Moon HOAX CONSPIRACY - LEM HATCH TOO SMALL! BEST DOCUMENTARY IS 1 OF OLDEST DOCUMENTARIES

Kubrick used the filming of 2001: A Space Odyssey (1968) as cover for filming the Apollo scenes. No one would've suspicious... After all, he's just filming a space/moon movie, right? :)

Kubrick used the filming of 2001: A Space Odyssey (1968) as cover for filming the Apollo scenes. No one would've suspicious... After all, he's just filming a space/moon movie, right? :)

Except the lunar scenes of 2001 look nothing like Apollo. Apollo had many more hours of EVA footage than all of 2001 and it included live interaction with mission control.

4am? Armstrong took his first steps at 2:56 UTC which would be 10:56 pm Eastern or as early as 7:56 pm on the west coast. So you started your story with a lie.

It is also a lie that all the footage from Apollo 11 is lost. We have copies of all the footage and all that is lost is the original video piggybacked on the telemetry tapes from the EVAs only. That is likely because the tapes were written over when Memorex had a tape shortage in the 70's and NASA was then faced with the choice of reusing tapes they had copies of or not collecting data from ongoing missions and probes.

The schematics for the LM are not lost either. NASA does not own them as they didn't build it. Grumman has the schematics.

No rocks have been found to be from Earth. On the contrary they have been found to have been formed in low gravity, exposed to millions of years of cosmic rays, and have never been in contact with liquid water. Perhaps you're thinking of the rock in the netherlands? It was not given by NASA. NASA didn't give out any rocks at all in 1969. At best it was given by the US ambassador to the former prime minister. But even that can't be proven. All that is known for sure is it was found in his estate after his death and his family ASSUMED it was a Moon rock.

LOL at Collier claiming they couldn't fit through the LM hatch when there are pics and videos showing them doing just that.

Apollo's path DID take them around the thickest parts of the belts. The recent NASA video is specifically talking about testing the electronics of the new craft which are more sensitive than Apollo's. The path around the belts is also not available for interplanetary trips.



There were 9 trips there and back. And again, their trajectory took them around the thickest parts of the belts. But thanks for proving that hoaxies know the least about the subject.

Didn't Kubrick direct more than one movie? Did they all have a similar look and feel of "2001"? Or was Kubrick more flexible?

The LM was never flown on Earth. It was designed for flight only in low gravity and a vacuum. It was tested in space on Apollo 9 and 10.

You are probably thinking of the LLTV and LLRV. Those were training vehicles used to simulate the lower gravity. They flew much more than once. There were hundreds of successful flights.

Thanks again for proving that hoaxies know the least about the subject.

you gotta explain the retro reflective mirrors

this element is what moon conspiracy tards always neglect

and it complicates every moon conspiracy

not saying there is not a conspiracy

but you need to explain it

and it also draws into the conspiracy all of those who are to this day claiming to receive readings from these mirrors

Yeah, the only way to get mirrors on the Moon would be to hand deliver them by Neil Armstrong. So there, conspiracy tards. Explain that away.

NASA has said many times in many talks by many people from engineers up to scientist that they have never gone out of low orbit.

yeah out the hatch they couldnt get through with all their gearton.

Hoaxies are big, fat liars who lie.

Why are hoaxies big, fat liars who lie?

Don't they actually know that they are regurgitating lies, like brain-dead parrots?
Are they post-truthers?
Are the merely despicable trolls?
What is it with these people?

Hey moron! Wake up it was fake!!!

.

If the moon landing was faked, why are retro reflectors returning light?

.

Think carefully. Is the only way to get a mirror on the Moon to have it hand delivered by Neil and Buzz?

Think carefully. Is the only way to get a mirror on the Moon to have it hand delivered by Neil and Buzz?

How do you know that they put mirrors on the moon? Did you point lasers at it a get a reflection? There isn't a laser out ther that can travel that distance without refracting to the point where the mirror would be useless.
Dumb uneducated people taking in all the Kool aid. Even educated people that can't apply theory to the real world drink the Kool aid as well.

Yeah, Halcyon has given his testimony that he personally and directly witnessed Armstrong land the LM on the Moon. Not only that, but he has signed his name to his statement.

Think carefully. Is the only way to get a mirror on the Moon to have it hand delivered by Neil and Buzz?

How do you know that they put mirrors on the moon?

There isn't a laser out ther that can travel that distance without refracting to the point where the mirror would be useless.

Dumb uneducated people taking in all the Kool aid. Even educated people that can't apply theory to the real world drink the Kool aid as well.

Only 2001 had scenes on the Moon which is why it is often quoted.

We also know that Kubrick was provably busy with multiple other films during Apollo and he was also in the UK and afraid of flying.

But sure, just gloss over the fact that there were multiple more hours of unbroken EVA footage compared to minutes in other films and that it included live interaction.

Think carefully. Is the only way to get a mirror on the Moon to have it hand delivered by Neil and Buzz?

Yes, it was filmed on the sound stage in England. What's the problem?

And it didn't need to look exactly like 2001. The point is, people would see a space/moon movie being filmed and think nothing of it because he was making 2001.

The problem is that he was busy doing other things and there is no evidence he was involved filming apollo at all. And if it didn't need to look exactly like 2001, then why bring up his 2001 moon shots?

The problem is that he was busy doing other things and there is no evidence he was involved filming apollo at all. And if it didn't need to look exactly like 2001, then why bring up his 2001 moon shots?

He was doing "moon" shots. People passing by would just assume it was for 2001.

Front screen projection.