"Great minds have purposes, others have wishes." - Washington Irving

User login

Who's online

There are currently 0 users and 170 guests online.

Welcome to iBrattleboro!

Welcome to iBrattleboro!
It's a local news source by and for the people of Brattleboro, Vermont, published continually. You can get involved in this experiment in citizen journalism by submitting meeting results, news, events, stories, reviews, how-to's, recipes, places to go, things to do, or anything else important to Brattleboro. Or, just drop by to see what others have contributed.

Find iBrattleboro on:

 Twitter YouTube

Search the Archives

Ye Olde iBrattleboro Archive

Use the pulldown to choose desired number of results.

 

Search the first decade
of iBrattleboro archives
at Archive-It.org
Feb 20, 2003 to Feb 6, 2013

Men on the Moon


Men on the moon

I’ve always believed that we landed men on the moon in the Apollo 11 Mission, July, 1969.  Heck, I watched it on TV as it was happening.

I have a friend who has always believed it was impossible and what we all saw was a “documentary” filmed in a London studio by Stanley Kubrick, creator of 2001-a Space Odyssey.

I have called him a crackpot to his face on several occasions.

He just emailed me 2 photos from the mission.

He told me to look at the rocks in the foreground.

What I saw blew my mind.

Although, the pictures were taken a day apart in 2 locations about 5 miles apart, the rocks were identical,
including their shadows.

How can this be?

»

Comments | 15

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
 #

Not different locations

The most obvious answer would be that they are not two photos from different locations. It's the same location.

A camera mounted to the spacecraft would keep it nice and steady.

 
 #

Same location and same time (same shadows)

They have definitely been shot from the same location. The pictures have been identified (presumably by NASA) as: “First day, first traverse: 1km west of landing site”. And “Second day – 4 km south of landing site”
I think NASA simply screwed up the identities of the pictures.

Even if these photos are accurate NASA releases, they do not prove the moon landing was faked.
However, they might show that what we all saw on TV was faked.

Again, from my friend:
During an interview with Stanley Kubrick’s widow an extraordinary story came to light. She claims Kubrick and other Hollywood producers were recruited to help the U.S. win the high stakes race to the moon.
In order to finance the space program through public funds, the U.S. government needed huge popular support, and that meant they couldn’t afford any expensive public relations failures.
Fearing that no live pictures could be transmitted from the first moon landing, President Nixon enlisted the creative efforts of Kubrick, whose 2001: a Space Odyssey (1968) had provided much inspiration, to ensure promotional opportunities wouldn’t be missed.
In return, Kubrick got a special NASA lens to help him shoot Barry Lyndon (1975).

Bottom Line:
I still believe the landings happened; however, the video may have been faked for the above-mentioned reasons.
My friend still believes the whole thing was fake.

From Wikipedia:
Many conspiracy theorists insist that the Apollo Moon landings were a hoax; however, empirical evidence is readily available to show that manned moon landings did indeed occur. Anyone on Earth with an appropriate laser and telescope system can bounce laser beams off three retroreflector arrays left on the Moon by Apollo 11, 14 and 15, verifying deployment of the Lunar Laser Ranging Experiment at historically documented Apollo Moon landing sites and so proving equipment constructed on Earth was successfully transported to the surface of the Moon. In addition, in August 2009 NASA's Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter began to send back high resolution photos of the Apollo landing sites. These photos show not only the large Descent Stages of the lunar landers left behind but also tracks of the astronauts' walking paths in the lunar dust.

Addendum: China and India are currently planning manned landings.

 
 #

In the event that the 1969 moon landing failed...

http://designtaxi.com/news/353456/The-US-President-s-Speech-If-The-1969-...

In the event that the 1969 moon landing failed, and the two Apollo 11 astronauts Neil Armstrong and Edwin Aldrin did not manage return to Earth, the White House had a memo and speech ready for the then-President of the United State Richard Nixon.

 
 #

The obvious questions are

The obvious questions are "how do you know these photos were taken on 2 separate days and 5 miles apart?" i would like to see the actual video of this... whenever something like this comes up, the first thing that i think is "how can so vast a conspiracy be hidden by so many people involved without someone slipping up ONCE and saying something that doesn't fit in with the 'approved' story?" then my thoughts go to the several government scandals that i remember in recent years...

Occam's razor would seem to fit this "conspiracy" here...

 
 #

Manhattan Project

"how can so vast a conspiracy be hidden by so many people involved without someone slipping up ONCE and saying something"

This successful conspiracy created the Atomic Bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Nobody slipped up. Even the Vice President was out of the loop.
Part of the explanation was "compartmentalization". Part of the explanation was "patriotism". We were at war with Japan at the time.

 
 #

The Rosenbergs

Julius and Ethel Rosenberg were executed in 1953 for passing atomic secrets to the Russians.
Ethel’s brother, Sgt. David Greenglass, who had been a machinist to the Manhattan Project, provided the Rosenbergs with data on nuclear weapons. The Rosenbergs turned over this information to the Soviet Union’s vice-consul in New York City.
Greenglass, who was tried separately, was sentenced to 15 years in prison.

 
 #

Loony tunes

Between 1968 and 1972 twelve men have walked on the moon. Six of them drove lunar rovers.

In order to deceive the world about this, twelve astronauts, Stanley Kubrick, and the owners, building staff and cameramen, actors, equipment makers, not to mention any media people in the know, etc., etc., ad infinitum, would all have to be involved in a lifetime, tightlipped conspiracy. That ain’t gonna happen.

Yup, that’s why they call people like your friend lunatics.

 
 #

Stars

Note the lack of stars in the background of both pics.
Sure looks like a telephoto lens, why wouldn't there be stars?

 
 #

Really?

It is 6pm in Brattleboro right now. I can't see the stars. We must be living in a Truman Show-like world.

See what I did there? Look at the photographs. The ground on the moon is lit by the sun - it is daytime on the moon when these photos were taken. If the photos were exposed long enough to capture starlight, everything else would be over-exposed - washed out and white. The sky looks black because there is no atmosphere to refract sunlight making a blue sky like we have on Earth.

 
 #

Correct explanation

You got it right!

 
 #

Schrödinger's cat

tomaidh simultaneously believes that the moon landing was authentic and that the moon landing was a fake.

 
 #

Wrong again

As usual, you got it wrong. You should pay more attention.
For the benefit of the feeble-minded, I will state my position again.

1. I DO believe we went to the moon . (the moon landing was authentic).
2. I believe it's possible that what we saw on TV may not have been shot on the moon. (The VIDEO of the moon landing could have been a fake.)

NB: I'm not saying that I believe it WAS a fake, but my mind isn't closed to that possibility.

Heidi wouldn't lie, but our government would. Remember Colin Powell and "Weapons of mass destruction"? He even had fake diagrams to show us.

 
 #

Schrödinger's cat: definitely alive, but perhaps dead.

"I'm not saying that I believe it WAS a fake, but my mind isn't closed to that possibility."

 
 #

Not paying attention

Again, you have it wrong.
I am NOT saying the LANDING was fake.
Repeat:I am NOT saying the landing was fake.

What might have been faked is the FILM shown to the world.

In other words, Schrödinger's cat is not the same thing as a FILM of Schrodinger's cat.

It has been reported that Stanley Kubrick’s widow claims Kubrick was recruited to help the U.S. win the high stakes race with Russia to get to the moon.
In order to finance our space program through public funds, the U.S. government needed huge popular support, and that meant they couldn’t afford any expensive public relations failures.
Fearing that no live pictures could be transmitted from the first moon landing, President Nixon enlisted the creative efforts of Kubrick, whose 2001: a Space Odyssey (1968) had provided much inspiration, to ensure promotional opportunities wouldn’t be missed.

This implies that the landing was real, but the gov't couldn't risk the public seeing any mistakes.

Our government pulls stuff like this all the time.

 
 #

A rather pitiful waste of time

What you have here is an unsubstantiated article based on hearsay passed along in an email. There isn’t even an attempt to provide even one link or document resource to backup what is claimed, either in the article or in the author's comments.

It isn’t that conspiracies don’t exist. Of course some are quite real. But because people are elemental believers, they are liable to believe anything.

I really don’t think that this article was presented to generate a thoughtprovoking, intelligent discussion. Claims of the first fake moon landing or all fake Apollo moon landings is a waste of good conspiracy topics and helps to give credible conspiracy theorists a bad name.

 

iBrattleboro Poll

It's not Thanksgiving unless I have a serving or two of

Choices