Another look at the moon landing.

Apple Sky · Jan 10, 2026

Hentenza said:
No that’s for your group not for NASA. There is nothing wrong with NASA at all.

Try telling this to all the moon landing deniers & there's plenty out there.

Randy2844 · Jan 10, 2026

imsaneru said:
I don't know if this vid is real or not and I can't prove it either way , but it's promoted by this man Pascal Najadi who is involved in Donald Trumps space force , speaks highly of Mike Flynn and just recently did an interview with Lt Colonel Riccardo Bosi , so I take him to be the real deal.

Now the vid shows a number of things , it shows the astronauts along with the camera crew filming what is supposed to be the moon landing among other things , but obviously doing it here from earth. Lights falling and other crazy stuff.

See what you think guys , because I don't normally get into this type of stuff , it always seemed too unreal for me. But I have always had an open mind...

TRUTH: « We are the Guardians of Humanity and our Light Obliterates the darkness of evil, and Treason, Always » - We are Human Species and now we are Striking Back - Spring of 2024 #STORM - Beyond Biblical

Not a shred of credible evidence supports the idea that the 1969 Apollo 11 Moon landing was faked. Every claim made by Moon‑landing hoax conspiracy theorists has been examined and thoroughly debunked by independent scientists, engineers, historians, and even international space agencies. A few points to consider:

1. Independent verification from outside NASA
The Soviet Union—America’s rival in the Space Race—tracked Apollo 11’s radio transmissions in real time. If the U.S. had faked the landing, the USSR had every incentive to expose it. They never did, because the mission was real.

2. Third‑party tracking and data
Observatories and amateur radio operators around the world followed the spacecraft’s trajectory. These were not NASA employees, and their data matches the mission timeline.

3. Physical Moon rocks
Apollo astronauts brought back 382 kilograms of lunar rock and soil. These samples have been studied by scientists worldwide—including countries not aligned with the U.S.—and their composition is unmistakably lunar, formed in an environment with no water and high radiation.

4. High‑resolution photos of the landing sites
NASA’s Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter has photographed the Apollo landing sites in detail. You can see the descent stages, scientific instruments, and even the astronauts’ footprints and rover tracks.

5. The scale of the Apollo program
Over 400,000 people worked on Apollo. Faking the mission would have required a conspiracy larger than any in history, with no leaks for more than 50 years—an implausible scenario by any standard.

The bottom line is, all credible evidence supports the Moon landings. The hoax theory survives only because of misunderstandings of physics, misinterpretations of photographs, and the appeal of conspiracy thinking—not because of any factual basis.

Hentenza · Jan 10, 2026

Apple Sky said:
Try telling this to all the moon landing deniers & there's plenty out there.

I don’t care. I know for a fact that we landed on the moon and so is most of the world. Only those that espouse unproven and evidence less conspiracy theories believe that nonsense.

Apple Sky · Jan 10, 2026

Hentenza said:
I don’t care. I know for a fact that we landed on the moon and so is most of the world

Hentenza · Jan 10, 2026

Apple Sky said:
View attachment 375206

Ignorance is bliss.

David Lamb · Jan 11, 2026

Apple Sky said:
View attachment 375206

Surely you don't think that is a photo of a spaceship? For a start, it looks more like the landing module than a spaceship. More importantly, it's a cutaway diagram; the "hole" is there to show the inside of the module, not to represent an actual hole in the module.

In fact, I found the image you posted, on a Facebook page headed, "Science Humour."

Apple Sky · Jan 11, 2026

David Lamb said:
In fact, I found the image you posted, on a Facebook page headed, "Science Humour."

And that is exactly what it was meant to be 'Humor'

David Lamb · Jan 11, 2026

Apple Sky said:
And that is exactly what it was meant to be 'Humor'

Thanks for explaining.

Apple Sky · Jan 11, 2026

Here's one for @Strong in Him, Bart Sibrel vs Charlie Duke.

Moon landing denier Bart Sibrel confronts Apollo 16 astronaut Charlie Duke — and gets a calm, first-hand reply to his toughest claims. Was the Moon landing a hoax, or is this the ultimate teachable moment from someone who actually walked on the lunar surface?

They both offer compelling arguments.

Strong in Him · Jan 11, 2026

Apple Sky said:
Here's one for @Strong in Him, Bart Sibrel vs Charlie Duke.

Why is this one "for me"?
I know Charles Duke walked on the moon. And here's the thing, so do you - if you have the guts to admit it. You were asked by other people on this forum to watch his testimony. You did and it gave you goosebumps. Then you wrote that Flat Earth is a load of rubbish and resolved to ask for God's help in sticking to your new belief in a globe earth.
Clearly you couldn't stick to that resolve, and forgot/didn't want to ask for God's help. So you called Charles a liar instead. And as it was God who converted Charles and gave him his testimony, you, effectively, mocked God by this attitude.

I suspect Charles' "compelling argument" is due to the fact that he was there.

Apple Sky · Jan 11, 2026

Strong in Him said:
Why is this one "for me"?

Because of your obsession with Charley Duke.

David Lamb · Jan 11, 2026

Apple Sky said:
Because of your obsession with Charley Duke.

Strong in Him has got no more of an obsession with Charles Duke than you have. The difference is that you are obsessed with calling him a liar. Several of us, including Strong in Him, have responded to your accusations of him lying.

Apple Sky · Jan 11, 2026

David Lamb said:
Strong in Him has got no more of an obsession with Charles Duke than you have. The difference is that you are obsessed with calling him a liar. Several of us, including Strong in Him, have responded to your accusations of him lying.

What's wrong can't @Strong in Him answer for herself ?

David Lamb · Jan 11, 2026

Apple Sky said:
What's wrong can't @Strong in Him answer for herself ?

I am sure she can. But I thought anybody could reply to any post on these forums. Sorry if I am mistaken about that.

Apple Sky · Jan 11, 2026

David Lamb said:
I am sure she can. But I thought anybody could reply to any post on these forums. Sorry if I am mistaken about that.

Yes of course they can but I was just expecting a response from stronginhim, that's all.

David Lamb · Jan 11, 2026

Apple Sky said:
Yes of course they can but I was just expecting a response from stronginhim, that's all.

Well perhaps she will reply.

Strong in Him · Jan 11, 2026

Apple Sky said:
Because of your obsession with Charley Duke.

I don't have an obsession with Charles Duke.

I keep mentioning him because;
a) he is an eyewitness to the moon landings.
b) he is a Christian, and child of God, as you are. If you don't like what he did, I thought you might, at least, have had the decency to listen and respect that he is a Christian who belongs to the Truth.
c) the thing is that you once DID listen to him - and wholeheartedly believed him. You seem to be embarrassed about that now, have brushed it off by saying "sorry, God, I didn't mean it" or are trying to claim that you had a mad moment. But you did believe it.
Now, you have reverted to calling him a liar. Not, "mistaken" or "fantasising" - lying. That means, he knows full well that he did not train as an astronaut, go into a rocket, leave his wife and family for a while, walk on the moon and return to earth - but he is deliberately trying to pretend that he did.

I'm trying to get you to understand that bad mouthing a Christian is not good; that telling God that you would ask for his help and then not doing so, is not good.
I keep repeating it because you keep changing the subject, making light of it or somehow deflecting and putting it all on me by saying that I am "obsessed." Again, I'm an optimist. I keep hoping that something might get through to you and that you say either, "I was wrong; Charles did go to the moon and is a lovely Christian who witnesses to Jesus". Or "I'm not listening to his testimony, I don't care if that means that I am doubting Jesus and mocking God - my flat Earth beliefs are FAR more important.

Strong in Him · Jan 11, 2026

Apple Sky said:
What's wrong can't @Strong in Him answer for herself ?

And you've just done the same thing to @David Lamb.
Rather than respond to his point about you calling Charles a liar, you demanded to know why he was speaking for me.

You wrote your post, "because of your obsession with Charley Duke" at 3.32 today. At just before 4.00 today you wrote that you had expected a response from me.
Not everyone sits around watching this forum all day. Some of us have a life.

Apart from which, you sometimes haven't answered my questions for days, if at all.

Apple Sky · Jan 11, 2026

Strong in Him said:
I don't have an obsession with Charles Duke.

I keep mentioning him because;
a) he is an eyewitness to the moon landings.
b) he is a Christian, and child of God, as you are. If you don't like what he did, I thought you might, at least, have had the decency to listen and respect that he is a Christian who belongs to the Truth.
c) the thing is that you once DID listen to him - and wholeheartedly believed him. You seem to be embarrassed about that now, have brushed it off by saying "sorry, God, I didn't mean it" or are trying to claim that you had a mad moment. But you did believe it.
Now, you have reverted to calling him a liar. Not, "mistaken" or "fantasising" - lying. That means, he knows full well that he did not train as an astronaut, go into a rocket, leave his wife and family for a while, walk on the moon and return to earth - but he is deliberately trying to pretend that he did.

I'm trying to get you to understand that bad mouthing a Christian is not good; that telling God that you would ask for his help and then not doing so, is not good.
I keep repeating it because you keep changing the subject, making light of it or somehow deflecting and putting it all on me by saying that I am "obsessed." Again, I'm an optimist. I keep hoping that something might get through to you and that you say either, "I was wrong; Charles did go to the moon and is a lovely Christian who witnesses to Jesus". Or "I'm not listening to his testimony, I don't care if that means that I am doubting Jesus and mocking God - my flat Earth beliefs are FAR more important.

Thanks for getting back to me, I just thought you may enjoy watching the video being as it was about Charles Duke but obviously I was wrong so I am so sorry to disturb you.

Strong in Him said:
Apart from which, you sometimes haven't answered my questions for days, if at all.

Sorry about this.

Strong in Him · Jan 11, 2026

Apple Sky said:
Thanks for getting back to me, I just thought you may enjoy watching the video being as it was about Charles Duke but obviously I was wrong so I am so sorry to disturb you.

No problem.
Thank you for thinking that I might enjoy it.

We hope the site problems here are now solved, however, if you still have any issues, please start a ticket in Contact Us

Another look at the moon landing.

In Sight Like Unto An Emerald

New and Improved

I will fear no evil for You are with me

In Sight Like Unto An Emerald

I will fear no evil for You are with me

Well-Known Member

In Sight Like Unto An Emerald

Well-Known Member

In Sight Like Unto An Emerald

Great is thy faithfulness

In Sight Like Unto An Emerald

Well-Known Member

In Sight Like Unto An Emerald

Well-Known Member

In Sight Like Unto An Emerald

Well-Known Member

Great is thy faithfulness

Great is thy faithfulness

In Sight Like Unto An Emerald

Great is thy faithfulness

Similar threads