Now that the dust has settled, was the Moon landing faked?

wait, what? Is that a new conspiracy argument? Its always fun to talk about flags, photo's, stars and the like with people who know nothing of how any of those things work, but that one was new.

Big space. For the unedited clips of Apollo 17 lunar rover footage, you'd need a studio space of around 4 square miles.

Thats nowhere near enough to fake it convincingly

Ask Buzz Aldrin

You also need to launch several successful unmanned moon landings to stage the fake landing sights that can be seen with telescopes, and several more to plant all the reflectors.

And you need to fully design (and build functioning replicas of) a theoretically viable manned mission vehicle

You also need to somehow convince your national enemy, who has satellites and telescopes of its own, that you went to the moon.

And you need to successfully prevent the hundreds or thousands of people involved in the hoax to never speak a word of it

>And you need to successfully prevent the hundreds or thousands of people involved in the hoax to never speak a word of it
Did you ever see the movie Capricorn One?

Nope

Hey i'm just saying it could be done, and even more easily nowadays. But i'm not a conspiranoic cuck. Just saying that it was "impossible" to do is a empty argument. A better way to logically debate this shit is by proving false every anti-moonlanding shitty argument.

Nobody claimed it was impossible, just absurdly difficult and pointless since you need to do pretty much all the work of an actual moon landing anyway

Except you wouldn't, because all the work would be done in a studio rather than 400,000km away.

Except for the multiple genuine missions you need to successfully land on the moon in order to stage the fake landing sights

Dudes to stop this nonsense discussion about if it was or not possible at the time why dont we get to research about movies at the time and special effects. I'm kinda sure that they were mature enough to fake moon landing with reasonable resources. That's why i think saying it were not possible to fake it a empty argument. Just debunk the other dumb myths and someone pleas list em for us to debunk with some research, i explained the flag shit already these conspiranoics cucks also say something about Van Allen belts but i haven't researched enough about that to debunk it and let's build "The Ultimate Anticonspiranoic Argument" or something like that haha

Ive already said no one has claimed it isnt possible

That's the least important point

So why do you keep bringing it up?

Hahahaha, just saw some anons discussing over it.

youtu.be/sGXTF6bs1IU

>landing sights that can be seen with telescopes

its impossible to see the moon landing sites.

biggest vacuum chamber was made in 1969.
they could've easily made a studio and filmed in there to do tests.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_Power_Facility

>Do you believe the moon landing was real or fake?
fake

>What is the evidence you use to support your claim?
1.) astronaut behavior in interviews as well as history of alcoholism in some Apollo astronauts.
2.) changed or retracted statements of Apollo astronauts
3.) photographic anomalies
4.) missing data
5.) historical fraud of donations to institutions, moon rocks.
6.) contradictions in physics
7.) fraternization of pilots in NASA, i.e all Apollo astronauts are Freemasons. Fraternization of government agencies have historically been part of fraudulence and crime.

>Do you think we will return to the Moon any time in the near future?
never.
>Why or why not?
because space is a fraud.

youtube.com/watch?v=HBhzRY6UuVA

youtube.com/watch?v=-2FTZhyuJy8

Hahaha magnificent video bro, got convinced.

1- Astronaut behavior isn't by any means an argument to disband the moon landing
2- Same as 1
The rest, please give source to judge.
This is what i'm talking about bros, to have a reasonable discussion, a dialectic exercise.

What about the way they walked in low gravity. It cant be faked. Even the martian looked fake as fuck when he was walking on mars or his mates floating in the ship.

It's easy to do that underwater.

>pointless
Have you ever read about the cold war and the space race, little fella? It was a crucial moment in the history where the 2 biggest countries were trying to role the world after WWII.
>pointless

dude, it's like you can't read sentences more than halfway through

yup, turns it was just scheme made up by grant chasing scientists

These movies look fake if you have seen astronauts actually moving in 0 gravity inside the ISS.

Thats my starman

But i dont get why some of you claim that it is harder faking it than getting to the moon.

Just because Intersteller said the moon landing was fake and used that exact talking point doesn't make it true. We brought samples back from the moon landing and studied them you piece of shit.

Was it only the first one or all six were faked ?

I ask because I discovered recently that many people that don't believe in the moon landing don't even know there was more than one.

And no it wasn't faked. It's baffling to see that on Veeky Forums Even if you ignore the fact that all of the arguments against the landing have been distroyed you really think the russians would have been so easily fooled ?

independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/russia-calls-investigation-into-whether-us-moon-landings-happened-10327714.html

Wow bro stop the violence just share arguments. That and interstellar didn't said moon landing was faked the total opposite

>“We are not contending that they did not fly [to the moon], and simply made a film about it. But all of these scientific — or perhaps cultural — artifacts are part of the legacy of humanity, and their disappearance without a trace is our common loss. An investigation will reveal what happened,” Markin wrote, according to the Moscow Times translation.

Wow it's fucking nothing

...

>astronaut behavior in interviews as well as history of alcoholism in some Apollo astronauts.
What?

>changed or retracted statements of Apollo astronauts
I'm not aware of any significant examples. And if you had any, I'm sure you would have mentioned them.

>photographic anomalies
What, the "wonky shadows"? People have been over that a thousand times - that's just how perspective works. Go outside and look.

>missing data
Shit happens. How is that evidence of a conspiracy?

>historical fraud of donations to institutions, moon rocks.
How does scam artists faking things discredit NASA?

>contradictions in physics
You're not really doing well at backing any of these claims up.

>fraternization of pilots in NASA
So what?

>because space is a fraud.
No.

>youtube.com/watch?v=HBhzRY6UuVA
Context is important. There's nothing unusual in that video.

>youtube.com/watch?v=-2FTZhyuJy8
The Apollo missions didn't go through the middle of the belts, they went around the edge of therm.