|
Documentary - Moon
Landing Hoax - part (3)
-- APFN-1 YahooGroups: Subscribe: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/apfn-1/join Unsubscribe: [email protected] APFN MSG BOARD: `In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.' http://disc.yourwebapps.com/Indices/149495.html APFN CONTENTS PAGE: http://www.apfn.org/old/apfncont.htm APFN TWITTER http://twitter.com/signup?follow=APFN1 Find elected officials, including the president, members of Congress, governors, state legislators, local officials, and more. http://congress.org/congressorg/dbq/officials/ SUPPORT APFN: PMB 206, 7549 W. CACTUS RD. #104, PEORIA, AZ 85381 |
@Comed3y With respect,all the evidence points to Apollo being real.The hoax theories have all been refuted.The "no stars" theory is explained by reflected light from the moons surface.the moon is very reflective hence why it is so bright in the sky.You can test this yourself.If you take a picture of the moon in the night sky,no stars will be in the image,the moon is too bright.If NASA was capable of pulling off such a hoax,would they make such an error as film the flag in the wind?
@shenry4921 The LEM isn`t designed for long term space travel Apollo took a route that minimzed radiation.James Van Allen,after whom the van Allen radiation belts were named,went on record repeatedly to deny the hoax theory that the VA belts would be deadly to the Apollo crews.the shuttle only goes into low Earth orbit and is not affected by the VA belts.The problem of radiation for long term missions,such as mars,is still being investigated by NASA.I hope this helps.
@Hirene6963Have you any actual evidence that Apollo is "fake"? I mean real evidence traceable to a source,not factless utube hoax vids.So anyone who dares to disagree with your view must be being paid off? How typical of a conspiracy theorist to "think" this way.All the actual evidence backs Apollo.Scientists the world over have studied the Apollo data,footage and samples,including many unfriendly to the US.If it`s fake,why din`t the USSR expose it?Why would they let NASA claim a "fake" landing?
@MegaWesleywesleyHow typical of a conspiracy theorist to regard anyone who disagrees as a "sheep".What actual evidence have you got that Apollo was fake? All the real evidence backs apollo.1000s of experts in geology,physics,maths,engineering and astronomy have studied the
Apollo data,footage and samples.100s of peer reviewed academic papers
have been written on Apollo.The only "evidence" of a "hoax" is utube
hoax vids and conspiracy sites.If Apollo is fakw,why didn`t the uSSR
expose it?
Many grateful NASA retirees with big pensions posting to stick up for this nonsense.
" BUT MYTHBUSTERS CONFIRMED THIS !!" haha jk its all a hoax people wake up most of you are sheep do what your told make money "dont think"
@Comed3y No problem man, I cant explain everything, ex radiation in space. A space suit does have 12 layers of protection, but it still provides poor protection from radiation, so u can stay outside for only about six hours. I'm not sure how the shuttle and LEM will protect u from radiation for weeks without large amounts of lead. Although, I am stubborn and I believe NASA.
@shenry4921 No ı get it , and it makes sense . But I still cant really believe that we ever went to the moon . Some things just dont really add up , ı dont wanna adress them one by one right now , but yeah ...
@Comed3y "The flag is mounted on one side on the pole, and along the top by another pole that sticks out to the side. In a vacuum or not, when you whip around the vertical pole, the flag will ``wave'', since it is attached at the top. The top will move first, then the cloth will follow along in a wave that moves down. This isn't air that is moving the flag, it's the cloth itself." - Bad Astronomy: Bad TV. If this explanation is confusing, just ask me to explain it in my own words.
@shenry4921 that part makes sense , but the flag cannot be moving in airless space , thats all i need to hear to know it was fake , its impossible .