The Apollo Moon Missions Were Faked in a Studio

The gullible masses who are sucked in by the government's lies have ... pictures.

LOL Yeah, good one guys, good one.

 

You believe everything, that every government tells you ... don't you.

 

Anyone who actually watches the video will see that's not the case.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?gl=ES&hl=es&v=gMxQEHfU6hM

The astronaut actually tries to stop it from going upward.

That's because he drops the heavy end with the metal clip on it and the weight of the clip pulls it downward.

Your trying to obfuscate this clear evidence of their being in a water tank totally destroys your credibility. Your success rate on this thread is going to be close to zero as all of the hoax evidence is on page one so you pro-Apollo people can't bury it and most of the viewers have seen your attempts to obfuscate the proof that the Chinese spacewalk was faked in a water tank. It's really amusing how you pro-Apollo people can say such lame things with an authoritiative patronizing attitude.

 

Anybody with any degree of discernment will have no trouble dismissing the idea of this taking place underwater. Utter hogwash.

Yet this so called "heavy-end" is pulled up by a steel cable that also has some magical tendency to rise. Contradictions seem to be dismissed in your alternate reality universe.

We have already decreed that your credibility test holds no water(pun intended). Using one ludicrous conspiracy theory to determine my credibility to prop up another is the act of one with no argument to what is presented.

When you use the word "lame" does it also encompass one who blankly refuses to address questions?


Now answer the rest of my post. The bubble that is clearly space debris, and a citation for the use of wave blowers in a neutral buoyancy capacity.

And for good measure, please tell me why your "credibility test" is itself credible, given that the maker of your video is very much a pro-Apollo supporter. Irony seems lost on you.

 

Anyone who clicks on this link and watches how the thicker cable moves knows the footage was taken in a water tank and that you don't even believe your own arguments because you tried to obfuscate this clear evidence of fakery.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?gl=ES&hl=es&v=gMxQEHfU6hM

This is simply too clear to obfuscate. Your credibility is shot.

There are a lot of anti-establishment pundits that say strange things. I've started some threads on this.
http://s1.zetaboards.com/LooseChangeForums/topic/3761668/1/
http://houseofpolitics.com/forum/showthread.php?t=784

Some of these people may be agents but I think some of the better known ones are probably just being threatened. If the government wants to put out some disinfo, a good way to do it is to mix it with real info. Sometimes an article will be ninety percent good subversive info and ten percent will be disinfo. The people who write the articles are either agents or sincere people who are being threatened.
People can do YouTube searches on 9/11 disinfo to see some examples of this.

The anomalies in the Chinese spacewalk are so clear that it doesn't matter that the person who pointed them out also says something he obviously doesn't even believe himself.
http://www.politicalforum.com/moon-...missions-were-faked-studio-5.html#post4105095

He's either working for the government, or being threatened by it. This bit of confusion will help the government muddy the waters and slow the Apollo truth movement a bit I suppose.

You can pretend all you want but you're fooling about as many people as the Black Knight in this video is fooling.
Black Knight Holy Grail - YouTube

In that video the Black Knight can be safely ignored no matter how much he yells and insists he won the fight. It's the same with you Betamax and you know it.

Why didn't you put it next the part of your blog where you discussed the buoyant cable issue?

http://debunking-a-moron.blogspot.com/2011/07/chinese-spacewalks-part-2.html
(excerpt)
---------------------------------------------------------
The tethers have shape memory caused by them being wound on drums during manufacture. The only tendency the cable has in an unrestricted vacuum is to assume that curled position from being wound around a large drum. There are numerous examples where it makes this same movement in a horizontal vector in relation to the camera. Bunkum.
---------------------------------------------------------

You put it on a different page. Now fewer people will see exactly what you're talking about.

Why didn't you post all of the video about the Chinese spacewalk on your blog so that the viewers could make an informed judgement?
Proof China Faked Their Spacewalk (Part 2) - YouTube
About paper and bubbles of ShenzhouVII - YouTube
China's Space Walk Was FAKE (part 1) - YouTube
http://en.epochtimes.com/n2/content/view/8332/
http://www.theepochtimes.com/n2/content/view/5809/

I wasn't able to copy the ones on page one. If you're going to analyze something, the people who read your analysis should be able to see what you're analyzing.

 

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pCfzhoeHABQ"]Does anybody think this is a bubble? - YouTube[/ame]

Not a bubble. Is there anybody viewing this thread who thinks that cosmored/scott is correct in saying the object tracking across the helmet is a bubble?

The links provided are now on both pages of my blog. This is the last amendment I make for you. You blatantly refuse to answer simple questions and fire ad hominems out as a means to avoid answering them. Your constant references to my credibility, based on your own dithering conspiracy theory, itself discredited by the video maker believing in Apollo, are really quite pathetic.

Now, I ask once again, provide a reference for the use of wave blowers in neutral buoyancy tanks.

Please explain why the heavy end of the cable pulls it down when it suits you, but floats freely when it doesn't.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?gl=ES&hl=es&v=gMxQEHfU6hM
(3:25 time mark)

It's clear that the astronaut flicks it downward. It's weighted, so it goes downward. It's perfectly consistent with being in a water tank and every movement the cable makes that you say is due to "Shape memory" is at a time when it's perfectly consistent with it's being buoyant in a water tank. This is so clear that it's obvious that you don't even believe your own argument.
http://www.opposingdigits.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=1222

This is really a moot argument because the buoyant safety cables have already proved they were in a water tank.

The fact that not much comes up when "Wave blowers" is googled doesn't mean that they don't exist. There are lots of things that exist that can't be found in google. If your argument is, "It can't be found with Google. Therefore, they don't exist", you are guilty of defective thinking.

I did find this though.
http://www.theepochtimes.com/n2/china/chinese-space-spacewallk-china-bloggers-5326.html
(excerpt)
-------------------------------------------------------------------
A blogger, who is a physicist, commented in a Chinese Epoch Times article that, assuming the operation was conducted in the water, the bubbles rose faster than they would have if the water was not propelled using a wave-blower. Wave blowers are commonly used in underwater space-training exercises to simulate the weightlessness of space.
-------------------------------------------------------------------

You have an authoritative patronizing attitude but what you're saying would get you laughed out of the debating hall. Your attitude here doesn't fit the situation.

 

I don't think you even know what shape memory is. You keep equating your self supporting observations with reality. Metal cables don't rise in water, and your "heavy object" would sink. Yet during sequences where the cable is moving sideways, this "heavy object" is rising upwards. Complete bunkum, as per usual, especially in view of your comment below.

This seems to be a common statement by you! Your opinion is so clear to you, that anybody who shows why it is complete nonsense, must by your delusional standards, be disbelieving of their own argument. Ridiculous logic. Not only do I believe my argument, I know that you cannot possibly believe yours. Nobody could be so blind as to think a piece of debris that changes between flat and open, clearly rotating, is a bubble!

No, it is not a moot argument. It is one which you have no answer to. The whole premise of your argument relies on made up nonsense, for which you are unable to provide one single piece of supporting information.

Google and any other search engines contain very little reference data that cannot be found in one form or another. Your argument is unfounded, and you know it. When you use the phrase "not much", I offer the correct translation as nothing!

Yes, like little pink fairies on Saturn. Name one thing of any substance not found on google.

Strawman arguing. My argument is that your video maker has made this up, and you blindly follow it with not the slightest clue as to its veracity. The fact that you are completely unable to verify your ludicrous claim means you have no argument to make. Bare assertion.

Citing a biased site that makes and supports the claims of a fake spacewalk, is that your best effort? Epic fail. The "physicist" offers no citation for his claim.

My attitude kicks ignorant CT butt. If I had you in a debating hall, you would shrivel up and leave with your stubborn tail between your legs. You claim your film maker has been "got at" to support Apollo, yet "not got at" to claim the Chinese spacewalk was faked. The guffaws of laughter from the debating hall await you!

 

No.

Have you ever told a lie...ever?

So then why should I believe anything you say...ever?

100% of all evidence points to the government's story being 100% factual and true.

0% of Scott's lame assertions are factual. Serial conspiracy theorists are fun to mess with. I will give him credit for that.

 

Keep drinkin' that Kool-Aid.

 

Gee, hard to get happy after that comment. Do you find it amusing to have such insignificance? I wouldn't.

 

The truth often hurts.

I find it amusing that you always reply to my "insignificant" posts.

I don't think anyone cares.

 

Sarcasm...look it up.

I'll keep the responses rolling if you keep the humor coming. The least I can do.

For the first time in what I'm guessing ever...you are right. Nobody cares what you think.

 

I left my dictionary on the moon, last time I was there.

I'll have to ask Elvis to bring it back down for me.

 

Ahhh...well say hi to all of the hardware we left up there which proves we landed.

 

Yep, that certainly would prove it.

So, show me this hardware ...

 

Give me a few billion and I'll get it for you.

 

As long as I can come along for the ride.

 

the real question is, what does the Government and NASA stand to lose if the faked moon landing is proved to be faked once and for all?

I think that's the real issue. so might as well keep the lie going.

 

No,the real question is why would they 'fake' it in the first place,when it was just as easy to go?

 

Because it's not "just as easy to go" or they would've made up there again by now.

They have since stopped trying to reach the moon(too far away) and just decided to build a spacestation instead.

Why not build the spacestation ON THE MOON?

Well, When you can't support the lie, you re-route it.

 

Yes.it is just that easy.....they went 5 times after 11,

And they stopped not because the moon was too far, it was lack of vision

If they built it on the moon, then it would be a lunar BASE, a space station is much easier to build and to get to.

And there was NO lie

 

Irrational logic.

Lack of vision? the vision is to have a Spacestation up there so how is attaching it to the Moon a lack of vision?

and How is it "so easy' to get to one minute, but "not so easy" the next minute? this is where the lies get complex....

And it's still a Spacestation whether it's attached to the Moon or floating
...WHY? because it's in outerspace...duh.


You make no sense whatsoever on this topic.

 

first off,'lack of vision' means not seeing the big picturewe'd been there 6 times,why spend billions doing the same thing over and over?...so congress killed the funding

Because we don't have a heavy lift rocket like the saturn V anymore we were on the track with the constellation project to build another,but it was cancelled

No if it's it sace,like the ISS, it's a space station, if it's on the moon, it's no longer in space,it's on the moon, thus,a lunar base

Maybe you need to read more on the subject

 

Still makes no sense. we stopped going all the way to the Moon, only to start going half way by building a Spacestation suspended in thin air when anchoring it to a solid surface is more logical?

sounds like a bottomless pit of funding that needs to be shut off. Because it will never be usable by the general public.

It's only purpose is to spy on each other's country. one huge manned- satellite. that's all it is.

This is why people believe it was faked, because they stopped going and making it's reachability a waste of time. I honestly think we shot a few shuttles up there to TRY and reach it but we never did. and that's why they've settled for a spacestation.