4 ms·
Sort of off-topic, but the big banner picture at the top has a lot of obvious Photoshop rubber-stamping in the bottom left around the edge of the crater. It's p
by ajlburke 13y ago
Sort of off-topic, but the big banner picture at the top has a lot of obvious Photoshop rubber-stamping in the bottom left around the edge of the crater. It's presumably covering up blank bits from the photo stitching, but I worry it'll inspire conspiracy types.
(For the record, I think it's easier to land a bunch of people on the moon than to fake it convincingly with 1960s special effects and then successfully cover it up for 45 years.)
- jonah 13y agoS G Collins claims it would have been impossible to fake the landing: http://www.openculture.com/2013/01/moon_hoax_not_short_film_explains_why_it_was_impossible_to_fake_the_moon_landing.html http://www.openculture.com/2013/01/moon_hoax_not_short_film_...
- alan_cx 13y agoFor me, end of any ideas that the moon landings were faked, is faking it such that the monitoring Soviets would have been fooled, or that the Soviets knew it was faked and kept quiet. The USSR would have absolutely monitored everything they could have associated with the USA's adventures in space, and if they detected the slightest hint of US fakery, they would have used that to thoroughly discredit their great enemy. Even if not for some odd political reason, by now, the information would have leaked. But I cant see any way it would have served Soviet interests to allow the USA to get away with faking it. Not saying other evidence doesn't prove that the US landed on the moon, just saying that for me, what ever theory any one wants to put forward to suggest it was faked, this one point is a 10ft thick lead wall in their way, and as yet I have not see a solid reason for the Soviets to play ball with a grand US fraud.
- deleted 13y ago[deleted]