Moon Landing Video. Is this how it happened?

ISeenItFirst

Well-known member
Messages
651
Reactions
1,337
Well said, and I love Miles Mathis' take on this in his critique of String Theory.



More insights on maths at milesmathis.com.

Edit just noticed you mentioned Mathis in your later post. Personally I believe he's a gatekeeper/disinfo agent, but all of these people have to mix in a lot of truth as well. See this reddit comment on him.
I don't know much of Mathis. It is things like this quote that bother me. So they are calling it a messenger particle. That's just a label. He says its absurd. That's just a judgement. He is doing exactly what he accuses the physicists of doing. The main difference is that I can look up the data and experiments that led to the physicists conclusions. I can't look up what qualifies as absurd in Mathis mind or why. He can rail against mathematical fuzziness, but I have never known math to be fuzzy at all, and I have done quite a bit. I know of no real world application where the math and the reality differ.

That's my initial impression. Dang it, now I have to read his stuff to see if he brings any evidence for his labels and judgements.

I quit math for the very reason that I had progressed beyond anything that could be modeled in the real world. What on earth am I ever going to need differentials in eleven dimensions for?

I should have stuck with it, I hear there is a real shortage of physicists just now as the banks have been hiring them left and right. It seems it takes a particle physicists to figure out the derivatives market. Financial people don't have anywhere near the maths to even come close.

I watched the video, but not very closely. I don't think anything on there is gonna change any minds.

ETA - So I read some Mathis. Just reminded me why I never liked string theory in the first place. Perhaps his labels and judgements are well founded, still, Id prefer the facts, sans commentary. Tough to sell books or ads that way I guess.
 
Last edited:

Magnus

Well-known member
Messages
103
Reactions
371
Nah, Casimir most certainly speaks for all of us. There is no need to be so cranky. You are being kinda weird yelling at us because you got asked to watch a video. Lol. It's weird, knock it off ;)



Those were great and I have always enjoyed your input, which makes this kinda awkward you being such a curmudgeon and all.
Dont be so damn presumptive that ONE individual can speak for 300+ individuals.

What the hell is wrong with your thinking?
Seriously, I hope you will retract that. You are permitted to say that another individual speaks for you (and perhaps your nuclear family if you are considered the leader of your family) BUT NOT other individuals whom YOU HAVE NOT ASKED PERMISSION to speak on their behalf.

Hive mind much?

Disappointed to read you write that.
 

anotherlayer

Well-known member
Messages
659
Reactions
2,251
Dont be so damn presumptive that ONE individual can speak for 300+ individuals.

What the hell is wrong with your thinking?
Seriously, I hope you will retract that. You are permitted to say that another individual speaks for you (and perhaps your nuclear family if you are considered the leader of your family) BUT NOT other individuals whom YOU HAVE NOT ASKED PERMISSION to speak on their behalf.

Hive mind much?

Disappointed to read you write that.
lol. what on earth are you going on about?

it's official. you are the cointelpro. you have been sent here to divide us, create anger and rage. it ain't gonna work, Magnus. we're way too smart here...
 

trismegistus

Well-known member
Messages
256
Reactions
1,366
lol. what on earth are you going on about?

it's official. you are the cointelpro. you have been sent here to divide us, create anger and rage. it ain't gonna work, Magnus. we're way too smart here...
I see this kind of stuff on Reddit all the time. People who refuse to discuss the topic at hand and instead make arguments to those who are new to the thread as to why they shouldn't "waste their time" for one reason or another. I hate to use terms like "shill", "cointelpro" or "disinfo" agent, as there's really no way to ever know. But when it comes to a user showing up on a thread they aren't interested in and trying to cause arbitrary divisiveness it certainly makes me wonder.

I came here because I appreciated the open discussions of topics you can't really find anywhere else (save for Reddit but most of the communities are compromised in some form or fashion), and seeing reasonable, rational people ask smart questions and engage in debate.

If you are convinced the moon landings are faked (I personally fall on that side, myself) and you don't need to see any more evidence, that's great. But nobody is going to take it on your word that is the truth, and posting evidence like the OP did can help someone make a decision.

If that video is real, and it really is a bunch of B-roll of the moon landing footage, then its a great find for anyone on their journey. If it is faked (or at least not as advertised), then I would think there could be a good discussion to be had on how and why it was disseminated as disinfo. I will say that in this clip it is hard for me to say for sure that the footage from the "moon" set and the day time desert stuff are necessarily one in the same. That being said I have plenty of research under my belt to know that almost everything NASA does is falsified in some way. However I would hate to fall into cognitive bias and assume that just because NASA fakes everything that means that this footage is confirmation of faked NASA footage, if that makes sense.
 

dreamtime

Well-known member
Messages
575
Reactions
2,962
ETA - So I read some Mathis. Just reminded me why I never liked string theory in the first place. Perhaps his labels and judgements are well founded, still, Id prefer the facts, sans commentary. Tough to sell books or ads that way I guess.
Not so much about your comment, but a general thought about physics and also space science and NASA stuff:

I go with the premise that everything that isn't proven empirically is wrong in physics, especially astronomy/astrophysics.

Everything that can be proven empirically should be subject to debate or interpretation.

For example we can observe gravity. But what is gravity really? That is open for discussion.

Many here know that there is no vast outer space. It's all just a philosophical construct. Just like any sophisticated theory, astronomy can explain many observed phenomena. But that doesn't mean the theory is right.

I think it's important to understand the nature of our earth's concavity. Things are actually inverted. That's why astronomy works in practice, at least superficially. There's a very good book about concave earth (http://www.rolf-keppler.de/johanneslang.pdf), but I don't know if it's available in english.

The question is, does NASA know about this as well? I think it doesn't take long to find out that there's a big light bulb in the sky, when a big agency like NASA starts looking. Maybe in the beginning they even considered a real exploration to the moon, but then they realized it's impossible to cover things up because everyone can see through telescopes and see what's going on there, and the chance of failure is pretty much 100%, becaus they even failed to create space suits that protect against a vacuum.

I am convinced this is one of the things they already knew hundreds of years ago anyway: There's a firmament, and the interesting things are going on below the earth, not in the sky.

There's more action going on in antarctica than in space right now, and that's for a reason.

If space was exciting, things would be different. Either Russia or the U.S. would be aggressively expanding to the moon. If people can live comfortably on the ISS even with holes in it and a never-ending supply of guitars and soccer balls, there is no reason they can't comfortably live on the moon.

Instead, space is as boring as it gets. It's just an artificial sun with vacuum around it. That's all. There isn't even more gravity on the moon than anywhere else in space. You probably can't walk on it, and it may be extremely hot.
 
Last edited:

Onijunbei

Well-known member
Messages
174
Reactions
578
Its common knowledge now that Stanley Kubrick was tasked with filming the moon landing scenario in exchange for some camera equipment nasa had to film 2001 a space odyssey. Hollywood continued to mock the general public by including scenes in certain movies of film crews filming the moon landing... The most obvious one being in a James bond film where Roger Moore is running after a bad guy through a movie studio... I think the movie was diamonds are forever.. Don't quote me.
 

Magnetic

Well-known member
Messages
146
Reactions
508
Its common knowledge now that Stanley Kubrick was tasked with filming the moon landing scenario in exchange for some camera equipment nasa had to film 2001 a space odyssey. Hollywood continued to mock the general public by including scenes in certain movies of film crews filming the moon landing... The most obvious one being in a James bond film where Roger Moore is running after a bad guy through a movie studio... I think the movie was diamonds are forever.. Don't quote me.
There is a good movie Capricorn 1 where astronots are taken off a Mars mission and fake telemetry/acting is subsituted....Ya it's funny the James Bond film where 007 hi-jacks a moon buggy from a "filming" of men slow walking on the moon.
 

Searching

Well-known member
Messages
331
Reactions
1,896
There is a good movie Capricorn 1 where astronots are taken off a Mars mission and fake telemetry/acting is subsituted....Ya it's funny the James Bond film where 007 hi-jacks a moon buggy from a "filming" of men slow walking on the moon.
Not to spoil the ending of Capricorn 1, but when the "astronaut" they couldn't kill showed up at his own funeral at the end and then the credits rolled, I was so disappointed. I wanted to know what happened next.
All the media at this astonaut's funeral, everybody's been told they all died in space, and here he is, alive. I thought that is where the movie really should have began. I want to know the reaction of the American people when they find out their government has been lying to them and wasting their money. Does the astronaut make the talk show circuits? In his interviews does he tell the television audience their government killed his fellow astronauts and tried to kill him? What happens to America then? Does everyone still sleep?
That is the sequel I want to see.
 

MirCo

New member
Messages
1
Reactions
0
If you haven´t seen the Operation Avalanche, watch it. It shows how the movie of the landing was made up
 

Top