Moonwalk '69 by.. Kubrick?

[RageAgainst]

Have anyone heard about this.. Nixon wanted to win the space race at all costs right.. So when the NASA got ready to bring people on the moon, he asked them if they could film it, so they could show the whole world that USA pwnd the commies. Well, the NASA said it's impossible. During the day it's way to hot and during the night it's way to cold, and the batteries couldn't even work. The film would break. Etc etc.

So with Rumsfeld's complicity, he asked Stanley Kubrick to film it, in a studio. 4 technicians assisted him, they all worked for the CIA, and after the film was made, they all had to disappear with new identities. Later the same year 3 of them were found "accidently dead" in random places of the world. The 4th one hid in a synagog in Brooklin for 20 years.

According to ex-KGB agents, when they saw the pictures of Armstrong on the moon, it took 20 minutes for the KGB to figure out they were fake. For many reasons like light, reflection, shadow, footprints (you're 1/6 of your weight on the moon, there's no huge footprints.. come on), the flag, etc etc.

Have you heard of this?

[gehtfuct]

If Armstrong was the first to step foot on the moon....Who was standing there taking the picture? I also think it's weird that there wasn't any telescopes strong enough to view the LM in orbit. But at the same time, you could see the basketball sized Sputnik with the naked eye.

Nah! I seriously doubt that the U.S. is the subject of any type of conspiracies.

NASA could give you the full open house tour. And you'd still leave wondering what they lied about.

[dustinzgirl]

The top foot of the moon is pure loose dust, not like the hard earth we walk on.
As for the rest of it, I dont know, never cared. Could be fake, but I'm pretty damn sure that there was a few pics of the russian guys in space back then too.

[gehtfuct]

It's loose because there is no water in the Moon soil. Knowing that, how does the shoe print hold it's form? And it's not in debate whether the Russians made it or not. The whole shit-pile was about who made it to the Moon first. It's good thing we all know the U.S. has never cheated at anything.

[dustinzgirl]

It's loose because there is no water in the Moon soil. Knowing that, how does the shoe print hold it's form? And it's not in debate whether the Russians made it or not. The whole shit-pile was about who made it to the Moon first. It's good thing we all know the U.S. has never cheated at anything.

No air, it is a vaccum. I'm not saying it isnt plausible, just that there is a counterpoint to the theory.

[RageAgainst]

I already heard all those theories, but what captured my attention on this one was Stanley Kubrick.. wtf?

[MsChevyKat]

I already heard all those theories, but what captured my attention on this one was Stanley Kubrick.. wtf?

Yeah me too...I've heard all the theories and reasons why the moon landing was faked,but this is the first I've heard about Kubrick being involved!

Strange days indeed!

[Devien]

man did walk on the moon:

- the shadows did go in different directions, but this happens on earth with a single light source, its because light radiates out and shadows are affected by the ground they're on.

- the astronauts were not blacked out when they apparantly should have been, given the light source was behind them, because the light reflected off the ground in front of them and lit them up.

- the flag only moved when the astronauts were handling it or immediately afterwards.

- as for the ground, thats already been said in previous posts.

[HoneyImHome]

If you sit and look at ANYthing long enough, you'll see little things that make you question, "wonder why the shadow isn't there?" or "wouldn't that have fallen more to the right?" or whatever.

So, instead of investigating the possibilities of why each instance occur, many (almost all conspiracy theorists) find more questions and list them off with their own deductions, never once investigating these things for themselves.

I'm not saying it's real or not, but yeah, as of yet the evidence definitely leans more to yes, than no.

[dookie]

Have you heard of this?

i have now

[RageAgainst]

- the flag only moved when the astronauts were handling it or immediately afterwards.

Yeah right :
http://www.novaspace.com/AUTO/Moonwalk/ALDRIN/BuzzFlag.jpeg


Oh and one more thing, in the movie, someone films the lunar lander taking off from a vantage point of the moon. Who was left out behind to film that? ... Answer that and you get a cookie.

[gehtfuct]

Apparently, there were rovers on the Moon prior to the LM landing.
NASA has an answer for everything. Imagine that.

[JLXC]

This is one of those out there theories that actually intrigues me.

We have much better tech now, but ask NASA how long before someone could walk on the moon again and it's "Well... how about 2016!!!" Huh? We did it with monkies and tape back in 1969, but now it's very difficult and would take many years? Huh?

I've looked at some of those sites, and I see flaws in their arguments. Not all of the arguments are totally dismissable though. Knowing the US govt, especially the people at the time, cheating and lying was a very good option for them, so it's not beyond my belief that they may have made the whole thing up. I see valid points on both sides, and unfortunately, there's no real evidence against the landing. Of course there's no "real" evidence anything ever happened at Roswell, but I believe that one.

All in all I'm skeptical of a landing on the moon, but I'm not able to find anything concrete (like they'd let you!) to dismiss it. Still it's fascinating to thing about and if they did fake it, WOW! It's one of the best Bullshit screens even beofre Roswell!

[HoneyImHome]

Refuting the refuting... http://www.iangoddard.net/moon01.htm

[King Goldfish]

Have anyone heard about this.. Nixon wanted to win the space race at all costs right.. So when the NASA got ready to bring people on the moon, he asked them if they could film it, so they could show the whole world that USA pwnd the commies. Well, the NASA said it's impossible. During the day it's way to hot and during the night it's way to cold, and the batteries couldn't even work. The film would break. Etc etc.

So with Rumsfeld's complicity, he asked Stanley Kubrick to film it, in a studio. 4 technicians assisted him, they all worked for the CIA, and after the film was made, they all had to disappear with new identities. Later the same year 3 of them were found "accidently dead" in random places of the world. The 4th one hid in a synagog in Brooklin for 20 years.

According to ex-KGB agents, when they saw the pictures of Armstrong on the moon, it took 20 minutes for the KGB to figure out they were fake. For many reasons like light, reflection, shadow, footprints (you're 1/6 of your weight on the moon, there's no huge footprints.. come on), the flag, etc etc.

Have you heard of this?


Jeez, I hate this conspiracy.

first off, It was not *Film* used to film the luner landing. It was Video (stil experimental at that time). You could almost say we have mobile video camera's today thanks to our Japanese friends at Sony. It was sony who created the first beta video camcorder and tape recorder that was strapped onto the astronauts space suit.

The video that shows Niel coming down and out of the LM was a video camera on the side with an extending Jib (crane) that shot the LM as it was landing and Armstrong coming out.

All those "fake" lighting and shadows that you people see is just he way the sun refracts off of objects. Its an omni light and not directional. Its bouncing off of all kinds of stuff on the moon. some of the rocks of the moon are very reflective. Its why its so damn bright at night.

[King Goldfish]

No air, it is a vaccum. I'm not saying it isnt plausible, just that there is a counterpoint to the theory.


Solar winds.

Dont you guys think that if The NASA wanted to fake something like this, that they would have thought about a waving flag. if it was recorded in a hanger in New mexico, they would have made sure there was no draft in the thing.

now, I had this one theory a while back that sort of is the same. But it wasnt that NASA couldnt record on the moon because of fluxuating temps. It was because our friends down in Australia wouldnt allow NASA to work on the broken Sat dish that was helping to broadcast the event. It was said it was fixed in the final hour before liftoff but if this was faked, it was faked because NASA couldnt broadcast the biggest event in modern history.

But I doubt what you see is fake. I think its the real deal.

[King Goldfish]

This is one of those out there theories that actually intrigues me.

We have much better tech now, but ask NASA how long before someone could walk on the moon again and it's "Well... how about 2016!!!" Huh? We did it with monkies and tape back in 1969, but now it's very difficult and would take many years? Huh?

I've looked at some of those sites, and I see flaws in their arguments. Not all of the arguments are totally dismissable though. Knowing the US govt, especially the people at the time, cheating and lying was a very good option for them, so it's not beyond my belief that they may have made the whole thing up. I see valid points on both sides, and unfortunately, there's no real evidence against the landing. Of course there's no "real" evidence anything ever happened at Roswell, but I believe that one.

All in all I'm skeptical of a landing on the moon, but I'm not able to find anything concrete (like they'd let you!) to dismiss it. Still it's fascinating to thing about and if they did fake it, WOW! It's one of the best Bullshit screens even beofre Roswell!


You bring up some good points JL, but I think "the gungho, do or die" mentality of 1969 doesnt exist today. It wouldnt be very popular with todays liberal generation.

So they want to make it as safe as possible. We're no longer having a cold war with the evil "commie pinko bastards". We're doing this strictly for science and to help advance human kind. As I mentioned before in the thread. We now have things that we may never of had. at least not in this day and age.

camcorders, Digital photography, home computers, calculators or even digital clocks.

Thanks to NASA we have 500 channel TV and GPS. We have alot to thank them for. People who would of died just 20 or 30 years ago while getting lost are able to know exactly we're they're at.

We might get some cool new gadgets from this new trip to the moon. Who knows what kind of awesome, like saving materials can be created, to help with the next expidition.

Plus we're going to send Pods to the moon that will snap together and make a large living quarters for the astronauts who will then build a permanent station that will help launch us to Mars.

BTW, LMAO@ the monkey and tape comment. Monkies and Ducttape :)

[RageAgainst]

Jeez, I hate this conspiracy.

first off, It was not *Film* used to film the luner landing. It was Video (stil experimental at that time). You could almost say we have mobile video camera's today thanks to our Japanese friends at Sony. It was sony who created the first beta video camcorder and tape recorder that was strapped onto the astronauts space suit.

The video that shows Niel coming down and out of the LM was a video camera on the side with an extending Jib (crane) that shot the LM as it was landing and Armstrong coming out.

All those "fake" lighting and shadows that you people see is just he way the sun refracts off of objects. Its an omni light and not directional. Its bouncing off of all kinds of stuff on the moon. some of the rocks of the moon are very reflective. Its why its so damn bright at night.

Excuse me... Yes it was film, there was no digital cameras at the time. It can be VIDEO, but it's still recorded on a fucking FILM. kk.

[King Goldfish]

Excuse me... Yes it was film, there was no digital cameras at the time. It can be VIDEO, but it's still recorded on a fucking FILM. kk.


I wasnt talking about the still shots. They took actual video up there. and I'm not about the live feed. But im guessing they had a special camera made by kodak as well, that took still photos. I didnt mean to say they took digital photos. I know it didnt exist back then. So you're saying that film would have froze and broke or not worked?

Well if you google "The Moon conspiracy" you will see all kinds of sites that have creditable people to explain how things were done. The radiation belt that cirlces our globe would have given them about 1/25th the radiation exposure that is considered within safe guidelines in a single day. It took them about 1 hour to pass through it.

The sun is not a single directional light source and the earth, too gives off alot of light from its own reflection. The moons surface is very reflective as well.

A jib on the LM was video taping as well as a mobile device that was sent out first with a camera attached to it.

You people cant honestly believe the moon landing was faked?

[HoneyImHome]

Rage, I don't know if you noticed my link in post #14, but I thought it was pretty descriptive and detailed in its arguments.

Yeah, KG is right though there are several others. I just liked that this one actually explained many of the arguments mentioned here specifically.

[BamWam]

This link answers most of the claims and gives scientific or facts the prove the hoaxers wrong. I also wrote a paper about it but I did it quickly and it was very brief but if you really want to see how bad I did on the report just say so I'll copy and paste it in here.

Click It (http://www.badastronomy.com/bad/tv/foxapollo.html)

[King Goldfish]

This link answers most of the claims and gives scientific or facts the prove the hoaxers wrong. I also wrote a paper about it but I did it quickly and it was very brief but if you really want to see how bad I did on the report just say so I'll copy and paste it in here.

Click It (http://www.badastronomy.com/bad/tv/foxapollo.html)

I read that site already. Are you saying you wrote this article? or you just copied it?

[RageAgainst]

I wasnt talking about the still shots. They took actual video up there.

WTF is wrong with you? When you make a movie with a video camera, it gets recorded on a TAPE wich will FREEZE and BREAK at extreme temperatures.

[FireAngel]

There are good arguments for both sides. One thing to consider on the side of it being real is this: On the day Armstrong and the rest of the crew landed on the moon (believing it to be real for the moment at least) many people set up amateur radio towers to catch the transmissions between Armstrong and NASA. They heard Armstrong's first words when they landed on the moon. This is what my AP American history teacher told me at any rate. The question he posed was this: If this was a conspiracy, how did the government know about all of these people and fake the message?
He believes that we really did land on the moon. I personally can see both sides, but I lean more towards it being real after this argument.

[HoneyImHome]

I'm sorry, could it not have been a feed taped back at NASA? Did they actually claim that this was taped on the moon? I'm sure that if they had the technology to land on the moon they surely could have figured out how to tape from a camera feed...

[FireAngel]

I'm sorry, could it not have been a feed taped back at NASA? Did they actually claim that this was taped on the moon? I'm sure that if they had the technology to land on the moon they surely could have figured out how to tape from a camera feed...
I was talking radio, not t.v. Unless you're not even replying to me, then I feel dumb. :happysad: With the radio NASA would have had to know that people were going to set up their amateur stations to be able to reach them and send them false radiowaves, at least according to what I remember of my teacher's response when I posed the question to him. This guy had studied history since he was able to read, so I figured I'd ask his opinion, and that was the answer he gave. Like I said, I don't really know what to believe on this subject.

[BamWam]

I read that site already. Are you saying you wrote this article? or you just copied it?
Neither. I am saying that I had to write my own paper for science and this was one of the sites I used as a resource but I still have my paper saved if anyone wants to see it (it is shitty though).

[HoneyImHome]

I was talking to Rage and/or KG, Tiger.

You're not dumb by the way. ;)

[FireAngel]

I was talking to Rage and/or KG, Tiger.

You're not dumb by the way. ;)
Oh good. That makes me feel a lot better. :)

[King Goldfish]

WTF is wrong with you? When you make a movie with a video camera, it gets recorded on a TAPE wich will FREEZE and BREAK at extreme temperatures.


If you do your research, You will find information that Sony created a casing for the video tape box (Which was seperate from the camera that was warn on the side, kind of like an older beta cam) which was obviouslly insulated as the astronaut suits were. The fucking magnetic tape isnt going to freeze. I think the tape would have a much better chance at surviving then a fucking human being.

You people make me laugh. You think you're an endless source of information or If anyone argues with you shitheads, you kill the thread or edited the person out.

[King Goldfish]

I'm sorry, could it not have been a feed taped back at NASA? Did they actually claim that this was taped on the moon? I'm sure that if they had the technology to land on the moon they surely could have figured out how to tape from a camera feed...


There was both. Their was a live sat feed from the LM but they also brought home film and video taken by the astronauts themselves. Sony invented a special casing for the video camera and reel to reel tape that redcorded it. It wasnt seen until they returned home.

My teacher used to have one of these older beta style cameras. But it was a Toshiba which just copied Sonys design for the commercial market. We have the second generation model when I was 14 back in 1979. I used to have alot of fun with that old camera. To say film would break on the moon because of extreem temps is like saying the LM would blow up because of extreem temps. I dont think they took an old Browie camera up to the moon. It doesnt take a rocket scientist to figure this out. Some idiot conspiracy nut throws this out on the web and thats good enough for the average nutcase.

[Ahnold]

So I have two questions to pose if the moon landing was real.

1. Why hasn't NASA ever pointed the Hubble at the moon and show pictures of the equipment left behind? (At least they could fake those pictures too.)

2. Why is it that when China said they're going to the moon, we the US immediately decided that we too will go again - ahead of the Chinese? Do we not want the Chinese to get to Tranquility base as say "where's all the equipment that's supposed to be here?"

[King Goldfish]

So I have two questions to pose if the moon landing was real.

1. Why hasn't NASA ever pointed the Hubble at the moon and show pictures of the equipment left behind? (At least they could fake those pictures too.)

I read something about this. And Hubble has pointed itself at the moon. google it. It has to do with the diameter of the lens. as big as the Hubbles lens is, Its not large enough to pick up the flag or other objects left off. You would need a diameter of roughly the size of a football field to zoom that close in. We dont have the technology to do that yet. It would be easier to just go back to the moon.


2. Why is it that when China said they're going to the moon, we the US immediately decided that we too will go again - ahead of the Chinese? Do we not want the Chinese to get to Tranquility base as say "where's all the equipment that's supposed to be here??"

I dont think its to cover up the former moon mission (If thats what you're implying.) But once china and the ESA desided to push for luner exploration, perhaps Mr Bush felt America should go back. It could be just political. Same as the Cold War. I think the real idea for Bush to go back to the moon was to make it a launching post for future Mars exploration. If they find water on the moon, they can make fuel which would be a hell of alot easier to launch from the moon the earth. There is no atmosphere barrier to slow down the rocket and the moons gravitaional pull is like 1/6th the earths.

hope that helps.

[scarfacebob]

http://www.space.com/news/spacehistory/apollo_mirror.html is a link to information about a reflector that was placed on the moon for measuring the distance. Seems it was placed there by Apollo 11 crew. Somebody can debunk this I am sure.

[dirtlover]

Yeah right :
http://www.novaspace.com/AUTO/Moonwalk/ALDRIN/BuzzFlag.jpeg


Oh and one more thing, in the movie, someone films the lunar lander taking off from a vantage point of the moon. Who was left out behind to film that? ... Answer that and you get a cookie.
the flag isn't moving, it's upper edge is connected to a second stick(not the pole that it's standing on) that's shorter then the flag itself, making it a bit wavery. It's like with curtains: try moving them and they become a bit wavery, and if you take a picture there's an illusion that they are moving. Not too clear, was I?

[Icarus]

What about, like... the moonwalking? How did they jump like that?

I don't know about anybody else but the very posture of the astronauts is so different from an Earth walker's posture that it seems obvious they are under different gravity conditions.

[BelaLugosi]

Shit yeah it's a conspiracy! The moon isn't even real! Everyone knows that what we think is the moon is really just light reflecting off the surface of Mercury.

[RageAgainst]

the flag isn't moving, it's upper edge is connected to a second stick(not the pole that it's standing on) that's shorter then the flag itself, making it a bit wavery. It's like with curtains: try moving them and they become a bit wavery, and if you take a picture there's an illusion that they are moving. Not too clear, was I?

On the picture, the flag is moving. Don't even try to tell me that it's not.

[BamWam]

On the picture, the flag is moving. Don't even try to tell me that it's not.
If you would read what he said he explained why the flag looks like it is waving.

[RageAgainst]

If you would read what he said he explained why the flag looks like it is waving.

I know, but no. It's not a curtain, it's a flag. It's fucking moving.

Anyways... I think we will never have the absolute answer on that.

[Hypernova]

guys...thats from a movie...the lunar landing was filmed in black and white, my mom and dad remember perfectly well, it was in black and white.

[Jugular]

guys...thats from a movie...the lunar landing was filmed in black and white, my mom and dad remember perfectly well, it was in black and white.

OWNED!!!!!!!!!!!