Quote:
Originally Posted by Ego Tripping
So true. I love it...where does the conspiracy end, anyway? Perhaps it's an even MORE elite group trying to control those who are trying to control the very people who are trying to control us! Come on Kamee, why stop there? There's an off-planet Reptilian Species performing mind control on the most powerful leaders on Earth yet you never post about them. Why so biased? I'm being half-serious. At what point do you stop believe how deep the conspiracy goes before being considered hypocritical?
|
Quote:
|
There's still no real reason to fake a moon landing SIX TIMES. I can understand once, sure, they wanted to show up the world. But five more consecutive times? The amount of energy that would be needed not only to hoax it but to keep it covered up (a god damn balloon story can't even get farther than one day before being exposed in this day and age) they could have gone there for real.
|
Additional missions including the failed Apollo 13 mission would have seemed at the time to give the whole project more credibility.
Quote:
|
Sorry Kamee, I see your point and I truly hope it's more philosophical than literal...because if you still don't believe we have landed on the moon, then I must admit, it makes me think twice about most of what you post.
|
Have a healthy skepticism of anything anyone posts.
Don't be so open minded that you accept any claim. But don't be so close minded that you instantly think "Oh that conspiracy theorist is saying it therefore it must be wrong."
I am at this point skeptical of the moon landings. I am on the fence. I have been on the fence for several years because I don't know what to conclude. I have seen many of the arguments and find them convincing. However, as this field of science is not my expertise, I am still malleable toward being brought back to more firmly believing the official story.
Quote:
|
Since you are alluding to the fact that you think we haven't landed, do you think we've actually made it into space?
|
Yes.
Quote:
|
If so, why didn't we land?
|
It seems the main argument here is that
manned spacecraft hasn't gone farther than 400 miles above (away from) earth since 1972, because of the Van Allen Radiation Belts. There are those debunkers who insist that man could have survived the radiation belts. This is why I don't have a 100% firm opinion. But only
unmanned spacecraft, with no intent to return, have gone farther than 400 miles in the decades since.
Quote:
|
Perhaps you might think the Round Earth theory is also hoax and the Earth is still, indeed, flat?
|
Well, now, apart from your sarcastic tone, let's face it: if the landings were faked, but if the shuttle really did go into orbit, what was it doing during the interim? It would have been orbiting the round earth.
Quote:
|
I'm sure you'll scoff at the mere proposal of such an accusation, but is this really such an irrational conclusion to draw if you're saying the cover-up is THIS large? I don't see why you would believe one cover-up but deny another.
|
Quote:
|
As far as the photo in the OP, what's really so "fake" about it? Don't you know there's kevlar that looks relatively flimsy yet can stop a bullet? There's glue that can mount hundreds of pounds in a few seconds? There's a god damn prototype of a cloaking device that looks like a regular raincoat and you're trying to deduce off a mere photo observation that the lunar module is akin to a high school play!?
|
Chill out dude. I mean, I know that it's easy to get angry when presented with ideas and information (especially if you're preconceived to think of such ideas as nonsensical garbage) which challenge your view of the world, and history, but is it possible that this conversation can occur without the GOD DAMN HYSTERICAL TONE????
Quote:
|
That's as irrational as it gets, man. The modules are built to be lightweight yet strong and by no means are they to be aesthetically pleasing.
|
Aircraft on earth are built to be as lightweight yet strong as possible, but when I see photos of a Boeing 757 or a DC-10 or an F-16, they appear to be credible aeronautical vehicles.
Thank you for being one of the few people to actually answer my OP's question though. Gotta give you props for that.
Quote:
|
Kamee, sometimes I think if the US didn't go to the moon, you did. Come back to Earth brother...it's not as paranoid down here as you might think.
|
Think of the motive that the US would have had to fake it if they couldn't make it.
Many conspiracy debunkers say that there was no reason for the US to fake the moon landings.
This is false, as at the time America was publicly losing the space race, as Russia had put the:
First man/woman in space.
First animal in space.
First three person mission in space.
And the first space station in orbit.
Even though these landmarks were achieved using crude methods, (i.e. putting a man on a rocket or adding a extra man on a two maned spaceship) to the public eye, it would seem as if the US were losing the space race against the USSR at the height of the cold war. It was widely perceived that whoever won the space race would win the cold war. There was also a famous saying in the 1960's: "If you can't make it, fake it." And ‘IF’, and only if the US couldn’t put a man on the moon in time, then the deadline that JFK set (he wanted America to put a man on the moon "before this decade is out"), and public pressure, could have made the idea of faking a moon landing extremely tempting on the US' part.
It's crystal clear what the motive would have been if in fact it was a hoax.