I can't think of any. The idea is ludicrous.

 

Bart Sibrel uncovered 100% cast iron evidence that part of the moon landings were faked. So why should anyone believe any of it was real?

 

 

I disagree with you on this dude. I did used to think that it was faked but think about it, the Russians would surely have known. They had all the instrumentation and knowledge that America had and were only just beaten to the moon by them. They'd have known if it was faked that day as they were monitoring every second of the flight! They'd have had n o hesitation but to blow the whistle just to embarass the Yanks.

Edited September 23, 201212 yr by Common Sense

I disagree with you on this dude. I did used to think that it was faked but think about it, the Russians would surely have known. They had all the instrumentation and knowledge that America had and were only just beaten to the moon by them. They'd have known if it was faked that day as they were monitoring every second of the flight! They'd have had mo nesitation but to blow the whistle just to embarass the Yanks.

 

How do the russians know the craft they followed was manned?

 

The video evidence of Armstrong faking a far earth shot, while in near earth orbit, completely seals it. It was fake.

How do the russians know the craft they followed was manned?

 

The video evidence of Armstrong faking a far earth shot, while in near earth orbit, completely seals it. It was fake.

 

What used to make me think the moon landings were faked was the Van Allen Belt of radiation that it's said no spacecraft could ever pass through without all human occupants being killed. This was explained though, in layman's language, by them having extra thick suits, the rocket being super-sealed against radiaton and travelling quickly through the Van Allen belt,

Oh and while you're at it, Roosevelt orchestrated World War II.

Oh good grief. Leaving aside Chris's point - which is a good one - just look at the number of people who would have been involved in a conspiracy. All the astronauts, obviously, but also the people who built the set, all the camera crews plus a whole host of other people at NASA. It is inconceivable that so many people would have kept quiet for so long. That's without the question of Apollo 13. Are you saying that was scripted all along to put us off the scent? And why did these connspiracy theories only start after the release of the film Capricorn One which had a similar story?

 

I look forward to your next thread about how Diana was murdered.

 

And since you asked so kindly:

 

The Mitchell & Webb sketch is one of the best debunkings of the moon landing conspiracy theory :lol:

Oh good grief. Leaving aside Chris's point - which is a good one - just look at the number of people who would have been involved in a conspiracy. All the astronauts, obviously, but also the people who built the set, all the camera crews plus a whole host of other people at NASA. It is inconceivable that so many people would have kept quiet for so long. That's without the question of Apollo 13. Are you saying that was scripted all along to put us off the scent? And why did these connspiracy theories only start after the release of the film Capricorn One which had a similar story?

 

I look forward to your next thread about how Diana was murdered.

 

The number of people involved is a rather odd rebuttal. There were 150,000 people involved in the manhattan project. Parts of it are still secret.

 

The fact that man hasn't been to the moon has now been proved by the footage unearthed by Bart Sibrel.

The Mitchell & Webb sketch is one of the best debunkings of the moon landing conspiracy theory :lol:

 

lol at youtube rebuttals

lol at youtube rebuttals

let's have a youtube rebuttal rebuttal then PLEASE

I can't think of any. The idea is ludicrous.

 

Bart Sibrel uncovered 100% cast iron evidence that part of the moon landings were faked. So why should anyone believe any of it was real?

Like every other Lunar Landing Conspiracy Bart Sibrel's has been conclusively debunked time and again.

 

http://www.clavius.org/bibfunny8.html

Like every other Lunar Landing Conspiracy Bart Sibrel's has been conclusively debunked time and again.

 

http://www.clavius.org/bibfunny8.html

 

 

Could you quote the bit that debunks the far earth shot fakery? This isn't a link dump.

Could you quote the bit that debunks the far earth shot fakery? This isn't a link dump.

The whole page details the entire footage and Sibrel's claim.

The whole page details the entire footage and Sibrel's claim.

 

 

I don't see where it debunks it. Have you seen the footage?

I don't see where it debunks it. Have you seen the footage?

Have you actually read the whole page? It points out how Sibrel has edited and taken footage out of context to merely back up his claim. When the full 1 and a half hours of the footage is viewed all his claims are show to be distortions and misinformation. The footage he claims was accidentally sent to him is film that much of which was actually shown in full on TV in 1969. He's simply cut it up to fit his claims

Have you actually read the whole page? It points out how Sibrel has edited and taken footage out of context to merely back up his claim. When the full 1 and a half hours of the footage is viewed all his claims are show to be distortions and misinformation. The footage he claims was accidentally sent to him is film that much of which was actually shown in full on TV in 1969. He's simply cut it up to fit his claims

 

You haven't watched the footage have you?

 

Lets have a look at their debunking:

 

windows looking out into a pitch blackness do not have to show up as pitch black in photography, or even to the naked eye.

 

Wtf? He doesn't even back this up.

 

Watch the footage before you claim it is debunked. It is undebunkable.

What is it with all these spam threads clogging up the Perspectives Forum?

 

Could we please have a little bit of quality control? Thank you!

Edited September 24, 201212 yr by Griff

charsui i don't think I ever got an answer to my request for a youtube rebuttal rebuttal. Now if you continue to ignore my points then I'm going to have to assume that you can't handle a debate on it and are accepting that I am right.

charsui i don't think I ever got an answer to my request for a youtube rebuttal rebuttal. Now if you continue to ignore my points then I'm going to have to assume that you can't handle a debate on it and are accepting that I am right.

 

Sorry, I don't do youtube. I will leave that to the debunkers.