• NEW! LOWEST RATES EVER -- SUPPORT THE SHOW AND ENJOY THE VERY BEST PREMIUM PARACAST EXPERIENCE! Welcome to The Paracast+, eight years young! For a low subscription fee, you can download the ad-free version of The Paracast and the exclusive, member-only, After The Paracast bonus podcast, featuring color commentary, exclusive interviews, the continuation of interviews that began on the main episode of The Paracast. We also offer lifetime memberships! Flash! Take advantage of our lowest rates ever! Act now! It's easier than ever to susbcribe! You can sign up right here!

    Subscribe to The Paracast Newsletter!

Moon Landing is a Fake

Free episodes:

Forums New posts
the probability of being found out was virtually nil
Click to expand...

Things were definitely different then in that the average household didn't have the tools for scrutinization that we all do these days, but there were still plenty of uber geeks back then that had a lot, not to mention the govts and scientists of other countries.

Governments and politicians were generally regarded with high esteem, and it was unheard of to ask politicians or celebrities tough and probing questions.
Click to expand...

You mean other than being during the years that held what was probably the largest, most well known counter cultural revolution in recent history, right?

Like I said... I used to be in the "didn't happen" camp. All of these little bits of evidence at one time did have me convinced that it was all a hoax, and I do still wonder about it, no doubt. But overall there have been a few key things that have swayed me to it being real despite a small handful of brow raising moments with varying degrees of strength.

I am certainly open to the possibility that it was a hoax, but at this time I just do not think that it was, and that's after watching all of the pro hoax videos I could find, and also hours upon hours of Apollo footage.
 
Considering the time lapse flag footage helped sway me to the "real" side, I suppose it's not at all too "out there" to imagine that they could have created a vacuum chamber to film it in.
 
Sure, we are free to draw our own conclusions.

What I have a big problem with, is this: Whenever asked for detailed information about how they accomplished their amazing feats, NASA invariably falls silent. Their refrain is "We went to the Moon, and if you don't believe us, you are a loon. We don't have to prove we went. You have to prove that we didn't." They effectively create a catch 22 situation, where they hold all relevant information, but choose to disclose only what suits them.

To get an idea of how "advanced" NASA's technologies were at the time: The photo cameras used on the Moon were stock Hasselblad with a bit of silvery paint on them, the film stock Kodak, and the astronauts wore stock Omega Speedmaster Professional wrist watches. Then suddenly, we are led to believe they also had a remotely controllable video camera on board, no bigger in size than a modern camcorder, which was capable of keeping up with an ascending, rocket propelled spacecraft..? And, different from the other items listed, there is no technical documentation whatsoever available for this incredible piece of 1960s engineering - anywhere???

The reality is that every single sequence of Apollo footage could have been shot here on Earth, or in LEO. On every count, NASA fails to explain how they managed to overcome the more serious technical hurdles.

Don't get me wrong, I think sending people into LEO, and getting them back alive, is an incredible technological achievement. It is awesome. However, embellishing these capabilities to the point of science fiction I find unacceptable.
 
David Biedny said:
There were no moon landings.

Outer space is an illusion.

There are no satellites in orbit around the Earth - if you claim to see one, you're obviously drunk or high.

Water is not made of hydrogen and oxygen - it's made from water.

Oxygen is a solid.

The sun is made of Pepsi Cola.

Neil Armstrong is a woman.

Buzz Aldrin is a boat.

Our government is made of American cheese, that's why they're American.

Discuss.
Click to expand...

I love the show... but when you post stuff like this you come off like a child.
 
Wow that was a huge thread...

This topic is always fun to read about. I think I have watched most of the videos debunking the moon landing... They were very entertaining.

Those Sibrel videos we just messed. I found it sick how he could bombard the old timers on a false pretence. I was very happy when he got punched in the face, lol.

Beside the entire pro and anti moon landing comments.. I can't say I believe it or not. I would like to think we did go to the moon, so I'm going to say I believe we went to the moon.

I have always been bothered by the fact that Neil Armstrong has left the public eye. This has always pissed me off. I would think that Neil can be said to have done one of the greatest thing known to man and he can't do a interview. I think that is weak.

Call me crazy but...
I found this moon debate to be much like the BM case. You have the believers and the non-believers. But still, I have never been one to say that if you prove one thing to be false/true than the case must be dismissed.

Now I will tie this back to the moon landing... I think that DB studying of the BM pictures and conclusion that they are a hoax is small in comparison to the people that can say that the moon landing is also a hoax… So which case holds more water??? This is why guys like MH can get away with their claims.

Sure some of the hoax believers’ claims are just plain weak and obviously wrong, but there are a few things that I find compelling.
 
One way we can put this whole topic to bed (DAVID) is to have an episode of the Paracast with a moon landing debate, Gene and David host, have either two or four guests, one or two per side, pick the guests with the best evidence and that are best known for their position. Don't pick the most nutty or whacko guests--because then there will still be doubters. And it doesn't count to just have somebody that was alive during the moon landing because they have no inside information. I'm talking scientists, NASA insiders, people that would have the knowledge.

Hell, have a poll on the forum about which guests to invite. I think Sibrel would obviously be a good choice. His name has been mentioned on here several times.

Invite an astronaut or someone from NASA. A scientist. Hell, invite Michael Shermer, I don't care. But I think an astronaut would be a hell of a choice. Why hasn't Neil Armstrong done ONE SINGLE interview since he got back? Invite him, what a coup if he came on the show.

Have the guest(s) on the HOAX side present their BEST evidence against why we didn't go, and then let the guest on the REAL side refute it with the facts. Just like a court proceeding.

Then, you can close down this thread like you wanted to from the beginning and that's that.

We asked for it, you make it happen, we'll listen to it, and decide for ourselves. Have it on April Fool's Day if you're worried about the integrity of the show. Let's get this all out in the open.

Be sure to take questions from the forum once you announce the guests. Mine would be, "What about the tapes that recently went missing, the original tapes of the moon landing? What happened to them; how could hundreds of boxes of original NASA tapes just go missing? Surely there is some conspiracy there? And now that they have dismantled the only machine that could play them, it's a dead issue. Can you explain?"

That would be my question.

Discuss.
 
one way to put it to bed is to go there again.

i suggest pointing the hubble telescope at it and taking a picture of the artifacts we left behind. the technology is there, why dont we use it? seriously, WHY dont we study the moon's surface with telescopes? if we can see where the universe began with the hubble then we should be able to photograph a grain of dust on the moon... or am i missing something here?
 
OK, I'll get burned for saying this, here we go:

The Paracast will NOT be doing any show regarding the question of whether the moon missions were real or faked. In our minds - mine & Gene's - there is no question about the issue. Further, even if the conspiracy theorists were actually right about the situation, we'd STILL decline to do a show on it, as it falls into the realm of conspiracies, and not paranormality. Just to clear that up...

And kova, sorry you don't Grok my sense of humor about that post. Glad to know you enjoy the show otherwise.

dB
 
david why dont we study the moon's surface with telescopes? i mean the actual particles of dust, rocks, left behind stuff... etc.
 
pixelsmith said:
david why dont we study the moon's surface with telescopes? i mean the actual particles of dust, rocks, left behind stuff... etc.
Click to expand...

And who says someone isn't doing that at right this moment?

We know what's on the moon, WE'VE BEEN THERE. Dust, rocks, cheese.

What else do you expect to find, exactly?

dB
 
i wonder why NASA would pass off the practice footage of the astronauts dangling from wires as actual moon footage?
my guess is that if they actually did land on the moon the photos or videos they took were destroyed by radiation so they had to use fake materials.
 
we havent even discovered a fraction of what is on our own planet.
are you suggesting that we know everything there is to know about the moon?!? i can download hi res images from mars that were taken only days ago from 2 different robots yet we have nothing to study from the moon.
 
Of course I'm not suggesting that we know everything about the moon.

But for my money, given that almost 90% of the Earth's species remain undiscovered, and the atmosphere here is MUCH MORE USEFUL TO US than whatever's on the moon, I'm all for Earth as a priority for exploration.

That is my OPINION. Your own may be different.

dB
 
David Biedny said:
The notion that the landings were staged or hoaxed is right up there with the Holocaust denial nonsense.
Click to expand...

Personally, I felt offended by this comment. David has no idea who most of the posters are, let alone what their political convictions are. To be compared to a Holocaust denier is insulting to the extreme and entirely inappropriate. It is a bullying tactic, used by someone who has run out of arguments.

But I understand David takes his cues from Bill O'Riley. That's yet another guy who doesn't care whether of not something is true, as long as he can push his own ideas down the throats of his audience. Attacking the messenger while ignoring the message is a tried and tested method, used by many demagogues.
 
i might point out that there is dust and rocks and cheese on earth as well yet we continue to discover new species of life every day.
 
David Biedny said:
The Paracast will NOT be doing any show regarding the question of whether the moon missions were real or faked. In our minds - mine & Gene's - there is no question about the issue. Further, even if the conspiracy theorists were actually right about the situation, we'd STILL decline to do a show on it, as it falls into the realm of conspiracies, and not paranormality. Just to clear that up...
Click to expand...

I appreciate that you don't want to cover this topic, but to say "we don't cover conspiracy theories", is in my mind, a weak argument.

Don't get me wrong, I can see that there's no question in your mind about the reality of the moon landings and therefore it's a "no brainer" to you and Gene that you're not going to give the subject any air time, but conspiracies are a big part of the UFO debate and the majority of your shows have covered the UFO/ETI/Crypto-Terrestrial/Hollow-Earth/Deep-Sea-Bases debate, so you're argument just doesn't hold.

If there is something being hidden from view about the moon-landings, then that 'something' may have paranormal connections. There may be a single underlying 'secret' that ties ALL conspiracy theories together - the moon landings, the assassination of JFK, 9/11 and UFO activity could all be connected.

Proving that the moon landings were faked is right up there with Disclosure of UFO/ET activity - the American Super-Power 'house of cards' would come tumbling down in the blink of an eye.
 
Excellent points, Rick.

Everything in this universe is ultimately connected. That said, I still have zero desire to do a Fake Moon Landing episode.

Call me stubborn.

I dare Gene to weigh in on this thread.

dB
 
i would like to know why they needed to hang from wires on the moon. any thoughts on that David?
 
David Biedny said:
Everything in this universe is ultimately connected. That said, I still have zero desire to do a Fake Moon Landing episode.
Click to expand...

That's fine by me - thankfully we have a forum to thrash out such 'nonsense' :D
 
Back
Top