|
Post by brotherofthemoon on Dec 11, 2006 21:02:28 GMT -4
Two from the Apollo 13 IMDB board. Apparently, intelligent film conversation isn't the only thing that dies at IMDB.
Oh no, he's gonna "throw at us the same proof we've failed to offer concrete evidence for!"
Well, he's convinced me.
Better spelling, but still stupid:
|
|
|
Post by brotherofthemoon on Dec 10, 2006 8:53:18 GMT -4
Try to avoid posting anything you read on this forum.
Today I learned something new. The idea that we landed on the "god damn moon" is "ludacris" because The computer on the "LEM" wasn't powerful enough to "send live video, and many other things."
Source: IMDB message board for Conspiracy Theory: Did We Land on the Moon?
|
|
|
HUBBLE
Dec 9, 2006 20:55:39 GMT -4
Post by brotherofthemoon on Dec 9, 2006 20:55:39 GMT -4
I just noticed that the forum software censors the world "Astron*t"...
|
|
|
HUBBLE
Dec 9, 2006 18:55:26 GMT -4
Post by brotherofthemoon on Dec 9, 2006 18:55:26 GMT -4
SLUR OF DISCONNECTED TOPICS ATTEPMT TO CONFUZE READER MOON HOAX HUBBLE astronaut FALL CIA COCAIN LOL!!!
|
|
|
Post by brotherofthemoon on Dec 7, 2006 10:41:12 GMT -4
My god, I think the HBs have discovered stream of consciousness poetry!
(They also know more about the Moon's atmosphere than anyone else, too...)
|
|
|
Post by brotherofthemoon on Oct 24, 2006 17:24:12 GMT -4
Well, it is listed as the Apollo 2 press conference. It's almost like those bozos were talking about Apollo 11 or something.
|
|
|
Post by brotherofthemoon on Feb 24, 2007 23:50:07 GMT -4
What good is that if youre doing cartwheels in space. Wasnt that what happened to "Snoopy"? I'm still wondering how anyone can watch footage of the Apollo CSM and LM maneuvering around in lunar orbit and think "hmm... that looks fake to me". How could they possibly fake that? With miniatures? Nope, because in some shots from the CSM you can see the astronauts moving around inside the the LM through the windows, all while the moon passes by beneath them and the two vehicles fly in totally different orientations. Godlike powers of real time special effects compositing. In the 1960s. And we still couldn't actually land there. Right.
|
|
|
Post by brotherofthemoon on Jan 24, 2007 16:06:15 GMT -4
Are you sure they're not all related? ;D Somewhere out there, I'm sure there's a Sister of the Moon getting government bribes for her prodigious disinformation campaign. ;D
|
|
|
Post by brotherofthemoon on Jan 9, 2007 23:50:23 GMT -4
Jason Thompson, you sir are a liar! You forgot the "pants on fire" bit.
|
|
|
Post by brotherofthemoon on Sept 4, 2006 15:49:21 GMT -4
So let me get this straight.... The HBs want us to believe that the LM was made from scotch tape, so it couldn't land on the Moon. Now they're telling me the CM was made from scotch tape, but managed to make it to Earth orbit. Oh, and there's no way that's a closeup form the smaller photo. The closeup looks like it was taken during the spacecraft checkout.
|
|
|
Post by brotherofthemoon on Aug 21, 2006 23:16:11 GMT -4
I've been "inspired" by the recent ramblings of Moon Man on the Unexplained Mysteries forum.
The CM would be about 25 feet in diameter, big enough to house 100 pounds of moon rocks, three astronauts, and the folding LM when it's time to bring it to the Smithsonian. The docking port would be at the top, and the parachutes and docking probe would be installed on the side of the spacecraft on opposite ends. Also on the front would be a giant window so the spacecraft can be steered like a car.
The service module would have to be absolutely enormous, as it has to store enough oxygen for two weeks, and enough fuel for 500,000 miles of continuous thrusting. "Directional vector adjustment" thrusters would be installed around the perimeter of the SM to change the spacecraft's course. It would also have a high-resolution camera that permanantly focused on the Earth. Because if you can't see the Earth, everyone will think it's faked.
The lunar module would have an aerodynamic shape, and giant weeks for flying through the scorching radiation hell of the lunar vacuum. It would have a six foot wide hatch so astronauts could bring the giant sample boxes inside, and so they could exit standing upright. The descent stage would be clad in polished aluminum panels, house a fully-assembled LRV, have giant heavy-duty landing gear like the Nostromo, and be powered by a giant rocket that burned LO2 & LH2 at a continuous 100% thrust.
Of course, the entire assembly would be surrounded by six feet of lead shielding. The windows would have to be transparent lead, of course.
|
|
|
Post by brotherofthemoon on Aug 23, 2006 14:48:21 GMT -4
Maybe we have a "next generation" of HBs springing up. The try valiantly to raise new "issues", having seen the old hoax evidence being soundly thrashed. Unfortunately, without the slightest knowledge of Apollo or science, their new theories are ridiculous to the extreme...but they keep swinging away... I've learned more about Apollo from debunking threads than I have from websites or books on Apollo. Not that I ever believed a word the HBs had to say.
|
|
|
Post by brotherofthemoon on Aug 20, 2006 21:28:28 GMT -4
I just learned that the Apollo 13 LM is in the Smithsonian, and that a spacecraft is always pointed in the direction it's pointed. I even learned that NASA didn't install a camera on the CM that permanantly faced the Earth because people would know they were in LEO! And there was no way to fit moon rocks inside the ascent stage! And that using the thrusters to yaw left or right would have crashed the spacecraft into the Moon! Seriously, what the flying f**k?
|
|
|
Post by brotherofthemoon on Aug 17, 2006 15:19:27 GMT -4
Am I the only person who just PgDns past HB messages if they're longer than one or two paragraphs? They've just gotten so damned predictable lately. No crackpot theories, just the same old crap.
|
|
|
Post by brotherofthemoon on Jun 26, 2006 16:50:45 GMT -4
I found a link to this site on BAUT earlier. www.gratestshowonearth.com/speakingofdamoon.html Can't be bothered to debunk the entire thing because I'm not a genius like you guys. It does involve my personal "favorite" (cough) HB tactic, badly compressed tiny JPEG images. Isn't it amazing that ina fuzzy, tiny JPEG image you can't seem the Remote Control Unit, but in a hi-resolution digital scan you can? vs. He also knows jack-s*^t about the lunar module, and spends three pages devoted to the assumption that the MESA camera was mounted on the downlock assembly for the forward landing gear! He can't understand why the DPS didn't have a blast deflector if the RCS did ( what's the thrust gonna impinge on, anyway?), can't figure out that a good portion of the sensing probe would have crushed under the landing pad, and acts as if the fact that the ladder didn't go all the way to the lunar surface was some sort of potentially astronaut-killing flaw! Oh yeah, and somewhere there's a mockup of the LM that doesn't match exactly the real-life hardware. Wow, I'm convinced it's all a fake now! ;D
|
|