moon landing....do you believe the conspiracy theories or are they just a load o

@ Snork : I totaly agree with you. But (yes, it is always a but with the Xeno mouse), regarding the technologic aspect, fiew time before, the USSR was more advanced about propulsion and life experimentation, keeping alive and bringing back to earth, also about extra earth communication ? I am a space and moon fan and i clearly believe that the USA reach it and landed some guys on it. But some aspects are realy not clear about it, in 1968. My parents seen it in live from TV in 1968 and are clearly sure that it was real !! never mind :)

We will no doubt get the same thing with a manned mission to Mars, when that happens there will be those that say "its a fake, a hoax". Now although everyone is entitled to their own opinion, people with such attitudes are not those that endeavor to push the boundaries of human understanding and knowledge, they are naysayers. If we all listened to naysayers we'd all still be living in the trees picking nits of each others back and throwing turds at the tree next door.

What's fake about Moon landing? Stuff llike - [list] [/list] [list] Neil armstrong heard azan on moon. (Sound doesn't travel in vaccum, nuf said) [/list] [list] Moon has aliens. [/list] [list] Moon has broken spaceship. [/list] [list] Moon has nazis. [/list] [list] Moon can be accessed with worm hole from earth. [/list] [list] Moon is door of ctuhulu's heaven. [/list] and list goes on.

@ Sky: Do you know any of those worm holes ? Promise, i get in, i take a stone and i jump back.

No but I have patent for that worm hole and I wish to sell it to apple, so that I can charge per jump. It's about monies ya know. :P

Sky: may I quote? "What's fake about Moon landing? Moon has aliens. Moon has broken spaceship." I don't understand in which ground you stand on this matter but I'll grant the following ideas as dismissable: the "nazis on the moon" and the "cthulhu" one as well as the "door for inner earth" However, can you explain: why some of the photos taken from the moon were airbrushed? Why the backgrounds are cut off and replaced with sheer blackness that cut the crossairs on the photo machines? Why is it that with technology increasing, the imagery being taken gets worser instead of improving? Why can't people get their hands on [the most of] harmless photos taken by NASA? And when they do, they are airbrushed?

A lie in your face is not a conspiracy, it is a simple lie.

AL good one

@David Moon landing is true. Conspiracies that are around moon landing are fake and that was in my list. Moon has no aliens because there is no environment for the organic life to sustain. We're talking about vacuum here. Unless ofcourse aliens are in the form of wind or stone, In that case I will wait for the empirical evidence of their existence. 3 years back India found organism which managed to sustain without oxygen but required exposure to the light, they were in the higher region of atmosphere of earth, usually where our satellites move. So I don't want to comment on life on other planets, unless there is strong evidence. [quote]why some of the photos taken from the moon were airbrushed?[/quote] ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I don't know how come you have access to such images. Other than US, countries like India, USSR and China had missions collaboratively and there was nothing edited or airbrushed from their set of images. But thing is that you can't find anything online from these countries as there is government censorship that prevents it on their official sites. Thanks to US free culture, they do show it for the rest of us. Ofcourse some things will be removed because these missions are not part of exploration but are in the hopes of finding resources which our planet will lack in few years and many other reasons. [quote]Why is it that with technology increasing, the imagery being taken gets worser instead of improving?Why can't people get their hands on [the most of] harmless photos taken by NASA? And when they do, they are airbrushed?[/quote] -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Sensors. You can take good image of nebulae and galaxies if they're emitting or reflecting enough lights. Sensors catch objects better if there is good reflective objects or if the surface is emitting enough for it. Images taken inside the cave or any other underground places sucks equally like Moon images. However I can't answer your question WRT images taken on moon and mars during day time. I have never seen any good daylight image of mars from any source on and off internet. Also the images taken by the source are not live, they pass through the political filtersl. I don't think there is alien conspiracy about it.

However one can not deny the airbrushing. Same thing with the "face on mars". Instead of the pics getting better they got worse.

There are many such mountains that looks like face or say some fictional structures. They can't be treated as evidence for ET. However, Nazca lines, debated among people. Nobody goes at the top of mountain and draws images of species. I cant argue on that. Must be some civilization who had contact while ET modified set of species and which are shown in symbolics or whatever that conspiracy theory is on the net.

If you take a good look at Cidonia {where the "face" is located] you'll see some other oddities there, such as pyramidal figures with perfect geometry. I know of no case in nature that winds sculpts a perfet geometrical figure. That includes the "face" as well. Is too darned geometrical for a "natural thing" Yeah I herd that theory on the Nasca lines. Sometimes people prefer humanity to be a dumb animal, when actually we are great at doing things. Sure no one can say with a degree of certaity "it was build usig this and this" and jump to the Alien theory instead. However, there are some oddities that just don't fit well in the mainstream scientific knowledge. The "face on mars" and Cidonia being one of them. There are more, though, but the point in question is: why the secrecy about it?

The thing with shapes is that you can't come to conclusion. Do you know religious people believe that clouds that make certain shapes are because of heavenly blessing and stuff? Look around, you have many such sites with happy go lucky quotes on those cloud shape images. It's for the sake of psychological brainwashing so we know it. In case of structures it's hard. It is really hard to comment on structures, I am not into archeology and anthropology so that's really hard to comment. I do see secrecy from more of dominating politics angle. And I have seen how people do suppress knowledge for their own benefit. If any evidence comes out regarding biological manipulation and space travel. I would no doubt admit aliens contact or more like some of the civilizations getting more knowledgeable to leave this planet and farming us for their own sake. Structures and random sighting of ships, don't give us enough data for the ancient humans progress. I mean humans are not dumb enough for that. Look around we are more than 100k apart and communicating, we are smarter than our ancestors as well.

indeed we are mate, indeed we are.

Wow, i just caught up on this thread...long... Want to make a point about the film and taking of pictures. Indeed radiation could have wiped film clean and kill astronauts for that matter, but this does not mean that it "would" happen. The chances of rogue radiation from anything other than our sol star is unlikely and the chance of our own star producing a flair that would kill them or wipe film is also unlikely...yet not impossible. There is a very good chance that you could make it to the moon and not get zapped during the trip. They took a big risk and i honor their determination. It was a very important time for us to make it to the moon and I can definitely see why some throughout history would "like" it to be a hoax...but i think not. @Al I love the derelict in the background.. :)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3GiUtnRRCl8&feature=youtube_gdata_player B

Fan: The pics were clearly airbrushed in many aspects, including the background. Richard C. Hoagland made a pretty good statement regarding it [though I'm sceptical to "insiders"], both him, Joseph P. Farrel and Richard Dolan make very good points on the whole issue with their feet down in the ground.

Batty: Good one. I have my doubts about that gentleman's personal persuit, but I have to reckon he presented some incredible stuff. Other things he shown were pure hoaxes while he sweared they were true. Never the less, the effort that coutry makes to show the world the phenomenon there happening all the time is, by all means, deserving a standing ovation.

Sorry if this has been talked about already but I didn't have time to read it all and some of it wasnt on subject anyway :P ! I heard two interesting things: 1 surely if they have been we could see the evidence from some satilite or telescope (footprints - flag etc.) - no? There were quiet a few sent up over the last 20 years no? And 2 why hasnt the chinese sent anyone up - I heard it because they say its impossible - in this day and age?! I my self think they did probably go (all 12 people that have supposedly walked on the moon) - but questions do hang over it all...

It would take more effort to coverup a lie of this magnitude than to actually go to the moon. Do a little math In your head on the logistics and it is staggering.

face on mars. With light coming from a certain angle there does appear to be a face on mars. But if the light comes from a different angle the "face" appears to be just a typical rock . I think we just see what we want to see. There is a good doco on youtube about the face on mars, the guy giving to the lecture sees a whole more too. Interesting , but B.S. I agree that if the moon landings were faked i think the russians would point it out to th world, but so far zip.

telescoping to moon looking for evidence. Ive been told telescope are not powerful enough to pick up things that small on the moon yet. the moon is about 1/4 the size of earth. the area they have to look in would be about the size of australia.

pulserifle187 watch Richard C. Hoagland on the "face of Mars" and the rest of interesting things found on that spot called Cydonia. He talks and demonstrates pretty well about the unatural geometry of the "face", how it is not a matter of "light" and all that stuff.

[i]watch Richard C. Hoagland on the "face of Mars" and the rest of interesting things found on that spot called Cydonia.[/i] "Interesting", meaning "amusing". [i]He talks and demonstrates pretty well about the unatural geometry of the "face", how it is not a matter of "light" and all that stuff.[/i] By disregarding overwhelming evidence against it and relying on his viewers' lack of scientific knowledge.

Hercules: [i]"Interesting", meaning "amusing".[/i] those are your words, not mine. [i]By disregarding overwhelming evidence against it and relying on his viewers' lack of scientific knowledge.[/i] Please, oh great wizard, enlighten us, [i]the viewers[/i] with your amazing scientific knowledge so we, [i]the viewers[/i], can see the truth. I beg thee, oh great one, to release us, [i]the viewers[/i], from the age of darkness. what I find "amusing" [i'll have to use thy words, oh majestical one] is someone who says about 70.000 people witnessing an event as "He said this. So did she." Good call again mate.

[img]http://i1113.photobucket.com/albums/k511/mcsnapshot/SCI%20FI/016-mars_facec.jpg[/img]

[img]http://shirkkan.tripod.com/images/cydonia3.jpg[/img]

yeah the dude as talking about 5 sided pyramids and where an asteroid hit causing a "splash Crater" ( where a asteroid hit the water). I see the splash crater ( evidence of water existing on mars ). But i dont see how he came to the conclusion of the five sided pyramid ( im sure there is a word for a 5 sided pyramid but i cant think of it). Considering the number of dust storm mars has , i think most "details" would be buried or obscured . All the geometry linesdont make any sense what so ever, i think hes just grandstanding and making it up>

Or maybe its just like Han solo and is frozen in carbonite . If we land there hes going to get up and kick our ass

Pulse: Actually they do and follow a very precise padron. There are a lot of oddities on the mounds at Cydonia. How to explain geometrical porportions and straight lines on "mounds" via "wind". As far as I know "god doesn't build in straight lines" [pun intended]. That pic I posted is not Hoaglands. But it shows where the 5 sided Pyramid is located. Another thing that is interesting to note is that with the technology jumps the pics taken from Cydonia just get worser and worser, blurry and there seems to be some pics Nasa is not that much interested in divulging, and when they do they airbrush it. Hoagland also points that out and shows a lot of them from both the moon and Mars. Correlating to what one of the Apollo astronauts keeps saying [about there being no shots of the other side of the moon avaiable to the public]. That is the only part which I'm interested in.

Very interesting. I do believe you have a shot of my summer house there.

Patch: I can only imagine how much of a rent you pay for it. lol

quiet neighbours.

I believed it. But then I was a little American kid seeing it on TV. I had no reason not to. I think the first time I heard detailed ideas of why some people thought it was hoax was from Ozzy Ozbourne on his reality show. I have to saw he brought up some interesting points. But no real evidence.