4 ms·

It is unusual how many people still believe in this hoax. Dudes, this never happened. Only the Soviet robots did really something on the Moon. Check the regolit

It is unusual how many people still believe in this hoax. Dudes, this never happened. Only the Soviet robots did really something on the Moon. Check the regolite story, check the Stormwind icebreaker mission story. No, you do not want to see the truth, you just like to please yourself with that warm and fuzzy feeling of being proud.

ColinWright 14y ago
Fascinating. I'd like to ask you a couple of questions: * How did they fake the video of the astronauts on the Moon? Please be careful to pay attention to explaining the arc of the dust they kick up. * How did they fake the open-loop back on the recordings where the delay exactly matches the orbit of the Moon, and in an apparently unanticipated analysis 40 years later it was possible to deduce from the recordings alone the date of the recording? Thanks.
- ommunist 14y ago
  For the second one - there was an agreement with the USSR government about the Moon, so 'Luna-10' station could be used for that, or the earlier robot. With regard to the 1st one, I should check the available fx tech of that time. How shall you explain the founding of the intact Apollo housing (supposed to be burned) in the Atlantic ocean? Check this photo. http://www.warandpeace.ru/ru/reports/view/70866/ http://www.warandpeace.ru/ru/reports/view/70866/ - illustration 17.
laserDinosaur 14y ago
I get the feeling that the moon landing fakers are starting to wind down. With all the independent photography and research being done that clearly shows evidence of the moon landing, the ambiguity in which these hoaxers peddled their books and movies has gotten smaller and smaller. 10 years ago I used to run into at least one person a month who would bring this up. Now (as the comment by ColinWright shows) people are now MORE surpised to hear people once thought the moon landing was a hoax than the moon was a hoax =)
- DanBC 14y ago
  Some people will be more convinced that they are correct when you present more information to challenge their views. It's a tricky problem - how do you convince someone that something is a useful, valid, thing to do if they think you're trying to harm them?

ColinWright 14y ago

Fascinating. I'd like to ask you a couple of questions: * How did they fake the video of the astronauts on the Moon? Please be careful to pay attention to explaining the arc of the dust they kick up. * How did they fake the open-loop back on the recordings where the delay exactly matches the orbit of the Moon, and in an apparently unanticipated analysis 40 years later it was possible to deduce from the recordings alone the date of the recording? Thanks.

ommunist 14y ago
For the second one - there was an agreement with the USSR government about the Moon, so 'Luna-10' station could be used for that, or the earlier robot. With regard to the 1st one, I should check the available fx tech of that time. How shall you explain the founding of the intact Apollo housing (supposed to be burned) in the Atlantic ocean? Check this photo. http://www.warandpeace.ru/ru/reports/view/70866/ http://www.warandpeace.ru/ru/reports/view/70866/ - illustration 17.

laserDinosaur 14y ago

I get the feeling that the moon landing fakers are starting to wind down. With all the independent photography and research being done that clearly shows evidence of the moon landing, the ambiguity in which these hoaxers peddled their books and movies has gotten smaller and smaller. 10 years ago I used to run into at least one person a month who would bring this up. Now (as the comment by ColinWright shows) people are now MORE surpised to hear people once thought the moon landing was a hoax than the moon was a hoax =)

DanBC 14y ago
Some people will be more convinced that they are correct when you present more information to challenge their views. It's a tricky problem - how do you convince someone that something is a useful, valid, thing to do if they think you're trying to harm them?