"Houston.. please, no more problems.."

Solid technique and timing on that punch... brings the power from the hip

 

Op is moronic.

 

If it was fakE, they wouldn't have to get 1000 people in on it. Just only the main players in the con and pretend like everything is normal towards everyone else. You obviously never conspired to fake an event. Looooser!

 

So, in short, don't trust the media and do all your research via YouTube. LOL.

 

Hilarious OP. Has a thread ever had to be moved from the Houston sports forum to D&D?

 

It will never go away. Its engrained.

Thanks LBJ. And yes the landing was done at area 51(from ex-workers witnessing)

the only thing you can do is make a sign saying the other team like "New York you have a problem" something like that

 

ok,well, the LIFE magazine photo cover is the proof, shadows being wrong,wind being wrong, flag waving wrong etc.....

also,when you speed up the astronauts "walking" on the moon,it literally is normal walking, meaning the video was slowed down to make it look like less gravity...but with less gravity you wouldnt be walking "slower" youd be "floating"

tons of evidence to prove its faked. not to mention we have 1000x better technology now and for some "reason" we cant get back on the moon...think about it

 

Mythbusters on fake moon landing

One of the NASA photos is fake because the shadows of the rocks and lunar lander are not parallel.
busted

The Mythbusters built a small-scale replica of the lunar landing site based on the photograph, using reflective sand similar to that found on the Moon, and a single light to represent the Sun. Next, they took a photo which was exactly the same as the NASA photo, including the differing shadows. The Mythbusters explained that the shadows were not parallel because of the way the light falls on the Moon’s natural topography.

One of the NASA photos is fake because Neil Armstrong can be clearly seen while in the shadow of the lunar lander.
busted

To test this myth, the Mythbusters built a large-scale replica of the landing site, allowing them to take a photo which was nearly identical to the original NASA photo. The Mythbusters explained that Armstrong was visible because of ambient light being reflected off of the Moon’s surface.

A flag cannot flap in a vacuum.
busted

The Build Team placed a replica of the American flag planted on the moon into a vacuum chamber at the Marshall Space Flight Center. They first tested at normal pressure and manipulated the flag. The momentum moved the flag around but the motion quickly dissipated. In vacuum conditions, manipulating the flag caused it to flap vigorously as if it were being blown by a breeze. This demonstrated that a flag could appear to wave in a vacuum, as the Apollo flag did.

A clear footprint cannot be made in vacuum because there is no moisture to hold its shape.
busted

The Build Team first tested whether dry or wet sand made a more distinguishable footprint by stepping in them with an astronaut boot. It was clear that the wet footprint had more detail than the dry footprint. They then placed sand similar in composition to the Moon’s soil in a vacuum chamber and stepped on it with an astronaut boot, which made a clear print. The reason provided for this was that the unique composition of lunar soil allows it to behave differently than terrestrial soil.

The film of the astronauts moonwalking is actually film of the astronauts skipping in front of a high-framerate camera, slowing down the picture and giving the illusion they are on the Moon.
busted

Adam donned a replica NASA spacesuit and mimicked the astronauts’ motions while being filmed by a slow motion camera. They also attached Adam to wires in order to mimic the Moon’s lower gravity. While comparing their new footage with the original footage, the Mythbusters noted an initial similarity, but there were several small discrepancies attributable to filming in Earth’s gravity. In order to film in microgravity, the Mythbusters boarded a Reduced Gravity Aircraft and filmed the exact same movements. Adam noted that the movements were more comfortable and more logical in microgravity, and their footage from the plane looked exactly like the original NASA film. The Mythbusters concluded that the moon landing film is authentic.

The Apollo astronauts left behind special equipment on the Moon like reflectors that scientists can bounce lasers off of.
confirmed

The Mythbusters went to an observatory equipped with a high powered laser. They first fired at the bare lunar surface but did not detect the laser bouncing back. Then they pointed the laser at a reflector left behind by NASA and received a confirmed bounce.

 

don't be fooled by all that. the Mythbusters have been paid by the right-wingers who also killed JFK. they're in the conspiracy, bro.

 

I've got more technology in my Bic® ballpoint pen than the Egyptians had 6 or 7 thousand years ago. There's your proof. It had to be the aliens that built that. Because you can't do anything without technology! :grin:

 

Well I haven't read their statements, so I'm hazarding possibly a reckless guess (though no more reckless than the conclusion you've arrived at, which you said you didn't arrive at...). My guess is that they simply don't want to use the type of rockets they were using in the 50s and 60s, but their current technologies have not been developed with "landing" on anything but a long, smooth concrete runway in an inhabitable atmosphere in mind.

That's right, they've proven unable to get a ship into the air. There have been no launches whatsoever between 1969 and now except the tragic 1986 launch. Not only is your take here freaking stupid, it is also disrespectful to those who lost their lives that day.

 

You do know that there were several spectacular failures at launching both manned and unmanned rockets prior to 1969, don't you? Also, Sputnik with in 1957, so by your logic I got married "right after" I got out of the fourth grade.

 

I certainly *did* answer the question. "My guess is that they simply don't want to use the type of rockets they were using in the 50s and 60s, but their current technologies have not been developed with "landing" on anything but a long, smooth concrete runway in an inhabitable atmosphere in mind." In case you missed it the first time.

I'm not "backed into a corner" in the least.

 

win what, ain't exactly high cotton in h town sports these days

 

Where are your links about the "another 20 years"? A few years ago, NASA formulated a plan to get back to the moon within your "20 year" (non)quote, but their budget was slashed where they could not do it. Also, Kennedy's speech was in 1961 - 8 years, not 6, prior to the moon landing.

When you can't get these simple facts correct how can we take anything you say seriously?

 

whatev man, he's got us backed into a corner!