| THEORIES WITH PROBLEMS - MOON LANDINGS -> Interesting reading | Start A New Topic | Reply |
| Post Info | TOPIC: Interesting reading |
| Posted By: Shingon Posted On: Jan 4, 2004 Views: 1105 | Interesting reading After reading as many sites for/against the moon landing being a hoax, then checking science journals on the belt and other facts from multiple sources, including doing research on photography, some things struck me. Most of the photographic "errors" have very explainable causes. Assuming it was faked, the more faked material provide, the more chance someone will pick it up, in this case, nasa provided 30,000 still images (figure may be wrong) video footage, rock samples, radio broadcasts and repeated the mission multiple times, plus dealing with the hoax augments you may as well add sending probes to drop the laser things (sorry forgot the name) and if not fake collect rocks of the qty provided. With modern computers techniques, the work load, and people needed to fake images would be possible but to bring the % of errors down to those "discovered" would still require a lot of work/time/people/money. Faking the photographs, and checking 30,000 for errors and making sure nothing obvious showed for the Russians to pick up, again work/time/money. Faking rocks or creating modules to collect and place items, again time/money and people needed. Though it can be agued money was not a problem, and the time needed was their, the sheer amount of people needed to create the hoax, would of made the hoax viable would make it unbelievably impossible to keep secret this long (by that I mean people involved coming forward and saying look here how it is). If you made that group smaller then the time/money needed for this smaller secure unit would make it even harder still. Assuming Time/Money were no issue, and all staff involved could be kept quiet, then the issue of countless independents and some out right hostile external observers who had an vested reason to try and prove it fake, who not only failed to do so, still fail to do so. Yes there are people who believe it is fake, but I have yet to see anyone with sufficient credentials, even with vested reasons to prove it a fake doing so. If we look at say jfk conspiracy (not saying I believe it or not) playing the numbers game. The amount of people who were witnesses to the event (either being in the area where he was shot, part of the security forces or in the vehicles), involved in one way or another who have raised the possibility of it being something other than a single gunman from the book depository is small but still exists. I have not seen a single pro-hoax from a person on the nasa team, independent scientists monitoring the trip, and again the hostile powers who had a vested interest to disprove it, have ever come forward. (though I may have missed it I agree, however I am pretty sure it would be the first thing they had on their sites in massive letters) . Now some of it can be explained away by, idealism, loyalty being paid off, but the sheer qty raises serious questions to the chance of killing all cases. On a scientific background, I have seen the same 10 or so pictures, same video clips as proof of a hoax. In comparison the proof for on purely scientific level against it being a hoax, is believable and most importantly consistent (I suggest people do research on the belt, plus some basic physics under different g) and all the pictures can not only be explained away to a very good satisfaction, the effects of shadows etc has been simulated by this camp, but no proof beyond conjecture by the other camp. I dont claim to be a scientist, or anything else, and came at this subject wondering if it was faked (thus in pro-hoax) camp, on observing both sides evidence, plus external sources unrelated on the pure proof, for/against I have to now say I am deeply in the it wasnt a hoax camp. The sheer level of the conspiracy needed to make this a hoax, once you realise how much external evidence there is, makes it being a hoax even more impossible, but that is conjecture on my part, as I provided no figures/external evidence which kind of sums up the evidence for it being a hoax too. I am still open minded so will keep an eye on the debates, but pro-hoax people you need more statiscal and scientific evidence on your camp than you have at this time. |
| Posted By: Edward Welbourne Posted On: Feb 2, 2004 Views: 1090 | RE: Interesting reading Also note: there's a rule of thumb which says that a conspiracy of more than a dozen people is essentially doomed to come out into the open. Those who believe NASA faked the landings are obliged to believe in a conspiracy vastly larger (by several orders of magnitude) than this critical size. |
| Posted By: Anonymous Posted On: Mar 25, 2004 Views: 1083 | RE: Interesting reading I don't care if it's faked or real. why don't you go up in space and make sure it goes real. |
| Posted By: Nick Posted On: Apr 6, 2004 Views: 1079 | RE: Interesting reading If you don't care, why are you here? |