“In 1995 or 1996 FOX did a special titled, [i“We Never Went To The Moon”[/i. It was one of the highest rated shows in FOX history. Some of the material presented was not correct and it was very sensationalistic but it covered many of the main objections to the official story. James Oberg who is one of the top science writers in the world saw the ratings of the show and became incensed. He went to NASA and said, [i“I want you to open up your archives and I will write a book proving that we went to the moon without a shadow of a doubt”[/i. The people at NASA rubbed their hands and said, [i“Great. Come on in”[/i. They gave him a $20,000 advance and he began the project. I know James well and was following this story with interest. For five months I heard nothing and I was wondering what was happening when I read in the newspaper that James Oberg had quietly given back the $20,000 advance. Well, we never heard any more about it but later I discovered exactly what happened because it happened to me. In the early nineties I was working with Richard Hoagland and started asking NASA questions about the moon landings. Could I see the designs for the suits? Could I look at the type of air-conditioning they had? I was interested in what kind of battery could possibly power a heater/cooler which had to cope with over three-hundred degree fluctuations in temperature. At the time I really did believe that we went to the moon but I simply couldn’t get any traction out of NASA. They would never respond to my questions. They would never help me. I was planning to write a book and NASA was fully aware of this. Oberg asked the same questions and received exactly the same runaround until he became fed up with the whole affair and gave them their money back. "

"In 1996 Hoagland and I pitched several major Wall Street investors with the proposal to make a whole load of money out of filming an IMAX movie titled, [i“Return To The Moon”[/i. Our plan was to privately launch a 3D camera which would orbit above the moon and take high-resolution stills and video of the lunar landing sites. It would be an IMAX feature which everyone felt we’d make billions out of. We’d budgeted a cost of $20million which we felt would be more than sufficient. In our last meeting we waited two hours to get the go-ahead for funding. We’d hired a very famous movie producer to run the project and everything was going forward. As part of the due-diligence they hired a guy who had worked extensively with Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin and his job was to make sure we could do what we said we could do i.e. build a reliable rocket which could launch without killing everyone etc. etc. Ironically this guy was a friend of mine who lived just a few miles down the road. When I called him to find out why the project had suddenly been delayed he said, [i“I’m sorry, Jay. I called up the head of NASA and when I told him about your proposal his words were, “You are not going to the moon, Frank. No one is going to the moon. If you launch your rocket and I don’t care if it’s launched out of India or China or the middle of the ocean we will BLOW IT OUT OF THE SKY and DO NOT EVER CALL ME AGAIN”.[/i

In debates such as these defenders of the official narrative at some point triumphantly declare victory with nauseating arguments such as this:

Bear in mind that the person who wrote this claims to have a science-based Ph.D.

[i"Though I fear few conspiracists have a level of intelligence high enough to actually carry out this experiment, there is a way to empirically prove that man has been on the moon. Why?

Because the astronauts put a bunch of mother*&$^ing reflectors on the moon, that's why!

Here's how to shut up your conspiracist friend in five convenient steps:

1 - Grab a high-power laser and a light sensor

2 - Point the high-power laser at any of the Lunar Laser Ranging RetroReflectors:
coordinates degrees N degrees E
(on the moon -duh) (latitude ) (longitude)
Apollo 11 LRRR 0.67337 23.47293
Apollo 14 LRRR -3.64421 -17.47880
Apollo 15 LRRR 26.13333 3.62837

3 - Fire a densely-packed lightbeam at one of these coordinates (with a pulse frequency unique to it so your conspiracist friend cannot pretend it's just space noise).

4 - ????? a couple seconds (you know, because light travels at ~c=~300.000km/sec and the moon is at ~300.000km)

5 - measure light that has been mirrored back to your sensor.

6 - Profit by making your conspiracy theorist friend shut the hell up.

Science 1 - Fruitcakes 0"[/i

Without using the Internet can anyone hazard a guess at the fatal flaw in the above reasoning? If not you are in good company because no less an intellect than Dr. Brian "D:REAM" Cox publicly swallowed this argument in a fifty minute episode on BBC2 without question.

[iDave McGowan was an excellent researcher. His passing was a real shame for the truth movement and a real slam dunk for the NWO. Considering Laurel Canyon is in Hollywood, the more information we have about what come out of there the better.[/i

[i[uRoseanne Barr: “MK Ultra Rules In Hollywood”[/u[/i

It’s funny that ancient Druid ‘wizards’ and ‘magicians’ used to make their wands specific for casting spells from the Holly Wood tree. Maybe “Hollywood” is used to cast spells on the masses, because at the very least it can sure seem that way. Everything we do is so systematic, so robotic in nature. We go to school, get a job, have a family and chase materialistic gains only to find out that it is not what our soul truly desires. We are told what to wear, what’s popular, what to buy, what truth is and how life is through television. It keeps us occupied, ignorant and blind to what is really happening on our plane.

Roseanne’s public remark that the CIA’s MK Ultra program rules in Hollywood is an educated statement, and not just an opinion. It comes from her own experiences within the industry as well as an awareness of known facts about the CIA and their involvement in Hollywood -all of which also happen to be available to the public. It’s not hard to see how television and mass advertising can be used as mind control, basically shaping the perception of the individual, as well as displaying what each individual should “be” like, what type of life to chase and what it means to be successful. Given Roseanne’s statement, as well as the information we already have in the public domain, it’s safe to say that something fishy is going on in Hollywood. Ask yourself, are your wants really yours? Or have they been programmed into you since birth?

Not many people know this, but the CIA has an entire department dedicated to the entertainment industry. It’s run through the CIA’s Entertainment Industry Liaison Office which collaborates in a strictly advisory capacity with filmmakers. The CIA doesn’t just offer guidance to filmmakers, it even offers money. In 1950, the agency bought the rights to George Orwell’s Animal Farm, and then funded the 1954 British animated version of the film. Its involvement had long been rumoured, but only in the past decade have those rumours been substantiated. The link between Hollywood and the CIA isn’t something new, and Roseanne isn’t just blurting out information that has no backing behind it.
[i
This list is weird, quite a creepy mixture actually. Jimi Hendrix lived there, Alice Cooper, David Carradine,Jerry Brown (linked to Jonestown), Boris Karloff (horror movie actor lived at both Laurel Canyon and The Dakota), Marilyn Manson, Kd Lang, Steve Martin (and all his King Tut Rosicrucian insider humor), Mia Farrow (me a pharoah), Keith Moon, Slash, Frances Farmer....plus a whole bunch more other celebrities who died young...[/i

[iHere is a list of Laurel Canyon Residents: Past and Present[/i

[i* Jensen Ackles, Supernatural, present * Elvis Cole, Fictional Detective, Present * Jennifer Aniston, early-mid 1990s.
* Christina Applegate, present * Mary Astor, Appian Way * Lex Barker (Alexander Crichlow Barker, Jr.), international Actor (Tarzan, German Karl May movies), Mulholland Drive, neighbour to Errol Flynn, end of 1940s. * Saul Bass, graphic designer
* Harry Bosch, present (fictional) * Clara Bow, 1920s, on Horseshoe Canyon and Lookout Mountain.
* David Blue 1980s,rented on Lookout Mountain Ave. * Victory (Vicki) Tischler Blue, 1980s - 2003,and 2006 [rented on Lookout Mountain producer/director, bass player for the The Runaways. * Zach Braff, present on Lookout Mountain Ave.
* Peter Brocco 1940s to 1992 (died at 89 years old) stage, film and tv character actor, blacklisted in the 1950s. His home was on Laurel Canyon Blvd., just north of the Country Store. * Louise Brooks, 1927-28 * Jerry Brown, 1970s * Eric Burdon, 1970s
* David Byrne * Neve Campbell, 1996-2000 * Canned Heat, their house and rehearsal studio on Lookout Mountain Ave. Next to Joni Mitchell's burned to the ground in 1969. A photo of their charred amplifiers was used for Steppenwolf's album At Your Birthday Party'. * Leslie Caron, 1950s, lived on Laurel Canyon Boulevard, near the Country Store * Danny Carey, drummer for Tool, present * Adam Carolla, 1980s * David Carradine 1970s * Stephen Christian, present * George Clooney, present * Chuck Connors, 1950s, lived on Ridpath * Alice Cooper, 1971-1976 * David Crosby, 1960's* Richard Day, art director, lived on Oakstone Way, 1920-1940 * Pamela Des Barres * Henry Diltz, photographer, 1960s * Denny Doherty, 1960s, also lived in the Mary Astor house on Appian Way * Shannen Doherty 1980s, rented (her first time away from home) on Lookout Mountain Avenue * Micky Dolenz, 1960s * D.C. Douglas, actor, present* Marty Teboe, 1967, and once again early 1989 thru 1994
* Troy Donahue, early 1960s, lived on Ridpath* Rob Dyrdek, Pro Skateboarder, MTV2 star, present* Eliza Dushku, present
* Cass Elliot, 1960s off Woodrow Wilson* Geoff Emerick, present* Will Ferrell, present * Fabian, 1960s, lived on Ridpath
* Kim Fowley, 1970's* Errol Flynn, early to mid 1950s * Abigail Folger and Wojciech Frykowski, 1968-1969
* John Frusciante, guitarist for the Red Hot Chili Peppers, present * Glenn Frey, 1970's
* James Frey, presumably mid-90's, however, his account of his time there, in My Friend Leonard had a compressed timeline
* Roman Gabriel, former quarterback of the Los Angeles Rams, lived on Skyline Drive, 1970s * Esther Galil, present
* Balthazar Getty rented a house on the corner of Laurel Canyon Blvd. and Laurelmont Dr., 1990s* Jackson Browne, 1960s-70s
* [[Erin Hamilton recording artist, daughter of Carol Burnett, 1990s on Lookout Mountain Ave.* Robert A. Heinlein, 1940s
* Katherine Helmond, present* Jimi Hendrix, summer 1968* Maya Asztinx, Present* Chris Hillman, 1960s
* Harry Houdini, 1919-1921* Jim Hutton, 1970s* Boris Karloff, 1930s* Anthony Kiedis, 1990s-present* Ed Kienholz, artist
* Carole King, 1970's-90's* C. M. Kornbluth, 1940s* Robby Krieger, 1960's-70's* K.D. Lang, musician, present
* Leadbelly (Huddie William Ledbetter), blues singer and musician lived as subtenant on Merrywood Drive, in a house which was damaged by fire 1944, then remodeled by R.M. Schindler when he was trying to get work as a studio musician in Hollywood.
* Timothy Leary, 1990's * Arthur Lee, and his band Love, in the Béla Lugosi house on Blue Heights Rd, 1960s
* Sharmagne Leland-St. John, poet, concert performer, film-maker, author, lived on Prospect Drive 1965, Fareholm Drive '68-'70, Ridpath '71 and on 34 acres known as Lookout Mountain Park with Paul A. Rothchild, record producer until '74, has lived in her present home on Merrywood Drive off Lookout Mountain since 1986 * Daisy-Alexandra Sylbert-Torres, Film costumer 1986-2002 * Martyn LeNoble, bassist for Porno For Pyros, Jane's Addiction, and The Cult* Jenny Lewis, Present * Tom Leykis, syndicated radio talk show host, 1989-93* Bessie Love, silent film actress, lived at 8227 Lookout Mountain Ave, reportedly haunted, 1920's* Josh Lucas, actor, present* Béla Lugosi, Blue Heights Road* Sue Lyon, 1960s (during first marriage, on Kirkwood)* Joel Madden, present * Marilyn Manson, 1997-2004, residence is on Appian Way at the famed 'Mary Astor House', built in the 1920s as a 'Hills hideaway for actress Mary Astor, who used the home secretly for her romantic trysts with studio execs and other notables; Marilyn Manson wrote the entire Mechanical Animals album at this house, and much of it was recorded at 'The White Room' -- Manson's home recording studio in his pool house * Ray Manzarek, 1970's * Alicia Silverstone, present * Gardner McKay, actor, author* Steve Martin, late 1960s* Bob Masse, late 1960s* John Mayall, 1969-1979 House burned down, see the 1968 blues album Blues from Laurel Canyon* Monet Mazur 2000s, rented on Merrywood Drive.
* Mark McGrath, singer, Sugar Ray, host of Extra, present* Roger McGuinn, 1960's* Jillian Michaels
* Joni Mitchell, 1960's- 1970s on Lookout Mountain Ave. Still owns the house.* Robert Mitchum, 1940s-'60s
* Tom Mix, cowboy film star, 1920's * Keith Moon, mid-1970s, Studio City side of Laurel Canyon* Tom Morello, guitarist for Rage Against The Machine and Audioslave, present* Jim Morrison, lived behind the Canyon Country Store, late 1960s
* Mark Mothersbaugh, musician, composer, artist, founder of Devo, present
* Douglas Anne Munson, novelist, attorney, on Kirkwood Dr., late 1950s, attended Wonderland Ave. Elementary School
* Graham Nash, 1960's- 70's* Harry Falk, T.V. director former husband of child actress Patty Duke. 1968-1970. 8046 Fareholm Drive. * Patty Duke, Child actress. Bought house on Fareholm from former husband Harry Falk.
* Buzz Osborne, singer, guitarist for The Melvins present* Mackie Osborne, artist, present* Gram Parsons, early-1970s
* Adam Pascal, present* Iggy Pop, 1970s* Irving Ravetch and Harriet Frank, Jr. 1960s - present
* Trent Reznor, 1995-1997* Jonathan Rice, Present* Keith Richards, 1970s* Nicole Richie, present
* The Rolling Stones, 1970s, interestingly, The Rolling Stones occupied the same house mentioned above, the 'Mary Astor House' in which Marilyn Manson lives today; their film, Cocksucker Blues was filmed here* Paul Rothchild, producer, The Doors, Crosby Stills & Nash 1960's-90's * Rick Rubin, and his studio The Mansion where the Red Hot Chili Peppers recorded Blood Sugar Sex Magic, Stadium Arcadium and shot the film Funky Monks. Others who have recorded here include Johnny Cash, Slayer, Audioslave, Slipknot, Jay-Z, Linkin Park, System of a Down, Maroon 5, The Mars Volta.* Meg Ryan, present* Betye Saar, 1950s-70s* Alison Saar, 1950s-70s* John Saxon, 1960s-70s (lived on Jewett Dr.)* Kesha (singer) (Ke$ha), present
* Slash, guitarist for Guns N' Roses, Velvet Revolver, 1976-mid-'80s* Matt Sorum drummer for The Cult, Guns N' Roses, Velvet Revolver 2006- present* Dusty Springfield, 1970s* Danny Sugerman, Author, No One Here Gets Out Alive and Wonderland Avenue, manager of The Doors & Iggy Pop 1970s* John Taylor bassist for Duran Duran, 1995-1998* Lloyd Thaxton, 1960's
* Justin Timberlake, present* Ian Thorpe, present* Peter Tork, mid 1960s* Mark Volman, late 1960s
* Victoria Vetri, actress, ex-Playmate of the Year* Orson Welles, lived on Greenvalley Road, late 1970'* Pete Wentz, present
* Brian Wilson, 1960s* Chuck Wright, bassist for Quiet Riot, present* Neil Young, late 1960s* Frank Zappa, 1968-1993
* Travis Keller, present* Frances Farmer, American actress and husband Leif Erickson American actor. Hollywood Hills Road. Late 1930s early 1940s.* Claudia Jennings, American actress, Playboy Playmate of the Year, Playboy fold. On Woodrow Wilson, then on Ridpath, until her death in a car accident in Malibu in 1979* Tommy Boyce, Boyce and Hart, Studio City side of Laurel Canyon at "Sunshine Park"* Bobby Hart, Boyce and Hart on Woodrow Wilson in two separate locations form the 1960s to present* Hedge Capers & Donna Carson, A & M recording artists Hedge and Donna 1960s to 1970s off Ridpath then after divorce Hedge moved to Stanley Hills Road* Peter Walker, Vanguard recording artist concert performer. Rainy Day Raga Second Poem to Karmela Father of American Folk Raga. Played music behind Timothy Leary's "Celebrations" slide shows. Rented a room in a house owned by Fred Tackett Little Feat 1966.* Fred Tackett, Guitarist. [Little Feat 1960s.[/i
[i
It certainly make me wonder about these people, they must know the history of their neighbourhood. I suppose they also do not fit in with those that are not of their own kind. I think that most people in the entertainment industry, know about the Illuminati and are too scared to speak out, for fear of loosing everything. Perhaps they keep their heads down and look for a spiritual way out, though that is also a part of the matrix as well. After having lived a life of wanton debauchery i suppose its good news to be told God will forgive if you repent. Johnny Cash comes to mind.[/i

=#800000Signing at contract with the devil for the price of fame and success obviously is too much to resist for most people.

[iBut Russia, China, Japan etc all know this was hoaxed so they'd of known about whatever classified information that was not for public knowledge.=#BF0040[u I doubt The US would share their Super Duper technical aeronautics with other nations IMHO [/u[/i. [iI have my own beliefs as to why this was hoaxed and by all nations knowing this fraudulent mission only strengthens my favoured thoughts of reasoning[/i

You know NOTHING about the effects of low or aero gravity. You COULD know a helluva lot about the effects of zero gravity if you read the tonnage of materials available freely due to the fact that so many nations and so many astronauts have in so many decades experienced it and done an array of endless tests and experiment in such conditions. Which continue even as we type. That is where our knowledge of zero gravity comes from. But if you don't believe humans have been, then all you can do is guess. As you have nothing but your own imagination to go on.


Your ignorance of mass and gravity is embarrassing. The buggies were designed to operate on the Moon not Earth. The astronauts naturally went very steadily at first, and soon learned the handling characteristics and were able to travel faster and manoeuvre more. How much they would "bounc" would have been easily predictable and their suspension was obviously not ever going to be the same as if they'd stripped it off a '65 Chevy truck, now was it? I find your tendency to simply watch a video and draw final conclusions based on just what you somehow "think" a buggy "should" bounce like pretty odd. And 100% unscientific.

But you can SEE for yourself what the buggy did, and what the regolith did. You could usefully spend time doing the maths and science to work out why, instead of obsessing with your knee-jerk irrational position that (a) it never happened and that if so (b) NASA, despite having billions at their disposal, couldn't even come up with fakes that could fool even some guy calling himself "Mugwump" stuck in a loft in Wigan.


One of us is, but it's not me. The suits exist still, for anyone who wnats to go and see.


But this "shooting to hell" didn' happen, though. (If it had, and their systems had been unable to cope, they could of course have rapidly terminated the EVA). Also, as explained, the regolith is a poor conductor of heat so would not have the effect you are claiming. I don't know about "electrostatically charged" and can't be bothered to look it up as I don't see the relevance. Again, you are positing some effect which you then promote to fact. What tests in 1/6th g and vacuum in matching conditions have you carried out which support your knee-jerk top-of-your head thoughts?


Once again, the conditions the lander would face on the surface were something that were almost 100% predictable due to earlier reseacrh and unmanned craft. So, the lander had been at great cost and very carefully specially designed and built to withstand the known conditions that it would face. And they all did. They all worked exactly as they had been built to work. '"

The reflectors are on the Moon and non-NASA laser technology confirms this. What's your point?

Also, in the very recent past, China's Chang'e-2 and Chang'e-3 missions produced what they claimed was the most detailed lunar mapping ever. This included, according to the Chinese scientists, clear evidence of all the Apollo landing sites. My question to you is this: do you believe that these Chinese scientists are now just participating in the alleged hoax and cover-up? Really? If they are not, what does Occam tell us?

[iYou NASA freaks are claiming that something very historically important happened. All you have to rely on is what you have been told, heard, and pictures you have seen.Which has been expertly disembowelled.

You really have nothing solid to go on other than relying on the premise that the media has been honest and that our government has also been honest. Not much of a basis for believing when you have to rely on just your faith. Occam's tells us they're ALL pi55ing in the same hoaxing pot. Simples.[/i

I'm not a NASA freak. I have zero connection with NASA. They do provide a wealth of info / data / images but then as the largest such organisation in the world, they would. However, there have been and are almost countless other scientific sources, none of which except 1 are NASA.

I have no claims. I know my scientific facts. You are the one who presumably claims nothing happened - but then you're the one who claims Sky satellites don't exist, and that the ISS is a holograph, and that the Earth is flat, amongst your myriad delusions. You are the one therefore behaving like a delusional, and if you persist in such claims then it's up you you to prove them. Which of course you have no desire to try.

Quote ="FLAT STANLEY" All you have to rely on is what you have been told, heard, and pictures you have seen.'"

Well, all any human can go on is information which reaches their brain from extraneous sources. The trouble is, I analyse the input from a scientific viewpoint, and weigh and categorize accordingly, whereas you are both gullible and weak-minded, and prone to "beliefs" instead of scientific proofs. This has many results, one of which is "belief" trumps "proof" and in turn means that any scientific evidence that conflicts with your mad beliefs you will always dismiss as "fake" or "CGI" or some such, without a shred of evidence for that, because if in conflict with your unscientific worldviews, then ... it just is.

Quote ="FLAT STANLEY"Which has been expertly disembowelled.'"

that's ironically the funniest of all. When the hoax theories came out in fact I did look at them with interest, because unlike you I have an open mind, and the scientific method works simply because any proposition is constantly challenged, and if the challenge supports it then the proposition is strengthened.

But it became very quickly every apparent atht the hoax theories were largely by raving nutters, supported by grossly unscientific numbskulls, aided and abetted by people who thought they knew a bit about this, or that, and had promoted themselves to experts. People who (for example) had not the slightest clue about how a camera works, or albedo, or luminosity, or reflectivity, or perspective, yet risibly claimed photos were "fake" because "the shadows are wrong" or some such instantly recognisable drivel.

So it is not that I ignore the "evidence " of such theorists, it is that it is drivel.

Quote ="FLAT STANLEY"You really have nothing solid to go on other than relying on the premise that the media has been honest '"

The media? Honest? Which media do you mean? Which media have I taken my science from that is dishonest, then?

For example, I subscribe to Astronomy magazine. That is media. Do you claim they are dishonest? Give me examples as to lies they have published with your evidence that they are lies, so i can further consider your claim.

In fact, you have NO IDEA what media I have read over the past few decades and so you can't possibly make such a risibly outrageous sweeping statement.

Finally, YOU in contrast seem to get ALL your beliefs from the media, but in your case that media is restricted to
(a) some version of a collection of writings called the Bible ; and
(b) endless puerile pseduobabble contained in cringeworthy YouTube media.

How ironic that you swallow the contents of your highly restricted media diet wholesale, and ignore the overwhelming weight of scientific media that is available, if you would only look.

Quote ="FLAT STANLEY"Not much of a basis for believing when you have to rely on just your faith.'"

You are the one who tells us we are all doomed to hellfire because unlike you we aren't ruled by "faith". You're the one who says your faith is the be-all and end-all for you. So how can you then make such a ludicrous statement?


Only if you have absolutely not the slightest clue what Occam's razor does, or how it works.

Occam would tell you that if there are thousands of Sky dish installers (150 advertised just in Bradford yellow pages) and if any one of them will come to your house and fit you a dish and tune it to the satellite, and if it will then all work; and if you then slightly move the dish, or obstruct the line of sight of the satellite, or cut the cable, then it won;t work, Occam would tell you that yes, there is a satellite and yes your images are being beamed in from the satellite.

Your alternative presumably involves the thousands of installers and engineers being NASA spies and agents, who are all in on the secret that in fact the dishes and receivers don't work, which YOU have said you believe. Occam would walk away shaking his head, so don't ever talk to me about Occam

Cracking thread, best on both forums atm, some real ' loons ' out there

=#800000Eyeroll[i Firstly you used the word gullible. Now I'm the one who's rejecting the official narrative so how can the rejecter be the gullible one. The one accepting the official credulous narrative is the gullible one.Another typical tongue twisting Aardvark trait. PMSL. More laughter at your expense is your subscription fetish for CGI composite overload in [url=https://astronomynow.com/category/news/Astronomy Magazine[/url I bet there's plenty of sticky pages adhered to the CGI glossy hair-brushed cartooned sections. With regards to faith. My faith is spiritually fulfilling whereas yours is based on a Stanley Kubrik filmset somewhere in/near Hollywood. [/iicon_lol.gif

Hi Butcher.

Because of course the question of who rejects or accepts what is in itself nothing to do with who is gullible. The criterion is who is prone to blindly and uncritically swallow transparent bull rap. Like you swallowing bull rap about Sky (and other) TV satellites "not existing" or the Earth "being flat". That is gold star gullible.

Quote More laughter at your expense is your subscription fetish for CGI composite overload in [url=https://astronomynow.com/category/news/Astronomy Magazine[/url I bet there's plenty of sticky pages adhered to the CGI glossy hair-brushed cartooned sections. '"

So typical, you reject a scientific publication without even seeing it, because your faiths dictate that everything in it must be fake. Really pathetic. Embarrassingly so.


I have no interest in your faith, it is a matter for you if you believe in fictional deities, and if you really don't get the difference between faith in things for which there is zero evidence and scientific theory then you must be too stupid for words. But of course you well understand, you just don't know how to deal with the cold hard evidence, mountains of it, and so - as is your normal defensive mode - you dismiss all but your crank drivel as "fake" or "CGI" (your favourite). You kid yourself in this way all the time, so you don't have to confront reality.

[iSatellite TV is Analogue . Digital is an analogue radio signal, digitized compressed and so they're able to carry more information. You can still use your old analogue aerial to pick up digital signals as an example,, or you can be conned into paying for a satellite TV package and all they did is put a dish up which picks up digital same as an old aerial connection it's definitely not picking up signals from satellites they do not exist. Satellite dishes are just digital signal antennas in disguise that receive directly from land based signal relay and Deep Sea Cables with repeaters to boost the signal. The whole dish thing is a diversion.Thought this was obvious.

So if anyone who wants to take a bit of time to look up the launch to satellite ratio..seriously have a look. If you are doing it to grasp the rip off then great. If you are doing it to come back at me to argue that is perfectly plausible, then don't waste your time with me, seriously. I don't want my mind poisoned with clap trap and stuff that should be ridiculously evident to a person with the basic of basic common sense to see it for what it is. Bull.

I'm quite sure that there's plenty of people who have satellite dishes on their walls who have had them there for maybe 15/20 years and never had them aligned since they were installed. Bear in mind that satellites are supposed to have lives of 10/15 years and some lately being longer. That's due to covering their s. The point is, how come your dish has never had to be re-aligned when they change a so called satellite.

The sensible thinkers among us will have the answer easily. It's because satellites in space are a fantasy. They are a fantasy money maker so we have to pay for TV with the old excuse that it costs so much to send them up and maintain them. The silly thing is that once a satellite is in this 23,000 mile orbit. Yes, I said 23,000 mile orbit, just perfectly in Geo-synch with Earth, it cannot be repaired if anything goes wrong. Luckily they never ever need repairing until they fall out of orbit until the tefal headed fantasy merchants decide they fall. If people want to believe in all this crap then go right ahead, just don't try and convince me, because I'm done with the old "heads they win, tails I lose" bull. It's about time the coin has a heads and a tails and is tossed by fair means. Until that happens, we will always be slaves to the system.

For those who argue about GPS and such. It's all triangulation. It's a pretence of something special. Well just remember that when you're driving along with your Sat Nav stuck to your dashboard with no aerial or dish and yet you're getting told where you are. The voice that tells you to turn left or whatever is just following a pre-set map that is picked up as you drive to your destination between cells, just like your phone and even your radio. You notice your Sat Nav re-adjusts as you drive. As you hit another marker. Your radio re-tunes just the same. It's just a different set of frequencies and booster signals, etc.

The trouble with fantasy merchants who sell you bull is, they want more. they want to keep hitting you with more fantasy and sometimes they over do it. You see, one minute your satellite dish on your home is aligned perfectly to a Geo-synch satellite in 23,000 mile orbit and the next minute you've just bought a car satellite system that sits on your car roof and "Voiila" gives your kids the TV as you move about. And weirdly...no dish.

I understand that there will be many that are GENUINELY perplexed by some of this and will not accept it so readily. All I say to you people is, spend the time to sit back and think. Look up stuff. Do the jigsaw puzzle of the real picture and paint over the fantasy one that was set out for you. It can be slow and painstaking. I understand that. All I ask is, please learn to use your logic and your own common sense by not allowing the bullter fantasy merchants to bamboozle your mind and scramble it. Peer pressure and ridicule are two massive obstacles to overcome to even start to think. Do this and you have a chance to actually see through the blindfold's you/we were made to wear.

.As i said with GPS, TV the same, there is nothing that is allegedly done by 'communication satellites' that cannot be done with ground-based systems. Good luck and happy thinking.Which is more probable. That satellites exist but NASA seems incapable of confirming their existence or simply they do not exist at all? Occam's Razor makes it simple, they don't exist at all.[/i

And so all satellite installers are in on the scam - right? You cannot surely be as gullible as to actually give one second of credence to the bullcrap you just cut n pasted? Can you? You do know people are laughing at you? This is lunacy if the highest order, yet you can't see it! It is this sort of drivel that strongly suggests you're a troll, as it's hard to think anyone could be so gullible as to swallow that bull you just posted. Scientifically illiterate drivel.

This thread is incredible.

Since 2004 ?

Nah, but you certainly are entertaining

To be honest I’m in despair.

I blocked a certain poster, due to having totally different views.

Unfortunately other members keep quoting his posts – which makes them visible once again!

I like a good conspiracy as much as the next man, but for crying out loud.

If a big eared bloke and his dog from Preston can get to the moon, i'm sure NASA could manage it

I’d have thought you’d have had enough conspiracies theories regarding your beloved club, to spend time in this alternative universe.

No real conspiraces at Leigh, a few ' ideas ' floating about, but ultimatly what happens happens and we just carry on

Been quite interesting today ont telly, ive seen a moon buggy and astronauts on a film set in the Nevada desert, and a human on Mars

Nearly as entertaining as this thread

=#BF0000Hahaha have you heard yourself. Of course they're not in the scam. [iThey the installers just cable clip their route from dish to Sky box, then point the Aeriel to a certain location. Theres no inevitable satellite handshake that takes place.

I've had Sky TV for 28 years with no engineer interaction to realign my dish.Now the so called satellites we've been told are prone to malfunction quite frequently. So why haven't i needed an engineer to realign my antenna.

In fact i've had a varied Sky connection for the past 6 years which involves no interaction whatsoever with Sky. The antenna/dish recieves the analogue signal from ground based transmitters which signals my Digital box, which is then linked to my WiFi which connects to my mates server which decodes my Digital box and then Boom i have every channel going throughout our household.

Why do you think sky require a broadband connection. So they can control your package by dialling in from there centres. The dish is just an aerial picking up signal data from ground based transmitters. Then sky add your package through dialling in to your Digital box from the call centre. Simples... Don't tell me knowbody knows this. My Sky system has no interaction with sky hence no satellite interaction needed. So to answer your question installers do as they are told on where to point the antenna thats all[/i. Simples.

[iTypically the troll reverts to More Ad Hominem insulting behaviour. Why do you get so angry. Insults plus angst equals lost the squabble. Easy..[/i

You can receive paid sky channels by paying next to nothing not exactly free but minimum cost.
You need a satellite dish and a broadband internet connection and a 'SKY' V8 android box plus a '12 months gift' which costs about £10.
Bingo 'FREE' sky tv including all PPV at a cost of around £10 per year

[iYes 25 years. I remember many years ago in my primary school days before dishes were raging tuning our TV and we received The Super Channel and what was then Sky Channel which i thought was amazing because it shown American Wrestling and Aussie rugby league. Now they were supposedly Satellite channels so how did we receive these Channels through a common TV Aerial. I'll tell you why its because Satellites don't exist.[/i

[iThe dish won't move exactly. But if/when the so called satellite malfunctions which they would if they were truly orbiting.Yours/my dish would need re-aligning to another Satellite. Durrrh. And this never happens.

[iI ain't lying just like Tigerman has just posted. I pay £40 yearly subscription for 4x boxes. I get all channels including PPV without Sky's even knowing proving Satellites are a myth. I don't tell porkies like you i'm all about trut[/ih.

As stated, I believed in the Apollo missions for forty years. During that time no one would ever convince me that the whole thing was staged. Although this was purely an act of FAITH on my part because I'd never bothered to really delve into the minutiae. It was only after some issues cropped up which were tangential to NASA that I realized it really was the last institution I should be trusting.

I mean, just look at the farrago of lies which is the Apollo I fire. NASA passes the "accident" off as an unfortunate coalescence of haste and over enthusiasm.

Yet almost no-one is aware of the fact that Gus Grissom had become so frustrated with the complete and utter SHAMBLES which was the Apollo capsule that he'd gone so far as to pick the biggest lemon he could find from his orchard and hung it PUBLICLY on the craft using a coathanger for everyone to see and called a PRESS CONFERENCE to air his views.

Of course, it was just PURE CO-INCIDENCE that prior to the "Plugs Out" test which involved pressurizing the Apollo capsule to 20PSI of PURE OXYGEN (a combination which both the Apollo mission controllers and the designers of the capsule KNEW to be potentially LETHAL because of the propensity for just about any substance including fire-retarding asbestos to catch fire at the slightest opportunity) the Apollo capsule had been stuffed to the gunnels with just about every flammable and toxic substance NASA could lay its hands on. Just as it was PURE CO-INCIDENCE that the door mechanism had been changed making it practically impossible for anyone to escape in an emergency. Just as it was PURE CO-INCIDENCE that the team meant to oversee the test which normally surrounded the capsule were for some strange reason not at their posts.

[iBut in a flash fire situation it's doubtful they could have cranked open the door and extracted the three astronauts before they were overcome anyway - right?[/i

Well, that was certainly the story - UNTIL safety supervisor Thomas Ronald Barron made the ASTONISHING claim that Grissom, Chaffee & White had first reported the fire a full [uFIVE MINUTES[/u prior to the only communications transcript NASA released which led everyone to believe the three astronauts were incinerated in seconds. And it was just PURE CO-INCIDENCE that Grissom suddenly found he couldn't communicate with the tower prompting an exasperated comment, [i"How the hell are we supposed to go to the moon if we can't communicate between three buildings"?[/i

Just as it was PURE CO-INCIDENCE that days prior to the accident enquiry when he was about to release a DAMNING FIVE-HUNDRED PAGE safety report which would have undoubtedly sunk the program Barron and his wife were killed when their car mysteriously stalled on a level-crossing and they were crushed beneath a freight train. And the CO-INCIDENCES just kept piling up when contrary to state law both bodies were cremated without autopsy.

And yet we are supposed to have FAITH in NASA?

As for the moon landings - I suspect that many people can't see the truth PRECISELY BECAUSE the deception is literally staring them in the face.

Regarding the supposed cooling systems in both the suits and the Lunar Excursion Module - it really isn't difficult to determine that even the notion is patently LUDICROUS.

Turn your oven to 180 degrees centigrade and leave it for a few minutes to warm up. Now open the door and stick your hand in. In that brief moment you can tolerate the heat you are getting just a taste of what both cooling systems had to overcome for hours - even days.

According to NASA's own specifications the moonwalkers were cooled by barely more than THREE LITRES of water circulating through both the backpack and the suit and then vented onto the heat exchanger (did anyone SEE ice crystals escaping into the vacuum?) - which of course reduced the level of water each time. And this is BEFORE the suit's reflectivity becomes compromised by lunar dust.

And as for the LEM - think of 190 degrees beating down on every square inch of its paper-thin skin. And if we are to believe Neil Armstrong & Buzz Aldrin it was so COLD inside the LEM they were [i"constantly shivering"[/i. Laughable!

Think of Neil Armstrong's quiet, assured and professional tone as he hunts for a safe place to land the LEM. Now think of the [uROCKET MOTOR[/u which is barely more than a [uCOUPLE OF METRES[/u below his feet delivering five-figures of thrust. Boy! NASA must really have spent big on high-technology sound-proofing because Armstrong never raised his voice once.

And whilst we are at it - the hypergolic fuel NASA claims was used burns up at around 4,000/5,000C. Are we to supposed to believe the moon's surface is so heat-resistant that instead of turning to LAVA immediately below the LEM (bear in mind that many earth rocks are reduced to this state at 1,000C) it retarded the heat as well as any heat-shield?

As for the photographs - even though there's plenty of evidence of multiple shadows (remember, the astronauts brought no separate light sources according to the manufacturers of the camera - Hasselblad) - as a Canon-accredited photographer who has worked extensively with fast lenses and multiple flash packs I tend to concentrate purely on LIGHT.

You see - anyone who understands the full significance of the INVERSE SQUARE LAW, f-stops and dynamic range must instantly realise there's something very WRONG with many of the photographs.

Given that the sun effectively functions as a [ipoint-source of light[/i any original and unaltered photograph which features significant light fall-off that cannot be explained by the casting of shadows can [uONLY[/u be fake. There are no ifs and buts about this and if you think so you really don't understand the INVERSE SQUARE LAW which is ... well ... an IMMUTABLE LAW.

As for those photographs in which the "sun" backlights the scene and yet the subject is clearly visible (rather than turning to a silhouette) despite the fact that the camera is stopped down to such an extent that everything in the scene is PIN SHARP and yet the photographer is not using a tripod - LAUGHABLE.

If you have a camera, remote trigger and a flash do yourself a favour and try to recreate that shot in low light whilst handholding at f/22 or above using everyday items. A flash is a good analogue for the sun providing you don't place it close.

When you have finished let me know how you got on.