' 'landed' on the Moon it would've landed with 10,000 lb's [Pounds] of thrust. So it would've had to 'cushion' the impact to ensure no damage was done to any equipment on board. The easiest way to do so, was to use 'Thruster Jets'. Which could steer and gently lower the Lander. These 'Thruster Jets' Were extremely hot, So hot it would melt the moons crust, and create a 'Blast Crater' and destroy meters of the Moon's crust. Then why on the videos is there no crater?
On lots of footage you can see 'Wires' pulling and moving 'Astronauts' around the 'Moon's' surface.
You can see all of these 'mistakes' for yourself.
It is a five part documentary that was aired on live television.
But is not allowed to be televised any more.
Surprise?
Here is the first part
Heres is the second part
Here is the third part
Here is the fourth part.
And finally the fifth part
What are your thoughts and opinions on this?
Do you think we landed on the moon? Or not?
I don't. And I am going to prove to you, that we haven't.
After watching numerous conspiracy videos, I started to ask myself. 'Why would the government lie about landing on the moon?'
And I answered my own question...
Back when America were fighting Russia in the Cold War, America believed that, if they could beat Russia to the moon, Russia would back down and surrender their 150 Nuclear Warheads.
And every other country would see America as the most 'Dominant Country' on the Earth. This would give them power beyond belief.
After I had finished watching countless videos and documentary's on the web, certain things just didn't make sense. Here are a few that convinced me we never landed on the moon.
On all of the released footage released by the government. Many people realised the stars are not visible.
On the moon there is zero gravity, which means, there's no wind. But the American flag is still waving.
When the 'Lunar Lander' 'landed' on the Moon it would've landed with 10,000 lb's [Pounds] of thrust. So it would've had to 'cushion' the impact to ensure no damage was done to any equipment on board. The easiest way to do so, was to use 'Thruster Jets'. Which could steer and gently lower the Lander. These 'Thruster Jets' Were extremely hot, So hot it would melt the moons crust, and create a 'Blast Crater' and destroy meters of the Moon's crust. Then why on the videos is there no crater?
On lots of footage you can see 'Wires' pulling and moving 'Astronauts' around the 'Moon's' surface.
You can see all of these 'mistakes' for yourself.
It is a five part documentary that was aired on live television.
But is not allowed to be televised any more.
Surprise?
Here is the first part
Heres is the second part
Here is the third part
Here is the fourth part.
And finally the fifth part
What are your thoughts and opinions on this?
Do you think we landed on the moon? Or not?
#2. Posted:
Status: Offline
Joined: Oct 02, 201112Year Member
Posts: 2,875
Reputation Power: 822
Status: Offline
Joined: Oct 02, 201112Year Member
Posts: 2,875
Reputation Power: 822
we landed on the moon Nuff said .
- 11useful
- 3not useful
#3. Posted:
Status: Offline
Joined: Feb 26, 201113Year Member
Posts: 2,669
Reputation Power: 109
No Your Wrong
Welcome to Mars
:trollin:
Welcome to Mars
:trollin:
- 7useful
- 0not useful
#4. Posted:
Status: Offline
Joined: Aug 10, 201112Year Member
Posts: 173
Reputation Power: 7
Status: Offline
Joined: Aug 10, 201112Year Member
Posts: 173
Reputation Power: 7
Obviously you didn't read the last post about man not landing on the moon yea that guy got proved wrong by 20 people. Here you go Forums/t=2888368/man-on-moon-fake.html
O and thanx for the repost it's not like half off TTG posted this
O and thanx for the repost it's not like half off TTG posted this
- 0useful
- 2not useful
#5. Posted:
Status: Offline
Joined: Jun 13, 201113Year Member
Posts: 1,360
Reputation Power: 57
Status: Offline
Joined: Jun 13, 201113Year Member
Posts: 1,360
Reputation Power: 57
I strongly believe that the Americans have been on the moon, and so do many other people.
You might of done your homework by finding out about the Cold War between America and Russia, but that wasn't the main aim; "To be the first to the moon" that's silly.
-CaLvee
You might of done your homework by finding out about the Cold War between America and Russia, but that wasn't the main aim; "To be the first to the moon" that's silly.
-CaLvee
- 0useful
- 0not useful
#6. Posted:
Status: Offline
Joined: Feb 21, 201014Year Member
Posts: 5,715
Reputation Power: 279
Status: Offline
Joined: Feb 21, 201014Year Member
Posts: 5,715
Reputation Power: 279
Too bad we actually did land on the moon. The astronauts put things on the moon so when you shoot radio waves or something at the moon they will bounce back and things like that. There's also reflectors on the moon so when you shoot a high powered laser and it it directly it will reflect back
- 1useful
- 2not useful
#7. Posted:
Status: Offline
Joined: Dec 22, 201112Year Member
Posts: 1,695
Reputation Power: 69
Status: Offline
Joined: Dec 22, 201112Year Member
Posts: 1,695
Reputation Power: 69
I really don't give a **** about a man on the moon but why do people have to keep bringing this back? It's same thing as saying if Hitler died.
- 0useful
- 3not useful
#8. Posted:
Status: Offline
Joined: Mar 02, 201113Year Member
Posts: 922
Reputation Power: 42
I think we landed. People are always out to prove things wrong.
- 0useful
- 0not useful
#9. Posted:
Status: Offline
Joined: May 01, 201014Year Member
Posts: 5,834
Reputation Power: 249
Status: Offline
Joined: May 01, 201014Year Member
Posts: 5,834
Reputation Power: 249
wow... wow serious?
400,000 people worked on it and I doubt the government could suppress 400,000 people.
and also quote:
"No crater should be expected. The Descent Propulsion System was throttled very far down during the final landing. The Moon lander was no longer quickly decelerating, so the descent engine only had to support the lander's own weight, which was lessened by the Moon's gravity and by the near exhaustion of the descent propellants. At landing, the engine thrust divided by the nozzle exit area is only about 10 kilopascals (1.5 PSI).[83] Beyond the engine nozzle, the plume spreads and the pressure drops very quickly. (In comparison the Saturn V F-1 first stage engines produced 3.2 MPa (459 PSI) at the mouth of the nozzle.) Rocket exhaust gases expand much quicker after leaving the engine nozzle in a vacuum than in an atmosphere. The effect of an atmosphere on rocket plumes can be easily seen in launches from Earth; as the rocket rises through the thinning atmosphere, the exhaust plumes broaden very noticeably. To lessen this, rocket engines designed for vacuums have longer bells than those designed for use on Earth, but they still cannot stop this spreading. The Moon lander's exhaust gases therefore expanded quickly well beyond the landing site. However, the descent engines did scatter a lot of very fine surface dust as seen in 16mm movies of each landing, and many mission commanders spoke of its effect on visibility. The landers were generally moving horizontally as well as vertically, and photos do show scouring of the surface along the final descent path. Finally, the lunar regolith is very compact below its surface dust layer, further making it impossible for the descent engine to blast out a "crater".[84] In fact, a blast crater was measured under the Apollo 11 lander using shadow lengths of the descent engine bell and estimates of the amount that the landing gear had compressed and how deep the lander footpads had pressed into the lunar surface and it was found that the engine had eroded between 4 and 6 inches of regolith out from underneath the engine bell during the final descent and landing.[85],pp. 97-98"
They tested the flag conspiracy on Myth busters and it was untrue.
also another quote:
"The flag was attached to a -shaped rod so that it did not hang down. The flag only seemed to flutter when the astronauts were moving it into position. Without air drag, these movements caused the free corner of the flag to swing like a pendulum for some time. The flag was rippled because it had been folded during storagethe ripples could be mistaken for movement in a still photograph. Videotapes show that when the astronauts let go of the flagpole it vibrates briefly but then remains motionless."
400,000 people worked on it and I doubt the government could suppress 400,000 people.
and also quote:
"No crater should be expected. The Descent Propulsion System was throttled very far down during the final landing. The Moon lander was no longer quickly decelerating, so the descent engine only had to support the lander's own weight, which was lessened by the Moon's gravity and by the near exhaustion of the descent propellants. At landing, the engine thrust divided by the nozzle exit area is only about 10 kilopascals (1.5 PSI).[83] Beyond the engine nozzle, the plume spreads and the pressure drops very quickly. (In comparison the Saturn V F-1 first stage engines produced 3.2 MPa (459 PSI) at the mouth of the nozzle.) Rocket exhaust gases expand much quicker after leaving the engine nozzle in a vacuum than in an atmosphere. The effect of an atmosphere on rocket plumes can be easily seen in launches from Earth; as the rocket rises through the thinning atmosphere, the exhaust plumes broaden very noticeably. To lessen this, rocket engines designed for vacuums have longer bells than those designed for use on Earth, but they still cannot stop this spreading. The Moon lander's exhaust gases therefore expanded quickly well beyond the landing site. However, the descent engines did scatter a lot of very fine surface dust as seen in 16mm movies of each landing, and many mission commanders spoke of its effect on visibility. The landers were generally moving horizontally as well as vertically, and photos do show scouring of the surface along the final descent path. Finally, the lunar regolith is very compact below its surface dust layer, further making it impossible for the descent engine to blast out a "crater".[84] In fact, a blast crater was measured under the Apollo 11 lander using shadow lengths of the descent engine bell and estimates of the amount that the landing gear had compressed and how deep the lander footpads had pressed into the lunar surface and it was found that the engine had eroded between 4 and 6 inches of regolith out from underneath the engine bell during the final descent and landing.[85],pp. 97-98"
They tested the flag conspiracy on Myth busters and it was untrue.
also another quote:
"The flag was attached to a -shaped rod so that it did not hang down. The flag only seemed to flutter when the astronauts were moving it into position. Without air drag, these movements caused the free corner of the flag to swing like a pendulum for some time. The flag was rippled because it had been folded during storagethe ripples could be mistaken for movement in a still photograph. Videotapes show that when the astronauts let go of the flagpole it vibrates briefly but then remains motionless."
- 7useful
- 0not useful
#10. Posted:
Status: Offline
Joined: Jan 04, 201212Year Member
Posts: 370
Reputation Power: 15
Status: Offline
Joined: Jan 04, 201212Year Member
Posts: 370
Reputation Power: 15
I think we landed. I could be wrong though
- 0useful
- 0not useful
You are viewing our Forum Archives. To view or take place in current topics click here.