Remember me
▼ Content

where the moonlandings a hoax?


where the moonlandings a hoax?06-06-2016 06:53
Tudoceros
☆☆☆☆☆
(2)
I am aware it sounds bizarre at first

However,

The more one looks into it, the more it seems so.

Nasa , which is a MILITARY organization, lies a lot to us, so people

now are saying nasa stands for Never A Straight Answer.


The point is, there is actually NO PROOF that we went to the moon.

what do you think?
28-06-2016 19:04
GingerShortcake
☆☆☆☆☆
(6)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5muY64Oyp10
10-08-2016 13:56
tracy18
☆☆☆☆☆
(5)
I believe it is a hoax...if it was true NASA or other space organizations would have sent astronauts to moon in past 40 years
19-08-2016 09:02
Tim the plumber
★★★☆☆
(754)
tracy18 wrote:
I believe it is a hoax...if it was true NASA or other space organizations would have sent astronauts to moon in past 40 years


Why?

Of course it is not a hoax. The reason it is clearly real is the degree of scrutiny that the thing has been subject to since it happened and especially since the internet has allowed every crazy a platform to spread crap.

That no evidence of such fakery has come up means that it was real.
26-08-2016 22:56
StephenS20
☆☆☆☆☆
(12)
While the government has indeed lied about things, I'm not seeing it here. I really do not think the moon landing was a hoax, because there simply is no evidence for it. Some attempt to claim the flag was "blowing", but there is no evidence to say or suspect this is due to wind. Instead, the flag appeared to be blowing because the astronauts had to twist it to get it into the ground.
06-09-2016 18:30
IBdaMann
★★★★★
(2917)
tracy18 wrote:
I believe it is a hoax...if it was true NASA or other space organizations would have sent astronauts to moon in past 40 years

...because it's so inexpensive to just go to the moon and there is a huge demand to go there.


.


Global Warming: The preferred religion of the scientifically illiterate.

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
13-09-2016 06:01
jwoodward48
★★★★☆
(1537)
Oh thank god. Even the climate change skeptics aren't moon landing deniers.
13-09-2016 15:04
IBdaMann
★★★★★
(2917)
jwoodward48 wrote: Oh thank god. Even the climate change skeptics aren't moon landing deniers.

Please don't call me a "skeptic." Global Warming / Climate Change skeptics are anything but. They don't question anything. They accept all the "greenhouse effect" violations of physics they are handed. They eagerly BELIEVE their WACKY religious faith is actually "settled science." They persecute with venom and with extreme prejudice all non-believers like they are on a crusade. Their arguments are just petty personal insults. They quickly become ashsoles when someone starts bringing actual science into the discussion.

I am not a "skeptic." I am a full non-believer/non-worshiper.

I'll stick with science, thank you very much.


.


Global Warming: The preferred religion of the scientifically illiterate.

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
13-09-2016 22:20
jwoodward48
★★★★☆
(1537)
IBdaMann: "they quickly become ****s"

i cannot even

i just cannot even

pot's calling the chair black, dude

we aren't even black

or we aren't until you spray your dust all over us
15-09-2016 14:24
IBdaMann
★★★★★
(2917)
jwoodward48 wrote:
IBdaMann: "they quickly become ****s"

i cannot even i just cannot even pot's calling the chair black, dude we aren't even black or we aren't until you spray your dust all over us

I am always happy to try to help, and I am always happy to fire back in like kind. Warmizombies and climate lemmings are scientifically illiterate morons who become ashsoles at the first hint of a differing opinion.

If you want an ever-flowing font of forgiving niceness, talk to Into the Night. You can insult him all day and he'll forever turn the other cheek ... AND he is a great resource for practical industry experience and for actual VALID data and conclusions.

I, on the other hand, won't waste my time playing nicey-nice with bulverist morons who are screaming to be flogged rhetorically. I am under no mistaken impression that you are going to one day find science "important" if it somehow runs counter to your faith ... which it does.


.


Global Warming: The preferred religion of the scientifically illiterate.

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
15-09-2016 18:06
Tim the plumber
★★★☆☆
(754)
IBdaMann wrote:
jwoodward48 wrote:
IBdaMann: "they quickly become ****s"

i cannot even i just cannot even pot's calling the chair black, dude we aren't even black or we aren't until you spray your dust all over us

I am always happy to try to help, and I am always happy to fire back in like kind. Warmizombies and climate lemmings are scientifically illiterate morons who become ashsoles at the first hint of a differing opinion.

If you want an ever-flowing font of forgiving niceness, talk to Into the Night. You can insult him all day and he'll forever turn the other cheek ... AND he is a great resource for practical industry experience and for actual VALID data and conclusions.

I, on the other hand, won't waste my time playing nicey-nice with bulverist morons who are screaming to be flogged rhetorically. I am under no mistaken impression that you are going to one day find science "important" if it somehow runs counter to your faith ... which it does.


Given I have explained to you how to calculate the effect on temperature of a specific amount of heat energy going into the world's oceans, specific heat capacity ect., I know your level of understanding of such things is low.

Consequentially sod off troll. You understand vertually nothing.
15-09-2016 20:12
IBdaMann
★★★★★
(2917)
Tim the plumber wrote:Given I have explained to you how to calculate the effect on temperature of a specific amount of heat energy going into the world's oceans, specific heat capacity ect., I know your level of understanding of such things is low.

You drooled on your keyboard when you wrote that, didn't you?

The one constant with you is your lack of ability to explain ANYTHING about your WACKY religion. You are the classic "greenhouse effect" worshiper who EVADES direct, relevant, simple, EASY and straightforward questions about his/her assertions. Watch...

How do you account for the additional energy required for "greenhouse effect" to increase temperature?

Tim the plumber wrote: Consequentially sod off troll. You understand vertually nothing.

Well, I understand that you won't answer those pesky questions that offend your religious sensitivities.

I also understand that our inability to discuss science is a result of your EVASION. You are a science-avoiding climate lemming who is EXTREMELY insecure in his faith.

By T'mee


.


Global Warming: The preferred religion of the scientifically illiterate.

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
16-09-2016 03:35
jwoodward48
★★★★☆
(1537)
"I am always happy to try to help, and I am always happy to fire back in like kind. Warmizombies and climate lemmings are scientifically illiterate morons who become ashsoles at the first hint of a differing opinion."

That second part, the insult - what was it in response to? Because you have just insulted millions of people. Have they all personally insulted you?

Also note how my first post in this thread was my first post in the entire forum. (I just checked.) Additionally, it was my only post that occurred prior to your response, so nothing else that I later said affected it. The insulting response was responding to nothing but a statement of relief, that in fact we may disagree, but at least we aren't as bloody stupid as the moon landing deniers.

I, in fact, attempted to be diplomatic, using "skeptic" instead of "denier," as several sources indicated that gw-deniers prefer.

So what did I do wrong? How did that one simple, not unkind sentence deserve its response?

Here's my guess. You just assume that all gw-supporters are stupid. Then when they get angry at you, you get evidence that they are quick to anger [sarcasm]and also did I say they're stupid? Hah. Getting angry at the truth.[/sarcasm] Whether or not you're right, you have no way of telling! Anything you experience would lead to the perception that you are right, whether or not that is the case.

You know what that is? It's circular logic. It uses a predefined assumption to prove the very same statement. Gw-supporters are stupid - and so anything they say is wrong. Why are they stupid? Because they go against science. Science is right, and they are wrong. One nice, neat, wrong circle.

Remember, everything that I say is to help you.
Edited on 16-09-2016 03:43
18-09-2016 06:51
jwoodward48
★★★★☆
(1537)
Into, this is the thread I referenced in "XKCD earth temperature".

IB: heh, I swear I didn't get him mad to prove you wrong, but... You were wrong. Into will not endlessly turn his cheek. (Not that that's a bad thing.)

Also, "he is a good source of actual REAL data": unlike you?
20-09-2016 15:27
IBdaMann
★★★★★
(2917)
jwoodward48 wrote:Also, "he is a good source of actual REAL data": unlike you?

Correct. I'm not in the business of providing "data." I'm in the business of discussing science. There is no "data" either for or against Global Warming. There is just weather data that warmizombies and climate lemmings choose to "interpret" as signs from "Climate" proving their respective dogmas are the Truth, the Light and the Way.


.


Global Warming: The preferred religion of the scientifically illiterate.

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
20-09-2016 17:50
jwoodward48
★★★★☆
(1537)
There is too data! You just dismiss it all as "fudged by the Evil Liberal Science Conspiracy" or the "Liberally Evil Government Conspiracy".
24-09-2016 02:09
jwoodward48
★★★★☆
(1537)
Oh, how foolish you are, young one.
27-09-2016 15:25
IBdaMann
★★★★★
(2917)
jwoodward48 wrote: There is too data! You just dismiss it all as "fudged by the Evil Liberal Science Conspiracy" or the "Liberally Evil Government Conspiracy".

By the way, invalid data does not count as "data for" anything.

There is no valid adequate raw datasets "showing" Global Warming.


.


Global Warming: The preferred religion of the scientifically illiterate.

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
27-09-2016 22:54
jwoodward48
★★★★☆
(1537)
Well, the graph looked very definitive, I can tell you that.
18-11-2016 15:09
litesong
★★★☆☆
(817)
ibm wrote: I'll stick with science....
/////
litesong wrote: That is why ibm DIDN'T get science chemistry astronomy physics algebra & pre-calc in its unearned hi skule DEE-plooomaa.
28-11-2016 21:33
IBdaMann
★★★★★
(2917)
litesong wrote:
ibm wrote: I'll stick with science....
/////
litesong wrote: That is why ibm DIDN'T get science chemistry astronomy physics algebra & pre-calc in its unearned hi skule DEE-plooomaa.

litesong, you are one super-cool dude and that line you post never gets old.

You rock.


.


Global Warming: The preferred religion of the scientifically illiterate.

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
06-12-2016 18:26
litesong
★★★☆☆
(817)
IBdaMann wrote:
litesong wrote:
ibm wrote: I'll stick with science....
/////
litesong wrote: That is why ibm DIDN'T get science chemistry astronomy physics algebra & pre-calc in its unearned hi skule DEE-plooomaa.

....that line you post never gets old.


& always is true.
02-02-2017 03:04
Wake
★★★☆☆
(552)
Tudoceros wrote:
I am aware it sounds bizarre at first

However,

The more one looks into it, the more it seems so.

Nasa , which is a MILITARY organization, lies a lot to us, so people

now are saying nasa stands for Never A Straight Answer.


The point is, there is actually NO PROOF that we went to the moon.

what do you think?


No one would commit such a hoax without something to gain. So what would they gain by committing such a highly expensive hoax when a trip to the moon in reality would be far cheaper?
18-02-2017 15:00
sceptic777
☆☆☆☆☆
(6)
The most logical explanation, I believe, is that they probably did go to the moon but the footage is fake. When not in shadow, the temperature is on the surface of the moon is 100Deg C, too much for any filming equipment at that time. That plus the many anomalies of the photos and movies that were shown, tends to make one think that they couldn't film it but didn't want to miss a photo opportunity.

Apparently there is a reflector placed on the moons surface that can bounce back laser beams so that scientists can monitor the distance that the moon is from the Earth. How did it get there? It was placed there during one of the landings.
19-02-2017 17:45
litesong
★★★☆☆
(817)
skkkeptikkk(AGW denier liar whiner)666 cited: When not in shadow, the temperature is on the surface of the moon is 100Deg C, too much for any filming equipment at that time. That plus the many anomalies of the photos and movies that were shown....

skkkeptikkk(AGWdenier liar whiner)666 denys with its lies. The moon surface gets to 100degC after being in the sun for 1 week after sunrise, the sun is 90arcceg straight overhead with the moon's heat absorbing surface albedo about that of faded highway blacktop. The lunar photographs have much shadowing, showing that pictures were NOT taken at lunar noontime, but with the sun's elevation much lower. Cameras were silver colored, reflecting heat much better than moon's surface.
https://sterileeye.com/2009/07/23/the-apollo-11-hasselblad-cameras/
Yeah, those Hasselblads were miraculously scientific, you hippy, dippy skkkeptikkk(AGW denier liar whiner)666.
20-02-2017 12:34
sceptic777
☆☆☆☆☆
(6)
litesong: Will you shut the **** UP! you are certainly not the smartest but you are the most aggressive and rude poster on this site.
20-02-2017 22:58
Tim the plumber
★★★☆☆
(754)
sceptic777 wrote:
litesong: Will you shut the **** UP! you are certainly not the smartest but you are the most aggressive and rude poster on this site.


Worry not.

The posting of mindless insults is only effective in demonstrating both the lack of intelligence he has and the lack of rational argument he can call upon.

Whe they attack you and not the argument you know you have won.
27-02-2017 00:13
litesong
★★★☆☆
(817)
"tipped the leaky plunger" plugged:
"skkkeptikkk(AGW denier liar whiner666" sobbed:
litesong: Will you shut the **** UP! you are certainly not the smartest but you are the most aggressive and rude poster on this site.

Worry not.

"skkkeptikkk(AGW denier liar whiner666" doesn't worra no more. It stopped posting here.




Join the debate where the moonlandings a hoax?:

Remember me

Related content
ThreadsRepliesLast post
Incredible News! Climate Change Really *was* Just a Hoax *all along*!1014-03-2017 19:47
▲ Top of page
Public Poll
Will Arctic summers be ice-free in this century?

Yes

No

Don't know


Thanks for supporting Climate-Debate.com.
Copyright © 2009-2017 Climate-Debate.com | About | Contact