Another look at the moon landing.

[Herman Hedning]

If you want to know more why don't you read Bill Kaysing's book ? ' We Never Went to the Moon: America's Thirty Billion Dollar Swindle.'

Know more about what? How deranged ramblings look written down in a book?

 

[David Lamb]

Sorry David, I would try to explain what it is up there but I'm not really sure as for giving evidence that it not a space station watch a few video's.
I will give you a list when I have time.

But watching a few videos doesn't prove anything. I have just done a Google search, and there are plenty of videos that show the space station, views from the space station, and astronauts inside it.

 

[David Lamb]

If you want to know more why don't you read Bill Kaysing's book ? ' We Never Went to the Moon: America's Thirty Billion Dollar Swindle.'

But why do you think Bill Kaysing's book is more reliable than the sources that Herman Hedning linked to which argue against the conspiracy theories, the first of which starts:

" 'In the 1960s and 1970s the technology didn't exist to travel to the moon.'

In making this statement, conspiracists often draw parallels to the consumer technology of the 1960s. "If they couldn't make X, then how could they go to the moon?"

First we must remember that NASA was on the cutting edge of technology in the 1950s and 1960s. They had an enormous budget and attracted the top scientists in the country. At the height of the Apollo project there were half a million scientists and engineers working on different aspects of the missions.

In a larger sense, it's easy to lose touch with technology. That is, it's easy to look back to the past and wonder how we ever got along without the miracles we enjoy today. We sit at our gigahertz computers and forget that there was a time when an eight megahertz computer was pretty cool......."

 

[Strong in Him]

Sure plenty of times I just hop onto my space buggy and go, but it's getting a bit crowed up there now for parking.

Well exactly - you haven't

 

[Strong in Him]

Sorry David, I would try to explain what it is up there but I'm not really sure

So you're not sure, but you know that it isn't the ISS.
How? Oh, silly me, it's probably because of a video on YouTube.

 

[Apple Sky]

Well exactly - you haven't

Well of course I blooming well haven't.

So this don't stop me reading & watching video's about it that mock the whole farce & with evidence.

One astronot said on the ISS something on the lines of 'we are here in Huston talking to you' Then another said 'The building of Artimis will allow us to go further than low earth orbit, I'm like.

 

[Strong in Him]

Well of course I blooming well haven't.

So therefore you don't know.

So this don't stop me reading & watching video's about it that mock the whole farce & with evidence.

Except that you only choose to watch the videos which align with/affirm your beliefs.

One astronot said on the ISS

Stating that the ISS doesn't exist and then quoting an astronaut who was on the ISS, makes no sense, and almost invalidates the quote.

I'm like.

But "you're like " with science in general - you can't get your head round it.

Almost every time someone gives a scientific fact/explanation, your response is, "", "" " " or "".

 

[d taylor]

How do you no that? I assume you do have some basis for making such a certain statement.

-
​

The ISS is not much bigger than an airplane and so photographing it. It is not 240+ miles difference in height, if it was that much difference in their distances. The ISS when photographed, would in no way be able to be zoomed in as close as i can. I mean there is a big difference from 6 miles high to 250 miles high and the difference is just not there.

 

[Apple Sky]

Stating that the ISS doesn't exist and then quoting an astronaut who was on the ISS, makes no sense, and almost invalidates the quote.

Was he stating that from ISS or Houston ? That is the question.

 

[David Lamb]

-
​

The ISS is not much bigger than an airplane and so photographing it. It is not 240+ miles difference in height, if it was that much difference in their distances. The ISS when photographed, would in no way be able to be zoomed in as close as i can. I mean there is a big difference from 6 miles high to 250 miles high and the difference is just not there.

I have just looked up the dimensions, and find that the space station is about the size of an American football field:

"The space station is 356 feet (109 meters) end-to-end, one yard shy of the full length of an American football field including the end zones."

 

[d taylor]

I have just looked up the dimensions, and find that the space station is about the size of an American football field:

"The space station is 356 feet (109 meters) end-to-end, one yard shy of the full length of an American football field including the end zones."

-
​

Like i said not much bigger

 

[David Lamb]

-
​

Like i said not much bigger

View attachment 370714​

Fair enough. I hadn't realised quite how large planes are.

 

[Strong in Him]

Was he stating that from ISS or Houston ? That is the question.

You brought it up; you find out.

None of this makes any difference to anything.

 

[Strong in Him]

-
​

The ISS is not much bigger than an airplane and so photographing it. It is not 240+ miles difference in height, if it was that much difference in their distances. The ISS when photographed, would in no way be able to be zoomed in as close as i can. I mean there is a big difference from 6 miles high to 250 miles high and the difference is just not there.

The moon is much further away and much bigger than the ISS. Yet it's possible to zoom right in and take a close up.

 

[d taylor]

The moon is much further away and much bigger than the ISS. Yet it's possible to zoom right in and take a close up.View attachment 370716

-
​

i can get closer than that

 

[Strong in Him]

-
​

i can get closer than that


View attachment 370717

Well good.

And that disproves your statement - that something far away can't be photographed clearly - even more.

 

[Apple Sky]

You brought it up; you find out.

I don't have to find out anything as one of the astro-nots at the time who was supposedly on the ISS said, 'we are talking to you from here in Houston.'

None of this makes any difference to anything.

This makes me wonder why your here on this thread.

 

[d taylor]

Well good.

And that disproves your statement - that something far away can't be photographed clearly - even more.

-
​

i tell you what, go take a car and an 18 wheeler. Drive the car 6 miles away and drive the 18 wheeler 250 miles away and show the photos and that they can be photographed the same.

Here is a photo of a plane and the ISS.

​

 

[Strong in Him]

-
​

i tell you what, go take a car and an 18 wheeler. Drive the car 6 miles away and drive the 18 wheeler 250 miles away and show the photos and that they can be photographed the same.

On the ground, maybe not.
But in the sky; a plane and the moon can be photographed together, A bird and the sun can be photographed together - as can a balloon and a cloud.

 

[prodromos]

-
​

i tell you what, go take a car and an 18 wheeler. Drive the car 6 miles away and drive the 18 wheeler 250 miles away and show the photos and that they can be photographed the same.

Here is a photo of a plane and the ISS.

View attachment 370718

View attachment 370719


​

Which are meaningless comparisons when posted without any lens details and settings.