June 9, 20214 yr 2 minutes ago, Toastrel said: You understand there are MUCH better optics than that Nikon camera, right? No? I thought not. Haha. That idiot posted a video taken with a thousand dollar camera. LMAO.
June 9, 20214 yr 3 hours ago, EagleJoe8 said: A camera intentionally not focused at that. Gotta love the dishonesty. How far away do you believe Venus is, exactly?
June 9, 20214 yr 1 minute ago, Toastrel said: How far away do you believe Venus is, exactly? Off the top of my head, I’m not sure. I’m not sure I ever recall hearing a distance to Venus.
June 9, 20214 yr Author 3 hours ago, Toastrel said: You understand there are MUCH better optics than that Nikon camera, right? No? I thought not. What I understand is those photos that NASA shows us are total BS. The Nikkon renders most of the stars and wandering stars the exact same way, namely a disk facing Earth with a center point in the middle and an outer ring, you can purchase one and see for yourself......if you can figure out how to use it. The only wandering star that vaguely resembles what NASA shows us is Saturn.
June 9, 20214 yr 22 minutes ago, EagleVA said: What I understand is those photos that NASA shows us are total BS. The Nikkon renders most of the stars and wandering stars the exact same way, namely a disk facing Earth with a center point in the middle and an outer ring, you can purchase one and see for yourself......if you can figure out how to use it. The only wandering star that vaguely resembles what NASA shows us is Saturn. What you understand is how to watch YouTube. That's all. You seem incapable of science. Consider why one would use a standard camera rather than a telescope, for example. The fact that you PRETEND to gather scientific info from grainy, crappy photos, is telling.
June 9, 20214 yr Conspiracy theory 3: why are there no stars in pictures of the NASA Moon landings? Here is another Moon landing photograph which has caught conspiracy theorists' eye. Buzz Aldrin carries experiment equipment during the Apollo 11 Moon landing (NASA) If the image really was taken on the Moon, shouldn't the sky be filled with stars? After all, there is no atmosphere to distort the image, no clouds to interrupt that glorious view. Conspiracy theorists argue that the lack of stars in the Apollo 11 mission photographs prove that the event was staged. NASA could not have faked the full wonder of the lunar sky, and so they simply chose not to include any stars at all. Here's another solution: both the astronauts and the lunar landscape itself are brightly lit by the Sun. The sky may look black, but remember, this is in fact daytime on the Moon. If you're going to take a photo of a brightly lit scene, your camera's shutter speed needs to be fast and your aperture incredibly small. In that situation, faint objects like stars simply aren't going to show up. Conspiracy status: debunked.
June 9, 20214 yr Conspiracy theory 4: the Apollo 11 US flag is waving in the wind... but there's no wind on the Moon "One of the crowning moments in terms of US national pride was seeing the Stars and Stripes on the surface of the Moon," Prof Ojha says. Buzz Aldrin salutes the US flag during the Apollo 11 Moon landing (NASA) Buzz Aldrin saluting the proudly waving American flag on the Moon remains one of the iconic images of the Apollo 11 mission, a declaration of US supremancy over space race rivals the Soviet Union. But if there is no atmosphere on the Moon, there is no wind - so why is the flag waving? Is this the proof that conspiracy theorists have been seeking? Look again at the image, and in particular along the top edge of the flag, and you will find the answer. A telescopic pole has been extended along the top in order to make the flag fly proudly (yes, NASA really did think of everything). "Because it’s been set up like this, it appears to be waving in the wind," Ojha explains. "All the wrinkles are there because it’s literally been screwed up for four days en route to the Moon." Conspiracy status: debunked
June 9, 20214 yr Apollo 11 50 years on: leaving our mark on the Moon The Moon landings were not a hoax. Apollo 11 did happen. Humans really did set foot on the Moon. We have countless images, videos, lunar samples and scientific data to prove it. But more than that, human exploration has literally left its mark on the Moon's surface. "In 2009 we sent a lunar reconnaissance orbiter to map the lunar surface in three or four orders of magnitude more resolution than had ever been managed before," Prof Ojha says. "Every single Apollo landing site was pictured. Absolutely stunning. "What really strikes me about these images is that those footprints, those tracks of the lunar vehicles - they’re going to maintain their integrity for millions of years," he says. "No matter what we do to ourselves as a civilization, we’ve really left our mark on the cosmos."
June 9, 20214 yr ONE GIANT LEAP FOR CONSPIRACIES Bill Kaysing is considered to be the granddaddy of moon landing hoaxes. Kaysing, a former U.S. Navy officer, self-published a book in 1976 titled "We Never Went to the Moon: America’s Thirty Billion Dollar Swindle” — four years after the 17th and final Apollo moon landing. In it, he and co-author Randy Reid describe, without evidence, an elaborate government plot to make it look like NASA sent astronauts to the moon when it hadn’t. The basis for their conspiracy goes like this: They say NASA lacked the technical expertise to send someone to the moon, stars don’t appear in some lunar photographs, and astronauts wouldn’t be able to survive a trip to the moon because of radiation exposure. As PolitiFact and others have pointed out, those kinds of claims don’t hold up to independent scrutiny. "His rationale offered poorly developed logic, sloppily analyzed data and sophomorically argued assertions,” Roger Launius, former chief historian for NASA, wrote in an article for Smithsonian in May, which summarizes some of the most persistent conspiracies about the Apollo missions. Kaysing had previously worked as a senior technical writer for Rocketdyne, a company that built the rockets that aided the Apollo space missions. His book was by far the most comprehensive rebuke of the moon landings, laying the groundwork for future hoaxes. And the time was ripe for them. In 1974, Richard Nixon resigned the presidency amid the Watergate scandal, contributing to a decades-long deterioration of public trust in the government. That event, coupled with other crises of the period, at least partially contributed to the spread of hoaxes. "The initial event occurred around the time that the U.S. was facing significant political disruptions and tragedies: the (Martin Luther) King (Jr.) and (John F.) Kennedy assassinations, the Vietnam War and increasing student unrest,” said Mark Fenster, a law professor at the University of Florida who has written extensively about conspiracy theories, in an email to PolitiFact. "As an anomalous event that occurred in the midst of that, the moon landing got swept up in a period of distrust in government.” The film "Capricorn One” in 1977 also provided ammunition for conspiracists, many of whom claimed the moon landing was filmed in a Hollywood studio. The movie focuses on a fictionalized NASA plot to fake a Mars mission. "Although the director, Peter Hayms, did not believe Apollo had been faked, he was nevertheless fascinated by the notion that such a hoax was possible,” Andrew Chaikin, an author and science journalist, wrote in the 2007 NASA book. "Interestingly, he had written the script in 1972 but met strong resistance to the idea in Hollywood. By the late 1970s, when he sold the film, that resistance was gone.” Then, in 1980, the International Flat Earth Research Society, which falsely claims the Earth is flat instead of spherical, accused NASA of faking the moon landings. The organization claimed, without evidence, that the agency had staged the events in Hollywood with a Walt Disney partnership — all of which was directed by the famous film director Stanley Kubrick. A slate of other conspiracy theorists continued to spread hoaxes throughout the 1980s and 90s, but none achieved the kind of success that Kaysing had. In a film titled "A Funny Thing Happened on the Way to the Moon,” writer Bart Sibrel claimed to show that "the Apollo 11 astronauts never actually landed on the moon.” Fox TV broadcasted a similar program the same year titled "Conspiracy Theory: Did We Land On The Moon?” TO FACEBOOK AND BEYOND These days, moon landing conspiracists don’t broadcast their false beliefs in self-published pamphlets or feature-length documentaries. Instead, they rely on their Instagram feeds and Facebook groups. Using CrowdTangle, an audience analytics tool, and reverse image searches, PolitiFact tracked down where Facebook users have shared the moon landing hoaxes we’ve debunked in the past. Examples include that a Chinese rover found no evidence of the American moon landing (Pants on Fire!) and that Aldrin encountered alien life (also Pants on Fire!). Those conspiracies performed especially well in Facebook groups dedicated to flat-earthers. In one group we found, which has more than 55,000 members, Apollo conspiracies are fairly popular. When PolitiFact asked the group about their beliefs, or lack thereof, in the moon landing, some pointed to the lack of stars in photos taken on the moon as proof that no one was actually there. (History.com has debunked that notion.) Then there are entire groups dedicated solely to the moon hoax itself. In one of the most popular groups we could find, which falsely claims in its bio that the Apollo missions sent unmanned vehicles into space, members regularly share photos, articles and memes that they say help back up their allegations. And it’s not just Facebook. We found the same moon landing hoaxes that we previously debunked on Pinterestand Tumblr, too. A search for "moon landing hoax” on Instagram yielded more than 11,000 posts. Then there’s YouTube, where a variety of videos contain misinformation — which are often cross-posted on a subreddit dedicated to the conspiracy. Amazon sells shirts that suggest the Apollo missions were staged. Why? Ted Goertzel, an emeritus professor of sociology at Rutgers University at Camden, told PolitiFact that it has to do with perceived scientific elitism. "The moon landing conspiracy theories appeal to people who suspect that they are being manipulated and taken advantage of by a scientific elite,” he said. "They are similar in this respect to 9/11 hoax theories, vaccine hoax theories, global warming conspiracy theories and even flat-earth theories.” But recently, moon landing hoaxes have taken on a more casual tinge. The New York Times identified a few online influencers who have given new life to the hoax that the Apollo missions never sent a man to the moon. Shane Dawson has an entire video dedicated to the conspiracy, only to say halfway through that "it’s a theory.” Joe Rogan, a famous stand-up comedian and podcast host, has made similar remarks about conspiracies in the past. But the internet and social media have also opened up the doors for more debunking of moon landing conspiracies. Clavius.org, an organization of "amateurs and professionals devoted to the Apollo program,” regularly debunk hoaxes about the moon landings. Organizations like ours also fact-check such conspiracies, the future reach of which can be decreased through our partnership with Facebook. (Read more about that here.) And just because moon landing conspiracies are more accessible today doesn’t necessarily mean more people believe them. "It’s not clear to me that social media has changed the narratives or vastly increased the number of believers,” Fenster said. "It makes them believable, but just because it’s easier to find someone willing to say they believe in the flat earth theory doesn’t mean more people believe in it.”
June 9, 20214 yr The moon landing is fake because you can’t see the stars. "One of the first arguments I heard and one of the easiest to debunk…is the fact that there are no stars in the lunar sky,” Fienberg says. Or rather, there are no stars in the pictures that Armstrong and Aldrin took on the moon. But if you’ve ever used a camera before, it’s easy to understand why. "All of the exposures of the astronauts on the moon are daylight exposures,” he explains. "The surface was brightly illuminated [from the sun]. And the astronauts are wearing bright white space suits that are highly reflective.” The exposure on the astronauts’ cameras was too short to capture the space suits and the moon’s surface while also capturing the comparatively dimmer stars. The same thing happens if you go onto someone’s back porch at night and turn on the lights. Even though you can see the stars from where you’re standing, a quick-exposure camera won’t be able to capture them. Debunked.
June 9, 20214 yr The moon landing is fake because Stanley Kubrick filmed it. Turns out the Conspiracy Nuts faked an Interview with Kubrick but he was already dead. False About this rating On 10 December 2015, the web site YourNewsWire.com published a video purportedly showing film acclaimed director Stanley Kubrick, who helmed such groundbreaking films as Dr. Strangelove, 2001: A Space Odyssey, and A Clockwork Orange, confessing to having helped NASA fake the Apollo program moon landings: A stunning new video has emerged 15 years after Stanley Kubrick’s death in which Kubrick admits that the NASA moon landings were faked. Filmmaker T. Patrick Murray interviewed Kubrick three days before his death in March 1999. He was forced to sign an 88-page NDA to keep the contents of the interview a secret for 15 years. Below is a transcript from the interview with Stanley Kubrick, in which the 2001 Space Odyssey Director admits on camera that, "the moon landings ALL were faked, and that I was the person who filmed it.” In the interview, the alleged Stanley Kubrick figures confesses that: Kubrick: I perpetrated a huge fraud on the American public, which I am now about to detail, involving the United States government and NASA, that the moon landings were faked, that the moon landings ALL were faked , and that I was the person who filmed it. Murray: Ok. (laughs) What are you talking … You’re serious. Ok. Kubrick: I’m serious. Dead serious. Yes, it was fake. Murray: Why are you telling the world? Why does the world need to know that the moon landings aren’t real and you faked them? Kubrick: I consider them to be my masterpiece. Murray: And you can’ t take credit, or even talk about … Kubrick: Well, I am now … Murray: So, you can’t talk to Roger Ebert about it. Does that frustrate you? Why did they have to fake it? Why would they have to do that? Kubrick: Because it is impossible to get there … 2001 was very ambitious, but that’s not to say that faking the moon landing was not ambitious. But I learned things from making 2001, and that’s why I got this gig in the first place. Murray: That makes sense Kubrick: Well, it was easy for me, because I didn’t think a whole lot about the morality of it. But I didn’t. And I could see that Neil [Armstrong] was, he was bothered by it. This video has been circulating online since at least August 2015 and is one of several clips purportedly showing Kubrick talking about his alleged involvement in faking the U.S. moon landings. While there are various edits of this infamous (and fake) interview circulating on YouTube, the videos all originated with a new film from T. Patrick Murray titled Shooting Kubrick. Murray claimed on the Shooting Kubrick web site that he was granted unprecedented access to interview the director in May 1999, which would have been quite an impressive feat since Kubrick had passed away two months earlier: Although the date could be a simple typographical error, that was not the only questionable aspect of the interview. The man being interviewed simply doesn’t look or sound like Stanley Kubrick when compared to a video of the real Kubrick accepting the D.W. Griffith Award in 1997: Furthermore, unedited versions of the interview contain hints that the "Stanley Kubrick” in the video is an actor. In a since-deleted clip, the interviewer called his subject "Tom” and instructed him on how to tell the next part of his story: "You don’t say he said anything. You say what he says. Tom, I’m giving you directions. You don’t have to imitate him (Richard Nixon). You’re not reporting it. You’re repeating it … We’re doing exposition here. That’s how we’re going to sneak it in.” A spokesman for Kubrick’s widow also proclaimed that “[t]he interview is a lie, Stanley Kubrick has never been interviewed by T.Patrick Murray the whole story is made up, fraudulent and untrue.” T. Patrick Murray has not admitted that his interview with Stanley Kubrick is a hoax, but he certainly is banking the mystery’s driving interest in his project: This video has been circulating online since at least August 2015 and is one of several clips purportedly showing Kubrick talking about his alleged involvement in faking the U.S. moon landings. While there are various edits of this infamous (and fake) interview circulating on YouTube, the videos all originated with a new film from T. Patrick Murray titled Shooting Kubrick. Murray claimed on the Shooting Kubrick web site that he was granted unprecedented access to interview the director in May 1999, which would have been quite an impressive feat since Kubrick had passed away two months earlier: Although the date could be a simple typographical error, that was not the only questionable aspect of the interview. The man being interviewed simply doesn’t look or sound like Stanley Kubrick when compared to a video of the real Kubrick accepting the D.W. Griffith Award in 1997: Furthermore, unedited versions of the interview contain hints that the "Stanley Kubrick” in the video is an actor. In a since-deleted clip, the interviewer called his subject "Tom” and instructed him on how to tell the next part of his story: A spokesman for Kubrick’s widow also proclaimed that “[t]he interview is a lie, Stanley Kubrick has never been interviewed by T.Patrick Murray the whole story is made up, fraudulent and untrue.” T. Patrick Murray has not admitted that his interview with Stanley Kubrick is a hoax, but he certainly is banking the mystery’s driving interest in his project:
June 11, 20214 yr Author On 6/9/2021 at 1:09 PM, Toastrel said: That's all. You seem incapable of science. I have enough of a science background to know we live on a flat and stationary Earth, here's proof without science, all you need is simple observations. The Earth is 70% water, everyone knows that a body of water is alway level, the only time you'll see a body of water that's not level is in Hollywood and NASA's photos, so tell me, who's right, everybody that knows bodies of water is always level or Hollywood and NASA? We're told by the scientific community that the Earth spins at 1040 mph at the equator while obriting the Sun at 66,000 mph with our solar system zooming through the milky way galaxy at 490,000 mph and the milky way galaxy is hauling arsing through infinite space at over 1,000,000 mph. The problem with the BS above is we look up at the night sky and see the same stars and constllations in the exact same position at a given time of year since time began, how is that so with all the movements we're told? Now if you want to bring real science for proof just review the Michelson-Morley, Airy's Failure and Sagnac experiments, they al came to the same conclusion, the Earth does not move!! It was right after these experiments that that clown arse Einstein was call into to action and came up with his BS theory of relativity. I could go on and on with simple observations that prove heliocentrism is for dumb sheets that doesn't have any critical thinking skills what-so-ever, these are the people that belive any and everything the so-called experts tell them, no matter how silly it is. If yu want to be taken seriously you need to jump off the heliocentric bandwagon, as long as you're on it I render you a dumb sheet.
June 11, 20214 yr 6 minutes ago, EagleVA said: The problem with the BS above is we look up at the night sky and see the same stars and constllations in the exact same position at a given time of year since time began, how is that so with all the movements we're told? If the flat earth model was true, these stars and constellations would be in the exact same position every night ( not at a given time of year ), and the sun and moon would be in the same place every day and night. They are not.
June 11, 20214 yr 5 minutes ago, EagleVA said: I have enough of a science background to know we live on a flat and stationary Earth, here's proof without science, all you need is simple observations. The Earth is 70% water, everyone knows that a body of water is alway level, the only time you'll see a body of water that's not level is in Hollywood and NASA's photos, so tell me, who's right, everybody that knows bodies of water is always level or Hollywood and NASA? We're told by the scientific community that the Earth spins at 1040 mph at the equator while obriting the Sun at 66,000 mph with our solar system zooming through the milky way galaxy at 490,000 mph and the milky way galaxy is hauling arsing through infinite space at over 1,000,000 mph. The problem with the BS above is we look up at the night sky and see the same stars and constllations in the exact same position at a given time of year since time began, how is that so with all the movements we're told? Now if you want to bring real science for proof just review the Michelson-Morley, Airy's Failure and Sagnac experiments, they al came to the same conclusion, the Earth does not move!! It was right after these experiments that that clown arse Einstein was call into to action and came up with his BS theory of relativity. I could go on and on with simple observations that prove heliocentrism is for dumb sheets that doesn't have any critical thinking skills what-so-ever, these are the people that belive any and everything the so-called experts tell them, no matter how silly it is. If yu want to be taken seriously you need to jump off the heliocentric bandwagon, as long as you're on it I render you a dumb sheet. Simple observations. Do your research!
June 11, 20214 yr The stupid dope claims to have a science background, but as of January, 2018, when the first flat earth thread was made on the old boards, on the very first page, he was not a flat earther as of then. It only happened a short time later. Which proves, he doesn't learn by science, he accepts anything idiots tell him provided it's all prefaced with "The gubmint's lying to us".
June 11, 20214 yr Author There goes TheClownDownUnder and PACO....The Movie Watcher, I not surprised those stalkers replied right after I hit enter, they're total mental cases.
June 11, 20214 yr Just now, EagleVA said: There goes TheClownDownUnder and PACO....The Movie Watcher, I not surprised those stalkers replied right after I hit enter, they're total mental cases. What in those youtube videos, your favorite medium, do you specifically disagree with and why?
June 11, 20214 yr 19 minutes ago, paco said: Simple observations. Do your research! This is my favorite. Australia is a hoax I was born there, lived there until I was 14. Countless people travel there regularly, I still have relatives there that have flown to the states to visit.
June 11, 20214 yr Just now, downundermike said: This is my favorite. Australia is a hoax I was born there, lived there until I was 14. Countless people travel there regularly, I still have relatives there that have flown to the states to visit. That's the thing about these wacko theories. As soon as something doesn't fit their theory, they just say it's fake and doesn't exist. If you think about it, it must be a nice comforting way to go through life.
June 11, 20214 yr 14 minutes ago, EagleJoe8 said: ^^ And further proof he's incapable of debate. He needs an echo chamber. Yep. The fraud ignores anyone who owns him with the facts. That is exhibit A that he is wrong, he won't discuss it with you if he has no answer, and hides behind the ignore feature. He had no answer when I asked why the sun is in a different position during the year as I drive heading due east down this street. This is Central Valley High School in Spokane Valley Washington. Address can be seen on top corner. During the summer it is directly above the building centered between the two stop lights, during fall and spring it is offset. Also, at the same time of day different parts of the year, it may not have even cleared the building as the length of the day changes. How would this happen if the sun traveled the exact same path all the time ?? This is another great example of go outside and observe, and you can tell the earth is a globe. This would not happen on the flat earth model.
June 11, 20214 yr 12 minutes ago, downundermike said: This is my favorite. Australia is a hoax I was born there, lived there until I was 14. Countless people travel there regularly, I still have relatives there that have flown to the states to visit. what was living upside down like?
June 11, 20214 yr 33 minutes ago, EagleVA said: I have enough of a science background to know we live on a flat and stationary Earth, here's proof without science, all you need is simple observations. SIR The Earth is 70% water, everyone knows that a body of water is alway level, the only time you'll see a body of water that's not level is in Hollywood and NASA's photos, so tell me, who's right, everybody that knows bodies of water is always level or Hollywood and NASA? YOU We're told by the scientific community that the Earth spins at 1040 mph at the equator while obriting the Sun at 66,000 mph with our solar system zooming through the milky way galaxy at 490,000 mph and the milky way galaxy is hauling arsing through infinite space at over 1,000,000 mph. REALLY The problem with the BS above is we look up at the night sky and see the same stars and constllations in the exact same position at a given time of year since time began, how is that so with all the movements we're told? DO Now if you want to bring real science for proof just review the Michelson-Morley, Airy's Failure and Sagnac experiments, they al came to the same conclusion, the Earth does not move!! It was right after these experiments that that clown arse Einstein was call into to action and came up with his BS theory of relativity. NOT I could go on and on with simple observations that prove heliocentrism is for dumb sheets that doesn't have any critical thinking skills what-so-ever, these are the people that belive any and everything the so-called experts tell them, no matter how silly it is. UNDERSTAND If yu want to be taken seriously you need to jump off the heliocentric bandwagon, as long as you're on it I render you a dumb sheet. SIMPLE CONCEPTS You believe psuedoscience and refuse to address any scientific point, unless it is to point us towards another psuedo-science youtube link.
Create an account or sign in to comment