And if not, why are you not out on normie Voat in full force spreading the message of fakery to poor souls who view the moon landings as a source of national or ethnic pride?
I’d like to know everyone’s favorite argument for the moon landing hoaxes.
If I had to pick one, other than the unassailable and eternally damning observation that none of the photos contain stars, mine comes from the move What Happened on the Moon, in which they contrast the sounds from a bobsled team on a practice run with the chatter during the touchdown of Apollo 11. In the bobsled video, you can hear the nervous adrenaline in the men’s quavering voices as well as the vibrations of the sled racing across the ice. Meanwhile, the Apollo astronauts, though using an engine that had literally never been tested, landing a craft that had literally never been landed successfully (and in fact crashed every time on earth), performing the most complex and challenging aeronautic feat in human history, a quarter million miles from home with no chance of rescue, with a myriad of catastrophes that could occur at any moment leading to sudden or horrific death, with (as one of the Apollo astronauts estimated) only a 50% chance of landing successfully, dwindling fuel supply, sound like two casual buffoons parking their car at Wal Mart. And of course you can’t hear the engine firing or any other sound. In fact I always encourage everyone to actually watch the original mission footage from any Apollo mission (few actually have), and notice how despite being in a constant state of peril with no chance of rescue, where the slightest mishap is fatal, they sound like a couple buddies on a fishing trip.
view the rest of the comments →
TrialsAndTribulation ago
@blackguard19 I'm totally on board with you. I came around to the Apollo moon landing hoax a little less than 20 years ago and I haven't stopped talking about it since then, at least with my long-suffering family and friends. I also watch "What Happened on the Moon", along with a few other such documentaries, but WHOTM is far and away the best of the bunch.
As a documentary that discusses the numerous arguments against the very possibility of getting to the moon and the bizarre anomalies in the documentary evidence, it would have been very helpful if the creators of the documentary had put titles between the various segments so we would know what they were going to talk about next. I have breakdown I began years ago for the first part but lost momentum to complete the second part. (Not because I'm lazy, but I had some other things going on where I couldn't find the time.) I'd like to share it with you because you seem like my kind of guy and you'd find value in it.
The moon landing hoax is taken for granted in most parts of the world. In the former Soviet Union, no one believed it, partly for political reasons and partly for practical scientific reasons. The Soviets were not able to put men on the moon and didn't even try because they knew it was impossible with existing technology and never believed either the US or NASA surmounted the challenges of the Van Allen belt and the blasting ambient radiation beyond that.
The Soviets did, however, put two rovers on the moon, which is quite verifiable and collected samples, some of which were tested on the lunar surface and extremely small quantities of which were returned to Earth. I recommend the document "Tank on the Moon". It's National Geographic, but still pretty objective.
blackguard19 ago
Sibrel’s film was pivotal for my opening up to the Apollo hoax, and watching it for the first time was truly an unforgettable and mind-blowing experience. It’s very powerful and effective just from a production standpoint and really draws you in right from the opening montage of failed rocket launches overlaid with haunting renaissance-style choral singing. I have even personally emailed Sibrel to thank him for the movie and tell him how much it helped change my perspective and he actually replied, even inviting me to visit his church if I’m ever in Nashville again.
However, I have come to change my views on Sibrel or at least that movie. While I still appreciate the film as well as it’s follow-up Astronauts Gone Wild, and without boring you with the interstitial details of how I reached these conclusions, I now stand convinced that the “leaked” footage Sibrel claims he received from NASA, is actually also part of the Apollo cover-up. In other words words the scene from “low earth orbit” where they were faking the earth being seen as a far away ball out the porthole, I also believe this to be entirely staged.
No one goes to orbit, or the moon. I also must disagree that the Soviets or any other nation has ever put any people or craft on the moon. Because as a matter of fact it’s not “verifiable.” There was no space race, any more than there was really a Cold War. The USSR and now Russia are complicit in faking space missions like the ISS. It was a long road full of cognitive dissonance for me to accept these things and probably took me an additional two years to digest after first seeing Sibrel’s film and realizing that Apollo was a hoax.
TrialsAndTribulation ago
This sounds like some bizarre form of solipsism -- nothing is real outside of Earth. I don't suppose you also believe in a flat Earth, do you?
blackguard19 ago
I don’t know that the earth is flat and I think that “flat earth theory” is basically a misnomer. The larger point is that “outer space” is fake and we are in an enclosed system. What is outside our system, if anything, I obviously can only guess. But for example, a vacuum (space) cannot exist next to a pressurized system (atmosphere) without a barrier in between. Also there is no observable or measurable movement/rotation of the earth.