The Apollo Moon Missions Were Faked in a Studio

[FatFreddy]

[ProfWag]

[FatFreddy]

[FatFreddy]

http://www.opposingdigits.com/forums/vi ... php?t=1222
(excerpt)
---------------------------------------------
Distraction with irrelevant posts. What better example than the recent porn posts? Discussion is lost in the noise. (In this case, the posts may make the group "appealing" to a new audience, so a small silver lining is that new people can be informed about mind control.)

[FatFreddy]

Look at this.

Start watching this at the 16:40 time mark.

"Physics of the Moon Flag"

Watch as the swinging gets narrow before it stops.

It looks a little faster than the Apollo flag which could be explained by the slow-motion at which the Apollo footage is shown (sixty seven percent according to Jarrah White).

(2:37 time mark)

The Apollo flag is moving much faster than the speed at which the video shows it should be moving at the 18:50 time mark.

Let's hear some analyses of this from the pro-Apollo posters.

[SydneyPSIder]

[FreeSlave]

[pwil]

Let's just disregard NASA's LRO pics . Prakish Chauhun from the Indian Research Organisation had confirmed seeing the rover tracks from Apollo 15 site by their own probe Chandrayaan-1. The Japanese probe Kaguya Selene took pics of the terrain of the Apollo 15 site and the terrain matched up perfectly to our own pics and videos. Radio transmissions can determine their distance from Earth. And about the telescopes I mentioned,sorry I should have specified, the Apollo would have been seen by anyone if they stayed below the Van Allen belts.

[pwil]

I just find more proof that the astronauts went to the moon than not. But if you could present more proof,( much more proof), maybe I'll believe you that most of the world was in on the hoax. And you would most likely be visited by the CIA.

[SydneyPSIder]

Pics thanks, pwil, all we have from you is hearsay at this stage where you claim pics but can't produce any pics.

If anyone happened to be looking up, they might see a tiny spot like a satellite. There are other possibilities, such as ditching the rockets at sea, and dropping the lander modules out of a military plane at the end of the supposed mission for splashdown.

It's interesting to note that the Russians, who were ahead of the US for a long while in space-faring technology, couldn't get a splashdown pinpointed within 700 km due to the vagaries of re-entry, whereas the US splashdowns were always within a couple of miles of where the navy ship was waiting. That much accuracy coming in from the moon is suspicious.

And there is already a great deal of proof listed on other topics on this site, as well as many other sites out there -- stereoscopic analysis of 'moon photos' proving backdrops were used, placement of prop errors in photos, evidence of barn lights, light globes in the sun, etc etc. As for any other forum, the onus is on you to search existing threads rather than demanding a repeat performance. When you say the CIA may visit, are you admitting that in fact it was a hoax, and the only option left is to use illicit force on anyone who works it out?

[pwil]

Nowhere have I said that I was 100% sure the landings really happened. Based upon the evidence and the amount of people who have corroborated, I see more pros than cons. Yes I do believe they happened until you, Freddy, and Jarrah prove otherwise. Not enough disproof.

[ProfWag]

[ProfWag]

[ProfWag]

[SydneyPSIder]