Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 31 to 33 of 33

Thread: Did man fly to the moon??

  1. #31
    Join Date
    18th April 2004 - 19:47
    Bike
    Kawasaki en 450 LTD
    Location
    Rotorua
    Posts
    797
    I saw the doco and I really did think it was quite probable that it was a hoax, the ongoing " my one is bigger than your one" that went on between the states and the former soviet union is my biggest reason for believing the points put forward in the documentary. Knowing the potential for land grabbing the powers that be have, why haven't they been out there setting up shop on any of these planets?, low gravity, and oxygen problems aside, if it were possible, it surely would have been done repeatedly, the russians with their love of nuclear stuff and radiation are far more likely to have done it, than the yanks who at least have a little more regard for human life.

  2. #32
    Join Date
    6th July 2004 - 12:20
    Bike
    1989, Yamaha VT250R
    Location
    Auckland
    Posts
    59
    Elvis is alive... he now lives on the moon.

  3. #33
    Join Date
    9th March 2004 - 20:16
    Bike
    Trumpton triple
    Location
    North Shore
    Posts
    736
    Quote Originally Posted by moko
    Maybe not on the same scale but locally 900 American Troops were killed of of the Devon coast in a war-time series of disasters that included being killed by "friendly fire from both each other and the british navy during exercises with live ammo and being bush-whacked by german E-boats on another occaission.All of this was covered up until a local guy tried to buy a tank he found in just off the coast from the U.S. government.Hundreds of locals knew about it,thousands of troops took part in the exercise as well as several Royal naval vessels,Eisenhower was even an eye-witness to one of the friendly fire incidents.All got brought to light mainly by chance by this guy as it was covered-up at the time and he`s been able to tell families where their loved ones ended up.Now it`s out in the open there are memorials by the tank at slapton Sands in Devon but the question is how many times was that sort of thing repeated in other places?Thousands of people knew what happened and no-one blabbed for 40-odd years until it became obvious that the truth was going to come out anyway,the civilians were threatened with prison if they said a word.Why would they fake the Moon landing?Dont forget the "space race" of that era,massive propaganda coup plus it was partly a pissing contest between the U.S. and Russia,no doubt the underlying message also given the Cold War was "hey look where we can stick a missile base if we want to".Remember only recently T.V. pictures of U.S. Marines in action in Afghanistan which the Pentagon had to admit were faked on a film set,and the Sky T.V. reporter sacked for a report he totally fabricated from one of the Brit navy vessels at the start of the Iraq war?Millions of Brits,me included,saw that report and believed it,the truth only came out weeks afterwards.
    Yeah, I know about the Slapton Sands disaster. I've read 'The Magic Army' (is that the right title?)

    If you're into war/thriller type books, I think I remeber reading one of Jack Higgens's ones that takes this incident as a starting point. 'Night of the Eagle', I think. Funny coincidence that one of his other books with the same characters is called 'The Eagle has Landed', given the subject of this thread.

    I think the crucial difference between the two is that there was probably a genuine consensus amongst the military and the civilians that they should keep Slapton Sands quiet. The civilian population in the UK in WW2 put up with quite a lot (the 'blitz spirit' etc) and was generally happy to do thier bit ofr the war effort. Then after the war it was just one incident amongst many, and there wasn't much motiviation for people to go looking for it. When it did come out, it was sort of by accident. But it did come out, and there wasn't (after the war) much attempt at a cover up.

    On the other hand, people seem to have been looking specifically for a smoking gun for the moon landing for a long time, and haven't been able to find anything to prove their theory. They slap together a product to sell, pull a few smoke and mirrors tricks to put together a mole hill of flimsy 'evidence', whilst ignoring the mountain of positive evidence just off to one sde.


    For example, NASA has rocks which geologists agree can't have come from earth because they have odd or no wear/erosion patterns on them (amongst other things), and which aren't meteors. They say they came from the moon. If they didn't, where did they come from? These are the sort of things that get conveniently ignored by docos like this.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •