Language: 
To browser these website, it's necessary to store cookies on your computer.
The cookies contain no personal information, they are required for program control.
  the storage of cookies while browsing this website, on Login and Register.

GDPR and DSGVO law

Storing Cookies (See : http://ec.europa.eu/ipg/basics/legal/cookies/index_en.htm ) help us to bring you our services at overunity.com . If you use this website and our services you declare yourself okay with using cookies .More Infos here:
https://overunity.com/5553/privacy-policy/
If you do not agree with storing cookies, please LEAVE this website now. From the 25th of May 2018, every existing user has to accept the GDPR agreement at first login. If a user is unwilling to accept the GDPR, he should email us and request to erase his account. Many thanks for your understanding.
Amazon Warehouse Deals ! Now even more Deep Discounts ! Check out these great prices on slightly used or just opened once only items.I always buy my gadgets via these great Warehouse deals ! Highly recommended ! Many thanks for supporting OverUnity.com this way.

User Menu

Donations

Please Donate for the Forum.
Many thanks.
Regards, Stefan.(Admin)

A-Ads

Powerbox

Smartbox

3D Solar

3D Solar Panels

DC2DC converter

Micro JouleThief

FireMatch

FireMatch

CCKnife

CCKnife

CCTool

CCTool

Magpi Magazine

Magpi Magazine Free Rasberry Pi Magazine

Battery Recondition

Battery Recondition

Arduino

Ultracaps

YT Subscribe

Gravity Machines

Tesla-Ebook

Magnet Secrets

Lindemann Video

Navigation

Products

Products

WaterMotor kit

Statistics

  • *Total Members: 83680
  • *Latest: dnz007

  • *Total Posts: 516047
  • *Total Topics: 15381
  • *Online Today: 44
  • *Most Online: 103
(December 19, 2006, 11:27:19 PM)
  • *Users: 6
  • *Guests: 11
  • *Total: 17

Author Topic: Was the moon landing for real ???  (Read 51296 times)

Offline hartiberlin

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7931
    • free energy research OverUnity.com
Re: Was the moon landing for real ???
« Reply #75 on: November 05, 2007, 10:05:25 PM »
Hans,
a quotefrom this page:


"Moon rocks in the form of lunar meteorites, although expensive, are widely sold and traded among private collectors."

Well, surely this could also have been faked just giving the university some samples
of a lunar meteorite !


With a fake so big, this would have been the easiest part to have some access to some
lunar meteorites rocks...

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Was the moon landing for real ???
« Reply #75 on: November 05, 2007, 10:05:25 PM »

Offline hansvonlieven

  • elite_member
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 2558
    • Keelytech
Re: Was the moon landing for real ???
« Reply #76 on: November 05, 2007, 10:06:18 PM »
Sorry Freezer,

There is no way you could fool a good geologist by substituting a meteorite for the real thing. While travelling through our atmosphere the thing gets white hot and the outer layers vaporise. That leaves its marks. The moon rocks do not show this.

Hans von Lieven

Offline hartiberlin

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7931
    • free energy research OverUnity.com
Re: Was the moon landing for real ???
« Reply #77 on: November 05, 2007, 10:10:20 PM »
You could crack up a bigger lunar meteorite and extract a sample without the
shell,so it would look like it would be a normal moon rock...

I wonder, how many pieces
and what sizes of the rocks has been supplied to universities at all ?

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Was the moon landing for real ???
« Reply #77 on: November 05, 2007, 10:10:20 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline hartiberlin

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7931
    • free energy research OverUnity.com
Re: Was the moon landing for real ???
« Reply #78 on: November 05, 2007, 10:15:07 PM »
Maybe they are also just earth rocks from some places.
where the composition of the elements is not common...
who knows...

as all of this is second hand information and we can not verify it
ourselfs, whom are you going to trust on this ?

The photographic evidence and the "ducking" of the astronauts
and the technical circumstances and all the until now
shown mysteries in this thread
are just too much convincing to make it seem,
that the moon landings took never place and just were
a clever made up Hollywood studio production...

Offline Freezer

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 414
Re: Was the moon landing for real ???
« Reply #79 on: November 05, 2007, 10:24:38 PM »
Sorry Freezer,

There is no way you could fool a good geologist by substituting a meteorite for the real thing. While travelling through our atmosphere the thing gets white hot and the outer layers vaporise. That leaves its marks. The moon rocks do not show this.

Hans von Lieven

Well, I do actually believe we went there, it just didn't happen like they portrayed.  There are many instances of fakery in the images and even video.  There are images with the same background, and also video with the same background.  Most all the images have the distant horizon looking like it was pasted in.  As Cap-Z-ro said, there are existing bases already there, which was the real target.  Explain all the inconsistencies of the way we could even get there with what NASA built..  We used our stolen anti-gravity tech only to claim a place already inhabited. :D

I always liked this poor smudge.

http://www.cmf.nrl.navy.mil/cgi-bin/clementine/clib/multires.pl?clickres=5&ox=0&oy=0&res=0&size=768&latitude=-70&longitude=137&submit=Use+Lat%252FLong&sensor=UVVIS&filter=415_nm

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Was the moon landing for real ???
« Reply #79 on: November 05, 2007, 10:24:38 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline hartiberlin

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7931
    • free energy research OverUnity.com
Re: Was the moon landing for real ???
« Reply #80 on: November 05, 2007, 10:33:40 PM »
Here are PDF files of Lunar rocks samples...


http://www-curator.jsc.nasa.gov/lunar/compendium.cfm


But only because these are scientifically made must not mean
the rocks were really brought back by the Apollo astronauts...

Offline hartiberlin

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7931
    • free energy research OverUnity.com
Re: Was the moon landing for real ???
« Reply #81 on: November 05, 2007, 10:40:17 PM »


I always liked this poor smudge.

http://www.cmf.nrl.navy.mil/cgi-bin/clementine/clib/multires.pl?clickres=5&ox=0&oy=0&res=0&size=768&latitude=-70&longitude=137&submit=Use+Lat%252FLong&sensor=UVVIS&filter=415_nm

Hmm,
that is a real interesting picture.

So that it is not deleted out of the NASA database I am copying it over here.

Here it is.
So what do they might have retouched  there ?
A building or a landed UFO ?


« Last Edit: November 05, 2007, 11:08:27 PM by hartiberlin »

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Was the moon landing for real ???
« Reply #81 on: November 05, 2007, 10:40:17 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline hansvonlieven

  • elite_member
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 2558
    • Keelytech
Re: Was the moon landing for real ???
« Reply #82 on: November 05, 2007, 11:12:18 PM »
Amongst the rocks collected by the Apollo teams there were a number of specimens that had been gathered from the surface.

Perhaps, if you had a very large meteorite, you could split it and pass the core off as the real thing.

With a rock that has been lying on the surface for millions of years on an atmosphere lacking celestial body this becomes quite a different matter. The passage of time as well as the inevitable bombardment with micro particles leave their mark. Here on earth we do not get this as small particles burn up in the atmosphere before reaching the surface.

On the moon this is not so. These high energy collisions leave traces. It would be impossible to fake samples to such perfection as to fool a really good geologist.

No, I believe the samples are real, as to when and by whom they were collected I cannot say, I wasn't there.

Hans von Lieven

Offline devilzangel

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 169
Re: Was the moon landing for real ???
« Reply #83 on: November 05, 2007, 11:22:59 PM »
Who took this picture,
when the astronauts have already left the moon ????


(http://www.fast-geheim.de/assets/images/Apollo16.jpg)

Well, it must have been bugs bunny. ok kidding.

Seriously though, it could have been a left over camera which could have been remote controlled or timed to take an image and relay back via radio frequency. The quality doesnt seem too great, could be a cheaper camera.

Alot of stuff and equipment was left behind due to the size of the smaller top module as well as the weight it could jettison back into space.

Look to the right of the left over module; you see a shadow of another object left behind.

I would also have to say that image has had a severe loss in quality. Do you notice all the air burshing? For me, examining a close to near original source would allow for better judgement.

who knows, maybe it is the camera crew taking a last few shots from the UFO before leaving.

*****
About the airbrushed object sat image., with proper expertise, you might be able to see a fair amount of what is layered behind the airbrush; it was done as a transparency airbrush, allowing for a certain amount of see through.

If you look over the rest of that image, doesnt it look so strange to see close to 70% of the image kind of airburshed? wow, something big there. (big as in importance as well as size)

devilzangel
..

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Was the moon landing for real ???
« Reply #83 on: November 05, 2007, 11:22:59 PM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline Cap-Z-ro

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3545
Re: Was the moon landing for real ???
« Reply #84 on: November 05, 2007, 11:23:38 PM »

Whether the number is accurate or not, I've read this is the 3rd go round on this planet for human kind - supported by an article I once read, showing a stainless steel hammer which was reportedly found incased in rock millions of years old.

Regards

Offline devilzangel

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 169
Re: Was the moon landing for real ???
« Reply #85 on: November 06, 2007, 01:12:12 AM »
Hey guys,

check this video out!! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ifC6dqmsY1k

devilzangel
..

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Was the moon landing for real ???
« Reply #85 on: November 06, 2007, 01:12:12 AM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline Koen1

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1172
Re: Was the moon landing for real ???
« Reply #86 on: November 06, 2007, 01:40:23 PM »
Amongst the rocks collected by the Apollo teams there were a number of specimens that had been gathered from the surface.

Perhaps, if you had a very large meteorite, you could split it and pass the core off as the real thing.

With a rock that has been lying on the surface for millions of years on an atmosphere lacking celestial body this becomes quite a different matter. The passage of time as well as the inevitable bombardment with micro particles leave their mark. Here on earth we do not get this as small particles burn up in the atmosphere before reaching the surface.

On the moon this is not so. These high energy collisions leave traces. It would be impossible to fake samples to such perfection as to fool a really good geologist.
Ah, obviously it is totally impossible to treat rocks with particle bombardments etc to make them look almost exactly like moon rocks... or is it? ;)
And on top of that, how would we know if a rock was from the moon or not? The only "moon rocks" we know are the ones Nasa shows us... Seems quite easy for them to simply dig up some earth rock, bombard it with high energy radiation to simulate exposure to cosmic radiation, and then present them as "real" moon rocks; after all, who is going to prove them wrong? The Russians? Lol! :)

Quote
No, I believe the samples are real, as to when and by whom they were collected I cannot say, I wasn't there.
Exactly. You were not there when the rocks were "collected"/"produced". So you can believe all you want, but it is still no convincing proof.

I have seen so much faked or otherwise dodgy footage by Nasa that I would not simply assume they are being honest.
For example, you must have seen the renormalised colour photos from the latest Mars Rover? They very clearly show a 'normal' sand-coloured desert scene, in contrast to the official Nasa pictures which were clearly colour doctored to make everything look very red. (the bright yellow wires on the lander show dark orange on the Nasa pics, and renormalised to yellow the pics show a very normal looking sandy and rocky desert landscape, nothing special. One could even doubt if the pics were not made on earth somewhere, what with the light blue sky and all). So either Nasa is trying to make us think Mars looks a lot redder and less earthlike than it really does, or they have doctored pictures taken on earth to make them look like they were made on Mars.
Rover pictures also show a lot of very unnatural looking chunks of rock, with right angles, square holes, metallic-looking shiny surfaces... either the rocks on Mars look nothing like the moon rocks for reasons unexplained, or they are not actually rocks... Some of the chunks have shapes that suggest they might be constructed. In any case, very odd. Since it seems unlikely for Nasa to plant unnatural looking rocks on a staged set on earth, as that would counteract the entire goal of a staged natural looking Mars-picture, it appears to be more likely that Nasa actually did take pictures on Mars but altered the colour schemes to make them look a lot more red, so they look like the original viking lander pictures.
After all, if people would see a normal patch of earthlike desert, people would probably exclaim "huh? but you guys said it was the RED planet!" or even "why aren't we there yet? It's just like earth, only dryer!". :)

Oh, and what about these vids? This one shows one of the original movie sets where the first couple of "moon landings" were staged: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BMJugPGGe7E&NR=1 And this one shows some type of craft (crashed?) on the lunar surface, filmed by the apollo crew before landing: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rc7mkHtuLOs.
Of course they could be fake, but then again so could all of the other "official" Nasa footage.

Whatever is really going on, fact remains that it is extremely odd to pump billions into a spacerace lasting over a decade, only to reach the destination, plant a flag, and never go back. That just does not make sense.
If you've managed to come all that way, you would expect them to at least build a base there. I mean, you've already spent all those billions of dollars trying to get there, you can just as well spend another couple of million putting the finishing touches on it. You've researched and developed all this technology, for what? To try if it works and after you figure out that it does... just leave it and forget about it? When in history has that ever happened? They researched and developed nuclear fission so that they could do nothing with it? They developed computer technology so they could leave it to gather dust? They developed radio to not use it? No, of course not! So it would be naive and quite ignorant to assume they would really spend billions on space technology only to do the primary proof of concept test (which was reaching the moon).
So either there is a base on the moon, and it was built by people from earth, and probably built in a spot where we cannot see it, or there is not which would mean there is some very good reason for us (them) not to build it.

Offline shruggedatlas

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 549
Re: Was the moon landing for real ???
« Reply #87 on: November 06, 2007, 03:47:01 PM »
If you've managed to come all that way, you would expect them to at least build a base there. I mean, you've already spent all those billions of dollars trying to get there, you can just as well spend another couple of million putting the finishing touches on it.

You think a moon base can be built for $2 million?  You are seriously deluded.

Offline Koen1

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1172
Re: Was the moon landing for real ???
« Reply #88 on: November 06, 2007, 05:07:43 PM »
You think a moon base can be built for $2 million?  You are seriously deluded.

1) I said "a couple of million". That does not necessarily mean "2 million", it could just as well be 10 million. As long as we're comparing it to the enormous amount of several billion dollars, "a couple" of million can be quite a lot still.
2) It is not at all inconceivable to build a lunar base even for the amount of 2 million dollars. After all, the transport craft had already been developed (using those billions, remember?), and the USAF had a nuclear powered tunnel boring machine in the 60s already... All you'd need to do is get it to the moon and start tunneling, thn seal off the entry point with an airlock, and they could continue to build for as long as they would need to dig out the entire complex.
I assume you thought I was talking about building it on the lunar surface? That is simply dumb. It would get hit by meteorites all the time, and it would be visible, and it would also be a hell of a difficult construction project what with all those construction workers having to stumble around in their space suits. No, obviously if one were to build on the moon, one would build at least the basic living and working areas underground, if not the entire thing. Tunneling inside rock is a much easier way to build a base than actually constructing one on the surface.

Please read and think properly before calling people seriously deluded.

Offline shruggedatlas

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 549
Re: Was the moon landing for real ???
« Reply #89 on: November 06, 2007, 05:35:09 PM »
You think a moon base can be built for $2 million?  You are seriously deluded.

1) I said "a couple of million". That does not necessarily mean "2 million", it could just as well be 10 million. As long as we're comparing it to the enormous amount of several billion dollars, "a couple" of million can be quite a lot still.
2) It is not at all inconceivable to build a lunar base even for the amount of 2 million dollars. After all, the transport craft had already been developed (using those billions, remember?), and the USAF had a nuclear powered tunnel boring machine in the 60s already... All you'd need to do is get it to the moon and start tunneling, thn seal off the entry point with an airlock, and they could continue to build for as long as they would need to dig out the entire complex.
I assume you thought I was talking about building it on the lunar surface? That is simply dumb. It would get hit by meteorites all the time, and it would be visible, and it would also be a hell of a difficult construction project what with all those construction workers having to stumble around in their space suits. No, obviously if one were to build on the moon, one would build at least the basic living and working areas underground, if not the entire thing. Tunneling inside rock is a much easier way to build a base than actually constructing one on the surface.

Please read and think properly before calling people seriously deluded.

You are still seriously disconnected with what things cost in the real world of space travel.  I think building a lunar base is a $300 billion (with a "B") plus project.  You just have no idea of the cost of getting materials to the moon and the cost of building there.

To give you perspective.  The U.S.'s share of the International Space Station's cost was $100 billion.  And this involves getting materials only to Earth's orbit, and this is only part of the entire cost.  So figure it out.

Oh, and now you want to dig up/drill into the moon?  Multiply that number by 3, 4?  Who knows.  How are you even going to get the equipment to drill or dig to the moon?  That stuff is real heavy.

 

OneLink