1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Apollo astronaut: Alien visits covered up by US government

Discussion in 'Sports and News' started by Inky_Wretch, Jul 24, 2008.

  1. Herbert Anchovy

    Herbert Anchovy Active Member



    I understand, but I don't understand. What makes it not apocryphal?

     
  2. Pastor

    Pastor Active Member


    The levels and the amount of people involved. We have, since the time of the landing, used the same equipment. Additionally, the hardware involved is still available.

    Then you need to factor in the actual landing of the shuttle and the people returning. These were recorded. Other people witnessed them live.

    To argue that the moon landing was staged would then mean that the shuttle launched into space, did a couple of laps and then came back home without actually going to the moon. It would also mean that the footage had to be shot before the take-off.

    When you have people watching a shuttle re-enter orbit, you really can’t just fake it away.
     
  3. 2muchcoffeeman

    2muchcoffeeman Well-Known Member

    Last edited by a moderator: Dec 15, 2014
  4. forever_town

    forever_town Well-Known Member

    Riiiiiight.
     
  5. 2muchcoffeeman

    2muchcoffeeman Well-Known Member

    EDIT: OK, never mind. Fixed. One line of bad code screwed up the whole thing.
     
  6. Herbert Anchovy

    Herbert Anchovy Active Member

    This thread must be under surveillance by The Party.
     
  7. Pastor

    Pastor Active Member

    My phrasing was poor. I was not trying to imply that we use the same hardware today. I was trying to say that we had used the same hardware on other occassions since the time of the landing.
     
  8. Ace

    Ace Well-Known Member

    If Halliburton was a major NASA contractor, I would be willing to believe we faked the landing to save a few bucks.
     
  9. Starman

    Starman Well-Known Member



    It's not a "very good" case. It's invariably based on factual ignorance or material fabrication of the evidence.

    And, once again, it would depend on the worldwide cooperation of thousands of people, many of whom would be highly motivated to break the story, over the course of 40 years.
     
  10. BTExpress

    BTExpress Well-Known Member

    I sure hope this "evidence" is not the usual "fluttering flag" on the moon or the absence of visible stars in the sky.

    Both of which are ridiculously easy to explain.
     
  11. Ace

    Ace Well-Known Member

    Yeah. It was cloudy and windy that day. Duh!
     
  12. Starman

    Starman Well-Known Member

    That's where 98% of the conspiracy theorists start.
     
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page