Thought y’all might like this. It’s in this month’s issue of Caltech’s Engineering & Science.
Dude, those pictures come from NASA, the agency at the heart of the conspiracy! We can’t trust anything they say!
Ahem. Snarking aside… the original in slightly higher quality, and pictures of many other Apollo landing sites can be found here.
Very clever, NASA. You can claim that those pictures are from Apollo, but we both know those tracks were left by the Greys - the aliens you’re working with at area 51. You are using the photo to both cover up the fact that the Moon landing telecasts were faked and to cover up the existence of the Greys. Two birds with one stone. Very clever, but I’m on to you.
That’s photoshopped. I can tell from some of the pixels and seeing a few shops in my time.
You guys are missing the point. Of course man never landed on the moon, because the moon doesn’t exist! The moon itself is the hoax!
Caltech is part of the conspiracy, of course. Think of all the funding for “research” they’ve gotten since the space program began.
Oh that is noting, not only they are Photoshopped, the lines, footprints and modules are added to hide the alien spacecrafts and structures on the moon! *
Ah, those were the days! And there was even a poster that indeed peddled that theory! Step into the rabbit hole if you dare:
Washoe, the big mistake you’re making here is that you’re using evidence and facts to back up your argument. The moon-hoaxers decided what they want to believe and simply cannot be pursuaded otherwise with logic, eye-witness accounts and/or solid evidence to the contrary.
If you really want to screw with them, tell them the conspiracy is that we went to the moon and are trying to cover it up by planting people in the press claiming it was a hoax.
That is awesome. The guy who wrote that has waaay too much time on his hands, but it’s still awesome.
Yes, they are part and parcel of the photo-industrial complex.
There’s an old racist joke about a young black male in the South who attempts to purchase a one-way ticket to Africa at an airport terminal only to discover that he’s twenty-five cents short, and the clerk refuses to sell him the necessary ticket. So he goes through the terminal panhandling for the quarter. A sympathetic old redneck obligingly hands him a dollar and invites him to “take three of your friends with you.”
I’m thinking that if there were only some way to arrange one-way passage to the Moon so that the hoaxers could see the evidence for themselves, I would gladly contribute what I could to the effort.
Or that Nicole wasn’t killed by OJ. It was all just a covert op to discredit OJ before he told the world the truth about the moon landing being faked. If you want to feed their insanity.
You mean the Mars landing.
Ok, serious question: Why’d they leave the rover way the hell over there? Why not drive it back to the LM? Did they just drive it till it ran out of juice?
I learned this when I did go deep finding evidence during the [del]cola wars[/del] moon hoax threads:
The moon rover also had a remote camera that could be controlled from ground control, it was with this camera that some of the best shots of the ascent of the top of the moon module were made; so, good distance was needed to get a panoramic shot of the launch of the top of the moon module so the rover was moved to a spot that was a little bit higher than the location of the module.
No, I mean the moon landing. The…‘theory’ is that on the set of Capricorn One, one of the technical advisors was one of the people that staged the moon landing. They maintained contact, and the guy had given OJ the proof that the landing was a hoax as, at the time, OJ had the status to expose the truth. So the .gov framed him for the murder to discredit him. I wish I could find the webpage that had the full theory, but…it appears to be gone from the web. Duh. Duh. Duh!
I especially love the part about there not being any photographs of the moon until the 1850’s. Proof!!!
Awesome. Thanks!
I am absolutely, without reservation, 100% confident that we did in fact go to the moon, and that the linked picture shows photographic evidence of that. But if any of you think that a single ‘Hoaxer’ is going to be convinced by this, then you are as deluded as they are.
Of course, the primary reason for this is that they are loony, and nothing will *ever *convince them that the whole thing wasn’t faked.
But the other reason is that there is no scientific evidence in this photograph that proves human involvement unless you accept ahead of time the premise that man did land on the moon. If you accept that as fact, then you can clearly see that the photograph shows the artifacts as described. But if you take away that premise, and try to prove from the photograph alone that this was the result of human activity, it falls far short of the mark.
All I cal clearly see are a few blobs and some tracks. Without the foreknowledge of what they are supposed to be, there is nothing that tells me that any of the blobs are man-made. The resolution of the photo is simply too low for that level of detail to be made out. There’s less to suggest ‘man-made’ here than in the famous ‘face on Mars’ photo.
As for the tracks, they look like something that might be evidence of past water flows, or perhaps wind driven features similar to the Sailing Stones in Death Valley. Now of course we know there is not, and never has been, and liquid water or wind on the Moon to cause such features, but if we had no evidence of human involvement to cause such features, we might be re-thinking those assumptions.
I guess my point is that this is a fabulous picture, and for a reasonable person provides clear evidence of one of the Moon landings (which is cool beyond belief), but for someone who believes that such landings never took place it provides nothing approaching ‘proof’, even if such a person were to accept that the photograph itself was genuine.