50 years today, man set off to land on the Moon..Did it really happen?

JackStagger

Junior Member
Messages
37
Yes photos can be manipulated. People can be bought. People can be brainwashed. Science can be buried. Consider what proof would qualify as proof in your eyes, though? Would seeing it through a screen in any way validate the historical account for you, or would you still doubt? Would Elon Musk bringing the moon flag back to Earth for it to reside in a museum be good enough, where science at large could test it and confirm resolve your doubt? How then do the moon rocks brought back by Apollo 11 and their confirmation of validity tests not hold water by the same metric? I get the impression that many people will not believe it, many people from foreign nations with different educational programs relating to history and science, unless they literally saw it with their own eyes from five feet away. Sadly, this is not practical in the slightest.

Here's the thing, I'm not saying I know for sure without a doubt. What I'm saying is that to hold a prevailing theory to the contrary is in my own opinion illogical. Whatever the truth is, many doubters on this planet are mistaken to not find evidence in favour of the current historical account to be the most compelling explanation, given that they do not have the proximity of observation needed to prove or disprove it. Is NASA completely honest, no, the agency is a snake just about through-and-through, but that doesn't mean that you can cherry-pick the evidence available. All facts must stand individually and collectively or else there is logical conflict, modulating that with doubt is intelligent I fully admit— but when China, India, Japan, the Soviet Union/Russia confirm the facts that some think were manufactured, I find that compelling confirmation of the historical record basis. It's as good of a peer review as will ever be available to us realistically. Is it still possible these known liars are collaborating, sure, but it would be drastically out of character for them to agree on a falsehood in benefit of America.

Remember the Soviets wouldn't even accept American help for Chernobyl or the Kursk disaster, in fact there are popular conspiracies in Russian modern culture that America is responsible for those disasters. Russia and America are not cool with each other, despite their correlations in science and culture. Both countries have long conspired to manipulate public opinion of the other negatively, mostly predicated on arbitrary sociopolitical divides and downright lies, and all in the aim to shift blame or in the aim of glorifying their own nation. The one constant between them is that they put their own countries first, especially before the counterpart nation at any opportunity. Sure, it's possible that the Russian unmanned mission equipment is reflecting the Earth projected lasers, but no amount of money or coercion in the world would get them to swallow the truth of an American lie. Not going to happen. The one thing I know about Putin and previous Russian leaders after the Romanovs is that they draw their power and credibility by putting Russia first, even though you could argue that both countries are swept up in an autocratic web of deception predicated on national cohesion.

Keep in mind that the ALSEP (Apollo Lander Surface Experiment Package) conducted by the Apollo 11 mission astronauts, which cannot be foreign as the Russian reflector is, has given us data which we know to be reliable and congruent scientifically in regard to moon observations since then. The ALSEP had to be deployed by hand, there is no evidence to the contrary at all. The EASEP (Early Apollo Surface Experiments Package) which was left there for the on-going collection of data has the same timbre of credibility, though it lasted only about 12 days. Both have given us data which could not have come from any other source and are scientifically congruent with the notion that Apollo 11 landed man on the moon before any other mission. Some of the devices literally detected the influence of the astronauts as they slept, and that specific data is not contested as being unreliable by a single person to my knowledge. We can conceivably prove mathematically based on relationships observed since that date that this data is ~100% reliable.

From what I can tell, the belief that America is lying about being the first to put a man on the moon with the Apollo 11 mission (and further Apollo missions) originally came from a man named Bill Kaysing. Kaysing was a Navy midshipman up until 1949 when he failed to complete officer training school. In 1976 he wrote a book called "We Never Went to the Moon: America’s Thirty Billion Dollar Swindle". The content of his book was founded from his experiences when he worked as a senior technical writer at Rocketdyne in 1956, the company which manufactured parts of the Saturn V rockets. Rocketdyne did not design the rockets, they produced some components for them. This is the difference between Nikola Tesla's work and the ability to manufacture a coil to Tesla's specifications, these are vastly different scopes of specialization. Kaysing does not hold any degree in any science field whatsoever, he has a BA in English literature. He's a writer, not a scientist, not an engineer, not a physicist, not an astronaut, not a naval officer.

His job is to be eloquent and accurate in the written word when describing the manufacturing process of certain components. He does not have to comprehend the purpose of these components or even the materials used, in a sense his job was telling others how to pull a lever or push a button and in what order. All of his claims are anecdotal, none of them require any relative understanding of engineering, mathematics, or aerospace science— in fact, those are the avenues in which they are all disproven. Kaysins also claimed that the Challenger disaster was perpetrated by NASA to keep whistleblower astronauts quiet, though he has literally zero evidence or logical assertions of this. The man who did design the Saturn V rocket, Wernher von Braun, is arguably a man of infinitesimal moral convictions, but this does not make Kaysing an intrinsic or even peripheral element in the pioneering of aerospace rocketry during that time period. It makes him a distant observer within tertiary levels of compartmentalized information relative to the manufacturing of single components. I suspect that is where his confusion and doubt is born and then spread to those who have a bias against American technological pioneering and against the truncation of elaborate scientific data which they themselves cannot comprehend as fact or fiction.

I could outline every claim Kaysing has made in regard to the falsifying of A11 with scientific factual assertions to the contrary from different angles. He has not relinquished himself of the burden of proof, the truth in any case is that science has unilaterally vanquished any avenue through which he might, and with extensive corroborated elaboration. Does this mean he is mistaken? I find it a likely indicator. I think it is wise to be sceptical and give equal consideration to all explanations, but I do not find the A11 moon landing hoax to be compelling due to methods of evidence which are at best conjecture garnished with the requisition of credibility. I have been educated in Great Brittain and America, and I'll be the first one to be critical of the doctrine of western powers, but in this case specifically it is empirically logical to give credibility to the historical record in regard to the landing of A11. Do I invest in much more beyond that point simply because NASA has clearly been deceptive on other points? Not really. I think A11 is when the lies started, and a large element of that rationale dictates that man landed on the moon on July 20th 1969.
 

titorite

Senior Member
Messages
1,974
Its amazing when they popped out of the capsule that they were all freshly and clean shaven. And its amazing how they stored the water and oxygen and carbon scrubbers needed for the trip I MEAN submarines should use micro carbon scrubbers like they used.... too bad they destroyed the tapes and technology i guess the tech and recordings that got us too the moon wasnt that important after all.

Move along. Nothing to see here.
 

TimeFlipper

Senior Member
Messages
13,705
@JackStagger Thanks for your comments Jack, i enjoyed reading them (y):)..
Over a period of time i hope to put forward several valid explanations as to why i believe Apollo 11 never left the ground on our Earth..Wether our members including yourself believe me or not, are your prerogatives..

There is also a "mind set" called denial, where no matter how much proof an individual sees or reads (on anything actually), he or she will NEVER believe it happened, simply because they dont WANT to believe it....But of course, that mind set could never be attached to ANY of our members, could it Jack? ;)..
 
Last edited:

TimeFlipper

Senior Member
Messages
13,705
Its amazing when they popped out of the capsule that they were all freshly and clean shaven. And its amazing how they stored the water and oxygen and carbon scrubbers needed for the trip I MEAN submarines should use micro carbon scrubbers like they used.... too bad they destroyed the tapes and technology i guess the tech and recordings that got us too the moon wasnt that important after all.

Move along. Nothing to see here.

Yes i agree with you just how good they looked after the time spent in zero gravity, or a small amount of gravity (one sixth the gravity of Earth, i think)..I would have thought their leg muscles might have shrunk a little (especially Michael Collins who was in the CSM orbiting the Moon), resulting in hesitancy and staggering out the module to retain balance, dont you think? . The oxygen storage got me thinking too...

Apparently, the Lunar Lander held two tanks, each containing 48 pounds of gaseous oxygen plus a smaller tank holding about 2.5 pounds of gaseous oxygen, purely for the ascent back to the Command and Service Module....The two tanks were used to supply the astronauts back packs, whilst they were wandering about on the moon..

I did a check on what the size of each tank would be, that could hold 48 pounds of gaseous oxygen...Each tank size would be about 600 cubed feet..So could they have had 1200 cubed feet of space available in the Lunar Lander, just to hold oxygen and a pressurised system of 2600psi (pounds per square inch) to get the oxygen into the astronauts back packs?....I didnt check on the amount of oxygen that the CSM carried, and there were also three men consuming oxygen, going to and from the Moon..

Apparently, sometime in 2009, and in some dark corner of a basement of a University in the UK (unnamed), were 50% of the original first edition video tapes found, and subsequently lost again!!.....Also in 2009 some NASA guy said on UK TV that most of the original first edition video tapes were "recorded over", because of the high cost of video tapes in 1969!!!....Imagine, recording over the original video tapes of the greatest most incredible time EVER in scientific achievement :ROFLMAO:!!!!

Some NASA guys again made up a ruse about the "lost technology" behind the Moon landing of 1969, just to cover up the reality of how pitiful technology was then...There are even videos and written evidence that only a couple of weeks before the Moon journey began, the Lunar Lander was still highly unstable, and consequently kept crashing!!...
 
Last edited:

JackStagger

Junior Member
Messages
37
@JackStagger Thanks for your comments Jack, i enjoyed reading them (y):)..
Over a period of time i hope to put forward several valid explanations as to why i believe Apollo 11 never left the ground on our Earth..Wether our members including yourself believe me or not, are your prerogatives..

There is also a "mind set" called denial, where no matter how much proof an individual sees or reads (on anything actually), he or she will NEVER believe it happened, simply because they dont WANT to believe it....But of course, that mind set could never be attached to ANY of our members, could it Jack? ;)..

I'm not much for taking the tiptoe around saying things, or picking up on it when other folks do it. You're gonna have to lay it flat for me and I mean that with no disrespect. I'm sure I have made it clear that I do not unilaterally subscribe to my own side of it, just that I think it is logical and why I think otherwise is not compelling. Not sure if I rubbed you the wrong way but that was not my intention.
 

TimeFlipper

Senior Member
Messages
13,705
I'm not much for taking the tiptoe around saying things, or picking up on it when other folks do it. You're gonna have to lay it flat for me and I mean that with no disrespect. I'm sure I have made it clear that I do not unilaterally subscribe to my own side of it, just that I think it is logical and why I think otherwise is not compelling. Not sure if I rubbed you the wrong way but that was not my intention.

Ok Jack, i will lay it flat for you...
Every member of Paranormalis has the right to his or her own opinions...If members think the Moon landing did take place and gives me their reasons why, i will at least try to add more information that they might not be aware of, which may or may not, change their views slightly:)..
 

JackStagger

Junior Member
Messages
37
Ok Jack, i will lay it flat for you...
Every member of Paranormalis has the right to his or her own opinions...If members think the Moon landing did take place and gives me their reasons why, i will at least try to add more information that they might not be aware of, which might or might not, change their views slightly:)..
I don't understand where I am relevant to this.

I'll be straight up with you dude, there are folks who want to know and folks who want to debate. I want to know, I'm not here to debate. It's that simple. I think you took undue offence to something I said or implied, and I don't appreciate you embellishing my motivation to discuss this topic. I am not here to antagonize anyone, but at any rate, you are not the local librarian for the notions of anyone but yourself.
 

T-J

Junior Member
Messages
74
@JackStagger

Jack, give us your take on why you think the Moon landings occurred.

What is it you found that convinced you it all really might have happened after all?

Specifics are, of course, greatly appreciated.

Thnx.
 

JackStagger

Junior Member
Messages
37
T-J I appreciate you asking, but I feel like I have come off the wrong way inadvertently and am politely finding my way out of this thread as to not clog it or stifle contrasting opinions. I hope everyone has a good day and continues to explore the topic.
 

TimeFlipper

Senior Member
Messages
13,705
Our wonderful BBC TV Company made a documentary a few days ago (i missed it), titled, 8 Days To The Moon...It featured Michael Collins, who was in the Apollo 11 Command Service Module...He spoke about the time that the Lunar Lander was jettisoned onto the Moon containing Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin...The BBC made up a video "mockumentary" with actors taking the roles of Armstrong and Aldrin, as to what they were saying, during the descent to the Moon...You will be able to see the video mockumentary on the link i give you for it :)..

Moving back to Michael Collins, the BBC reported him as saying during the jettison, that he suddenly became very lonely, as he was on the "Far Side of the Moon", with no radio contact at all with his two astronaut friends now safely on the Moon, and no contact with Houston!!...Collins was orbiting the Moon at a rate of approximately one orbit every 2 hours, and spending 47 minutes out of the 2 hours, orbiting the "Far Side of the Moon" under complete radio silence...However, maybe the BBC "made up" the comments that Michael Collins was SUPPOSED to have said, or their researchers "made up" that story themselves....

Fortunately, Michael Collins is still alive and trains regularly, so i will invite him onto Paranormalis, if i can get his correct Email Addy :D..
First Things First...Even if the Command Service Module was on the Far side of the Moon, and Armstrong and Aldrin were happily wandering about the Moon, radio contact could still be made, along a "Line of Sight Path"..The Moon was only blocking radio signals between itself and the Earth, NOT between Collins Armstrong and Aldrin!!....Please remember that on each orbit of the Moon, it took Michael Collins about 2 hours, and that 47 minutes of that 2 hours would be spent on the Far Side of the Moon, in radio silence..

.Iam going to show you a video that NASA made, "titled "Restored Apollo 11 Moonwalk-Original NASA EVA mission-Walking On The Moon"...The video is slightly over 3 hours long, just see if you can find a spot where there is a 47 minute Radio Silence, totally dead sound!...If you cannot see the video in your country, type into You Tube the title i just gave you....The featured link for Michael Collins, which includes the mockumentary, just go onto your browser and type in, "Moon Landing": How Radio Went Dead When Apollo 11 Was On The Dark Side Of The Moon"...You will immediately see, The Daily Express title, so just scroll down and read the full account that Michael Collins made to the BBC....Next comes the video :)..

 
Last edited:

Top