You're puzzled by the world, didn't bother to learn much about it…..
It’s not a case of me being puzzled by the world, but rather, my perception of the world is merely different to what you perceive it to be. What does puzzle me however is why some people believe that governments and large organisations such as NASA would be incapable of lying.
Your argument is that for most things regarding Apollo we just have to take NASA's word for it. That's not true. There are (and were in the 1960s) plenty of people who knew a lot about space and space travel who didn't get it from NASA and can't be fooled by NASA if NASA is wrong. Those people have to be accounted for in your theory
Only America and Russia were supposedly actively exploring space in the 60’s, so anyone outside of these countries would only know what they had been told.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_space_exploration#1960%E2%80%931969Wind forward to recent years and the heads of every so called space agency in the world know that Apollo was a hoax, along with all other alleged manned space flight, as they are all in on the act. This is not my own theory, as you state, but a very likely fact, given the obvious fakery we see on board the ISS, because if they are faking space now, then they were definitely faking it fifty years ago. We see clear evidence of wire harnesses, mad looking hair, permed into place and pixelating objects and foregrounds, while the background stays intact. This fakery isn’t up for argument, as it is plainly obvious, so the way I see it, your only defence can be to explain why they need to fake the footage if they are really in space.
As for tangled wires, maybe the scenes you mention, only had one man on wires, or if the men stayed approximately the same distance apart...
This is why it's important for you to have seen more than just the odd YouTube clip of astronauts on the lunar surface. You're proposing stuff that would potentially work for a few seconds, or maybe a minute or two. But not for the lengthy shots that are in the unedited source material
Why would any of the footage be impossible to fake with a combination of wire rigs, helium balloons and framerate editing? Don’t forget, they only needed support for those high skips and jumps, where the fall could be measurable. The bulk of the footage doesn’t require wires, just crank up the speed and it becomes clear that they are on a movie set.
...it would be an easy task to suspend both of them
You've obviously never staged Peter Pan with a flyrig. Multiple actors on wires "live" on a stage with two dimensions of travel is not possible with theatrical flyrigs today. I'm certified by Foy to operate multiaxis flyrigs and I've designed and built my own single-axis flyrig. Since Foy's technology is proprietary, an NDA prevents me from describing it in detail. But safe to say it works on a gantry principle that can't accommodate more than a single flier without drastically reducing his field of travel. And that's state of the art. So please describe a rig that could do what you say
First of all, we are talking a multibillion dollar organisation, not some two-bit “live” stage production. I would imagine a rotating rail underneath the main rig would suffice in order to allow the actors to skip and jump around each other, but I’ve yet to find any footage of the actors crossing paths multiple times, that would require both actors to be suspended.
Helium balloons would be a good solution.....
That's how they did it for From the Earth to the Moon. I worked on a film with the grip company that did those effects. And no, it's not just handwavingly easy.
They didn’t do it because it was easy, but because it was hard
![Smiley :)](http://www.apollohoax.net/forum/Smileys/default/smiley.gif)
So in what field is your expertise…..
Aerospace engineering, along with film and theater as side businesses. Please tell me what your training and experience is in aerospace engineering. Please tell me what your training and experience is in professional film and theater. You're making claims along those lines that would ordinarily be probative only if they came from someone with suitable expertise, to be able to give his informed judgment regarding what is easy, hard, possible, or impossible in those fields
There are people with better qualifications than you, who have fell foul to NASA’s lies. The qualifications you are so proud of are the very thing preventing you from viewing the evidence with an open mind. I can’t believe we are arguing over how they managed to suspend the actors when the video fakery as a whole is so insanely obvious, and I do believe some of you when you say you can’t see it, but that’s mind control for you.
Knowledge is power, but that doesn’t apply to you, as the people running the world have the real knowledge, which gives them the power to control the rest of us, by giving us a false knowledge, which in turn, gives us a false understanding of the world we live in. Therefore, the less knowledge we have, to a certain extent, the more open our minds are, and since I have less of this alleged scientific knowledge than you, it gives me power over the likes of you, as I am free to think outside the box, in which, you will be forever locked inside.
It’s already been proven that the footage you got your earth images from, was not shot on the outward journey to the moon…..
No, it hasn't been proven. You've just bought Sibrel's line uncritically and are uninterested in why his attempt at proof fails. Then you're simply begging the question of your belief to insist that any rebuttal against it must somehow be false. That's as circular as reasoning can get
Sibrel was wrong in his assumption that the trickery was performed while in LEO, but rather on board a plane, as we never see the alleged astronauts speaking, because to have live audio would mean hearing the planes engines. The triple glazing theory doesn’t come close to debunking what we see in the footage. There are large discrepancies in the views of the windows when the camera is zoomed out, depending on which transmission we are viewing, and the size of the earth is only a fraction of the size it should be from the distances alleged. There are also numerous cuts in the video footage, while the audio continues seamlessly over these cuts, in all three of the alleged transmissions.
It seems that every TV network, apart from ABC have lost the original live news coverage of that second broadcast, and the ABC News channel showed an edited version of that transmission in an alleged “live” broadcast. How the hell does that work? The “fact” that there is no unedited archive TV footage from the time of the event, and the fact that the bulk of the footage was never officially released to the public until after Sibrel released his DVD is very suspicious to say the least. Your flimsy debunking efforts only make sense to those within the realms of the NASA fan club, while the rest of us see it as pure BS.
.....how can anyone be this gullible?
Most of my sources for Apollo reference are contemporary. You are trying very hard to hide what is effectively an affirmative rebuttal. No matter what material is produced that contradicts your belief, your standard rebuttal -- made with no evidence -- is that it must somehow have been faked. Calling your critics gullible doesn't relieve you of the burden to prove an affirmative rebuttal.
Made with no evidence? What do you hope to gain by being dishonest? You may have some respect among your fellow cult members, but most people outside of your little club see you as a deceitful character who will distort the truth and make false accusations toward your opponents in an attempt to discredit them.
Why would anyone accept your challenge to debate with you, as they would be banging their heads against a brick wall? You and your friends will either ignore the evidence presented to you and instead, discredit the person making the claim, or simply wave it away with weak counterevidence and then claim victory on the grounds that you allegedly have the superior knowledge.
I’m only here to fill in my spare time, and to try and understand how people can be so easily blinded by science. This is incredulity of the highest order, as there is a mountain of evidence staring you in the face, but you put your fingers in your ears and look the other way. This has to be a form of mental illness you are all suffering from, as your way of thinking is completely alien to any rational thinking person. Try and imagine your emotions if the government and NASA were to come clean and admit the fraud. The very thought should terrify you, but I’m guessing that your brains are not wired for imaginative thinking.