[geocentrism] Re: Apollo moon hoax question
- From: "Neil Robertson" <nroberts@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2004 00:45:53 +1000
Gary,
> Neil,
> You warned about conspiracy theories. Somethings, though, beg questions
> big time. The >Apollo moon missions left themselves open to so many
> questions.
Did they? Or is it simply a case of people who were not even born at the
time the landing took place spreading nonsense around the web in a lame
attempt at amusement.
I was a teenager when the landings took place and I hurried home from school
to watch the moonwalk on TV. I still remember that day and was quite excited
that a man that carried my first name was the first man to walk on another
astronomical body. Kinda insperational I would have thought and one of mans
greatest achievements. I am only sad that they did not continue the program
as I always thought it might be possible for me to get up there some time
within my lifetime. I still have some slides somewhere that I bought showing
various aspects of the moonwalk.
>I just wonder in the final analysis if there is nothing to all of the hoax
>claimers, why doesn't >Neil Armstrong, Buzz Aldrin, or Michael Collins just
>come forward and convince the >doubters that all is well and true? If
>they've ever entered the fray, I'd sure like to know >that....
Why should they concern themselves with the silliness that propagates around
the web. They achieved greatness, received many accolades and underwent many
interviews at the time. Now they are in retirement and should be left in
peace. I believe there is some video footage on the web that shows Buzz
Aldrin giving some obnoxous character a right cross for badgering him on a
street somewhere. Good stuff.
The point is Gary do you really think that a card carrying conspiacy
theorist is going to believe Neil Armstrong or any of the astronaughts
simply stating that the moonwalk was authentic. Did they not already say
that essentially when they returned form the moon. Do they have to repeat it
for every generation. You could take the hoax believers to the moon and
allow them to kick the tyres of the abandoned rover and they still would not
believe that it happened. There is more than enough information available on
the web to convince anybody that is truely interested in the event. These
people do not believe that the moon landings are a hoax because there is
evidence to support that proposition they believe that the hoax exists
because they want to believe it and no amount of evidence would change their
minds.
> The BA will maintain steadfastly that Apollo was for real. Rob Glover
> (aka Yorkshireman) >gave us a couple of links before he left here. I
> admit I haven't thoroughly looked into those >yet, and this is perhaps
> answered there. I don't know yet. I thought maybe you could >answer me
> quicker.
The BA site has some information of the moon hoax situation but a more
comprehensive site is www.clavius.org which is dedicated to debunking such
nonsense. The guy that runs the site is a regular poster in the Lunar forum
on the BA site. He goes by the name of JayUtah. He is an engineer by trade
and worked/works in the aerospace industry. His knowledge of the Appllo
program is exceptional and he would be without a doubt the clearest most
professional and informative poster I have come across in all my time on the
internet. You should browse that forum for some of his past posts.
> This bit was from the Dark Moon 3 1/2 hour video. You are probably
> familiar with this issue, but here's a recap:
>
> During Apollo 11 the three astronauts made a broadcast to earth and they
> were supposedly 200,000 miles from the earth at that moment. They
> supposedly took a tight video shot out of the side window (the camera was
> right up against the window suspiciously) and we got to see the earth as a
> small blueish sphere surrounded by darkness and stars all around. Then,
> momentarily is all, a hand emerges into the image somewhere between the
> spacecraft and the earth. The question was asked, "How did that happen?"
>
> Next, the camera pans clockwise around the capsule and turns to another
> window where brilliant daylight is pouring in, though the capsule is far,
> far away from any atmosphere. Then, the pan continues and down on the
> floor of the capsule we see a dark rectangular image with a small blue dot
> in the center. Finally, the pan completes a 360 degree circle and we now
> see the first window with a camera positioned well back from the window
> this time. There is a transparency upon the window and you can clearly
> see the clips which hold the current transparency in front of the window.
> It is a transparency of the constellations.
>
> Why would they want a picture of the constellations up when the real thing
> was all around them?
>
> Doesn't all of this plainly show something fishy was going on?
I think I know the video you are talking about. I can recall watching a
french made film that had interviews from Kisinger and other vip types
supposedly talking about the faking of the moonlanding. If that is the one
then I have seen some of it but I do not recall seeing the scene you
mentioned. From my understanding of the film it was a spoof to show how
easily it is to manipulate media. It stated this in the credits at the end
to make it clear. It was well done if I remember correctly and was achieved
by using excerpts of real interviews manipulated to look as though they were
confessing to a coverup for a staged moon landing.
Gary the bottom line is that if the moon landings were a hoax it would be
the grand daddy of all hoaxes. One of the key ingredients for a hoax to be
perpetrated is for the conspirators to remain silent. This could be achieved
if the hoax was small and the conspirators few. Think about the production
that was the moon landings and how many people, companies and countries were
involved to actually achieve the goal. Human nature being what it is it
would be imposible for every one to keep silent about the matter all these
years.
In the end everyone has to make up his own mind about such things but I
would suggest you do your own reasearch and above all do some critical
thinking. Take nothing for granted even sites like BA or Clavius, but weigh
up the evidence that is presented for yourself.
Neil.
ps.
I just hopped over to Clavius and Jay has a reference to the video you speak
of although I don't know if he has actually commented about it in depth on
his site. The producers of the video do have a web site
http://www.pointdujour.fr/Va/programmes/prog_fiche.asp?idProg=20965&pos=6&nb=41&recherche=&idcateg=40&sur=&cpt=0
which gives some details of what they were trying to do with the film and
how they went about the deception. They call it a mockumentary.
Other related posts:
