Landed on the Moon? Yeah right...

[stinkycheese]

Oh haii Bound

Anyone that believes man has been to the moon is a mong.

http://topdocumentaryfilms.com/a-fun...y-to-the-moon/

[Bound]

Originally Posted by stinkycheese

Oh haii Bound

Anyone that believes man has been to the moon is a mong.

http://topdocumentaryfilms.com/a-fun...y-to-the-moon/

I believe.

Couldn't help yourself? . Genuinely smiling at prospect of this thread.

[sparky771]

i believe it happened too

[Bound]

http://www.badastronomy.com/bad/tv/foxapollo.html

Bad: The first bit of actual evidence brought up is the lack of stars in the pictures taken by the Apollo astronauts from the surface of the Moon. Without air, the sky is black, so where are the stars?

Good: The stars are there! They're just too faint to be seen.

This is usually the first thing HBs talk about when discussing the Hoax. That amazes me, as it's the silliest assertion they make. However, it appeals to our common sense: when the sky is black here on Earth, we see stars. Therefore we should see them from the Moon as well.

I'll say this here now, and return to it many times: the Moon is not the Earth. Conditions there are weird, and our common sense is likely to fail us.

The Moon's surface is airless. On Earth, our thick atmosphere scatters sunlight, spreading it out over the whole sky. That's why the sky is bright during the day. Without sunlight, the air is dark at night, allowing us to see stars.

On the Moon, the lack of air means that the sky is dark. Even when the Sun is high off the horizon during full day, the sky near it will be black. If you were standing on the Moon, you would indeed see stars, even during the day.

So why aren't they in the Apollo pictures? Pretend for a moment you are an astronaut on the surface of the Moon. You want to take a picture of your fellow space traveler. The Sun is low off the horizon, since all the lunar landings were done at local morning. How do you set your camera? The lunar landscape is brightly lit by the Sun, of course, and your friend is wearing a white spacesuit also brilliantly lit by the Sun. To take a picture of a bright object with a bright background, you need to set the exposure time to be fast, and close down the aperture setting too; that's like the pupil in your eye constricting to let less light in when you walk outside on a sunny day.

So the picture you take is set for bright objects. Stars are faint objects! In the fast exposure, they simply do not have time to register on the film. It has nothing to do with the sky being black or the lack of air, it's just a matter of exposure time. If you were to go outside here on Earth on the darkest night imaginable and take a picture with the exact same camera settings the astronauts used, you won't see any stars!

It's that simple. Remember, this the usually the first and strongest argument the HBs use, and it was that easy to show wrong. Their arguments get worse from here.

EEEEEEEE TTTTTT CCCCCCCC

[Bound]

It does discredit your credibility when you believe all conspiracies .

Flying spaghetti monster? Can't prove it doesn't exist, therefore it exists - South Park .

[stinkycheese]

Originally Posted by Bound

http://www.badastronomy.com/bad/tv/foxapollo.html

Bad: The first bit of

blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah
It's that simple. Remember, this the usually the first and strongest argument the HBs use, and it was that easy to show wrong. Their arguments get worse from here.

EEEEEEEE TTTTTT CCCCCCCC

Watch the documentary, it even explains why there were no stars in the photos. I dont question that.

[Bound]

Originally Posted by stinkycheese

Watch the documentary, it even explains why there were no stars in the photos. I dont question that.

Well, this is gonna be a long one then .

[stinkycheese]

Van Allen belt anyone?

[stinkycheese]

The only thing stopping me from being 1000000% certain it was faked is the Russians havn't called the US out on it.

[sparky771]

Originally Posted by stinkycheese

Van Allen belt anyone?

That sounds made up lol gonna have to do some research Ok so its not made up its here on Wiki (could still be made up there is some shite written on there) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Van_Allen_radiation_belt

My favorite argument is the dust from the lunar rover where they can't comprehend why the dust comes back to the surface

[Bound]

Jews ??

[stinkycheese]

The ONLY manned missions EVER to pass through the belts were the apollo missions (supposedly). No other country has ever sent a man through them, and we never have since 1970 something.
The space stations, and every other manned flight by any country have never left earth's orbit and passed through the belts.

Anything living that enters the Van Allen Belts gets FUCKED UP BITCHES!

[Bound]

Originally Posted by stinkycheese

Anything living that enters the Van Allen Belts gets FUCKED UP BITCHES!

How do you know? You ever been ya Jew?

[stinkycheese]

Originally Posted by Bound

How do you know? You ever been ya Jew?

No, but a shit load of monkeys and dogs can vouch for me

[Bound]

Srsly though..Need to test it on monkeys, then move on to bigger stuff like horses and whales before we can be sure.. That image from South Park of the whale beached on the moon, lifeless, when it was promised eternal happiness.

Ahahaha.

[sparky771]

lol.....

[K17NEY]

This is going to be interesting,ive never really looked into it but how the fuck does a flag get blown when there is no atmosphere?No atmosphere means no air,no air means no wind!

Bound:fair play your in depth arguments never siese to impress me,your like a font of knowledge.

[sparky771]

did the research and......


Solar cells, integrated circuits, and sensors can be damaged by radiation. Geomagnetic storms occasionally damage electronic components on spacecraft. Miniaturization and digitization of electronics and logic circuits have made satellites more vulnerable to radiation, as incoming ions may be as large as the circuit's charge. Electronics on satellites must be hardened against radiation to operate reliably. The Hubble Space Telescope, among other satellites, often has its sensors turned off when passing through regions of intense radiation.[9]

Missions beyond low earth orbit leave the protection of the geomagnetic field, and transit the Van Allen belts. Thus they may need to be shielded against exposure to cosmic rays, Van Allen radiation, or solar flares. The region between two to three earth radii lies between the two radiation belts and is sometimes referred to as the "safe zone".[10][11]

A satellite shielded by 3 mm of aluminium in an elliptic orbit (200 by 20,000 miles) passing through the radiation belts will receive about 2,500 rem (25 Sv) per year. Almost all radiation will be received while passing the inner belt.

[Chr15]

I dont care tbh

[craig180p]

Give me a synopsis so I don't have to sit here for 45 mins