Jump to content

Moon Landings


Christmas Tree
 Share

Recommended Posts

Ok, so Im not a conspiracy theorist etc etc however I was reading a piece on the moon landings today and found myself wondering whether they were in fact simply an elaborate hype aimed at scaring Russia.

 

Like most, I gobble up the news and claims of the day without any consideration.

 

Just have to wonder if they really had the technology to land a craft on the moon back in the 60's and then take off again and dock with another craft before returning home.

 

Given what we have just recently being able to do with the space shuttle, could they really have transported Moon Buggys back then in such small primitive crafts?

 

As I say, Im not a conspiracy theorist normally but it just hits me as so far fetched this morning.

 

Is there any non american evidence of moon landings?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 2.4k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Honestly, you need to use your own minds to consider this properly and not just be sheep.

 

We are saying that over 40 years ago we were able to orbit, land, take off, dock.

 

We could transport a huge motor car to the surface yet today we can still only send tea trolleys to Mars.

 

Im becoming very doubtful.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No man or craft of any description have landed on the moon...No mirrors, no buggy's, no 4 legged tin foil/cardboard contraptions...Nothing!

 

Why?

 

Because no craft can work in the vacuum of space, if indeed it is a vacuum as we have been led to believe, which is debatable.

 

But let's go with what we are told and that space is a vacuum. If that's the case, then rockets cannot propel themselves in space because they are propelling against nothing.

 

Any rocket fuel used in space, would be immediately swallowed up by the vacuum, so as soon as it's released, it's gone creating nothing.

 

We don't possess rockets that can break through our atmosphere and like it or not, we are prisoners on this planet...we can't get out and most likely nothing except large meteors can get in.

 

To think they used batteries in 1969 to power pumps, back packs and all the power in that supposed LM, yet the batteries were unaffected by the extreme cold or extreme heat.

 

After all, how hard is it to start your car on a freezing cold morning of only 5 or 10 degrees below freezing, yet these craft not only managed to conquer 240,000 miles of space but also managed to keep the batteries operating (and bear in mind, 1960's batteries) through the extreme cold that was minus 250 or plus 250 depending on the so called day.

 

Stanley Kubrick is the man behind it In my opinion. I think he was drafted in (against his will maybe) to oversee the hoax, which makes sense when you consider he made 2001 a space odyssey.

 

For anyone that has any interest in whether the moon were a hoax or not, I suggest you watch the film "the shining"...most of you might have watched it without giving any thought to it but watch it closely , like a detective if you want.

 

What you will notice , is that Stanley Kubrick is basically telling the audience about the sinister goings on behind the moon landing Apollo11 and there are many many references to it in the film so you have to be vigilant.

 

 

does that mean stephen king was aware of it too? or are you saying that kubrick is telling the audience through the medium of directorship and not the plot line?

 

 

give me an example.

Edited by ADP
Link to comment
Share on other sites

We don't really know what space is, it's all guesswork but let's assume it isn't a perfect vacuum. It's still a vacuum as they tell us, which renders any powered craft useless, even if it could get into space.

 

How are you sure it's a vacuum?

 

It could be a jelly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We don't really know what space is, it's all guesswork but let's assume it isn't a perfect vacuum. It's still a vacuum as they tell us, which renders any powered craft useless, even if it could get into space.

 

no it doesn't

Link to comment
Share on other sites

no it doesn't im not going to sit here and teach you the physics of it, go and look it up.

I don't need to look it up, I know it wouldn't work and I don;t want you to teach me anything.

If you decide to have input, then feel free but I'm sticking with what I say.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.