Doubts about the moon landings

Seems like it requires a lot of complex explanatory conditions beyond what would happen if here in 2020 you tried to tell folks you thought the moon landings were a hoax.

What about the massive volume of people required to stage this in the 1960s? All of them buying into a code of iron-clad secrecy where there would have been a massive audit trail of hoax-related activities and facts to keep under wraps.

Our powers of disbelief are immense for sure, but our ability to keep secrets has been shown time and time again to be severely limited.
Which is why this conspiracy theory is so huge, and has been for decades.
 
Seems like it requires a lot of complex explanatory conditions beyond what would happen if here in 2020 you tried to tell folks you thought the moon landings were a hoax.

What about the massive volume of people required to stage this in the 1960s? All of them buying into a code of iron-clad secrecy where there would have been a massive audit trail of hoax-related activities and facts to keep under wraps.

Our powers of disbelief are immense for sure, but our ability to keep secrets has been shown time and time again to be severely limited.
My short somewhat uninformed opinion at this point is there is a good case to be made that the film We saw was made in the studio but I’m not yet ready to believe the entire Apollo project was a hoax
 
My short somewhat uninformed opinion at this point is there is a good case to be made that the film We saw was made in the studio but I’m not yet ready to believe the entire Apollo project was a hoax
Joe Rogan (for what it’s worth, he’s not an expert but he’s talked to several people involved from both sides of the debate) believes that certain shots were faked as a publicity stunt in order to show better images, but that other images were real and that the landing happened.
 
Which is why this conspiracy theory is so huge, and has been for decades.
I'm no following. What does "huge" mean?

I'm presuming by "huge" you may be referring to the number of necessary participants to pull this one off. I refer back to the line of reasoning Eric laid out in the Lucas thread: the larger the conspiracy the less likely solidarity of its participants will remain intact. The volume of participants needed to have staged a fake landing would be massive and include lots of powerful people quite capable of "breaking ranks" so to speak should their interests have become misaligned (seems quite likely actually).

There never seems to be a rational explanation for this component of any of these large conspiracy theories.
 
I'm no following. What does "huge" mean?

I'm presuming by "huge" you may be referring to the number of necessary participants to pull this one off. I refer back to the line of reasoning Eric laid out in the Lucas thread: the larger the conspiracy the less likely solidarity of its participants will remain intact. The volume of participants needed to have staged a fake landing would be massive and include lots of powerful people quite capable of "breaking ranks" so to speak should their interests have become misaligned (seems quite likely actually).

There never seems to be a rational explanation for this component of any of these large conspiracy theories.
Well, when we go back to the moon we’ll all have a good laugh, won’t we?!
 
I'm no following. What does "huge" mean?

I'm presuming by "huge" you may be referring to the number of necessary participants to pull this one off. I refer back to the line of reasoning Eric laid out in the Lucas thread: the larger the conspiracy the less likely solidarity of its participants will remain intact. The volume of participants needed to have staged a fake landing would be massive and include lots of powerful people quite capable of "breaking ranks" so to speak should their interests have become misaligned (seems quite likely actually).

There never seems to be a rational explanation for this component of any of these large conspiracy theories.
Right, and part of the problem is that nobody here wants to map out in some detail how this hoax could have been performed. I mean, clearly those Saturn rockets took off, and presumably they could be tracked from a number of countries - such as the USSR. So did they launch with nobody on board, or was there a rendezvous in Earth orbit to extract the crew (seems unlikely). Then we need to remember that the Apollo capsule came back at high speed from the moon - no chance to insert the crew back into the capsule in Earth orbit.

I'd like to hear a plausible way this whole thing could have been done before I will believe it!

David
 
Right, and part of the problem is that nobody here wants to map out in some detail how this hoax could have been performed. I mean, clearly those Saturn rockets took off, and presumably they could be tracked from a number of countries - such as the USSR. So did they launch with nobody on board, or was there a rendezvous in Earth orbit to extract the crew (seems unlikely). Then we need to remember that the Apollo capsule came back at high speed from the moon - no chance to insert the crew back into the capsule in Earth orbit.

I'd like to hear a plausible way this whole thing could have been done before I will believe it!

David
I’ve linked Crroww777 radio here before, he’s the one to watch, and do your own research.

I'm not sure that it's a source of humour.
Compared to all the other psy-ops going on, it’s pretty harmless. And these guys at least have a sense of humor about it all, and can make some great jokes. Did you not hear the Flat Earth man song I posted above about the Moon? Some super hilarious stuff right there!
 
I'm no following. What does "huge" mean?

I'm presuming by "huge" you may be referring to the number of necessary participants to pull this one off. I refer back to the line of reasoning Eric laid out in the Lucas thread: the larger the conspiracy the less likely solidarity of its participants will remain intact. The volume of participants needed to have staged a fake landing would be massive and include lots of powerful people quite capable of "breaking ranks" so to speak should their interests have become misaligned (seems quite likely actually).

There never seems to be a rational explanation for this component of any of these large conspiracy theories.
Silence,
To make my assertion more tangible, observe the example of the mafia (aka La Cosa Nostra). This is a nation wide - actually international - criminal conspiracy. In New York there are 5 "families" (or distinct gangs, each with its own leader) and then a family in most major cities across the country. There is official membership, members are recognized as being "made men" and then there are many more "connected" criminals (aka wise guys) that are not official members, but who act as hired help to the made men.

Betraying the mafia is punished by death, yet wiseguys and made men become witnesses against the mafia all of the time, with many made men landing in prison for long sentences as a result. The families indeed cooperate on criminal conspiracies when it benefits those involved and then they go to war with each other when doing so seems to be advantageous or somehow necessary. In a war they kill each other over turf, other resources or honor. Local police and the FBI have a pretty good idea who is a made man and who is connected and have some decent sense of what criminal enterprises each is involved with; not all, but enough to describe the conspiracy.

The conspiracy is not in the least bit a secret - and it's not because, even on pain of death, few maintain their vow of secrecy and because members of the conspiracy fight intramurally and kill each other and publicly testify against each other.
 
Last edited:
I’ve linked Crroww777 radio here before, he’s the one to watch, and do your own research.
I searched this thread, and this is the only reference to "Crroww777". I am new to searching specific threads, so I may have got that wrong in some way.

Do you have a scenario in mind that would explain all the facts of the moon landings and the two trips to the moon that preceded the landing?

David
 
I searched this thread, and this is the only reference to "Crroww777". I am new to searching specific threads, so I may have got that wrong in some way.

Do you have a scenario in mind that would explain all the facts of the moon landings and the two trips to the moon that preceded the landing?

David
Sorry, maybe I just mentioned him, but never linked. Again, this is a topic I skim, and I’m sure there’s someone out there better to be offering you some info, I hope he’ll chime in anytime!

Let me just repeat a small bit of what those who are actually doing serious research on this are saying, as far as I understand it, as a total layperson. Crrow777 has a documentary film out about his research on the moon, which got him to some preliminary inside circles before he was totally shutdown. He started his own channel about it and called it the Lunar Wave, what he was able to catch on camera, which then inspired lots of other guys with similar experience with telescopic work to copy him. This is pretty big online, big as in these guys have their own platforms with millions of viewers (not just bots, either, actual people, I’ve met some).

Many of these guys have taken apart the Moon landing footage, b/c they have video and audio training, I’ve watched some of them and imo their takedown of the events look credible. You’d really have to watch them yourself and hear and see what they are saying first-hand, then decide, b/c to recount will not make any sense at all, you have to see it.

“A funny thing happened on the way to the moon” is one documentary that a lot of folks talk about, on YT.
Here’s Crrow’s playlist on his research:


And if you really get interested, watch his documentary: Shoot the Moon.
 
Mishelle,

Of course that video does not directly relate to the moon landings, but also, I think that glitch originated in his camera equipment - don't you?

David
Then it appears there are a lot of glitches happening.

What the research is pointing to, from the angle of those in that camp, is that you cannot land on the moon, it’s not a rock in space. There’s loads of other folks with other theories, again, I’m just a dabbler here, you need to go to the sources. The camera glitch thing was the first question he dealt with, like many years ago now.
 
you cannot land on the moon, it’s not a rock in space
If Moon is not a rock in space, then what is it, according to the people in "this camp"?

And which "camp", BTW? As far as I understand, people who doubt Moon landings are questioning whether they actually happened, but not whether they are in principle possible.
 
Then it appears there are a lot of glitches happening.

What the research is pointing to, from the angle of those in that camp, is that you cannot land on the moon, it’s not a rock in space. There’s loads of other folks with other theories, again, I’m just a dabbler here, you need to go to the sources. The camera glitch thing was the first question he dealt with, like many years ago now.
Don't forget that there have been lots of unmanned craft landing on the moon! The US, Russia and China (maybe other countries) have landed on the moon and sent back images and other data.

Thus if your theory were valid, a vastly greater number of people would have to be in this conspiracy - including many people who run planetariums, or make telescopes or whatever.

David
 
your theory were valid,
This is not ‘my theory’ please stop saying that!
[/QUOTE]
Obviously I was only associating it with you because you brought it up.
Their main theory is that no one and nothing leave low earth orbit. The images are all CGI.
That means all the close up pictures of the planets are fake too!

I'd sooner believe a glitch! Remember that for a telescope to track the moon for any period of time, it needs a steering mechanism to change its direction in real time as the Earth rotates. I'd guess there is some kind of error in that mechanism.

Sorry, I accidentally edited your message!

David
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Top