Were The Moon Landings A Hoax? - Page 3 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Theories and happenings too odd for the main forums.
User avatar
By Vivisekt
#376466
kayne-ballard wrote:I dont get it, there is no gravity on the moon, so how did the space craft "land" on the moon


There is gravity on the moon.



kayne-ballard wrote:and also how did the frag stick into the ground?


Even if there was no gravity, an object at rest will remain at rest in a vaccum. Stick the flag into the soil, and it would remain there.
By Cap
#376484
Mr Bill wrote:The moon landing was confirmed by individual RADAR sites world wide.

It was widely observed.



Thank you. Now everyone shut up. hehe it's all jokes. :D :p


Cap 8)
User avatar
By Comrade Ogilvy
#380035
Vivisekt wrote:
kayne-ballard wrote:and also how did the frag stick into the ground?


Even if there was no gravity, an object at rest will remain at rest in a vaccum. Stick the flag into the soil, and it would remain there.


What soil? :lol:
By Damien
#380056
The so-called "lunar" landings were actually filmed in a remote location in Antarctica very late at night, so case closed.:)

I have even heard quite highly-ranking NASA personnel admit live on national radio that, of all supposed moon landings since 1969, "a couple of them were fakes", so what is there to say that the major ones - the leapfrog ones of Armstrong, Aldrin, and Collins - were not in fact also very much vacuous?:?:
User avatar
By Vivisekt
#380165
NationaliDemocratiSociali wrote:What soil? :lol:


Have you ever seen a picture of the surface of the moon? Ever notice the grey talcum-powder like substance that coats the entire surface? Lunar Soil.

Now go play.
User avatar
By Boondock Saint
#380172
The so-called "lunar" landings were actually filmed in a remote location in Antarctica very late at night, so case closed.


Why would they need to go to antarctica?

And dont tell me the white landscape ...

I have even heard quite highly-ranking NASA personnel admit live on national radio that, of all supposed moon landings since 1969, "a couple of them were fakes", so what is there to say that the major ones - the leapfrog ones of Armstrong, Aldrin, and Collins - were not in fact also very much vacuous?


No you havent, you were imagining that while your 'colonel' freind told you all about robot praying mantises ...

Its ok to have imaginary freinds.
User avatar
By Comrade Ogilvy
#380241
Vivisekt wrote:
NationaliDemocratiSociali wrote:What soil? :lol:


Have you ever seen a picture of the surface of the moon? Ever notice the grey talcum-powder like substance that coats the entire surface? Lunar Soil.

Now go play.


Its not soil, because they even have "moon rocks" like chips of white rock, and they sell it at the Kennedy Space center in the State of Florida within the United States of America.
User avatar
By Attila The Nun
#380247
The moon is made from rock, and therefore there are rocks on the moon, along with moon dust, made from cracked rocks.
#380333
NationaliDemocratiSociali wrote:The most common "Moon Hoax" argument that I have heard is that in the video in which they show the American moon-landing with the Astronaut sticking the flag on the moon, that it shows the shadow of the Astronaut, which is through common sense though to not exist on the moon in all probability.


Why wouldn't there be a shadow? i don't get that at all. If there is a light source, in fact 2 light sources of merit, why the hell wouldn'y there be a shadow?
User avatar
By Vivisekt
#380356
NationaliDemocratiSociali wrote:Its not soil, because they even have "moon rocks" like chips of white rock, and they sell it at the Kennedy Space centre in the State of Florida within the United States of America.


Why are you even arguing with me, NDS? You clearly don't know what you're talking about. It is Lunar Soil; a component of the regolithic layer of the Moon.


Reference:
http://www.planetary.brown.edu/pds/LSCCsoil.html
http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/s ... 11015.html
http://www-curator.jsc.nasa.gov/curator/lunar/lunar.htm
http://news.uns.purdue.edu/UNS/html4eve ... ndust.html
http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/Histo ... lcome.html
http://www.space-rockets.com/lsp.html
http://web.utk.edu/~pgi/lunar/page1.html
http://www.nasm.si.edu/exhibitions/attm ... .so.1.html
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/1593504.stm
http://www.lunarsoil.com/


I just don't understand why so many people will insist upon the irrational and useless continuation of a semantic argument upon a subject of which they are completely ignorant - even once refuted by someone who knows exactly what they're talking about.

I am exceedingly tired of your sophisms, in particular.
User avatar
By Yeddi
#380366
Boondock Saint wrote:Because light only exists on earth Yeddi ... :borg:


Good point :hmm:

My apologies.
By Damien
#380750
Triggerhappy Nun wrote:Where'd you get that from? Weekly World News?

The James Whale Show, actually.

I've never heard of Weekly World News.

Boondock Saint wrote:
The so-called "lunar" landings were actually filmed in a remote location in Antarctica very late at night, so case closed.


Why would they need to go to antarctica?

And dont tell me the white landscape ...

Maybe because it was an extremely distant location from southern America and quite far away from all - even southernmost Chile?:eek:

Triggerhappy Nun wrote:
I have even heard quite highly-ranking NASA personnel admit live on national radio that, of all supposed moon landings since 1969, "a couple of them were fakes", so what is there to say that the major ones - the leapfrog ones of Armstrong, Aldrin, and Collins - were not in fact also very much vacuous?


No you havent, you were imagining that while your 'colonel' freind told you all about robot praying mantises ...

Its ok to have imaginary freinds.

The James Whale Show is not "imaginary" at all. It ususally goes out on a Monday-Thursday from 10:00 p.m.-1:00 a.m. United Kingdom time, although it is actually in somewhat of a "recess" at the moment. Recent special guests have included David Icke.

The Colonel has only told me about them - but I don't yet believe him about them quite simply because he just has not yet provided for me the rock solid visual proof that I would in fact very much require to believe him.:eek: I am just really relaying the information on to you. Maybe I should have perhaps just waited for a little bit first though in this particular case.
By Crazy Brown Guy
#380794
Moon landings never took place, if they did land moon people would have declared war on us for invading their land. Besides Martians would have came to their aid since they have an alliance against Earth. And everyone knows how powerful the Martians are so we wouldn’t have dared to land on the Moon...didn’t you watch that movie.

PS: Radiation on Moon is the same as space it self because of the lack of atmosphere on Moon. Moon got 1/6 the gravity of Earth. Flag will sink into to the Moon because the Moon is not a fucking rock. It’s the Van Allen Belt not Van Halen Belt. Van Allen is the dude who found this concentrated radiation field. And yes those spaceships had enough protection to shield them from going through this field.
#380979
Yeddi wrote:
NationaliDemocratiSociali wrote:The most common "Moon Hoax" argument that I have heard is that in the video in which they show the American moon-landing with the Astronaut sticking the flag on the moon, that it shows the shadow of the Astronaut, which is through common sense though to not exist on the moon in all probability.


Why wouldn't there be a shadow? i don't get that at all. If there is a light source, in fact 2 light sources of merit, why the hell wouldn'y there be a shadow?


Because of a lack of the same projection of sun-light that occurs on Earth, through the clouds and many layers of atmosphere, such as starotsphere, which break down the light, and especially since light is a material energy, though its material form is as microscopic as electrons in an atom of an element.
#380982
NationaliDemocratiSociali wrote:Because of a lack of the same projection of sun-light that occurs on Earth, through the clouds and many layers of atmosphere, such as starotsphere, which break down the light, and especially since light is a material energy, though its material form is as microscopic as electrons in an atom of an element.


You are wrong, they are not microscopic.
User avatar
By Comrade Ogilvy
#380985
Triggerhappy Nun wrote:The moon is made from rock, and therefore there are rocks on the moon, along with moon dust, made from cracked rocks.


Ok, this statement is very understandable, but still, if you stick a flag onto the rocky soil of the moon, won't the soil fly into the air from the impact of the stick with the rocks, and thus sending the small pieces of the moon-rock into "flight" at a constant speed?
User avatar
By MB.
#380986
Light casts shadows. doesn't matter where you are- if you're BLOCKING light there will be a blank area behind the direction of the light. It's true in space, it's true on Earth and it's true on the moon.
By Crazy Brown Guy
#380989
NationaliDemocratiSociali wrote:Ok, this statement is very understandable, but still, if you stick a flag onto the rocky soil of the moon, won't the soil fly into the air from the impact of the stick with the rocks, and thus sending the small pieces of the moon-rock into "flight" at a constant speed?


The rocks willl not move at a constant speed on moon.

I admittedly look at recent events with a differen[…]

Everyone knows the answer to this question. Ther[…]

@QatzelOk , the only reason you hate cars is beca[…]

But the ruling class... is up in arms about the f[…]