Warp wrote:
> The USSR certainly
> did have enough equipment to survey the flights, all the radio signals and
> everything.

Indeed, as a HAM operator, one could point the antenna at the moon and pick 
up the radio transmissions oneself.

-- 
   Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   "We'd like you to back-port all the changes in 2.0
    back to version 1.0."
   "We've done that already. We call it 2.0."

Post a reply to this message

Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote:
> I want to know what he thought the first ten Apollo flights were all about.
> It might even make sense if it was a one-time flight that went to the moon
> on the first try, but why all the *other* launches, including a faked Apollo
> 13 screw-up?

Just to make the fake all the more plausible-looking? And more heroic?

The conspiracy theorists will surely know the reason why.

Post a reply to this message

Warp <war### [at] tagpovrayorg> wrote:
> Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote:
> >
http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2009/07/17/apollo-landing-sites-imaged-by-lro/
>
> > Gee, looks like there's footprints on the moon after all.
>
>   Sadly, I have hard time believing even such tangible evidence is going to
> convince the conspiracy theorists. They will just say that the images are
> faked (and will undoubtedly point out "flaws" in them), or the most idiot
> ones of them will say that they are actually not depicting the landing sites
> at all.

This one's my favorite comment:

-------------------------
2.   John Says:
July 17th, 2009 at 10:54 am



available evidence, right?
-------------------------

Yeah, right. 'Nuff said I think :P

Post a reply to this message

Neeum Zawan wrote:
> 
>     It's much easier than faking the moon landings. Ergo, they could do it.
> 

And isn't it a bit *too* convenient that this new image is released not 
too long after people started asking questions about the truth of the 
moon landings?

I'm curious, does anyone have a statistic as to what percentage of 
people (in the US, Europe, whatever) actually believe that the landings 
were faked?

Post a reply to this message

Kevin Wampler <wam### [at] uwashingtonedu> wrote:
> I'm curious, does anyone have a statistic as to what percentage of 
> people (in the US, Europe, whatever) actually believe that the landings 
> were faked?

  Way too many. People are really gullible.

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message

Warp wrote:
> Kevin Wampler <wam### [at] uwashingtonedu> wrote:
>> I'm curious, does anyone have a statistic as to what percentage of 
>> people (in the US, Europe, whatever) actually believe that the landings 
>> were faked?
> 
>   Way too many. People are really gullible.

http://fatpita.net/images/image%20(1832).jpg

On the other hand, atheists look at the faithful who have beliefs strongly 
contrary to science and feel the same as most people feel looking at the 
"moon landing was faked" believers.   It's sort of the same sensation: "that 
doesn't make sense - why do you disregard all the evidence against your theory?"

-- 
   Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   "We'd like you to back-port all the changes in 2.0
    back to version 1.0."
   "We've done that already. We call it 2.0."

Post a reply to this message

Kevin Wampler <wam### [at] uwashingtonedu> wrote:
> And isn't it a bit *too* convenient that this new image is released not
> too long after people started asking questions about the truth of the
> moon landings?

"Not too long after..."? This Moon Hoax stuff has been around a while.

> I'm curious, does anyone have a statistic as to what percentage of
> people (in the US, Europe, whatever) actually believe that the landings
> were faked?

I guess ironically there's more in the US than in Europe who believe it was a
fake, or they covered up something, or what-have-you.

As a German, I've never come across anyone believing there was something fishy
about it - but from what I hear it seems like virtually all Americans know
*someone* who does.

Post a reply to this message

On Sat, 18 Jul 2009 16:22:50 EDT, "clipka" <nomail@nomail> wrote:

>
>As a German, I've never come across anyone believing there was something fishy
>about it - but from what I hear it seems like virtually all Americans know
>*someone* who does.
>

My mother in-law always said that she believed it was a hoax. But I'm sure she
said that just to wind me up.
-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

On 07/18/09 14:18, Kevin Wampler wrote:
> And isn't it a bit *too* convenient that this new image is released not
> too long after people started asking questions about the truth of the
> moon landings?

	Something I sent to someone the other day:

(Subject line: NASA releases tribute to Michael Jackson)

         You think it's a coincidence that he died so close to the
anniversary? Think again. The Jackson 5's first number 1 was released in
1969. His naming the dance move as the moonwalk was part of a
partnership between him and NASA to subliminally make the population
sympathetic to NASA, so that they could get more funding.

         There really can be no doubt.

         I hear MJ was trying blackmail NASA: He told them to get the
government off his back permanently, or he would expose their complete
manipulation of the entertainment industry. Given that the movie Moon
was about to be released to the public, they just couldn't take that
risk.


-- 
Q: What do you call a half-dozen Indians with Asian flu?
A: Six sick Sikhs (sic).

Post a reply to this message

On 07/18/09 14:49, Warp wrote:
> Kevin Wampler<wam### [at] uwashingtonedu>  wrote:
>> I'm curious, does anyone have a statistic as to what percentage of
>> people (in the US, Europe, whatever) actually believe that the landings
>> were faked?
>
>    Way too many. People are really gullible.

	Gullible if they want to be gullible (or is that redundant)? I think 
it's more of an anti-establishment attitude. And they want to appear 
more sophisticated by challenging accepted beliefs.


-- 
Q: What do you call a half-dozen Indians with Asian flu?
A: Six sick Sikhs (sic).

Post a reply to this message